Exemption for Florida Power & Light Company; St. Lucie Plant, Unit 1, 19659-19662 [2014-07972]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 68 / Wednesday, April 9, 2014 / Notices
IAEA to fulfill its reporting
responsibilities.
This information collection request
will also categorize this form as a
common form. Once OMB approves the
use of this common form, all Federal
agencies using the form may request use
of this common form without additional
60- or 30-day notice and comment
requirements. At that point, each agency
will account for its number of
respondents and the burden associated
with the agency’s use.
The public may examine and have
copied for a fee publicly available
documents, including the final
supporting statement, at the NRC’s
Public Document Room, Room O–1F21,
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The
OMB clearance requests are available at
the NRC’s Web site: https://www.nrc.gov/
public-involve/doc-comment/omb/. The
document will be available on the
NRC’s home page site for 60 days after
the signature date of this notice.
Comments and questions should be
directed to the OMB reviewer listed
below by May 9, 2014. Comments
received after this date will be
considered if it is practical to do so, but
assurance of consideration cannot be
given to comments received after this
date. Danielle Jones, Desk Officer, Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs
(3150–0057), NEOB–10202, Office of
Management and Budget, Washington,
DC 20503.
Comments can also be emailed to
Danielle_Y_Jones@omb.eop.gov or
submitted by telephone at 202–395–
1741.
The Acting NRC Clearance Officer is
Kristen Benney, telephone: 301–415–
6355.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day
of March 2014.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Kristen Benney,
Acting NRC Clearance Officer, Office of
Information Services.
[FR Doc. 2014–07878 Filed 4–8–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
[Docket No. 52–033; NRC–2008–0566]
DTE Electric Company; Fermi 3
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Combined license application;
availability.
AGENCY:
On September 18, 2008, the
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:54 Apr 08, 2014
Jkt 232001
(NRC) received an application for a
combined license (COL) submitted by
Detroit Edison Company. The NRC
published a notice of receipt and
availability for an application for a COL
in the Federal Register on October 17,
2008. In a letter dated December 21,
2013, the Detroit Edison Company
notified the NRC that, effective January
1, 2013, the name of the company
would be changed to ‘‘DTE Electric
Company.’’ This notice is being
published to make available to the
public the application for a COL
submitted by DTE Electric Company
(Formerly the Detroit Edison Company).
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID
NRC–2008–0566 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of
information regarding this document.
You may access publicly-available
information related to this action by the
following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2008–0566. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol
Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422;
email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For
technical questions, contact the
individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document.
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly
available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. To begin the search, select
‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then
select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS
Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS,
please contact the NRC’s Public
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by
email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
application for a combined license
submitted by Detroit Edison Company
and the letter notifying the NRC of the
name change are available in ADAMS
under Accession Nos. ML082730763
and ML12361A437.
• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and
purchase copies of public documents at
the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Adrian Muniz, Office of New Reactors,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone:
301–415–4093, email: Adrian.Muniz@
nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
September 18, 2008, Detroit Edison
Company (renamed DTE Electric
Company as of January 1, 2013) filed
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19659
with the NRC, pursuant to Section 103
of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, and Part 52 of Title 10 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR),
‘‘Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals
for Nuclear Power Plants,’’ an
application for a COL for an economic
simplified boiling-water reactor
designated as Fermi 3 in Monroe
County, Michigan. The NRC published
a notice of receipt and availability for an
application for a COL in the Federal
Register on October 17, 2008 (73 FRN
61916). The application is currently
under review by the NRC staff. On
December 21, 2012, the Detroit Edison
company sent the NRC a letter
indicating that, effective January 1,
2013, the name of the company would
be changed to ‘‘DTE Electric Company.’’
An applicant may seek a COL in
accordance with Subpart C of 10 CFR
Part 52. The information submitted by
the applicant includes certain
administrative information, such as
financial qualifications submitted
pursuant to 10 CFR 52.77, as well as
technical information submitted
pursuant to 10 CFR 52.79. This notice
is being provided in accordance with
the requirements in 10 CFR 50.43(a)(3).
A copy of the application is available
for public inspection at the NRC’s PDR,
and online in the ADAMS Public
Documents collection at https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
The application is also available at
https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/newreactors/col.html. Additional
information about accessing the
application and other publicly available
documents related to the application,
including revisions filed after the initial
submission, are provided in the
ADDRESSES section of this document.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day
of April 2014.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Ronaldo Jenkins,
Chief, Licensing Branch 3, Division of New
Reactor Licensing, Office of New Reactor.
[FR Doc. 2014–07958 Filed 4–8–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–335; NRC–2014–0076]
Exemption for Florida Power & Light
Company; St. Lucie Plant, Unit 1
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Exemption; issuance.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is granting an
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\09APN1.SGM
09APN1
19660
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 68 / Wednesday, April 9, 2014 / Notices
exemption in response to a May 10,
2013, request from Florida Power &
Light Company for an exemption for the
use of a different fuel rod cladding
material (AREVA M5®).
Please refer to Docket ID
NRC–2014–0076 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of
information regarding this document.
You may access publicly-available
information related to this action by the
following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2014–0076. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol
Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422;
email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For
technical questions, contact the
individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document.
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly
available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. To begin the search, select
‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then
select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS
Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS,
please contact the NRC’s Public
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by
email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
ADAMS accession number for each
document referenced in this document
(if that document is available in
ADAMS) is provided the first time that
a document is referenced.
• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and
purchase copies of public documents at
the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
ADDRESSES:
Lisa
M. Regner, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington DC 20555–
0001; telephone: 301–415–1906; email:
Lisa.Regner@nrc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
I. Background
Florida Power & Light Company (the
licensee) is the holder of Renewed
Facility Operating License No. DPR–67,
which authorizes operation of the St.
Lucie Plant, Unit 1. The license
provides, among other things, that the
facility is subject to all rules,
regulations, and orders of the NRC now
or hereafter in effect. The facility
consists of a pressurized-water reactor
(PWR) located in St. Lucie County,
Florida.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:54 Apr 08, 2014
Jkt 232001
II. Request/Action
A. Special Circumstances
In accordance with § 50.12, of Title 10
of the Code of Federal Regulations (10
CFR), ‘‘Specific exemptions,’’ the
licensee, by letter dated May 10, 2013
(ADAMS Accession No. ML13135A008),
requested an exemption from the
requirements of 10 CFR 50.46,
‘‘Acceptance criteria for emergency core
cooling systems [ECCS] for light-water
nuclear power reactors,’’ and 10 CFR
Part 50, Appendix K, ‘‘ECCS Evaluation
Models,’’ to allow the use of fuel rods
clad with AREVA M5® alloy for future
reload applications. The regulations in
10 CFR 50.46 contain acceptance
criteria for the ECCS for reactors fueled
with zircaloy or ZIRLOTM fuel rod
cladding material. In addition,
Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50 requires
that the Baker-Just equation be used to
predict the rates of energy release,
hydrogen concentration, and cladding
oxidation from the metal/water reaction.
The Baker-Just equation assumes the use
of a zirconium alloy, which is a material
different from the AREVA M5® material.
The licensee requested the exemption
because these regulations do not have
criteria for the use of fuel rods clad in
a material other than zircaloy or
ZIRLOTM. Because the material
specifications of M5® differ from the
specification for zircaloy or ZIRLOTM, a
plant-specific exemption is required to
support the reload applications for St.
Lucie Plant Unit 1.
The exemption request relates solely
to the cladding material specified in
these regulations (i.e., fuel rods with
zircaloy or ZIRLOTM cladding material).
This exemption would provide for the
application of the acceptance criteria of
10 CFR 50.46 and Appendix K to 10
CFR Part 50 to fuel assembly designs
using AREVA M5® fuel rod cladding
material.
Special circumstances, in accordance
with 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), are present
whenever application of the regulation
in the particular circumstances is not
necessary to achieve the underlying
purpose of the rule. The underlying
purpose of 10 CFR 50.46 and Appendix
K to 10 CFR Part 50 is to establish
acceptance criteria for ECCS
performance. The regulations in 10 CFR
50.46 and Appendix K are not expressly
applicable to M5® cladding material,
because the M5® cladding material is
not specified in 10 CFR 50.46 or
presumed in the Baker-Just equation
required by paragraph I.A.5 of 10 CFR
Part 50, Appendix K. The evaluations
described in the following sections of
this exemption, however, show that the
intent of the regulation is met, in that,
subject to certain conditions, the
acceptance criteria are valid for M5®
zircaloy-based alloy cladding, the
material is less susceptible to
embrittlement, and the Baker-Just
equation conservatively bounds
scenarios following a loss of coolant
accident (LOCA) for rods with M5®
cladding material. Thus, a strict
application of the rule (which would
preclude the applicability of ECCS
performance acceptance criteria to, and
the use of, M5® clad fuel rods) is not
necessary to achieve the underlying
purposes of 10 CFR 50.46 and Appendix
K of 10 CFR Part 50. The purpose of
these regulations is achieved through
the application of the requirements to
the use of M5® fuel rod cladding
material. Therefore, the special
circumstances required by 10 CFR
50.12(a)(2)(ii) for the granting of an
exemption exist.
III. Discussion
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, the
Commission may, upon application by
any interested person, grant exemptions
from the requirements of 10 CFR Part
50, which are authorized by law, will
not present an undue risk to the public
health and safety, and are consistent
with the common defense and security.
Paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of 10 CFR 50.12
states that the Commission will not
consider granting an exemption unless
special circumstances are present, such
as when application of the regulation in
the particular circumstance is not
necessary to achieve the underlying
purpose of the rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
B. The Exemption Is Authorized by Law
This exemption would allow the use
of M5® fuel rod cladding material for
future reload applications at St. Lucie
Plant, Unit 1. Section 10 CFR 50.12
allows the NRC to grant exemptions
from the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50
provided that special circumstances are
present. The NRC staff determined that
special circumstances exist to grant the
proposed exemption and that granting
the exemption would not result in a
violation of the Atomic Energy Act of
1954, as amended, or the Commission’s
regulations. Therefore, the exemption is
authorized by law.
C. The Exemption Presents No Undue
Risk to Public Health and Safety
Section 10 CFR 50.46 requires that
each boiling or pressurized light-water
nuclear power reactor fueled with
uranium oxide pellets within
E:\FR\FM\09APN1.SGM
09APN1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 68 / Wednesday, April 9, 2014 / Notices
cylindrical zircaloy or ZIRLO cladding
must be provided with an ECCS that
must be designed so that its calculated
cooling performance following
postulated LOCAs conforms to the
criteria set forth in paragraph (b) of this
section. The underlying purpose of 10
CFR 50.46 is to establish acceptance
criteria for ECCS performance at nuclear
power reactors. The NRC staff
previously documented its approval of
AREVA topical report BAW–10227P,
‘‘Evaluation of Advanced Cladding and
Structural Material (M5®) in PWR
Reactor Fuel,’’ in a safety evaluation
dated February 4, 2000 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML003681490), and
concluded that the 10 CFR 50.46 and 10
CFR Part 50, Appendix K, criteria are
applicable to M5® fuel, subject to
compliance with specific conditions.
The specific conditions that address the
use of M5® with respect to ECCS
performance requirements are: (1) the
corrosion limit will remain below 100
microns for all locations of the fuel; (2)
all conditions listed in the NRC safety
evaluations for AREVA methodologies
for M5® fuel analysis will continue to be
met; (3) AREVA methodologies will be
used only within the range for which
M5® data was acceptable and for which
the verifications discussed in the topical
reports were performed; and (4) the
burnup limit for implementation of M5®
is 62 gigawatt-days per megaton
uranium metal (GWd/MTU). The staff
determined that the licensee has
satisfied these conditions. The corrosion
limit stated in condition (1) is verified
by the licensee for each reload as
required by TS 6.9.1.11, ‘‘Core
Operating Limits Report [COLR].’’ The
conditions from NRC approved safety
evaluations stated in condition (2) are
incorporated as restrictions in AREVA
procedures that control the core reload
designs which are also verified by the
licensee for each reload as required by
the COLR. The restrictions on the use of
AREVA methodologies stated as
condition (3) are also incorporated as
restrictions in AREVA procedures that
control the core reload designs which
are also verified for each reload as
required by the COLR. Finally, the
burnup limit stated in condition (4) is
currently part of the St. Lucie Plant,
Unit 1, COLR, and is also verified as
part of the reload analysis required by
the COLR.
The AREVA topical report BAW–
10227P–A, which was submitted to the
NRC by letter dated February 11, 2000
(ADAMS Accession No. ML003685828),
demonstrates that M5® has essentially
the same properties as the current
zircaloy cladding material and requires
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:54 Apr 08, 2014
Jkt 232001
no change in fuel rod dimensions.
Subsequently, the NRC staff approved
topical report, BAW–10240P–A,
‘‘Incorporation of M5 Properties in
Framatome ANP Approved Methods’’
(dated May 5, 2004; ADAMS Accession
No. ML041260560), which further
addressed M5® material properties with
respect to LOCA applications and
reached similar conclusions.
Based on the recently completed
LOCA research program at Argonne
National Laboratory (ANL), the results
showed that cladding corrosion and
associated hydrogen pickup had a
significant impact on postquench
ductility. The research identified a new
embrittlement mechanism referred to as
hydrogen-enhanced beta layer
embrittlement. Pretest characterization
of irradiated M5® fuel cladding
segments at ANL provides further
evidence of favorable corrosion and
hydrogen pickup characteristics of M5®
as compared with standard zircaloy.
Due to its favorable hydrogen pickup,
fuel rods with M5® zirconium-based
alloy cladding are less susceptible to
this new embrittlement mechanism.
Furthermore, ANL postquench
ductility tests on un-irradiated and
irradiated M5® cladding segments
demonstrate that the 10 CFR 50.46(b)
acceptance criteria (i.e., 2200 degrees
Fahrenheit and 17-percent equivalent
cladding reacted) remain conservative
up to the current burnup limit of 62
GWd/MTU. Information provided in the
previously approved M5® topical
reports and recent ANL LOCA research
demonstrate that the acceptance criteria
within 10 CFR 50.46 remain valid for
the M5® alloy material, and thus the
underlying purpose of the rule—to
maintain a degree of post-quench
ductility in the fuel cladding material
through ECCS performance criteria—
would be served if an exemption were
granted to allow those criteria to apply
to M5® clad fuel.
In addition, utilizing currentlyapproved LOCA models and methods
and consistent with technical
specifications, the licensee will perform
an evaluation to ensure that the M5®
fuel rods continue to satisfy 10 CFR
50.46 acceptance criteria. Therefore, for
the reasons above, granting the
exemption request will ensure that the
underlying purpose of the rule is
achieved for St. Lucie Plant, Unit 1.
Thus, a strict application of the rule
(which would prohibit the applicability
of ECCS performance acceptance criteria
to M5® clad fuel rods) is not necessary
to achieve the underlying purpose of the
rule.
Paragraph I.A.5 of Appendix K to 10
CFR Part 50 states that the rates of
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19661
energy, hydrogen concentration, and
cladding oxidation from the metal-water
reaction shall be calculated using the
Baker-Just equation. Since the BakerJust equation presumes the use of
zircaloy clad fuel, strict application of
the rule would not permit use of the
equation for the advanced zirconiumbased M5® alloy for determining
acceptable fuel performance. The
underlying intent of this portion of the
appendix, however, is to ensure that the
analysis of fuel response to LOCAs is
conservatively calculated. The approved
AREVA topical reports show that due to
the similarities in the chemical
composition of the advanced zirconiumbased M5® alloy and zircaloy, the
application of the Baker-Just equation in
the analysis of the M5® clad fuel rods
will continue to conservatively bound
all post-LOCA scenarios. For the reasons
above, granting the exemption request
will ensure that the Baker-Just equation
can be applied to M5® clad fuel and that
the underlying purpose of the rule is
achieved for St. Lucie Plant, Unit 1.
Thus, a strict application of the rule
(which would preclude the application
of the Baker-Just equation) is not
necessary to achieve the underlying
purpose of the rule.
Based upon results of metal-water
reaction testing and mechanical testing
which ensure the applicability of 10
CFR 50.46 acceptance criteria and 10
CFR 50 Appendix K methods, the staff
finds it acceptable to grant an
exemption from the requirements of 10
CFR 50.46 and Appendix K to 10 CFR
Part 50 to allow these regulations to
apply to, and enable the use of, fuel rods
with M5® zirconium-based alloy at St.
Lucie Plant, Unit 1. Therefore, the
exemption presents no undue risk to
public health and safety.
D. The Exemption Is Consistent With the
Common Defense and Security
The licensee’s exemption request is
only to allow the application of the
aforementioned regulations to an
improved fuel rod cladding material
that is not specified or presumed by the
cited regulations. In its letter dated May
10, 2013, the licensee stated that 10 CFR
50.46 and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix K,
requirements and acceptance criteria
will be maintained. The licensee is
required to handle and control special
nuclear material in these assemblies in
accordance with its approved plant
procedures. This change to the reactor
core internals is adequately controlled
by NRC requirements and is not related
to security issues. Therefore, the NRC
staff determined that this exemption
does not impact common defense and
E:\FR\FM\09APN1.SGM
09APN1
19662
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 68 / Wednesday, April 9, 2014 / Notices
security and thus, is consistent with the
common defense and security.
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
E. Environmental Considerations
The NRC staff determined that the
exemption discussed herein meets the
eligibility criteria for the categorical
exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)
because it is related to a requirement
concerning the installation or use of a
facility component located within the
restricted area, as defined in 10 CFR
Part 20, and the granting of this
exemption involves: (i) No significant
hazards consideration, (ii) no significant
change in the types or a significant
increase in the amounts of any effluents
that may be released offsite, and (iii) no
significant increase in individual or
cumulative occupational radiation
exposure. Therefore, in accordance with
10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental
impact statement or environmental
assessment need to be prepared in
connection with the NRC’s
consideration of this exemption request.
The basis for the NRC staff’s
determination is discussed in the
following evaluation of the
requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(i)–
(iii).
Requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(i)
The NRC staff evaluated the issue of
no significant hazards consideration,
using the standards described in 10 CFR
50.92(c), as presented as follows:
1. Does the proposed exemption
involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated?
No. The proposed exemption would
allow the use of M5® fuel rod cladding
material in the St. Lucie Plant Unit 1
reactor core. The NRC-approved topical
reports, BAW–10227P–A and BAW–
10240(P)(A), address the M5® material
and demonstrate that it has essentially
the same properties as currently
licensed zircaloy. The fuel cladding
itself is not an accident initiator and
does not affect accident probability. Use
of M5® fuel rod cladding material will
continue to meet all 10 CFR 50.46
acceptance criteria and, therefore, will
not increase the consequences of an
accident. Therefore, the proposed
exemption does not involve a significant
increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated.
2. Does the proposed exemption
create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any
accident previously evaluated?
No. The use of M5® fuel rod cladding
material will not result in changes in the
operation or configuration of the
facility. The NRC-approved topical
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:54 Apr 08, 2014
Jkt 232001
reports BAW–10227P–A and BAW–
10240(P)(A) demonstrated that the
material properties of M5® are similar to
those of zircaloy. The M5® fuel rod
cladding material will perform similarly
to those fabricated from zircaloy, thus
precluding the possibility of the fuel
cladding becoming an accident initiator
and causing a new or different type of
accident. Therefore, the proposed
exemption does not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed exemption
involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
No. The proposed exemption does not
involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety because it has been
demonstrated that the material
properties of the M5® material are not
significantly different from those of
zircaloy. M5® is expected to perform
similarly to zircaloy for all normal
operating and accident scenarios,
including both LOCA and non-LOCA
scenarios. For LOCA scenarios, plantspecific LOCA analyses using M5®
properties demonstrate that the
acceptance criteria of 10 CFR 50.46 have
been satisfied. Therefore, the proposed
exemption does not involve a significant
reduction in a margin of safety.
Based on the above, the NRC staff
concludes that the proposed exemption
presents no significant hazards
consideration under the standards set
forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c), and,
accordingly, a finding of no significant
hazards consideration is justified.
Requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(ii)
The proposed exemption would allow
the use of M5® fuel rod cladding
material in the reactors. AREVA M5®
material has essentially the same
properties as the currently licensed
zircaloy cladding. The use of the M5®
fuel rod cladding material will not
significantly change the types of
effluents that may be released offsite, or
significantly increase the amount of
effluents that may be released offsite.
Therefore, the provisions of 10 CFR
51.22(c)(9)(ii) are met.
Requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(iii)
The proposed exemption would allow
the use of the M5® fuel rod cladding
material in the St. Lucie Plant, Unit 1
reactor core. M5® has essentially the
same properties as the currently used
zircaloy cladding. The use of the M5®
fuel rod cladding material will not
significantly increase individual
occupational radiation exposure, or
significantly increase cumulative
occupational radiation exposure.
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Therefore, the provisions of 10 CFR
51.22(c)(9)(iii) are met.
IV. Conclusions
Accordingly, the Commission has
determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR
50.12(a)(1), the exemption is authorized
by law, will not present an undue risk
to the public health and safety, and is
consistent with the common defense
and security. Also, special
circumstances required by 10 CFR
50.12(a)(2)(ii) are present. Therefore, the
Commission hereby grants the licensee
an exemption from the requirements of
10 CFR 50.46 and Appendix K to 10
CFR Part 50, to allow the application of
those criteria to, and the use of, M5®
fuel rod cladding material at St. Lucie
Plant Unit 1.
This exemption is effective upon
issuance.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day
of March 2014.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michele G. Evans,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2014–07972 Filed 4–8–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2014–0069]
Regulatory Guide 3.28, Welder
Qualification for Welding in Areas of
Limited Accessibility in Fuel
Reprocessing Plants and in Plutonium
Processing and Fuel Fabrication
Plants
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Regulatory guide; withdrawal.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is withdrawing
Regulatory Guide 3.28, ‘‘Welder
Qualification for Welding in Areas of
Limited Accessibility in Fuel
Reprocessing Plants and in Plutonium
Processing and Fuel Fabrication Plants.’’
This guide is being withdrawn because
more recently updated guidance is
provided in RG 1.71, Rev. 1, ‘‘Welder
Qualification for Areas of Limited
Accessibility,’’ which was updated in
March 2007.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID
NRC–2014–0069 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of
information regarding this document.
You may access publicly-available
information related to this action by the
following methods:
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\09APN1.SGM
09APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 68 (Wednesday, April 9, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19659-19662]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-07972]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-335; NRC-2014-0076]
Exemption for Florida Power & Light Company; St. Lucie Plant,
Unit 1
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Exemption; issuance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is granting an
[[Page 19660]]
exemption in response to a May 10, 2013, request from Florida Power &
Light Company for an exemption for the use of a different fuel rod
cladding material (AREVA M5[supreg]).
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2014-0076 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You
may access publicly-available information related to this action by the
following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2014-0076. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-
3422; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS,
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
ADAMS accession number for each document referenced in this document
(if that document is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time
that a document is referenced.
NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa M. Regner, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1906; email: Lisa.Regner@nrc.gov.
I. Background
Florida Power & Light Company (the licensee) is the holder of
Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-67, which authorizes
operation of the St. Lucie Plant, Unit 1. The license provides, among
other things, that the facility is subject to all rules, regulations,
and orders of the NRC now or hereafter in effect. The facility consists
of a pressurized-water reactor (PWR) located in St. Lucie County,
Florida.
II. Request/Action
In accordance with Sec. 50.12, of Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), ``Specific exemptions,'' the licensee, by letter
dated May 10, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No. ML13135A008), requested an
exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.46, ``Acceptance criteria
for emergency core cooling systems [ECCS] for light-water nuclear power
reactors,'' and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix K, ``ECCS Evaluation Models,''
to allow the use of fuel rods clad with AREVA M5[supreg] alloy for
future reload applications. The regulations in 10 CFR 50.46 contain
acceptance criteria for the ECCS for reactors fueled with zircaloy or
ZIRLO\TM\ fuel rod cladding material. In addition, Appendix K to 10 CFR
Part 50 requires that the Baker-Just equation be used to predict the
rates of energy release, hydrogen concentration, and cladding oxidation
from the metal/water reaction. The Baker-Just equation assumes the use
of a zirconium alloy, which is a material different from the AREVA
M5[supreg] material. The licensee requested the exemption because these
regulations do not have criteria for the use of fuel rods clad in a
material other than zircaloy or ZIRLO\TM\. Because the material
specifications of M5[supreg] differ from the specification for zircaloy
or ZIRLO\TM\, a plant-specific exemption is required to support the
reload applications for St. Lucie Plant Unit 1.
The exemption request relates solely to the cladding material
specified in these regulations (i.e., fuel rods with zircaloy or
ZIRLO\TM\ cladding material). This exemption would provide for the
application of the acceptance criteria of 10 CFR 50.46 and Appendix K
to 10 CFR Part 50 to fuel assembly designs using AREVA M5[supreg] fuel
rod cladding material.
III. Discussion
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, the Commission may, upon application by
any interested person, grant exemptions from the requirements of 10 CFR
Part 50, which are authorized by law, will not present an undue risk to
the public health and safety, and are consistent with the common
defense and security. Paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of 10 CFR 50.12 states that
the Commission will not consider granting an exemption unless special
circumstances are present, such as when application of the regulation
in the particular circumstance is not necessary to achieve the
underlying purpose of the rule.
A. Special Circumstances
Special circumstances, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii),
are present whenever application of the regulation in the particular
circumstances is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the
rule. The underlying purpose of 10 CFR 50.46 and Appendix K to 10 CFR
Part 50 is to establish acceptance criteria for ECCS performance. The
regulations in 10 CFR 50.46 and Appendix K are not expressly applicable
to M5[supreg] cladding material, because the M5[supreg] cladding
material is not specified in 10 CFR 50.46 or presumed in the Baker-Just
equation required by paragraph I.A.5 of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix K. The
evaluations described in the following sections of this exemption,
however, show that the intent of the regulation is met, in that,
subject to certain conditions, the acceptance criteria are valid for
M5[supreg] zircaloy-based alloy cladding, the material is less
susceptible to embrittlement, and the Baker-Just equation
conservatively bounds scenarios following a loss of coolant accident
(LOCA) for rods with M5[supreg] cladding material. Thus, a strict
application of the rule (which would preclude the applicability of ECCS
performance acceptance criteria to, and the use of, M5[supreg] clad
fuel rods) is not necessary to achieve the underlying purposes of 10
CFR 50.46 and Appendix K of 10 CFR Part 50. The purpose of these
regulations is achieved through the application of the requirements to
the use of M5[supreg] fuel rod cladding material. Therefore, the
special circumstances required by 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) for the
granting of an exemption exist.
B. The Exemption Is Authorized by Law
This exemption would allow the use of M5[supreg] fuel rod cladding
material for future reload applications at St. Lucie Plant, Unit 1.
Section 10 CFR 50.12 allows the NRC to grant exemptions from the
requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 provided that special circumstances are
present. The NRC staff determined that special circumstances exist to
grant the proposed exemption and that granting the exemption would not
result in a violation of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or
the Commission's regulations. Therefore, the exemption is authorized by
law.
C. The Exemption Presents No Undue Risk to Public Health and Safety
Section 10 CFR 50.46 requires that each boiling or pressurized
light-water nuclear power reactor fueled with uranium oxide pellets
within
[[Page 19661]]
cylindrical zircaloy or ZIRLO cladding must be provided with an ECCS
that must be designed so that its calculated cooling performance
following postulated LOCAs conforms to the criteria set forth in
paragraph (b) of this section. The underlying purpose of 10 CFR 50.46
is to establish acceptance criteria for ECCS performance at nuclear
power reactors. The NRC staff previously documented its approval of
AREVA topical report BAW-10227P, ``Evaluation of Advanced Cladding and
Structural Material (M5[supreg]) in PWR Reactor Fuel,'' in a safety
evaluation dated February 4, 2000 (ADAMS Accession No. ML003681490),
and concluded that the 10 CFR 50.46 and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix K,
criteria are applicable to M5[supreg] fuel, subject to compliance with
specific conditions. The specific conditions that address the use of
M5[supreg] with respect to ECCS performance requirements are: (1) the
corrosion limit will remain below 100 microns for all locations of the
fuel; (2) all conditions listed in the NRC safety evaluations for AREVA
methodologies for M5[supreg] fuel analysis will continue to be met; (3)
AREVA methodologies will be used only within the range for which
M5[supreg] data was acceptable and for which the verifications
discussed in the topical reports were performed; and (4) the burnup
limit for implementation of M5[supreg] is 62 gigawatt-days per megaton
uranium metal (GWd/MTU). The staff determined that the licensee has
satisfied these conditions. The corrosion limit stated in condition (1)
is verified by the licensee for each reload as required by TS 6.9.1.11,
``Core Operating Limits Report [COLR].'' The conditions from NRC
approved safety evaluations stated in condition (2) are incorporated as
restrictions in AREVA procedures that control the core reload designs
which are also verified by the licensee for each reload as required by
the COLR. The restrictions on the use of AREVA methodologies stated as
condition (3) are also incorporated as restrictions in AREVA procedures
that control the core reload designs which are also verified for each
reload as required by the COLR. Finally, the burnup limit stated in
condition (4) is currently part of the St. Lucie Plant, Unit 1, COLR,
and is also verified as part of the reload analysis required by the
COLR.
The AREVA topical report BAW-10227P-A, which was submitted to the
NRC by letter dated February 11, 2000 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML003685828), demonstrates that M5[supreg] has essentially the same
properties as the current zircaloy cladding material and requires no
change in fuel rod dimensions. Subsequently, the NRC staff approved
topical report, BAW-10240P-A, ``Incorporation of M5 Properties in
Framatome ANP Approved Methods'' (dated May 5, 2004; ADAMS Accession
No. ML041260560), which further addressed M5[supreg] material
properties with respect to LOCA applications and reached similar
conclusions.
Based on the recently completed LOCA research program at Argonne
National Laboratory (ANL), the results showed that cladding corrosion
and associated hydrogen pickup had a significant impact on postquench
ductility. The research identified a new embrittlement mechanism
referred to as hydrogen-enhanced beta layer embrittlement. Pretest
characterization of irradiated M5[supreg] fuel cladding segments at ANL
provides further evidence of favorable corrosion and hydrogen pickup
characteristics of M5[supreg] as compared with standard zircaloy. Due
to its favorable hydrogen pickup, fuel rods with M5[supreg] zirconium-
based alloy cladding are less susceptible to this new embrittlement
mechanism.
Furthermore, ANL postquench ductility tests on un-irradiated and
irradiated M5[supreg] cladding segments demonstrate that the 10 CFR
50.46(b) acceptance criteria (i.e., 2200 degrees Fahrenheit and 17-
percent equivalent cladding reacted) remain conservative up to the
current burnup limit of 62 GWd/MTU. Information provided in the
previously approved M5[supreg] topical reports and recent ANL LOCA
research demonstrate that the acceptance criteria within 10 CFR 50.46
remain valid for the M5[supreg] alloy material, and thus the underlying
purpose of the rule--to maintain a degree of post-quench ductility in
the fuel cladding material through ECCS performance criteria--would be
served if an exemption were granted to allow those criteria to apply to
M5[supreg] clad fuel.
In addition, utilizing currently-approved LOCA models and methods
and consistent with technical specifications, the licensee will perform
an evaluation to ensure that the M5[supreg] fuel rods continue to
satisfy 10 CFR 50.46 acceptance criteria. Therefore, for the reasons
above, granting the exemption request will ensure that the underlying
purpose of the rule is achieved for St. Lucie Plant, Unit 1. Thus, a
strict application of the rule (which would prohibit the applicability
of ECCS performance acceptance criteria to M5[supreg] clad fuel rods)
is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule.
Paragraph I.A.5 of Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50 states that the
rates of energy, hydrogen concentration, and cladding oxidation from
the metal-water reaction shall be calculated using the Baker-Just
equation. Since the Baker-Just equation presumes the use of zircaloy
clad fuel, strict application of the rule would not permit use of the
equation for the advanced zirconium-based M5[supreg] alloy for
determining acceptable fuel performance. The underlying intent of this
portion of the appendix, however, is to ensure that the analysis of
fuel response to LOCAs is conservatively calculated. The approved AREVA
topical reports show that due to the similarities in the chemical
composition of the advanced zirconium-based M5[supreg] alloy and
zircaloy, the application of the Baker-Just equation in the analysis of
the M5[supreg] clad fuel rods will continue to conservatively bound all
post-LOCA scenarios. For the reasons above, granting the exemption
request will ensure that the Baker-Just equation can be applied to
M5[supreg] clad fuel and that the underlying purpose of the rule is
achieved for St. Lucie Plant, Unit 1. Thus, a strict application of the
rule (which would preclude the application of the Baker-Just equation)
is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule.
Based upon results of metal-water reaction testing and mechanical
testing which ensure the applicability of 10 CFR 50.46 acceptance
criteria and 10 CFR 50 Appendix K methods, the staff finds it
acceptable to grant an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.46
and Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50 to allow these regulations to apply
to, and enable the use of, fuel rods with M5[supreg] zirconium-based
alloy at St. Lucie Plant, Unit 1. Therefore, the exemption presents no
undue risk to public health and safety.
D. The Exemption Is Consistent With the Common Defense and Security
The licensee's exemption request is only to allow the application
of the aforementioned regulations to an improved fuel rod cladding
material that is not specified or presumed by the cited regulations. In
its letter dated May 10, 2013, the licensee stated that 10 CFR 50.46
and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix K, requirements and acceptance criteria
will be maintained. The licensee is required to handle and control
special nuclear material in these assemblies in accordance with its
approved plant procedures. This change to the reactor core internals is
adequately controlled by NRC requirements and is not related to
security issues. Therefore, the NRC staff determined that this
exemption does not impact common defense and
[[Page 19662]]
security and thus, is consistent with the common defense and security.
E. Environmental Considerations
The NRC staff determined that the exemption discussed herein meets
the eligibility criteria for the categorical exclusion set forth in 10
CFR 51.22(c)(9) because it is related to a requirement concerning the
installation or use of a facility component located within the
restricted area, as defined in 10 CFR Part 20, and the granting of this
exemption involves: (i) No significant hazards consideration, (ii) no
significant change in the types or a significant increase in the
amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite, and (iii) no
significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation
exposure. Therefore, in accordance with 10 CFR 51.22(b), no
environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need to be
prepared in connection with the NRC's consideration of this exemption
request. The basis for the NRC staff's determination is discussed in
the following evaluation of the requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(i)-
(iii).
Requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(i)
The NRC staff evaluated the issue of no significant hazards
consideration, using the standards described in 10 CFR 50.92(c), as
presented as follows:
1. Does the proposed exemption involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
No. The proposed exemption would allow the use of M5[supreg] fuel
rod cladding material in the St. Lucie Plant Unit 1 reactor core. The
NRC-approved topical reports, BAW-10227P-A and BAW-10240(P)(A), address
the M5[supreg] material and demonstrate that it has essentially the
same properties as currently licensed zircaloy. The fuel cladding
itself is not an accident initiator and does not affect accident
probability. Use of M5[supreg] fuel rod cladding material will continue
to meet all 10 CFR 50.46 acceptance criteria and, therefore, will not
increase the consequences of an accident. Therefore, the proposed
exemption does not involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed exemption create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
No. The use of M5[supreg] fuel rod cladding material will not
result in changes in the operation or configuration of the facility.
The NRC-approved topical reports BAW-10227P-A and BAW-10240(P)(A)
demonstrated that the material properties of M5[supreg] are similar to
those of zircaloy. The M5[supreg] fuel rod cladding material will
perform similarly to those fabricated from zircaloy, thus precluding
the possibility of the fuel cladding becoming an accident initiator and
causing a new or different type of accident. Therefore, the proposed
exemption does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed exemption involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
No. The proposed exemption does not involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety because it has been demonstrated that the
material properties of the M5[supreg] material are not significantly
different from those of zircaloy. M5[supreg] is expected to perform
similarly to zircaloy for all normal operating and accident scenarios,
including both LOCA and non-LOCA scenarios. For LOCA scenarios, plant-
specific LOCA analyses using M5[supreg] properties demonstrate that the
acceptance criteria of 10 CFR 50.46 have been satisfied. Therefore, the
proposed exemption does not involve a significant reduction in a margin
of safety.
Based on the above, the NRC staff concludes that the proposed
exemption presents no significant hazards consideration under the
standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c), and, accordingly, a finding of
no significant hazards consideration is justified.
Requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(ii)
The proposed exemption would allow the use of M5[supreg] fuel rod
cladding material in the reactors. AREVA M5[supreg] material has
essentially the same properties as the currently licensed zircaloy
cladding. The use of the M5[supreg] fuel rod cladding material will not
significantly change the types of effluents that may be released
offsite, or significantly increase the amount of effluents that may be
released offsite. Therefore, the provisions of 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(ii)
are met.
Requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(iii)
The proposed exemption would allow the use of the M5[supreg] fuel
rod cladding material in the St. Lucie Plant, Unit 1 reactor core.
M5[supreg] has essentially the same properties as the currently used
zircaloy cladding. The use of the M5[supreg] fuel rod cladding material
will not significantly increase individual occupational radiation
exposure, or significantly increase cumulative occupational radiation
exposure. Therefore, the provisions of 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9)(iii) are met.
IV. Conclusions
Accordingly, the Commission has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR
50.12(a)(1), the exemption is authorized by law, will not present an
undue risk to the public health and safety, and is consistent with the
common defense and security. Also, special circumstances required by 10
CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) are present. Therefore, the Commission hereby
grants the licensee an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.46
and Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50, to allow the application of those
criteria to, and the use of, M5[supreg] fuel rod cladding material at
St. Lucie Plant Unit 1.
This exemption is effective upon issuance.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day of March 2014.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michele G. Evans,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2014-07972 Filed 4-8-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
