|
---|
Category:GRANTS OF EXEMPTION FROM & EXTENSION TO NRC REQUIREME
MONTHYEARML20248C0491998-05-21021 May 1998 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR50,App R for Plant, Unit 1.Exemption Re Unpressurized Leakage Sites in RCP Lube Oil Collection Sys Granted ML20203B2031998-02-0606 February 1998 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR70.24, Criticality Accident Requirements. Exemption Granted ML20204C1721988-10-14014 October 1988 Corrected Page 1 of Exemption from 10CFR50.54(w)(5)(i), Increasing Amount of Onsite Property Damage Insurance Required by NRC Licensees ML20155F7021988-09-30030 September 1988 Temporary Exemption from 10CFR 50.54(w)(5)(i) Requirements Until Completion of Pending Rulemaking Extending Implementation Date Specified But Not Later than 890401 ML20236X6881987-11-25025 November 1987 Exemption from 10CFR50.54(w)(1) Requirements Re Util Maint of Min Insurance Coverage for Operating Plants.Exemption Extends Date for Acquiring Full Amount of Property Insurance Required to No Later than 881205,per Util 851005 Request ML20137H5531986-01-10010 January 1986 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR50,App J Re Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for water-cooled Power Reactors 1998-05-21
[Table view] Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARLIC-99-0094, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Eliminating Requirement for Licensees to Revise Their Inservice Insp & Testing Programs Beyond Baseline Edition & Addenda of ASME Code1999-10-0101 October 1999 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Eliminating Requirement for Licensees to Revise Their Inservice Insp & Testing Programs Beyond Baseline Edition & Addenda of ASME Code ML20216F6761999-09-17017 September 1999 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 72 Re Reporting Requirements for Nuclear Power Reactors & NUREG-1022,Rev 1 LIC-99-0082, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Rev to NRC Emergency Preparedness Regulations on Use of Potassium Iodide in Emergency Plans1999-09-10010 September 1999 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Rev to NRC Emergency Preparedness Regulations on Use of Potassium Iodide in Emergency Plans LIC-98-0168, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50.65, Requirements for Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Npps. Concerns Raised by NEI Well Founded & Endorses NEI Comments1998-12-0909 December 1998 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50.65, Requirements for Monitoring Effectiveness of Maint at Npps. Concerns Raised by NEI Well Founded & Endorses NEI Comments ML20248C0491998-05-21021 May 1998 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR50,App R for Plant, Unit 1.Exemption Re Unpressurized Leakage Sites in RCP Lube Oil Collection Sys Granted LIC-98-0052, Comment Supporting Proposed Generic Communication Re Lab Testing of Nuclear-Grade Activated Charcoal1998-03-27027 March 1998 Comment Supporting Proposed Generic Communication Re Lab Testing of Nuclear-Grade Activated Charcoal LIC-98-0025, Comment on Proposed Communications Re Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Sys at NPP1998-02-24024 February 1998 Comment on Proposed Communications Re Year 2000 Readiness of Computer Sys at NPP ML20203B2031998-02-0606 February 1998 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR70.24, Criticality Accident Requirements. Exemption Granted ML20199E2941997-11-19019 November 1997 Order Prohibiting Involvement in NRC Licensed Activities (Effectively Immediately).Fs Bandy Prohibited from Involvement in Activities Licensed by NRC for Period of 5 Yrs ML20151L9901997-07-24024 July 1997 Comments on NUREG-1606, Proposed Regulatory Guidance Re Implementation of 10CFR50.59 (Changes,Tests or Experiments) ML20217J6521997-07-22022 July 1997 Demand for Info Re NRC Question Re Arrest Info Supplied to OPPD in Mar 1993 for Unescorted Access to Plant ML20141B8821997-05-0606 May 1997 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR73 Re Changes to NPP Security Requirements.Rule Should Not Be Limited to Designated Licensee or licensee-owned Vehicles,For Listed Reasons LIC-97-0052, Comment Opposing Proposed safety-conscious Work Environ Strategies1997-04-17017 April 1997 Comment Opposing Proposed safety-conscious Work Environ Strategies ML20128F6571996-09-26026 September 1996 Comment on Proposed Generic Communication Re Primary Water Stress Corrosion Cracking of Control Rod Drive Mechanism & Other Vessel Head Penetrations LIC-96-0110, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Mod to fitness-for-duty Program Requirements1996-08-0505 August 1996 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Mod to fitness-for-duty Program Requirements ML20117P0961996-06-18018 June 1996 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Financial Assurance Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Power Reactors. Any Addl Costs Imposed on Licensee Due to Change in Decommissioning Funding Will Aggravate Potential Investment LIC-96-0069, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50.76, Reporting Reliability & Availability Info for Risk-Significant Sys & Equipment1996-06-11011 June 1996 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50.76, Reporting Reliability & Availability Info for Risk-Significant Sys & Equipment LIC-95-0193, Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 51 Re Decommissioning of NPPs1995-10-11011 October 1995 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 51 Re Decommissioning of NPPs LIC-95-0165, Comments Supporting Revised Salp1995-08-29029 August 1995 Comments Supporting Revised Salp ML20086T3911995-07-20020 July 1995 Comments on Proposed Generic Communications Re Testing of safety-related Logic Circuits LIC-95-0116, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR73 Re Changes to NPP Security Requirements Associated W/Containment Access Control1995-05-25025 May 1995 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR73 Re Changes to NPP Security Requirements Associated W/Containment Access Control LIC-95-0106, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Changes in Frequency Requirements for Emergency Planning & Preparedness Exercises from Annual to Biennial1995-05-22022 May 1995 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Changes in Frequency Requirements for Emergency Planning & Preparedness Exercises from Annual to Biennial LIC-94-0236, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR20 Re Frequency of Medical Exams for Use of Respiratory Protection Equipment. Util Feels Proposed Change Would Be Beneficial in Terms of Cost Savings1994-11-11011 November 1994 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR20 Re Frequency of Medical Exams for Use of Respiratory Protection Equipment. Util Feels Proposed Change Would Be Beneficial in Terms of Cost Savings LIC-94-0137, Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-59 Re Proposed Changes to 10CFR50 & 73 Concerning Frequency for Conducting Independent Reviews & Audits of Safeguards Contingency Plan & Security Program1994-07-18018 July 1994 Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-59 Re Proposed Changes to 10CFR50 & 73 Concerning Frequency for Conducting Independent Reviews & Audits of Safeguards Contingency Plan & Security Program LIC-94-0072, Informs That Implementation of Proposed Rulemaking at Plant Would Require Numerous Procedure Changes,Addl Dosimetry for Members of Public, & Changes to Chemical Effluent Release Software Due to Deletion of Term Controlled Area1994-03-31031 March 1994 Informs That Implementation of Proposed Rulemaking at Plant Would Require Numerous Procedure Changes,Addl Dosimetry for Members of Public, & Changes to Chemical Effluent Release Software Due to Deletion of Term Controlled Area LIC-94-0047, Comment on Draft NUREG-1482, Guidelines for IST Programs at Npps. Licensee Should Not Have to State in IST Program Methods of Ensuring Code Compliance,If Licensee Complying W/ Code1994-02-18018 February 1994 Comment on Draft NUREG-1482, Guidelines for IST Programs at Npps. Licensee Should Not Have to State in IST Program Methods of Ensuring Code Compliance,If Licensee Complying W/ Code LIC-94-0035, Comments on Proposed GL Guidance for Mod of Tech Specs to Reflect Revs to 10CFR20 & 10CR50.36,related Current Industry Initiatives & Miscellaneous Related Editorial Clarifications1994-02-0404 February 1994 Comments on Proposed GL Guidance for Mod of Tech Specs to Reflect Revs to 10CFR20 & 10CR50.36,related Current Industry Initiatives & Miscellaneous Related Editorial Clarifications LIC-93-0300, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR73 Re Protection Against Malevolent Use of Vehicles at NPPs1993-12-20020 December 1993 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR73 Re Protection Against Malevolent Use of Vehicles at NPPs ML20045H3231993-07-0606 July 1993 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR55 Re Exam Procedures for Operator Licensing.Supports Rule ML20096A0351992-05-0101 May 1992 Comment on Petition for Rulemaking, Elimination of Requirements Marginal to Safety ML20094K7831992-03-17017 March 1992 Comments Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-57 Re Insurance Requirements for Shutdown Reactors ML20092D2791992-01-31031 January 1992 Comment Supporting & Endorsing Positions Submitted by NUMARC & BWR Owners Group Re Rev 1 to NUREG-1022, Event Reporting Sys ML20086F8931991-11-11011 November 1991 Comment Opposing Petition for Rulemaking PRM-30-59 Re Rev of Decommissioning Regulations to Provide for Means of self-guarantee of Decommissioning Funding Costs by Licensees Meeting Stringent Financial Assurance Requirements ML20085K1581991-10-23023 October 1991 Supports Proposed Rule 10CFR50,requiring That NRC Evaluate Decommissioning Funding Plans for Power Reactors That Shut Down Prematurely on case-by-case Basis LIC-91-0063, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Incorporating 1986- 1988 Addenda & 1989 Editions of ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code,Section Iii,Div 1 & Section Xi,Div 1,by Ref Into 10CFR50.55a1991-04-15015 April 1991 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Incorporating 1986- 1988 Addenda & 1989 Editions of ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code,Section Iii,Div 1 & Section Xi,Div 1,by Ref Into 10CFR50.55a LIC-91-0046, Comment Supporting Proposed Rule (Misc 90-10), Regulatory Impact Survey Rept1991-01-25025 January 1991 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule (Misc 90-10), Regulatory Impact Survey Rept LIC-90-0820, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 54 Re Nuclear Power Power Plant License Renewal.Endorses NUMARC Comments1990-10-12012 October 1990 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 54 Re Nuclear Power Power Plant License Renewal.Endorses NUMARC Comments ML20012C6471990-03-12012 March 1990 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Fracture Toughness Requirements for Protection Against Thermal Shock Events. Recommends That Use of Credible Surveillance Data Be Allowed to Establish Consistent Calculational Method W/Reg Guide ML19353B2091989-11-30030 November 1989 Comments on Draft Reg Guide,Task DG-1001, Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants. Util Supports NUMARC Position ML20246K2441989-07-0505 July 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Enactment of Generic Ltr 89-02 Requirements & Info Sharing Would Achieve Desired Results LIC-88-1031, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty. Endorses NUMARC Comments.Believes That 100% Annual Testing Frequency Appropriate as Adequate Deterrent & More than 100% Would Install Burden of Excess for Certain Employees1988-11-21021 November 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty. Endorses NUMARC Comments.Believes That 100% Annual Testing Frequency Appropriate as Adequate Deterrent & More than 100% Would Install Burden of Excess for Certain Employees ML20206C1081988-11-0404 November 1988 Requests for Renewal or Extension of Exemption from 10CFR50.54(w)(i) Re Property Insurance Regulations ML20204C1721988-10-14014 October 1988 Corrected Page 1 of Exemption from 10CFR50.54(w)(5)(i), Increasing Amount of Onsite Property Damage Insurance Required by NRC Licensees ML20155F7021988-09-30030 September 1988 Temporary Exemption from 10CFR 50.54(w)(5)(i) Requirements Until Completion of Pending Rulemaking Extending Implementation Date Specified But Not Later than 890401 ML20236X6881987-11-25025 November 1987 Exemption from 10CFR50.54(w)(1) Requirements Re Util Maint of Min Insurance Coverage for Operating Plants.Exemption Extends Date for Acquiring Full Amount of Property Insurance Required to No Later than 881205,per Util 851005 Request ML20206C1341987-11-0202 November 1987 Requests for Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR50.54(w)(i) Re Property Insurance Requirements Due to Licensees Inability to Provide Equivalent Protection in Lieu of Purchasing Nuclear Electric Insurance Ltd Coverage ML20236F7601987-10-0202 October 1987 Request for Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR50.54.Util Will Not Be Able to Comply W/Requirements by Effective Date or within 60 Days Thereafter ML20238E0891987-09-10010 September 1987 Order Imposing Civil Monetary Penalty in Amount of $50,000 Based on Violations Identified During Insps on 850916-20, 1001-08,1106-08,18-22 & 1209-17 ML20137H5531986-01-10010 January 1986 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR50,App J Re Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for water-cooled Power Reactors ML20132G6021985-07-30030 July 1985 Order Imposing Civil Penalty in Amount of $21,425 for Violations Noted During Special Insp on 840820-24 Re Failure to Adhere to NRC Regulations & Physical Security Plans 1999-09-17
[Table view] |
Text
-. _. _ _. _
i i
l 7590-01 P UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
In the Matter of
)
)
i OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
)
Docket No. 50-285
)
i Fort Calhoun Ste! ion, Unit No.1
)
t EXEMPTION j
1.
The Omaha Public Power District (OPPD)is the holder of Facility Operating License No.
DPR-40 for the Fort Calhoun Station, Unit No.1 (FCS) which authorizes operation of the Fort ilhoun Station, Unit No.1. The license provides, among other things, that the licensee is i
subject to all rules, regulations, and orders of the Commission now or hereafter in effect.
The facility consists of one pressurized-water reactor at the licensee's site located in 4
i 4
Washington County, Nebraska.
)
i 11.
Section 70.24 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations," Criticality Accident Requirements," requires that each licensee authorized to possess special nuclear material (SNM) shall maintain a criticality accident monitoring system in each area where such material
)
is' handled, used, or stored. Subsections (a)(1) and (a)(2) of 10 CFR 70.24 specify detection and sensitivity requirements that these monitors must meet. Subsection (a)(1) also specifies that all areas subject to criticality accident monitoring must be covered by two detectors.
Subsection (a)(3) of 10 CFR 70.24 requires licensees to maintain emergency procedures for i
9002240226 900206 PDR ADOCK 05000295 P
PDR
-2*
each area in which this licensed SNM is handled, used, or atored and provides that (1) the procedures ensure that all personnel withdraw to an trea of safety upon the sounding of a criticality accident mon' tor alarm, (2) the procedures trust include drills to familiarize personnel with the evacuation plen, and (3) the procedures designate responsible individuals for determining the cause of the alarm and placement of radiation survey instruments in accessible locations for use in such an emergency. Subsection (b)(1) of 10 CFR 70.24 requires licensees to have a means to identify quickly personnel who have received a dos.o of 10 rads or more.
Subsection (b)(2) of 10 CFR 70.24 requires licenst es to maintain personnel decontamination facilities, to maintain arrangements for a physician and ether medical personnel qualified to handle radiation emergencies, and to maintain arrangements for the transportation cf contaminated individuals to treatment facilities outside t::e site boundary. Paragraph (c) of 10 CFR 70.24 exempts Part 50 licensees from the requirements of paragraph (b) of 10 CFR 70.24 for SNM used or to be used in the reactor. Paragraph (d) of 10 CFR 70.24 4
states that any licensee who believes that there is good cause why he should be granted an exemption from all or part of 10 CFR 70.24 may apply to the Commission for such an exerr ption and shall specify the reasons for the relief requested.
Ill.
The SNM that could be assembled into a critical mass at FCS is in the form of nuclear i
fuel. In addition, the quantity of SNM other than fuel that is stored on site in any given location is smali enough to preclude achieving a critical mass. As set forth below, the Commissiva's technical staff has evaluated the possibility of an inadvertent criticality of the nuclear fuel at FCS.
r y-,.
. By letter dated August 29,1997, as supplemented by letter dated October 23,1997, thJ licensee requested an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 70.24 in its entirety for FCS.
The licensee proposes to handte and store unirradiated fuel without having a criticality monitoring system with the sensitivity required by 10 CFR 70.24.
The basis for the staff to determine that inadvertent or accidental criticality is extremely unlikely can be established through compliance with the FCS Technical Speci'ications, the geomc'.ric spacing of fuel assemblies in the new fuel storage racks and spent fuel storage pool, and administrative controls imposed on fuel handling procedures.
SNM, as nuclear fuel, is stored in the new fuel storage rack and in the spent fuel pool.
The spent fuel pool is used to store irradiated fuel under water after its discharge from the reactor and new (unirradiated) fue! prior to loading into the ret.ctor. New fuel is stored in the new fuel storage rack in a dry condition.
SNM is also present in the form of excore fission chamber detectors and startup neutron sourcee The small quantity of SNM present in these latter items precludes an inadvertent criticality, l
The spent fuel pool is designed to store the fuel in a geometric array using a solid neutron absorber that precludes criticality. The
..,ctive neutron multiplication factor, k,,, is maintained less than or equal to 0.95 by the solid neutron absorber for fuel enriched tc 4 5 wt%
U-235. Although soluble boron is maintained in the spent fuel pool, no credit is taken for it in determining k,.
The new fuel storage racks may be used to receive and store new fuel in a dry condition upon arrival onsite and prior to loading in the reactor or spent fuel pool. The spacing between new fuel assemblies and the solid neutron absorbers in the storage racks is sufficient to
. maintain the dry array in a suberitical condition. The new fuel storage rack is located at an elevation of 18.75 feet above the main floor which provides adequate drainage and precludes flooding. Because no fire protection sprinkler system exists in this area, there is no source of low-density aqueous fcam optimum moderation. The current approved maximum enrichment of 4.5 wt% U-235 for the new fuel assemblies results in a maximum k, of less than 0.90 under dry conditions.
Nuclear fuel is moved between the NRC-approved shipping containers, the new fuel storage racks, the reactor vessel, and the spent fuel pool to accommodate refueling operations.
In all cases, fuel movements are procedurally controlled and designed to preclude conditions involving criticality concerns. For example, during new fuel receipt inspection, FCS fuel handling procedures allow a maximum of two fuel assemblies to be in the inspection stands in the receipt area (out of the shipping container and not in the new fuel storage rack). Howeve..
when installed in the inspection stands, both assemblies have an edge-to-edge separation distance in excess of 14 feet. This geometric spacing is well in excess of that maintained by the NRC-approved shipping container (approximately 3 inches). There are no sprinklers in the new fuel receipt / storage room and the use of fire fighting equipment is very unlikely since there are no combustible materials permanently stored in this room. Even if fire suppression water were introduced into the room, sufficient drainage exists to preclude potential moderation of new fuel assemblies. Therefore, because of the large physical separation of new fuel assemblies and the extremely unlikely event of any potential moderation, there is sufficient assurance that k,, remains less tnan 0.95, thus precluding criticality.
FCS was licensed to the 70 General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plant Construction published as drafts in the Federal Register (32 FR 10213) on July 11,1967. Draft
P 5-Critarion 18, Monitoring Fuel and Waste Storage, was met. As noted in Section 11.2.3 and Appendix G of the FCS Updated Safety Analysis Report, area monitoring of dose rates is supplied in the containment and auxiliary buildings, including the fuel storage areas. Local and control room alarms and indicators (not necessarily meeting the 10 CFR 70.24 sensitivity requirements) are provided to alert personnel to take appropnate action in the unlikely event of excessive radiation leels due to accidental criticality.
The purpose of the criticality monitors required by 10 CFR 70.24 is to ensure that if a criticality were to occur during the handling of SNM, personnel would be alerted to that fact and would take appropriate action. In view of the above information, the staff has determined that it is extremely unlikely for an inadvertent criticality to occur in SNM handling or storage areas at FCS. Criticality is precluded with the present design configuration, Technical Specification requirements, administrative controls, and the fuel handling equipment and procedures. In addition, as described above, the licensee has radiation monitors, as required by General Design Criterion 63, in fuel storage and handling areas. These monitors will alert personnel to excessive radiation levels and allow them to initiate appropriate safety actions. The low probability of an inadvertent criticality, together with the licensee's adherence to General Design Criterion 63, constitutes good cause for granting an exemption to the requirements of 10 CFR 70.24.
IV.
Accordingly, the Commission has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR 70.14, this exemption is authorized by law, will not endanger life or pmperty or the common defense and security, and is otherwise in the public interest. Therefore, the Commission hereby grants
6-Omaha Public Power District an exemption as described in Section ll above from 10 CFR 70.24," Criticality Accident Requirements" for the Fort Calhoun Station.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, the Commission has determined that the granting of this exemption will have no significant impact on the quality of the human environment (63 FR 5821).
This exemptiou.. cffective upon issuance.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g2nd,,
M Frank J.
- iraglia, Acting Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of February 1998 l
-