[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 72 (Monday, April 15, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22347-22349]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08704]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-320; NRC-2013-0065]
GPU Nuclear Inc., Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Station, Unit
2, Exemption From Certain Security Requirements
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Exemption.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John B. Hickman, Office of Federal and
State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-
3017; email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1.0 Background
GPU Nuclear, Inc. (GPUN, the licensee) is the licensee and holder
of Facility Operating License No. DPR-73 issued for Three Mile Island
Nuclear Power Station (TMI), Unit 2, located in Dauphin County,
Pennsylvania. TMI Unit 2 is a permanently shutdown nuclear reactor
facility. TMI Unit 2 was a pressurized water reactor that was operated
from December 1978 until March 28, 1979, when the unit experienced an
accident which resulted in severe damage to the reactor core.
As a result of this accident, small quantities of core debris and
fission products were transported through the Reactor Coolant System
and the reactor building during the accident. In addition, a small
quantity of core debris was transported to the auxiliary and fuel
handling buildings. Further spread of the debris also occurred as part
of the post-accident water processing cleanup activities.
TMI Unit 2 has been placed in a safe, inherently stable condition
suitable for long-term management. Fuel and core material was removed
in the defueling and has been shipped off site. The removed fuel is
currently in storage at Idaho National and Environmental Engineering
Laboratory (INEEL), and the U.S. Department of Energy has taken title
and possession of the fuel.
Substantial contaminated areas still exist at the facility, as well
as trace quantities of spent nuclear fuel (SNF). The quantity of fuel
remaining at TMI Unit 2 is a small fraction of the initial fuel load;
approximately 99% was successfully removed in the defueling.
Additionally, large quantities of radioactive fission products were
released into various systems and structures. Most of this
radioactivity was removed as part of the waste processing activities
during the TMI Unit 2 Clean-up Program. Significant quantities of
radioactive fission products were removed from the reactor coolant
system. Most of the residual fuel remaining is fixed in the form of
fine and granular debris that is inaccessible to defueling, tightly
adherent surface deposits not readily removable by available dynamic
defueling techniques, and resolidified material that is either tightly
adherent to the reactor vessel components or inaccessible to defueling.
There is no physical inventory requirement for special nuclear material
(SNM) quantities at TMI Unit 2 during post-defueled monitored storage
because the remaining materials are of low enrichment, highly
radioactive and relatively inaccessible.
Part 73 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR),
``Physical Protection of Plants and Materials'' ``prescribes
requirements for the establishment and maintenance of a physical
protection system which will have capabilities for the protection of
special nuclear material at fixed sites and in transit and of plants in
which special nuclear material is used.'' Section 73.55(b)(1), entitled
``Requirements for physical protection of licensed activities in
nuclear power reactors against radiological sabotage,''
[[Page 22348]]
states, ``The licensee shall establish and maintain a physical
protection program, to include a security organization, which will have
as its objective to provide high assurance that activities involving
special nuclear material are not inimical to the common defense and
security and do not constitute an unreasonable risk to the public
health and safety.''
The Power Reactor Security Rule, which applies to all 10 CFR part
50 licensees, was revised on March 27, 2009, with compliance required
by March 31, 2010 (74 FR 13926). The NRC held a webinar on July 20,
2010, to provide clarification on the applicability of the power
reactor security regulations to 10 CFR part 50 licensees undergoing
decommissioning or 10 CFR part 50 licensees that have only a general
licensed Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI). By letter
dated August 2, 2010, the NRC informed GPUN of the applicability of the
revised rule and stated that GPUN should evaluate the applicability of
the regulation to its facility and either make appropriate changes or
request an exemption (ML102080269).
2.0 Request/Action
By letter dated November 22, 2010 (ML110730375), and supplemented
by email dated February 8, 2013 (ML13044A053), GPUN responded to the
NRC's letter and requested exemptions from certain security
requirements in 10 CFR 73.55.
3.0 Discussion
Pursuant to 10 CFR 73.5, ``Specific Exemptions,'' the Commission
may, upon application of any interested person or upon its own
initiative, grant such exemptions from the requirements in 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.
The purpose of the security requirements of 10 CFR Part 73, as
applicable to a 10 CFR Part 50 licensed facility, is to prescribe
requirements for a facility that possesses and utilizes SNM. The fuel
removed from TMI Unit 2 is currently in storage at Idaho National and
Environmental Engineering Laboratory, and the U.S. Department of Energy
has taken title and possession of the fuel. With the completion of the
fuel transfer, there is no longer any SNM located within TMI Unit 2
other than that contained in plant systems as residual contamination.
The remaining radioactive material is in a form that does not pose
a risk of removal (i.e., an intact reactor pressure vessel and
contaminated structures) and is well dispersed and is not easily
aggregated. With the removal of the fuel containing SNM, the potential
for radiological sabotage or diversion of SNM at the 10 CFR Part 50
licensed site was eliminated.
For clarity, the staff grouped each GPUN exemption request into one
of two categories:
(1) Exemption denied because the regulations are not applicable to
the facility; and
(2) Exemption granted.
3.1 Exemption Denied Because the Regulations Are Not Applicable to the
Facility
The licensee has requested exemptions from the cyber security and
protection of digital assets regulations as delineated in 10 CFR
73.55(a)(1), 73.55(b)(8), 73.55(b)(9)(ii)(C), 73.55(c)(1)(i),
73.55(c)(6), and 73.55(m)(2). Cyber Security under 10 CFR 73.54 is
applicable to licensees currently ``licensed to operate a nuclear power
plant under Part 50.'' Since TMI Unit 2 is licensed to possess but not
operate a nuclear power plant, requirements under 10 CFR 73.54 do not
apply. Consequently, requirements under 10 CFR 73.55 that reference
cyber security or protection of digital assets are not applicable and
the exemptions are denied. The licensee also requested an exemption
from 10 CFR 73.55(f)(2). In 10 CFR 73.55(f)(2) also specifies cyber
security requirements that are not applicable to TMI Unit 2, therefore
that exemption is denied.
3.2 Exemption Granted
The licensee has requested exemptions from the target sets
requirements in 10 CFR 73.55(b)(4), 10 CFR 73.55(f)(1), 10 CFR
73.55(f)(3), and 10 CFR 73.55(f)(4). Due to the status of TMI Unit 2,
permanently shutdown with virtually all fuel removed from the facility,
there is no longer any equipment or facilities that need to be
protected. Therefore, there are no designated Target Sets identified
for TMI Unit 2. Therefore, regulations which refer to Target Sets are
not necessary for TMI Unit 2 and the requested exemptions are granted.
The licensee has requested an exemption from the bullet-resisting-
physical barriers requirements in 10 CFR 73.55(e)(5) with respect to
the main control room (MCR). Due to the status of TMI Unit 2,
permanently shutdown with virtually all fuel removed from the facility,
the TMI Unit 2 MCR has no operational or safety function and is no
longer continuously manned or classified as a vital area. With the TMI
Unit 2 MCR no longer performing the original design safety function,
there is no need for it to be protected by bullet resisting barriers.
Therefore, the requested exemption is granted.
The licensee has requested exemption from the vital areas
requirements in 10 CFR 73.55(e)(9)(v), for the reactor control room,
(e)(9)(v)(A), and the spent fuel pool, (e)(9)(v)(B). Due to the
permanently defueled and shutdown status of the facility, the TMI Unit
2 MCR is no longer a functional facility for controlling reactivity or
safety related systems. Because the MCR no longer performing any vital
control or safety function it does not need to be considered a vital
area from a security perspective. The TMI Unit 2 spent fuel pool (SFP)
has been drained and decontaminated and no longer serves as a spent
fuel pool. Therefore, the TMI Unit 2 SFP is not a vital security area
with respect to TMI Unit 2. Therefore, the requested exemptions are
granted.
The licensee has requested an exemption from the waterways
requirements at 10 CFR 73.55(e)(10)(ii)(A). By email dated February 8,
2013, the licensee clarified that their original request for exemption
from 10 CFR 73.55(e)(11)(A) was a typographical error and that they
intended to request an exemption from 10 CFR 73.55(e)(10)(ii)(A). Due
to the status of TMI Unit 2, permanently shutdown with virtually all
fuel removed from the facility, there is no longer any equipment or
facilities that need to be protected. The Unit 2 River Water Intake
Structure is no longer considered a vital area and all equipment
previously located within the intake structure has been removed and
piping leading to the Protected Area has been filled in with concrete
and stone. Based on the reduced need for security at the permanently
defueled and shutdown facility, there is no need for waterway security
and no need to identify areas from which a waterborne vehicle must be
restricted. Therefore, the exemption is granted.
The licensee has requested exemption from the requirements for
communication in 10 CFR 73.55(j)(4), (j)(4)(ii), and (n)(5),
specifically, for communications with the MCR and testing
communications with the MCR and local law enforcement agencies (LLEAs).
Due to the permanently defueled and shutdown status of the facility the
TMI Unit 2 MCR is no longer continuously manned or functional from a
security perspective. Since the MCR no longer performs any vital
control or safety function there is no need to maintain communications
capability with the MCR. The removal
[[Page 22349]]
of the SNM from the site obviates the need for communications between
the alarm stations and the MCR or LLEAs and the testing of such
communications systems. Therefore, the requested exemptions are
granted.
The licensee has requested an exemption from the safeguards
contingency plan requirement in 10 CFR 73.55(c)(5). With the SNM
removed from the TMI Unit 2 site, the protection of the SNM is no
longer required of Unit 2. Because there is no SNM to protect, there is
no need for the physical protection requirements of 10 CFR 73.55 (c)(5)
which requires a safeguards contingency plan. Therefore the exemption
is granted.
Therefore, the continued application of the previously discussed 10
CFR Part 73 requirements to TMI Unit 2, are not necessary to achieve
the underlying purpose of the rule. Additionally, with the removal of
the spent nuclear fuel from the site, the radioactive materials
remaining on the 10 CFR Part 50 licensed site would be comparable to a
source and byproduct licensee that uses general industrial security
(i.e., locks and barriers) to protect the public health and safety. As
stated in the regulations, Part 73, ``* * * prescribes requirements for
the establishment and maintenance of a physical protection system which
will have capabilities for the protection of special nuclear material
at fixed sites and in transit and of plants in which special nuclear
material is used.'' The possession and responsibility for the security
of the SNM was transferred to INEEL and is no longer the responsibility
of the licensee. Therefore, protection of the SNM is no longer a
requirement of the licensee's 10 CFR Part 50 license.
With no SNM to protect, there is no need for a cyber security plan,
target sets, bullet resisting physical barriers at the MCR, vital area
requirements for the MCR or SFP, waterway security, continuous
communications with the MCR or LLEA, or a safeguards contingency plan
for the TMI Unit 2, 10 CFR Part 50 licensed site.
4.0 Conclusion
Accordingly, the Commission has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR
73.5, an exemption is authorized by law, will not endanger life or
property or the common defense and security, and is otherwise in the
public interest because the security requirements for the spent fuel
containing SNM are no longer the responsibility of the licensee.
Therefore, the Commission hereby grants GPU Nuclear, Inc., an exemption
from the physical protection requirements of 10 CFR 73.55 (b)(4),
(f)(1), (f)(3), (f)(4), (e)(5), (e)(9)(v)(A), (e)(9)(v)(B),
(e)(10)(ii)(A), (j)(4)(ii), (n)(5), and (c)(5) at TMI Unit 2.
This licensing action meets the categorical exclusion provision in
10 CFR 51.22(c)(25)(vi)(F). This action is an exemption from the
requirements of the Commission's regulations. For the reasons detailed
above in the staff's analysis of the request, (i) the exemption
involves 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 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. The requirements from which an exemption is
sought involve safeguard plans and is one of the categories of
exemptions identified in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25)(vi)(F) as appropriate for
application of this categorical exclusion.
Therefore, this action does not require either an environmental
assessment or an environmental impact statement.
These exemptions are effective immediately.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of April 2013.
For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Larry W. Camper,
Director, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection,
Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2013-08704 Filed 4-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P