Exelon Generation Company, LLC; Clinton Power Station, Unit No. 1; Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2; Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, 9243-9246 [2017-02336]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 22 / Friday, February 3, 2017 / Notices
Friday, February 17, 2017
9:30 a.m. Briefing on Project Aim
(Public Meeting) (Contact: Tammy
Bloomer: 301–415–1785).
This meeting will be webcast live at
the Web address—https://www.nrc.gov/.
Week of February 20, 2017—Tentative
There are no meetings scheduled for
the week of February 20, 2017.
Regulatory Commission, Office of the
Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301–
415–1969), or email
Brenda.Akstulewicz@nrc.gov or
Patricia.Jimenez@nrc.gov.
AGENCY:
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. For the
convenience of the reader, the ADAMS
accession numbers are provided in a
table in the ‘‘Availability of Documents’’
section of 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: John
G. Lamb, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington DC 20555–
0001; telephone: 301–415–3100; email:
John.Lamb@nrc.gov.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is issuing an
exemption in response to an August 16,
2016, request from Exelon Generation
Company, LLC (Exelon or the licensee),
from certain regulatory requirements.
The exemption would allow a certified
fuel handler (CFH), besides a licensed
senior operator, to approve the
emergency suspension of security
measures for Clinton Power Station,
Unit No. 1 (CPS); Quad Cities Nuclear
Power Station, Units 1 and 2 (QCNPS);
and Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating
Station (OCNGS) during certain
emergency conditions or during severe
weather.
DATES: The exemption was issued on
January 23, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID
NRC–2017–0014 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–2017–0014. 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
I. Background
Exelon is the holder of Facility
Operating License No. NPF–62 for CPS,
Renewed Facility Operating License
Nos. DPR–29 and DPR–30 for QCNPS,
and Renewed Facility Operating License
No. DPR–16 for OCNGS. The license
provides, among other things, that the
facility is subject to all rules,
regulations, and orders of the NRC now
or hereafter in effect. The CPS, QCNPS,
and OCNGS facilities consist of boilingwater reactors located in DeWitt County,
Illinois; Rock Island County, Illinois;
and Ocean County, New Jersey,
respectively, and site-specific licensed
independent spent fuel storage
installations (ISFSI) at CPS, QCNPS, and
OCNGS.
By letter dated January 7, 2011, the
licensee submitted Certification of
Permanent Cessation of Operations for
OCNGS. In this letter, Exelon provided
notification to the NRC of its intent to
permanently cease power operation no
later than December 31, 2019.
By letter dated June 20, 2016, the
licensee submitted Certification of
Permanent Cessation of Operations for
CPS. In this letter, Exelon provided
notification to the NRC of its intent to
permanently cease power operation by
June 1, 2017.
By letter dated June 20, 2016, the
licensee submitted Certification of
Permanent Cessation of Operations for
QCNPS. In this letter, Exelon provided
notification to the NRC of its intent to
permanently cease power operation by
June 1, 2018.
In accordance with § 50.82(a)(1)(i) and
(ii), and § 50.82(a)(2) of title 10 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR),
Dated: February 1, 2017.
Denise L. McGovern,
Policy Coordinator, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017–02404 Filed 2–1–17; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
Week of February 27, 2017—Tentative
Wednesday, March 1, 2017
10:00 a.m. Briefing on NRC
International Activities (Closed Ex.
1 & 9).
Thursday, March 2, 2017
9:00 a.m. Strategic Programmatic
Overview of the Fuel Facilities and
the Nuclear Materials Users
Business Lines (Public Meeting)
(Contact: Soly Soto; 301–415–7528).
This meeting will be webcast live at
the Web address—https://www.nrc.gov/.
Week of March 6, 2017—Tentative
There are no meetings scheduled for
the week of March 6, 2017.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Week of March 13, 2017—Tentative
There are no meetings scheduled for
the week of March 13, 2017.
*
*
*
*
*
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 301–415–0981 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
9243
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50–461, 72–1046, 50–254, 50–
265, 72–53, 50–219 and 72–15; NRC–2017–
0014]
Exelon Generation Company, LLC;
Clinton Power Station, Unit No. 1;
Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station,
Units 1 and 2; Oyster Creek Nuclear
Generating Station
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Exemption; issuance.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\03FEN1.SGM
03FEN1
9244
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 22 / Friday, February 3, 2017 / Notices
the 10 CFR part 50 licenses for the
facilities will no longer authorize
reactor operation, placement, or
retention of fuel in the respective
reactor vessel after certifications of
permanent cessation of operations and
of permanent removal of fuel from the
reactor vessel are docketed for CPS,
QCNPS, and OCNGS.
By letter dated September 6, 2016, the
NRC approved the Certified Fuel
Handler Training and Retraining
Program for CPS, QCNPS, and OCNGS.
By letters dated December 14, 2016,
Exelon withdrew its ‘‘Certification of
Permanent Cessation of Power
Operations’’ for CPS and QCNPS. The
withdrawal letters for CPS and QCNPS
did not revise its request for exemption,
and did not change the effectiveness of
the exemption or the conditions
required to implement the actions
permitted by the exemption.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
II. Request/Action
On August 16, 2016, the licensee
requested an exemption from
§ 73.55(p)(1)(i) and (ii), pursuant to
§ 73.5, ‘‘Specific exemptions.’’ Section
73.55(p)(1)(i) and (ii) require, in part,
that the suspension of security measures
during certain emergency conditions or
during severe weather be approved by a
licensed senior operator. Exelon
requested an exemption from these rules
to allow either a licensed senior
operator or a CFH to approve the
suspension of security measures. There
is no need for an exemption from these
rules for a licensed senior operator
because the current regulation allows
the licensed senior operator to approve
the suspension of security measures.
The exemption request relates solely to
the licensing requirements specified in
the regulations for the staff directing
suspension of security measures in
accordance with § 73.55(p)(1)(i) and (ii),
and would allow a CFH, besides a
licensed senior operator, to provide this
approval. The exemption would allow
the suspension of security measures
during certain emergency conditions or
during severe weather by a licensed
senior operator or a CFH.
The current § 73.55(p)(1)(i) and (ii)
regulations state the licensed senior
operator can approve suspension of
security measures.
The proposed exemption would
authorize that the suspension of security
measures must be approved as a
minimum by either a licensed senior
operator or a certified fuel handler, at a
nuclear power plant reactor facility for
which the certifications required under
§ 50.82(a)(1) have been submitted.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
III. Discussion
The NRC’s security rules have long
recognized the potential need to
suspend security or safeguards measures
under certain conditions. Accordingly,
10 CFR 50.54(x) and (y), first published
in 1983, allow a licensee to take
reasonable steps in an emergency that
deviate from license conditions when
those steps are ‘‘needed to protect the
public health and safety’’ and there are
no conforming comparable measures (48
FR 13970; April 1, 1983). As originally
issued, the deviation from license
conditions must be approved by, as a
minimum, a licensed senior operator. In
1986, in its final rule, ‘‘Miscellaneous
Amendments Concerning the Physical
Protection of Nuclear Power Plants’’ (51
FR 27817; August 4, 1986), the
Commission issued § 73.55(a).
In 1996, the NRC made a number of
regulatory changes to address
decommissioning. One of the changes
was to amend § 50.54 (x) and (y) to
authorize a non-licensed operator called
a ‘‘Certified Fuel Handler,’’ in addition
to a licensed senior operator, to approve
such protective steps. Specifically, in
addressing the role of the CFH during
emergencies, the Commission stated in
the proposed rule, ‘‘Decommissioning of
Nuclear Power Reactors’’ (60 FR 37379;
July 20, 1995):
The Commission is proposing to amend 10
CFR 50.54(y) to permit a certified fuel
handler at nuclear power reactors that have
permanently ceased operations and
permanently removed fuel from the reactor
vessel, subject to the requirements of
§ 50.82(a) and consistent with the proposed
definition of ‘‘Certified Fuel Handler’’
specified in § 50.2, to make these evaluations
and judgments. A nuclear power reactor that
has permanently ceased operations and no
longer has fuel in the reactor vessel does not
require a licensed individual to monitor core
conditions. A certified fuel handler at a
permanently shutdown and defueled nuclear
power reactor undergoing decommissioning
is an individual who has the requisite
knowledge and experience to evaluate plant
conditions and make these judgments.
In the final rule (61 FR 39298; July 29,
1996), the NRC added the following
definition to § 50.2: ‘‘Certified fuel
handler means, for a nuclear power
reactor facility, a non-licensed operator
who has qualified in accordance with a
fuel handler training program approved
by the Commission.’’ However, the
decommissioning rule did not propose
or make parallel changes to § 73.55(a),
and did not discuss the role of a nonlicensed CFH.
In the final rule, ‘‘Power Reactor
Security Requirements’’ (74 FR 13926;
March 27, 2009), the NRC relocated the
security suspension requirements from
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
§ 73.55(a) to § 73.55(p)(1)(i) and (ii). The
role of a CFH was not discussed in the
rulemaking, so the suspension of
security measures in accordance with
§ 73.55(p) continued to require approval
as a minimum by a licensed senior
operator, even for a site that otherwise
no longer operates.
However, pursuant to § 73.5, the
Commission may, upon application by
any interested person or upon its own
initiative, grant exemptions from the
requirements of 10 CFR part 73, as it
determines are authorized by law and
will not endanger life or property or the
common defense and security, and are
otherwise in the public interest.
A. The Exemption Is Authorized by Law
The exemption from § 73.55(p)(1)(i)
and (ii) would allow a CFH, besides a
licensed senior operator, to approve the
suspension of security measures, under
certain emergency conditions or severe
weather. The licensee intends to align
these regulations with § 50.54(y) by
using the authority of a CFH in place of
a licensed senior operator to approve
the suspension of security measures
during certain emergency conditions or
during severe weather.
Per § 73.5, the Commission is allowed
to grant exemptions from the regulations
in 10 CFR part 73, as authorized by law.
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, as
amended, or other laws. Therefore, the
exemption is authorized by law.
B. Will Not Endanger Life or Property or
the Common Defense and Security
Relaxing the requirement to allow a
CFH, besides a licensed senior operator,
to approve suspension of security
measures during emergencies or severe
weather will not endanger life or
property or the common defense and
security for the reasons described in this
section.
First, § 73.55(p)(2) continues to
require that ‘‘[s]uspended security
measures must be reinstated as soon as
conditions permit.’’
Second, the suspension for nonweather emergency conditions under
§ 73.55(p)(1)(i) will continue to be
invoked only ‘‘when this action is
immediately needed to protect the
public health and safety and no action
consistent with license conditions and
technical specifications that can provide
adequate or equivalent protection is
immediately apparent.’’ Thus, the
exemption would not prevent the
licensee from meeting the underlying
purpose of § 73.55(p)(1)(i) to protect
E:\FR\FM\03FEN1.SGM
03FEN1
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 22 / Friday, February 3, 2017 / Notices
public health and safety even after the
exemption is granted.
Third, the suspension for severe
weather under § 73.55(p)(1)(ii) will
continue to be used only when ‘‘the
suspension of affected security
measures is immediately needed to
protect the personal health and safety of
security force personnel and no other
immediately apparent action consistent
with the license conditions and
technical specifications can provide
adequate or equivalent protection.’’ The
requirement to receive input from the
security supervisor or manager will
remain. The exemption would not
prevent the licensee from meeting the
underlying purpose of § 73.55(p)(1)(ii)
to protect the health and safety of the
security force.
Additionally, by letter dated
September 6, 2016, the NRC approved
Exelon’s CFH training and retraining
program for the CPS, QCNPS, and
OCNGS facilities. The NRC staff found
that, among other things, the program
addresses the safe conduct of
decommissioning activities, safe
handling and storage of spent fuel, and
the appropriate response to plant
emergencies. Because the CFH is
sufficiently trained and qualified under
an NRC-approved program, the NRC
staff considers a CFH to have sufficient
knowledge of operational and safety
concerns, such that allowing a CFH to
suspend security measures during
emergencies or severe weather will not
result in undue risk to public health and
safety.
In addition, the exemption does not
reduce the overall effectiveness of the
physical security plan and has no
adverse impacts to Exelon’s ability to
physically secure the sites or protect
special nuclear material at CPS, QCNPS,
and OCNGS, and thus would not have
an effect on the common defense and
security. The NRC staff has concluded
that the exemption would not reduce
security measures currently in place to
protect against radiological sabotage.
Therefore, relaxing the requirement to
allow a CFH, besides a licensed senior
operator, to approve the suspension of
security measures in an emergency or
during severe weather, does not
adversely affect public health and safety
issues or the assurance of the common
defense and security.
C. Is Otherwise in the Public Interest
Exelon’s proposed exemption would
relax the requirement to allow a CFH,
besides a licensed senior operator, to
approve suspension of security
measures in an emergency when
‘‘immediately needed to protect the
public health and safety’’ or during
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
severe weather when ‘‘immediately
needed to protect the personal health
and safety of security force personnel.’’
Without the exemption, the licensee
cannot implement changes to its
security plan to authorize a CFH to
approve the temporary suspension of
security regulations during an
emergency or severe weather,
comparable to the authority given to the
CFH by the NRC when it published
§ CFR 50.54(y). Instead, the regulations
would continue to require that a
licensed senior operator be available to
make decisions for a permanently
shutdown plant, even though CPS,
QCNPS, and OCNGS would no longer
require a licensed senior operator after
the certifications required by 10 CFR
50.82(a)(1)(i) and 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1)(ii)
were submitted. It is unclear how the
licensee would implement emergency or
severe weather suspensions of security
measures without a licensed senior
operator. This exemption is in the
public interest for two reasons. First,
without the exemption, there is
uncertainty on how the licensee will
invoke temporary suspension of security
matters that may be needed for
protecting public health and safety or
the safety of the security force during
emergencies and severe weather. The
exemption would allow the licensee to
make decisions pursuant to
§ 73.55(p)(1)(i) and (ii) without having
to maintain a staff of licensed senior
operators. The exemption would also
allow the licensee to have an
established procedure in place to allow
a trained CFH to suspend security
measures in the event of an emergency
or severe weather. Second, the
consistent and efficient regulation of
nuclear power plants serves the public
interest. This exemption would assure
consistency between the security
regulations in 10 CFR part 73 and CFR
50.54(y), and the requirements
concerning licensed operators in 10 CFR
part 55. The NRC staff has determined
that granting the licensee’s proposed
exemption would allow the licensee to
designate an alternative position, with
qualifications appropriate for a
permanently shutdown and defueled
reactor, to approve the suspension of
security measures during an emergency
to protect the public health and safety,
and during severe weather to protect the
safety of the security force, consistent
with the similar authority provided by
§ 50.54(y). Therefore, the exemption is
in the public interest.
D. Environmental Considerations
The NRC’s approval of the exemption
to security requirements belongs to a
category of actions that the Commission,
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
9245
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 § 51.22(c)(25), the 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: Safeguard plans, and
materials control and accounting
inventory scheduling requirements; or
involve other requirements of an
administrative, managerial, or
organizational nature.
The Director, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, has determined that
approval of the exemption request
involves no significant hazards
consideration because allowing a CFH,
besides a licensed senior operator, to
approve the security suspension at a
defueled shutdown power plant 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 security
regulation is unrelated to any
operational restriction. 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. 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. Thus, there is
no significant increase in the potential
for, or consequences of, a radiological
accident. The requirement to have a
licensed senior operator approve
departure from security actions may be
E:\FR\FM\03FEN1.SGM
03FEN1
9246
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 22 / Friday, February 3, 2017 / Notices
viewed as involving either safeguards,
materials control, or managerial matters.
Therefore, pursuant to § 51.22(b) and
(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
73.5, the exemption is authorized by
law and will not endanger life or
property or the common defense and
security, and is otherwise in the public
interest. Therefore, the Commission
hereby grants the licensee’s request for
an exemption from the requirements of
10 CFR 73.55(p)(1)(i) and (ii), to
authorize that the suspension of security
measures must be approved as a
minimum by either a licensed senior
operator or a certified fuel handler, at a
nuclear power plant reactor facility for
which the certifications required under
10 CFR 50.82(a)(1) have been submitted.
The exemption is effective upon
receipt.
V. Availability of Documents
The documents identified in the
following table are available to
interested persons.
Title
Date
Exelon letter to NRC, ‘‘Permanent Cessation of Operations at Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station.’’ ..
Exelon letter to NRC, Clinton Power Station, Unit 1, ‘‘Certification of Permanent Cessation of Power Operations.’’ ...........................................................................................................................................................
Exelon letter to NRC, Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, ‘‘Certification of Permanent Cessation of Power Operations.’’ .........................................................................................................................
NRC letter to Exelon, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station; ‘‘Clinton Power Station, Unit No. 1; and
Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2—Approval of Certified Fuel Handler Training and Retraining Program.’’ ..........................................................................................................................................
Exelon letter to NRC, Clinton Power Station, Unit No. 1, Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2,
and Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, ‘‘Request for Exemption from Specific Provisions in 10
CFR 7355(p)(1)(i) and (p)(1)(ii) Related to the Suspension of Security Measures in an Emergency or
During Severe Weather.’’ ...............................................................................................................................
Exelon letter to NRC, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, ‘‘License Amendment Request—Proposed
Changes to Technical Specifications Section 6.0 Administrative Controls for Permanently Defueled Condition’’ .............................................................................................................................................................
Exelon letter to NRC, Clinton Power Station, Unit No. 1, ‘‘License Amendment Request—Proposed
Changes to Technical Specifications Section 5.0 Administrative Controls for Permanently Defueled Condition’’ .............................................................................................................................................................
Exelon letter to NRC, Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, ‘‘License Amendment Request—
Proposed Changes to Technical Specifications Section 5.0 Administrative Controls for Permanently
Defueled Condition .........................................................................................................................................
Exelon Letter to NRC, Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, ‘‘Withdrawal of Certification of
Permanent Cessation of Power Operations.’’ ................................................................................................
Exelon Letter to NRC, Clinton Power Station, Unit No. 1, ‘‘Withdrawal of Certification of Permanent Cessation of Power Operations.’’ .........................................................................................................................
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day
of January 2017.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Anne T. Boland,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2017–02336 Filed 2–2–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2017–0016]
Guidance for Developing Principal
Design Criteria for Non-Light Water
Reactors
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Draft regulatory guide; request
for comment.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is issuing for public
comment draft regulatory guide (DG),
DG–1330, ‘‘Guidance for Developing
Principal Design Criteria for Non-Light
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:26 Feb 02, 2017
Jkt 241001
Submit comments by April 4,
2017. Comments received after this date
will be considered if it is practical to do
so, but the NRC is able to ensure
consideration only for comments
received on or before this date.
Although a time limit is given,
comments and suggestions in
connection with items for inclusion in
guides currently being developed or
improvements in all published guides
are encouraged at any time.
DATES:
AGENCY:
SUMMARY:
Water Reactors.’’ This DG is a proposed
new regulatory guide (RG) to provide
designers, applicants, and licensees of
non-light water cooled nuclear reactors
(non-LWR) guidance for developing
principal design criteria (PDC) for a
proposed facility. The PDC establish the
necessary design, fabrication,
construction, testing, and performance
requirements for structures, systems,
and components important to safety;
that is, structures, systems, and
components that provide reasonable
assurance that the facility can be
operated without undue risk to the
health and safety of the public.
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
ADAMS accession
No.
1/07/2011
ML110070507
6/20/2016
ML16172A137
6/20/2016
ML16172A151
9/06/2016
ML16222A787
8/16/2016
ML16229A133
5/17/2016
ML16138A129
7/28/2016
ML16210A300
10/20/2016
ML16294A203
12/14/2016
ML16349A311
12/14/2016
ML16349A314
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–2017–0016. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol
Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463;
email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For
technical questions, contact the
individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document.
• Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey,
Office of Administration, Mail Stop:
OWFN–12–H08, 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: Jan
Mazza, Office of New Reactors,
telephone: 301–415–0498, email:
Jan.Mazza@nrc.gov, or Mark Orr, Office
of Nuclear Regulatory Research,
telephone: 301–415–6003, email:
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\03FEN1.SGM
03FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 22 (Friday, February 3, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9243-9246]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-02336]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-461, 72-1046, 50-254, 50-265, 72-53, 50-219 and 72-15;
NRC-2017-0014]
Exelon Generation Company, LLC; Clinton Power Station, Unit No.
1; Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2; Oyster Creek
Nuclear Generating Station
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Exemption; issuance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing an
exemption in response to an August 16, 2016, request from Exelon
Generation Company, LLC (Exelon or the licensee), from certain
regulatory requirements. The exemption would allow a certified fuel
handler (CFH), besides a licensed senior operator, to approve the
emergency suspension of security measures for Clinton Power Station,
Unit No. 1 (CPS); Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2
(QCNPS); and Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (OCNGS) during
certain emergency conditions or during severe weather.
DATES: The exemption was issued on January 23, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2017-0014 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-2017-0014. 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. For
the convenience of the reader, the ADAMS accession numbers are provided
in a table in the ``Availability of Documents'' section of 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: John G. Lamb, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3100; email: John.Lamb@nrc.gov.
I. Background
Exelon is the holder of Facility Operating License No. NPF-62 for
CPS, Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-29 and DPR-30 for
QCNPS, and Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-16 for OCNGS. The
license provides, among other things, that the facility is subject to
all rules, regulations, and orders of the NRC now or hereafter in
effect. The CPS, QCNPS, and OCNGS facilities consist of boiling-water
reactors located in DeWitt County, Illinois; Rock Island County,
Illinois; and Ocean County, New Jersey, respectively, and site-specific
licensed independent spent fuel storage installations (ISFSI) at CPS,
QCNPS, and OCNGS.
By letter dated January 7, 2011, the licensee submitted
Certification of Permanent Cessation of Operations for OCNGS. In this
letter, Exelon provided notification to the NRC of its intent to
permanently cease power operation no later than December 31, 2019.
By letter dated June 20, 2016, the licensee submitted Certification
of Permanent Cessation of Operations for CPS. In this letter, Exelon
provided notification to the NRC of its intent to permanently cease
power operation by June 1, 2017.
By letter dated June 20, 2016, the licensee submitted Certification
of Permanent Cessation of Operations for QCNPS. In this letter, Exelon
provided notification to the NRC of its intent to permanently cease
power operation by June 1, 2018.
In accordance with Sec. 50.82(a)(1)(i) and (ii), and Sec.
50.82(a)(2) of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR),
[[Page 9244]]
the 10 CFR part 50 licenses for the facilities will no longer authorize
reactor operation, placement, or retention of fuel in the respective
reactor vessel after certifications of permanent cessation of
operations and of permanent removal of fuel from the reactor vessel are
docketed for CPS, QCNPS, and OCNGS.
By letter dated September 6, 2016, the NRC approved the Certified
Fuel Handler Training and Retraining Program for CPS, QCNPS, and OCNGS.
By letters dated December 14, 2016, Exelon withdrew its
``Certification of Permanent Cessation of Power Operations'' for CPS
and QCNPS. The withdrawal letters for CPS and QCNPS did not revise its
request for exemption, and did not change the effectiveness of the
exemption or the conditions required to implement the actions permitted
by the exemption.
II. Request/Action
On August 16, 2016, the licensee requested an exemption from Sec.
73.55(p)(1)(i) and (ii), pursuant to Sec. 73.5, ``Specific
exemptions.'' Section 73.55(p)(1)(i) and (ii) require, in part, that
the suspension of security measures during certain emergency conditions
or during severe weather be approved by a licensed senior operator.
Exelon requested an exemption from these rules to allow either a
licensed senior operator or a CFH to approve the suspension of security
measures. There is no need for an exemption from these rules for a
licensed senior operator because the current regulation allows the
licensed senior operator to approve the suspension of security
measures. The exemption request relates solely to the licensing
requirements specified in the regulations for the staff directing
suspension of security measures in accordance with Sec. 73.55(p)(1)(i)
and (ii), and would allow a CFH, besides a licensed senior operator, to
provide this approval. The exemption would allow the suspension of
security measures during certain emergency conditions or during severe
weather by a licensed senior operator or a CFH.
The current Sec. 73.55(p)(1)(i) and (ii) regulations state the
licensed senior operator can approve suspension of security measures.
The proposed exemption would authorize that the suspension of
security measures must be approved as a minimum by either a licensed
senior operator or a certified fuel handler, at a nuclear power plant
reactor facility for which the certifications required under Sec.
50.82(a)(1) have been submitted.
III. Discussion
The NRC's security rules have long recognized the potential need to
suspend security or safeguards measures under certain conditions.
Accordingly, 10 CFR 50.54(x) and (y), first published in 1983, allow a
licensee to take reasonable steps in an emergency that deviate from
license conditions when those steps are ``needed to protect the public
health and safety'' and there are no conforming comparable measures (48
FR 13970; April 1, 1983). As originally issued, the deviation from
license conditions must be approved by, as a minimum, a licensed senior
operator. In 1986, in its final rule, ``Miscellaneous Amendments
Concerning the Physical Protection of Nuclear Power Plants'' (51 FR
27817; August 4, 1986), the Commission issued Sec. 73.55(a).
In 1996, the NRC made a number of regulatory changes to address
decommissioning. One of the changes was to amend Sec. 50.54 (x) and
(y) to authorize a non-licensed operator called a ``Certified Fuel
Handler,'' in addition to a licensed senior operator, to approve such
protective steps. Specifically, in addressing the role of the CFH
during emergencies, the Commission stated in the proposed rule,
``Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors'' (60 FR 37379; July 20,
1995):
The Commission is proposing to amend 10 CFR 50.54(y) to permit a
certified fuel handler at nuclear power reactors that have
permanently ceased operations and permanently removed fuel from the
reactor vessel, subject to the requirements of Sec. 50.82(a) and
consistent with the proposed definition of ``Certified Fuel
Handler'' specified in Sec. 50.2, to make these evaluations and
judgments. A nuclear power reactor that has permanently ceased
operations and no longer has fuel in the reactor vessel does not
require a licensed individual to monitor core conditions. A
certified fuel handler at a permanently shutdown and defueled
nuclear power reactor undergoing decommissioning is an individual
who has the requisite knowledge and experience to evaluate plant
conditions and make these judgments.
In the final rule (61 FR 39298; July 29, 1996), the NRC added the
following definition to Sec. 50.2: ``Certified fuel handler means, for
a nuclear power reactor facility, a non-licensed operator who has
qualified in accordance with a fuel handler training program approved
by the Commission.'' However, the decommissioning rule did not propose
or make parallel changes to Sec. 73.55(a), and did not discuss the
role of a non-licensed CFH.
In the final rule, ``Power Reactor Security Requirements'' (74 FR
13926; March 27, 2009), the NRC relocated the security suspension
requirements from Sec. 73.55(a) to Sec. 73.55(p)(1)(i) and (ii). The
role of a CFH was not discussed in the rulemaking, so the suspension of
security measures in accordance with Sec. 73.55(p) continued to
require approval as a minimum by a licensed senior operator, even for a
site that otherwise no longer operates.
However, pursuant to Sec. 73.5, the Commission may, upon
application by any interested person or upon its own initiative, grant
exemptions from the requirements of 10 CFR part 73, as it determines
are authorized by law and will not endanger life or property or the
common defense and security, and are otherwise in the public interest.
A. The Exemption Is Authorized by Law
The exemption from Sec. 73.55(p)(1)(i) and (ii) would allow a CFH,
besides a licensed senior operator, to approve the suspension of
security measures, under certain emergency conditions or severe
weather. The licensee intends to align these regulations with Sec.
50.54(y) by using the authority of a CFH in place of a licensed senior
operator to approve the suspension of security measures during certain
emergency conditions or during severe weather.
Per Sec. 73.5, the Commission is allowed to grant exemptions from
the regulations in 10 CFR part 73, as authorized by law. 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, as amended,
or other laws. Therefore, the exemption is authorized by law.
B. Will Not Endanger Life or Property or the Common Defense and
Security
Relaxing the requirement to allow a CFH, besides a licensed senior
operator, to approve suspension of security measures during emergencies
or severe weather will not endanger life or property or the common
defense and security for the reasons described in this section.
First, Sec. 73.55(p)(2) continues to require that ``[s]uspended
security measures must be reinstated as soon as conditions permit.''
Second, the suspension for non-weather emergency conditions under
Sec. 73.55(p)(1)(i) will continue to be invoked only ``when this
action is immediately needed to protect the public health and safety
and no action consistent with license conditions and technical
specifications that can provide adequate or equivalent protection is
immediately apparent.'' Thus, the exemption would not prevent the
licensee from meeting the underlying purpose of Sec. 73.55(p)(1)(i) to
protect
[[Page 9245]]
public health and safety even after the exemption is granted.
Third, the suspension for severe weather under Sec.
73.55(p)(1)(ii) will continue to be used only when ``the suspension of
affected security measures is immediately needed to protect the
personal health and safety of security force personnel and no other
immediately apparent action consistent with the license conditions and
technical specifications can provide adequate or equivalent
protection.'' The requirement to receive input from the security
supervisor or manager will remain. The exemption would not prevent the
licensee from meeting the underlying purpose of Sec. 73.55(p)(1)(ii)
to protect the health and safety of the security force.
Additionally, by letter dated September 6, 2016, the NRC approved
Exelon's CFH training and retraining program for the CPS, QCNPS, and
OCNGS facilities. The NRC staff found that, among other things, the
program addresses the safe conduct of decommissioning activities, safe
handling and storage of spent fuel, and the appropriate response to
plant emergencies. Because the CFH is sufficiently trained and
qualified under an NRC-approved program, the NRC staff considers a CFH
to have sufficient knowledge of operational and safety concerns, such
that allowing a CFH to suspend security measures during emergencies or
severe weather will not result in undue risk to public health and
safety.
In addition, the exemption does not reduce the overall
effectiveness of the physical security plan and has no adverse impacts
to Exelon's ability to physically secure the sites or protect special
nuclear material at CPS, QCNPS, and OCNGS, and thus would not have an
effect on the common defense and security. The NRC staff has concluded
that the exemption would not reduce security measures currently in
place to protect against radiological sabotage. Therefore, relaxing the
requirement to allow a CFH, besides a licensed senior operator, to
approve the suspension of security measures in an emergency or during
severe weather, does not adversely affect public health and safety
issues or the assurance of the common defense and security.
C. Is Otherwise in the Public Interest
Exelon's proposed exemption would relax the requirement to allow a
CFH, besides a licensed senior operator, to approve suspension of
security measures in an emergency when ``immediately needed to protect
the public health and safety'' or during severe weather when
``immediately needed to protect the personal health and safety of
security force personnel.'' Without the exemption, the licensee cannot
implement changes to its security plan to authorize a CFH to approve
the temporary suspension of security regulations during an emergency or
severe weather, comparable to the authority given to the CFH by the NRC
when it published Sec. CFR 50.54(y). Instead, the regulations would
continue to require that a licensed senior operator be available to
make decisions for a permanently shutdown plant, even though CPS,
QCNPS, and OCNGS would no longer require a licensed senior operator
after the certifications required by 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1)(i) and 10 CFR
50.82(a)(1)(ii) were submitted. It is unclear how the licensee would
implement emergency or severe weather suspensions of security measures
without a licensed senior operator. This exemption is in the public
interest for two reasons. First, without the exemption, there is
uncertainty on how the licensee will invoke temporary suspension of
security matters that may be needed for protecting public health and
safety or the safety of the security force during emergencies and
severe weather. The exemption would allow the licensee to make
decisions pursuant to Sec. 73.55(p)(1)(i) and (ii) without having to
maintain a staff of licensed senior operators. The exemption would also
allow the licensee to have an established procedure in place to allow a
trained CFH to suspend security measures in the event of an emergency
or severe weather. Second, the consistent and efficient regulation of
nuclear power plants serves the public interest. This exemption would
assure consistency between the security regulations in 10 CFR part 73
and CFR 50.54(y), and the requirements concerning licensed operators in
10 CFR part 55. The NRC staff has determined that granting the
licensee's proposed exemption would allow the licensee to designate an
alternative position, with qualifications appropriate for a permanently
shutdown and defueled reactor, to approve the suspension of security
measures during an emergency to protect the public health and safety,
and during severe weather to protect the safety of the security force,
consistent with the similar authority provided by Sec. 50.54(y).
Therefore, the exemption is in the public interest.
D. Environmental Considerations
The NRC's approval of the exemption to security 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 Sec. 51.22(c)(25), the 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: Safeguard plans, and materials control and accounting
inventory scheduling requirements; or involve other requirements of an
administrative, managerial, or organizational nature.
The Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation, has determined that approval of the
exemption request involves no significant hazards consideration because
allowing a CFH, besides a licensed senior operator, to approve the
security suspension at a defueled shutdown power plant 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 security regulation is unrelated to any operational
restriction. 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. 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. Thus, there is no significant increase in
the potential for, or consequences of, a radiological accident. The
requirement to have a licensed senior operator approve departure from
security actions may be
[[Page 9246]]
viewed as involving either safeguards, materials control, or managerial
matters.
Therefore, pursuant to Sec. 51.22(b) and (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
73.5, the exemption is authorized by law and will not endanger life or
property or the common defense and security, and is otherwise in the
public interest. Therefore, the Commission hereby grants the licensee's
request for an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 73.55(p)(1)(i)
and (ii), to authorize that the suspension of security measures must be
approved as a minimum by either a licensed senior operator or a
certified fuel handler, at a nuclear power plant reactor facility for
which the certifications required under 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1) have been
submitted.
The exemption is effective upon receipt.
V. Availability of Documents
The documents identified in the following table are available to
interested persons.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADAMS accession
Title Date No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exelon letter to NRC, ``Permanent 1/07/2011 ML110070507
Cessation of Operations at Oyster
Creek Nuclear Generating Station.''.
Exelon letter to NRC, Clinton Power 6/20/2016 ML16172A137
Station, Unit 1, ``Certification of
Permanent Cessation of Power
Operations.''.......................
Exelon letter to NRC, Quad Cities 6/20/2016 ML16172A151
Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and
2, ``Certification of Permanent
Cessation of Power Operations.''....
NRC letter to Exelon, Oyster Creek 9/06/2016 ML16222A787
Nuclear Generating Station;
``Clinton Power Station, Unit No. 1;
and Quad Cities Nuclear Power
Station, Units 1 and 2--Approval of
Certified Fuel Handler Training and
Retraining Program.''...............
Exelon letter to NRC, Clinton Power 8/16/2016 ML16229A133
Station, Unit No. 1, Quad Cities
Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and
2, and Oyster Creek Nuclear
Generating Station, ``Request for
Exemption from Specific Provisions
in 10 CFR 7355(p)(1)(i) and
(p)(1)(ii) Related to the Suspension
of Security Measures in an Emergency
or During Severe Weather.''.........
Exelon letter to NRC, Oyster Creek 5/17/2016 ML16138A129
Nuclear Generating Station,
``License Amendment Request--
Proposed Changes to Technical
Specifications Section 6.0
Administrative Controls for
Permanently Defueled Condition''....
Exelon letter to NRC, Clinton Power 7/28/2016 ML16210A300
Station, Unit No. 1, ``License
Amendment Request--Proposed Changes
to Technical Specifications Section
5.0 Administrative Controls for
Permanently Defueled Condition''....
Exelon letter to NRC, Quad Cities 10/20/2016 ML16294A203
Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and
2, ``License Amendment Request--
Proposed Changes to Technical
Specifications Section 5.0
Administrative Controls for
Permanently Defueled Condition......
Exelon Letter to NRC, Quad Cities 12/14/2016 ML16349A311
Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and
2, ``Withdrawal of Certification of
Permanent Cessation of Power
Operations.''.......................
Exelon Letter to NRC, Clinton Power 12/14/2016 ML16349A314
Station, Unit No. 1, ``Withdrawal of
Certification of Permanent Cessation
of Power Operations.''..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day of January 2017.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Anne T. Boland,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2017-02336 Filed 2-2-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P