[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 208 (Thursday, October 27, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74820-74822]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-25989]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-333; NRC-2016-0221]
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Exemption; issuance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing an
exemption in response to a January 15, 2016, request from Entergy
Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy or the licensee), from certain
regulatory requirements. The exemption would permit a certified fuel
handler to approve the emergency suspension of security measures for
James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAF) during certain emergency
conditions or during severe weather. The exemption will be effective
after JAF has submitted the certifications that it has permanently
ceased power operation and has permanently removed fuel from the
reactor vessel.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2016-0221 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You
may obtain publicly-available information related to this document
using any of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0221. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-
3463; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection 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 (if it is available
in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this
document.
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: Thomas Wengert, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-4037; email: [email protected].
I. Background
Entergy is the holder of Renewed Facility Operating License No.
DPR-59, which authorizes operation of JAF. The license provides, among
other things, that the facility is subject to all rules, regulations,
and orders of the NRC now or hereafter in effect. The facility consists
of a boiling-water reactor located in Oswego County, New York.
By letter dated November 18, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML15322A273), Entergy submitted to the NRC, the certification, in
accordance with Sec. 50.82(a)(1)(i) of title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), indicating that it intended to permanently cease
operations of JAF. By letter dated March 16, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML16076A391), Entergy certified that it plans to permanently cease
power operations at JAF on January 27, 2017.
II. Request/Action
On January 15, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16015A457), the licensee
requested an exemption from Sec. 73.55(p)(1)(i) and (ii), pursuant to
Sec. 73.5, ``Specific exemptions.'' Section 73.55(p)(1)(i) and (ii)
require, in part, that the suspension of security measures during
certain emergency conditions or during severe weather be approved by a
licensed senior operator. The exemption request relates solely to the
licensing requirements specified in the regulations directing
suspension of security measures in accordance with Sec.
73.55(p)(1)(i)-(ii), and would expand on the requirement for a licensed
senior operator to provide this approval. The exemption would allow the
suspension of security measures during certain emergency conditions or
during severe weather by a certified fuel handler
[[Page 74821]]
(CFH) after the certifications required under Sec. 50.82(a)(1) have
been docketed.
III. Discussion
Historically, the NRC's security regulations have long recognized
the potential to suspend security or safeguards measures under certain
conditions. Accordingly, 10 CFR 50.54(x) and (y), first issued or
published in 1983, allow a licensee to take reasonable steps in an
emergency that deviate from license conditions when those steps are
``needed to protect the public health and safety'' and there are no
conforming comparable measures (48 FR 13970; April 1, 1983). As
originally issued, the deviation from license conditions must be
approved by, as a minimum, a licensed senior operator. In 1986, in its
final rule, ``Miscellaneous Amendments Concerning the Physical
Protection of Nuclear Power Plants'' (51 FR 27817; August 4, 1986), the
Commission issued 10 CFR 73.55(a), stating in part:
In accordance with Sec. 50.54 (x) and (y) of Part 50, the
licensee may suspend any safeguards measures pursuant to Sec. 73.55
in an emergency when this action is immediately needed to protect
the public health and safety and no action consistent with license
conditions and technical specification that can provide adequate or
equivalent protection is immediately apparent. This suspension must
be approved as a minimum by a licensed senior operator prior to
taking the action.
In 1995, the NRC made a number of regulatory changes to address
decommissioning. Among the changes was new text that amended Sec.
50.54(x) and (y) by allowing a non-licensed operator called a
``Certified Fuel Handler,'' in addition to a licensed senior operator,
to authorize protective steps. Specifically, in addressing the role of
the CFH during emergencies, the NRC stated in the proposed rule,
``Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors'' (60 FR 37379; July 20,
1995):
The Commission is proposing to amend 10 CFR 50.54(y) to permit a
certified fuel handler at nuclear power reactors that have
permanently ceased operations and permanently removed fuel from the
reactor vessel, subject to the requirements of Sec. 50.82(a) and
consistent with the proposed definition of ``Certified Fuel
Handler'' specified in Sec. 50.2, to make these evaluations and
judgments. A nuclear power reactor that has permanently ceased
operations and no longer has fuel in the reactor vessel does not
require a licensed individual to monitor core conditions. A
certified fuel handler at a permanently shutdown and defueled
nuclear power reactor undergoing decommissioning is an individual
who has the requisite knowledge and experience to evaluate plant
conditions and make these judgements.
In the final rule (61 FR 39298; July 29, 1996), the NRC added the
following definition to Sec. 50.2: ``Certified fuel handler means, for
a nuclear power reactor facility, a non-licensed operator who has
qualified in accordance with a fuel handler training program approved
by the Commission.'' However, the decommissioning rule did not propose
or make parallel changes to Sec. 73.55(a), and did not discuss the
role of a non-licensed certified fuel handler.
In the final rule, ``Power Reactor Security Requirements'' (74 FR
13926; March 27, 2009), the NRC removed the security suspension
requirements from Sec. 73.55(a) and added them to Sec. 73.55(p)(1)(i)
and (ii). The CFHs were not discussed in the rulemaking, so the
requirements of Sec. 73.55(p) to use a licensed senior operator
remain, even for a site that otherwise no longer operates.
However, pursuant to Sec. 73.5, the Commission may, upon
application by any interested person or upon its own initiative, grant
exemptions from the requirements of 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.
A. The Exemption Is Authorized by Law
The exemption from Sec. 73.55(p)(1)(i) and (ii) would expand upon
the requirement that only a licensed senior operator could approve the
suspension of security measures under certain emergency conditions or
severe weather. The licensee intends to use the exemption to authorize
the use of a non-licensed CFH, in place of a licensed senior operator,
to approve the suspension of security measures during certain emergency
conditions or during severe weather after JAF permanently ceases
operation and the licensee has submitted the certifications required
under Sec. 50.82(a)(1).
Per Sec. 73.5, the Commission is allowed to grant exemptions from
the regulations in 10 CFR part 73, as authorized by law. The NRC staff
has determined that granting the licensee's proposed exemption will not
result in a violation of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or
other laws. Therefore, the exemption is authorized by law.
B. Will Not Endanger Life or Property or the Common Defense and
Security
Expanding the requirement to have a licensed senior operator or a
CFH approve suspension of security measures during emergencies or
severe weather will not endanger life or property or the common defense
and security for the reasons described in this section.
First, Sec. 73.55(p)(2) continues to require that ``[s]uspended
security measures must be reinstated as soon as conditions permit.''
Second, the suspension for nonweather emergency conditions under
Sec. 73.55(p)(1)(i) will continue to be invoked only ``when this
action is immediately needed to protect the public health and safety
and no action consistent with license conditions and technical
specifications that can provide adequate or equivalent protection is
immediately apparent.'' Thus, the exemption would not prevent the
licensee from meeting the underlying purpose of Sec. 73.55(p)(1)(i) to
protect public health and safety.
Third, the suspension for severe weather under Sec.
73.55(p)(1)(ii) will continue to be used only when ``the suspension of
affected security measures is immediately needed to protect the
personal health and safety of security force personnel and no other
immediately apparent action consistent with the license conditions and
technical specifications can provide adequate or equivalent
protection.'' The requirement to receive input from the security
supervisor or manager will remain. The exemption would not prevent the
licensee from meeting the underlying purpose of Sec. 73.55(p)(1)(ii)
to protect the health and safety of the security force.
Additionally, by letter dated October 17, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML16259A347), the NRC approved Entergy's CFH training and retraining
program for the JAF facility. The NRC staff found that, among other
things, the program addresses the safe conduct of decommissioning
activities, safe handling and storage of spent fuel, and the
appropriate response to plant emergencies. Because the CFH is qualified
under an NRC-approved program, the NRC staff considers a CFH to have
sufficient knowledge of operational and safety concerns, such that
allowing a CFH to suspend security measures during emergencies or
severe weather will not result in undue risk to public health and
safety.
In addition, the exemption does not reduce the overall
effectiveness of the physical security plan and has no adverse impacts
to Entergy's ability to physically secure the site or protect special
nuclear material at JAF, and thus would not have an effect on the
common defense and security. The NRC staff has concluded that the
exemption would not reduce security measures currently in place to
protect against radiological sabotage. Therefore,
[[Page 74822]]
removing the requirement for a licensed senior operator to approve the
suspension of security measures in an emergency or during severe
weather, to allow suspension of security measures to be authorized by a
CFH, does not adversely affect public health and safety issues or the
assurance of the common defense and security.
C. Is Otherwise in the Public Interest
Entergy's proposed exemption would allow a CFH, following permanent
cessation of operation and permanent removal of fuel from the reactor
vessel, to approve suspension of security measures in an emergency when
``immediately needed to protect the public health and safety'' or
during severe weather when ``immediately needed to protect the personal
health and safety of security force personnel.'' Without the exemption,
the licensee cannot implement changes to its security plan to authorize
a CFH to approve the temporary suspension of security regulations
during an emergency or severe weather, comparable to the authority
given to the CFH by the NRC when it published Sec. 50.54(y). Instead,
the regulations would continue to require that a licensed senior
operator be available to make decisions for a permanently shutdown
plant, even though JAF would no longer require a licensed senior
operator. However, it is unclear how the licensee would implement
emergency or severe weather suspensions of security measures without a
licensed senior operator. This exemption is in the public interest for
two reasons. First, without the exemption, there is uncertainty on how
the licensee will invoke temporary suspension of security matters that
may be needed for protecting public health and safety or the safety of
the security force during emergencies and severe weather. The exemption
would allow the licensee to make decisions pursuant to Sec.
73.55(p)(1)(i) and (ii) without having to maintain a staff of licensed
senior operators. The exemption would also allow the licensee to have
an established procedure in place to allow a trained CFH to suspend
security measures in the event of an emergency or severe weather.
Second, the consistent and efficient regulation of nuclear power plants
serves the public interest. This exemption would assure consistency
between the security regulations in 10 CFR part 73 and the operating
reactor regulations in 10 CFR part 50, and the requirements concerning
licensed operators in 10 CFR part 55. The NRC staff has determined that
granting the licensee's proposed exemption would allow the licensee to
designate an alternative position, with qualifications appropriate for
a permanently shutdown and defueled reactor, to approve the suspension
of security measures during an emergency to protect the public health
and safety, and during severe weather to protect the safety of the
security force, consistent with the similar authority provided by Sec.
50.54(y). Therefore, the exemption is in the public interest.
D. Environmental Considerations
The NRC's approval of the exemption to security requirements
belongs to a category of actions that the Commission, by rule or
regulation, has declared to be a categorical exclusion, after first
finding that the category of actions does not individually or
cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
Specifically, the exemption is categorically excluded from further
analysis under Sec. 51.22(c)(25).
Under Sec. 51.22(c)(25), the granting of an exemption from the
requirements of any regulation of Chapter I to 10 CFR is a categorical
exclusion provided that: (i) There is 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 public or 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; and (vi) the requirements from which an exemption is sought
involve: Safeguard plans, and materials control and accounting
inventory scheduling requirements; or involve other requirements of an
administrative, managerial, or organizational nature.
The Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation, has determined that approval of the
exemption request involves no significant hazards consideration because
expanding the requirement to allow a CFH to approve the security
suspension at a defueled shutdown power plant does 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. The exempted
security regulation is unrelated to any operational restriction.
Accordingly, there is no significant change in the types or significant
increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite;
and no significant increase in individual or cumulative public or
occupational radiation exposure. The exempted regulation is not
associated with construction, so there is no significant construction
impact. The exempted regulation does not concern the source term (i.e.,
potential amount of radiation in an accident), nor mitigation. Thus,
there is no significant increase in the potential for, or consequences
of, a radiological accident. The requirement to have a licensed senior
operator approve departure from security actions may be viewed as
involving either safeguards, materials control, or managerial matters.
Therefore, pursuant to Sec. 51.22(b) and (c)(25), no environmental
impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in
connection with the approval of this exemption request.
IV. Conclusions
Accordingly, the Commission has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR
73.5, the exemption is authorized by law and will not endanger life or
property or the common defense and security, and is otherwise in the
public interest. Therefore, the Commission hereby grants the licensee's
request for an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 73.55(p)(1)(i)
and (ii), which otherwise would require suspension of security measures
during emergencies and severe weather, respectively, to be approved by
a licensed senior operator following permanent cessation of operations
and permanent removal of fuel from the reactor vessel. The exemption is
effective upon the docketing of the certification of permanent removal
of fuel in accordance with 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1)(ii).
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of October 2016.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
George A. Wilson,
Deputy Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2016-25989 Filed 10-26-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P