[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 236 (Tuesday, December 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64895-64896]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32162]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-245]


Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (Millstone Nuclear Power 
Station, Unit No. 1); Exemption

I

    The Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNECO or licensee) is the 
holder of Facility Operating License No. DPR-21, which authorizes 
operation of Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1 (MNPS1), at a 
rated power level not in excess of 2011 megawatts (thermal). MNPS1 is a 
boiling water reactor located at the licensee's site in New London 
County, Connecticut. The license provides among other things, that it 
is subject to all rules, regulations, and orders of the U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (the Commission or NRC) now or hereafter in 
effect.

II

    Sections III.D.2.(a) and III.D.3 of Option A of Appendix J to Title 
10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 50 require the 
performance of local leak rate (Type B) and containment isolation valve 
(Type C) tests (hereafter collectively referred to as local leak rate 
tests (LLRT)) at intervals no greater than 2 years. By letter dated 
October 16, 1997, NNECO requested a one-time scheduler exemption from 
the requirement to perform these tests at intervals no greater than 2 
years. The requested exemption would permit NNECO to delay performing 
the Type B and Type C tests until startup from the current Cycle 15 
refueling outage (RF015). RF015 is currently scheduled to end in June 
1998.

[[Page 64896]]

    The licensee requested the exemption pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12. This 
regulation allows the Commission to grant exemptions from the 
requirements of 10 CFR part 50 which are ``[a]uthorized by law, will 
not present an undue risk to the public health and safety, and are 
consistent with the common defense and security.'' However, the 
``Commission will not consider granting an exemption unless special 
circumstances are present.'' Section 50.12(a)(2) lists the criteria for 
qualifying as a special circumstance. On the basis of the information 
submitted by the licensee, the NRC staff evaluated the licensee's 
request against 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), which states ``[a]pplication 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.''

III

    The underlying purpose of the requirement to perform Type B and 
Type C testing at intervals not to exceed 2 years is to protect the 
public by assuring that leakage through the primary reactor containment 
does not exceed allowable values. The licensee's facility is currently 
in an extended outage. During this outage, primary containment 
integrity is not required to be maintained. The primary containment, 
along with the emergency core cooling system, was designed to limit the 
offsite doses to values less than those specified in 10 CFR Part 100 in 
the event of a break in the primary system piping. Thus, containment 
integrity is required whenever the potential for loss of the primary 
reactor system integrity could result in significant offsite doses. 
Concern about such a condition exists whenever the reactor is critical 
and above atmospheric pressure. In this case, MNPS1 has been shut down 
for an extended period of time and primary containment integrity is not 
required. Primary containment integrity will not be required until 
MNPS1 restarts (currently scheduled for June 1998). As long as MNPS1 
remains shut down, containment integrity is not required and, 
therefore, testing for containment integrity is not required to 
adequately protect the public. The public will continue to be 
adequately protected as long as the Type B and Type C testing is 
satisfactorily completed prior to restarting from RF015.

IV

    On the basis of the above discussion, the staff finds that the 
licensee's request for exemption is authorized by law, will not present 
an undue risk to the public health and safety, and is consistent with 
the common defense and security as specified in 10 CFR 50.12(a)(1). 
Additionally, the staff finds that application of the regulations in 
this particular circumstance would not serve, nor is it necessary to 
achieve, the underlying purpose of the rule. Therefore, the licensee's 
requested scheduler exemption from the 2-year testing requirements of 
Sections III.D.2.(a) and III.D.3 of Option A of Appendix J to 10 CFR 
part 50 is granted.

V

    Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the Commission has determined that 
granting this exemption will not have a significant impact on the 
environment (62 FR 63736).
    This exemption is effective upon issuance and shall expire when 
containment integrity is required for startup from the current 
refueling outage.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of December 1997.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Roy P. Zimmerman,
Acting Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
[FR Doc. 97-32162 Filed 12-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P