[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 238 (Wednesday, December 11, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 75383-75385]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-29582]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 52-022 and 52-023; NRC-2013-0261]
Duke Energy Progress; Shearon Harris Units 2 and 3; Exemption
From Requirements To Revise Combined License Applications To Address
Enhancements to Emergency Preparedness Rules
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Exemption.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing an
exemption in response to a July 29, 2013, request from Duke Energy
Progress (DEP). On May 2, 2013, DEP requested that the NRC suspend
review of its combined license (COL) application until further notice.
On July 29, 2013, DEP requested an exemption from certain regulatory
requirements which, if granted, would allow them to revise their COL
application in order to address enhancements to the Emergency
Preparedness (EP) rules within six months of requesting the NRC to
resume the review of their COL application, rather than by December 31,
2013, as the regulations currently require. The NRC staff reviewed this
request and determined that it is appropriate to grant the exemption,
but stipulated that the revised application must be submitted prior to
requesting the NRC resume its review of the COL application or by
December 31, 2014, whichever comes first.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2013-0261 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You
may access publicly-available information related to this action by the
following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-0261. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-
3422; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact
the individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
of this document.
[[Page 75384]]
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may access publicly available documents online in the NRC
Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the
search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and then select ``Begin Web-
based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's
Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-
4737, or by email to [email protected]. The ADAMS accession number
for each document referenced in this document (if that document is
available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that the document is
referenced.
NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Minarik, Office of New
Reactors, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001; telephone: 301-415-6185; email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following sections include the text of
the exemption in its entirety as issued to DEP.
1.0 Background
On February 18, 2008, Agencywide Documents Access and Management
System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML080580078) Duke Energy Progress,
Incorporated (DEP), submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC/the Commission) a Combined License (COL) application for two units
of Westinghouse Electric Company's AP1000 advanced pressurized water
reactors to be constructed and operated at the existing Shearon Harris
Nuclear Plant (Harris) site (Docket Numbers 052000-22 and 052000-23).
The NRC docketed the Harris Units 2 and 3 COL application on April 23,
2008. On May 2, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No. ML13123A344), DEP requested
that the NRC suspend review of the Harris Units 2 and 3 COL
application. The NRC granted DEP's request for suspension and all
review activities related to the Harris Units 2 and 3 COL application
were suspended while the application remained docketed. On July 29,
2013 (ADAMS Accession No. ML13212A361), DEP requested an exemption from
the requirements part 50 Appendix E Section I.5 of Title 10 of the Code
of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), as referenced by 10 CFR 52.79(a)(21),
to submit an update to the COL application, addressing the enhancements
to the EP rules by December 31, 2013.
2.0 Request/Action
10 CFR part 50 appendix E, Section 1.5 requires that an applicant
for a COL under Subpart C of 10 CFR part 52 whose application was
docketed prior to December 23, 2011, must revise their COL application
to comply with the EP rules published in the Federal Register (76 FR
72560) on November 23, 2011. An applicant that does not receive a COL
before December 31, 2013 shall revise its COL application to comply
with these changes no later than December 31, 2013.
Because DEP will not hold a COL prior to December 31, 2013, it is
therefore required to revise its application to be compliant with the
new EP rules by December 31, 2013. By letter dated May 2, 2013 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML13123A344), DEP requested that the NRC suspend review
of the Harris Units 2 and 3 COL application. The NRC granted DEP's
request for suspension of all review activities while the application
remained docketed. In a letter dated July 29, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML13212A361), DEP requested an exemption from the requirements of 10
CFR part 50 appendix E, section I.5 until the time that DEP requests
the NRC to resume the review of the Harris Units 2 and 3 COL
application. DEP's requested exemption is interpreted as a one-time
schedule change from the requirements of 10 CFR part 50 appendix E,
section I.5. In its request, DEP asked the NRC to grant the exemption
from 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix E Section I.5 until 6 months after
reactivating the Harris Units 2 and 3 COL application review. Because
such a request is seen as open-ended, the NRC included an imposed
December 31, 2014, deadline as part of its review of the exemption
request. The exemption would allow DEP to comply with the new EP rule
at a later date, but still in advance of the NRC resuming its review of
the application and in any event, by December 31, 2014. The current
requirement to comply with the new EP rule by December 31, 2013, could
not be changed, absent the exemption.
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, including 10 CFR part 50 appendix
E, SECTION I.5, when: (1) The exemption(s) 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) special
circumstances are present. As relevant to the requested exemption,
special circumstances exist if: ``[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'' (10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii)).
The purpose of 10 CFR part 50 appendix E, section I.5 was to ensure
that applicants and new COL holders updated their COL applications or
Combined License to allow the NRC to review them efficiently and
effectively, and to bring the applicants or licensees into compliance
prior to receiving a license, or, for licensees, prior to operating the
plant. The targets of section I.5 of the rule were those applications
that were being actively reviewed by the NRC staff when the rule went
into effect on November 23, 2011. Because DEP requested the NRC suspend
its review of the Harris Units 2 and 3 COL application, compelling DEP
to revise its COL application in order to meet the December 31, 2013
compliance deadline would result in unnecessary burden and hardship for
the applicant to meet the compliance date. As long as it is recognized
that the COL application must be updated to comply with the
enhancements to the EP rules prior to the NRC approving their COL
application, it makes no difference if they revise the COL application
now, when they request the review be restarted, or December 31, 2014.
For this reason the application of 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix E, Section
I.5, for the suspended Harris 2 and 3 COL application is deemed
unnecessary, and therefore special circumstances are present.
Authorized by Law
The exemption is a one-time schedule exemption from the
requirements of 10 CFR part 50 appendix E Section I.5. The exemption
would allow DEP to revise its COL application, and comply with the new
EP rules on or before December 31, 2014, in lieu of December 31, 2013,
the date required by 10 CFR part 50 appendix E, Section I.5. As stated
above, 10 CFR 50.12 allows the NRC to grant exemptions from the
requirements of 10 CFR part 50. The NRC staff has determined that
granting DEP the requested one-time exemption from the requirements of
10 CFR part 50 appendix E, Section I.5 will not result in a violation
of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or the NRC's regulations.
Therefore, the exemption is authorized by law.
[[Page 75385]]
No Undue Risk to Public Health and Safety
The underlying purpose of the enhancements to Emergency
Preparedness found in 10 CFR part 50, appendix E, is to amend certain
EP requirements to enhance protective measures in the event of a
radiological emergency; address, in part, enhancements identified after
the terrorist events of September 11, 2001; clarify regulations to
effect consistent Emergency Plan implementation among licensees; and
modify certain requirements to be more effective and efficient. Since
plant construction cannot proceed until the NRC review of the
application is completed, a mandatory hearing is completed and a
license is issued, the exemption does not increase the probability of
postulated accidents. Additionally, based on the nature of the
requested exemption as described above, no new accident precursors are
created by the exemption; thus neither the probability, nor the
consequences of postulated accidents are increased. Therefore, there is
no undue risk to public health and safety.
Consistent With Common Defense and Security
The requested exemption would allow DEP to submit the revised COL
application prior to requesting the NRC to resume the review and, in
any event, on or before December 31, 2014. This schedule change has no
relation to security issues. Therefore, the common defense and security
is not impacted.
Special Circumstances
Special circumstances, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii)
are present whenever ``[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'' (10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii)). The underlying purpose of 10 CFR part
50 appendix E, section I.5 is to ensure that applicants are in
compliance with the new EP rules in a time that allows the NRC to
effectively review their revised COL application prior to issuance of
the license. Because the Harris Units 2 and 3 COL application review is
now suspended, the application of this regulation in this particular
circumstance is unnecessary in order to achieve its underlying purpose.
If the NRC were to grant this exemption, and DEP were then required to
comply by December 31, 2014 or prior to any request to restart of their
review, the purpose of the rule would still be achieved. Therefore, the
special circumstances required by 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) for the
granting of an exemption from 10 CFR part 50, appendix E, section I.5
exist.
Eligibility for Categorical Exclusion From Environmental Review
With respect to the exemption's impact on the quality of the human
environment, the NRC has determined that this specific exemption
request is eligible for categorical exclusion as identified in 10 CFR
51.22(c)(25) and justified by the NRC staff as follows:
(c) The following categories of actions are categorical exclusions:
(25) Granting of an exemption from the requirements of any
regulation of this chapter, provided that--
(i) There is no significant hazards consideration;
The criteria for determining whether there is no significant
hazards consideration are found in 10 CFR 50.92. The proposed action
involves only a schedule change regarding the submission of an update
to the application for which the licensing review has been suspended.
Therefore, there are no significant hazards considerations because
granting the proposed exemption would not:
(1) Involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or
(2) Create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
from any accident previously evaluated; or
(3) Involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
(ii) There is no significant change in the types or significant
increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite;
The proposed action involves only a schedule change which is
administrative in nature, and does not involve any changes to be made
in the types or significant increase in the amounts of effluents that
may be released offsite.
(iii) There is no significant increase in individual or cumulative
public or occupational radiation exposure;
Since the proposed action involves only a schedule change which is
administrative in nature, it does not contribute to any significant
increase in occupational or public radiation exposure.
(iv) There is no significant construction impact;
The proposed action involves only a schedule change which is
administrative in nature; the application review is suspended until
further notice, and there is no consideration of any construction at
this time, and hence the proposed action does not involve any
construction impact.
(v) There is no significant increase in the potential for or
consequences from radiological accidents; and
The proposed action involves only a schedule change which is
administrative in nature, and does not impact the probability or
consequences of accidents.
(vi) The requirements from which an exemption is sought involve:
(B) Reporting requirements;
The exemption request involves submitting an updated COL
application by DEP and
(G) Scheduling requirements;
The proposed exemption relates to the schedule for submitting a COL
application update to the NRC.
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 DEP a one-time exemption from
the requirements of 10 CFR part 50, appendix E, section I.5 pertaining
to the Harris Units 2 and 3 COL application to allow submittal of the
revised COL application that complies with the enhancements to the EP
rules prior to any request to the NRC to resume the review, and in any
event, no later than December 31, 2014.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22, the Commission has determined that the
exemption request meets the applicable categorical exclusion criteria
set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25), and the granting of this exemption
will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human
environment.
This exemption is effective upon issuance.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 21st day of November 2013.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Lawrence Burkhart,
Chief, Licensing Branch 4, Division of New Reactor Licensing, Office of
New Reactors.
[FR Doc. 2013-29582 Filed 12-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P