76052 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2010 / Notices 

use of different fuel rod cladding 

material. Therefore, the licensee 

requested an exemption that would 

allow the use of Optimized ZIRLOTM

fuel rod cladding at PINGP. The NRC 

staff will prepare a separate safety 

evaluation, fully addressing NSPM’s 

application for a related license 

amendment. 

3.0 Discussion 

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, the 

Commission may, upon application by 

any interested person or upon its own 

initiative, grant exemptions from the 

requirements of 10 CFR part 50 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) when special circumstances are 

present. Under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2), 

special circumstances include, among 

other things, when application of the 

specific regulation in the particular 

circumstance would not serve, or is not 

necessary to achieve, the underlying 

purpose of the rule. 

Authorized by Law 

This exemption would allow the use 

of Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel rod 

cladding material at PINGP. As stated 

above, 10 CFR 50.12 allows the NRC to 

grant exemptions from the requirements 

of 10 CFR part 50. The NRC staff has 

determined that granting of the 

licensee’s proposed exemption will not 

result in a violation of the Atomic 

Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or the 

Commission’s regulations. Therefore, 

the exemption is authorized by law. 

No Undue Risk to Public Health and 

Safety 

The underlying purpose of 10 CFR 

50.46 is to establish acceptance criteria 

for ECCS performance. Westinghouse 

topical reports WCAP–12610–P–A and 

CENPD–404–P–A, Addendum 1–A, 

‘‘Optimized ZIRLOTM,’’ dated July 2006, 

contain the justification to use 

Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel rod cladding 

material in addition to Zircaloy-4 and 

ZIRLOTM (these topical reports are nonpublicly available because they contain 

proprietary information). The NRC staff 

approved the use of these topical 

reports, subject to the conditions stated 

in the staff’s safety evaluations for each. 

In these topical reports, Westinghouse 

evaluated the structural and material 

properties of Optimized ZIRLOTM and 

determined that the use of Optimized 

ZIRLOTM as cladding would have either 

no significant impact or would produce 

a reduction in corrosion or oxidation 

and a corresponding reduction in 

hydrogen pickup. Westinghouse also 

evaluated the impact of Optimized 

ZIRLOTM fuel cladding on the loss-ofcoolant accident (LOCA) and non-LOCA 

accident analyses. The evaluations 

determined that the LOCA analyses for 

fuel with Optimized ZIRLOTM cladding 

complied with 10 CFR 50.46, and that 

there was a negligible difference in the 

non-LOCA analyses between fuel clad 

with standard ZIRLOTM and fuel clad 

with Optimized ZIRLOTM. 

The underlying purpose of 10 CFR 

Part 50, Appendix K, Section I.A.5, 

‘‘Metal-Water Reaction Rate,’’ is to 

ensure that cladding oxidation and 

hydrogen generation are appropriately 

limited during a LOCA and 

conservatively accounted for in the 

ECCS evaluation model. Appendix K of 

10 CFR part 50 requires that the BakerJust equation be used in the ECCS 

evaluation model to determine the rate 

of energy release, cladding oxidation, 

and hydrogen generation. Westinghouse 

has shown in WCAP–12610–P–A that 

the Baker-Just model is conservative in 

all post-LOCA scenarios with respect to 

the use of the Optimized ZIRLOTM

advanced alloy as a fuel cladding 

material. 

The NRC-approved topical reports 

have demonstrated that predicted 

chemical, thermal, and mechanical 

characteristics of the Optimized 

ZIRLOTM alloy cladding are bounding 

for those approved for ZIRLOTM under 

anticipated operational occurrences and 

postulated accidents. Reload cores are 

required to be operated in accordance 

with the operating limits specified in 

the technical specifications and the core 

operating limits report. 

Based on the above, no new accident 

precursors are created by using 

Optimized ZIRLOTM; thus, the 

probability of postulated accidents is 

not increased. Also, based on the above, 

the consequences of postulated 

accidents are not increased. Therefore, 

there is no undue risk to public health 

and safety due to using Optimized 

ZIRLOTM. 

Consistent With Common Defense and 

Security 

The proposed exemption would allow 

the use of Optimized ZIRLOTM fuel rod 

cladding material at PINGP. This change 

to the plant configuration has no 

relation to security issues. Therefore, 

the common defense and security is not 

impacted by this exemption. 

Special Circumstances 

Special circumstances, in accordance 

with 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), are present 

whenever application of the regulation 

in the particular circumstances is not 

necessary to achieve the underlying 

purpose of the rule. The underlying 

purpose of 10 CFR 50.46 and Appendix 

K to 10 CFR part 50 is to establish 

acceptance criteria for ECCS 

performance. The wording of the 

regulations in 10 CFR 50.46 and 

Appendix K is not directly applicable to 

Optimized ZIRLOTM, even though the 

evaluations above show that the intent 

of the regulation is met. Therefore, since 

the underlying purposes of 10 CFR 

50.46 and Appendix K are achieved 

through the use of Optimized ZIRLOTM

fuel rod cladding material, the special 

circumstances required by 10 CFR 

50.12(a)(2)(ii) for the granting of an 

exemption from 10 CFR 50.46 and 

Appendix K exist. 

4.0 Conclusion 

Accordingly, the Commission has 

determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR 

50.12, the exemption is authorized by 

law, will not present an undue risk to 

the public health and safety, and is 

consistent with the common defense 

and security. Also, special 

circumstances are present. Therefore, 

the Commission hereby grants NSPM an 

exemption from the requirements of 10 

CFR 50.46 and Appendix K to 10 CFR 

part 50, to allow the use of Optimized 

ZIRLOTM fuel rod cladding material, for 

the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating 

Plant, Units 1 and 2. 

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the 

Commission has determined that the 

granting of this exemption will not have 

a significant effect on the quality of the 

human environment as published in the 

Federal Register on October 14, 2010 

(75 FR 63213). 

This exemption is effective upon 

issuance. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd 

day of November, 2010. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Joseph G. Giitter, 

Director, Division of Operating Reactor 

Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 2010–30653 Filed 12–6–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket Nos. 50–348 and 50–364; NRC– 

2009–0375] 

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, 

Inc. Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, 

Units 1 and 2; Exemption 

1.0 Background 

Southern Nuclear Operating 

Company, Inc. (SNC, the licensee), is 

the holder of Renewed Facility 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2010 / Notices 76053 

Operating License Nos. NPF–2 and 

NPF–8, which authorizes operation of 

the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, 

Units 1 and 2 (FNP). The licenses 

provide, among other things, that the 

facility is subject to all rules, 

regulations, and orders of the U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, 

the Commission) now or hereafter in 

effect. 

The facility consists of two 

pressurized-water reactors located in 

Houston County, Alabama. 

2.0 Request/Action 

Title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (10 CFR), part 73, ‘‘Physical 

protection of plants and materials,’’ 

Section 73.55, ‘‘Requirements for 

physical protection of licensed activities 

in nuclear power reactors against 

radiological sabotage,’’ published March 

27, 2009, effective May 26, 2009, with 

a full implementation date of March 31, 

2010, requires licensees to protect, with 

high assurance, against radiological 

sabotage by designing and 

implementing comprehensive site 

security programs. The amendments to 

10 CFR 73.55 published on March 27, 

2009, establish and update generically 

applicable security requirements similar 

to those previously imposed by 

Commission orders issued after the 

terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, 

and implemented by licensees. In 

addition, the amendments to 10 CFR 

73.55 includes additional requirements 

to further enhance site security based 

upon insights gained from 

implementation of the post September 

11, 2001, security orders. It is from three 

of these new requirements that, by its 

letters dated September 10 and October 

5, 2010, SNC now seeks an exemption 

from the March 31, 2010, 

implementation date. All other physical 

security requirements established by 

this recent rulemaking have already 

been implemented by the licensee by 

March 31, 2010. 

Previously, by letters dated June 9, 

and July 31, 2009, SNC submitted a 

request for an exemption from the 

compliance date identified in 10 CFR 

73.55 for the three requirements of 10 

CFR 73.55 that are discussed above. The 

NRC staff reviewed the request and by 

letter dated August 27, 2009, granted an 

exemption to the March 31, 2010, 

compliance date for the specific 

requirements identified within the SNC 

exemption request until December 15, 

2010, to afford additional time for the 

necessary security system upgrades. 

Subsequently, by letters dated 

September 10 and October 5, 2010, the 

licensee submitted an additional request 

for an exemption to the compliance date 

identified in 10 CFR 73.55, in 

accordance with 10 CFR 73.5, ‘‘Specific 

exemptions.’’ The new compliance date 

requested for the specific requirements 

identified within this exemption request 

is July 15, 2011. 

The licensee’s letters dated September 

10, 2010 (NL–10–1676) and October 5, 

2010 (NL–10–1908) contain securityrelated information and, accordingly, 

are not available to the public. A 

redacted version of the licensee’s 

September 10, 2010, letter (NL–10– 

1795) is available at ADAMS Accession 

No. ML102560042. The licensee has 

requested a further exemption from the 

March 31, 2010, compliance date stating 

that a number of issues, including 

unforeseen growth in the amount of 

design work required, design product 

loss due to computer hardware failures, 

and weather-related construction 

delays, will present a significant 

challenge to timely completion of the 

project related to a specific requirement 

in 10 CFR part 73. Specifically, the 

request is to extend the compliance date 

for three specific requirements from the 

current March 31, 2010, deadline to July 

15, 2011. Being granted this exemption 

for these items will allow the licensee 

to complete the modifications designed 

to update equipment and incorporate 

state-of-the-art technology to meet the 

noted regulatory requirement. 

3.0 Discussion of Part 73 Schedule 

Exemptions From the March 31, 2010, 

Full Implementation Date 

Pursuant to 10 CFR 73.55(a)(1), ‘‘By 

March 31, 2010, each nuclear power 

reactor licensee, licensed under 10 CFR 

part 50, shall implement the 

requirements of this section through its 

Commission-approved Physical Security 

Plan, Training and Qualification Plan, 

Safeguards Contingency Plan, and Cyber 

Security Plan referred to collectively 

hereafter as ‘security plans.’’’ Pursuant 

to 10 CFR 73.5, the Commission may, 

upon application by any interested 

person or upon its own initiative, grant 

exemptions from the requirements of 10 

CFR Part 73 when the exemptions are 

authorized by law, and will not 

endanger life or property or the common 

defense and security, and are otherwise 

in the public interest. 

An NRC approval of this exemption 

would; as noted above, allow an 

extension from March 31, 2010, to July 

15, 2011, for the implementation date 

for three specific requirements of the 

new rule. 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 the Commission’s 

regulations. Therefore, the exemption is 

authorized by law. 

In the draft final rule provided to the 

Commission (SECY–08–0099, dated July 

9, 2008), the NRC staff proposed that the 

requirements of the new regulation be 

met within 180 days. The Commission 

directed a change from 180 days to 

approximately 1 year for licensees to 

fully implement the new requirements. 

This change was incorporated into the 

final rule. From this, it is clear that the 

Commission wanted to provide a 

reasonable timeframe for licensees to 

achieve full compliance. 

As noted in the final rule, the 

Commission also anticipated that 

licensees would have to conduct site 

specific analyses to determine what 

changes were necessary to implement 

the rule’s requirements, and that 

changes could be accomplished through 

a variety of licensing mechanisms, 

including exemptions. Since issuance of 

the final rule, the Commission has 

rejected a generic industry request to 

extend the rule’s compliance date for all 

operating nuclear power plants, but 

noted that the Commission’s regulations 

provide mechanisms for individual 

licensees, with good cause, to apply for 

relief from the compliance date 

(Reference: June 4, 2009, letter from R. 

W. Borchardt, NRC, to M. S. Fertel, 

Nuclear Energy Institute). The licensee’s 

request for an exemption is therefore 

consistent with the approach set forth 

by the Commission as discussed in the 

June 4, 2009, letter. 

FNP Schedule Exemption Request 

The licensee provided detailed 

information in its letters dated 

September 10 and October 5, 2010, 

requesting an exemption. It describes a 

comprehensive plan to install 

equipment related to the requirements 

in the new Part 73 rule and provides a 

timeline for achieving full compliance 

with the new regulation. The submittals 

contain security-related information 

regarding the site security plan, details 

of the specific requirements of the 

regulation for which the site cannot be 

in compliance by the March 31, 2010, 

deadline and why, the required changes 

to the site’s security configuration, and 

a timeline with critical path activities 

that will bring the licensee into full 

compliance by July 15, 2011. The 

timeline provides dates indicating (1) 

When various phases of the project 

begin and end (i.e., design, field 

construction), (2) outages scheduled for 

each unit, and (3) when critical 

equipment will be ordered, installed, 

tested and become operational. 

Notwithstanding the schedular 

exemption for these limited 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
76054 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 7, 2010 / Notices 

requirements, the licensee is required to 

be in compliance with all other 

applicable physical security 

requirements as described in 10 CFR 

73.55 and reflected in its current NRC 

approved physical security program. By 

July 15, 2011, SNC will be in full 

compliance with all the regulatory 

requirements of 10 CFR 73.55 for the 

FNP, as issued on March 27, 2009. 

4.0 Conclusion for Part 73 Schedule 

Exemption Request 

The NRC staff has reviewed the 

licensee’s submittals and concludes that 

the licensee has provided adequate 

justification for its request for an 

extension of the compliance date to July 

15, 2011, with regard to three specific 

requirements of 10 CFR 73.55. 

Accordingly, the Commission has 

determined that pursuant to 10 CFR 

73.5, ‘‘Specific exemptions,’’ an 

exemption from the March 31, 2010, 

compliance date is authorized by law 

and will not endanger life or property or 

the common defense and security, and 

is otherwise in the public interest. 

Therefore, the Commission hereby 

grants the requested exemption. 

The NRC staff has determined that the 

long-term benefits that will be realized 

when the FNP equipment installation is 

complete justifies extending the full 

compliance date with regard to the 

specific requirements of 10 CFR 73.55. 

The security measures, that SNC needs 

additional time to implement, are new 

requirements imposed by the March 27, 

2009, amendments to 10 CFR 73.55, and 

is in addition to those required by the 

security orders issued in response to the 

events of September 11, 2001. 

Therefore, it is concluded that the 

licensee’s actions are in the best interest 

of protecting the public health and 

safety through the security changes that 

will result from granting this exemption. 

As per the licensee’s request and the 

NRC’s regulatory authority to grant an 

exemption from the March 31, 2010, 

implementation deadline for the 

requirement specified in the SNC letters 

dated September 10 and October 5, 

2010, the licensee is required to be in 

full compliance by July 15, 2011. In 

achieving compliance, the licensee is 

reminded that it is responsible for 

determining the appropriate licensing 

mechanism (i.e., 10 CFR 50.54(p) or 10 

CFR 50.90) for incorporation of all 

necessary changes to its security plans. 

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, ‘‘Finding of 

no significant impact,’’ the Commission 

has previously determined that the 

granting of this exemption will not have 

a significant effect on the quality of the 

human environment (75 FR 73135, 

dated November 29, 2010). 

This exemption is effective upon 

issuance. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day 

of December 2010. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Joseph G. Giitter, 

Director, Division of Operating Reactor 

Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 2010–30650 Filed 12–6–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 50–341; NRC–2010–0357] 

Detroit Edison Company Fermi, Unit 2; 

Exemption 

1.0 Background 

Detroit Edison Company (DECo) is the 

licensee and holder of Facility 

Operating License No. NFP–43 issued 

for Fermi, Unit 2 (Fermi-2), located in 

Monroe County, Michigan. The licensee 

anticipates using rail to ship radioactive 

waste. From the licensee’s experience 

with radioactive shipments from the 

decommissioning of Fermi-1, a 

permanently shutdown nuclear reactor 

facility located onsite, rail shipments 

typically take more than 20 days from 

the site to receipt acknowledgement 

from the disposal site. Each shipment 

with receipt notifications greater than 

20 days requires a special investigation 

and report to the U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission (NRC or the 

Commission) which the licensee 

believes to be burdensome and 

unnecessary to meet the intent of the 

regulation. 

2.0 Request/Action 

In a letter to the Commission dated 

February 5, 2010 (Agencywide 

Documents Access and Management 

System (ADAMS) Accession No. 

ML100430349), DECo requested an 

exemption from the requirements in 10 

CFR part 20, appendix G, section III.E, 

to investigate and file a report to the 

NRC if shipments of low-level 

radioactive waste are not acknowledged 

by the intended recipient within 20 

days after transfer to the shipper. This 

exemption would extend the time 

period that can elapse during shipments 

of low-level radioactive waste before 

DECo is required to investigate and file 

a report to the NRC from 20 days to 35 

days. The exemption would be 

applicable to rail and truck/rail mixedmode shipments. The exemption 

request is based on an analysis of the 

historical data of low-level radioactive 

waste shipment times from the Fermi-1 

site to the disposal site. This historical 

data is further described below and in 

the Environmental Assessment and 

Finding of No Significant Impact (75 FR 

20867) that was published for the 

exemption which was granted in May 

2010 for Enrico Fermi Atomic Power 

Plant Unit 1. 

3.0 Discussion 

The proposed action would grant an 

exemption to extend the 20-day 

investigation and reporting 

requirements for shipments of low-level 

radioactive waste to 35 days. 

Historical data derived from 

experience at Fermi-1 indicates that rail 

transportation time to waste disposal 

facilities almost always exceeds the 20- 

day reporting requirement. A review of 

the Fermi-1 data indicates that 

transportation time for shipments by rail 

or truck/rail took over 20 days on 

average. In addition, administrative 

processes at the disposal facilities and 

mail delivery times could add several 

additional days. 

Pursuant to 10 CFR 20.2301, the 

Commission may, upon application by a 

licensee or upon its own initiative, grant 

an exemption from the requirements of 

regulations in 10 CFR part 20 if it 

determines the exemption is authorized 

by law and would not result in undue 

hazard to life or property. There are no 

provisions in the Atomic Energy Act (or 

in any other Federal statute) that impose 

a requirement to investigate and report 

on low-level radioactive waste 

shipments that have not been 

acknowledged by the recipient within 

20 days of transfer. 

Therefore, the Commission concludes 

that there is no statutory prohibition on 

the issuance of the requested exemption 

and the Commission is authorized to 

grant the exemption by law. 

The Commission acknowledges that, 

based on the shipment times to date 

from the Fermi-1 site to the disposal 

facility, the need to investigate and 

report on shipments that take longer 

than 20 days could result in an 

excessive administrative burden on the 

licensee. The Commission finds that the 

underlying purpose of the Appendix G 

timing provision at issue is to 

investigate a late shipment that may be 

lost, misdirected, or diverted. 

Furthermore, by extending the elapsed 

time for receipt acknowledgment to 35 

days before requiring investigations and 

reporting, a reasonable upper limit on 

shipment duration (based on historical 

analysis) is still maintained if a 

breakdown of normal tracking systems 

were to occur. Consequently, the 

Commission finds that there is no 

hazard to life or property by extending 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES