[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 35 (Monday, February 23, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9483-9485]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-03624]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-271; NRC-2015-0034]
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power
Station
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Exemption; issuance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing an
exemption in response to a October 31, 2013, request from Entergy
Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy or the licensee), from certain
regulatory requirements. The exemption would remove the requirement
that a licensed senior operator approve the emergency suspension of
security measures for Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VY) during
certain emergency conditions or during severe weather.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2015-0034 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-2015-0034. 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 in this document
(if that document is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time
that a 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: James Kim, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001; telephone: 301-415-4125; email: [email protected].
I. Background
Entergy is the holder of Renewed Facility Operating License No.
DPR-28. 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 Windham County, Vermont.
By letter dated January 12, 2015, (ADAMS Accession No.
ML15013A426), Entergy submitted to the NRC the certification, in
accordance with Section 50.82(a)(1)(i) and 50.82(a)(1)(ii) of Title 10
of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), indicating it permanently
ceased power operations and that the VY reactor vessel was permanently
defueled.
II. Request/Action
On October 31, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No. ML13317A077), the licensee
requested an exemption from 10 CFR 73.55(p)(1)(i) and 73.55(p)(1)(ii),
pursuant to 10 CFR 73.5, ``Specific exemptions.'' Section
73.55(p)(1)(i) and 73.55(p)(1)(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
[[Page 9484]]
requirements specified in the regulations for the staff directing
suspension of security measures in accordance with 10 CFR
73.55(p)(1)(i) and 73.55(p)(1)(ii), and would remove the requirement
for a licensed senior operator to provide this approval. Instead, the
exemption would allow the suspension of security measures during
certain emergency conditions or during severe weather by a certified
fuel hander (CFH). Portions of the letter dated October 31, 2013,
contain sensitive unclassified nonsafeguards information (security-
related) and, accordingly, have been withheld from public disclosure.
III. Discussion
Historically, the Commission's security rules have long recognized
the potential to suspend security or safeguards measures under certain
conditions. Accordingly, 10 CFR 50.54(x) and (y), first promulgated 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
promulgated, 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
promulgated 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 Commission made a number of proposed rule changes to
address decommissioning. Among the changes were new regulations that
affected 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 Commission 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 judgments.
In the final rule (61 FR 39298; July 29, 1996), the Commission
added the following definition to 10 CFR 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 10 CFR 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 relocated and split the security
suspension requirements from 10 CFR 73.55(a) to 10 CFR 73.55(p)(1)(i)
and (p)(1)(ii). The CFHs were not discussed in the rulemaking, so the
requirements of 10 CFR 73.55(p) to use a licensed senior operator
remain, even for a site that otherwise no longer operates.
However, pursuant to 10 CFR 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 10 CFR 73.55(p)(1)(i) and 10 CFR 73.55(p)(1)(ii)
would remove the requirement that a licensed senior operator approve
the suspension of security measures, under certain emergency conditions
or severe weather. The licensee intends to align these regulations with
10 CFR 50.54(y) by using the authority 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.
Per 10 CFR 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 of 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
Removing the requirement to have a licensed senior operator 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 below.
First, 10 CFR 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 10
CFR 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 underlying purpose of 10 CFR 73.55(p)(1)(i) will
continue to be to protect public health and safety even after the
exemption is granted.
Third, the suspension for severe weather under 10 CFR
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 underlying purpose of 10 CFR
73.55(p)(1)(ii) will continue to be to protect the health and safety of
the security force.
Additionally, by letter dated October 1, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML14162A209), the NRC approved Entergy's CFH training and retraining
program for the VY 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
sufficiently trained and 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 the emergencies or severe weather will not
[[Page 9485]]
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 VY, 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, 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 remove the requirement that a
licensed senior operator 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 Commission when it promulgated 10 CFR
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 VY no longer requires 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 forces during emergencies and
severe weather. The exemption would allow the licensee to make
decisions pursuant to 73.55(p)(1)(i) & (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 of 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 10 CFR 50.54(y). Therefore, the
exemption is in the public interest.
D. Environmental Considerations
The NRC 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 10 CFR
51.22(c)(25).
Under 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25), 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
removing the requirement to have a licensed senior operator 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 10 CFR 51.22(b) and 51.22(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 73.55(p)(1)(ii), which otherwise would require suspension of
security measures during emergencies and severe weather, respectively,
to be approved by a licensed senior operator. The exemption is
effective upon issuance.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day of February 2015.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michele G. Evans,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2015-03624 Filed 2-20-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P