Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Notices 80549 

seeks exemption, justification for the 

additional extension request, a 

description of the required changes to 

the physical security systems, and a 

revised timeline with critical path 

activities that would enable the licensee 

to achieve full compliance by November 

30, 2011. The timeline provides dates 

indicating when (1) design activities 

will be completed and approved, (2) the 

exterior missile protection plate will be 

modified for entry, and (3) the new and 

relocated equipment will be installed 

and tested. 

The site-specific information 

provided within the HNP exemption 

request is relative to the requirements 

from which the licensee requested 

exemption and demonstrates the need 

for modification to meet the one specific 

remaining requirement of 10 CFR 73.55. 

The proposed implementation schedule 

depicts the critical activity milestones of 

the security system upgrades; is 

consistent with the licensee’s solution 

for meeting the requirements; is 

consistent with the scope of the 

modifications and the issues and 

challenges identified; and is consistent 

with the licensee’s requested 

compliance date. 

Notwithstanding the proposed 

schedule exemption for this one 

remaining requirement, the licensee will 

continue to be in compliance with all 

other applicable physical security 

requirement as described in 10 CFR 

73.55 and reflected in its current NRCapproved physical security program. By 

November 30, 2011, the HNP physical 

security system will be in full 

compliance with all of the regulatory 

requirements of 10 CFR 73.55, as 

published 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 previously authorized 

implementation date from December 15, 

2010, with regard to one remaining 

requirement of 10 CFR 73.55, to 

November 30, 2011. This conclusion is 

based on the NRC staff’s determination 

that the licensee has made a good faith 

effort to meet the requirements in a 

timely manner, has sufficiently 

described the reason for the 

unanticipated delays, and has provided 

an updated detailed schedule with 

adequate justification to the additional 

time requested for the extension. 

The long-term benefits that will be 

realized when the security systems 

upgrade is complete justify extending 

the full compliance date with regard to 

the specific requirements of 10 CFR 

73.55 for this particular licensee. The 

security measures that HNP needs 

additional time to implement are new 

requirements imposed by amendments 

to 10 CFR 73.55, as published on March 

27, 2009, and are in addition to those 

required by the security orders issued in 

response to the events of September 11, 

2001. Accordingly, an exemption from 

the March 31, 2010, implementation 

date is authorized by law and will not 

endanger life or property or the common 

defense and security, and the 

Commission hereby grants the requested 

exemption. 

As per the licensee’s request and the 

NRC’s regulatory authority to grant an 

exemption to the March 31, 2010, 

implementation date for the one item 

specified in Attachment 1 of the CP&L 

letter dated September 20, 2010, the 

licensee is required to implement this 

one remaining item and be in full 

compliance with 10 CFR 73.55 by 

November 30, 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. 

In accordance with 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 77919 dated December 14, 2010). 

This exemption is effective upon 

issuance. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th 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. 2010–32145 Filed 12–21–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 50–346; NRC–2010–0378] 

FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating 

Company, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power 

Station; Exemption 

1.0 Background 

FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating 

Company (FENOC, the licensee) is the 

holder of Facility Operating License No. 

NFP–3, which authorizes operation of 

the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, 

Unit 1 (DBNPS). The license provides, 

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 one 

pressurized-water reactor located in 

Ottawa County, Ohio. 

2.0 Request/Action 

Title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (10 CFR), Part 50, Appendix 

G requires that fracture toughness 

requirements for ferritic materials of 

pressure-retaining components of the 

reactor coolant pressure boundary of 

light-water nuclear power reactors 

provide adequate margins of safety 

during any condition of normal 

operation, including anticipated 

operational occurrences and system 

hydrostatic tests, to which the pressure 

boundary may be subjected over its 

service lifetime; and Section 50.61 

provides fracture toughness 

requirements for protection against 

pressurized thermal shock (PTS) events. 

By letter dated April 15, 2009, 

(Agencywide Documents Access and 

Management System (ADAMS) 

Accession No. ML091130228), as 

supplemented by letters dated 

December 18, 2009, (ADAMS Accession 

No. ML093570103) and October 8, 2010 

(ADAMS Accession No. ML102861221), 

FENOC proposed exemptions from the 

requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, 

Appendix G and 10 CFR 50.61, to revise 

certain DBNPS reactor pressure vessel 

(RPV) initial (unirradiated) properties 

using Framatome Advanced Nuclear 

Power Topical Report (TR) BAW–2308, 

Revisions 1A and 2A, ‘‘Initial RTNDT of 

Linde 80 Weld Materials.’’ 

The licensee requested an exemption 

from Appendix G to 10 CFR Part 50 to 

replace the required use of the existing 

Charpy V-notch (Cv) and drop weightbased methodology and allow the use of 

an alternate methodology to incorporate 

the use of fracture toughness test data 

for evaluating the integrity of the 

DBNPS RPV circumferential beltline 

welds based on the use of the 1997 and 

2002 editions of American Society for 

Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard 

Test Method E 1921, ‘‘Standard Test 

Method for Determination of Reference 

Temperature T0, for Ferritic Steels in the 

Transition Range,’’ and American 

Society for Mechanical Engineering 

(ASME), Boiler and Pressure Vessel 

Code (Code), Code Case N–629, ‘‘Use of 

Fracture Toughness Test Data to 

establish Reference Temperature for 

Pressure Retaining materials of Section 

III, Division 1, Class 1.’’ The exemption 

is required since Appendix G to 10 CFR 

Part 50, through reference to Appendix 

G to Section XI of the ASME Code 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
80550 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Notices 

pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55(a), requires 

the use of a methodology based on Cv

and drop weight data. 

The licensee also requested an 

exemption from 10 CFR 50.61 to use an 

alternate methodology to allow the use 

of fracture toughness test data for 

evaluating the integrity of the DBNPS 

RPV circumferential beltline welds 

based on the use of the 1997 and 2002 

editions of ASTM E 1921 and ASME 

Code Case N–629. The exemption is 

required since the methodology for 

evaluating RPV material fracture 

toughness in 10 CFR 50.61 requires the 

use of the Cv and drop weight data for 

establishing the PTS reference 

temperature (RTPTS). 

3.0 Discussion of Exemption 

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a), 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, are consistent with the 

common defense and security; and (2) 

when special circumstances are present. 

These circumstances include the special 

circumstances that allow the licensee an 

exemption from the use of the Cv and 

drop weight-based methodology 

required by 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix 

G and 10 CFR 50.61. These exemptions 

only modify the methodology to be used 

by the licensee for demonstrating 

compliance with the requirements of 10 

CFR Part 50, Appendix G and 10 CFR 

50.61, and does not exempt the licensee 

from meeting any other requirement of 

10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G and 10 CFR 

50.61. 

Authorized by Law 

These exemptions would allow the 

licensee to use an alternate methodology 

to make use of fracture toughness test 

data for evaluating the integrity of the 

DBNPS RPV beltline welds, and would 

not result in any changes to the 

operation of the plant. Section 50.60(b) 

of 10 CFR Part 50 allows the use of 

alternatives to 10 CFR Part 50, 

Appendix G, or portions thereof, when 

an exemption is granted by the 

Commission under 10 CFR 50.12. In 

addition, Section 50.60(b) of 10 CFR 

Part 50 permits different NRC-approved 

methods for use in determining the 

initial material properties. As stated 

above, 10 CFR 50.12(a) allows the NRC 

to grant exemptions from the 

requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, 

Appendix G and 10 CFR 50.61. The 

NRC staff has determined that granting 

of the licensee’s proposed exemptions 

will not result in a violation of the 

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 

or the Commission’s regulations. 

Therefore, the exemptions are 

authorized by law. 

No Undue Risk to Public Health and 

Safety 

The underlying purpose of Appendix 

G to 10 CFR Part 50 is to set forth 

fracture toughness requirements for 

ferritic materials of pressure-retaining 

components of the reactor coolant 

pressure boundary of light-water 

nuclear power reactors to provide 

adequate margins of safety during any 

condition of normal operation, 

including anticipated operational 

occurrences and system hydrostatic 

tests, to which the pressure boundary 

may be subjected over its service 

lifetime. The methodology underlying 

the requirements of Appendix G to 10 

CFR Part 50 is based on the use of Cv

and drop weight data. The licensee 

proposes to replace the use of the 

existing Cv and drop weight-based 

methodology by a fracture toughnessbased methodology to demonstrate 

compliance with Appendix G to 10 CFR 

Part 50. The NRC staff has concluded 

that the exemptions are justified based 

on the licensee utilizing the fracture 

toughness methodology specified in 

BAW–2308, Revisions 1A and 2A, 

within the conditions and limitations 

delineated in the NRC staff’s safety 

evaluations (SEs), dated August 4, 2005 

(ADAMS Accession No. ML052070408) 

and March 24, 2008 (ADAMS Accession 

No. ML080770349). The use of the 

methodology specified in the NRC 

staff’s SEs will ensure that pressuretemperature limits developed for the 

DBNPS RPV will continue to be based 

on an adequately conservative estimate 

of RPV material properties and ensure 

that the pressure-retaining components 

of the reactor coolant pressure boundary 

retain adequate margins of safety during 

any condition of normal operation, 

including anticipated operational 

occurrences. This exemption only 

modifies the methodology to be used by 

the licensee for demonstrating 

compliance with the requirements of 

Appendix G to 10 CFR Part 50, and does 

not exempt the licensee from meeting 

any other requirement of Appendix G to 

10 CFR Part 50. 

The underlying purpose of 10 CFR 

50.61 is to establish requirements for 

evaluating the fracture toughness of RPV 

materials to ensure that a licensee’s RPV 

will be protected from failure during a 

PTS event. The licensee seeks an 

exemption from 10 CFR 50.61 to use a 

methodology for the ‘‘determination of 

adjusted/indexing reference 

temperatures.’’ The licensee proposes to 

use ASME Code Case N–629 and the 

methodology outlined in its submittal, 

which are based on the use of fracture 

toughness data, as an alternative to the 

Cv and drop weight-based methodology 

required by 10 CFR 50.61 for 

establishing the initial, unirradiated 

properties when calculating RTPTS

values. The NRC staff has concluded 

that the exemption is justified based on 

the licensee utilizing the methodology 

specified in the NRC staff’s SE regarding 

TR BAW–2308, Revisions 1–A and 2–A, 

dated August 4, 2005, and March 24, 

2008, respectively. This TR established 

an alternative method for determining 

initial (unirradiated) material reference 

temperatures for RPV welds 

manufactured using Linde 80 weld flux 

(i.e., ‘‘Linde 80 welds’’) and established 

weld wire heat-specific and Linde 80 

weld generic values of this reference 

temperature. These weld wire heatspecific and Linde 80 weld generic 

values may be used in lieu of the nilductility reference temperature (RTNDT) 

parameter, the determination of which 

is specified by paragraph NB–2331 of 

Section III of the ASME Code. 

Regulations associated with the 

determination of RPV material 

properties involving protection of the 

RPV from brittle failure or ductile 

rupture include Appendix G to 10 CFR 

Part 50 and 10 CFR 50.61, the PTS rule. 

These regulations require that the initial 

(unirradiated) material reference 

temperature, RTNDT, be determined in 

accordance with the provisions of the 

ASME Code, and provide the process for 

determination of RTPTS, the reference 

temperature RTNDT, evaluated for the 

end of license fluence. 

In TR BAW–2308, Revision 1, the 

Babcock and Wilcox Owners Group 

proposed to perform fracture toughness 

testing based on the application of the 

Master Curve evaluation procedure, 

which permits data obtained from 

sample sets tested at different 

temperatures to be combined, as the 

basis for redefining the initial 

(unirradiated) material properties of 

Linde 80 welds. NRC staff evaluated this 

methodology for determining Linde 80 

weld initial (unirradiated) material 

properties and uncertainty in those 

properties, as well as the overall method 

for combining unirradiated material 

property measurements based on NRCaccepted values of initial (unirradiated) 

reference temperature (IRTTo), with 

property shifts from models in 

Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.99, Revision 2, 

‘‘Radiation Embrittlement of Reactor 

Vessel Materials,’’ which are based on Cv

testing and a defined margin term to 

account for uncertainties in the NRC 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 245 / Wednesday, December 22, 2010 / Notices 80551 

1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(7). 

staff SE. Table 3 in the staff’s August 4, 

2005, SE of BAW–2308, Revision 1, 

contains the NRC staff-accepted IRTTO

and corresponding initial uncertainty 

term, sI, for specific Linde 80 weld wire 

heat numbers. In accordance with the 

conditions and limitations outlined in 

the NRC staff’s August 4, 2005 SE of TR 

BAW–2308, Revision 1, for utilizing the 

values in Table 3, the licensee’s 

proposed methodology (1) utilized the 

appropriate NRC staff-accepted IRTTo

and sI values for Linde 80 weld wire 

heat numbers; (2) applied the 

appropriate chemistry factors for 

temperatures greater than 167 °F (the 

weld wire heat-specific chemical 

composition, via the methodology of RG 

1.99, Revision 2, indicated that higher 

chemistry factors are applicable); (3) 

applied a value of 28 °F for sD in the 

margin term; and (4) submitted values 

for DRTNDT and the margin term for each 

Linde 80 weld in the RPV through the 

end of the current operating license. 

Additionally, the NRC’s SE for TR 

BAW–2308, Revision 2, concludes that 

the revised IRTT0 and sI values for 

Linde 80 weld materials are acceptable 

for referencing in plant-specific 

licensing applications as delineated in 

TR BAW–2308, Revision 2, and to the 

extent specified under Section 4.0, 

Limitations and Conditions, of the SE, 

which states: ‘‘Future plant-specific 

applications for RPVs containing weld 

heat 72105, and weld heat 299L44, of 

Linde 80 welds must use the revised 

IRTT0 and sI, values in TR BAW–2308, 

Revision 2.’’ The staff notes that neither 

of these weld heats is used at DBNPS. 

Therefore, all conditions and limitations 

outlined in the NRC staff SEs for TR 

BAW–2308, Revisions 1–A and 2–A, 

have been met for DBNPS. 

The use of the methodology in TR 

BAW–2308, Revision 1, will ensure the 

PTS evaluation developed for the 

DBNPS RPV will continue to be based 

on an adequately conservative estimate 

of RPV material properties and ensure 

the RPV will be protected from failure 

during a PTS event. Also, when 

additional fracture toughness data 

relevant to the evaluation of the DBNPS 

RPV welds is acquired as part of the 

surveillance program, this data must be 

incorporated into the evaluation of the 

DBNPS RPV fracture toughness 

requirements. 

Based on the above, no new accident 

precursors are created by allowing an 

exemption to use an alternate 

methodology to comply with the 

requirements of 10 CFR 50.61 in 

determining adjusted/indexing 

reference temperatures, 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. On February 3, 2010, a new 

rule, 10 CFR 50.61a, ‘‘Alternate Fracture 

Toughness Requirements for Protection 

Against PTS Events,’’ became effective. 

The NRC staff reviewed this new rule 

against the licensee’s exemption request 

and determined that there is no effect on 

the exemption request. The new rule 

does not modify the requirements from 

which the licensee has sought an 

exemption, and the alternative provided 

by the new rule does not address the 

scope of issues associated with both 10 

CFR 50.61 and 10 CFR Part 50, 

Appendix G that the requested 

exemption does. 

Consistent With Common Defense and 

Security 

The proposed exemption would allow 

the licensee to use an alternate 

methodology to allow the use of fracture 

toughness test data for evaluating the 

integrity of the DBNPS RPV beltline 

welds. This change has no relation to 

security issues. Therefore, the common 

defense and security is not impacted by 

these exemptions. 

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 Part 50, Appendix G 

and 10 CFR 50.61 is to protect the 

integrity of the reactor coolant pressure 

boundary by ensuring that each reactor 

vessel material has adequate fracture 

toughness. Therefore, since the 

underlying purpose of 10 CFR Part 50, 

Appendix G and 10 CFR 50.61 is 

achieved by an alternative methodology 

for evaluating RPV material fracture 

toughness, the special circumstances 

required by 10 CFR 50(a)(2)(ii) for the 

granting of an exemption from portions 

of the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, 

Appendix G and 10 CFR 50.61 exist. 

4.0 Conclusion 

The staff has reviewed the licensee’s 

submittals and concludes that the 

licensee has provided adequate 

justification for its request for an 

exemption from certain requirements of 

Appendix G to 10 CFR Part 50 and 10 

CFR 50.61, to allow an alternative 

methodology that is based on using 

fracture toughness test data to determine 

initial, unirradiated properties for 

evaluating the integrity of the DBNPS 

RPV beltline welds. 

Accordingly, the Commission has 

determined that pursuant to 10 CFR 

50.12, ‘‘Specific exemptions,’’ an 

exemption from certain requirements of 

Appendix G to 10 CFR Part 50 and 10 

CFR 50.61 is authorized by law and will 

not endanger life or property or the 

common defense and security, and is 

otherwise in the public interest. 

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 76498). 

This exemption is effective upon 

issuance. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th 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. 2010–32141 Filed 12–21–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–63551; File No. SR–CME– 

2010–01] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; 

Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc.; 

Notice of Filing and Immediate 

Effectiveness of a Proposed Rule 

Change Relating to Amendments to 

Chicago Mercantile Exchange’s Rules 

Governing Contract Specifications for 

Physically Delivered Single Security 

Futures 

December 15, 2010. 

Pursuant to Section 19(b)(7) of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 

(‘‘Act’’),1 notice is hereby given that on 

December 7, 2010, Chicago Mercantile 

Exchange Inc. (‘‘CME’’) filed with the 

Securities and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’) the proposed 

rule change described in Items I and II 

below, which Items have been prepared 

by the self-regulatory organization. The 

Commission is publishing this notice to 

solicit comments on the proposed rule 

change from interested persons. CME 

also has filed this proposed rule change 

concurrently with the Commodity 

Futures Trading Commission (‘‘CFTC’’). 

CME filed a written certification with 

the CFTC under Section 5c(c) of the 

Commodity Exchange Act on November 

24, 2010. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES