[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 10 (Wednesday, January 17, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2019-2021]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-501]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[ Docket No. 50-425]
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.; Vogtle Electric
Generating Plant, Unit 2; Exemption
1.0 Background
The Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (SNC/licensee), is the
holder of Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-68 and NPF-81, which
authorize operation of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1
and 2 (VEGP Unit 1 and VEGP Unit 2), respectively. The licenses
provide, among other things, that the facility is subject to all rules,
regulations, and orders of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, the
Commission) now or hereafter in effect.
The facility consists of two pressurized-water reactors (PWRs)
supplied by Westinghouse Electric Corporation, each rated at 3565
megawatts (thermal). The facility is located in Burke County, Georgia.
This exemption addresses VEGP Unit 2.
2.0 Request/Action
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Part 54.17(c)
stipulates that an application for a renewed license may not be
submitted to the Commission earlier than 20 years before the expiration
of the operating license currently in effect.
By letter dated May 22, 2006, the licensee requested a schedular
exemption from the 20-year restriction specified in 10 CFR 54.17(c) for
VEGP Unit 2 so that the license renewal application (LRA) for both
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant units can be prepared and submitted
concurrently, with the goal of attaining efficiencies for preparation
and review of the application. The current operating license for VEGP
Unit 1 expires on January 16, 2027, whereas the current operating
license for VEGP Unit 2 expires on February 9, 2029. At the time the
exemption request was filed, VEGP Unit 1 had over 19 years of operating
experience and VEGP Unit 2 had over 17 years of operating experience.
This exemption is required in order to allow an application for
renewal of the VEGP Unit 2 license to be prepared and submitted
concurrently with the LRA for VEGP Unit 1. Based on an anticipated
submittal of a renewal application on June 28, 2007, VEGP Unit 1 will
meet the requirements of 10 CFR 54.17(c) and the license renewal
request for VEGP Unit 2 would occur approximately 2 years earlier than
the earliest date allowed by 10 CFR 54.17(c).
3.0 Discussion
Pursuant to 10 CFR 54.15, the Commission may, upon application by
any interested person or upon its own initiative, grant exemptions from
the requirements of 10 CFR Part 54, in accordance with the provisions
of 10 CFR 50.12, (1) when 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.
Authorized by Law
The Commission's basis for establishing the 20-year limit contained
in Section 54.17(c) is discussed in the 1991 Statements of
Consideration for Part 54 of 10 CFR (56 FR 64963). The limit was
established to ensure that substantial operating experience was
accumulated by a licensee before a renewal application is submitted
such that any plant-specific concerns regarding aging would be
disclosed. In amending the rule in 1995, the Commission sought public
comment on whether the 20-year limit should be reduced. The Commission
determined that sufficient basis did not exist to generically reduce
the 20-year limit. However, the Commission did indicate in the
Statements of Consideration for the amended rule (60 FR 22488), that it
was willing to consider plant-specific exemption requests by applicants
who believe that sufficient information is available to justify
applying for license renewal prior to 20 years from expiration of the
current license. SNC's exemption request is consistent with the
Commission's intent to consider plant-specific requests and is
permitted by 10 CFR 54.15. Therefore, the exemption is authorized by
law.
[[Page 2020]]
The current operating licenses for VEGP Unit 1 and Unit 2, were
issued in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
(AEA), and 10 CFR 50.51, which limit the duration of an operating
license to a maximum of 40 years. In accordance with 10 CFR 54.31, the
renewed license will be of the same class as the operating license
currently in effect and cannot exceed a term of 40 years. Therefore,
the terms of the renewal licenses for VEGP Unit 1 and Unit 2, are
limited both by law and the Commission's regulations to 40 years.
Additionally, 10 CFR 54.31(b) states that ``A renewed license will be
issued for a fixed period of time, which is the sum of the additional
amount of time beyond the expiration of the operating license (not to
exceed 20 years) that is requested in a renewal application plus the
remaining number of years on the operating license currently in effect.
The term of any renewed license may not exceed 40 years.''
The potential exists that, because SNC's decision to apply early
for license renewal for VEGP Unit 2, SNC may not obtain the maximum 20-
year extended operation permitted by 10 CFR 54.31(b). Any actual
reduction will depend on the date the renewed licenses are issued. If a
reduction in the 20-year extension is required, and SNC desires further
extension of VEGP Units 2's operating licenses in the future, an
additional renewal application can be submitted in accordance with 10
CFR Part 54.
Therefore, should the Commission determine to renew the VEGP Unit 2
operating license, the term of the license will not exceed 40 years,
and granting of VEGP Unit 2's exemption request will not result in
violation of the AEA or the Commission's regulations.
No Undue Risk to Public Health and Safety
This exemption will not result in changes to the operation of the
plant. SNC's exemption request seeks only schedular relief regarding
the date of submittal, and not substantive relief from the requirements
of Parts 51 or Part 54. SNC must still conduct all environmental
reviews required by Part 51 and all safety reviews and evaluations
required by Part 54 when preparing the applications for VEGP Units 1
and 2. The NRC staff's review will verify that all applicable
Commission regulations have been met before issuing the renewed
licenses. Therefore, the NRC staff finds that granting this schedular
exemption will not represent an undue risk to public health and safety.
Consistent With the Common Defense and Security
As discussed previously, the exemption requested is only a
schedular exemption. The NRC staff will review the LRA SNC submits
pursuant to the requested exemption, to assure all applicable
requirements are fully met. This change has no relation to security
issues. Therefore, the common defense and security is not impacted by
this exemption.
Special Circumstances
An exemption will not be granted unless special circumstances are
present as defined in 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2). Specifically, Section
50.12(a)(2)(ii) states that a special circumstance exists when
``application of the regulation in the particular circumstances * * *
is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule.'' In
initially promulgating Section 54.17(c) in 1991, the Commission stated
that the purpose of the time limit was ``to ensure that substantial
operating experience is accumulated by a licensee before it submits a
renewal application'' (56 FR 64963). At that time, the Commission found
that 20 years of operating experience provided a sufficient basis for
renewal applications. However, in issuing the amended Part 54 in 1995,
the Commission indicated it would consider an exemption to this
requirement if sufficient information was available on a plant-specific
basis to justify submission of an application to renew a license before
completion of 20 years of operation (60 FR 22488). The 20-year limit
was imposed by the Commission to ensure that sufficient operating
experience was accumulated to identify any plant-specific aging
concerns. As set forth below, VEGP Unit 1 is sufficiently similar to
Unit 2, such that the operating experience for VEGP Unit 1 is
applicable to VEGP Unit 2. In addition, VEGP Unit 2 has accumulated
significant operating experience. Accordingly, under the requested
exemption, sufficient operating experience will have been accumulated
to identify any plant-specific aging concerns for both units.
SNC stated that special effort was made during construction of VEGP
to keep the designs of the two units the same. Both units are PWRs
supplied by Westinghouse Electric Corporation with a design net core
output of 3565 megawatts (thermal). The containment for each of the
VEGP units is a steel-lined, prestressed, post-tensioned concrete
cylinder with a hemispherical dome. SNC states that the two units have
similar materials of construction of the systems, structures, and
components and are typically identical.
These statements are supported by a review of the VEGP Updated
Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR for Units 1 and 2). In particular,
Section 1.3 of the UFSAR describes the similarities in design between
VEGP Unit 1, VEGP Unit 2, and similar licensed reactor facilities.
Table 1-3-1 of the UFSAR lists significant similarities between
systems, structures and components installed at VEGP, including
elements of the reactor system, the reactor coolant system, the
engineered safety features, and auxiliary systems.
SNC also states that the Operating Experience Program ensures that
operating experience originating from all sources is appropriately
utilized at VEGP. Specifically, any operating experience originating
with VEGP Unit 1 is systematically applied to Unit 2. Moreover, SNC
states that since the two VEGP units are essentially the same in
design, operation, maintenance, materials and environments, there will
be little difference in the aging management analyses for the two
units.
Based on the above discussion, the NRC staff concludes that, with
respect to VEGP Unit 1 and VEGP Unit 2 containment design, structural
configuration, and management of structural-related aging effects, the
applicant has provided adequate justifications for the NRC
consideration of granting the VEGP Unit 2 request for exemption from
the requirements of 10 CFR 54.17(c).
Therefore, sufficient combined operating experience from VEGP Unit
1 and industry exists to satisfy the intent of 10 CFR 54.17(c), and the
application of the regulation in this case is not necessary to achieve
the underlying purpose of the rule. The NRC staff concludes that SNC's
request meets the requirement, in Section 50.12(a)(2) of 10 CFR, that
special circumstances exist to grant the exemption.
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 SNC an exemption from the
requirements of 10 CFR 54.17(c). Specifically, this schedular exemption
allows SNC to apply for a renewed license for VEGP Unit 2 earlier than
20 years before the expiration of the license currently in effect.
[[Page 2021]]
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 (71 FR 58014).
This exemption is effective upon issuance.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day of January 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John W. Lubinski,
Acting Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E7-501 Filed 1-16-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P