81_FR_18714 81 FR 18652 - Duke Energy Florida, Inc. Crystal River, Unit 3

81 FR 18652 - Duke Energy Florida, Inc. Crystal River, Unit 3

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 62 (March 31, 2016)

Page Range18652-18656
FR Document2016-07305

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing an exemption from the requirement to maintain a specified level of onsite property damage insurance in response to a request from Duke Energy Florida, Inc. (DEF or the licensee) dated December 17, 2015. This exemption would permit the licensee to reduce its onsite property damage insurance from $1.06 billion to $50 million at the Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Station (CR-3) based on the reduced risks and consequences of a nuclear incident at a decommissioning nuclear power reactor.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 62 (Thursday, March 31, 2016)
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 62 (Thursday, March 31, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18652-18656]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-07305]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-302; NRC-2016-0048]


Duke Energy Florida, Inc. Crystal River, Unit 3

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Exemption; issuance.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing an 
exemption from the requirement to maintain a specified level of onsite 
property damage insurance in response to a request from Duke Energy 
Florida, Inc. (DEF or the licensee) dated December 17, 2015. This 
exemption would permit the licensee to reduce its onsite property 
damage insurance from $1.06 billion to $50 million at the Crystal River 
Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Station (CR-3) based on the reduced risks and 
consequences of a nuclear incident at a decommissioning nuclear power 
reactor.

DATES: March 31, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2016-0048 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-2016-0048. 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 on-line 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

[[Page 18653]]

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: John B. Hickman, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3017; email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    The CR-3 facility is a decommissioning power reactor located in 
Citrus County, Florida. The licensee, DEF, is the holder of CR-3 
Facility Operating License No. DPR-72. 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.
    By letter dated February 20, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML13056A005), DEF submitted to the NRC a certification in accordance 
with section 50.82(a)(1)(i) of title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR) indicating it would permanently cease power 
operations, and with 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1)(ii) that it had permanently 
defueled the reactor vessel at CR-3. On May 28, 2011, DEF completed the 
final removal of fuel from the reactor vessel at CR-3. Because CR-3 is 
a permanently shutdown and defueled facility, and in accordance with 
section 50.82(a)(2), DEF is no longer authorized to operate the reactor 
or emplace nuclear fuel into the reactor vessel. The licensee is still 
authorized to possess and store irradiated (i.e., spent) nuclear fuel. 
The spent fuel is currently being stored onsite in a spent fuel pool 
(SFP).

II. Request/Action

    Under 10 CFR 50.12, ``Specific exemptions,'' DEF requested an 
exemption from 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) by a letter dated December 17, 2015 
(ADAMS Accession No. ML15351A490). The exemption from the requirements 
of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) would permit DEF to reduce the amount of its 
onsite property damage insurance from $1.06 billion to $50 million.
    The regulation in 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) requires each licensee to have 
and maintain onsite property damage insurance to stabilize and 
decontaminate the reactor and reactor site in the event of an accident. 
The onsite insurance coverage must be either $1.06 billion or whatever 
amount of insurance is generally available from private sources 
(whichever is less).
    The licensee states that the risk and consequences of an accident 
at a permanently shutdown and defueled reactor are much less than the 
risk and consequences from an accident at an operating power reactor. 
In addition, since reactor operation is no longer authorized at CR-3, 
no events could occur that would require the stabilization of reactor 
conditions after an accident. Similarly, the risk of an accident that 
would result in significant onsite contamination at CR-3 is also much 
lower than the risk of such an event at operating reactors. Therefore, 
DEF is requesting an exemption from 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) to reduce its 
onsite property damage insurance from $1.06 billion to $50 million, 
commensurate with the reduced risk of an accident at the permanently 
shutdown and defueled CR-3 site.

III. Discussion

    Under 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 when: (1) 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) any of the 
special circumstances listed in 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2) are present.
    The financial protection limits of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) were 
established after the Three Mile Island accident in 1979 out of concern 
that licensees may be unable to financially cover onsite cleanup costs 
in the event of a major nuclear accident. The NRC based the $1.06 
billion coverage amount requirement on an analysis of an accident at a 
nuclear reactor operating at power that results in a large fission 
product release and requires significant resource expenditures to 
stabilize the reactor conditions and ultimately decontaminate and 
remediate the site. These activities would be similar to the 
stabilization and cleanup activities at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear 
power facility following the damage from a severe earthquake and 
tsunami.
    The NRC developed these cost estimates based on the spectrum of 
postulated accidents for an operating nuclear reactor and the 
consequences of a release of radioactive material from the reactor. 
Although the risk of an accident at an operating reactor is very low, 
the consequences can be large. In an operating plant, the high 
temperature and pressure of the reactor coolant system (RCS), as well 
as the inventory of relatively short-lived radionuclides, contribute to 
both the risk and consequences of an accident. With the permanent 
cessation of reactor operations at CR-3 (i.e., the reactor, RCS, and 
supporting systems no longer operate) and the permanent removal of the 
fuel from the reactor core, postulated accidents involving failure or 
malfunction of the reactor, RCS, or supporting systems are no longer 
possible. Additionally, these systems and components cannot support the 
storage of the irradiated fuel.
    During reactor decommissioning, the principal radiological risks 
are associated with the storage of spent fuel onsite. In its December 
17, 2015, exemption request, DEF discusses both design-basis and 
beyond-design-basis events involving irradiated fuel stored in the SFP. 
The licensee states that there are no possible design-basis events at 
CR-3 that could result in a radiological release exceeding the limits 
established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) early-
phase Protective Action Guidelines (PAG) of 1 Roentgen Equivalent Man 
(REM) at the exclusion area boundary. The only accident that might lead 
to a significant radiological release at the decommissioning reactor is 
a zirconium fire. The zirconium fire scenario is a postulated, but 
highly unlikely, beyond-design-basis accident scenario that involves 
loss of all water inventory from the SFP, resulting in a significant 
heat-up of the spent fuel, and culminating in substantial zirconium 
cladding oxidation and fuel damage. The probability of a zirconium fire 
scenario is related to the decay heat of the irradiated fuel stored in 
the SFP. Therefore, the risks from a zirconium fire scenario continue 
to decrease as a function of the time that CR-3 has been permanently 
shut down.
    The licensee provided a detailed analysis of hypothetical beyond-
design-basis accidents that could result in a radiological release at 
CR-3 in its September 6, 2013, emergency planning-related license 
amendment and exemption requests (ADAMS Accession No. ML13274A584). One 
of these beyond-design-basis accidents involves a complete loss of SFP 
water inventory, where cooling of the spent fuel would be primarily 
accomplished by natural circulation of air through the uncovered spent 
fuel assemblies. The licensee's analysis of this accident shows that as 
of September 26, 2013, air-cooling of the spent fuel assemblies will be 
sufficient to keep the fuel within a safe temperature range 
indefinitely without fuel damage or radiological

[[Page 18654]]

release. This is important because the NRC staff has previously 
authorized a lesser amount of onsite property damage insurance coverage 
based on analysis of the zirconium fire risk. In SECY-96-256, ``Changes 
to Financial Protection Requirements for Permanently Shutdown Nuclear 
Power Reactors, 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) and 10 CFR 140.11,'' dated December 
17, 1996 (ADAMS Accession No. ML15062A483), the staff recommended 
changes to the power reactor insurance regulations that would allow 
licensees to lower onsite insurance levels to $50 million upon 
demonstration that the fuel stored in the SFP can be air-cooled. In its 
Staff Requirements Memorandum to SECY-96-256, dated January 28, 1997 
(ADAMS Accession No. ML15062A454), the Commission supported the staff's 
recommendation that, among other things, would allow permanently 
shutdown power reactor licensees to reduce commercial onsite property 
damage insurance coverage to $50 million when the licensee was able to 
demonstrate the technical criterion that the spent fuel could be air-
cooled if the SFP was drained of water. The staff has used this 
technical criterion to grant similar exemptions to other 
decommissioning reactor licensees (e.g., Maine Yankee Atomic Power 
Station, published in the Federal Register on January 19, 1999 (64 FR 
2920); Zion Nuclear Power Station, published in the Federal Register on 
December 28, 1999 (64 FR 72700); and Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant, 
published in the Federal Register on April 13, 2015 (80 FR 19697)). The 
NRC based these prior exemptions on the licensees' demonstrating that 
the SFP could be air-cooled, consistent with the technical criterion 
discussed above.
    In SECY-00-0145, ``Integrated Rulemaking Plan for Nuclear Power 
Plant Decommissioning,'' dated June 28, 2000, and SECY-01-0100, 
``Policy Issues Related to Safeguards, Insurance, and Emergency 
Preparedness Regulations at Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants 
Storing Fuel in the Spent Fuel Pools,'' dated June 4, 2001 (ADAMS 
Accession Nos. ML003721626 and ML011450420, respectively), the NRC 
staff discussed additional information concerning SFP zirconium fire 
risks at decommissioning reactors and associated implications for 
onsite property damage insurance. As discussed in SECY-00-0145, 
providing an analysis of when the spent fuel stored in the SFP is 
capable of air-cooling is one measure that a licensee can use to 
demonstrate that the probability of a zirconium fire is exceedingly 
low. More recently, as discussed in SECY-01-0100, the staff has used an 
additional analysis that bounds an incomplete drain down of the SFP 
water or some other catastrophic event (such as a complete drainage of 
the SFP with rearrangement of spent fuel rack geometry and/or the 
addition of rubble to the SFP). The analysis postulates that decay heat 
transfer from the spent fuel via conduction, convection, or radiation 
would be impeded. This analysis is often referred to as an adiabatic 
heatup analysis.
    The DEF analyses, as referenced in DEF's December 15, 2015, 
exemption request, demonstrate that under conditions where the SFP 
water inventory has drained and only air-cooling of the stored 
irradiated fuel is available, there is reasonable assurance that as of 
September 26, 2013, the CR-3 spent fuel will remain at temperatures far 
below those associated with a significant radiological release. In 
addition, the licensee has also provided an adiabatic heatup analysis, 
demonstrating that as of September 26, 2013, there will be at least 
19.7 hours after the loss of all means of cooling (both air and/or 
water) before the spent fuel cladding would reach a temperature where 
the potential for a significant offsite radiological release could 
occur. The licensee states that should all means to cool the spent fuel 
be lost, 19.7 hours is sufficient time for personnel to respond with 
additional resources, equipment, and capability to restore cooling to 
the SFP, even after a non-credible, catastrophic event.
    In the NRC's March 30, 2015, safety evaluation (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML15058A906) of the licensee's request for exemptions from certain 
emergency planning requirements, the NRC staff assessed the DEF 
accident analyses associated with the radiological risks from a 
zirconium fire at the permanently shutdown and defueled CR-3 site. The 
staff has confirmed that under conditions where cooling airflow can 
develop, suitably conservative calculations indicate that as of 
September 26, 2013, the fuel will remain at temperatures where the 
cladding will be undamaged for an unlimited period. For the very 
unlikely beyond-design-basis accident scenario, where the SFP coolant 
inventory is lost in such a manner that all methods of heat removal 
from the spent fuel are no longer available, there will be a minimum of 
19.7 hours from the initiation of the accident until the cladding 
reaches a temperature where offsite radiological release might occur. 
The staff found that 19.7 hours was sufficient time to support 
deployment of mitigation equipment to prevent the zirconium cladding 
from reaching a point of rapid oxidation. Even more time would be 
available now, given that more than two years have passed since the 
analysis was performed and the risks from a zirconium fire scenario 
continue to decrease as a function of the time that the fuel has cooled 
since CR-3 permanently shut down.
    In response to a request for additional information related to the 
licensee's request for exemptions from certain emergency planning 
requirements, the licensee also provided an analysis of a postulated 
airborne dispersal of radioactive waste resin upon dropping a High 
Integrity Container (HIC) outside the power block. Although an airborne 
release is not expected to occur with a drop, or while in storage 
awaiting shipment, due to the low flammability and reactivity of the 
spent resin, a release is nevertheless postulated. The event is based 
on a release of radioactive material with activity and isotopic mix 
taken from the resin shipments that occurred during a recent 5\1/2\ 
year period. The licensee reviewed resin shipments made from 2008 
through June 2013 and obtained the isotopic distribution (except for 
Cobalt-60) from the shipment with the highest overall activity. Cobalt-
60 activity was taken from a different shipment to assure that the 
highest activity was used and the dose was maximized. This created a 
composite maximum shipment having a total activity of approximately 116 
curies, which is approximately twice the activity of the average 
shipment made during this period. The analysis assumed a release of 10 
percent of the total radioactive material inventory and that the 
release would occur outside of the CR-3 site's Auxiliary Building on 
the south berm. The analysis of the dropped spent resin HIC 
consequences indicates that the dose would be 40 mrem total effective 
dose equivalent at the site boundary over a 2-hour period, which is 
well below the PAG limit of 1 rem.
    In SECY-96-256, the NRC staff provided its basis as to why it 
considers $50 million to be an adequate level of onsite property damage 
insurance for a decommissioning reactor, once the spent fuel in the SFP 
is no longer susceptible to a zirconium fire. The staff has postulated 
that there is still a potential for other radiological incidents at a 
decommissioning reactor that could result in significant onsite 
contamination besides a zirconium fire. In SECY-96-256, the NRC staff 
cited the rupture of a large contaminated liquid storage tank, causing 
soil contamination

[[Page 18655]]

and potential groundwater contamination, as the most costly postulated 
event to decontaminate and remediate (other than a SFP zirconium fire). 
The NRC determined that the postulated large liquid radiological waste 
storage tank rupture event would have a bounding onsite cleanup cost of 
approximately $50 million.
    The NRC staff has found that DEF's proposed reduction in onsite 
property damage insurance coverage to a level of $50 million is 
consistent with SECY-96-256. In addition, the staff notes that there is 
a precedent of granting a similar exemption to other permanently 
shutdown and defueled power reactor licensees. As previously stated, 
the staff concluded that as of September 26, 2013, sufficient 
irradiated fuel decay time has elapsed at CR-3 to decrease to 
negligible levels the probability of an onsite radiological release 
from a postulated zirconium fire accident. In addition, the licensee's 
proposal to reduce onsite insurance to a level of $50 million is 
consistent with the maximum estimated cleanup costs for the recovery 
from the rupture of a large liquid radiological waste storage tank.

IV. Regulatory Requirements

A. Authorized by Law

    Under 10 CFR 50.12, the Commission may grant exemptions from the 
regulations in 10 CFR part 50 that the Commission determines are 
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. No Undue Risk to Public Health and Safety

    The NRC established the onsite property damage insurance 
requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) to provide financial assurance that 
following a significant nuclear incident, onsite conditions could be 
stabilized and the site decontaminated. The requirements of 10 CFR 
50.54(w)(1) and the existing level of onsite insurance coverage for CR-
3 are predicated on the assumption that the reactor is operating. 
However, CR-3 is a permanently shutdown and defueled facility. As 
explained in section III of this document, the permanently defueled 
status of the facility has resulted in a significant reduction in the 
number and severity of potential accidents, and correspondingly, a 
significant reduction in the potential for and severity of onsite 
property damage. The proposed reduction in the amount of onsite 
insurance coverage does not impact the probability or consequences of 
potential accidents. The proposed level of insurance coverage is 
commensurate with the reduced risk and reduced cost consequences of 
potential nuclear accidents at CR-3. Therefore, the NRC staff concludes 
that granting the requested exemption will not present an undue risk to 
the health and safety of the public.

C. Consistent With the Common Defense and Security

    The proposed exemption would not eliminate any requirements 
associated with physical protection of the site and would not adversely 
affect DEF's ability to physically secure the site or protect special 
nuclear material. Physical security measures at CR-3 are not affected 
by the requested exemption. Therefore, the proposed exemption is 
consistent with the common defense and security.

D. Special Circumstances

    Under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), special circumstances are present if 
the application 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. The underlying purpose of 
10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) is to provide reasonable assurance that adequate 
funds will be available to stabilize conditions and cover onsite 
cleanup costs associated with site decontamination, following an 
accident that results in the release of a significant amount of 
radiological material. As explained in section III of this document, 
because CR-3 is permanently shut down and defueled, the radiological 
consequences of design-basis accidents or other credible events at CR-3 
cannot possibly exceed the limits of the EPA PAGs at the exclusion area 
boundary. The licensee has performed site-specific analyses of highly 
unlikely, beyond-design-basis zirconium fire accidents involving the 
stored irradiated fuel in the SFP. The analyses show that as of 
September 26, 2013, the probabilities of such an accident are minimal. 
The NRC staff's evaluation of the licensee's analyses confirm this 
conclusion.
    The NRC staff also finds that DEF's proposed $50 million level of 
onsite insurance is consistent with the bounding cleanup and 
decontamination cost, as discussed in SECY-96-256, to account for 
hypothetical rupture of a large liquid radiological waste tank at the 
CR-3 site, should such an event occur. Therefore, the staff concludes 
that the application of the current requirements in 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) 
to maintain $1.06 billion in onsite insurance coverage is not necessary 
to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule for the permanently 
shutdown and defueled CR-3 reactor.
    Under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(iii), special circumstances are present 
whenever compliance would result in undue hardship or other costs that 
are significantly in excess of those contemplated when the regulation 
was adopted, or that are significantly in excess of those incurred by 
others similarly situated. The NRC staff concludes that if the licensee 
were required to continue to maintain an onsite insurance level of 
$1.06 billion, the associated insurance premiums would be in excess of 
those necessary and commensurate with the radiological contamination 
risks posed by the site. In addition, such insurance levels would be 
significantly in excess of other decommissioning reactor facilities 
that have been granted similar exemptions by the NRC.
    The NRC staff finds that DEF's compliance with the existing rule 
would result in an undue hardship or other costs that are significantly 
in excess of those contemplated when the regulation was adopted and are 
significantly in excess of those incurred by others similarly situated.
    Therefore, the special circumstances required by 10 CFR 
50.12(a)(2)(ii) and 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(iii) exist.

E. Environmental Considerations

    The NRC approval of the exemption from insurance or indemnity 
requirements belongs to a category of actions that the Commission, by 
rule or regulation, has declared to be a categorical exclusion from 
further environmental analysis, 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 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25), granting an exemption from the 
requirements of any regulation in Chapter I of 10 CFR is a categorical 
exclusion provided that: (1) There is no significant hazards 
consideration; (2) there is no significant change in the types or 
significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be 
released offsite; (3) there is no significant increase in individual or 
cumulative public or occupational radiation exposure; (4) there is no 
significant construction impact; (5) there is no significant increase 
in the potential for or consequences from

[[Page 18656]]

radiological accidents; and (6) the requirements from which an 
exemption is sought involve: Surety, insurance, or indemnity 
requirements.
    Utilizing the standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92, the NRC has 
determined that approval of the exemption request involves no 
significant hazards consideration because reducing the licensee's 
onsite property damage insurance for CR-3 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 
financial protection regulation is unrelated to the operation of CR-3. 
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. 
Therefore, there is no significant increase in the potential for, or 
consequences of, a radiological accident. In addition, there would be 
no significant impacts to biota, water resources, historic properties, 
cultural resources, or socioeconomic conditions in the region. The 
requirement for onsite property damage insurance may be viewed as 
involving surety, insurance, or indemnity 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.

V. Conclusions

    Accordingly, the Commission has determined that pursuant to 10 CFR 
50.12(a), the requested 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 DEF 
an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1), to permit the 
licensee to reduce its onsite property damage insurance to a level of 
$50 million.
    The exemption is effective upon issuance.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of March 2016.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John R. Tappert,
Director, Division of Decommissioning, Uranium Recovery, and Waste 
Programs, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2016-07305 Filed 3-30-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P



                                                  18652                        Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 62 / Thursday, March 31, 2016 / Notices

                                                  Clearance Officer, David Cullison,                      be performed on an on-going basis, and                  Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day
                                                  Office of the Chief Information Officer,                reporting of transfer of byproduct                    of March 2016.
                                                  U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,                     material must be reported every                         For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
                                                  Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone:                   calendar year, and in some cases, every               Brenda Miles,
                                                  (301) 415–2084; email:                                  calendar quarter.                                     Acting NRC Clearance Officer, Office of the
                                                  INFOCOLLECTS.Resource@NRC.GOV.                             6. Who will be required or asked to                Chief Information Officer.
                                                                                                          respond: All specific licensees who                   [FR Doc. 2016–07212 Filed 3–30–16; 8:45 am]
                                                  B. Submitting Comments                                  manufacture or initially transfer items               BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
                                                    The NRC cautions you not to include                   containing byproduct material for sale
                                                  identifying or contact information in                   or distribution to general licensees, or
                                                  comment submissions that you do not                     persons exempt from licensing, medical                NUCLEAR REGULATORY
                                                  want to be publicly disclosed in your                   use product distributors to specific                  COMMISSION
                                                  comment submission. All comment                         licensees, and those requesting a
                                                  submissions are posted at http://                       certificate of registration for a sealed              [Docket No. 50–302; NRC–2016–0048]
                                                  www.regulations.gov and entered into                    source and/or device.
                                                                                                             7. The estimated number of annual                  Duke Energy Florida, Inc. Crystal
                                                  ADAMS. Comment submissions are not
                                                                                                          responses: 3,937 [2,807 responses (446                River, Unit 3
                                                  routinely edited to remove identifying
                                                  or contact information.                                 NRC responses + 2,361 Agreement State                 AGENCY:  Nuclear Regulatory
                                                    If you are requesting or aggregating                  responses)] + 535 recordkeepers (172                  Commission.
                                                  comments from other persons for                         NRC + 363 Agreement State) + 595                      ACTION: Exemption; issuance.
                                                  submission to the OMB, then you                         third-party recordkeepers (186 NRC +
                                                  should inform those persons not to                      409 Agreement State)].                                SUMMARY:   The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
                                                  include identifying or contact                             8. The estimated number of annual                  Commission (NRC) is issuing an
                                                  information that they do not want to be                 respondents: 713 (204 NRC licensees,                  exemption from the requirement to
                                                  publicly disclosed in their comment                     registration certificate holders and 509              maintain a specified level of onsite
                                                  submission. Your request should state                   Agreement State licensees and                         property damage insurance in response
                                                  that comment submissions are not                        registration certificate holders).                    to a request from Duke Energy Florida,
                                                  routinely edited to remove such                            9. An estimate of the total number of              Inc. (DEF or the licensee) dated
                                                  information before making the comment                   hours needed annually to comply with                  December 17, 2015. This exemption
                                                  submissions available to the public or                  the information collection requirement                would permit the licensee to reduce its
                                                  entering the comment into ADAMS.                        or request: 164,608 (13,139 reporting +               onsite property damage insurance from
                                                                                                          1,257 recordkeeping + 150,212 third-                  $1.06 billion to $50 million at the
                                                  II. Background                                          party).                                               Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating
                                                     Under the provisions of the                             10. Abstract: Part 32 of title 10 of the
                                                                                                                                                                Station (CR–3) based on the reduced
                                                  Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44                     Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR)
                                                                                                                                                                risks and consequences of a nuclear
                                                  U.S.C. Chapter 35), the NRC recently                    establishes requirements for specific
                                                                                                                                                                incident at a decommissioning nuclear
                                                  submitted a request for renewal of an                   licenses for the introduction of
                                                                                                                                                                power reactor.
                                                  existing collection of information to                   byproduct material into products or
                                                                                                          materials and transfer of the products or             DATES: March 31, 2016.
                                                  OMB for review titled, ‘‘Specific
                                                  Domestic Licenses to Manufacture or                     materials to general licensees, or                    ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID
                                                  Transfer Certain Items Containing                       persons exempt from licensing, medical                NRC–2016–0048 when contacting the
                                                  Byproduct Material.’’ The NRC hereby                    use product distributors to specific                  NRC about the availability of
                                                  informs potential respondents that an                   licensees, and those requesting a                     information regarding this document.
                                                  agency may not conduct or sponsor, and                  certificate of registration for a sealed              You may obtain publicly-available
                                                  that a person is not required to respond                source and/or device. It also prescribes              information related to this document
                                                  to, a collection of information unless it               requirements governing holders of the                 using any of the following methods:
                                                  displays a currently valid OMB control                  specific licenses. Some of the                           • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
                                                  number. The NRC published a Federal                     requirements are for information which                http://www.regulations.gov and search
                                                  Register notice with a 60-day comment                   must be submitted in an application for               for Docket ID NRC–2016–0048. Address
                                                  period on this information collection on                a certificate of registration for a sealed            questions about NRC dockets to Carol
                                                  September 10, 2015 (80 FR 54596).                       source and/or device, records which                   Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463;
                                                     1. The title of the information                      must be kept, reports which must be                   email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For
                                                  collection: 10 CFR part 32, ‘‘Specific                  submitted, and information which must                 technical questions, contact the
                                                  Domestic Licenses to Manufacture or                     be forwarded to general licensees and                 individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
                                                  Transfer Certain Items Containing                       persons exempt from licensing. As                     INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
                                                  Byproduct Material.’’                                   mentioned, 10 CFR part 32 also                        document.
                                                     2. OMB approval number: 3150–0001.                   prescribes requirements for the issuance                 • NRC’s Agencywide Documents
                                                     3. Type of submission: Extension.                    of certificates of registration (concerning           Access and Management System
                                                     4. The form number if applicable:                    radiation safety information about a                  (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-
                                                  NRC Form 653, NRC Form 653A, and                        product) to manufacturers or initial                  available documents on-line in the
                                                  NRC Form 653B.                                          transferors of sealed sources and                     ADAMS Public Documents collection at
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                     5. How often the collection is required              devices. Submission or retention of the               http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
                                                  or requested: There is a one-time                       information is mandatory for persons                  adams.html. To begin the search, select
                                                  submittal of information to receive a                   subject to the 10 CFR part 32                         ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then
                                                  certificate of registration for a sealed                requirements. The information is used                 select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS
                                                  source and/or device. Certificates of                   by the NRC to make licensing and other                Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS,
                                                  registration for sealed sources and/or                  regulatory determinations concerning                  please contact the NRC’s Public
                                                  devices can be amended at any time. In                  the use of radioactive byproduct                      Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
                                                  addition, licensee recordkeeping must                   material in products and devices.                     1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   19:09 Mar 30, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00089   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM   31MRN1


                                                                               Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 62 / Thursday, March 31, 2016 / Notices                                            18653

                                                  email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The                      site in the event of an accident. The                 and pressure of the reactor coolant
                                                  ADAMS accession number for each                         onsite insurance coverage must be either              system (RCS), as well as the inventory
                                                  document referenced in this document                    $1.06 billion or whatever amount of                   of relatively short-lived radionuclides,
                                                  (if that document is available in                       insurance is generally available from                 contribute to both the risk and
                                                  ADAMS) is provided the first time that                  private sources (whichever is less).                  consequences of an accident. With the
                                                  a document is referenced.                                  The licensee states that the risk and              permanent cessation of reactor
                                                     • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and                     consequences of an accident at a                      operations at CR–3 (i.e., the reactor,
                                                  purchase copies of public documents at                  permanently shutdown and defueled                     RCS, and supporting systems no longer
                                                  the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One                         reactor are much less than the risk and               operate) and the permanent removal of
                                                  White Flint North, 11555 Rockville                      consequences from an accident at an                   the fuel from the reactor core,
                                                  Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.                        operating power reactor. In addition,                 postulated accidents involving failure or
                                                  FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
                                                                                                          since reactor operation is no longer                  malfunction of the reactor, RCS, or
                                                  B. Hickman, Office of Nuclear Material                  authorized at CR–3, no events could                   supporting systems are no longer
                                                  Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear                     occur that would require the                          possible. Additionally, these systems
                                                  Regulatory Commission, Washington,                      stabilization of reactor conditions after             and components cannot support the
                                                  DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415–                      an accident. Similarly, the risk of an                storage of the irradiated fuel.
                                                  3017; email: John.Hickman@nrc.gov.                      accident that would result in significant                During reactor decommissioning, the
                                                                                                          onsite contamination at CR–3 is also                  principal radiological risks are
                                                  SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:                              much lower than the risk of such an                   associated with the storage of spent fuel
                                                  I. Background                                           event at operating reactors. Therefore,               onsite. In its December 17, 2015,
                                                                                                          DEF is requesting an exemption from 10                exemption request, DEF discusses both
                                                     The CR–3 facility is a                               CFR 50.54(w)(1) to reduce its onsite                  design-basis and beyond-design-basis
                                                  decommissioning power reactor located                   property damage insurance from $1.06                  events involving irradiated fuel stored
                                                  in Citrus County, Florida. The licensee,                billion to $50 million, commensurate                  in the SFP. The licensee states that there
                                                  DEF, is the holder of CR–3 Facility                     with the reduced risk of an accident at               are no possible design-basis events at
                                                  Operating License No. DPR–72. The                       the permanently shutdown and                          CR–3 that could result in a radiological
                                                  license provides, among other things,                   defueled CR–3 site.                                   release exceeding the limits established
                                                  that the facility is subject to all rules,                                                                    by the U.S. Environmental Protection
                                                  regulations, and orders of the NRC now                  III. Discussion
                                                                                                                                                                Agency’s (EPA) early-phase Protective
                                                  or hereafter in effect.                                    Under 10 CFR 50.12, the Commission                 Action Guidelines (PAG) of 1 Roentgen
                                                     By letter dated February 20, 2013                    may, upon application by any interested               Equivalent Man (REM) at the exclusion
                                                  (ADAMS Accession No. ML13056A005),                      person or upon its own initiative, grant              area boundary. The only accident that
                                                  DEF submitted to the NRC a                              exemptions from the requirements of 10                might lead to a significant radiological
                                                  certification in accordance with section                CFR part 50 when: (1) The exemptions                  release at the decommissioning reactor
                                                  50.82(a)(1)(i) of title 10 of the Code of               are authorized by law, will not present               is a zirconium fire. The zirconium fire
                                                  Federal Regulations (10 CFR) indicating                 an undue risk to public health or safety,             scenario is a postulated, but highly
                                                  it would permanently cease power                        and are consistent with the common                    unlikely, beyond-design-basis accident
                                                  operations, and with 10 CFR                             defense and security; and (2) any of the              scenario that involves loss of all water
                                                  50.82(a)(1)(ii) that it had permanently                 special circumstances listed in 10 CFR                inventory from the SFP, resulting in a
                                                  defueled the reactor vessel at CR–3. On                 50.12(a)(2) are present.                              significant heat-up of the spent fuel, and
                                                  May 28, 2011, DEF completed the final                      The financial protection limits of 10              culminating in substantial zirconium
                                                  removal of fuel from the reactor vessel                 CFR 50.54(w)(1) were established after                cladding oxidation and fuel damage.
                                                  at CR–3. Because CR–3 is a permanently                  the Three Mile Island accident in 1979                The probability of a zirconium fire
                                                  shutdown and defueled facility, and in                  out of concern that licensees may be                  scenario is related to the decay heat of
                                                  accordance with section 50.82(a)(2),                    unable to financially cover onsite                    the irradiated fuel stored in the SFP.
                                                  DEF is no longer authorized to operate                  cleanup costs in the event of a major                 Therefore, the risks from a zirconium
                                                  the reactor or emplace nuclear fuel into                nuclear accident. The NRC based the                   fire scenario continue to decrease as a
                                                  the reactor vessel. The licensee is still               $1.06 billion coverage amount                         function of the time that CR–3 has been
                                                  authorized to possess and store                         requirement on an analysis of an                      permanently shut down.
                                                  irradiated (i.e., spent) nuclear fuel. The              accident at a nuclear reactor operating at               The licensee provided a detailed
                                                  spent fuel is currently being stored                    power that results in a large fission                 analysis of hypothetical beyond-design-
                                                  onsite in a spent fuel pool (SFP).                      product release and requires significant              basis accidents that could result in a
                                                                                                          resource expenditures to stabilize the                radiological release at CR–3 in its
                                                  II. Request/Action
                                                                                                          reactor conditions and ultimately                     September 6, 2013, emergency
                                                     Under 10 CFR 50.12, ‘‘Specific                       decontaminate and remediate the site.                 planning-related license amendment
                                                  exemptions,’’ DEF requested an                          These activities would be similar to the              and exemption requests (ADAMS
                                                  exemption from 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) by                    stabilization and cleanup activities at               Accession No. ML13274A584). One of
                                                  a letter dated December 17, 2015                        the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power                   these beyond-design-basis accidents
                                                  (ADAMS Accession No. ML15351A490).                      facility following the damage from a                  involves a complete loss of SFP water
                                                  The exemption from the requirements of                  severe earthquake and tsunami.                        inventory, where cooling of the spent
                                                  10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) would permit DEF                        The NRC developed these cost                       fuel would be primarily accomplished
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                  to reduce the amount of its onsite                      estimates based on the spectrum of                    by natural circulation of air through the
                                                  property damage insurance from $1.06                    postulated accidents for an operating                 uncovered spent fuel assemblies. The
                                                  billion to $50 million.                                 nuclear reactor and the consequences of               licensee’s analysis of this accident
                                                     The regulation in 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1)                 a release of radioactive material from                shows that as of September 26, 2013,
                                                  requires each licensee to have and                      the reactor. Although the risk of an                  air-cooling of the spent fuel assemblies
                                                  maintain onsite property damage                         accident at an operating reactor is very              will be sufficient to keep the fuel within
                                                  insurance to stabilize and                              low, the consequences can be large. In                a safe temperature range indefinitely
                                                  decontaminate the reactor and reactor                   an operating plant, the high temperature              without fuel damage or radiological


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   19:09 Mar 30, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00090   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM   31MRN1


                                                  18654                        Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 62 / Thursday, March 31, 2016 / Notices

                                                  release. This is important because the                  exceedingly low. More recently, as                    sufficient time to support deployment of
                                                  NRC staff has previously authorized a                   discussed in SECY–01–0100, the staff                  mitigation equipment to prevent the
                                                  lesser amount of onsite property damage                 has used an additional analysis that                  zirconium cladding from reaching a
                                                  insurance coverage based on analysis of                 bounds an incomplete drain down of                    point of rapid oxidation. Even more
                                                  the zirconium fire risk. In SECY–96–                    the SFP water or some other                           time would be available now, given that
                                                  256, ‘‘Changes to Financial Protection                  catastrophic event (such as a complete                more than two years have passed since
                                                  Requirements for Permanently                            drainage of the SFP with rearrangement                the analysis was performed and the
                                                  Shutdown Nuclear Power Reactors, 10                     of spent fuel rack geometry and/or the                risks from a zirconium fire scenario
                                                  CFR 50.54(w)(1) and 10 CFR 140.11,’’                    addition of rubble to the SFP). The                   continue to decrease as a function of the
                                                  dated December 17, 1996 (ADAMS                          analysis postulates that decay heat                   time that the fuel has cooled since CR–
                                                  Accession No. ML15062A483), the staff                   transfer from the spent fuel via                      3 permanently shut down.
                                                  recommended changes to the power                        conduction, convection, or radiation                     In response to a request for additional
                                                  reactor insurance regulations that would                would be impeded. This analysis is                    information related to the licensee’s
                                                  allow licensees to lower onsite                         often referred to as an adiabatic heatup              request for exemptions from certain
                                                  insurance levels to $50 million upon                    analysis.                                             emergency planning requirements, the
                                                  demonstration that the fuel stored in the                  The DEF analyses, as referenced in                 licensee also provided an analysis of a
                                                  SFP can be air-cooled. In its Staff                     DEF’s December 15, 2015, exemption                    postulated airborne dispersal of
                                                  Requirements Memorandum to SECY–                        request, demonstrate that under                       radioactive waste resin upon dropping a
                                                  96–256, dated January 28, 1997                          conditions where the SFP water                        High Integrity Container (HIC) outside
                                                  (ADAMS Accession No. ML15062A454),                      inventory has drained and only air-                   the power block. Although an airborne
                                                  the Commission supported the staff’s                    cooling of the stored irradiated fuel is              release is not expected to occur with a
                                                  recommendation that, among other                        available, there is reasonable assurance              drop, or while in storage awaiting
                                                  things, would allow permanently                         that as of September 26, 2013, the CR–                shipment, due to the low flammability
                                                  shutdown power reactor licensees to                     3 spent fuel will remain at temperatures              and reactivity of the spent resin, a
                                                  reduce commercial onsite property                       far below those associated with a                     release is nevertheless postulated. The
                                                  damage insurance coverage to $50                        significant radiological release. In                  event is based on a release of radioactive
                                                  million when the licensee was able to                   addition, the licensee has also provided              material with activity and isotopic mix
                                                  demonstrate the technical criterion that                an adiabatic heatup analysis,                         taken from the resin shipments that
                                                  the spent fuel could be air-cooled if the               demonstrating that as of September 26,                occurred during a recent 51⁄2 year
                                                  SFP was drained of water. The staff has                 2013, there will be at least 19.7 hours               period. The licensee reviewed resin
                                                  used this technical criterion to grant                  after the loss of all means of cooling                shipments made from 2008 through
                                                  similar exemptions to other                             (both air and/or water) before the spent              June 2013 and obtained the isotopic
                                                  decommissioning reactor licensees (e.g.,                fuel cladding would reach a temperature               distribution (except for Cobalt-60) from
                                                  Maine Yankee Atomic Power Station,                      where the potential for a significant                 the shipment with the highest overall
                                                  published in the Federal Register on                    offsite radiological release could occur.             activity. Cobalt-60 activity was taken
                                                  January 19, 1999 (64 FR 2920); Zion                     The licensee states that should all                   from a different shipment to assure that
                                                  Nuclear Power Station, published in the                 means to cool the spent fuel be lost, 19.7            the highest activity was used and the
                                                  Federal Register on December 28, 1999                   hours is sufficient time for personnel to             dose was maximized. This created a
                                                                                                          respond with additional resources,                    composite maximum shipment having a
                                                  (64 FR 72700); and Kewaunee Nuclear
                                                                                                          equipment, and capability to restore                  total activity of approximately 116
                                                  Power Plant, published in the Federal
                                                                                                          cooling to the SFP, even after a non-                 curies, which is approximately twice
                                                  Register on April 13, 2015 (80 FR
                                                                                                          credible, catastrophic event.                         the activity of the average shipment
                                                  19697)). The NRC based these prior                         In the NRC’s March 30, 2015, safety                made during this period. The analysis
                                                  exemptions on the licensees’                            evaluation (ADAMS Accession No.                       assumed a release of 10 percent of the
                                                  demonstrating that the SFP could be air-                ML15058A906) of the licensee’s request                total radioactive material inventory and
                                                  cooled, consistent with the technical                   for exemptions from certain emergency                 that the release would occur outside of
                                                  criterion discussed above.                              planning requirements, the NRC staff                  the CR–3 site’s Auxiliary Building on
                                                     In SECY–00–0145, ‘‘Integrated                        assessed the DEF accident analyses                    the south berm. The analysis of the
                                                  Rulemaking Plan for Nuclear Power                       associated with the radiological risks                dropped spent resin HIC consequences
                                                  Plant Decommissioning,’’ dated June 28,                 from a zirconium fire at the                          indicates that the dose would be 40
                                                  2000, and SECY–01–0100, ‘‘Policy                        permanently shutdown and defueled                     mrem total effective dose equivalent at
                                                  Issues Related to Safeguards, Insurance,                CR–3 site. The staff has confirmed that               the site boundary over a 2-hour period,
                                                  and Emergency Preparedness                              under conditions where cooling airflow                which is well below the PAG limit of 1
                                                  Regulations at Decommissioning                          can develop, suitably conservative                    rem.
                                                  Nuclear Power Plants Storing Fuel in                    calculations indicate that as of                         In SECY–96–256, the NRC staff
                                                  the Spent Fuel Pools,’’ dated June 4,                   September 26, 2013, the fuel will                     provided its basis as to why it considers
                                                  2001 (ADAMS Accession Nos.                              remain at temperatures where the                      $50 million to be an adequate level of
                                                  ML003721626 and ML011450420,                            cladding will be undamaged for an                     onsite property damage insurance for a
                                                  respectively), the NRC staff discussed                  unlimited period. For the very unlikely               decommissioning reactor, once the
                                                  additional information concerning SFP                   beyond-design-basis accident scenario,                spent fuel in the SFP is no longer
                                                  zirconium fire risks at decommissioning                 where the SFP coolant inventory is lost               susceptible to a zirconium fire. The staff
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                  reactors and associated implications for                in such a manner that all methods of                  has postulated that there is still a
                                                  onsite property damage insurance. As                    heat removal from the spent fuel are no               potential for other radiological incidents
                                                  discussed in SECY–00–0145, providing                    longer available, there will be a                     at a decommissioning reactor that could
                                                  an analysis of when the spent fuel                      minimum of 19.7 hours from the                        result in significant onsite
                                                  stored in the SFP is capable of air-                    initiation of the accident until the                  contamination besides a zirconium fire.
                                                  cooling is one measure that a licensee                  cladding reaches a temperature where                  In SECY–96–256, the NRC staff cited the
                                                  can use to demonstrate that the                         offsite radiological release might occur.             rupture of a large contaminated liquid
                                                  probability of a zirconium fire is                      The staff found that 19.7 hours was                   storage tank, causing soil contamination


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   19:09 Mar 30, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00091   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM   31MRN1


                                                                               Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 62 / Thursday, March 31, 2016 / Notices                                             18655

                                                  and potential groundwater                               insurance coverage does not impact the                requirements in 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) to
                                                  contamination, as the most costly                       probability or consequences of potential              maintain $1.06 billion in onsite
                                                  postulated event to decontaminate and                   accidents. The proposed level of                      insurance coverage is not necessary to
                                                  remediate (other than a SFP zirconium                   insurance coverage is commensurate                    achieve the underlying purpose of the
                                                  fire). The NRC determined that the                      with the reduced risk and reduced cost                rule for the permanently shutdown and
                                                  postulated large liquid radiological                    consequences of potential nuclear                     defueled CR–3 reactor.
                                                  waste storage tank rupture event would                  accidents at CR–3. Therefore, the NRC                   Under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(iii), special
                                                  have a bounding onsite cleanup cost of                  staff concludes that granting the                     circumstances are present whenever
                                                  approximately $50 million.                              requested exemption will not present an               compliance would result in undue
                                                     The NRC staff has found that DEF’s                   undue risk to the health and safety of                hardship or other costs that are
                                                  proposed reduction in onsite property                   the public.                                           significantly in excess of those
                                                  damage insurance coverage to a level of                                                                       contemplated when the regulation was
                                                                                                          C. Consistent With the Common Defense                 adopted, or that are significantly in
                                                  $50 million is consistent with SECY–                    and Security
                                                  96–256. In addition, the staff notes that                                                                     excess of those incurred by others
                                                  there is a precedent of granting a similar                 The proposed exemption would not                   similarly situated. The NRC staff
                                                  exemption to other permanently                          eliminate any requirements associated                 concludes that if the licensee were
                                                  shutdown and defueled power reactor                     with physical protection of the site and              required to continue to maintain an
                                                  licensees. As previously stated, the staff              would not adversely affect DEF’s ability              onsite insurance level of $1.06 billion,
                                                  concluded that as of September 26,                      to physically secure the site or protect              the associated insurance premiums
                                                  2013, sufficient irradiated fuel decay                  special nuclear material. Physical                    would be in excess of those necessary
                                                  time has elapsed at CR–3 to decrease to                 security measures at CR–3 are not                     and commensurate with the radiological
                                                  negligible levels the probability of an                 affected by the requested exemption.                  contamination risks posed by the site. In
                                                  onsite radiological release from a                      Therefore, the proposed exemption is                  addition, such insurance levels would
                                                  postulated zirconium fire accident. In                  consistent with the common defense                    be significantly in excess of other
                                                  addition, the licensee’s proposal to                    and security.                                         decommissioning reactor facilities that
                                                  reduce onsite insurance to a level of $50               D. Special Circumstances                              have been granted similar exemptions
                                                  million is consistent with the maximum                                                                        by the NRC.
                                                                                                             Under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), special                The NRC staff finds that DEF’s
                                                  estimated cleanup costs for the recovery                circumstances are present if the
                                                  from the rupture of a large liquid                                                                            compliance with the existing rule would
                                                                                                          application of the regulation in the                  result in an undue hardship or other
                                                  radiological waste storage tank.                        particular circumstances would not                    costs that are significantly in excess of
                                                  IV. Regulatory Requirements                             serve the underlying purpose of the rule              those contemplated when the regulation
                                                                                                          or is not necessary to achieve the                    was adopted and are significantly in
                                                  A. Authorized by Law                                    underlying purpose of the rule. The                   excess of those incurred by others
                                                    Under 10 CFR 50.12, the Commission                    underlying purpose of 10 CFR                          similarly situated.
                                                  may grant exemptions from the                           50.54(w)(1) is to provide reasonable                    Therefore, the special circumstances
                                                  regulations in 10 CFR part 50 that the                  assurance that adequate funds will be                 required by 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) and
                                                  Commission determines are authorized                    available to stabilize conditions and                 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(iii) exist.
                                                  by law. The NRC staff has determined                    cover onsite cleanup costs associated
                                                  that granting of the licensee’s proposed                with site decontamination, following an               E. Environmental Considerations
                                                  exemption will not result in a violation                accident that results in the release of a                The NRC approval of the exemption
                                                  of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as                    significant amount of radiological                    from insurance or indemnity
                                                  amended, or other laws. Therefore, the                  material. As explained in section III of              requirements belongs to a category of
                                                  exemption is authorized by law.                         this document, because CR–3 is                        actions that the Commission, by rule or
                                                                                                          permanently shut down and defueled,                   regulation, has declared to be a
                                                  B. No Undue Risk to Public Health and                   the radiological consequences of design-              categorical exclusion from further
                                                  Safety                                                  basis accidents or other credible events              environmental analysis, after first
                                                    The NRC established the onsite                        at CR–3 cannot possibly exceed the                    finding that the category of actions does
                                                  property damage insurance                               limits of the EPA PAGs at the exclusion               not individually or cumulatively have a
                                                  requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) to                   area boundary. The licensee has                       significant effect on the human
                                                  provide financial assurance that                        performed site-specific analyses of                   environment. Specifically, the
                                                  following a significant nuclear incident,               highly unlikely, beyond-design-basis                  exemption is categorically excluded
                                                  onsite conditions could be stabilized                   zirconium fire accidents involving the                from further analysis under
                                                  and the site decontaminated. The                        stored irradiated fuel in the SFP. The                § 51.22(c)(25).
                                                  requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) and                  analyses show that as of September 26,                   Under 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25), granting
                                                  the existing level of onsite insurance                  2013, the probabilities of such an                    an exemption from the requirements of
                                                  coverage for CR–3 are predicated on the                 accident are minimal. The NRC staff’s                 any regulation in Chapter I of 10 CFR is
                                                  assumption that the reactor is operating.               evaluation of the licensee’s analyses                 a categorical exclusion provided that:
                                                  However, CR–3 is a permanently                          confirm this conclusion.                              (1) There is no significant hazards
                                                  shutdown and defueled facility. As                         The NRC staff also finds that DEF’s                consideration; (2) there is no significant
                                                  explained in section III of this                        proposed $50 million level of onsite                  change in the types or significant
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                  document, the permanently defueled                      insurance is consistent with the                      increase in the amounts of any effluents
                                                  status of the facility has resulted in a                bounding cleanup and decontamination                  that may be released offsite; (3) there is
                                                  significant reduction in the number and                 cost, as discussed in SECY–96–256, to                 no significant increase in individual or
                                                  severity of potential accidents, and                    account for hypothetical rupture of a                 cumulative public or occupational
                                                  correspondingly, a significant reduction                large liquid radiological waste tank at               radiation exposure; (4) there is no
                                                  in the potential for and severity of                    the CR–3 site, should such an event                   significant construction impact; (5)
                                                  onsite property damage. The proposed                    occur. Therefore, the staff concludes                 there is no significant increase in the
                                                  reduction in the amount of onsite                       that the application of the current                   potential for or consequences from


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   19:09 Mar 30, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00092   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM   31MRN1


                                                  18656                        Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 62 / Thursday, March 31, 2016 / Notices

                                                  radiological accidents; and (6) the                       Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day         Appeals may be accessed on PBGC’s
                                                  requirements from which an exemption                    of March 2016.                                        Web site at www.pbgc.gov.
                                                  is sought involve: Surety, insurance, or                  For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.              FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
                                                  indemnity requirements.                                 John R. Tappert,                                      Deborah C. Murphy, Deputy Assistant
                                                     Utilizing the standards set forth in 10              Director, Division of Decommissioning,                General Counsel, or Donald McCabe,
                                                  CFR 50.92, the NRC has determined that                  Uranium Recovery, and Waste Programs,                 Attorney, Regulatory Affairs Group,
                                                  approval of the exemption request                       Office of Nuclear Material Safety and                 Office of the General Counsel, Pension
                                                  involves no significant hazards                         Safeguards.                                           Benefit Guaranty Corporation, 1200 K
                                                  consideration because reducing the                      [FR Doc. 2016–07305 Filed 3–30–16; 8:45 am]           Street NW., Washington, DC 20005–
                                                  licensee’s onsite property damage                       BILLING CODE 7590–01–P                                4026, 202–326–4400. (For TTY and
                                                  insurance for CR–3 does not: (1) Involve                                                                      TDD, call 800–877–8339 and request
                                                  a significant increase in the probability                                                                     connection to 202–326–4024.)
                                                  or consequences of an accident                          PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY                              SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PBGC’s
                                                  previously evaluated; or (2) create the                 CORPORATION                                           regulation on Rules for Administrative
                                                  possibility of a new or different kind of                                                                     Review of Agency Decisions (29 CFR
                                                  accident from any accident previously                   Proposed Submission of Information                    part 4003) prescribes rules governing
                                                  evaluated; or (3) involve a significant                 Collection for OMB Review; Comment                    the issuance of initial determinations by
                                                  reduction in a margin of safety. The                    Request; Filings for Reconsideration                  PBGC and the procedures for requesting
                                                  exempted financial protection                                                                                 and obtaining administrative review of
                                                  regulation is unrelated to the operation                AGENCY: Pension Benefit Guaranty
                                                                                                          Corporation.                                          initial determinations through
                                                  of CR–3. Accordingly, there is no                                                                             reconsideration or appeal. Subpart A of
                                                  significant change in the types or                      ACTION: Notice of intent to request
                                                                                                                                                                the regulation specifies which initial
                                                  significant increase in the amounts of                  extension of OMB approval of                          determinations are subject to
                                                  any effluents that may be released                      information collection.                               reconsideration. Subpart C prescribes
                                                  offsite; and no significant increase in                                                                       rules on who may request
                                                                                                          SUMMARY:  The Pension Benefit Guaranty
                                                  individual or cumulative public or                                                                            reconsideration, when to make such a
                                                                                                          Corporation (‘‘PBGC’’) intends to
                                                  occupational radiation exposure. The                                                                          request, where to submit it, form and
                                                                                                          request the Office of Management and
                                                  exempted regulation is not associated                                                                         content of reconsideration requests, and
                                                                                                          Budget (‘‘OMB’’) to extend approval
                                                  with construction, so there is no                                                                             other matters relating to
                                                                                                          without change, under the Paperwork
                                                  significant construction impact. The                                                                          reconsiderations.
                                                                                                          Reduction Act, of a collection of
                                                  exempted regulation does not concern                                                                             Any person aggrieved by an initial
                                                                                                          information under its regulation on
                                                  the source term (i.e., potential amount                                                                       determination of PBGC under
                                                                                                          Rules for Administrative Review of
                                                  of radiation in an accident), nor                                                                             § 4003.1(b)(1) (determinations that a
                                                                                                          Agency Decisions. This notice informs
                                                  mitigation. Therefore, there is no                                                                            plan is covered by section 4021 of
                                                                                                          the public of PBGC’s intent and solicits
                                                  significant increase in the potential for,                                                                    ERISA), § 4003.1(b)(2) (determinations
                                                                                                          public comment on the collection of
                                                  or consequences of, a radiological                                                                            concerning premiums, interest, and late
                                                                                                          information.
                                                  accident. In addition, there would be no                                                                      payment penalties under section 4007 of
                                                  significant impacts to biota, water                     DATES:  Comments should be submitted                  ERISA), § 4003.1(b)(3) (determinations
                                                  resources, historic properties, cultural                by May 31, 2016.                                      concerning voluntary terminations),
                                                  resources, or socioeconomic conditions                  ADDRESSES: Comments may be                            § 4003.1(b)(4) (determinations
                                                  in the region. The requirement for onsite               submitted by any of the following                     concerning allocation of assets under
                                                  property damage insurance may be                        methods:                                              section 4044 of ERISA), or § 4003.1(b)(5)
                                                  viewed as involving surety, insurance,                     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://                (determinations with respect to
                                                  or indemnity matters.                                   www.regulations.gov. Follow the Web                   penalties under section 4071 of ERISA)
                                                     Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR                        site instructions for submitting                      may request reconsideration of the
                                                  51.22(b) and 51.22(c)(25), no                           comments.                                             initial determination. Requests for
                                                  environmental impact statement or                          Email: paperwork.comments@                         reconsideration must be in writing, be
                                                  environmental assessment need be                        pbgc.gov.                                             clearly designated as requests for
                                                  prepared in connection with the                            Fax: 202–326–4224.                                 reconsideration, contain a statement of
                                                  approval of this exemption request.                        Mail or Hand Delivery: Regulatory                  the grounds for reconsideration and the
                                                                                                          Affairs Group, Office of the General                  relief sought, and contain or reference
                                                  V. Conclusions
                                                                                                          Counsel, Pension Benefit Guaranty                     all pertinent information.
                                                     Accordingly, the Commission has                      Corporation, 1200 K Street NW.,                          OMB has approved the
                                                  determined that pursuant to 10 CFR                      Washington, DC 20005–4026.                            reconsiderations collection of
                                                  50.12(a), the requested exemption is                       PBGC will make all comments                        information under control number
                                                  authorized by law, will not present an                  available on its Web site, www.pbgc.gov.              1212–0063 through July 31, 2016. PBGC
                                                  undue risk to the public health and                        Copies of the collection of                        intends to request that OMB extend
                                                  safety, and is consistent with the                      information may also be obtained                      approval without change of this
                                                  common defense and security. Also,                      without charge by writing to the                      collection of information for three years.
                                                  special circumstances are present.                      Disclosure Division of the Office of the              An agency may not conduct or sponsor,
                                                  Therefore, the Commission hereby
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                                                                          General Counsel of PBGC at the above                  and a person is not required to respond
                                                  grants DEF an exemption from the                        address or by visiting the Disclosure                 to, a collection of information unless it
                                                  requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1), to                  Division or calling 202–326–4040                      displays a currently valid OMB control
                                                  permit the licensee to reduce its onsite                during normal business hours. (TTY and                number.
                                                  property damage insurance to a level of                 TDD users may call the Federal relay                     PBGC estimates that an average of
                                                  $50 million.                                            service toll-free at 1–800–877–8339 and               about 230 appellants per year will
                                                     The exemption is effective upon                      ask to be connected to 202–326–4040.)                 respond to this collection of
                                                  issuance.                                               PBGC’s regulation on Administrative                   information. PBGC further estimates


                                             VerDate Sep<11>2014   19:09 Mar 30, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00093   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\31MRN1.SGM   31MRN1



Document Created: 2016-03-31 00:55:52
Document Modified: 2016-03-31 00:55:52
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionNotices
ActionExemption; issuance.
DatesMarch 31, 2016.
ContactJohn B. Hickman, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3017; email: [email protected]
FR Citation81 FR 18652 

2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR