Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, 23843-23845 [2017-10640]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 2017 / Notices
Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001; telephone: 301–415–3100, email:
John.Lamb@nrc.gov.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–293; NRC–2017–0076]
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.;
Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Exemption; issuance.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is issuing an
exemption in response to a February 7,
2017, request from Entergy Nuclear
Operations, Inc. (Entergy 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 Pilgrim Nuclear
Power Station (PNPS) during certain
emergency conditions or during severe
weather.
DATES: The exemption was issued on
May 16, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID
NRC–2017–0076 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–2017–0076. 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
a document is referenced.
• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and
purchase copies of public documents at
the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
G. Lamb, Office of Nuclear Reactor
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:43 May 23, 2017
Jkt 241001
I. Background
Entergy is the holder of Renewed
Facility Operating License No. DPR–35
for PNPS. 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
PNPS facility consists of a boiling-water
reactor located in Plymouth County,
Massachusetts.
By letter dated November 10, 2015
(ADAMS Accession No. ML15328A053),
the licensee submitted a Notification of
Permanent Cessation of Power
Operations for PNPS. In this letter,
Entergy provided notification to the
NRC of its intent to permanently cease
power operations no later than June 1,
2019.
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),
the 10 CFR part 50 license for the
facility will no longer authorize reactor
operation, placement, or retention of
fuel in the reactor vessel after
certifications of permanent cessation of
operations and of permanent removal of
fuel from the reactor vessel are docketed
for PNPS.
By letter dated April 12, 2017
(ADAMS Accession No. ML17058A325),
the NRC approved the Certified Fuel
Handler Training and Retraining
Program for PNPS.
II. Request/Action
By letter dated February 7, 2017
(ADAMS Accession No. ML17045A468),
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. Entergy
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
23843
The proposed exemption would
authorize that the suspension of security
measures during certain emergency
conditions or during severe weather
must be approved as a minimum by
either a licensed senior operator or a
CFH, at a nuclear power plant reactor
facility for which the certifications
required under § 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 § 73.55(a), which
provides that the licensee may suspend
any safeguards measures pursuant to
§ 73.55 in an emergency 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. The
regulation further requires that this
suspension be approved as a minimum
by a senior licensed operator prior to
taking action.
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 in an emergency
situation. 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
E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM
24MYN1
23844
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 2017 / Notices
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
§ 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.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
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,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:43 May 23, 2017
Jkt 241001
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
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 April 12,
2017, the NRC approved Entergy’s CFH
training and retraining program for the
PNPS facility. 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 Entergy’s ability to
physically secure the sites or protect
special nuclear material at PNPS, and
thus would not have an effect on the
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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
Entergy’s proposed exemption would
relax the current requirements by
allowing 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
§ 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 PNPS
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. This
exemption is in the public interest for
two reasons. First, 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 at a nuclear
power reactor that has permanently
ceased operations and permanently
removed fuel from the reactor vessel.
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 § 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
E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM
24MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 24, 2017 / Notices
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
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,
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:43 May 23, 2017
Jkt 241001
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
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.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day
of May 2017.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Eric J. Benner,
Deputy Director, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2017–10640 Filed 5–23–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–271; NRC–2017–0125]
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power
Station; Entergy Nuclear Operations,
Inc.; Consideration of Approval of
Transfer of License and Conforming
Amendment
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Application for direct transfer of
facility operating license and
conforming amendment; opportunity to
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
23845
comment, request a hearing, and
petition for leave to intervene.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) received and is
considering approval of an application
filed by the Entergy Nuclear Operations,
Inc. (ENO) on February 9, 2017. The
application seeks NRC approval of the
direct transfer of Renewed Facility
Operating License No. DPR–28 for the
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station
(VYNPS), as well as the general license
for the VYNPS Independent Spent Fuel
Storage Installation, from ENO, the
current licensed operator of VYNPS, to
NorthStar Nuclear Decommissioning
Company, LLC (NorthStar NDC), a
wholly-owned subsidiary of NorthStar
Group Services, Inc. (NorthStar). The
request is also for the indirect transfer
of control of Entergy Nuclear Vermont
Yankee, LLC (ENVY), the licensed
owner of the VYNPS, from ENVY’s
Entergy parent companies to NorthStar
Decommissioning Holdings, LLC and its
parents NorthStar, LVI Parent Corp., and
NorthStar Group Holdings, LLC. The
NRC is also considering amending the
facility operating license for
administrative purposes to reflect the
proposed transfer. The application
contains sensitive unclassified nonsafeguards information (SUNSI).
DATES: Comments must be filed by June
23, 2017. A request for a hearing must
be filed by June 13, 2017. Any potential
party as defined in § 2.4 of title 10 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR),
who believes access to SUNSI is
necessary to respond to this notice must
follow the instructions in Section VI of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
of this notice.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods (unless
this document describes a different
method for submitting comments on a
specific subject):
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2017–0125. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol
Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463;
email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For
technical questions, contact the
individual in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document
• Email comments to:
Hearingdocket@nrc.gov. If you do not
receive an automatic email reply
confirming receipt, then contact us at
301–415–1677.
• Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission at 301–
415–1101.
• Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
E:\FR\FM\24MYN1.SGM
24MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 99 (Wednesday, May 24, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23843-23845]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10640]
[[Page 23843]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-293; NRC-2017-0076]
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Exemption; issuance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing an
exemption in response to a February 7, 2017, request from Entergy
Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy 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 Pilgrim Nuclear Power
Station (PNPS) during certain emergency conditions or during severe
weather.
DATES: The exemption was issued on May 16, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2017-0076 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-2017-0076. 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 a document is referenced.
NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 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
Entergy is the holder of Renewed Facility Operating License No.
DPR-35 for PNPS. 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 PNPS facility consists of a boiling-
water reactor located in Plymouth County, Massachusetts.
By letter dated November 10, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML15328A053), the licensee submitted a Notification of Permanent
Cessation of Power Operations for PNPS. In this letter, Entergy
provided notification to the NRC of its intent to permanently cease
power operations no later than June 1, 2019.
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),
the 10 CFR part 50 license for the facility will no longer authorize
reactor operation, placement, or retention of fuel in the reactor
vessel after certifications of permanent cessation of operations and of
permanent removal of fuel from the reactor vessel are docketed for
PNPS.
By letter dated April 12, 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17058A325),
the NRC approved the Certified Fuel Handler Training and Retraining
Program for PNPS.
II. Request/Action
By letter dated February 7, 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17045A468),
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. Entergy 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 proposed exemption would authorize that the suspension of
security measures during certain emergency conditions or during severe
weather must be approved as a minimum by either a licensed senior
operator or a CFH, 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), which
provides that the licensee may suspend any safeguards measures pursuant
to Sec. 73.55 in an emergency 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. The
regulation further requires that this suspension be approved as a
minimum by a senior licensed operator prior to taking action.
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 in an emergency situation. 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
[[Page 23844]]
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 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 April 12, 2017, the NRC approved
Entergy's CFH training and retraining program for the PNPS facility.
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 Entergy's ability to physically secure the sites or protect special
nuclear material at PNPS, 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
Entergy's proposed exemption would relax the current requirements
by allowing 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. 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 PNPS 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. This exemption is in the public
interest for two reasons. First, 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 at a nuclear
power reactor that has permanently ceased operations and permanently
removed fuel from the reactor vessel. 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 Sec. 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
[[Page 23845]]
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 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.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of May 2017.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Eric J. Benner,
Deputy Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2017-10640 Filed 5-23-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P