[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 205 (Tuesday, October 24, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54525-54527]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-26273]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 54526]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-390]
Tennessee Valley Authority, Watts Bar Power Station, Unit 1
Exemption
I
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA, the applicant) is the holder of
Construction Permit CPPR-91, which authorizes the construction of Watts
Bar Power Station, Unit 1 (WBN, the facility). Construction permit
applications must contain emergency plans pursuant to 10 CFR 50.34. 10
CFR 50.34(b)(6)(v) provides that the Final Safety Analysis Report will
contain plans for coping with emergencies, which shall include the
items in Appendix E of 10 CFR Part 50. When converting from a
construction permit to a license upon completion of the construction or
alteration of a facility in compliance with the terms and conditions of
the construction permit and subject to any necessary testing of the
facility for health or safety purposes, the Commission will, in the
absence of good cause shown to the contrary, issue a license of the
class for which the construction permit was issued or an appropriate
amendment of the license, as the case may be. An operating license
provides, among other things, that it is subject to all rules,
regulations and orders of the Commission now or hereafter in effect.
The facility will consist of two pressurized water reactors located at
the licensee's site in Rhea County, Tennessee, even though only one is
being considered for an operating license at this time.
II
Section IV.F.2(a) of Appendix E of 10 CFR Part 50 requires that a
full participation exercise be conducted within 2 years before the
issuance of the first operating license for full power (one authorizing
operation above 5 percent of rated power) of the first reactor and
shall include participation by each State and local government within
the plume exposure pathway emergency planning zone (EPZ) and each State
within the ingestion pathway exposure EPZ.
The NRC may grant exemptions from the requirements of the
regulations which, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a), are (1) Authorized by
law, will not present an undue risk to the public health and safety,
and are consistent with the common defense and security; and (2)
present special circumstances. Section 50.12(a)(2) of 10 CFR Part 50
describes the special circumstances for an exemption. Special
circumstances are present when the application of the regulation in the
particular circumstances would not serve the underlying purpose of the
rule or is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule
[10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii)]. The underlying purpose of Appendix E, Section
IV.F.2(a) is to demonstrate the integrated capabilities of appropriate
local and State authorities and licensee personnel to adequately assess
and respond to an accident at a commercial nuclear power plant within 2
years before the issuance of the first operating license for full power
(authorizing operation above 5 percent of rated power) of the first
reactor. Special circumstances are also present when compliance would
result in undue hardship or other costs that are significantly in
excess of those contemplated when the regulation was adopted [10 CFR
50.12(a)(2)(iii)]. Additionally, special circumstances are present when
the exemption would provide only temporary relief from the applicable
regulation and the licensee or applicant has made good faith efforts to
comply with the regulation [10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(v)].
III
By letter dated July 19, 1995, as supplemented by letters dated
July 26, and September 6, 1995, TVA requested an exemption from the
ingestion pathway portion of the requirement of Appendix E of 10 CFR
Part 50 to conduct a prelicensing full-participation exercise of the
Watts Bar Emergency Plan in 1995. TVA plans to conduct a full-
participation emergency preparedness exercise, limited to the 10-mile
plume exposure pathway EPZ, in November 1995. The Watts Bar plant, in
conjunction with the State of Tennessee and the Counties of McMinn,
Meigs, Rhea, Cumberland, and Roane, conducted a full participation
emergency preparedness exercise, which included both the plume exposure
and ingestion exposure pathway EPZs, on October 6-7, 1993. Offsite
emergency response activities associated with the exercise were
evaluated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the
onsite emergency response activities were evaluated by the NRC. The
NRC's evaluation of onsite emergency response activities is documented
in Inspection Report 50-390/93-64, dated November 15, 1993. The report
states that no violations, deviations, or exercise weaknesses were
identified. It also states that the October 6-7, 1993, full-
participation emergency preparedness exercise demonstrated the ability
of the applicant's emergency response organization to respond to a
simulated emergency condition and to implement its radiological
emergency plan and implementing procedures.
FEMA's final exercise report for the October 1993 exercise, dated
August 11, 1994, identified one deficiency. This deficiency involved
the inability of the State of Tennessee to demonstrate the capability
to provide both an alert signal and an initial instructional message to
the populated areas throughout the 10-mile plume EPZ within 15 minutes
of the decision to activate the alert and notification system to
implement a protective action decision. The deficiency was shown to be
corrected during a remedial exercise conducted on November 15, 1993.
The FEMA report also indicates that the States of North Carolina and
Georgia lie within the WBN 50-mile ingestion exposure pathway EPZ.
These states did not participate in the October 1993 exercise because
the State of Georgia participated in the 1992 exercise at the Vogtle
site and the State of North Carolina participated in the 1991 exercise
at the McGuire site. No deficiencies were noted concerning ingestion
pathway exposure activities in the State of Tennessee during the
October 1993 exercise. FEMA concluded that, based on the results of the
October 6-7, 1993, exercise and the November 15, 1993, remedial
exercise, the offsite radiological emergency response plans and
preparedness for the State of Tennessee and the affected local
jurisdictions, site specific to the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, can be
implemented and are adequate to provide reasonable assurance that
appropriate measures can be taken to protect the health and safety of
the public in the event of a radiological emergency at the site.
TVA's exemption request extends only to that portion of the full-
participation, prelicensing exercise requirement that provides for an
ingestion exposure pathway (50 miles) exercise of the type that plants
licensed for full-power operations are required to conduct once every 6
years. Section IV.F.(2)(d) of Appendix E of 10 CFR Part 50 indicates
that States should participate in the ingestion pathway portion of
exercises at least once every 6 years. As noted above, the State of
Tennessee participated in an ingestion exposure pathway exercise at
Watts Bar in October 1993. It also participated in an ingestion
exposure pathway exercise at Sequoyah in 1992. In anticipation of
receiving an operating license in 1985, TVA conducted its first pre-
license full-participation exercise on September 11, 1984. A second
prelicensing full participation exercise was conducted on July 25,
1985, before TVA suspending
[[Page 54527]]
its efforts to obtain the operating license for Watts Bar Unit 1.
In a letter dated July 3, 1995, the Tennessee Emergency Management
Agency (TEMA) indicated that the State and local governments in the
Watts Bar area have conducted three full-participation exercises for
Watts Bar since 1983 with the last on October 6-7, 1993. TEMA stated
that another licensing exercise for Watts Bar would not be cost
effective in that the State and local governments exercise both the
Watts Bar and Sequoyah plans regularly and the same personnel
participate in both the Watts Bar and Sequoyah exercises. TEMA also
noted that the State of Tennessee has participated in exercises since
the late 1970's and no problems have been experienced at either site
with offsite programs. Consequently, these State and local government
agencies would be required to duplicate past efforts at significant
expense. Additionally, TEMA did not budget for State participation in a
second prelicensing full-participation WBN exercise in calendar year
1995, since the frequency requirements for State participation in the
emergency plan exercise would have been met under the previous schedule
for the licensing of WBN. If the prelicensing 50-mile ingestion pathway
requirement is not exempted, it is estimated that an additional
$160,000 would be expended by the State. Furthermore, State resources
have been strained in responding to six major emergencies which have
occurred in the last 15 months, including tornadoes, flooding and ice
storms. The State has spent in excess of $30 million mitigating the
consequences of these major emergencies. TEMA further states that the
local government agencies did not include funding for another
prelicensing full-participation exercise in calendar year 1995.
Consequently, they would have to redirect financial and personnel
resources to support such an effort. Since TVA and the State and local
governments depend heavily upon volunteer organizations to support the
radiological emergency preparedness program, there is concern that the
repeated use of the volunteers in emergency exercises would lessen
their enthusiasm for support of another ingestion pathway exercise.
The staff's last Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance
(SALP) report (Inspection Report Nos. 50-390/94-41 and 50-391/94-41)
for Watts Bar for the period of June 13, 1993 through June 18, 1994,
indicates that the emergency preparedness program was excellent,
emergency response training was strong, and that TVA's emergency
response facilities were good and capable of supporting emergency
operations. Additionally, the report indicated that individuals
demonstrated knowledge of duties and an ability to respond to emergency
conditions and mitigate the consequences during the October 1993 full-
scale exercise and that TVA conducted thorough critiques and was timely
in correcting identified problems.
The exemption from the ingestion exposure pathway exercise portion
of Section IV(F)(2)(a) to Appendix E of 10 CFR Part 50 would provide
relief from what was originally intended as a ``one-time'' prelicense
exercise requirement. As discussed above, TVA has already conducted
three full-participation plume and ingestion pathway exercises to
support anticipated operating license scheduled dates. In view of past
and planned emergency planning efforts and successful results, TVA has
made good faith efforts to fully comply with the prelicense emergency
exercise rule. If WBN does not obtain a full-power operating license
within 2 years of the November 1995 exercise, another prelicensing
full-participation exercise, to include both the plume and ingestion
exposure pathway EPZs, will have to be conducted.
IV
On the basis of its review of the applicant's request for an
exemption from the requirement to conduct the ingestion exposure
pathway portion of the qualifying full-participation exercise of the
Watts Bar Emergency Plan, the staff finds that the underlying purpose
of the regulation has been achieved through the applicant's conduct of
the ingestion exposure pathway portion of the October 6-7, 1993, full
participation exercise at Watts Bar and the ingestion exposure pathway
portion of the September 1992 full-participation exercise at Sequoyah.
In addition, because the States of Georgia and North Carolina have
participated in ingestion pathway exercises at other nuclear power
plant sites within their respective borders, as well as the fact that
only limited actions are required of these States in the WBN ingestion
pathway exposure EPZ, the staff concludes the underlying purpose for
their potential participation in the ingestion pathway portion of the
November 1995 exercise at WBN has been achieved. FEMA concurs with this
exemption.
For these reasons, the Commission has determined that, pursuant to
10 CFR 50.12, the exemption requested by the applicant is authorized by
law, will not present an undue risk to public health and safety, and is
consistent with the common defense and security and that special
circumstances are present as set forth in 10 CFR 50.12(a) (ii), (iii),
and (v).
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the Commission has determined that
granting of this exemption will have no significant impact on the
environment (60 FR 53814, dated October 17, 1995). A copy of the
applicant's request for exemption and supporting documentation is
available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document
Room, 2120 L Street, NW, Washington, DC and at the local public
document room located at Chattanooga-Hamilton Library, 1101 Broad
Street, Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402.
This exemption is effective upon issuance.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 17th day of October 1995.
For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Steven A. Varga,
Director, Division of Reactor Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-26273 Filed 10-23-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P