Dominion Energy Kewaunee, Inc.; Kewaunee Power Station, 65715-65727 [2014-26292]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 2014 / Notices
The comment period for the draft
EIS (79 FR 49820; August 22, 2014) has
been extended to December 6, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2014–0149. 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.
• Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey,
Office of Administration, Mail Stop:
3WFN–06–A44M, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001.
For additional direction on obtaining
information and submitting comments,
see ‘‘Obtaining Information and
Submitting Comments’’ in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Allen Fetter, Office of New Reactors,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001, telephone:
301–415–8556, email: Allen.Fetter@
nrc.gov.
DATES:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Information and
Submitting Comments
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2014–
0149, when contacting the NRC about
the availability of information regarding
this document. You may obtain
publicly-available information related to
this action by the following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for NRC Docket ID NRC–2014–0149.
• 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 draft EIS and an
accompanying reader’s guide are
available in ADAMS under Accession
No. ML14219A304.
• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and
purchase copies of public documents at
the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:42 Nov 04, 2014
Jkt 235001
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
• Project Web site: The draft EIS can
be accessed online at the PSEG ESP
specific Web page at https://www.nrc.
gov/reactors/new-reactors/esp/
pseg.html.
• Salem Free Public Library: The draft
EIS is available for public inspection at
112 West Broadway, Salem, New Jersey,
08079.
B. Submitting Comments
Please include Docket ID NRC–2014–
0149 in the subject line of your
comment submission, in order to ensure
that the NRC is able to make your
comment submission available to the
public in this docket.
The NRC cautions you not to include
identifying or contact information in
comment submissions that you do not
want to be publicly disclosed in your
comment submission. The NRC will
post all comment submissions at
https://www.regulations.gov as well as
enter the comment submissions into
ADAMS, and the NRC does not
routinely edit comment submissions to
remove identifying or contact
information.
If you are requesting or aggregating
comments from other persons for
submission to the NRC, then you should
inform those persons not to include
identifying or contact information that
they do not want to be publicly
disclosed in their comment submission.
Your request should state that the NRC
does not routinely edit comment
submissions to remove such information
before making the comment
submissions available to the public or
entering the comment submissions into
ADAMS.
II. Discussion
The application submitted by PSEG
Power, LLC, and PSEG Nuclear, LLC
(PSEG), for an ESP was submitted by
letter dated May 25, 2010 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML101480484), pursuant
to Part 52 of Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations. A notice of receipt
and availability of the application,
which included the environmental
report, was published in the Federal
Register on June 18, 2010 (75 FR 34794).
A notice of acceptance for docketing of
the ESP application was published in
the Federal Register on August 13, 2010
(75 FR 49539). A notice of intent to
prepare a draft environmental impact
statement (EIS) and to conduct the
scoping process was published in the
Federal Register on October 15, 2010
(75 FR 63521). On August 22, 2014, the
NRC and USACE published for public
comment the draft EIS in the Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65715
Register (79 FR 49820). The purpose of
this solicitation was to obtain public
comments on the draft EIS for NRC staff
to consider in preparing the final EIS.
The public comment period was to have
ended on November 6, 2014. Extensions
to the 75-day comment period may be
provided at the discretion of the NRC
staff if special circumstances are
present. The NRC staff has determined
that special circumstances exist that
support extending this comment period.
Those special circumstances include the
recent identification of some
individuals and organizations with
special knowledge and expertise in the
area of environmental justice that had
not been aware of the original notice
and other outreach efforts. In order to
gain additional information on any
minority or low-income populations
that might be disproportionately
affected, the NRC has determined that it
is prudent, in this instance, to extend
the public comment period on this
document until December 6, 2014, to
allow more time for members of the
public to submit their comments.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day
of October, 2014.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Frank Akstulewicz,
Director, Division of New Reactor Licensing,
Office of New Reactors.
[FR Doc. 2014–26301 Filed 11–4–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–305; NRC–2014–0219]
Dominion Energy Kewaunee, Inc.;
Kewaunee Power Station
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Exemption; issuance.
AGENCY:
Kewaunee Power Station
(KPS) is a decommissioning nuclear
power reactor that permanently shut
down on May 7, 2013, and permanently
defueled on May 14, 2013. In response
to a request from Dominion Energy
Kewaunee, Inc. (DEK or the licensee),
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is granting
exemptions from certain emergency
planning (EP) requirements. The
exemptions will eliminate the
requirements to maintain offsite
radiological emergency plans and
reduce the scope of the onsite
emergency planning activities at the
Kewaunee Power Station (KPS) based
on the reduced risks of accidents that
could result in an offsite radiological
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM
05NON1
65716
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 2014 / Notices
release when compared to operating
power reactors. The exemptions will
continue to maintain requirements for
onsite radiological emergency planning
and include provisions for capabilities
to communicate and coordinate with
offsite response authorities. The NRC
staff has concluded that the exemptions
being granted by this action will
maintain an acceptable level of
emergency preparedness at KPS given
its permanently shutdown and defueled
status, and that there is reasonable
assurance that adequate offsite
protective measures can and will be
taken by State and local government
agencies, if needed, in the event of a
radiological emergency at the KPS
facility.
Please refer to Docket ID
NRC–2014–0219 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of
information regarding this document.
You may obtain publicly-available
information related to this document
using any of the following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2014–0219. 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 access publicly
available documents online in the NRC
Library at https://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/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.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
William Huffman, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415–
2046; email: William.Huffman@nrc.gov.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:42 Nov 04, 2014
Jkt 235001
I. Background
The KPS facility is a
decommissioning power reactor located
on approximately 900 acres in Carlton
(Kewaunee County), Wisconsin, 27
miles southeast of Green Bay,
Wisconsin. The licensee, DEK, is the
holder of KPS Renewed Facility
Operating License No. DPR–43. 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.
By letter dated February 25, 2013
(ADAMS Accession No. ML13058A065),
DEK submitted a certification to the
NRC indicating it would permanently
cease power operations at KPS on May
7, 2013. On May 7, 2013, DEK
permanently shut down the KPS reactor.
On May 14, 2013, DEK certified that it
had permanently defueled the KPS
reactor vessel (ADAMS Accession No.
ML13135A209). As a permanently
shutdown and defueled facility, and in
accordance with § 50.82(a)(2) of Title 10
of the Code of Federal Regulations (10
CFR), KPS is no longer authorized to
operate the reactor or emplace nuclear
fuel into the reactor vessel. Kewaunee
Power Station is still authorized to
possess and store irradiated nuclear
fuel. Irradiated fuel is currently being
stored onsite in a spent fuel pool (SFP)
and in Independent Spent Fuel Storage
Installation (ISFSI) dry casks.
During normal power reactor
operations, the forced flow of water
through the reactor coolant system
(RCS) removes heat generated by the
reactor. The RCS, operating at high
temperatures and pressures, transfers
this heat through the steam generator
tubes converting non-radioactive
feedwater to steam, which then flows to
the main turbine generator to produce
electricity. Many of the accident
scenarios postulated in the updated
safety analysis reports (USARs) for
operating power reactors involve
failures or malfunctions of systems
which could affect the fuel in the
reactor core, which in the most severe
postulated accidents, would involve the
release of large quantities of fission
products. With the permanent cessation
of reactor operations at KPS and the
permanent removal of the fuel from the
reactor core, such accidents are no
longer possible. The reactor, RCS, and
supporting systems are no longer in
operation and have no function related
to the storage of the irradiated fuel.
Therefore, postulated accidents
involving failure or malfunction of the
reactor, RCS, or supporting systems are
no longer applicable.
PO 00000
Frm 00102
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Since KPS is permanently shutdown
and defueled, the only design basis
accident that could potentially result in
an offsite radiological release at KPS is
the fuel handling accident. Analysis
performed by DEK showed that 90 days
after KPS permanently shutdown, the
radiological consequence of the fuel
handling accident would not exceed the
limits established by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency’s
(EPA’s) Protective Action Guidelines
(PAGs) at the exclusion area boundary.
Based on the time that KPS has been
permanently shutdown (approximately
17 months), there is no longer any
possibility of an offsite radiological
release from a design basis-accident that
could exceed the EPA PAGs.
The EP requirements of 10 CFR 50.47,
‘‘Emergency plans,’’ and Appendix E to
10 CFR Part 50, ‘‘Emergency Planning
and Preparedness for Production and
Utilization Facilities,’’ continue to apply
to nuclear power reactors that have
permanently ceased operation and have
removed all fuel from the reactor vessel.
There are no explicit regulatory
provisions distinguishing EP
requirements for a power reactor that is
permanently shutdown and defueled
from a reactor that is authorized to
operate. In order for DEK to modify the
KPS emergency plan to reflect the
reduced risk associated with the
permanently shutdown and defueled
condition of KPS, certain exemptions
from the EP regulations must be
obtained before the KPS emergency plan
can be amended.
II. Request/Action
By letter dated July 31, 2013,
‘‘Request for Exemptions from Portions
of 10 CFR 50.47 and 10 CFR Part 50,
Appendix E’’ (ADAMS Accession No.
ML13221A182), DEK requested
exemptions from certain EP
requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 for KPS.
More specifically, DEK requested
exemptions from certain planning
standards in 10 CFR 50.47(b) regarding
onsite and offsite radiological
emergency plans for nuclear power
reactors; from certain requirements in
10 CFR 50.47(c)(2) that require
establishment of plume exposure and
ingestion pathway emergency planning
zones for nuclear power reactors; and
from certain requirements in 10 CFR
Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV, which
establishes the elements that make up
the content of emergency plans. In a
letter dated December 11, 2013 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML13351A040), DEK
provided responses to the NRC staff’s
request for additional information (RAI)
concerning the proposed exemptions. In
a letter dated January 10, 2014, DEK
E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM
05NON1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 2014 / Notices
provided a supplemental response to
the RAI (ADAMS Accession No.
ML14016A078), which contained
information applicable to the SFP
inventory makeup strategies for
mitigating the potential loss of water
inventory due to a beyond design-basis
accident. The information provided by
DEK included justifications for each
exemption requested. The exemptions
requested by DEK will eliminate the
requirements to maintain offsite
radiological emergency plans, reviewed
by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) under the requirements
of 44 CFR Part 350, and reduce the
scope of onsite emergency planning
activities. DEK stated that application of
all of the standards and requirements in
10 CFR 50.47(b), 10 CFR 50.47(c) and 10
CFR Part 50, Appendix E is not needed
for adequate emergency response
capability based on the reduced risks at
the permanently shutdown and
defueled facility. If offsite protective
actions where needed for a very
unlikely accident that could challenge
the safe storage of spent fuel at KPS,
provisions exist for offsite agencies to
take protective actions using a
comprehensive emergency management
plan (CEMP) under the National
Preparedness System to protect the
health and safety of the public. A CEMP
in this context, also referred to as an
emergency operations plan (EOP), is
addressed in FEMA Comprehensive
Preparedness Guide 101, ‘‘Developing
and Maintaining Emergency Operations
Plans.’’ Comprehensive Preparedness
Guide 101 is the foundation for State,
territorial, Tribal, and local emergency
planning in the United States. It
promotes a common understanding of
the fundamentals of risk-informed
planning and decision making and
helps planners at all levels of
government in their efforts to develop
and maintain viable, all-hazards, allthreats emergency plans. An EOP is
flexible enough for use in all
emergencies. It describes how people
and property will be protected; details
who is responsible for carrying out
specific actions; identifies the
personnel, equipment, facilities,
supplies and other resources available;
and outlines how all actions will be
coordinated. A comprehensive
emergency management plan is often
referred to as a synonym for ‘‘all hazards
planning.’’
III. Discussion
In accordance with 10 CFR 50.12,
‘‘Specific exemptions,’’ the Commission
may, upon application by any interested
person or upon its own initiative, grant
exemptions from the requirements of 10
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:42 Nov 04, 2014
Jkt 235001
CFR Part 50 when: (1) The exemptions
are authorized by law, will not present
an undue risk to public health or safety,
and are consistent with the common
defense and security; and (2) any of the
special circumstances listed in 10 CFR
50.12(a)(2) are present. These special
circumstances include, among other
things, that the application of the
regulation in the particular
circumstances would not serve the
underlying purpose of the rule or is not
necessary to achieve the underlying
purpose of the rule.
As noted previously, the current EP
regulations contained in 10 CFR
50.47(b) and Appendix E to 10 CFR Part
50 apply to both operating and
shutdown power reactors. The NRC has
consistently acknowledged that the risk
of an offsite radiological release at a
power reactor that has permanently
ceased operations and removed fuel
from the reactor vessel is significantly
lower, and the types of possible
accidents are significantly fewer, than at
an operating power reactor. However,
EP regulations are silent with regard to
the fact that once a power reactor
permanently ceases operation, the
consequences of credible emergency
accident scenarios are reduced. The
reduced risks generally relate to a
decrease in the potential for any
significant offsite radiological release
based on the preclusion of accidents
applicable to an operating power reactor
and on the reduced decay heat, and the
decay of short-lived radionuclides as
spent fuel ages. NUREG–1738,
‘‘Technical Study of Spent Fuel Pool
Accident Risk at Decommissioning
Nuclear Power Plants,’’ dated February
2001 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML010430066), confirmed that for
permanently shutdown and defueled
power reactors bounded by the
assumptions and conditions in the
report, the risk of offsite radiological
release is significantly less than for an
operating power reactor.
Similar to the EP exemptions
requested by DEK, prior EP exemptions
granted to permanently shutdown and
defueled power reactors did not relieve
the licensees of all EP requirements.
Rather, the exemptions allowed the
licensees to modify their emergency
plans commensurate with the credible
site-specific risks that were consistent
with a permanently shutdown and
defueled status. Specifically, precedent
for the approval of the exemptions from
certain EP requirements for previous
permanently shutdown and defueled
power reactors were based on
demonstrating that: (1) The radiological
consequences of design-basis accidents
would not exceed the limits of the EPA
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65717
PAGs at the exclusion area boundary,
and; (2) in the unlikely event of a
beyond design-basis accident resulting
in a loss of all modes of heat transfer
from the fuel stored in the SFP, there is
sufficient time to initiate appropriate
mitigating actions, and if needed, for
offsite authorities to implement offsite
protective actions using a CEMP
approach to protect the health and
safety of the public.
With respect to design-basis accidents
at KPS, the licensee provided analysis
demonstrating that 90 days after KPS
was permanently shutdown, the
radiological consequences of the only
remaining design-basis accident with
potential for offsite radiological release
(the fuel handling accident) will not
exceed the limits of the EPA PAGs at the
exclusion area boundary. Therefore,
because KPS has been permanently
shutdown for approximately 17 months,
there is no longer any design-basis
accident that would warrant an offsite
radiological emergency plan meeting the
requirements of 10 CFR Part 50.
With respect to beyond design-basis
accidents at KPS, the licensee analyzed
the two bounding beyond design-basis
accidents that have a potential for a
significant offsite release. One of these
beyond design-basis accidents involves
a complete loss of SFP water inventory,
where cooling of the spent fuel would
be primarily accomplished by natural
circulation of air through the uncovered
spent fuel assemblies. The licensee’s
analysis of this accident shows that by
October 30, 2014, air cooling of the
spent fuel assemblies will be sufficient
to keep the fuel within a safe
temperature range indefinitely without
fuel damage or offsite radiological
release. The other beyond design-basis
accident analysis performed by the
licensee could not completely rule out
the possibility of a radiological release
from a SFP. This more limiting analysis
assumes an incomplete drain down of
the SFP water, or some other
catastrophic event (such as a complete
drainage of the SFP with rearrangement
of spent fuel rack geometry and/or the
addition of rubble to the SFP), that
would effectively impede any decay
heat removal through all possible modes
of cooling. The licensee’s analysis
demonstrates that as of October 21,
2014, there would be at least 10 hours
after the loss of all cooling means
considered in the analysis for the
described beyond design-basis accident,
before the spent fuel cladding would
reach a temperature where the potential
for a significant offsite radiological
release could occur. This analysis
conservatively does not consider the
period of time from the initiating event
E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM
05NON1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
65718
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 2014 / Notices
causing a loss of SFP water inventory
until all cooling means are lost.
The NRC staff has verified DEK’s
analyses and its calculations. The
analyses provide reasonable assurance
that in granting the requested exemption
to DEK, there is no design-basis accident
that will result in an offsite radiological
release exceeding the EPA PAGs at the
site boundary. In the unlikely event of
a beyond design-basis accident affecting
the SFP that results in a complete loss
of heat removal via all modes of heat
transfer, there will be at least 10 hours
available before an offsite release might
occur and, therefore, at least 10 hours to
initiate appropriate mitigating actions to
restore a means of heat removal to the
spent fuel. If a radiological release were
projected to occur under this unlikely
scenario, a minimum of 10 hours is
considered sufficient time for offsite
authorities to implement protective
actions using a CEMP approach to
protect the health and safety of the
public.
The NRC staff reviewed the licensee’s
justification for the requested
exemptions against the criteria in 10
CFR 50.12(a), in addition to considering
the basis for prior EP exemption
requests as discussed above, to
determine whether the exemptions
should be granted. After evaluating the
exemption requests, the staff
determined, as described below, that the
criteria in 10 CFR50.12(a) are met, and
that the exemptions should be granted.
Assessment of the DEK EP exemptions
is described in SECY–14–0066,
‘‘Request by Dominion Energy
Kewaunee, Inc. for Exemptions from
Certain Emergency Planning
Requirements,’’ dated June 27, 2014
(ADAMS Accession No. ML14072A257).
The Commission approved the NRC
staff’s intention to grant the exemptions
in the staff requirements memorandum
(SRM) to SECY–14–0066, dated August
7, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML14219A366). Descriptions of the
specific exemptions being granted to
DEK, with the NRC staff’s basis for
granting each exemption, are provided
in SECY–14–0066 and summarized in a
table at the end of this document. The
staff’s detailed review and technical
basis for the approval of the specific EP
exemptions being granted to DEK are
provided in the NRC staff’s safety
evaluation enclosed in NRC letter dated
October 27, 2014 (ADAMS Accession
No. ML14261A223).
A. Authorized by Law
The licensee has proposed
exemptions from certain EP
requirements in 10 CFR 50.47(b), 10
CFR 50.47(c)(2), and 10 CFR Part 50,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:42 Nov 04, 2014
Jkt 235001
Appendix E, Section IV, that would
allow DEK to revise the KPS Emergency
Plan to reflect the permanently
shutdown and defueled condition of the
station. As stated above, in accordance
with 10 CFR 50.12, the Commission
may, upon application by any interested
person or upon its own initiative, grant
exemptions from the requirements of 10
CFR Part 50. The NRC staff has
determined that granting of the
licensee’s proposed exemptions will not
result in a violation of the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or the
Commission’s regulations. Therefore,
the exemptions are authorized by law.
B. No Undue Risk to Public Health and
Safety
As stated previously, DEK provided
analyses that show the radiological
consequences of design-basis accidents
will not exceed the limits of the EPA
PAGs at the exclusion area boundary.
Therefore, offsite radiological
emergency plans required under 10 CFR
Part 50 are no longer needed for
protection of the public beyond the
exclusion area boundary based on the
radiological consequences of designbasis accidents still possible at KPS.
Although very unlikely, there are
postulated beyond design-basis
accidents that might result in significant
offsite radiological releases. However,
NUREG–1738 confirms that the risk of
beyond design-basis accidents is greatly
reduced at permanently shutdown and
defueled reactors. The staff’s analyses in
NUREG–1738 concludes that the event
sequences important to risk at
permanently shutdown and defueled
power reactors are limited to large
earthquakes and cask drop events. For
EP assessments, this is an important
difference relative to operating power
reactors where typically a large number
of different sequences make significant
contributions to risk. Per NUREG–1738,
relaxation of offsite EP requirements
under 10 CFR Part 50 a few months after
shutdown resulted in only a small
change in risk. The report further
concludes that the change in risk due to
relaxation of offsite EP requirements is
small because the overall risk is low,
and because even under current EP
requirements for operating power
reactors, EP was judged to have
marginal impact on evacuation
effectiveness in the severe earthquakes
that dominate SFP risk. All other
sequences including cask drops (for
which offsite radiological emergency
plans are expected to be more effective)
are too low in likelihood to have a
significant impact on risk.
Therefore, granting exemptions
eliminating the requirements of 10 CFR
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
50 to maintain offsite radiological
emergency plans and reducing the scope
of onsite emergency planning activities
will not present an undue risk to the
public health and safety.
C. Consistent With the Common Defense
and Security
The requested exemptions by DEK
only involve EP requirements under 10
CFR Part 50 and will allow DEK to
revise the KPS Emergency Plan to reflect
the permanently shutdown and
defueled condition of the facility.
Physical security measures at KPS are
not affected by the requested EP
exemptions. The discontinuation of
offsite radiological emergency plans and
the reduction in scope of the onsite
emergency planning activities at KPS
will not adversely affect DEK’s ability to
physically secure the site or protect
special nuclear material. Therefore, the
proposed exemptions are consistent
with the common defense and security.
D. 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 50.47(b), 10 CFR
50.47(c)(2), and 10 CFR Part 50,
Appendix E, Section IV, is to provide
reasonable assurance that adequate
protective measures can and will be
taken in the event of a radiological
emergency, to establish plume exposure
and ingestion pathway emergency
planning zones for nuclear power
plants, and to ensure that licensees
maintain effective offsite and onsite
radiological emergency plans. The
standards and requirements in these
regulations were developed by
considering the risks associated with
operation of a power reactor at its
licensed full-power level. These risks
include the potential for a reactor
accident with offsite radiological dose
consequences.
As discussed previously, because KPS
is permanently shutdown and defueled,
there is no longer a risk of offsite
radiological release from a design-basis
accident and the risk of a significant
offsite radiological release from a
beyond design-basis accident is greatly
reduced when compared to an operating
power reactor. The NRC staff has
confirmed the reduced risks at KPS by
comparing the generic risk assumptions
in the analyses in NUREG–1738 to site
specific conditions at KPS and
determined that the risk values in
NUREG–1738 bound the risks presented
by KPS. Furthermore, the staff has
E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM
05NON1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 2014 / Notices
recently concluded in NUREG–2161,
‘‘Consequence Study of a BeyondDesign-Basis Earthquake Affecting the
Spent Fuel Pool for a U.S. Mark I
Boiling Water Reactor,’’ dated
September 2014 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML14255A365), that, consistent with
earlier research studies, SFPs are robust
structures that are likely to withstand
severe earthquakes without leaking
cooling water and potentially
uncovering the spent fuel. The NUREG–
2161 study shows the likelihood of a
radiological release from the spent fuel
after the analyzed severe earthquake at
the reference plant to be about one time
in 10 million years or lower.
The licensee has analyzed sitespecific beyond design-basis accidents
to determine the risk of a significant
offsite radiological release. In one such
analysis, DEK determined that if all the
normal cooling systems used to cool the
SFP were lost and not restored for the
duration of the postulated accident,
then as of September 20, 2014, the SFP
at the KPS would take 120 hours before
it would begin to boil and, due to the
loss of SFP water level from the
resulting boil off, it would take 26 days
for the water inventory to lower to a
level of three feet from the top of the
fuel. Additionally, DEK analysis shows
that as of October 30, 2014, in the event
of a complete SFP drain down due to a
loss of water inventory, assuming
natural circulation of air through the
spent fuel racks was available, then the
peak fuel clad temperature would
remain below 1049 °F (565 °C), the
temperature at which incipient cladding
failure may occur. Therefore, in this
postulated accident, fuel cladding
remains intact and an offsite
radiological release would not take
place.
The only beyond design-basis
accident analysis that reached a
condition where a significant offsite
release might occur involved a scenario
where the SFP drained in such a way
that all modes of cooling or heat transfer
are assumed to be unavailable. This
results in an adiabatic heat-up of the
spent fuel. DEK analysis of this beyond
design-basis accident shows that as of
October 21, 2014, a minimum of 10
hours would be available between the
time the fuel is uncovered (at which
time adiabatic heat-up begins), until the
fuel cladding reaches a temperature of
1652 °F (900 °C), the temperature
associated with rapid cladding
oxidation and the potential for a
significant radiological release.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:42 Nov 04, 2014
Jkt 235001
Exemptions from the offsite EP
requirements in 10 CFR 50 have
previously been approved by the NRC
when the site-specific analyses show
that at least 10 hours is available
following a loss of SFP coolant
inventory accident with no air cooling
(or other methods of removing decay
heat) until cladding of the hottest fuel
assembly reaches the zirconium rapid
oxidation temperature. The staff
concluded in its previously granted
exemptions, as it does with the DEK
requested EP exemptions, that if a
minimum of 10 hours is available to
initiate mitigative actions consistent
with plant conditions, or if needed, for
offsite authorities to implement
protective actions using a CEMP
approach, then offsite radiological
emergency plans, required under 10
CFR Part 50, are not necessary at
permanently shutdown and defueled
power reactor licensees.
Additionally, DEK committed to
enhanced SFP makeup strategies in its
letter to the NRC dated August 23, 2014
(ADAMS Accession No. ML13242A019).
The multiple strategies for providing
makeup to the SFP include: Using
existing plant systems for inventory
makeup; supplying water through hoses
to a spool piece connection to the
existing SFP piping; or using a dieseldriven portable pump to take suction
from Lake Michigan and provide
makeup or spray to the SFP. These
strategies will continue to be required as
a license condition. DEK further
provides that the equipment needed to
perform these actions will continue to
be located onsite, and that the external
makeup strategy (using a diesel driven
portable pump) is capable of being
deployed within 2 hours. Considering
the very low probability of beyond
design-basis accidents affecting the SFP,
these diverse strategies provide defensein-depth and time to provide makeup or
spray to the SFP before the onset of any
postulated offsite radiological release.
For all the reasons stated above, the
staff finds that the licensee’s requested
exemptions to meet the underlying
purpose of all of the standards in 10
CFR 50.47(b), and requirements in 10
CFR 50.47(c)(2) and Appendix E,
acceptably satisfy the special
circumstances in 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii)
in view of the greatly reduced risk of
offsite radiological consequences
associated with the permanently
shutdown and defueled state of the KPS
facility.
PO 00000
Frm 00105
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
65719
The NRC staff has concluded that the
exemptions being granted by this action
will maintain an acceptable level of
emergency preparedness at KPS and, if
needed, that there is reasonable
assurance that adequate offsite
protective measures can and will be
taken by State and local government
agencies using a CEMP approach in the
event of a radiological emergency at the
KPS facility. Since the underlying
purposes of the rules, as exempted,
would continue to be achieved, even
with the elimination of the requirements
under 10 CFR Part 50 to maintain offsite
radiological emergency plans and
reduction in the scope of the onsite
emergency planning activities at KPS,
the special circumstances required by
10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) exist.
E. Environmental Considerations
In accordance with 10 CFR 51.31(a),
the Commission has determined that the
granting of this exemption will not have
a significant effect on the quality of the
human environment as discussed in the
NRC staff’s Finding of No Significant
Impact and associated Environmental
Assessment published October 7, 2014
(79 FR 60513).
V. Conclusions
Accordingly, the Commission has
determined, pursuant to 10 CFR
50.12(a), that DEK’s request for
exemptions from certain EP
requirements in 10 CFR 50.47(b), 10
CFR 50.47(c)(2), and 10 CFR Part 50,
Appendix E, Section IV, and as
summarized in the table at the end of
this document, 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. Also, special
circumstances are present. Therefore,
the Commission hereby grants DEK
exemptions from certain EP
requirements of 10 CFR 50.47(b), 10
CFR 50.47(c)(2), and 10 CFR Part 50,
Appendix E, Section IV, as discussed
and evaluated in detail in the staff’s
safety evaluation dated October 27,
2014. The exemptions are effective as of
October 30, 2014.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day
of October, 2014.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michele G. Evans,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM
05NON1
65720
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 2014 / Notices
IV—TABLE OF EXEMPTIONS GRANTED TO DEK
NRC staff basis for exemption
10 CFR 50.47(b) .......................................................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require offsite emergency response plans.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
10 CFR 50.47
In the Statement of Considerations (SOC) for the final rule for emergency planning (EP) requirements for independent spent fuel storage
installations (ISFSIs) and for monitor retrievable storage installations
(MRS) (60 Federal Register (FR) 32430; June 22, 1995), the Commission responded to comments concerning offsite EP for ISFSIs or
an MRS and concluded that, ‘‘the offsite consequences of potential
accidents at an ISFSI or a MRS would not warrant establishing
Emergency Planning Zones [EPZ].’’
In a nuclear power reactor’s permanently defueled state, the accident
risks are more similar to an ISFSI or MRS than an operating nuclear
power plant. The EP program would be similar to that required for an
ISFSI under Section 72.32(a) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) when fuel stored in the spent fuel pool (SFP) has
more than 5 years of decay time and would not change substantially
when all the fuel is transferred from the SFP to an onsite ISFSI. Exemptions from offsite EP requirements have previously been approved when the site-specific analyses show that at least 10 hours is
available from a partial drain-down event where cooling of the spent
fuel is not effective until the hottest fuel assembly reaches 900 °C.
The technical basis that underlied the approval of the exemption request is based partly on the analysis of a time period that spent fuel
stored in the SFP is unlikely to reach the zirconium ignition temperature in less than 10 hours. This time period is based on a heat-up
calculation which uses several simplifying assumptions. Some of
these assumptions are conservative (adiabatic conditions), while others are non-conservative (no oxidation below 900 °C). Weighing the
conservatisms and non-conservatisms, the NRC staff judges that this
calculation reasonably represents conditions which may occur in the
event of an SFP accident. The staff concluded that if 10 hours were
available to initiate mitigative actions, or if needed, offsite protective
actions using a comprehensive emergency management plan
(CEMP), formal offsite radiological emergency plans are not necessary for these permanently defueled nuclear power reactor licensees.
As supported by the licensee’s SFP analysis, the NRC staff believes
an exemption to the requirements for formal offsite radiological emergency plans is justified for a zirconium fire scenario considering the
low likelihood of this event together with time available to take mitigative or protective actions between the initiating event and before
the onset of a postulated fire.
The Dominion Energy Kewaunee, Inc. (DEK) analysis has demonstrated that 90 days after shutdown, the radiological consequences of design-basis accidents will not exceed the limits of the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Protective Action
Guidelines (PAGs) at the exclusion area boundary. These analyses
also show that after the spent fuel has decayed for 17 months, for
beyond-design-basis events where the SFP is drained, air cooling
will prevent the fuel from reaching the lowest temperature where incipient cladding failure may occur (565 °C). In the event that air cooling is not possible, 10 hours is available to take mitigative or, if
needed, offsite protective actions using a CEMP from the time the
fuel is uncovered until it reaches the auto-ignition temperature of
900 °C.
DEK has also furnished information on its SFP inventory makeup strategies for mitigating the loss of water inventory. The multiple strategies for providing makeup to the SPF include: using existing plant
systems for inventory makeup; supplying water via hoses to a spool
piece connection to the existing SFP piping; or using a diesel-driven
portable pump to take suction from Lake Michigan and provide
makeup or spray to the SFP. DEK also stated that the tools and
equipment needed to perform these actions are located on site and
that the external makeup strategy (using a diesel driven portable
pump) was able to be deployed within 2 hours. DEK believes these
diverse strategies provide defense-in-depth and ample time to provide makeup or spray to the SFP prior to the onset of zirconium
cladding ignition when considering very low probability of beyond design-basis events affecting the SFP.
Refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b).
10 CFR 50.47(b)(1) ..................................................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the need for Emergency Planning Zones
(EPZs).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:42 Nov 04, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM
05NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 2014 / Notices
65721
IV—TABLE OF EXEMPTIONS GRANTED TO DEK—Continued
10 CFR 50.47
NRC staff basis for exemption
10 CFR 50.47(b)(3) ..................................................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the need for an Emergency Operations Facility.
Decommissioning power reactors present a low likelihood of any credible accident resulting in a radiological release together with the time
available to take mitigative or, if needed, offsite protective actions
using a CEMP between the initiating event and before the onset of a
postulated fire. As such, an emergency operations facility would not
be required. The ‘‘nuclear island,’’ control room, or other onsite location can provide for the communication and coordination with offsite
organizations for the level of support required.
Also refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b).
Decommissioning power reactors present a low likelihood of any credible accident resulting in a radiological release together with the time
available to take mitigative or if needed, offsite protective actions
using a CEMP between the initiating event and before the onset of a
postulated fire. As such, formal offsite radiological emergency response plans are not required.
The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) document NEI 99–01, ‘‘Development of Emergency Action Levels for Non-Passive Reactors’’ (Revision 6), was found to be an acceptable method for development of
emergency action levels (EALs) and was endorsed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in a letter dated March 28,
2013 (ADAMS Accession No. ML12346A463). NEI 99–01 provides
EALs for non-passive operating nuclear power reactors, permanently
defueled reactors, and ISFSIs.
Also refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b).
Refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b).
10 CFR 50.47(b)(4) ..................................................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require reference to formal offsite radiological emergency response plans.
10 CFR 50.47(b)(5) ..................................................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require early notification of the public and a means
to provide instructions to the public within the plume exposure pathway Emergency Planning Zone.
10 CFR 50.47(b)(6) ..................................................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require prompt communications with the public.
10 CFR 50.47(b)(7) ..................................................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require information to be made available to the public on a periodic basis about how they will be notified and what their
initial protective actions should be.
10 CFR 50.47(b)(9) ..................................................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the capability for monitoring offsite consequences.
10 CFR 50.47(b)(10) ................................................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would reduce the range of protective actions developed for emergency workers and the public. Consideration of evacuation, sheltering, or the use of potassium iodide will no longer be necessary.
Evacuation times will no longer need to developed or updated. Protective actions for the ingestion exposure pathway EPZ will not need
to be developed.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
10 CFR 50.47(c)(2) ..................................................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the establishment of a 10 mile radius plume
exposure pathway EPZ and a 50 mile radius ingestion pathway EPZ.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:42 Nov 04, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4703
Refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b).
Refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b).
Refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b).
In the unlikely event of an SFP accident, the iodine isotopes, which
contribute to an off-site dose from an operating reactor accident, are
not present, so potassium iodide distribution would no longer serve
as an effective or necessary supplemental protective action.
The Commission responded to comments in its SOC for the final rule
for emergency planning requirements for ISFSIs and MRS facilities
(60 FR 32435), and concluded that, ‘‘the offsite consequences of potential accidents at an ISFSI or an MRS would not warrant establishing Emergency Planning Zones.’’ Additionally, in the SOC for the
final rule for EP requirements for ISFSIs and for MRS facilities (60
FR 32430), the Commission responded to comments concerning
site-specific EP that includes evacuation of surrounding population
for an ISFSI not at a reactor site, and concluded that, ‘‘The Commission does not agree that as a general matter emergency plans for an
ISFSI must include evacuation planning.’’
Also refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b).
Refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b)(10).
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM
05NON1
65722
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 2014 / Notices
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV
NRC staff basis for exemption
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV 1 .....................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require onsite protective actions during hostile action.
The EP Rule published in the Federal Register (76 FR 72560; November 23, 2011) amended certain requirements in 10 CFR Part 50.
Among the changes, the definition of ‘‘hostile action’’ was added as
an act directed toward a nuclear power plant or its personnel. This
definition is based on the definition of ‘‘hostile action’’ provided in
NRC Bulletin 2005–02, ‘‘Emergency Preparedness and Response
Actions for Security-Based Events.’’ NRC Bulletin 2005–02 was not
applicable to nuclear power reactors that have permanently ceased
operations and have certified that fuel has been removed from the
reactor vessel.
The NRC excluded non-power reactors from the scope of ‘‘hostile action’’ at the time of the rulemaking because, as defined in 10 CFR
50.2, a non-power reactor is not considered a nuclear power reactor
and a regulatory basis had not been developed to support the inclusion of non-power reactors within the scope of ‘‘hostile action.’’ Similarly, a decommissioning power reactor or an ISFSI is not a ‘‘nuclear
reactor’’ as defined in 10 CFR Part 50. A decommissioning power reactor also has a low likelihood of a credible accident resulting in radiological releases requiring offsite protective measures. For all of
these reasons, the staff concludes that a decommissioning power reactor is not a facility that falls within the scope of ‘‘hostile action.’’
Similarly, for security, risk insights can be used to determine which targets are important to protect against sabotage. A level of security
commensurate with the consequences of a sabotage event is required and is evaluated on a site-specific basis. The severity of the
consequences declines as fuel ages and, thereby, removes over
time the underlying concern that a sabotage attack could cause offsite radiological consequences.
Although, this analysis provides a justification for exempting KPS from
‘‘hostile action’’ related requirements, some EP requirements for security-based events are maintained. The classification of securitybased events, notification of offsite authorities and coordination with
offsite agencies under a CEMP concept are still required.
Refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b)(10).
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV 2 .....................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language concerning the evacuation time analyses within the plume exposure
pathway EPZ for the licensee’s initial application
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV 3 .....................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require use of NRC-approved evacuation time estimates (ETEs) and updates to State and local governments when developing protective action strategies.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV 4 .....................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require licensees to develop evacuation time estimates based on the most recent census data and submit the ETE
analysis to the NRC prior to providing it to State and local government for developing protective action strategies.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV 5 .....................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require licensees to estimate the EPZ permanent
resident population changes once a year between decennial censuses.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV 6 .....................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the licensee to submit an updated ETE analysis to the NRC based on changes in the resident population that result in exceeding specific evacuation time increase criteria.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV A.1 ..................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from the word ‘‘operating’’ in the requirement to describe the normal plant organization.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV A.3 ..................................................
The NRC is granting exemption to the requirement to describe the licensee’s headquarters personnel sent to the site to augment the onsite emergency response organization.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:42 Nov 04, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.2.
Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.2.
Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.2.
Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.2.
Based on the permanently shutdown and defueled status of the reactor, a decommissioning reactor is not authorized to operate under 10
CFR 50.82(a). Because the licensee cannot operate the reactors, the
licensee does not have a ‘‘plant operating organization.’’
The number of staff at decommissioning sites is generally small but is
commensurate with the need to safely store spent fuel at the facility
in a manner that is protective of public health and safety. Decommissioning sites typically have a level of emergency response that does
not require response by the licensee’s headquarters personnel.
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM
05NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 2014 / Notices
65723
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV
NRC staff basis for exemption
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV A. 4 ................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the licensee to identify a position and function within its organization which will carry the responsibility for making offsite dose projections.
Although, the likelihood of events that would result in doses in excess
of the EPA PAGs to the public beyond the owner controlled area
boundary based on the permanently shutdown and defueled status
of the reactor is extremely low, the licensee still must be able to determine if a radiological release is occurring. If a release is occurring,
then the licensee staff should promptly communicate that information
to offsite authorities for their consideration. The offsite organizations
are responsible for deciding what, if any, protective actions should
be taken based on comprehensive emergency planning.
The number of staff at decommissioning sites is generally small but
should be commensurate with the need to operate the facility in a
manner that is protective of public health and safety.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV A. 5 ................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from the requirement for the licensee
to identify individuals with special qualifications for coping with emergencies.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV A.7 ..................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require a description of the assistance expected
from State, local, and Federal agencies for coping with a hostile action.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV A.8 ..................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from the requirement to identify the
State and local officials for ordering protective actions and evacuations.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV A.9 ..................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from the requirement for the licensee
to provide an analysis demonstrating that on-shift personnel are not
assigned responsibilities that would prevent them from performing
their assigned emergency plan functions.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV B.1 ..................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require offsite emergency actions levels and offsite
protective measures and associate offsite monitoring for the emergency conditions.
In addition, the NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule
language that would otherwise require emergency action levels
based on hostile action.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:42 Nov 04, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4703
Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.1.
Offsite emergency measures are limited to support provided by local
police, fire departments, and ambulance and hospital services, as
appropriate. Due to the low probability of design basis accidents or
other credible events to exceed the EPA PAGs, protective actions
such as evacuation should not be required, but could be implemented at the discretion of offsite authorities using a CEMP.
Also refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b)(10).
Responsibilities should be well defined in the emergency plan and procedures, regularly tested through drills and exercises audited and inspected by the licensee and the NRC. The duties of the onshift personnel at a decommissioning reactor facility are not as complicated
and diverse as those for an operating power reactor.
The NRC staff considered the similarity between the staffing levels at a
permanently shutdown and defueled reactor and staffing levels at an
operating power reactor site. The minimal systems and equipment
needed to maintain the spent nuclear fuel in the SFP or in a dry
cask storage system in a safe condition requires minimal personnel
and is governed by Technical Specifications. In the EP final rule published in the Federal Register (76 FR 72560; November 23, 2011),
the NRC concluded that the staffing analysis requirement was not
necessary for non-power reactor licensees due to the small staffing
levels required to operate the facility.
The NRC staff also examined the actions required to mitigate the very
low probability beyond design-basis events for the SFP. Additionally,
DEK also furnished information on its SFP inventory makeup strategies for mitigating the loss of water inventory. The multiple strategies
for providing makeup to the SFP include: using existing plant systems for inventory makeup; supplying water via hoses to a spool
piece connection to the existing SFP piping; or using a diesel-driven
portable pump to take suction from Lake Michigan and provide
makeup or spray to the SFP. DEK further provided that the tools and
equipment needed to perform these actions are located on site and
the external makeup strategy (using a diesel driven portable pump)
was demonstrated to be capable of being deployed within 2 hours,
significantly less time than the 10 hours that would be available for
ad hoc response. DEK believes, and the NRC staff agrees, that
these diverse strategies provide defense-in-depth and ample time to
provide makeup or spray to the SFP prior to the onset of zirconium
cladding ignition when considering very low probability beyond design-basis events affecting the SFP.
NEI 99–01, ‘‘Development of Emergency Action levels for Non-Passive
Reactors’’ (Revision 6), was found to be an acceptable method for
development of EALs and was endorsed by the NRC in a letter
dated March 28, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No. ML12346A463). No
offsite protective actions are anticipated to be necessary, so classification above the alert level is no longer required, which is consistent with ISFSI facilities.
Also refer to basis for 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.1.
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM
05NON1
65724
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 2014 / Notices
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV
NRC staff basis for exemption
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV C.1 .................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require emergency actions levels based on operating reactor concerns, such as offsite radiation monitoring, pressure
in containment, and the response of the emergency core cooling system. In addition, the NRC is striking language that would otherwise
require offsite emergency action levels of a site area emergency and
a general emergency.
Containment parameters do not provide an indication of the conditions
at a defueled facility and emergency core cooling systems are no
longer required. Other indications, such as SFP level or temperature,
can be used at sites where there is spent fuel in the SFPs.
In the SOC for the final rule for EP requirements for ISFSIs and MRS)
facilities (60 FR 32430), the Commission responded to comments
concerning a general emergency at an ISFSI and an MRS, and concluded that, ‘‘. . . an essential element of a General Emergency is
that a release can be reasonably expected to exceed EPA Protective
Action Guidelines exposure levels off site for more than the immediate site area.’’
The probability of a condition reaching the level above an emergency
classification of alert is very low. In the event of an accident at a
defueled facility that meets the conditions for relaxation of EP requirements, there will be available time for event mitigation and, if
necessary, implementation of offsite protective actions using a
CEMP.
NEI 99–01, ‘‘Development of Emergency Action levels for Non-Passive
Reactors,’’ (Revision 6) was found to be an acceptable method for
development of EALs and was endorsed by the NRC in a letter
dated March 28, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No. ML12346A463). No
offsite protective actions are anticipated to be necessary, so classification above the alert level is no longer required.
In the EP rule published in the Federal Register (76 FR 72560), nonpower reactor licensees were not required to assess, classify and
declare an emergency condition within 15 minutes. An SFP and an
ISFSI are also not nuclear power reactors as defined in the NRC’s
regulations. A decommissioning power reactor has a low likelihood of
a credible accident resulting in radiological releases requiring offsite
protective measures. For these reasons, the NRC staff concludes
that a decommissioning power reactor should not be required to assess, classify and declare an emergency condition within 15 minutes.
Refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b) and 10 CFR 50.47(b)(10).
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV C.2 .................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the licensee to assess, classify, and declare
an emergency condition within 15 minutes.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV D.1 .................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the licensee to reach agreement with local,
State, and Federal officials and agencies for prompt notification of
protective measures or evacuations and the associated titles of officials to be notified for each agency within the EPZs.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV D.2 .................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from the requirement for the licensee
to annually disseminate general information on emergency planning
and evacuations within the plume exposure pathway EPZ. The need
for signage or other measure to address transient populations is also
being struck.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV D.3 .................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the licensee to have the capability to make
notifications to State and local government agencies within 15 minutes of declaring an emergency.
Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.D.1.
While the capability needs to exist for the notification of offsite government agencies within a specified time period, previous exemptions
have allowed for extending the State and local government agencies’
notification time up to 60 minutes based on the site-specific justification provided.
DEK’s exemption request provides that the KPS will make notifications
to the State of Wisconsin, to the local county (Kewaunee) and the
NRC within 60 minutes of declaration of an event. In the permanently defueled condition of the reactor, the rapidly developing scenarios associated with events initiated during reactor power operation are no longer credible.
Also refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b) and 10 CFR 50.47(b)(10).
Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.D.3 regarding the alert and notification system requirements.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV D.4 .................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from the requirement for the licensee
to obtain FEMA approval of its backup alert and notification capability.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV E.8.a.(i) .......................................... Due to the low probability of design-basis accidents or other credible
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
events to exceed the EPA PAGs at the site boundary, the available
would otherwise require the licensee to have an onsite technical suptime for event mitigation at a decommissioning reactor and, if needport center and emergency operations facility..
ed, to implement offsite protective actions using a CEMP, an emergency operations facility (EOF) would not be required to support offsite agency response. Onsite actions may be directed from the control room or other location, without the requirements imposed on a
technical support center (TSC).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:42 Nov 04, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00110
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM
05NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 2014 / Notices
65725
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV
NRC staff basis for exemption
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV E.8.a.(ii) ..........................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the licensee to have an onsite operational
support center.
NUREG–0696, ‘‘Functional Criteria for Emergency Response Facilities,’’ provides that the operational support center (OSC) is an onsite
area separate from the control room and the TSC where licensee
operations support personnel will assemble in an emergency. For a
decommissioning power reactor, an OSC is no longer required to
meet its original purpose of an assembly area for plant logistical support during an emergency. The OSC function can be incorporated
into another facility.
Refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b)(3).
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV E.8.b. and subpart Sections IV
E.8.b.(1)–E.8.b.(5).
The NRC is granting exemption from the requirements related to an
offsite emergency operations facility location, space and size, communications capability, access to plant data and radiological information, and access to coping and office supplies.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV E.8.c. and Sections IV E.8.c.(1)–
E.8.c.(3).
The NRC is granting exemption from the requirements to have an
emergency operations facility with the capabilities to obtain and display plant data and radiological information; the capability to analyze
technical information and provide briefings; and the capability to support events occurring at more than one site (if the emergency operations center supports more than one site).
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV E.8.d ...............................................
The NRC is granting exemption from the requirements to have an alternate facility that would be accessible even if the site is under threat
of or experiencing hostile action, to function as a staging area for
augmentation of emergency response staff.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV E.8.e ...............................................
The NRC is granting exemption from the requirement regarding the
need for the licensee to comply with paragraph 8.b of this section
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV E.9.a ...............................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the licensee to have communications with
State and local governments that are within the plume exposure
pathway EPZ (which is no longer required by the exemption granted
to 10 CFR 50.47(b)(10)) but are not contiguous with or bordering on
the licensee site boundary.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV E.9.c ...............................................
The NRC is granting exemption from the requirements for communication and testing provisions between the control room, the onsite technical support center, State/local emergency operations facilities, and
field assessment teams.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV E.9.d ...............................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require provisions for communications from the control room, onsite technical support center, and emergency operations
facility with NRC Headquarters and appropriate Regional Operations
Center.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV F.1 and Section IV F.1. v.iii ...........
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the licensee to provide training and drills for
the licensee’s headquarters personnel, Civil Defense personnel, or
local news media.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV F.2 ..................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require testing of a public alert and notification system.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:42 Nov 04, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00111
Fmt 4703
Refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b)(3).
Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.1 regarding
hostile action.
Refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b)(3).
Refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b) and 10 CFR 50.47(b)(10).
Communications with State and local governments that are not contiguous with or bordering the site boundary will no longer be required.
However, the contiguous State and the local governments in which
the nuclear facility is located will still need to be informed of events
and emergencies, so lines of communication must be maintained.
Because of the low probability of design-basis accidents or other credible events that would be expected to exceed the EPA PAGs and the
available time for event mitigation and, if needed, implementation of
offsite protective actions using a CEMP, there is no need for the
TSC, EOF, or offsite field assessment teams.
Also refer to justification for 10 CFR 50.47(b)(3). Communication with
State and local emergency operation centers is maintained to coordinate assistance on site if required.
The functions of the control room, EOF, TSC, and OSC may be combined into one or more locations due to the smaller facility staff and
the greatly reduced required interaction with State and local emergency response facilities.
Also refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b).
Decommissioning power reactor sites typically have a level of emergency response that does not require additional response by the licensee’s headquarters personnel, Civil Defense personnel, or local
news media. Therefore, the NRC staff considers it reasonable to exempt the licensee from training and drill requirements for these personnel.
Because of the low probability of design basis accidents or other credible events that would be expected to exceed the limits of EPA
PAGs and the available time for event mitigation and offsite protective actions from a CEMP, the public alert and notification system will
not be used and, therefore, requires no testing.
Also refer to basis for 10 CFR 50.47(b).
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM
05NON1
65726
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 2014 / Notices
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV
NRC staff basis for exemption
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV F.2.a. and Section IV F.2.a.(i)
through IV F.2.a.(iii).
The NRC is granting exemption from the requirements for full participation exercises and the submittal of the associated exercise scenarios
to the NRC.
Due to the low probability of design basis accidents or other credible
events that would be expected to exceed the limits of EPA PAGs,
the available time for event mitigation and, if necessary, implementation of offsite protective actions using a CEMP, no formal offsite radiological emergency plans are required.
The intent of submitting exercise scenarios at an operating power reactor site is to ensure that licensees utilize different scenarios in order
to prevent the preconditioning of responders at power reactors. For
decommissioning power reactor sites, there are limited events that
could occur, and as such, the previously routine progression to general emergency in an operating power reactor site scenario is not applicable.
The licensee would be exempt from 10 CFR.
Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.F.2.a.(i)–(iii) because the licensee
would be exempt from the umbrella provision of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.F.2.a.
Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.F.2.a.
The low probability of design basis accidents or other credible events
that would exceed the EPA PAGs, the available time for event mitigation and, if necessary, implementation of offsite protective actions
using a CEMP, render a TSC, OSC and EOF unnecessary. The principal functions required by regulation can be performed at an onsite
location that does not meet the requirements of the TSC, OSC or
EOF.
Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.F.2.a.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV F.2.b ...............................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the licensee to submit scenarios for its biennial exercises of its onsite emergency plan. In addition, the NRC is
granting exemption from portions of the rule language that requires
assessment of offsite releases, protective action decision making,
and reference to the Technical Support Center, Operations Support
Center, and the Emergency Operations Facility.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV F.2.c. and Sections IV F.2.c.(1)
through F.2.c.(5).
The NRC is granting exemption from the requirements regarding the
need for the licensee to exercise offsite plans biennially with full participation by each offsite authority having a role under the radiological response plan. The NRC is also granting exemptions from the
conditions for conducting these exercises (including hostile action exercises) if two different licensees have facilities on the same site or
on adjacent, contiguous sites, or share most of the elements defining
co-located licensees.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV F.2.d ...............................................
The NRC is granting exemption from the requirements to obtain State
participation in an ingestion pathway exercise and a hostile action
exercise, with each State that has responsibilities, at least once per
exercise cycle.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV F.2.e ...............................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the licensee to allow participation exercise in
licensee drills by any State and local Government in the plume exposure pathway EPZ when requested.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV F.2.f ................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require FEMA to consult with the NRC on remedial
exercises. The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule
language that discuss the extent of State and local participation in
remedial exercises.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV F.2.i ................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the licensee to drill and exercise scenarios
that include a wide spectrum of radiological release events and hostile action.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV F.2.j ................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from the requirements regarding the
need for the licensee’s emergency response organization to demonstrate proficiency in key skills in the principal functional areas of
emergency response. Additionally, the NRC is granting exemption
during an eight calendar year exercise cycle, from demonstrating
proficiency in the key skills necessary to respond to such scenarios
as hostile actions, unplanned minimal radiological release,
§ 50.54(hh)(2) implementation strategies, and scenarios involving
rapid escalation to a Site Area Emergency or General Emergency.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:42 Nov 04, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00112
Fmt 4703
Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.2.
Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.2.
The U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency is responsible for
evaluating the adequacy of offsite response during an exercise. No
action is expected from State or local government organizations in
response to an event at a decommissioning power reactor site other
than onsite firefighting, law enforcement and ambulance/medical
services support. A memorandum of understanding should be in
place for those services. Offsite response organizations will continue
to take actions on a comprehensive emergency planning basis to
protect the health and safety of the public as they would at any other
industrial site.
Due to the low probability of design basis accidents or other credible
events to exceed the EPA PAGs, the available time for event mitigation and, if needed, implementation of offsite protective actions using
a CEMP, the previously routine progression to general emergency in
power reactor site scenarios is not applicable to a decommissioning
site. Therefore, the licensee is not expected to demonstrate response to a wide spectrum of events.
Also refer to basis for 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.1 regarding hostile action.
Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.F.2.
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM
05NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 214 / Wednesday, November 5, 2014 / Notices
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV
NRC staff basis for exemption
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV I ......................................................
The NRC is granting exemption from the requirements regarding the
need for the licensee to develop a range of protective action for onsite personnel during hostile actions.
[FR Doc. 2014–26292 Filed 11–4–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Advisory Committee on Reactor
Safeguards (ACRS); Meeting of the
ACRS Subcommittee on Structural
Analysis; Notice of Meeting
The ACRS Subcommittee on
Structural Analysis will hold a meeting
on November 17, 2014, Room T–2B1,
11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland.
The entire meeting will be open to
public attendance.
The agenda for the subject meeting
shall be as follows:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Monday, November 17, 2014—8:30 a.m.
Until 12:00 p.m.
The Subcommittee will review and
discuss the methodology used for
uncertainty in seismic hazard curve
development. The Subcommittee will
hear presentations by and hold
discussions with the NRC staff and
other interested persons regarding this
matter. The Subcommittee will gather
information, analyze relevant issues and
facts, and formulate proposed positions
and actions, as appropriate, for
deliberation by the Full Committee.
Members of the public desiring to
provide oral statements and/or written
comments should notify the Designated
Federal Official (DFO), Maitri Banerjee
(Telephone 301–415–6973 or Email:
Maitri.Banerjee@nrc.gov) five days prior
to the meeting, if possible, so that
appropriate arrangements can be made.
Thirty-five hard copies of each
presentation or handout should be
provided to the DFO thirty minutes
before the meeting. In addition, one
electronic copy of each presentation
should be emailed to the DFO one day
before the meeting. If an electronic copy
cannot be provided within this
timeframe, presenters should provide
the DFO with a CD containing each
presentation at least thirty minutes
before the meeting. Electronic
recordings will be permitted only
during those portions of the meeting
that are open to the public. Detailed
procedures for the conduct of and
participation in ACRS meetings were
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:02 Nov 04, 2014
Jkt 235001
Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.E.8.d.
published in the Federal Register on
October 13, 2014 (79 FR 59307–59308).
Detailed meeting agendas and meeting
transcripts are available on the NRC
Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/doc-collections/acrs. Information
regarding topics to be discussed,
changes to the agenda, whether the
meeting has been canceled or
rescheduled, and the time allotted to
present oral statements can be obtained
from the Web site cited above or by
contacting the identified DFO.
Moreover, in view of the possibility that
the schedule for ACRS meetings may be
adjusted by the Chairman as necessary
to facilitate the conduct of the meeting,
persons planning to attend should check
with these references if such
rescheduling would result in a major
inconvenience.
If attending this meeting, please enter
through the One White Flint North
building, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, MD. After registering with
security, please contact Mr. Theron
Brown (Telephone 240–888–9835) to be
escorted to the meeting room.
Dated: October 29, 2014.
Cayetano Santos,
Chief, Technical Support Branch, Advisory
Committee on Reactor Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2014–26291 Filed 11–4–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Advisory Committee on Reactor
Safeguards (ACRS); Meeting of the
ACRS Subcommittee on Reliability &
PRA; Notice of Meeting
The ACRS Subcommittee on
Reliability & PRA will hold a meeting
on November 19, 2014, Room T–2B1,
11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland.
The meeting will be open to public
attendance.
The agenda for the subject meeting
shall be as follows:
Wednesday, November 19, 2014–1:00
p.m. Until 5:00 p.m.
The Subcommittee will discuss the
containment protection and release
reduction (CPRR) rulemaking risk
evaluation and scoping study of human
error probabilities. The Subcommittee
PO 00000
Frm 00113
65727
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
will hear presentations by and hold
discussions with the NRC staff and
other interested persons regarding this
matter. The Subcommittee will gather
information, analyze relevant issues and
facts, and formulate proposed positions
and actions, as appropriate, for
deliberation by the Full Committee.
Members of the public desiring to
provide oral statements and/or written
comments should notify the Designated
Federal Official (DFO), John Lai
(Telephone 301–415–5197 or Email:
John.Lai@nrc.gov) five days prior to the
meeting, if possible, so that appropriate
arrangements can be made. Thirty-five
hard copies of each presentation or
handout should be provided to the DFO
thirty minutes before the meeting. In
addition, one electronic copy of each
presentation should be emailed to the
DFO one day before the meeting. If an
electronic copy cannot be provided
within this timeframe, presenters
should provide the DFO with a CD
containing each presentation at least
thirty minutes before the meeting.
Electronic recordings will be permitted
only during those portions of the
meeting that are open to the public.
Detailed procedures for the conduct of
and participation in ACRS meetings
were published in the Federal Register
on October 13, 2014 (79 FR 59307–
59308).
Detailed meeting agendas and meeting
transcripts are available on the NRC
Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/doc-collections/acrs. Information
regarding topics to be discussed,
changes to the agenda, whether the
meeting has been canceled or
rescheduled, and the time allotted to
present oral statements can be obtained
from the Web site cited above or by
contacting the identified DFO.
Moreover, in view of the possibility that
the schedule for ACRS meetings may be
adjusted by the Chairman as necessary
to facilitate the conduct of the meeting,
persons planning to attend should check
with these references if such
rescheduling would result in a major
inconvenience.
If attending this meeting, please enter
through the One White Flint North
building, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, MD. After registering with
security, please contact Mr. Theron
Brown (Telephone 240–888–9835) to be
escorted to the meeting room.
E:\FR\FM\05NON1.SGM
05NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 214 (Wednesday, November 5, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65715-65727]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26292]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-305; NRC-2014-0219]
Dominion Energy Kewaunee, Inc.; Kewaunee Power Station
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Exemption; issuance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Kewaunee Power Station (KPS) is a decommissioning nuclear
power reactor that permanently shut down on May 7, 2013, and
permanently defueled on May 14, 2013. In response to a request from
Dominion Energy Kewaunee, Inc. (DEK or the licensee), the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) is granting exemptions from certain
emergency planning (EP) requirements. The exemptions will eliminate the
requirements to maintain offsite radiological emergency plans and
reduce the scope of the onsite emergency planning activities at the
Kewaunee Power Station (KPS) based on the reduced risks of accidents
that could result in an offsite radiological
[[Page 65716]]
release when compared to operating power reactors. The exemptions will
continue to maintain requirements for onsite radiological emergency
planning and include provisions for capabilities to communicate and
coordinate with offsite response authorities. The NRC staff has
concluded that the exemptions being granted by this action will
maintain an acceptable level of emergency preparedness at KPS given its
permanently shutdown and defueled status, and that there is reasonable
assurance that adequate offsite protective measures can and will be
taken by State and local government agencies, if needed, in the event
of a radiological emergency at the KPS facility.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2014-0219 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You
may obtain publicly-available information related to this document
using any of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2014-0219. 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 access publicly available documents online in the NRC
Library 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: William Huffman, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2046; email: William.Huffman@nrc.gov.
I. Background
The KPS facility is a decommissioning power reactor located on
approximately 900 acres in Carlton (Kewaunee County), Wisconsin, 27
miles southeast of Green Bay, Wisconsin. The licensee, DEK, is the
holder of KPS Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-43. 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.
By letter dated February 25, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML13058A065), DEK submitted a certification to the NRC indicating it
would permanently cease power operations at KPS on May 7, 2013. On May
7, 2013, DEK permanently shut down the KPS reactor. On May 14, 2013,
DEK certified that it had permanently defueled the KPS reactor vessel
(ADAMS Accession No. ML13135A209). As a permanently shutdown and
defueled facility, and in accordance with Sec. 50.82(a)(2) of Title 10
of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), KPS is no longer
authorized to operate the reactor or emplace nuclear fuel into the
reactor vessel. Kewaunee Power Station is still authorized to possess
and store irradiated nuclear fuel. Irradiated fuel is currently being
stored onsite in a spent fuel pool (SFP) and in Independent Spent Fuel
Storage Installation (ISFSI) dry casks.
During normal power reactor operations, the forced flow of water
through the reactor coolant system (RCS) removes heat generated by the
reactor. The RCS, operating at high temperatures and pressures,
transfers this heat through the steam generator tubes converting non-
radioactive feedwater to steam, which then flows to the main turbine
generator to produce electricity. Many of the accident scenarios
postulated in the updated safety analysis reports (USARs) for operating
power reactors involve failures or malfunctions of systems which could
affect the fuel in the reactor core, which in the most severe
postulated accidents, would involve the release of large quantities of
fission products. With the permanent cessation of reactor operations at
KPS and the permanent removal of the fuel from the reactor core, such
accidents are no longer possible. The reactor, RCS, and supporting
systems are no longer in operation and have no function related to the
storage of the irradiated fuel. Therefore, postulated accidents
involving failure or malfunction of the reactor, RCS, or supporting
systems are no longer applicable.
Since KPS is permanently shutdown and defueled, the only design
basis accident that could potentially result in an offsite radiological
release at KPS is the fuel handling accident. Analysis performed by DEK
showed that 90 days after KPS permanently shutdown, the radiological
consequence of the fuel handling accident would not exceed the limits
established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's)
Protective Action Guidelines (PAGs) at the exclusion area boundary.
Based on the time that KPS has been permanently shutdown (approximately
17 months), there is no longer any possibility of an offsite
radiological release from a design basis-accident that could exceed the
EPA PAGs.
The EP requirements of 10 CFR 50.47, ``Emergency plans,'' and
Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50, ``Emergency Planning and Preparedness for
Production and Utilization Facilities,'' continue to apply to nuclear
power reactors that have permanently ceased operation and have removed
all fuel from the reactor vessel. There are no explicit regulatory
provisions distinguishing EP requirements for a power reactor that is
permanently shutdown and defueled from a reactor that is authorized to
operate. In order for DEK to modify the KPS emergency plan to reflect
the reduced risk associated with the permanently shutdown and defueled
condition of KPS, certain exemptions from the EP regulations must be
obtained before the KPS emergency plan can be amended.
II. Request/Action
By letter dated July 31, 2013, ``Request for Exemptions from
Portions of 10 CFR 50.47 and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E'' (ADAMS
Accession No. ML13221A182), DEK requested exemptions from certain EP
requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 for KPS. More specifically, DEK
requested exemptions from certain planning standards in 10 CFR 50.47(b)
regarding onsite and offsite radiological emergency plans for nuclear
power reactors; from certain requirements in 10 CFR 50.47(c)(2) that
require establishment of plume exposure and ingestion pathway emergency
planning zones for nuclear power reactors; and from certain
requirements in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV, which
establishes the elements that make up the content of emergency plans.
In a letter dated December 11, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No. ML13351A040),
DEK provided responses to the NRC staff's request for additional
information (RAI) concerning the proposed exemptions. In a letter dated
January 10, 2014, DEK
[[Page 65717]]
provided a supplemental response to the RAI (ADAMS Accession No.
ML14016A078), which contained information applicable to the SFP
inventory makeup strategies for mitigating the potential loss of water
inventory due to a beyond design-basis accident. The information
provided by DEK included justifications for each exemption requested.
The exemptions requested by DEK will eliminate the requirements to
maintain offsite radiological emergency plans, reviewed by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) under the requirements of 44 CFR
Part 350, and reduce the scope of onsite emergency planning activities.
DEK stated that application of all of the standards and requirements in
10 CFR 50.47(b), 10 CFR 50.47(c) and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E is not
needed for adequate emergency response capability based on the reduced
risks at the permanently shutdown and defueled facility. If offsite
protective actions where needed for a very unlikely accident that could
challenge the safe storage of spent fuel at KPS, provisions exist for
offsite agencies to take protective actions using a comprehensive
emergency management plan (CEMP) under the National Preparedness System
to protect the health and safety of the public. A CEMP in this context,
also referred to as an emergency operations plan (EOP), is addressed in
FEMA Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101, ``Developing and Maintaining
Emergency Operations Plans.'' Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101 is
the foundation for State, territorial, Tribal, and local emergency
planning in the United States. It promotes a common understanding of
the fundamentals of risk-informed planning and decision making and
helps planners at all levels of government in their efforts to develop
and maintain viable, all-hazards, all-threats emergency plans. An EOP
is flexible enough for use in all emergencies. It describes how people
and property will be protected; details who is responsible for carrying
out specific actions; identifies the personnel, equipment, facilities,
supplies and other resources available; and outlines how all actions
will be coordinated. A comprehensive emergency management plan is often
referred to as a synonym for ``all hazards planning.''
III. Discussion
In accordance with 10 CFR 50.12, ``Specific exemptions,'' the
Commission may, upon application by any interested person or upon its
own initiative, grant exemptions from the requirements of 10 CFR Part
50 when: (1) The exemptions are authorized by law, will not present an
undue risk to public health or safety, and are consistent with the
common defense and security; and (2) any of the special circumstances
listed in 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2) are present. These special circumstances
include, among other things, that the application of the regulation in
the particular circumstances would not serve the underlying purpose of
the rule or is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the
rule.
As noted previously, the current EP regulations contained in 10 CFR
50.47(b) and Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50 apply to both operating and
shutdown power reactors. The NRC has consistently acknowledged that the
risk of an offsite radiological release at a power reactor that has
permanently ceased operations and removed fuel from the reactor vessel
is significantly lower, and the types of possible accidents are
significantly fewer, than at an operating power reactor. However, EP
regulations are silent with regard to the fact that once a power
reactor permanently ceases operation, the consequences of credible
emergency accident scenarios are reduced. The reduced risks generally
relate to a decrease in the potential for any significant offsite
radiological release based on the preclusion of accidents applicable to
an operating power reactor and on the reduced decay heat, and the decay
of short-lived radionuclides as spent fuel ages. NUREG-1738,
``Technical Study of Spent Fuel Pool Accident Risk at Decommissioning
Nuclear Power Plants,'' dated February 2001 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML010430066), confirmed that for permanently shutdown and defueled
power reactors bounded by the assumptions and conditions in the report,
the risk of offsite radiological release is significantly less than for
an operating power reactor.
Similar to the EP exemptions requested by DEK, prior EP exemptions
granted to permanently shutdown and defueled power reactors did not
relieve the licensees of all EP requirements. Rather, the exemptions
allowed the licensees to modify their emergency plans commensurate with
the credible site-specific risks that were consistent with a
permanently shutdown and defueled status. Specifically, precedent for
the approval of the exemptions from certain EP requirements for
previous permanently shutdown and defueled power reactors were based on
demonstrating that: (1) The radiological consequences of design-basis
accidents would not exceed the limits of the EPA PAGs at the exclusion
area boundary, and; (2) in the unlikely event of a beyond design-basis
accident resulting in a loss of all modes of heat transfer from the
fuel stored in the SFP, there is sufficient time to initiate
appropriate mitigating actions, and if needed, for offsite authorities
to implement offsite protective actions using a CEMP approach to
protect the health and safety of the public.
With respect to design-basis accidents at KPS, the licensee
provided analysis demonstrating that 90 days after KPS was permanently
shutdown, the radiological consequences of the only remaining design-
basis accident with potential for offsite radiological release (the
fuel handling accident) will not exceed the limits of the EPA PAGs at
the exclusion area boundary. Therefore, because KPS has been
permanently shutdown for approximately 17 months, there is no longer
any design-basis accident that would warrant an offsite radiological
emergency plan meeting the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50.
With respect to beyond design-basis accidents at KPS, the licensee
analyzed the two bounding beyond design-basis accidents that have a
potential for a significant offsite release. One of these beyond
design-basis accidents involves a complete loss of SFP water inventory,
where cooling of the spent fuel would be primarily accomplished by
natural circulation of air through the uncovered spent fuel assemblies.
The licensee's analysis of this accident shows that by October 30,
2014, air cooling of the spent fuel assemblies will be sufficient to
keep the fuel within a safe temperature range indefinitely without fuel
damage or offsite radiological release. The other beyond design-basis
accident analysis performed by the licensee could not completely rule
out the possibility of a radiological release from a SFP. This more
limiting analysis assumes an incomplete drain down of the SFP water, or
some other catastrophic event (such as a complete drainage of the SFP
with rearrangement of spent fuel rack geometry and/or the addition of
rubble to the SFP), that would effectively impede any decay heat
removal through all possible modes of cooling. The licensee's analysis
demonstrates that as of October 21, 2014, there would be at least 10
hours after the loss of all cooling means considered in the analysis
for the described beyond design-basis accident, before the spent fuel
cladding would reach a temperature where the potential for a
significant offsite radiological release could occur. This analysis
conservatively does not consider the period of time from the initiating
event
[[Page 65718]]
causing a loss of SFP water inventory until all cooling means are lost.
The NRC staff has verified DEK's analyses and its calculations. The
analyses provide reasonable assurance that in granting the requested
exemption to DEK, there is no design-basis accident that will result in
an offsite radiological release exceeding the EPA PAGs at the site
boundary. In the unlikely event of a beyond design-basis accident
affecting the SFP that results in a complete loss of heat removal via
all modes of heat transfer, there will be at least 10 hours available
before an offsite release might occur and, therefore, at least 10 hours
to initiate appropriate mitigating actions to restore a means of heat
removal to the spent fuel. If a radiological release were projected to
occur under this unlikely scenario, a minimum of 10 hours is considered
sufficient time for offsite authorities to implement protective actions
using a CEMP approach to protect the health and safety of the public.
The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's justification for the
requested exemptions against the criteria in 10 CFR 50.12(a), in
addition to considering the basis for prior EP exemption requests as
discussed above, to determine whether the exemptions should be granted.
After evaluating the exemption requests, the staff determined, as
described below, that the criteria in 10 CFR50.12(a) are met, and that
the exemptions should be granted. Assessment of the DEK EP exemptions
is described in SECY-14-0066, ``Request by Dominion Energy Kewaunee,
Inc. for Exemptions from Certain Emergency Planning Requirements,''
dated June 27, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14072A257). The Commission
approved the NRC staff's intention to grant the exemptions in the staff
requirements memorandum (SRM) to SECY-14-0066, dated August 7, 2014
(ADAMS Accession No. ML14219A366). Descriptions of the specific
exemptions being granted to DEK, with the NRC staff's basis for
granting each exemption, are provided in SECY-14-0066 and summarized in
a table at the end of this document. The staff's detailed review and
technical basis for the approval of the specific EP exemptions being
granted to DEK are provided in the NRC staff's safety evaluation
enclosed in NRC letter dated October 27, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML14261A223).
A. Authorized by Law
The licensee has proposed exemptions from certain EP requirements
in 10 CFR 50.47(b), 10 CFR 50.47(c)(2), and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E,
Section IV, that would allow DEK to revise the KPS Emergency Plan to
reflect the permanently shutdown and defueled condition of the station.
As stated above, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.12, the Commission may,
upon application by any interested person or upon its own initiative,
grant exemptions from the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50. The NRC staff
has determined that granting of the licensee's proposed exemptions will
not result in a violation of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended,
or the Commission's regulations. Therefore, the exemptions are
authorized by law.
B. No Undue Risk to Public Health and Safety
As stated previously, DEK provided analyses that show the
radiological consequences of design-basis accidents will not exceed the
limits of the EPA PAGs at the exclusion area boundary. Therefore,
offsite radiological emergency plans required under 10 CFR Part 50 are
no longer needed for protection of the public beyond the exclusion area
boundary based on the radiological consequences of design-basis
accidents still possible at KPS.
Although very unlikely, there are postulated beyond design-basis
accidents that might result in significant offsite radiological
releases. However, NUREG-1738 confirms that the risk of beyond design-
basis accidents is greatly reduced at permanently shutdown and defueled
reactors. The staff's analyses in NUREG-1738 concludes that the event
sequences important to risk at permanently shutdown and defueled power
reactors are limited to large earthquakes and cask drop events. For EP
assessments, this is an important difference relative to operating
power reactors where typically a large number of different sequences
make significant contributions to risk. Per NUREG-1738, relaxation of
offsite EP requirements under 10 CFR Part 50 a few months after
shutdown resulted in only a small change in risk. The report further
concludes that the change in risk due to relaxation of offsite EP
requirements is small because the overall risk is low, and because even
under current EP requirements for operating power reactors, EP was
judged to have marginal impact on evacuation effectiveness in the
severe earthquakes that dominate SFP risk. All other sequences
including cask drops (for which offsite radiological emergency plans
are expected to be more effective) are too low in likelihood to have a
significant impact on risk.
Therefore, granting exemptions eliminating the requirements of 10
CFR 50 to maintain offsite radiological emergency plans and reducing
the scope of onsite emergency planning activities will not present an
undue risk to the public health and safety.
C. Consistent With the Common Defense and Security
The requested exemptions by DEK only involve EP requirements under
10 CFR Part 50 and will allow DEK to revise the KPS Emergency Plan to
reflect the permanently shutdown and defueled condition of the
facility. Physical security measures at KPS are not affected by the
requested EP exemptions. The discontinuation of offsite radiological
emergency plans and the reduction in scope of the onsite emergency
planning activities at KPS will not adversely affect DEK's ability to
physically secure the site or protect special nuclear material.
Therefore, the proposed exemptions are consistent with the common
defense and security.
D. 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 50.47(b), 10 CFR 50.47(c)(2),
and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV, is to provide reasonable
assurance that adequate protective measures can and will be taken in
the event of a radiological emergency, to establish plume exposure and
ingestion pathway emergency planning zones for nuclear power plants,
and to ensure that licensees maintain effective offsite and onsite
radiological emergency plans. The standards and requirements in these
regulations were developed by considering the risks associated with
operation of a power reactor at its licensed full-power level. These
risks include the potential for a reactor accident with offsite
radiological dose consequences.
As discussed previously, because KPS is permanently shutdown and
defueled, there is no longer a risk of offsite radiological release
from a design-basis accident and the risk of a significant offsite
radiological release from a beyond design-basis accident is greatly
reduced when compared to an operating power reactor. The NRC staff has
confirmed the reduced risks at KPS by comparing the generic risk
assumptions in the analyses in NUREG-1738 to site specific conditions
at KPS and determined that the risk values in NUREG-1738 bound the
risks presented by KPS. Furthermore, the staff has
[[Page 65719]]
recently concluded in NUREG-2161, ``Consequence Study of a Beyond-
Design-Basis Earthquake Affecting the Spent Fuel Pool for a U.S. Mark I
Boiling Water Reactor,'' dated September 2014 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML14255A365), that, consistent with earlier research studies, SFPs are
robust structures that are likely to withstand severe earthquakes
without leaking cooling water and potentially uncovering the spent
fuel. The NUREG-2161 study shows the likelihood of a radiological
release from the spent fuel after the analyzed severe earthquake at the
reference plant to be about one time in 10 million years or lower.
The licensee has analyzed site-specific beyond design-basis
accidents to determine the risk of a significant offsite radiological
release. In one such analysis, DEK determined that if all the normal
cooling systems used to cool the SFP were lost and not restored for the
duration of the postulated accident, then as of September 20, 2014, the
SFP at the KPS would take 120 hours before it would begin to boil and,
due to the loss of SFP water level from the resulting boil off, it
would take 26 days for the water inventory to lower to a level of three
feet from the top of the fuel. Additionally, DEK analysis shows that as
of October 30, 2014, in the event of a complete SFP drain down due to a
loss of water inventory, assuming natural circulation of air through
the spent fuel racks was available, then the peak fuel clad temperature
would remain below 1049 [deg]F (565 [deg]C), the temperature at which
incipient cladding failure may occur. Therefore, in this postulated
accident, fuel cladding remains intact and an offsite radiological
release would not take place.
The only beyond design-basis accident analysis that reached a
condition where a significant offsite release might occur involved a
scenario where the SFP drained in such a way that all modes of cooling
or heat transfer are assumed to be unavailable. This results in an
adiabatic heat-up of the spent fuel. DEK analysis of this beyond
design-basis accident shows that as of October 21, 2014, a minimum of
10 hours would be available between the time the fuel is uncovered (at
which time adiabatic heat-up begins), until the fuel cladding reaches a
temperature of 1652 [deg]F (900 [deg]C), the temperature associated
with rapid cladding oxidation and the potential for a significant
radiological release.
Exemptions from the offsite EP requirements in 10 CFR 50 have
previously been approved by the NRC when the site-specific analyses
show that at least 10 hours is available following a loss of SFP
coolant inventory accident with no air cooling (or other methods of
removing decay heat) until cladding of the hottest fuel assembly
reaches the zirconium rapid oxidation temperature. The staff concluded
in its previously granted exemptions, as it does with the DEK requested
EP exemptions, that if a minimum of 10 hours is available to initiate
mitigative actions consistent with plant conditions, or if needed, for
offsite authorities to implement protective actions using a CEMP
approach, then offsite radiological emergency plans, required under 10
CFR Part 50, are not necessary at permanently shutdown and defueled
power reactor licensees.
Additionally, DEK committed to enhanced SFP makeup strategies in
its letter to the NRC dated August 23, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML13242A019). The multiple strategies for providing makeup to the SFP
include: Using existing plant systems for inventory makeup; supplying
water through hoses to a spool piece connection to the existing SFP
piping; or using a diesel-driven portable pump to take suction from
Lake Michigan and provide makeup or spray to the SFP. These strategies
will continue to be required as a license condition. DEK further
provides that the equipment needed to perform these actions will
continue to be located onsite, and that the external makeup strategy
(using a diesel driven portable pump) is capable of being deployed
within 2 hours. Considering the very low probability of beyond design-
basis accidents affecting the SFP, these diverse strategies provide
defense-in-depth and time to provide makeup or spray to the SFP before
the onset of any postulated offsite radiological release.
For all the reasons stated above, the staff finds that the
licensee's requested exemptions to meet the underlying purpose of all
of the standards in 10 CFR 50.47(b), and requirements in 10 CFR
50.47(c)(2) and Appendix E, acceptably satisfy the special
circumstances in 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) in view of the greatly reduced
risk of offsite radiological consequences associated with the
permanently shutdown and defueled state of the KPS facility.
The NRC staff has concluded that the exemptions being granted by
this action will maintain an acceptable level of emergency preparedness
at KPS and, if needed, that there is reasonable assurance that adequate
offsite protective measures can and will be taken by State and local
government agencies using a CEMP approach in the event of a
radiological emergency at the KPS facility. Since the underlying
purposes of the rules, as exempted, would continue to be achieved, even
with the elimination of the requirements under 10 CFR Part 50 to
maintain offsite radiological emergency plans and reduction in the
scope of the onsite emergency planning activities at KPS, the special
circumstances required by 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) exist.
E. Environmental Considerations
In accordance with 10 CFR 51.31(a), the Commission has determined
that the granting of this exemption will not have a significant effect
on the quality of the human environment as discussed in the NRC staff's
Finding of No Significant Impact and associated Environmental
Assessment published October 7, 2014 (79 FR 60513).
V. Conclusions
Accordingly, the Commission has determined, pursuant to 10 CFR
50.12(a), that DEK's request for exemptions from certain EP
requirements in 10 CFR 50.47(b), 10 CFR 50.47(c)(2), and 10 CFR Part
50, Appendix E, Section IV, and as summarized in the table at the end
of this document, 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. Also, special circumstances are present.
Therefore, the Commission hereby grants DEK exemptions from certain EP
requirements of 10 CFR 50.47(b), 10 CFR 50.47(c)(2), and 10 CFR Part
50, Appendix E, Section IV, as discussed and evaluated in detail in the
staff's safety evaluation dated October 27, 2014. The exemptions are
effective as of October 30, 2014.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of October, 2014.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michele G. Evans,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[[Page 65720]]
IV--Table of Exemptions Granted to DEK
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 CFR 50.47 NRC staff basis for exemption
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 CFR 50.47(b)........................ In the Statement of
The NRC is granting exemption from Considerations (SOC) for the
portions of the rule language that final rule for emergency
would otherwise require offsite planning (EP) requirements for
emergency response plans. independent spent fuel storage
installations (ISFSIs) and for
monitor retrievable storage
installations (MRS) (60
Federal Register (FR) 32430;
June 22, 1995), the Commission
responded to comments
concerning offsite EP for
ISFSIs or an MRS and concluded
that, ``the offsite
consequences of potential
accidents at an ISFSI or a MRS
would not warrant establishing
Emergency Planning Zones
[EPZ].''
In a nuclear power reactor's
permanently defueled state,
the accident risks are more
similar to an ISFSI or MRS
than an operating nuclear
power plant. The EP program
would be similar to that
required for an ISFSI under
Section 72.32(a) of Title 10
of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR) when fuel
stored in the spent fuel pool
(SFP) has more than 5 years of
decay time and would not
change substantially when all
the fuel is transferred from
the SFP to an onsite ISFSI.
Exemptions from offsite EP
requirements have previously
been approved when the site-
specific analyses show that at
least 10 hours is available
from a partial drain-down
event where cooling of the
spent fuel is not effective
until the hottest fuel
assembly reaches 900 [deg]C.
The technical basis that
underlied the approval of the
exemption request is based
partly on the analysis of a
time period that spent fuel
stored in the SFP is unlikely
to reach the zirconium
ignition temperature in less
than 10 hours. This time
period is based on a heat-up
calculation which uses several
simplifying assumptions. Some
of these assumptions are
conservative (adiabatic
conditions), while others are
non-conservative (no oxidation
below 900 [deg]C). Weighing
the conservatisms and non-
conservatisms, the NRC staff
judges that this calculation
reasonably represents
conditions which may occur in
the event of an SFP accident.
The staff concluded that if 10
hours were available to
initiate mitigative actions,
or if needed, offsite
protective actions using a
comprehensive emergency
management plan (CEMP), formal
offsite radiological emergency
plans are not necessary for
these permanently defueled
nuclear power reactor
licensees.
As supported by the licensee's
SFP analysis, the NRC staff
believes an exemption to the
requirements for formal
offsite radiological emergency
plans is justified for a
zirconium fire scenario
considering the low likelihood
of this event together with
time available to take
mitigative or protective
actions between the initiating
event and before the onset of
a postulated fire.
The Dominion Energy Kewaunee,
Inc. (DEK) analysis has
demonstrated that 90 days
after shutdown, the
radiological consequences of
design-basis accidents will
not exceed the limits of the
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency's (EPA) Protective
Action Guidelines (PAGs) at
the exclusion area boundary.
These analyses also show that
after the spent fuel has
decayed for 17 months, for
beyond-design-basis events
where the SFP is drained, air
cooling will prevent the fuel
from reaching the lowest
temperature where incipient
cladding failure may occur
(565 [deg]C). In the event
that air cooling is not
possible, 10 hours is
available to take mitigative
or, if needed, offsite
protective actions using a
CEMP from the time the fuel is
uncovered until it reaches the
auto-ignition temperature of
900 [deg]C.
DEK has also furnished
information on its SFP
inventory makeup strategies
for mitigating the loss of
water inventory. The multiple
strategies for providing
makeup to the SPF include:
using existing plant systems
for inventory makeup;
supplying water via hoses to a
spool piece connection to the
existing SFP piping; or using
a diesel-driven portable pump
to take suction from Lake
Michigan and provide makeup or
spray to the SFP. DEK also
stated that the tools and
equipment needed to perform
these actions are located on
site and that the external
makeup strategy (using a
diesel driven portable pump)
was able to be deployed within
2 hours. DEK believes these
diverse strategies provide
defense-in-depth and ample
time to provide makeup or
spray to the SFP prior to the
onset of zirconium cladding
ignition when considering very
low probability of beyond
design-basis events affecting
the SFP.
10 CFR 50.47(b)(1)..................... Refer to basis for 10 CFR
50.47(b).
The NRC is granting exemption from
portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the need for
Emergency Planning Zones (EPZs).
[[Page 65721]]
10 CFR 50.47(b)(3)..................... Decommissioning power reactors
The NRC is granting exemption from present a low likelihood of
portions of the rule language that any credible accident
would otherwise require the need for resulting in a radiological
an Emergency Operations Facility. release together with the time
available to take mitigative
or, if needed, offsite
protective actions using a
CEMP between the initiating
event and before the onset of
a postulated fire. As such, an
emergency operations facility
would not be required. The
``nuclear island,'' control
room, or other onsite location
can provide for the
communication and coordination
with offsite organizations for
the level of support required.
Also refer to basis for 10 CFR
50.47(b).
10 CFR 50.47(b)(4)..................... Decommissioning power reactors
The NRC is granting exemption from present a low likelihood of
portions of the rule language that any credible accident
would otherwise require reference to resulting in a radiological
formal offsite radiological emergency release together with the time
response plans. available to take mitigative
or if needed, offsite
protective actions using a
CEMP between the initiating
event and before the onset of
a postulated fire. As such,
formal offsite radiological
emergency response plans are
not required.
The Nuclear Energy Institute
(NEI) document NEI 99-01,
``Development of Emergency
Action Levels for Non-Passive
Reactors'' (Revision 6), was
found to be an acceptable
method for development of
emergency action levels (EALs)
and was endorsed by the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) in a letter dated March
28, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML12346A463). NEI 99-01
provides EALs for non-passive
operating nuclear power
reactors, permanently defueled
reactors, and ISFSIs.
Also refer to basis for 10 CFR
50.47(b).
10 CFR 50.47(b)(5)..................... Refer to basis for 10 CFR
50.47(b).
The NRC is granting exemption from
portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require early
notification of the public and a means
to provide instructions to the public
within the plume exposure pathway
Emergency Planning Zone.
10 CFR 50.47(b)(6)..................... Refer to basis for 10 CFR
50.47(b).
The NRC is granting exemption from
portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require prompt
communications with the public.
10 CFR 50.47(b)(7)..................... Refer to basis for 10 CFR
50.47(b).
The NRC is granting exemption from
portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require information to
be made available to the public on a
periodic basis about how they will be
notified and what their initial
protective actions should be.
10 CFR 50.47(b)(9)..................... Refer to basis for 10 CFR
50.47(b).
The NRC is granting exemption from
portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the capability
for monitoring offsite consequences.
10 CFR 50.47(b)(10).................... In the unlikely event of an SFP
The NRC is granting exemption from accident, the iodine isotopes,
portions of the rule language that which contribute to an off-
would reduce the range of protective site dose from an operating
actions developed for emergency reactor accident, are not
workers and the public. Consideration present, so potassium iodide
of evacuation, sheltering, or the use distribution would no longer
of potassium iodide will no longer be serve as an effective or
necessary. Evacuation times will no necessary supplemental
longer need to developed or updated. protective action.
Protective actions for the ingestion The Commission responded to
exposure pathway EPZ will not need to comments in its SOC for the
be developed. final rule for emergency
planning requirements for
ISFSIs and MRS facilities (60
FR 32435), and concluded that,
``the offsite consequences of
potential accidents at an
ISFSI or an MRS would not
warrant establishing Emergency
Planning Zones.''
Additionally, in the SOC for
the final rule for EP
requirements for ISFSIs and
for MRS facilities (60 FR
32430), the Commission
responded to comments
concerning site-specific EP
that includes evacuation of
surrounding population for an
ISFSI not at a reactor site,
and concluded that, ``The
Commission does not agree that
as a general matter emergency
plans for an ISFSI must
include evacuation planning.''
Also refer to basis for 10 CFR
50.47(b).
10 CFR 50.47(c)(2)..................... Refer to basis for 10 CFR
50.47(b)(10).
The NRC is granting exemption from
portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the
establishment of a 10 mile radius
plume exposure pathway EPZ and a 50
mile radius ingestion pathway EPZ.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 65722]]
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV NRC staff basis for exemption
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV 1... The EP Rule published in the
The NRC is granting exemption from Federal Register (76 FR 72560;
portions of the rule language that November 23, 2011) amended
would otherwise require onsite certain requirements in 10 CFR
protective actions during hostile Part 50. Among the changes,
action. the definition of ``hostile
action'' was added as an act
directed toward a nuclear
power plant or its personnel.
This definition is based on
the definition of ``hostile
action'' provided in NRC
Bulletin 2005-02, ``Emergency
Preparedness and Response
Actions for Security-Based
Events.'' NRC Bulletin 2005-02
was not applicable to nuclear
power reactors that have
permanently ceased operations
and have certified that fuel
has been removed from the
reactor vessel.
The NRC excluded non-power
reactors from the scope of
``hostile action'' at the time
of the rulemaking because, as
defined in 10 CFR 50.2, a non-
power reactor is not
considered a nuclear power
reactor and a regulatory basis
had not been developed to
support the inclusion of non-
power reactors within the
scope of ``hostile action.''
Similarly, a decommissioning
power reactor or an ISFSI is
not a ``nuclear reactor'' as
defined in 10 CFR Part 50. A
decommissioning power reactor
also has a low likelihood of a
credible accident resulting in
radiological releases
requiring offsite protective
measures. For all of these
reasons, the staff concludes
that a decommissioning power
reactor is not a facility that
falls within the scope of
``hostile action.''
Similarly, for security, risk
insights can be used to
determine which targets are
important to protect against
sabotage. A level of security
commensurate with the
consequences of a sabotage
event is required and is
evaluated on a site-specific
basis. The severity of the
consequences declines as fuel
ages and, thereby, removes
over time the underlying
concern that a sabotage attack
could cause offsite
radiological consequences.
Although, this analysis
provides a justification for
exempting KPS from ``hostile
action'' related requirements,
some EP requirements for
security-based events are
maintained. The classification
of security-based events,
notification of offsite
authorities and coordination
with offsite agencies under a
CEMP concept are still
required.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV 2... Refer to basis for 10 CFR
50.47(b)(10).
The NRC is granting exemption from
portions of the rule language
concerning the evacuation time
analyses within the plume exposure
pathway EPZ for the licensee's initial
application
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV 3... Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part
The NRC is granting exemption from 50, Appendix E, Section IV.2.
portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require use of NRC-
approved evacuation time estimates
(ETEs) and updates to State and local
governments when developing protective
action strategies.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV 4... Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part
The NRC is granting exemption from 50, Appendix E, Section IV.2.
portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require licensees to
develop evacuation time estimates
based on the most recent census data
and submit the ETE analysis to the NRC
prior to providing it to State and
local government for developing
protective action strategies.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV 5... Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part
The NRC is granting exemption from 50, Appendix E, Section IV.2.
portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require licensees to
estimate the EPZ permanent resident
population changes once a year between
decennial censuses.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV 6... Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part
The NRC is granting exemption from 50, Appendix E, Section IV.2.
portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the licensee
to submit an updated ETE analysis to
the NRC based on changes in the
resident population that result in
exceeding specific evacuation time
increase criteria.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV A.1. Based on the permanently
The NRC is granting exemption from the shutdown and defueled status
word ``operating'' in the requirement of the reactor, a
to describe the normal plant decommissioning reactor is not
organization. authorized to operate under 10
CFR 50.82(a). Because the
licensee cannot operate the
reactors, the licensee does
not have a ``plant operating
organization.''
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV A.3. The number of staff at
The NRC is granting exemption to the decommissioning sites is
requirement to describe the licensee's generally small but is
headquarters personnel sent to the commensurate with the need to
site to augment the onsite emergency safely store spent fuel at the
response organization. facility in a manner that is
protective of public health
and safety. Decommissioning
sites typically have a level
of emergency response that
does not require response by
the licensee's headquarters
personnel.
[[Page 65723]]
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV A. 4 Although, the likelihood of
The NRC is granting exemption from events that would result in
portions of the rule language that doses in excess of the EPA
would otherwise require the licensee PAGs to the public beyond the
to identify a position and function owner controlled area boundary
within its organization which will based on the permanently
carry the responsibility for making shutdown and defueled status
offsite dose projections. of the reactor is extremely
low, the licensee still must
be able to determine if a
radiological release is
occurring. If a release is
occurring, then the licensee
staff should promptly
communicate that information
to offsite authorities for
their consideration. The
offsite organizations are
responsible for deciding what,
if any, protective actions
should be taken based on
comprehensive emergency
planning.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV A. 5 The number of staff at
The NRC is granting exemption from the decommissioning sites is
requirement for the licensee to generally small but should be
identify individuals with special commensurate with the need to
qualifications for coping with operate the facility in a
emergencies. manner that is protective of
public health and safety.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV A.7. Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part
The NRC is granting exemption from 50, Appendix E, Section IV.1.
portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require a description
of the assistance expected from State,
local, and Federal agencies for coping
with a hostile action.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV A.8. Offsite emergency measures are
The NRC is granting exemption from the limited to support provided by
requirement to identify the State and local police, fire
local officials for ordering departments, and ambulance and
protective actions and evacuations. hospital services, as
appropriate. Due to the low
probability of design basis
accidents or other credible
events to exceed the EPA PAGs,
protective actions such as
evacuation should not be
required, but could be
implemented at the discretion
of offsite authorities using a
CEMP.
Also refer to basis for 10 CFR
50.47(b)(10).
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV A.9. Responsibilities should be well
The NRC is granting exemption from the defined in the emergency plan
requirement for the licensee to and procedures, regularly
provide an analysis demonstrating that tested through drills and
on-shift personnel are not assigned exercises audited and
responsibilities that would prevent inspected by the licensee and
them from performing their assigned the NRC. The duties of the
emergency plan functions. onshift personnel at a
decommissioning reactor
facility are not as
complicated and diverse as
those for an operating power
reactor.
The NRC staff considered the
similarity between the
staffing levels at a
permanently shutdown and
defueled reactor and staffing
levels at an operating power
reactor site. The minimal
systems and equipment needed
to maintain the spent nuclear
fuel in the SFP or in a dry
cask storage system in a safe
condition requires minimal
personnel and is governed by
Technical Specifications. In
the EP final rule published in
the Federal Register (76 FR
72560; November 23, 2011), the
NRC concluded that the
staffing analysis requirement
was not necessary for non-
power reactor licensees due to
the small staffing levels
required to operate the
facility.
The NRC staff also examined the
actions required to mitigate
the very low probability
beyond design-basis events for
the SFP. Additionally, DEK
also furnished information on
its SFP inventory makeup
strategies for mitigating the
loss of water inventory. The
multiple strategies for
providing makeup to the SFP
include: using existing plant
systems for inventory makeup;
supplying water via hoses to a
spool piece connection to the
existing SFP piping; or using
a diesel-driven portable pump
to take suction from Lake
Michigan and provide makeup or
spray to the SFP. DEK further
provided that the tools and
equipment needed to perform
these actions are located on
site and the external makeup
strategy (using a diesel
driven portable pump) was
demonstrated to be capable of
being deployed within 2 hours,
significantly less time than
the 10 hours that would be
available for ad hoc response.
DEK believes, and the NRC
staff agrees, that these
diverse strategies provide
defense-in-depth and ample
time to provide makeup or
spray to the SFP prior to the
onset of zirconium cladding
ignition when considering very
low probability beyond design-
basis events affecting the
SFP.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV B.1. NEI 99-01, ``Development of
The NRC is granting exemption from Emergency Action levels for
portions of the rule language that Non-Passive Reactors''
would otherwise require offsite (Revision 6), was found to be
emergency actions levels and offsite an acceptable method for
protective measures and associate development of EALs and was
offsite monitoring for the emergency endorsed by the NRC in a
conditions. letter dated March 28, 2013
In addition, the NRC is granting (ADAMS Accession No.
exemption from portions of the rule ML12346A463). No offsite
language that would otherwise require protective actions are
emergency action levels based on anticipated to be necessary,
hostile action. so classification above the
alert level is no longer
required, which is consistent
with ISFSI facilities.
Also refer to basis for 10 CFR
Part 50, Appendix E, Section
IV.1.
[[Page 65724]]
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV C.1. Containment parameters do not
The NRC is granting exemption from provide an indication of the
portions of the rule language that conditions at a defueled
would otherwise require emergency facility and emergency core
actions levels based on operating cooling systems are no longer
reactor concerns, such as offsite required. Other indications,
radiation monitoring, pressure in such as SFP level or
containment, and the response of the temperature, can be used at
emergency core cooling system. In sites where there is spent
addition, the NRC is striking language fuel in the SFPs.
that would otherwise require offsite In the SOC for the final rule
emergency action levels of a site area for EP requirements for ISFSIs
emergency and a general emergency. and MRS) facilities (60 FR
32430), the Commission
responded to comments
concerning a general emergency
at an ISFSI and an MRS, and
concluded that, ``. . . an
essential element of a General
Emergency is that a release
can be reasonably expected to
exceed EPA Protective Action
Guidelines exposure levels off
site for more than the
immediate site area.''
The probability of a condition
reaching the level above an
emergency classification of
alert is very low. In the
event of an accident at a
defueled facility that meets
the conditions for relaxation
of EP requirements, there will
be available time for event
mitigation and, if necessary,
implementation of offsite
protective actions using a
CEMP.
NEI 99-01, ``Development of
Emergency Action levels for
Non-Passive Reactors,''
(Revision 6) was found to be
an acceptable method for
development of EALs and was
endorsed by the NRC in a
letter dated March 28, 2013
(ADAMS Accession No.
ML12346A463). No offsite
protective actions are
anticipated to be necessary,
so classification above the
alert level is no longer
required.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV C.2. In the EP rule published in the
The NRC is granting exemption from Federal Register (76 FR
portions of the rule language that 72560), non-power reactor
would otherwise require the licensee licensees were not required to
to assess, classify, and declare an assess, classify and declare
emergency condition within 15 minutes. an emergency condition within
15 minutes. An SFP and an
ISFSI are also not nuclear
power reactors as defined in
the NRC's regulations. A
decommissioning power reactor
has a low likelihood of a
credible accident resulting in
radiological releases
requiring offsite protective
measures. For these reasons,
the NRC staff concludes that a
decommissioning power reactor
should not be required to
assess, classify and declare
an emergency condition within
15 minutes.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV D.1. Refer to basis for 10 CFR
The NRC is granting exemption from 50.47(b) and 10 CFR
portions of the rule language that 50.47(b)(10).
would otherwise require the licensee
to reach agreement with local, State,
and Federal officials and agencies for
prompt notification of protective
measures or evacuations and the
associated titles of officials to be
notified for each agency within the
EPZs.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV D.2. Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part
The NRC is granting exemption from the 50, Appendix E, Section
requirement for the licensee to IV.D.1.
annually disseminate general
information on emergency planning and
evacuations within the plume exposure
pathway EPZ. The need for signage or
other measure to address transient
populations is also being struck.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV D.3. While the capability needs to
The NRC is granting exemption from exist for the notification of
portions of the rule language that offsite government agencies
would otherwise require the licensee within a specified time
to have the capability to make period, previous exemptions
notifications to State and local have allowed for extending the
government agencies within 15 minutes State and local government
of declaring an emergency. agencies' notification time up
to 60 minutes based on the
site-specific justification
provided.
DEK's exemption request
provides that the KPS will
make notifications to the
State of Wisconsin, to the
local county (Kewaunee) and
the NRC within 60 minutes of
declaration of an event. In
the permanently defueled
condition of the reactor, the
rapidly developing scenarios
associated with events
initiated during reactor power
operation are no longer
credible.
Also refer to basis for 10 CFR
50.47(b) and 10 CFR
50.47(b)(10).
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV D.4. Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part
The NRC is granting exemption from the 50, Appendix E, Section IV.D.3
requirement for the licensee to obtain regarding the alert and
FEMA approval of its backup alert and notification system
notification capability. requirements.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV Due to the low probability of
E.8.a.(i). design-basis accidents or
The NRC is granting exemption from other credible events to
portions of the rule language that exceed the EPA PAGs at the
would otherwise require the licensee site boundary, the available
to have an onsite technical support time for event mitigation at a
center and emergency operations decommissioning reactor and,
facility.. if needed, to implement
offsite protective actions
using a CEMP, an emergency
operations facility (EOF)
would not be required to
support offsite agency
response. Onsite actions may
be directed from the control
room or other location,
without the requirements
imposed on a technical support
center (TSC).
[[Page 65725]]
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV NUREG-0696, ``Functional
E.8.a.(ii). Criteria for Emergency
The NRC is granting exemption from Response Facilities,''
portions of the rule language that provides that the operational
would otherwise require the licensee support center (OSC) is an
to have an onsite operational support onsite area separate from the
center. control room and the TSC where
licensee operations support
personnel will assemble in an
emergency. For a
decommissioning power reactor,
an OSC is no longer required
to meet its original purpose
of an assembly area for plant
logistical support during an
emergency. The OSC function
can be incorporated into
another facility.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV Refer to basis for 10 CFR
E.8.b. and subpart Sections IV 50.47(b)(3).
E.8.b.(1)-E.8.b.(5).
The NRC is granting exemption from the
requirements related to an offsite
emergency operations facility
location, space and size,
communications capability, access to
plant data and radiological
information, and access to coping and
office supplies.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV Refer to basis for 10 CFR
E.8.c. and Sections IV E.8.c.(1)- 50.47(b)(3).
E.8.c.(3).
The NRC is granting exemption from the
requirements to have an emergency
operations facility with the
capabilities to obtain and display
plant data and radiological
information; the capability to analyze
technical information and provide
briefings; and the capability to
support events occurring at more than
one site (if the emergency operations
center supports more than one site).
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part
E.8.d. 50, Appendix E, Section IV.1
The NRC is granting exemption from the regarding hostile action.
requirements to have an alternate
facility that would be accessible even
if the site is under threat of or
experiencing hostile action, to
function as a staging area for
augmentation of emergency response
staff.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV Refer to basis for 10 CFR
E.8.e. 50.47(b)(3).
The NRC is granting exemption from the
requirement regarding the need for the
licensee to comply with paragraph 8.b
of this section
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV Refer to basis for 10 CFR
E.9.a. 50.47(b) and 10 CFR
The NRC is granting exemption from 50.47(b)(10).
portions of the rule language that Communications with State and
would otherwise require the licensee local governments that are not
to have communications with State and contiguous with or bordering
local governments that are within the the site boundary will no
plume exposure pathway EPZ (which is longer be required. However,
no longer required by the exemption the contiguous State and the
granted to 10 CFR 50.47(b)(10)) but local governments in which the
are not contiguous with or bordering nuclear facility is located
on the licensee site boundary. will still need to be informed
of events and emergencies, so
lines of communication must be
maintained.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV Because of the low probability
E.9.c. of design-basis accidents or
The NRC is granting exemption from the other credible events that
requirements for communication and would be expected to exceed
testing provisions between the control the EPA PAGs and the available
room, the onsite technical support time for event mitigation and,
center, State/local emergency if needed, implementation of
operations facilities, and field offsite protective actions
assessment teams. using a CEMP, there is no need
for the TSC, EOF, or offsite
field assessment teams.
Also refer to justification for
10 CFR 50.47(b)(3).
Communication with State and
local emergency operation
centers is maintained to
coordinate assistance on site
if required.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV The functions of the control
E.9.d. room, EOF, TSC, and OSC may be
The NRC is granting exemption from combined into one or more
portions of the rule language that locations due to the smaller
would otherwise require provisions for facility staff and the greatly
communications from the control room, reduced required interaction
onsite technical support center, and with State and local emergency
emergency operations facility with NRC response facilities.
Headquarters and appropriate Regional Also refer to basis for 10 CFR
Operations Center. 50.47(b).
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV F.1 Decommissioning power reactor
and Section IV F.1. v.iii. sites typically have a level
The NRC is granting exemption from of emergency response that
portions of the rule language that does not require additional
would otherwise require the licensee response by the licensee's
to provide training and drills for the headquarters personnel, Civil
licensee's headquarters personnel, Defense personnel, or local
Civil Defense personnel, or local news news media. Therefore, the NRC
media. staff considers it reasonable
to exempt the licensee from
training and drill
requirements for these
personnel.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV F.2. Because of the low probability
The NRC is granting exemption from of design basis accidents or
portions of the rule language that other credible events that
would otherwise require testing of a would be expected to exceed
public alert and notification system. the limits of EPA PAGs and the
available time for event
mitigation and offsite
protective actions from a
CEMP, the public alert and
notification system will not
be used and, therefore,
requires no testing.
Also refer to basis for 10 CFR
50.47(b).
[[Page 65726]]
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV Due to the low probability of
F.2.a. and Section IV F.2.a.(i) design basis accidents or
through IV F.2.a.(iii). other credible events that
The NRC is granting exemption from the would be expected to exceed
requirements for full participation the limits of EPA PAGs, the
exercises and the submittal of the available time for event
associated exercise scenarios to the mitigation and, if necessary,
NRC. implementation of offsite
protective actions using a
CEMP, no formal offsite
radiological emergency plans
are required.
The intent of submitting
exercise scenarios at an
operating power reactor site
is to ensure that licensees
utilize different scenarios in
order to prevent the
preconditioning of responders
at power reactors. For
decommissioning power reactor
sites, there are limited
events that could occur, and
as such, the previously
routine progression to general
emergency in an operating
power reactor site scenario is
not applicable.
The licensee would be exempt
from 10 CFR.
Part 50, Appendix E, Section
IV.F.2.a.(i)-(iii) because the
licensee would be exempt from
the umbrella provision of 10
CFR Part 50, Appendix E,
Section IV.F.2.a.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part
F.2.b. 50, Appendix E, Section
The NRC is granting exemption from IV.F.2.a.
portions of the rule language that The low probability of design
would otherwise require the licensee basis accidents or other
to submit scenarios for its biennial credible events that would
exercises of its onsite emergency exceed the EPA PAGs, the
plan. In addition, the NRC is granting available time for event
exemption from portions of the rule mitigation and, if necessary,
language that requires assessment of implementation of offsite
offsite releases, protective action protective actions using a
decision making, and reference to the CEMP, render a TSC, OSC and
Technical Support Center, Operations EOF unnecessary. The principal
Support Center, and the Emergency functions required by
Operations Facility. regulation can be performed at
an onsite location that does
not meet the requirements of
the TSC, OSC or EOF.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part
F.2.c. and Sections IV F.2.c.(1) 50, Appendix E, Section
through F.2.c.(5). IV.F.2.a.
The NRC is granting exemption from the
requirements regarding the need for
the licensee to exercise offsite plans
biennially with full participation by
each offsite authority having a role
under the radiological response plan.
The NRC is also granting exemptions
from the conditions for conducting
these exercises (including hostile
action exercises) if two different
licensees have facilities on the same
site or on adjacent, contiguous sites,
or share most of the elements defining
co-located licensees.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part
F.2.d. 50, Appendix E, Section IV.2.
The NRC is granting exemption from the
requirements to obtain State
participation in an ingestion pathway
exercise and a hostile action
exercise, with each State that has
responsibilities, at least once per
exercise cycle.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part
F.2.e. 50, Appendix E, Section IV.2.
The NRC is granting exemption from
portions of the rule language that
would otherwise require the licensee
to allow participation exercise in
licensee drills by any State and local
Government in the plume exposure
pathway EPZ when requested.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV The U.S. Federal Emergency
F.2.f. Management Agency is
The NRC is granting exemption from responsible for evaluating the
portions of the rule language that adequacy of offsite response
would otherwise require FEMA to during an exercise. No action
consult with the NRC on remedial is expected from State or
exercises. The NRC is granting local government organizations
exemption from portions of the rule in response to an event at a
language that discuss the extent of decommissioning power reactor
State and local participation in site other than onsite
remedial exercises. firefighting, law enforcement
and ambulance/medical services
support. A memorandum of
understanding should be in
place for those services.
Offsite response organizations
will continue to take actions
on a comprehensive emergency
planning basis to protect the
health and safety of the
public as they would at any
other industrial site.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV Due to the low probability of
F.2.i. design basis accidents or
The NRC is granting exemption from other credible events to
portions of the rule language that exceed the EPA PAGs, the
would otherwise require the licensee available time for event
to drill and exercise scenarios that mitigation and, if needed,
include a wide spectrum of implementation of offsite
radiological release events and protective actions using a
hostile action. CEMP, the previously routine
progression to general
emergency in power reactor
site scenarios is not
applicable to a
decommissioning site.
Therefore, the licensee is not
expected to demonstrate
response to a wide spectrum of
events.
Also refer to basis for 10 CFR
Part 50, Appendix E, Section
IV.1 regarding hostile action.
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part
F.2.j. 50, Appendix E, Section
The NRC is granting exemption from the IV.F.2.
requirements regarding the need for
the licensee's emergency response
organization to demonstrate
proficiency in key skills in the
principal functional areas of
emergency response. Additionally, the
NRC is granting exemption during an
eight calendar year exercise cycle,
from demonstrating proficiency in the
key skills necessary to respond to
such scenarios as hostile actions,
unplanned minimal radiological
release, Sec. 50.54(hh)(2)
implementation strategies, and
scenarios involving rapid escalation
to a Site Area Emergency or General
Emergency.
[[Page 65727]]
10 CFR Part 50, App. E, Section IV I... Refer to basis for 10 CFR Part
The NRC is granting exemption from the 50, Appendix E, Section
requirements regarding the need for IV.E.8.d.
the licensee to develop a range of
protective action for onsite personnel
during hostile actions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2014-26292 Filed 11-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P