CNL-26-010, Request for Exemption from Requirements of 10 CFR 54.23, Contents of Application-Environmental Information, and 10 CFR Part 51.53(c), Postconstruction Environmental Reports - Operating License Renewal Stage
| ML26034C383 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Watts Bar  (NPF-090, NPF-096) |
| Issue date: | 02/03/2026 |
| From: | Fegley D Tennessee Valley Authority |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Document Control Desk |
| References | |
| CNL-26-010 | |
| Download: ML26034C383 (0) | |
Text
10 CFR 54.23 10 CFR 51.53(c) 1101 Market Street, Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402 CNL-26-010 February 3, 2026 ATTN: Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-90 and NPF-96 NRC Docket Nos. 50-390 and 50-391
Subject:
Request for Exemption from Requirements of 10 CFR 54.23, Contents of application--environmental information, and 10 CFR Part 51.53(c),
Postconstruction environmental reports - Operating license renewal stage"
Reference:
- 1. TVA Letter to NRC, CNL-24-025, Notice of Intent to Pursue License Renewal for Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 - Submittal Schedule, dated March 25, 2024 [ML24085A212]
2.
NRC Letter to TVA, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 2 - One-Time Exemption From the Requirement of 10 CFR 54.17(c)
(EPID L-2025-LLE-0024), dated December 29, 2025 [ML25332A068]
Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Part 54.15, Specific exemptions, Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) requests Nuclear Regulatory Commission approval of the enclosed exemption request for the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant (WBN), Units 1 and 2, from the specific requirements of 10 CFR 54.23, Contents of application--
environmental information, and 10 CFR 51.53(c), Postconstruction environmental reports -
Operating license renewal stage. In Reference 1, TVA notified the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) of its intent to submit a License Renewal Application (LRA) for WBN Unit 1 in the fourth quarter of 2026. In Reference 2, the NRC granted TVA an exemption from the requirement of 10 CFR 54.17(c) such that WBN Unit 2 could be included within the scope of this LRA. The requirements of 10 CFR 54.23 require that LRAs include a supplement to the plants environmental report that complies with 10 CFR Part 51 Subpart A. In turn, 10 CFR 51.53(c) to Subpart A states that postconstruction environmental reports are applicable to LRAs, and outlines the content requirements.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission CNL-26-010 Page 2 February 3, 2026 As a federal agency, TVA is uniquely subject to National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations compared with other nuclear power plant licensees. These regulations drive a TVA NEPA environmental review of a proposed action. In the case of the previous Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant pursuit of subsequent license renewal, TVA noted that the information in the TVA NEPA environmental impact statement was largely redundant to information provided in the subsequent license renewal application environmental report. Completion of the WBN license renewal NEPA review is scheduled for December 2026, and will be prior to the planned submittal of the WBN LRA. Accordingly, TVA expects there would be large efficiencies gained with exempting TVA from the requirements of including an environmental report as part of the LRA (and instead the NRC crediting the information provided in the TVA NEPA environmental review). This approach would remain compliant with the underlying intent of the NEPA requirements for both agencies. This exemption request also encompasses the applicable Category 2 findings (summarized in Table B-1 of Appendix A to Subpart A of 10 CFR Part 51). These findings will not be included in the LRA, as they will be assessed in the separate TVA NEPA environmental review.
Details and supporting analysis for the exemption request are provided in Enclosure 1. An environmental assessment supporting the exemption request is provided in Enclosure 2.
TVA requests approval of this exemption request by July 31, 2026.
There are no new regulatory commitments associated with this submittal. Please address any questions regarding this request to Peter J. Donahue, Director, License Renewal, at pjdonahue@tva.gov.
Respectfully, Damon A. Fegley General Manager, Nuclear Regulatory Affairs & Emergency Preparedness
Enclosures:
- 1. Request for Exemption from Requirements of 10 CFR 54.23 and 10 CFR 51.53(c)
- 2. Environmental Assessment cc (Enclosures):
NRC Regional Administrator - Region II NRC Senior Resident Inspector - Watts Bar Nuclear Plant NRC Project Manager - Watts Bar Nuclear Plant
- Fegley, Damon Allan Digitally signed by Fegley, Damon Allan Date: 2026.02.03 14:07:20 -05'00'
CNL-26-010 Request for Exemption from Requirements of 10 CFR 54.23 and 10 CFR 51.53(c)
CNL-26-010 E1-1 of 7 Request for Exemption from Requirements of 10 CFR 54.23 and 10 CFR 51.53(c)
I.
SUMMARY
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 54 sets forth the requirements for the renewal of operating licenses for nuclear power plants. Part 54.23 states that "Each application must include a supplement to the environmental report that complies with the requirements of Subpart A of 10 CFR Part 51." Regarding postconstruction environmental reports, Part 51.53(c) states the requirement to submit an environmental report with the license renewal application (LRA) and details the content requirements.
Watts Bar Nuclear Plant (WBN), Units 1 and 2, are owned and operated by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). TVA intends to submit a license renewal application (LRA) for both units during the fourth quarter of 2026. As a federal agency, TVA is uniquely subject to National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations compared with other nuclear power plant licensees. These NEPA regulations drive a TVA environmental review of a proposed action. In the case of the previous Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant pursuit of subsequent license renewal, TVA noted that the information in the TVA NEPA environmental impact statement (EIS) was largely redundant to information provided in the Subsequent LRA environmental report. Completion of the WBN license renewal NEPA review is scheduled for completion in December 2026, which will precede the planned submittal of the WBN LRA. Accordingly, TVA expects there would be large efficiencies gained with exempting TVA from the requirements of including an environmental report as part of the LRA (and the NRC crediting the information provided in the TVA NEPA environmental review) and would remain compliant with the underlying intent of the NEPA requirements for both agencies.
This request encompasses all of the issues characterized as Category 2 findings summarized in Table B-1 of Appendix B to Subpart A of 10 CFR Part 51.
TVA also notes that Supplement 1 to the Final Environmental Statement (FES) for WBN
[NUREG-0498] was published in April 1995 with the following abstract.
The Final Environmental Statement-Operating License (FES-OL) issued in 1978 represents the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) previous environmental review related to the operation of Watts Bar Nuclear (WBN) Plant. The NRC staff has determined that it is appropriate to re-examine the issues associated with the environmental review before issuance of an operating license. The purpose of this NRC review is to discuss the effects of observed changes in the environment and to evaluate the changes in environmental impacts that have occurred as a result of changes in the WBN Plant design and proposed methods of operations since the last environmental review. A full scope of environmental topics has been evaluated, including regional demography, land and water use, meteorology, terrestrial and aquatic ecology, radiological and non-radiological impacts on humans and the environment, socioeconomic impacts, and environmental justice. The staff concluded that there are no significant changes in the environmental impacts since the NRC 1978 FES-OL from changes in plant-design, proposed methods of operations, or changes in the environment. The Tennessee Valley Authority's (TVA's) preoperational and operational monitoring programs were reviewed and found to be appropriate for establishing baseline conditions and ongoing assessments of environmental impacts.
The staff also conducted an analysis of plant operation with severe accident mitigation design alternatives (SAMDAs) and concluded that none of the SAMDAs, beyond the three procedural changes that the TVA committed to implement, would be cost-beneficial for further mitigating environmental impacts.
CNL-26-010 E1-2 of 5 In May 2013, the NRC issued Supplement 2 to the above FES relating to the operating of WBN Unit 2, following TVAs reactivation of that units pursuit of an Operating License. The summary conclusions were:
In this SFES [Supplemental Final Environmental Statement], the NRC staff concludes that impacts from the operation of WBN Unit 2 associated with water use, terrestrial resources, aquatic ecology, design-basis accidents, socioeconomics, the radiological and nonradiological environments, decommissioning, air quality, and land use are generally consistent with those reached in the 1978 FES-OL and Supplement No. 1 to the Final Environmental Statement Related to the Operation of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, dated April 1995 (1995 SFES-OL-1). In some cases, the impacts were less than those identified in the 1978 FES-OL.
Groundwater quality, public services, noise, socioeconomic transportation, cultural and historical resources, environmental justice, greenhouse gas emissions, severe accidents, severe accident mitigation alternatives, and cumulative impacts were not addressed in the 1978 FES-OL but are addressed in this SFES. The NRC staff concludes that impacts associated with the operation of WBN Unit 2 on groundwater quality, public services, noise, socioeconomic transportation, cultural and historical resources, greenhouse gas emissions, and severe accidents would be SMALL. In addition, the NRC staff concludes that the operation of WBN Unit 2 would not result in a disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effect on any of the low-income communities near the WBN site.
The NRC staff also considered cumulative impacts from past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. The NRC staff concludes that, although some of the cumulative impacts are LARGE as the result of other activities that affected the environment, the incremental impact from operation of WBN Unit 2 would in all cases be minor.1 The underlying purpose of the relevant 10 CFR Part 51 and 54 regulations is to ensure that an applicant for license renewal can demonstrate with reasonable assurance that an additional 20 years of licensed operations will not unduly harm the human environment in the site vicinity. The NEPA requirements on TVA as a federal agency establish that this environmental review will be performed prior to initiation of the proposed activity (submittal of the WBN LRA), and that based on the SFES conclusions these impacts are expected to be SMALL.
Exemptions are authorized by 10 CFR 54.15 for 10 CFR Part 54 in accordance with 10 CFR 50.12. Accordingly, TVA hereby requests an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 54.23 and 10 CFR 51.53(c) pursuant to 10 CFR 54.15 and 10 CFR 50.12. The following sections of this request demonstrate, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, that special circumstances exist to warrant the approval of this request; namely, that the application of 10 CFR 54.23 and 10 CFR 51.53(c) to the WBN LRA is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule. Additionally, both TVA and the NRC will benefit from the efficiencies gained with the preparation and review of the TVA NEPA environmental review prior to submittal of the WBN LRA without any adverse effect on public health and safety.
1 SFES Supplement 2 Section 4.14.6, Aquatic Ecology, concluded that the cumulative impacts on aquatic biota are LARGE based on non-WBN activities affecting the Watts Bar Reservoir and Chickamauga Reservoir, but that the impacts of the operation of WBN Unit 2 would be minor and not noticeable in comparison to the cumulative impact on aquatic ecology.
CNL-26-010 E1-3 of 5 II.
BACKGROUND TVA is the exclusive owner and operator and the holder of record for the operating licenses for WBN Units 1 and 2. The WBN units are classified as Westinghouse Four-Loop Pressurized Water Reactors with ice condensers. The licensed thermal capacity of each unit is 3459 MWt. The operating license for WBN Unit 1 was issued in February 1996.
Commercial operation of WBN Unit 1 was initiated in May 1996. The operating license for WBN Unit 2 was issued in October 2015, and commercial operation commenced in October 2016. Although WBN was conceived as a dual-unit site (with Construction Permits issued in January 1973), the construction of Unit 2 was halted in 1985 and then resumed in 2007. As a result, WBN Unit 1 has an operating license expiration date of February 7, 2036, and the Unit 2 operating license expires on October 21, 2055. The NEPA proposed action is for the NRC to renew the operating licenses of both WBN units in accordance with 10 CFR 54.
III.
BASIS FOR EXEMPTION REQUEST PURSUANT TO 10 CFR 50.12 The issuance of renewed operating licenses for nuclear power plants is governed by 10 CFR Part 54. The filing of a license renewal application to include an Environmental Report is addressed in 10 CFR 54.23 and 10 CFR 51.53(c). TVA, as a federal agency, is additionally subject to Title 18 of the Code of Federal Regulations (Conservation of Power and Water Resources), and in particular, Chapter XIII (Tennessee Valley Authority). In particular, Part 1318 allows for three options for a proposed action:
x Categorical Exclusion x
Environmental Assessment (EA) x Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
TVA has determined that an EA is the most appropriate vehicle for the required NEPA review, and plans to complete this by December 2026, which will precede the planned LRA submittal date. TVA notes the acceptability of an EA versus an EIS by the NRC for such recent activities as the planned restart of the Palisades Nuclear Plant and the licensing of the Hermes demonstration reactor.2 Most recently, the NRC issued SECY-25-0104, Subsequent License Renewal Review Efficiency [ML25229A004], which acknowledged that for subsequent license renewal the staff would prepare EAs to determine if a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) could be reached. It is TVAs opinion that this approach is equally valid for initial license renewal. The NRC would be at liberty to participate in the TVA NEPA process either in advance as a Cooperating Agency, via their readiness review process, or through the post-publication public comment process on the draft EA.
Regulation 10 CFR 54.15 regarding license renewal states, "Exemptions from the requirements of this part may be granted by the Commission in accordance with 10 CFR 50.12."
2 In Sections 4.2.1.1 and 4.2.1.2 of NUREG-1850, Frequently Asked Questions on License Renewal of Nuclear Power Reactors (Final Report), March 2006, the NRC acknowledged that reactor license renewal was not a major federal action that would trigger a NEPA EIS, but in response to public comments on the Final Rule on License Renewal opted to require a site-specific supplement to the generic EIS on license renewal in lieu of an EA finding of no significant impact.
CNL-26-010 E1-4 of 5 10 CFR 50.12(a) states, in pertinent part:
The Commission may, upon application by any interested person or upon its own initiative, grant exemptions from the requirements of the regulations of this part, which are:
(1) Authorized by law, will not present an undue risk to the public health and safety, and are consistent with the common defense and security.
(2) The Commission will not consider granting an exemption unless special circumstances are present. Special circumstances are present whenever...
(ii) 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 following analysis demonstrates that the requirements of 10 CFR 50.12(a)(1) are satisfied and that the special circumstances of 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) are applicable.
A. 10 CFR 50.12(a)(1)
This paragraph of the regulation requires an exemption request to satisfy three requirements: (1) the request must be authorized by law, (2) the request must not present an undue risk to public health and safety, and (3) the request must be consistent with the common defense and security. These three requirements are discussed below.
- 1. Authorized By Law The LRA content requirements of 10 CFR 54.23 which invoke inclusion of an environmental report that includes the subject matter of 10 CFR 51.53(c) to Subpart A were adopted for compliance with the NEPA of 1969. This Act requires an EIS for major federal actions that have a reasonably foreseeable significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Otherwise, an EA is required which is a concise public document to set forth the basis of a finding of no significant impact. It is the prerogative of the NRC to determine which level of review is applicable and was documented in the Final Rule on License Renewal that an EIS supplement would be required, even though there had been no finding that reactor license renewal was a significant federal action that significantly affected the quality of the human environment. The NRC has authority under 10 CFR 50.12 to grant exemptions from the requirements of NRC regulations. Therefore, no statutory or regulatory provision precludes the Commission from granting the requested exemption upon a proper showing.
Specifically, 10 CFR Part 54 states that the NRC may grant exemptions from the requirements of 10 CFR Part 54 in accordance with 10 CFR 50.12.
Accordingly, this requested exemption is "authorized by law," as required by 10 CFR 50.12(a)(1).
- 2. No Undue Risk to Public Health and Safety The granting of this exemption poses no risk to public health and safety. This exemption relates to redressing the redundancy of TVAs environmental review requirements related to WBN license renewal. TVA is performing a NEPA EA with formatting and subject matter as contained in Regulatory Guide (RG) 4.2, CNL-26-010 E1-5 of 5 Supplement 1, Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal Applications, at a level of detail commensurate with an EA. In this manner, the TVA NEPA EA will encompass the issues characterized as Category 2 findings as summarized in Table B-1 of Appendix B to Subpart A of 10 CFR Part 51. This justifies not including an environmental report in the WBN LRA.
- 3. Common Defense and Security The granting of this exemption request is consistent with the common defense and security. As noted above, this exemption request relates to redressing the redundancy of TVAs environmental review requirements related to WBN license renewal. Further, there are no security or safeguards issues raised by the proposed exemption.
B. 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii)
Part 50.12(a)(2) lists six "special circumstances" for which an exemption may be granted. Pursuant to the regulation, it is necessary for one of these special circumstances to be present in order for the NRC to consider granting an exemption request. One special circumstance that is applicable to this exemption request is found in 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), which states:
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 54.23 and 10 CFR 51.53(c) is to provide the NRC with sufficient information to make a determination with reasonable assurance that the renewal of the WBN operating licenses will not unduly harm the human environment in the site vicinity. While the NRC uses the EIS as the basis for making this conclusion under 10 CFR 51.20(b)(2), TVA expects that there will be sufficient environmental information: a) from the TVA NEPA EA that will be performed for WBN Units 1 and 2, and b) from the SFES documents published with licensing of WBN Unit 2, that the NRC will have reasonable assurance that renewing the operating license of WBN Units 1 and 2 will not significantly affect the quality of the human environment.
IV. Conclusion This exemption request provides sufficient basis to support the issuance of an exemption from 10 CFR 54.23 and 10 CFR 51.53(c) for inclusion of an environmental report with the LRA. As required by 10 CFR 50.12, the requested exemption is authorized by law, presents no undue risk to public health and safety, is consistent with the common defense and security, and is supported by "special circumstances." Accordingly, TVA hereby requests that the NRC grant this requested exemption.
CNL-26-010 Environmental Assessment CNL-26-010 E2-1 of 2 Environmental Assessment In accordance with 10 CFR 51.41 and 10 CFR 51.22(b), TVA has assessed whether the proposed exemption request would require an environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS), or whether the request meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25), as: (i) there is no significant hazards consideration; (ii) there is no significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite; (iii) there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative public or occupational radiation exposure; (iv) there is no significant construction impact; (v) there is no significant increase in the potential for or consequences from radiological accidents; and (vi) the requirements from which the exemption is sought involves reducing redundancy with respect to NEPA environmental reviews.
No Significant Hazards Consideration Analysis The proposed exemption would allow Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) to submit a license renewal application (LRA) for Watts Bar Nuclear Plant (WBN), Units 1 and 2, without inclusion of an environmental report. No physical changes are being made to the design features or operation of the facility as a result of, or in connection with, the proposed exemption from the LRA content requirements in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 54.23 and 10 CFR 51.53(c).
TVA has evaluated whether a significant hazards consideration is involved with the proposed exemption in accordance with the three standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92, "Issuance of amendment," as discussed below.
- 1.
Does the proposed exemption involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No The proposed exemption does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated because it does not involve a change to the design configuration or operation of the facility. The proposed exemption does not affect the source term, containment isolation, or radiological release assumptions used in evaluating the radiological consequences of an accident previously analyzed in the WBN Dual-Unit Updated Final Safety Analysis Report. Therefore, the proposed exemption does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
- 2. Does the proposed exemption create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously analyzed?
Response: No The proposed exemption does not involve physical alteration of plant systems, structures, or components, or changes in parameters governing the way the plant is operated and maintained. Therefore, the proposed exemption does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously analyzed.
CNL-26-010 E2-2 of 2
- 3. Does the proposed exemption involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No Margin of safety is associated with confidence in the ability of the fission product barriers (that is, fuel cladding, reactor coolant system pressure boundary, and containment structure) to limit the radiological dose to the public and control room operators in the event of an accident. The proposed exemption has no impact on the margin of safety and robustness provided in the design and construction of the facility. In addition, the proposed exemption will not relax any of the criteria used to establish safety limits, safety system settings, or limiting conditions of operation as defined in the technical specifications. Therefore, the proposed exemption does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Based on the above evaluation, TVA concludes that the proposed exemption from 10 CFR 54.17 (c) presents no significant hazards consideration under the standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92 and, accordingly, a finding that the exemption request involves "no significant hazards consideration" is justified.
Additional Considerations for Categorical Exclusion The requirements from which the exemption is sought involve reducing redundancy of TVA NEPA environmental review requirements relative to the LRA content, which is fundamentally administrative in nature.
There are no expected changes in the types, characteristics, or quantities of effluents discharged to the environment associated with the proposed exemption. Therefore, the proposed exemption will result in no significant change to the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite.
The proposed exemption does not involve any physical alterations to the plant configuration or any changes to the operation of the facility that could lead to a significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Thus, there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative public or occupational radiation exposure.
There is no significant construction impact as no construction activities are associated with the proposed exemption.
There is no significant increase in the potential for or consequences from radiological accidents.
As stated in the no significant hazards considerations discussion, there is no increase in the potential for or consequences from radiological accidents.
==
Conclusion:==
The proposed exemption would change a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area, as defined in 10 CFR 20, or would change an inspection or surveillance requirement. However, the proposed change does not involve (i) a significant hazards consideration, (ii) a significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite, or (iii) a significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Accordingly, the proposed change meets the eligibility criterion for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9), and pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no EIS or EA need be prepared in connection with the proposed exemption.