[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 24, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8278-8281]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-3899]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-414; NRC-2009-0072]


Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC; Notice of Consideration of Issuance 
of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant 
Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. 
NPF-35 issued to Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (the licensee), for 
operation of the Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 2, located in York 
County, South Carolina.
    The proposed amendment proposes a one-cycle revision to the 
Technical Specifications (TSs) to incorporate an interim alternate 
repair criterion for steam generator tube repair criteria during the 
End of Cycle 16 refueling outage and subsequent cycle 17 operation.
    Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission 
will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 
amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations.
    The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment 
request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the 
Commission's regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
(10 CFR), Section 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in 
accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or 
(3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required 
by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue 
of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:

    Criterion 1:
    Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    Of the various accidents previously evaluated, the following are 
limiting with respect to the proposed changes to TS 5.5.9, TS 5.6.8, 
and the Facility Operating License:
     SG Tube Rupture (SGTR) evaluation
     Steam Line Break (SLB) evaluation
     Locked Rotor Accident (LRA) evaluation
     Rod Ejection Accident (REA) evaluation
    Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) conditions cause a compressive 
axial load to

[[Page 8279]]

act on the tube. Therefore, since the LOCA tends to force the tube 
into the tubesheet rather than pull it out, it is not a factor in 
this amendment request. Another faulted load consideration is a Safe 
Shutdown Earthquake (SSE); however, the seismic analysis of Model D5 
SGs (the SGs at Catawba) has shown that axial loading of the tubes 
is negligible during a SSE.
    At normal operating pressures, leakage from Primary Water Stress 
Corrosion Cracking (PWSCC) below 17 inches from the TTS is limited 
by both the tube-to-tubesheet crevice and the limited crack opening 
permitted by the tubesheet constraint. Consequently, negligible 
normal operating leakage is expected from cracks within the 
tubesheet region.
    For the SGTR event, the required structural margin of the SG 
tubes is maintained by limiting the allowable ligament size for a 
circumferential crack to remain in service to 203 degrees below 17 
inches from the TTS and above 1 inch from the bottom of the 
tubesheet. Tube rupture is precluded for cracks in the hydraulic 
expansion region due to the constraint provided by the tubesheet. 
The potential for tube pullout is mitigated by limiting the 
allowable crack size to 203 degrees. This allowable crack size takes 
into account eddy current uncertainty and crack growth rate. It has 
been shown that a circumferential crack with an azimuthal extent of 
203 degrees meets the performance criteria of NEI (Nuclear Energy 
Institute) 97-06, Rev. 2, ``Steam Generator Program Guidelines'' and 
NRC draft Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.121, ``Bases for Plugging Degraded 
PWR Steam Generator Tubes.'' Therefore, the margin against tube 
burst/pullout is maintained during normal and postulated accident 
conditions and the proposed change does not result in a significant 
increase in the probability or consequence of a SGTR.
    The probability of a SLB, LRA, and REA are not affected by the 
potential failure of a SG tube, as the failure of a tube is not an 
initiator for any of these events. SLB leakage is limited by leakage 
flow restrictions resulting from the leakage path above potential 
cracks through the TTS crevice. The leak rate during postulated 
accident conditions has been shown to remain within the accident 
analysis assumptions for all axially or circumferentially oriented 
cracks occurring 17 inches below the TTS. Since normal operating 
leakage is limited to 60 gpd through any one SG and 240 gpd through 
all SGs, the attendant accident condition leak rate, assuming all 
leakage to be from indications below 17 inches from the TTS, would 
be bounded by 150 gpd through any one SG and 600 gpd through all 
SGs. This value is within the accident analysis assumptions for 
these design basis accidents for Catawba Unit 2.
    Based on the above, the performance criteria of NEI 97-06, Rev. 
2 and draft RG 1.121 continue to be met and the proposed change does 
not involve a significant increase in the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    Criterion 2:
    Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed changes to TS 5.5.9, TS 5.6.8, and the Facility 
Operating License do not introduce any changes or mechanisms that 
create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident. Tube 
bundle integrity is expected to be maintained for all plant 
conditions upon implementation of the IARC. The proposed change does 
not introduce any new equipment or any change to existing equipment. 
No new effects on existing equipment are created nor are any new 
malfunctions introduced.
    Therefore, based on the above evaluation, the proposed change 
does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of 
accident from any accident previously evaluated.
    Criterion 3:
    Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed changes to TS 5.5.9, TS 5.6.8, and the Facility 
Operating License maintain the required structural margins of the SG 
tubes for both normal and accident conditions. NEI 97-06, Rev. 2 and 
draft RG 1.121 are used as the basis in the development of a 
methodology for determining that SG tube integrity considerations 
are maintained within acceptable limits. Draft RG 1.121 describes a 
method acceptable to the NRC staff for meeting GDC 14, 15, 31, and 
32 by reducing the probability and consequences of a SGTR. Draft RG 
1.121 concludes that by determining the limiting safe conditions of 
tube wall degradation beyond which tubes with unacceptable cracking, 
as established by inservice inspection, should be removed from 
service or repaired, the probability and consequences of a SGTR are 
reduced. This RG uses safety factors on loads for tube burst that 
are consistent with the requirements of Section III of the ASME 
Code.
    For axially oriented cracking located within the tubesheet, tube 
burst is precluded due to the presence of the tubesheet. For 
circumferentially oriented cracking in a tube or the TTS weld, the 
supporting Westinghouse analysis defines a length of remaining tube 
ligament that provides the necessary resistance to tube pullout due 
to the pressure induced forces (with applicable safety factors 
applied).
    Based on the above, it is concluded that the proposed change 
does not result in any reduction of margin with respect to plant 
safety as defined in the UFSAR or Bases of the plant TS.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the 
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
    The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed 
determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of 
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final 
determination.
    Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the 
expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The 
Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-
day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment 
involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the 
Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-
day comment period should circumstances change during the 30-day 
comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, 
for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the 
Commission take action prior to the expiration of either the comment 
period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a 
notice of issuance. Should the Commission make a final No Significant 
Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will take place after 
issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will 
occur very infrequently.
    Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rulemaking, 
Directives and Editing Branch, TWB-05-B01M, Division of Administrative 
Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and 
page number of this Federal Register notice. Documents may be examined, 
and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), 
located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
    Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any 
person(s) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a 
request for a hearing and a petition to intervene with respect to 
issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license. 
Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be 
filed in accordance with the Commission's ``Rules of Practice for 
Domestic Licensing Proceedings'' in 10 CFR Part 2. Interested person(s) 
should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at 
the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File 
Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. 
Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide 
Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic 
Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing or petition 
for

[[Page 8280]]

leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or a 
presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief 
Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, 
will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the 
Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 
will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order.
    As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene 
shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in 
the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of 
the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons 
why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the 
following general requirements: (1) The name, address and telephone 
number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the 
requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the 
proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's 
property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the 
possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the 
proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must 
also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor 
seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.
    Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue 
of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the 
petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for 
the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert 
opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner 
intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The 
petitioner/requestor must also provide references to those specific 
sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the 
petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. 
The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine 
dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. 
Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the 
amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if 
proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner/requestor 
who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one 
contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
    Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, 
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, 
and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the 
hearing.
    If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final 
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The 
final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If 
the final determination is that the amendment request involves no 
significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the 
amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the 
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance 
of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment 
request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held 
would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
    All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a 
request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or 
other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a 
request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by 
interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c), 
must be filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule, which the NRC 
promulgated on August 28, 2007 (72 FR 49139). The E-Filing process 
requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents 
over the Internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic 
storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies of their 
filings unless they seek a waiver in accordance with the procedures 
described below.
    To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 
ten (10) days prior to the filing deadline, the petitioner/requestor 
must contact the Office of the Secretary by e-mail at 
[email protected], or by calling (301) 415-1677, to request (1) a 
digital ID certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or 
representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal 
server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and/or (2) 
creation of an electronic docket for the proceeding (even in instances 
in which the petitioner/requestor (or its counsel or representative) 
already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Each petitioner/
requestor will need to download the Workplace Forms ViewerTM 
to access the Electronic Information Exchange (EIE), a component of the 
E-Filing system. The Workplace Forms ViewerTM is free and is 
available at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/install-viewer.html. Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is 
available on NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html.
    Once a petitioner/requestor has obtained a digital ID certificate, 
had a docket created, and downloaded the EIE viewer, it can then submit 
a request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions 
should be in Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC 
guidance available on the NRC public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the 
time the filer submits its documents through EIE. To be timely, an 
electronic filing must be submitted to the EIE system no later than 
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a 
transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends 
the submitter an e-mail notice confirming receipt of the document. The 
EIE system also distributes an e-mail notice that provides access to 
the document to the NRC Office of the General Counsel and any others 
who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to 
participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the 
documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and 
other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for 
and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition 
to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document 
via the E-Filing system.
    A person filing electronically may seek assistance through the 
``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html or by calling the NRC electronic filing 
Help Desk, which is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, 
Monday through Friday. The electronic filing Help Desk can be contacted 
by telephone at 1-866-672-7640 or by e-mail at [email protected].
    Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not 
submitting documents electronically must file a motion, in accordance 
with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing requesting 
authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such 
filings must be submitted by: (1) first class mail addressed to the 
Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and 
Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited 
delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One 
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike,

[[Page 8281]]

Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications 
Staff. Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible 
for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is 
considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in 
the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service 
upon depositing the document with the provider of the service.
    Non-timely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be 
entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the presiding 
officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition and/
or request should be granted and/or the contentions should be admitted, 
based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-
(viii).
    Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in 
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at 
http://www.ehd.nrc.gov/ehd_proceeding/home.asp, unless excluded 
pursuant to an order of the Commission, an Atomic Safety and Licensing 
Board, or a Presiding Officer. Participants are requested not to 
include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, 
home addresses, or home phone numbers in their filings. With respect to 
copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose 
of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use 
application, Participants are requested not to include copyrighted 
materials in their submissions.
    For further details with respect to this license amendment 
application, see the application for amendment dated November 13, 2008, 
which is available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, 
located at One White Flint North, File Public Area O1 F21, 11555 
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available 
records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents 
Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room 
on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter 
problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact 
the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-
4737, or by e-mail to [email protected].

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day of February 2009.
    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John Stang,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-1, Division of 
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E9-3899 Filed 2-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P