[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 183 (Friday, September 20, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59318-59319]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-23948]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-254]


Exelon Generation Company, LLC; Quad Cities Nuclear Power 
Station, Unit 1; Exemption

1.0 Background

    The Exelon Generation Company, LLC (the licensee) is the holder of 
Facility Operating License No. DPR-29, which authorizes operation of 
the Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station (Quad Cities), Unit 1. The 
license provides, among other things, that the facility is subject to 
all rules, regulations, and orders of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission (NRC, the Commission) now or hereafter in effect.
    The facility consists of a boiling-water reactor located in Rock 
Island County, Illinois.

2.0 Request/Action

    Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), part 50, 
section 50.55a, ``Codes and standards,'' paragraph (g)(4) requires that 
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure 
Vessel Code (Code) Class 1, 2, and 3 components, including supports, 
shall meet the requirements, except the design and access provisions 
and the preservice examination requirements, as stated in the ASME 
Code, Section XI, ``Rules for Inservice Inspection of Nuclear Power 
Plant Components,'' to the extent practical within the limitations of 
design, geometry, and materials construction of the components. 10 CFR 
50.55a(g)(4)(ii) requires that inservice examination of components and 
system pressure tests conducted during the first 10-year interval and 
subsequent intervals comply with the requirements in the latest edition 
and addenda of ASME Code, Section XI, incorporated by reference in 10 
CFR 50.55a(b) twelve months prior to the start of the 120-month 
interval, subject to limitations and modifications listed therein. The 
1989 Edition of the ASME Code is the code of record for the third 10-
year interval for Quad Cities, Unit 1. Therefore, inservice inspection 
of the ASME Code Class 1, 2, and 3 components is to be performed in 
accordance with ASME Code, 1989 Edition, Section XI, Table IWB-2500, 
Examination Category B-D, Item Nos. B3.90 and B3.100.
    The licensee's application dated July 10, 2002, requests a 
schedular extension for Quad Cities, Unit 1, from implementation of 
inservice examinations of certain reactor pressure vessel (RPV) nozzle-
to-vessel welds and nozzle inside radius sections, per ASME Code, 
Section XI, Table IWB-2500, Examination Category B-D, Item Nos. B3.90 
and B3.100, by the end of the current 120-month inspection interval, as 
required by 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(4)(ii). The current interval ends on 
February 17, 2003, for Quad Cities Unit 1. The proposed exemption would 
grant an extension for the performance of the third interval 
inspections until the completion of the Unit 1 refueling outage in 
January 2005.
    The proposed action is needed to provide temporary relief from the 
regulation and to prevent unnecessary radiation worker exposure. Quad 
Cities, Unit 1, was designed and fabricated before the examination 
requirements of ASME Section XI were formalized and published. The 
plant was not specifically designed or constructed to permit easy 
access to the RPV nozzle-to-vessel welds and nozzle inside radius 
sections for inservice inspection, from the inside or outside surface. 
The biological shield, lead bricks, and insulation around the nozzles 
do not permit ready access by personnel for inservice examination from 
the outside surface. The inside surface is totally inaccessible due to 
the inherent design of the reactor vessel. The task to access a nozzle 
for inservice examination employs several work groups and a significant 
number of man-hours with the attendant large radiation exposure 
accumulation. The estimated radiation dose avoided by exempting the 
nine nozzles until the fourth inspection interval is a minimum of 60 
man-rem.
    Plans to mitigate the radiation exposure accumulation by means of 
chemical decontamination of the reactor recirculation system piping 
were evaluated by the licensee for the November 2002 refueling outage. 
However, chemical decontamination would result in the removal of the 
noble metals chemical application (NMCA) coating on the piping. Re-
application of NMCA to the reactor recirculation system piping during, 
or immediately after, the November 2002 outage is not desirable due to 
the potential effects of double exposure of fuel to the NMCA process. 
Without a planned re-application of NMCA until the January 2005 
refueling outage, the affected piping would be more susceptible to 
intergranular stress corrosion cracking and potential crack creation 
and growth in the affected piping. Cracks would necessitate additional 
repair activities in a high radiation field. Given these potentially 
deleterious effects, the optimum time for source term reduction would 
be during the January 2005 outage concurrent with the next application 
of NMCA, permitting inspection activities to be performed in a lower 
dose environment.
    10 CFR 50.12 permits the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to grant 
exemptions which are authorized by law, will not present undue risk to 
the health and safety of the public, and are consistent with the common 
defense and security, provided that special circumstances are present. 
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2), the Commission believes that special 
circumstances exist in that the requested schedular exemption would 
provide only temporary relief from the applicable regulation and the 
licensee has made good faith efforts to comply with the regulation. The 
licensee states that all nine nozzles have received a minimum of three 
ultrasonic examinations in previous outages and each has received a 
baseline examination along with the

[[Page 59319]]

two previous inservice examinations during the first and second 120-
month inspection intervals. Implementation of inspection requirements 
industry-wide, to date, for RPV nozzle-to-vessel welds and nozzle 
inside radius sections of Class I systems, have not resulted in any 
findings in any of the identified nozzles with the exception of 
boiling-water reactor feedwater and control rod drive return line 
nozzles (NUREG-0619, November 1980). Given that both plant and industry 
experience shows no evidence of service-induced flaws, the increased 
risk of extending the inspection interval is minimal. Therefore, an 
extension of the completion date from the third 120-month inspection 
interval refueling outage of November 2002 until the fourth 120-month 
inspection interval refueling outage of January 2005 to achieve the 
inservice examinations and reduce excessive radiation dose is 
beneficial. In addition, the requested exemption will only provide 
temporary relief from the applicable regulation and does not jeopardize 
the health and safety of the public. The delayed examinations performed 
during the fourth 10-year interval will be credited to the third 10-
year interval. These examinations will be repeated during the fourth 
10-year interval in accordance with the fourth 10-year interval 
inservice inspection program.

3.0 Discussion

    Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, the Commission may, upon application by 
any interested person or upon its own initiative, grant exemptions from 
the requirements of 10 CFR part 50 when (1) the exemptions are 
authorized by law, will not present an undue risk to public health or 
safety, and are consistent with the common defense and security; and 
(2) when special circumstances are present. These circumstances include 
the special circumstances that 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.
    The underlying purpose of the regulation is to ensure the 
structural integrity of the reactor pressure vessel.
    The staff examined the licensee's rationale to support the 
exemption request and concluded that granting it would meet the 
underlying purpose of 10 CFR part 50. Public health and safety will not 
be jeopardized by the granting of the delay because the components 
listed in the licensee's July 10, 2002, exemption request are not the 
limiting components for RPV embrittlement. Additionally, previous 
examinations of the RPV nozzle-to-vessel welds and nozzle inside radius 
sections have not detected service-induced flaws. The proposed delay of 
examinations of the components results in no reduction in the number, 
type, or coverage of the examinations. Finally, the requested exemption 
is consistent with the common defense and security.
    The licensee asserts that under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(iii), the 
requested schedular exemption ``will avoid undue hardship or costs.'' 
However, 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(iii) requires for special circumstances 
that compliance would result in hardship or other costs that are 
significantly in excess of those contemplated or that the requirements 
are significantly in excess of those incurred by others similarly 
situated. The staff finds that there are no excessive hardships or 
costs.
    10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(v) requires that the exemption would offer only 
temporary relief from the applicable regulation and the licensee has 
made good faith efforts to comply with the regulation. All nine nozzles 
have received a minimum of three ultrasonic examinations in previous 
outages and each has received a baseline examination along with the two 
previous inservice examinations during the first and second 120-month 
inspection intervals. Coordinating the next inservice inspection with 
chemical decontamination and re-application of NMCA would be 
advantageous from the perspective of reducing both worker radiation 
exposure and vulnerability of the affected piping to intergranular 
stress corrosion cracking. The alternate inservice inspection schedule 
delays the planned inspections for a maximum of 26 months and results 
in a significant reduction in radiation exposure of a minimum of 60 
person-rem. The staff finds that the licensee merits the required 
special circumstances under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(v).
    Based upon a consideration that the exemption would offer only 
temporary relief from the regulation and result in a significant 
reduction in worker radiation exposure, the staff concludes that an 
extension of the completion date from the third 120-month inspection 
interval refueling outage of November 2002 until the fourth 120-month 
inspection interval refueling outage of January 2005 to achieve the 
inservice examinations is beneficial.

4.0 Conclusion

    Accordingly, the Commission has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR 
50.12(a), the 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. Also, special circumstances are present. 
Therefore, the Commission hereby grants Exelon Generation Company, LLC 
an exemption for Quad Cities, Unit 1, from the requirements of 10 CFR 
50.55a(g)(4)(ii) for implementation of inservice examinations of 
certain reactor pressure vessel (RPV) nozzle-to-vessel welds and nozzle 
inside radius sections, as listed in the licensee's July 10, 2002, 
application, per ASME Code, Section XI, Table IWB-2500, Examination 
Category B-D, Item Nos. B3.90 and B3.100, by the end of the current 
120-month inspection interval.
    Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the Commission has determined that the 
granting of this exemption will not have a significant effect on the 
quality of the human environment (67 FR 56860).
    This exemption is effective upon issuance.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of September, 2002.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John A. Zwolinski,
Director, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 02-23948 Filed 9-19-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P