Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, 24136-24139 [2016-09558]
Download as PDF
24136
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices
The schedule for Commission
meetings is subject to change on short
notice. For more information or to verify
the status of meetings, contact Denise
McGovern at 301–415–0681 or via email
at Denise.McGovern@nrc.gov.
*
*
*
*
*
The NRC Commission Meeting
Schedule can be found on the Internet
at: https://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/
public-meetings/schedule.html.
*
*
*
*
*
The NRC provides reasonable
accommodation to individuals with
disabilities where appropriate. If you
need a reasonable accommodation to
participate in these public meetings, or
need this meeting notice or the
transcript or other information from the
public meetings in another format (e.g.
braille, large print), please notify
Kimberly Meyer, NRC Disability
Program Manager, at 301–287–0739, by
videophone at 240–428–3217, or by
email at Kimberly.Meyer-Chambers@
nrc.gov. Determinations on requests for
reasonable accommodation will be
made on a case-by-case basis.
*
*
*
*
*
Members of the public may request to
receive this information electronically.
If you would like to be added to the
distribution, please contact the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Office of the
Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301–
415–1969), or email
Brenda.Akstulewicz@nrc.gov or
Patricia.Jimenez@nrc.gov.
Dated: April 20, 2016.
Denise McGovern,
Policy Coordinator, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016–09649 Filed 4–21–16; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–271; NRC–2016–0017]
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.;
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power
Station
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Exemption; issuance.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is issuing an
exemption from the requirement to
maintain a specified level of onsite
property damage insurance in response
to a request from Entergy Nuclear
Operations, Inc. (ENO or the licensee)
dated April 17, 2014. The exemption
would permit Vermont Yankee Nuclear
Power Station (VY) to reduce its onsite
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:02 Apr 22, 2016
Jkt 238001
insurance from $1.06 billion to $50
million.
DATES: April 25, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID
NRC–2016–0017 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–2016–0017. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol
Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463;
email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For
technical questions, contact the
individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document.
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. To begin the search, select
‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then
select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS
Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS,
please contact the NRC’s Public
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by
email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
ADAMS accession number for each
document referenced (if it is available in
ADAMS) is provided the first time that
it is mentioned in this document.
• 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: Jack
D. Parrott, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415–
6634, email: Jack.Parrott@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The VY site is a single unit facility
located near the town of Vernon,
Vermont. The site is situated in
Windham County on the western shore
of the Connecticut River, immediately
upstream of the Vernon Hydroelectric
Station. The VY facility employs a
General Electric boiling water reactor
nuclear steam supply system licensed to
generate 1,912 megawatts thermal. The
boiling water reactor and supporting
facilities are owned and operated by
Entergy Vermont Yankee, a subsidiary
of ENO. The licensee, ENO, is the
holder of Renewed Facility Operating
License No. DPR–28. The license
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 September 23, 2013
(ADAMS Accession No. ML13273A204),
ENO submitted a notification to the
NRC indicating that it would
permanently shut down VY in the
fourth calendar quarter of 2014. On
December 29, 2014, ENO permanently
ceased power operations at VY. On
January 12, 2015, ENO certified that it
had permanently defueled the VY
reactor vessel and placed the fuel in the
spent fuel pool (SFP) (ADAMS
Accession No. ML15013A426).
Accordingly, pursuant to § 50.82(a)(2) of
title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), the VY renewed
facility operating license no longer
authorized operation of the reactor or
emplacement or retention of fuel in the
reactor vessel. However, the licensee is
still authorized to possess and store
irradiated nuclear fuel. Irradiated fuel is
currently being stored onsite in a SFP
and independent spent fuel storage
installation dry casks.
II. Request/Action
Under 10 CFR 50.12, ‘‘Specific
exemptions,’’ ENO has requested an
exemption from 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) by
letter dated April 17, 2014 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML14111A401). The
exemption from the requirements of 10
CFR 50.54(w)(1) would permit ENO to
reduce its onsite property damage
insurance from $1.06 billion to $50
million.
The regulation in 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1)
requires each licensee to have and
maintain onsite property damage
insurance to stabilize and
decontaminate the reactor and reactor
site in the event of an accident. The
onsite insurance coverage must be either
$1.06 billion or whatever amount of
insurance is generally available from
private sources (whichever is less).
The licensee states that the risk of an
accident at a permanently shutdown
and defueled reactor is much less than
the risk from an operating power
reactor. In addition, since reactor
operation is no longer authorized at VY,
there are no events that would require
the stabilization of reactor conditions
after an accident. Similarly, the risk of
an accident that would result in
significant onsite contamination at VY
is also much lower than the risk of such
an event at operating reactors.
Therefore, ENO is requesting an
exemption from 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1),
effective April 15, 2016, that would
permit a reduction in its onsite property
damage insurance from $1.06 billion to
E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM
25APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
$50 million, commensurate with the
reduced risk of an accident at the
permanently shutdown and defueled
VY reactor.
III. Discussion
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 when (1)
the exemptions are authorized by law,
will not present an undue risk to the
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.
The financial protection limits of 10
CFR 50.54(w)(1) were established after
the Three Mile Island accident, out of
concern that licensees may be unable to
financially cover onsite cleanup costs,
in the event of a major nuclear accident.
The specified $1.06 billion coverage
amount requirement was developed
based on an analysis of an accident at
a nuclear reactor operating at power,
resulting in a large fission product
release and requiring significant
resource expenditures to stabilize the
reactor conditions and ultimately
decontaminate and cleanup the site
(similar to the stabilization and cleanup
activities at the Fukushima Daiichi
nuclear power facility following the
damage from a severe earthquake and
tsunami).
These cost estimates were developed
in consideration of the spectrum of
postulated accidents for an operating
nuclear reactor. The costs were derived
from the consequences of a release of
radioactive material from the reactor.
Although the risk of an accident at an
operating reactor is very low, the
consequences can be large. In an
operating plant, the high temperature
and pressure of the reactor coolant
system (RCS), as well as the inventory
of relatively short-lived radionuclides,
contribute to both the risk and
consequences of an accident. With the
permanent cessation of reactor
operations at VY and the permanent
removal of the fuel from the reactor
core, such accidents are no longer
possible. As a result, the reactor, RCS,
and supporting systems no longer
operate and, therefore, have no function
as it pertains to the storage of the
irradiated fuel. Hence, postulated
accidents involving failure or
malfunction of the reactor, RCS, or
supporting systems are no longer
applicable.
During reactor decommissioning, the
principal radiological risks are
associated with the storage of spent fuel
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:02 Apr 22, 2016
Jkt 238001
onsite. In its April 17, 2014, exemption
request, ENO describes both designbasis and beyond-design-basis events
involving irradiated fuel stored in the
SFP. The licensee determined that there
are no applicable design-basis events at
VY that could result in a radiological
release exceeding the limits established
by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) early-phase Protective
Action Guidelines (PAGs) of one
roentgen equivalent man (rem) at the
exclusion area boundary, as a way to
demonstrate that any possible
radiological releases would be minimal
and not require precautionary protective
actions (e.g., sheltering in place or
evacuation). The staff evaluated the
radiological consequences associated
with various decommissioning
activities, and design basis accidents at
VY, in consideration of VY’s
permanently shut down and defueled
status. The possible design-basis
accident scenarios at VY have greatly
reduced radiological consequences.
Based on its review, the staff concluded
that no reasonably conceivable designbasis accident exists that could cause an
offsite release greater than the EPA
PAGs. The only design-basis accident
that could potentially result in an offsite
radiological release at VY is a fuel
handling accident (FHA). Analysis
performed by the licensee concluded
that 17 days after shutdown, the
radiological consequence of an FHA
would not exceed the limits established
by the EPA PAGs at the exclusion area
boundary. Based on the time that VY
has been permanently shutdown
(approximately 13 months), the staff
determined that the possibility of an
offsite radiological release from a
design-basis accident that could exceed
the EPA PAGs has been eliminated. The
only event that has the potential to lead
to a significant radiological release at a
decommissioning reactor is a zirconium
fire. The zirconium fire scenario is a
postulated, but highly unlikely, beyonddesign-basis accident scenario that
involves the loss of water inventory
from the SFP, resulting in a significant
heat-up of the spent fuel and
culminating in substantial zirconium
cladding oxidation and fuel damage.
The probability of a zirconium fire
scenario is related to the decay heat of
the irradiated fuel stored in the SFP.
Therefore, the risks from a zirconium
fire scenario continue to decrease as a
function of the time that VY has been
permanently shut down.
The NRC staff has previously
authorized a lesser amount of onsite
property damage insurance coverage
based on this analysis of the zirconium
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24137
fire risk. In SECY–96–256, ‘‘Changes to
Financial Protection Requirements for
Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power
Reactors, 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) and 10
CFR 140.11,’’ dated December 17, 1996
(ADAMS Accession No. ML15062A483),
the staff recommended changes to the
power reactor insurance regulations that
would allow licensees to lower onsite
insurance levels to $50 million, upon
demonstration that the fuel stored in the
SFP can be air-cooled. In its Staff
Requirements Memorandum to SECY–
96–256, dated January 28, 1997
(ADAMS Accession No. ML15062A454),
the Commission supported the staff’s
recommendation that, among other
things, would allow permanently
shutdown power reactor licensees to
reduce commercial onsite property
damage insurance coverage to $50
million, when the licensee was able to
demonstrate the technical criterion that
the spent fuel could be air-cooled if the
SFP was drained of water. The staff has
used this technical criterion to grant
similar exemptions to other
decommissioning reactors (e.g., Maine
Yankee Atomic Power Station,
published in the Federal Register on
January 19, 1999 (64 FR 2920); and Zion
Nuclear Power Station, published in the
Federal Register on December 28, 1999
(64 FR 72700)). These prior exemptions
were granted, based on these licensees
demonstrating that the SFP could be aircooled, consistent with the technical
criterion discussed above.
In SECY–00–0145, ‘‘Integrated
Rulemaking Plan for Nuclear Power
Plant Decommissioning,’’ dated June 28,
2000, and SECY–01–0100, ‘‘Policy
Issues Related to Safeguards, Insurance,
and Emergency Preparedness
Regulations at Decommissioning
Nuclear Power Plants Storing Fuel in
Spent Fuel Pools,’’ dated June 4, 2001
(ADAMS Accession Nos. ML003721626
and ML011450420, respectively), the
NRC staff discussed additional
information concerning SFP zirconium
fire risks at decommissioning reactors
and associated implications for onsite
property damage insurance. Providing
an analysis of when the spent fuel
stored in the SFP is capable of aircooling is one measure that can be used
to demonstrate that the probability of a
zirconium fire is exceedingly low.
However, the staff has more recently
used an additional analysis that bounds
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). This analysis includes an
assumption of adiabatic conditions,
E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM
25APN1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
24138
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices
which means no heat transfer from the
spent fuel via conduction, convection,
or radiation.
In the case of VY, the licensee
determined that the fuel removed from
the reactor would have sufficiently
decayed by April 15, 2016, to
significantly reduce the risk from SFP
draining events. To support this
determination, the licensee provided an
adiabatic analysis indicating that the
fuel cladding temperature would not
reach levels associated with a
significant radiological release within
10 hours after the loss of all means of
cooling. The licensee maintains
strategies and equipment to cool the
spent fuel in the unlikely event that
coolant is lost, and the 10-hour
adiabatic heating time would provide
sufficient time for personnel to respond
with onsite equipment to restore a
means of spent fuel cooling.
In addition, the licensee cited NRCstaff developed reports concluding that
the high density storage of fuel in the
SFP is safe and the risk of a large
radiological release is very low. The
staff presented an independent
evaluation of a SFP subject to a severe
earthquake in NUREG–2161,
‘‘Consequence Study of a BeyondDesign-Basis Earthquake Affecting the
Spent Fuel Pool for a U.S. Mark I
Boiling Water Reactor,’’ September 2014
(ADAMS Accession No. ML14255A365).
This evaluation concluded that, for a
representative boiling-water reactor
(BWR), fuel in a dispersed high-density
configuration would be adequately
cooled by natural circulation airflow
within several months after discharge
from a reactor if the pool was drained
of water.
By letter dated November 23, 2015
(ADAMS Accession No.ML15329A167),
ENO confirmed that the plant design
and fuel storage configuration
considered in NUREG–2161 were
consistent with the VY plant design and
fuel storage configurations to be used in
the decommissioning of VY. The staff
independently confirmed that the fuel
assembly decay power was also
consistent. Thus, after 15.4 months
decay, which will be reached by the
requested effective date of April 15,
2016 for this exemption, the fuel stored
in the VY SFP will be able to adequately
be cooled by air in the unlikely event
the SFP drained. For the very unlikely
beyond-design-basis accident scenario,
where the SFP coolant inventory is lost
in such a manner that all methods of
heat removal from the spent fuel are no
longer available, there will be a
minimum of 10 hours from the
initiation of the accident until the
cladding reaches a temperature where
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:02 Apr 22, 2016
Jkt 238001
offsite radiological release might occur.
The staff finds that 10 hours is sufficient
time to support deployment of
mitigation equipment to prevent the
zirconium cladding from reaching a
point of rapid oxidation.
Based on the above discussion and
SECY–96–256, the NRC staff determined
$50 million to be an adequate level of
onsite property damage insurance for a
decommissioning reactor, once the
spent fuel in the SFP is no longer
susceptible to a zirconium fire. The staff
has postulated that there is still a
potential for other radiological incidents
at a decommissioning reactor that could
result in significant onsite
contamination besides a zirconium fire.
In SECY–96–256, the NRC staff cited the
rupture of a large contaminated liquid
storage tank, causing soil contamination
and potential groundwater
contamination, as the most costly
postulated event to decontaminate and
remediate (other than a SFP zirconium
fire). The postulated large liquid
radiological waste storage tank rupture
event was determined to have a
bounding onsite cleanup cost of
approximately $50 million. Therefore,
the staff determined that the licensee’s
proposal to reduce onsite insurance to a
level of $50 million would be consistent
with the bounding cleanup and
decontamination cost, as discussed in
SECY–96–256, to account for the
postulated rupture of a large liquid
radiological waste tank at the VY site,
should such an event occur.
A. Authorized by Law
The regulation in 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1)
requires each licensee to have and
maintain onsite property damage
insurance of either $1.06 billion or
whatever amount of insurance is
generally available from private sources,
whichever is less. In accordance with 10
CFR 50.12, the Commission may grant
exemptions from the regulations in 10
CFR part 50, as the Commission
determines are authorized by law.
As explained above, the NRC staff has
determined that the licensee’s proposed
reduction in onsite property damage
insurance coverage to a level of $50
million is consistent with SECY–96–
256. Moreover, the staff concluded that
as of April 15, 2016, sufficient irradiated
fuel decay time will have elapsed at VY
to decrease the probability of an onsite
and offsite radiological release from a
postulated zirconium fire accident to
negligible levels. In addition, the
licensee’s proposal to reduce onsite
insurance to a level of $50 million is
consistent with the maximum estimated
cleanup costs for the recovery from the
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
rupture of a large liquid radiological
waste storage tank.
The NRC staff has determined that
granting of the licensee’s proposed
exemption will not result in a violation
of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, or
other laws, as amended. Therefore,
based on its review of ENO’s exemption
request, as discussed above, and
consistent with SECY–96–256, the NRC
staff concludes that the exemption is
authorized by law.
B. No Undue Risk to Public Health and
Safety
The onsite property damage insurance
requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1)
were established to provide financial
assurance that following a significant
nuclear incident, onsite conditions
could be stabilized and the site
decontaminated. The requirements of 10
CFR 50.54(w)(1) and the existing level
of onsite insurance coverage for VY are
predicated on the assumption that the
reactor is operating. However, VY is a
permanently shutdown and defueled
facility. The permanently defueled
status of the facility has resulted in a
significant reduction in the number and
severity of potential accidents, and
correspondingly, a significant reduction
in the potential for and severity of
onsite property damage. The proposed
reduction in the amount of onsite
insurance coverage does not impact the
probability or consequences of potential
accidents. The proposed level of
insurance coverage is commensurate
with the reduced consequences of
potential nuclear accidents at VY.
Therefore, the NRC staff concludes that
granting the requested exemption will
not present an undue risk to the health
and safety of the public.
C. Consistent With the Common Defense
and Security
The proposed exemption would not
eliminate any requirements associated
with physical protection of the site and
would not adversely affect ENO’s ability
to physically secure the site or protect
special nuclear material. Physical
security measures at VY are not affected
by the requested exemption. Therefore,
the proposed exemption is consistent
with the common defense and security.
D. Special Circumstances
Under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), special
circumstances are present if 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. The
underlying purpose of 10 CFR
50.54(w)(1) is to provide reasonable
E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM
25APN1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 79 / Monday, April 25, 2016 / Notices
assurance that adequate funds will be
available to stabilize conditions and
cover onsite cleanup costs associated
with site decontamination, following an
accident that results in the release of a
significant amount of radiological
material. Because VY is permanently
shut down and defueled, it is no longer
possible for the radiological
consequences of design-basis accidents
or other credible events at VY to exceed
the limits of the EPA PAGs at the
exclusion area boundary. The licensee
has evaluated the consequences of
highly unlikely, beyond-design-basis
conditions involving a loss of coolant
from the SFP. The analyses show that
after April 15, 2016, the likelihood of
such an event leading to a large
radiological release is negligible. The
NRC staff’s evaluation of the licensee’s
analyses confirm this conclusion.
The NRC staff also finds that the
licensee’s proposed $50 million level of
onsite insurance is consistent with the
bounding cleanup and decontamination
cost, as discussed in SECY–96–256, to
account for the hypothetical rupture of
a large liquid radiological waste tank at
the VY site, should such an event occur.
Therefore, the staff concludes that the
application of the current requirements
in 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) to maintain $1.06
billion in onsite insurance coverage is
not necessary to achieve the underlying
purpose of the rule for the permanently
shutdown and defueled VY reactor.
Under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(iii), special
circumstances are present whenever
compliance would result in undue
hardship or other costs that are
significantly in excess of those
contemplated when the regulation was
adopted, or that are significantly in
excess of those incurred by others
similarly situated.
The NRC staff concludes that if the
licensee was required to continue to
maintain an onsite insurance level of
$1.06 billion, the associated insurance
premiums would be in excess of those
necessary and commensurate with the
radiological contamination risks posed
by the site. In addition, such insurance
levels would be significantly in excess
of other decommissioning reactor
facilities that have been granted similar
exemptions by the NRC.
The NRC staff finds that compliance
with the existing rule would result in an
undue hardship or other costs that are
significantly in excess of those
contemplated when the regulation was
adopted and are significantly in excess
of those incurred by others similarly
situated.
Therefore, the special circumstances
required by 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) and
10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(iii) exist.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:02 Apr 22, 2016
Jkt 238001
E. Environmental Considerations
The NRC approval of the exemption
to insurance or indemnity requirements
belongs to a category of actions that the
Commission, by rule or regulation, has
declared to be a categorical exclusion,
after first finding that the category of
actions does not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on
the human environment. Specifically,
the exemption is categorically excluded
from further analysis under
§ 51.22(c)(25).
Under 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25), granting
of an exemption from the requirements
of any regulation of Chapter I to 10 CFR
is a categorical exclusion provided that
(i) there is no significant hazards
consideration; (ii) there is no significant
change in the types or significant
increase in the amounts of any effluents
that may be released offsite; (iii) there is
no significant increase in individual or
cumulative public or occupational
radiation exposure; (iv) there is no
significant construction impact; (v)
there is no significant increase in the
potential for or consequences from
radiological accidents; and (vi) the
requirements from which an exemption
is sought involve: surety, insurance, or
indemnity requirements.
The Director, Division of
Decommissioning, Uranium Recovery
and Waste Programs, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, has
determined that approval of the
exemption request involves no
significant hazards consideration
because reducing the licensee’s onsite
property damage insurance for VY does
not (1) involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated; or (2)
create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any
accident previously evaluated; or (3)
involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety. The exempted
financial protection regulation is
unrelated to the operation of VY.
Accordingly, there is no significant
change in the types or significant
increase in the amounts of any effluents
that may be released offsite; and no
significant increase in individual or
cumulative public or occupational
radiation exposure.
In addition, the exempted regulation
is not associated with construction, so
there is no significant construction
impact. The exempted regulation does
not concern the source term (i.e.,
potential amount of radiation in an
accident), nor mitigation. Therefore,
there is no significant increase in the
potential for, or consequences of, a
radiological accident. In addition, there
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24139
would be no significant impacts to
biota, water resources, historic
properties, cultural resources, or
socioeconomic conditions in the region.
Moreover, the requirement for onsite
property damage insurance involves
surety, insurance, and indemnity
matters. Accordingly, the exemption
request meets the eligibility criteria for
categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR
51.22(c)(25). Therefore, pursuant to 10
CFR 51.22(b) and 51.22(c)(25), no
environmental impact statement or
environmental assessment need be
prepared in connection with the
approval of this exemption request.
IV. Conclusions
Accordingly, the Commission has
determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR
50.12(a), the exemption from
50.54(w)(1) is authorized by law, will
not present an undue risk to the public
health and safety, and is consistent with
the common defense and security. In
addition, special circumstances are
present as set forth in 10 CFR 50.12.
Therefore, the Commission hereby
grants VY an exemption from the
requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1). The
exemption will permit VY to lower
minimum required onsite insurance to
$50 million no earlier than April 15,
2016.
The exemption is effective upon
issuance.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day
of April, 2016.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John R. Tappert,
Director, Division of Decommissioning,
Uranium Recovery and Waste Programs,
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2016–09558 Filed 4–22–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Advisory Committee on Reactor
Safeguards; Notice of Meeting
In accordance with the purposes of
Sections 29 and 182b of the Atomic
Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2039, 2232b), the
Advisory Committee on Reactor
Safeguards (ACRS) will hold a meeting
on May 5–7, 2016, 11545 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland.
Thursday, May 5, 2016, Conference
Room T2–B1, 11545 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland
8:30 a.m.–8:35 a.m.: Opening Remarks
by the ACRS Chairman (Open)—
The ACRS Chairman will make
E:\FR\FM\25APN1.SGM
25APN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 79 (Monday, April 25, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24136-24139]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-09558]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-271; NRC-2016-0017]
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power
Station
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Exemption; issuance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing an
exemption from the requirement to maintain a specified level of onsite
property damage insurance in response to a request from Entergy Nuclear
Operations, Inc. (ENO or the licensee) dated April 17, 2014. The
exemption would permit Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VY) to
reduce its onsite insurance from $1.06 billion to $50 million.
DATES: April 25, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2016-0017 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-2016-0017. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-
3463; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS,
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available
in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this
document.
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: Jack D. Parrott, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-6634, email:
Jack.Parrott@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The VY site is a single unit facility located near the town of
Vernon, Vermont. The site is situated in Windham County on the western
shore of the Connecticut River, immediately upstream of the Vernon
Hydroelectric Station. The VY facility employs a General Electric
boiling water reactor nuclear steam supply system licensed to generate
1,912 megawatts thermal. The boiling water reactor and supporting
facilities are owned and operated by Entergy Vermont Yankee, a
subsidiary of ENO. The licensee, ENO, is the holder of Renewed Facility
Operating License No. DPR-28. 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 September 23, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML13273A204), ENO submitted a notification to the NRC indicating that
it would permanently shut down VY in the fourth calendar quarter of
2014. On December 29, 2014, ENO permanently ceased power operations at
VY. On January 12, 2015, ENO certified that it had permanently defueled
the VY reactor vessel and placed the fuel in the spent fuel pool (SFP)
(ADAMS Accession No. ML15013A426). Accordingly, pursuant to Sec.
50.82(a)(2) of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR),
the VY renewed facility operating license no longer authorized
operation of the reactor or emplacement or retention of fuel in the
reactor vessel. However, the licensee is still authorized to possess
and store irradiated nuclear fuel. Irradiated fuel is currently being
stored onsite in a SFP and independent spent fuel storage installation
dry casks.
II. Request/Action
Under 10 CFR 50.12, ``Specific exemptions,'' ENO has requested an
exemption from 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) by letter dated April 17, 2014 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML14111A401). The exemption from the requirements of 10
CFR 50.54(w)(1) would permit ENO to reduce its onsite property damage
insurance from $1.06 billion to $50 million.
The regulation in 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) requires each licensee to have
and maintain onsite property damage insurance to stabilize and
decontaminate the reactor and reactor site in the event of an accident.
The onsite insurance coverage must be either $1.06 billion or whatever
amount of insurance is generally available from private sources
(whichever is less).
The licensee states that the risk of an accident at a permanently
shutdown and defueled reactor is much less than the risk from an
operating power reactor. In addition, since reactor operation is no
longer authorized at VY, there are no events that would require the
stabilization of reactor conditions after an accident. Similarly, the
risk of an accident that would result in significant onsite
contamination at VY is also much lower than the risk of such an event
at operating reactors. Therefore, ENO is requesting an exemption from
10 CFR 50.54(w)(1), effective April 15, 2016, that would permit a
reduction in its onsite property damage insurance from $1.06 billion to
[[Page 24137]]
$50 million, commensurate with the reduced risk of an accident at the
permanently shutdown and defueled VY reactor.
III. Discussion
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 when (1) the
exemptions are authorized by law, will not present an undue risk to the
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.
The financial protection limits of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) were
established after the Three Mile Island accident, out of concern that
licensees may be unable to financially cover onsite cleanup costs, in
the event of a major nuclear accident. The specified $1.06 billion
coverage amount requirement was developed based on an analysis of an
accident at a nuclear reactor operating at power, resulting in a large
fission product release and requiring significant resource expenditures
to stabilize the reactor conditions and ultimately decontaminate and
cleanup the site (similar to the stabilization and cleanup activities
at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power facility following the damage
from a severe earthquake and tsunami).
These cost estimates were developed in consideration of the
spectrum of postulated accidents for an operating nuclear reactor. The
costs were derived from the consequences of a release of radioactive
material from the reactor. Although the risk of an accident at an
operating reactor is very low, the consequences can be large. In an
operating plant, the high temperature and pressure of the reactor
coolant system (RCS), as well as the inventory of relatively short-
lived radionuclides, contribute to both the risk and consequences of an
accident. With the permanent cessation of reactor operations at VY and
the permanent removal of the fuel from the reactor core, such accidents
are no longer possible. As a result, the reactor, RCS, and supporting
systems no longer operate and, therefore, have no function as it
pertains to the storage of the irradiated fuel. Hence, postulated
accidents involving failure or malfunction of the reactor, RCS, or
supporting systems are no longer applicable.
During reactor decommissioning, the principal radiological risks
are associated with the storage of spent fuel onsite. In its April 17,
2014, exemption request, ENO describes both design-basis and beyond-
design-basis events involving irradiated fuel stored in the SFP. The
licensee determined that there are no applicable design-basis events at
VY that could result in a radiological release exceeding the limits
established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) early-
phase Protective Action Guidelines (PAGs) of one roentgen equivalent
man (rem) at the exclusion area boundary, as a way to demonstrate that
any possible radiological releases would be minimal and not require
precautionary protective actions (e.g., sheltering in place or
evacuation). The staff evaluated the radiological consequences
associated with various decommissioning activities, and design basis
accidents at VY, in consideration of VY's permanently shut down and
defueled status. The possible design-basis accident scenarios at VY
have greatly reduced radiological consequences. Based on its review,
the staff concluded that no reasonably conceivable design-basis
accident exists that could cause an offsite release greater than the
EPA PAGs. The only design-basis accident that could potentially result
in an offsite radiological release at VY is a fuel handling accident
(FHA). Analysis performed by the licensee concluded that 17 days after
shutdown, the radiological consequence of an FHA would not exceed the
limits established by the EPA PAGs at the exclusion area boundary.
Based on the time that VY has been permanently shutdown (approximately
13 months), the staff determined that the possibility of an offsite
radiological release from a design-basis accident that could exceed the
EPA PAGs has been eliminated. The only event that has the potential to
lead to a significant radiological release at a decommissioning reactor
is a zirconium fire. The zirconium fire scenario is a postulated, but
highly unlikely, beyond-design-basis accident scenario that involves
the loss of water inventory from the SFP, resulting in a significant
heat-up of the spent fuel and culminating in substantial zirconium
cladding oxidation and fuel damage. The probability of a zirconium fire
scenario is related to the decay heat of the irradiated fuel stored in
the SFP. Therefore, the risks from a zirconium fire scenario continue
to decrease as a function of the time that VY has been permanently shut
down.
The NRC staff has previously authorized a lesser amount of onsite
property damage insurance coverage based on this analysis of the
zirconium fire risk. In SECY-96-256, ``Changes to Financial Protection
Requirements for Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power Reactors, 10 CFR
50.54(w)(1) and 10 CFR 140.11,'' dated December 17, 1996 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML15062A483), the staff recommended changes to the power
reactor insurance regulations that would allow licensees to lower
onsite insurance levels to $50 million, upon demonstration that the
fuel stored in the SFP can be air-cooled. In its Staff Requirements
Memorandum to SECY-96-256, dated January 28, 1997 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML15062A454), the Commission supported the staff's recommendation that,
among other things, would allow permanently shutdown power reactor
licensees to reduce commercial onsite property damage insurance
coverage to $50 million, when the licensee was able to demonstrate the
technical criterion that the spent fuel could be air-cooled if the SFP
was drained of water. The staff has used this technical criterion to
grant similar exemptions to other decommissioning reactors (e.g., Maine
Yankee Atomic Power Station, published in the Federal Register on
January 19, 1999 (64 FR 2920); and Zion Nuclear Power Station,
published in the Federal Register on December 28, 1999 (64 FR 72700)).
These prior exemptions were granted, based on these licensees
demonstrating that the SFP could be air-cooled, consistent with the
technical criterion discussed above.
In SECY-00-0145, ``Integrated Rulemaking Plan for Nuclear Power
Plant Decommissioning,'' dated June 28, 2000, and SECY-01-0100,
``Policy Issues Related to Safeguards, Insurance, and Emergency
Preparedness Regulations at Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants
Storing Fuel in Spent Fuel Pools,'' dated June 4, 2001 (ADAMS Accession
Nos. ML003721626 and ML011450420, respectively), the NRC staff
discussed additional information concerning SFP zirconium fire risks at
decommissioning reactors and associated implications for onsite
property damage insurance. Providing an analysis of when the spent fuel
stored in the SFP is capable of air-cooling is one measure that can be
used to demonstrate that the probability of a zirconium fire is
exceedingly low. However, the staff has more recently used an
additional analysis that bounds 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). This analysis includes an assumption of
adiabatic conditions,
[[Page 24138]]
which means no heat transfer from the spent fuel via conduction,
convection, or radiation.
In the case of VY, the licensee determined that the fuel removed
from the reactor would have sufficiently decayed by April 15, 2016, to
significantly reduce the risk from SFP draining events. To support this
determination, the licensee provided an adiabatic analysis indicating
that the fuel cladding temperature would not reach levels associated
with a significant radiological release within 10 hours after the loss
of all means of cooling. The licensee maintains strategies and
equipment to cool the spent fuel in the unlikely event that coolant is
lost, and the 10-hour adiabatic heating time would provide sufficient
time for personnel to respond with onsite equipment to restore a means
of spent fuel cooling.
In addition, the licensee cited NRC-staff developed reports
concluding that the high density storage of fuel in the SFP is safe and
the risk of a large radiological release is very low. The staff
presented an independent evaluation of a SFP subject to a severe
earthquake 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,'' September 2014 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14255A365). This
evaluation concluded that, for a representative boiling-water reactor
(BWR), fuel in a dispersed high-density configuration would be
adequately cooled by natural circulation airflow within several months
after discharge from a reactor if the pool was drained of water.
By letter dated November 23, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No.ML15329A167),
ENO confirmed that the plant design and fuel storage configuration
considered in NUREG-2161 were consistent with the VY plant design and
fuel storage configurations to be used in the decommissioning of VY.
The staff independently confirmed that the fuel assembly decay power
was also consistent. Thus, after 15.4 months decay, which will be
reached by the requested effective date of April 15, 2016 for this
exemption, the fuel stored in the VY SFP will be able to adequately be
cooled by air in the unlikely event the SFP drained. For the very
unlikely beyond-design-basis accident scenario, where the SFP coolant
inventory is lost in such a manner that all methods of heat removal
from the spent fuel are no longer available, there will be a minimum of
10 hours from the initiation of the accident until the cladding reaches
a temperature where offsite radiological release might occur. The staff
finds that 10 hours is sufficient time to support deployment of
mitigation equipment to prevent the zirconium cladding from reaching a
point of rapid oxidation.
Based on the above discussion and SECY-96-256, the NRC staff
determined $50 million to be an adequate level of onsite property
damage insurance for a decommissioning reactor, once the spent fuel in
the SFP is no longer susceptible to a zirconium fire. The staff has
postulated that there is still a potential for other radiological
incidents at a decommissioning reactor that could result in significant
onsite contamination besides a zirconium fire. In SECY-96-256, the NRC
staff cited the rupture of a large contaminated liquid storage tank,
causing soil contamination and potential groundwater contamination, as
the most costly postulated event to decontaminate and remediate (other
than a SFP zirconium fire). The postulated large liquid radiological
waste storage tank rupture event was determined to have a bounding
onsite cleanup cost of approximately $50 million. Therefore, the staff
determined that the licensee's proposal to reduce onsite insurance to a
level of $50 million would be consistent with the bounding cleanup and
decontamination cost, as discussed in SECY-96-256, to account for the
postulated rupture of a large liquid radiological waste tank at the VY
site, should such an event occur.
A. Authorized by Law
The regulation in 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) requires each licensee to have
and maintain onsite property damage insurance of either $1.06 billion
or whatever amount of insurance is generally available from private
sources, whichever is less. In accordance with 10 CFR 50.12, the
Commission may grant exemptions from the regulations in 10 CFR part 50,
as the Commission determines are authorized by law.
As explained above, the NRC staff has determined that the
licensee's proposed reduction in onsite property damage insurance
coverage to a level of $50 million is consistent with SECY-96-256.
Moreover, the staff concluded that as of April 15, 2016, sufficient
irradiated fuel decay time will have elapsed at VY to decrease the
probability of an onsite and offsite radiological release from a
postulated zirconium fire accident to negligible levels. In addition,
the licensee's proposal to reduce onsite insurance to a level of $50
million is consistent with the maximum estimated cleanup costs for the
recovery from the rupture of a large liquid radiological waste storage
tank.
The NRC staff has determined that granting of the licensee's
proposed exemption will not result in a violation of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, or other laws, as amended. Therefore, based on its review
of ENO's exemption request, as discussed above, and consistent with
SECY-96-256, the NRC staff concludes that the exemption is authorized
by law.
B. No Undue Risk to Public Health and Safety
The onsite property damage insurance requirements of 10 CFR
50.54(w)(1) were established to provide financial assurance that
following a significant nuclear incident, onsite conditions could be
stabilized and the site decontaminated. The requirements of 10 CFR
50.54(w)(1) and the existing level of onsite insurance coverage for VY
are predicated on the assumption that the reactor is operating.
However, VY is a permanently shutdown and defueled facility. The
permanently defueled status of the facility has resulted in a
significant reduction in the number and severity of potential
accidents, and correspondingly, a significant reduction in the
potential for and severity of onsite property damage. The proposed
reduction in the amount of onsite insurance coverage does not impact
the probability or consequences of potential accidents. The proposed
level of insurance coverage is commensurate with the reduced
consequences of potential nuclear accidents at VY. Therefore, the NRC
staff concludes that granting the requested exemption will not present
an undue risk to the health and safety of the public.
C. Consistent With the Common Defense and Security
The proposed exemption would not eliminate any requirements
associated with physical protection of the site and would not adversely
affect ENO's ability to physically secure the site or protect special
nuclear material. Physical security measures at VY are not affected by
the requested exemption. Therefore, the proposed exemption is
consistent with the common defense and security.
D. Special Circumstances
Under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), special circumstances are present if
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. The underlying purpose of
10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) is to provide reasonable
[[Page 24139]]
assurance that adequate funds will be available to stabilize conditions
and cover onsite cleanup costs associated with site decontamination,
following an accident that results in the release of a significant
amount of radiological material. Because VY is permanently shut down
and defueled, it is no longer possible for the radiological
consequences of design-basis accidents or other credible events at VY
to exceed the limits of the EPA PAGs at the exclusion area boundary.
The licensee has evaluated the consequences of highly unlikely, beyond-
design-basis conditions involving a loss of coolant from the SFP. The
analyses show that after April 15, 2016, the likelihood of such an
event leading to a large radiological release is negligible. The NRC
staff's evaluation of the licensee's analyses confirm this conclusion.
The NRC staff also finds that the licensee's proposed $50 million
level of onsite insurance is consistent with the bounding cleanup and
decontamination cost, as discussed in SECY-96-256, to account for the
hypothetical rupture of a large liquid radiological waste tank at the
VY site, should such an event occur. Therefore, the staff concludes
that the application of the current requirements in 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1)
to maintain $1.06 billion in onsite insurance coverage is not necessary
to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule for the permanently
shutdown and defueled VY reactor.
Under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(iii), special circumstances are present
whenever compliance would result in undue hardship or other costs that
are significantly in excess of those contemplated when the regulation
was adopted, or that are significantly in excess of those incurred by
others similarly situated.
The NRC staff concludes that if the licensee was required to
continue to maintain an onsite insurance level of $1.06 billion, the
associated insurance premiums would be in excess of those necessary and
commensurate with the radiological contamination risks posed by the
site. In addition, such insurance levels would be significantly in
excess of other decommissioning reactor facilities that have been
granted similar exemptions by the NRC.
The NRC staff finds that compliance with the existing rule would
result in an undue hardship or other costs that are significantly in
excess of those contemplated when the regulation was adopted and are
significantly in excess of those incurred by others similarly situated.
Therefore, the special circumstances required by 10 CFR
50.12(a)(2)(ii) and 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(iii) exist.
E. Environmental Considerations
The NRC approval of the exemption to insurance or indemnity
requirements belongs to a category of actions that the Commission, by
rule or regulation, has declared to be a categorical exclusion, after
first finding that the category of actions does not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
Specifically, the exemption is categorically excluded from further
analysis under Sec. 51.22(c)(25).
Under 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25), granting of an exemption from the
requirements of any regulation of Chapter I to 10 CFR is a categorical
exclusion provided that (i) there is no significant hazards
consideration; (ii) there is no significant change in the types or
significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be
released offsite; (iii) there is no significant increase in individual
or cumulative public or occupational radiation exposure; (iv) there is
no significant construction impact; (v) there is no significant
increase in the potential for or consequences from radiological
accidents; and (vi) the requirements from which an exemption is sought
involve: surety, insurance, or indemnity requirements.
The Director, Division of Decommissioning, Uranium Recovery and
Waste Programs, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, has
determined that approval of the exemption request involves no
significant hazards consideration because reducing the licensee's
onsite property damage insurance for VY does not (1) involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or
(3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The exempted
financial protection regulation is unrelated to the operation of VY.
Accordingly, there is no significant change in the types or significant
increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite;
and no significant increase in individual or cumulative public or
occupational radiation exposure.
In addition, the exempted regulation is not associated with
construction, so there is no significant construction impact. The
exempted regulation does not concern the source term (i.e., potential
amount of radiation in an accident), nor mitigation. Therefore, there
is no significant increase in the potential for, or consequences of, a
radiological accident. In addition, there would be no significant
impacts to biota, water resources, historic properties, cultural
resources, or socioeconomic conditions in the region. Moreover, the
requirement for onsite property damage insurance involves surety,
insurance, and indemnity matters. Accordingly, the exemption request
meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in
10 CFR 51.22(c)(25). Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b) and
51.22(c)(25), no environmental impact statement or environmental
assessment need be prepared in connection with the approval of this
exemption request.
IV. Conclusions
Accordingly, the Commission has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR
50.12(a), the exemption from 50.54(w)(1) is authorized by law, will not
present an undue risk to the public health and safety, and is
consistent with the common defense and security. In addition, special
circumstances are present as set forth in 10 CFR 50.12. Therefore, the
Commission hereby grants VY an exemption from the requirements of 10
CFR 50.54(w)(1). The exemption will permit VY to lower minimum required
onsite insurance to $50 million no earlier than April 15, 2016.
The exemption is effective upon issuance.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day of April, 2016.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John R. Tappert,
Director, Division of Decommissioning, Uranium Recovery and Waste
Programs, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2016-09558 Filed 4-22-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P