[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 146 (Friday, July 31, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38234-38238]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18367]
[[Page 38234]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-454, 50-455, 50-456, and 50-457; NRC-2009-0331]
Exelon Generation Company, LLC; Notice of Consideration of
Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No
Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a
Hearing and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive
Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI) for Contention
Preparation
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos.
NPF-37 and NPF-66 issued to Exelon Generation Company, LLC (the
licensee) for operation of the Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2,
located in Ogle County, Illinois and to Facility Operating License Nos.
NPF-72 and NPF-77 issued to the licensee for operation of the Braidwood
Station, Units 1 and 2, located in Will County, Illinois.
The proposed amendment would permanently revise Technical
Specification (TS) 5.5.9, ``Steam Generator (SG) Program,'' to exclude
portions of the tube below the top of the SG tubesheet from periodic SG
tube inspections and plugging or repair. In addition, this amendment
proposes to revise the wording of reporting requirements in TS 5.6.9,
``Steam Generator (SG) Tube Inspection Report.'' The amendment
application dated June 24, 2009, contains sensitive unclassified non-
safeguards information (SUNSI).
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:
1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The previously analyzed accidents are initiated by the failure
of plant structures, systems, or components. The proposed change
that alters the steam generator (SG) inspection and reporting
criteria does not have a detrimental impact on the integrity of any
plant structure, system, or component that initiates an analyzed
event. The proposed change will not alter the operation of, or
otherwise increase the failure probability of any plant equipment
that initiates an analyzed accident.
Of the various accidents previously evaluated, the proposed
changes only affect the steam generator tube rupture (SGTR),
postulated steam line break (SLB), feedwater line break (FLB),
locked rotor and control rod ejection accident evaluations. Loss-of-
coolant accident (LOCA) conditions cause a compressive axial load to
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 has shown that axial loading of the tubes is negligible during
an SSE.
During the SGTR event, the required structural integrity margins
of the SG tubes and the tube-to-tubesheet joint over the H* distance
will be maintained. Tube rupture in tubes with cracks within the
tubesheet is precluded by the constraint provided by the presence of
the tubesheet and the tube-to-tubesheet joint. Tube burst cannot
occur within the thickness of the tubesheet. The tube-to-tubesheet
joint constraint results from the hydraulic expansion process,
thermal expansion mismatch between the tube and tubesheet, and from
the differential pressure between the primary and secondary side,
and tubesheet rotation. Based on this design, the structural margins
against burst, as discussed in draft Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.121,
``Bases for Plugging Degraded PWR Steam Generator Tubes,'' and TS
5.5.9, are maintained for both normal and postulated accident
conditions.
The proposed change has no impact on the structural or leakage
integrity of the portion of the tube outside of the tubesheet. The
proposed change maintains structural and leakage integrity of the SG
tubes consistent with the performance criteria of TS 5.5.9.
Therefore, the proposed change results in no significant increase in
the probability of the occurrence of a SGTR accident.
At normal operating pressures, leakage from tube degradation
below the proposed limited inspection depth is limited by the tube-
to-tubesheet crevice. Consequently, negligible normal operating
leakage is expected from degradation below the inspected depth
within the tubesheet region. The consequences of an SGTR event are
not affected by the primary-to-secondary leakage flow during the
event as primary-to-secondary leakage flow through a postulated tube
that has been pulled out of the tubesheet is essentially equivalent
to a severed tube. Therefore, the proposed change does not result in
a significant increase in the consequences of a SGTR.
Primary-to-secondary leakage from tube degradation in the
tubesheet area during operating and accident conditions is
restricted due to contact of the tube with the tubesheet. The
leakage is modeled as flow through a porous medium through the use
of the Darcy equation. The leakage model is used to develop a
relationship between operational leakage and leakage at accident
conditions that is based on differential pressure across the
tubesheet and the viscosity of the fluid. A leak rate ratio was
developed to relate the leakage at operating conditions to leakage
at accident conditions. Since the fluid viscosity is based on fluid
temperature and it is shown that for the most limiting accident, the
fluid temperature does not exceed the normal operating temperature
and therefore the viscosity ratio is assumed to be 1.0. Therefore,
the leak rate ratio is a function of the ratio of the accident
differential pressure and the normal operating differential
pressure.
The leakage factor of 1.93 for Braidwood Station Unit 2 and
Byron Station Unit 2, for a postulated SLB/FLB, has been calculated
as shown in Table 9-7 of WCAP-17072-P. However, EGC Braidwood
Station Unit 2 and Byron Station Unit 2 will apply a factor of 2.03
to the normal operating leakage associated with the tubesheet
expansion region in the condition monitoring (CM) and operational
assessment (OA). The leakage factor of 2.03 is a bounding value for
all SG model designs, both hot and cold legs, in Table 9-7 of WCAP-
17072-P. Through application of the limited tubesheet inspection
scope, the existing operating leakage limit provides assurance that
excessive leakage (i.e., greater than accident analysis assumptions)
will not occur. The assumed accident induced leak rate limit is 0.5
gallons per minute at room temperature (gpmRT) for the faulted SG
and 0.218 gpmRT for the unfaulted SGs for accidents that assume a
faulted SG. These accidents are the SLB and the locked rotor with a
stuck open PORV. The assumed accident induced leak rate limit for
accidents that do not assume a faulted SG is 1.0 gpmRT for all SGs.
These accidents are the locked rotor and control rod ejection.
No leakage factor will be applied to the locked rotor or control
rod ejection transients due to their short duration, since the
calculated leak rate ratio is less than 1.0.
The TS 3.4.13 operational leak rate limit is 150 gallons per day
(gpd) (0.104 gpmRT) through any one SG. Consequently, there is
sufficient margin between accident leakage and allowable operational
leakage. The maximum accident leak rate ratio for the Model D5
design SGs is 1.93 as indicated in WCAP-17072-P Table 9-7. However,
EGC will use the more conservative value of 2.03 accident leak rate
ratio for the most limiting SG model design identified in WCAP-
17072-P Table 9-7. This results in significant margin between the
conservatively estimated accident leakage and the allowable accident
leakage (0.5 gpmRT).
For the CM assessment, the component of leakage from the prior
cycle from below the
[[Page 38235]]
H* distance will be multiplied by a factor of 2.03 and added to the
total leakage from any other source and compared to the allowable
accident induced leakage limit. For the OA, the difference in the
leakage between the allowable leakage and the accident induced
leakage from sources other than the tubesheet expansion region will
be divided by 2.03 and compared to the observed operational leakage.
Based on the above, the performance criteria of NEI-97-06,
Revision 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 the applicable accidents previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change does 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 permanent alternate repair
criteria. 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 changes
do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
from any accident previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change defines the safety significant portion of
the SG tube that must be inspected and repaired. WCAP-17072-P
identifies the specific inspection depth below which any type tube
degradation has no impact on the performance criteria in NEI 97-06,
Revision 2, ``Steam Generator Program Guidelines.''
The proposed change that alters the SG inspection and reporting
criteria maintains the required structural margins of the SG tubes
for both normal and accident conditions. NEI 97-06, and draft RG
1.121 are used as the bases in the development of the limited
tubesheet inspection depth methodology for determining that SG tube
integrity considerations are maintained within acceptable limits.
Draft RG 1.121 describes a method acceptable to the NRC for meeting
General Design Criteria (GDC) 14, ``Reactor Coolant Pressure
Boundary,'' GDC 15, ``Reactor Coolant System Design,'' GDC 31,
``Fracture Prevention of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary,'' and
GDC 32, ``Inspection of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary,'' by
reducing the probability and consequences of a SGTR. Draft RG 1.121
concludes that by determining the limiting safe conditions for tube
wall degradation, the probability and consequences of a SGTR are
reduced. This draft RG uses safety factors on loads for tube burst
that are consistent with the requirements of Section III of the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (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, WCAP-17072-P defines a length
of degradation-free expanded tubing that provides the necessary
resistance to tube pullout due to the pressure induced forces, with
applicable safety factors applied. Application of the limited hot
and cold leg tubesheet inspection criteria will preclude
unacceptable primary-to-secondary leakage during all plant
conditions. The methodology for determining leakage as described in
WCAP-17072-P shows that significant margin exists between an
acceptable level of leakage during normal operating conditions that
ensures meeting the SLB accident-induced leakage assumption and the
TS leakage limit of 150 gpd.
Based on the above, it is concluded that the proposed changes do
not result in any reduction in a margin of safety.
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
and Directives 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. Written comments may also
be faxed to the Chief, Rulemaking and Directives Branch at 301-492-
3446. 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 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
[[Page 38236]]
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 in 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 an exemption 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
should 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 using the agency's adjudicatory e-
filing system 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 Meta-System Help Desk, which is
available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through
Friday, excluding government holidays. The Meta-System 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 an exemption request, 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, 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, the Presiding
Officer, or the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the request and/
or petition 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://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.
[[Page 38237]]
Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information,
such as social security numbers, home addresses, or home phone numbers
in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law requires
submission of such information. 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 June 24, 2009,
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 from the 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].
Attorney for Licensee: Mr. Bradley J. Fewell, Associate General
Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road,
Warrenville, IL 60555.
Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information (SUNSI) for Contention Preparation
1. This order contains instructions regarding how potential parties
to this proceeding may request access to documents containing sensitive
unclassified information.
2. Within ten (10) days after publication of this notice of
opportunity for hearing any potential party as defined in 10 CFR 2.4
who believes access to SUNSI is necessary for a response to the notice
may request access to such information. A ``potential party'' is any
person who intends or may intend to participate as a party by
demonstrating standing and the filing of an admissible contention under
10 CFR 2.309. Requests submitted later than ten (10) days will not be
considered absent a showing of good cause for the late filing,
addressing why the request could not have been filed earlier.
3. The requester shall submit a letter requesting permission to
access SUNSI to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff, and provide a copy to the Associate General
Counsel for Hearings, Enforcement and Administration, Office of the
General Counsel, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The expedited delivery or
courier mail address for both offices is U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The e-mail
address for the Office of the Secretary and the Office of the General
Counsel are [email protected] and [email protected],
respectively.\1\ The request must include the following information:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See footnote 4. While a request for hearing or petition to
intervene in this proceeding must comply with the filing
requirements of the NRC's ``E-Filing Rule,'' the initial request to
access SUNSI under these procedures should be submitted as described
in this paragraph.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. A description of the licensing action with a citation to this
Federal Register notice of opportunity for hearing;
b. The name and address of the potential party and a description of
the potential party's particularized interest that could be harmed by
the licensing action;
c. The identity of the individual requesting access to SUNSI and
the requester's need for the information in order to meaningfully
participate in this adjudicatory proceeding, particularly why publicly
available versions of the application would not be sufficient to
provide the basis and specificity for a proffered contention;
4. Based on an evaluation of the information submitted under items
2 and 3.a through 3.c, above, the NRC staff will determine within ten
days of receipt of the written access request whether (1) there is a
reasonable basis to believe the petitioner is likely to establish
standing to participate in this NRC proceeding, and (2) there is a
legitimate need for access to SUNSI.
5. A request for access to SUNSI will be granted if:
a. The request has demonstrated that there is a reasonable basis to
believe that a potential party is likely to establish standing to
intervene or to otherwise participate as a party in this proceeding;
b. The proposed recipient of the information has demonstrated a
need for SUNSI;
c. The proposed recipient of the information has executed a Non-
Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit and agrees to be bound by the terms
of a Protective Order setting forth terms and conditions to prevent the
unauthorized or inadvertent disclosure of SUNSI; and
d. The presiding officer has issued a protective order concerning
the information or documents requested.\2\ Any protective order issued
shall provide that the petitioner must file SUNSI contentions 25 days
after receipt of (or access to) that information. However, if more than
25 days remain between the petitioner's receipt of (or access to) the
information and the deadline for filing all other contentions (as
established in the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the
petitioner may file its SUNSI contentions by that later deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ If a presiding officer has not yet been designated, the
Chief Administrative Judge will issue such orders, or will appoint a
presiding officer to do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. If the request for access to SUNSI is granted, the terms and
conditions for access to such information will be set forth in a draft
protective order and affidavit of non-disclosure appended to a joint
motion by the NRC staff, any other affected parties to this
proceeding,\3\ and the petitioner(s). If the diligent efforts by the
relevant parties or petitioner(s) fail to result in an agreement on the
terms and conditions for a draft protective order or non-disclosure
affidavit, the relevant parties to the proceeding or the petitioner(s)
should notify the presiding officer within five (5) days, describing
the obstacles to the agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Parties/persons other than the requester and the NRC staff
will be notified by the NRC staff of a favorable access
determination (and may participate in the development of such a
motion and protective order) if it concerns SUNSI and if the party/
person's interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by
the release of the information (e.g., as with proprietary
information).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. If the request for access to SUNSI is denied by the NRC staff,
the NRC staff shall briefly state the reasons for the denial. The
requester may challenge the NRC staff's adverse determination with
respect to access to SUNSI (including with respect to standing) by
filing a challenge within five (5) days of receipt of that
determination with (a) the presiding officer designated in this
proceeding; (b) if no presiding officer has been appointed, the Chief
Administrative Judge, or if he or she is unavailable, another
administrative judge, or an administrative law judge with jurisdiction
pursuant to 10 CFR 2.318(a); or (c) if another officer has been
designated to rule on information access issues, with that officer.
In the same manner, a party other than the requester may challenge
an NRC staff determination granting access to SUNSI whose release would
harm that party's interest independent of the proceeding. Such a
challenge must be filed within five (5) days of the notification by the
NRC staff of its grant of such a request.
[[Page 38238]]
If challenges to the NRC staff determinations are filed, these
procedures give way to the normal process for litigating disputes
concerning access to information. The availability of interlocutory
review by the Commission of orders ruling on such NRC staff
determinations (whether granting or denying access) is governed by 10
CFR 2.311.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ As of October 15, 2007, the NRC's final ``E-Filing Rule''
became effective. See Use of Electronic Submissions in Agency
Hearings (August 28, 2007; 72 FR 49139). Requesters should note that
the filing requirements of that rule apply to appeals of NRC staff
determinations (because they must be served on a presiding officer
or the Commission, as applicable), but not to the initial SUNSI
requests submitted to the NRC staff under these procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. The Commission expects that the NRC staff and presiding officers
(and any other reviewing officers) will consider and resolve requests
for access to SUNSI, and motions for protective orders, in a timely
fashion in order to minimize any unnecessary delays in identifying
those petitioners who have standing and who have propounded contentions
meeting the specificity and basis requirements in 10 CFR part 2.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of July 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
Attachment 1--General Target Schedule for Processing and Resolving
Requests for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information (SUNSI) in This Proceeding
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Event
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0............................ Publication of Federal Register notice,
including order with instructions for
access requests.
10........................... Deadline for submitting requests for
access to SUNSI with information:
supporting the standing of a potential
party identified by name and address;
and describing the need for the
information in order for the potential
party to participate meaningfully in an
adjudicatory proceeding.
20........................... NRC staff informs the requester of the
staff's determination whether the
request for access provides a reasonable
basis to believe standing can be
established and shows need for SUNSI.
NRC staff also informs any party to the
proceeding whose interest independent of
the proceeding would be harmed by the
release of the information. If NRC staff
makes the finding of need for SUNSI and
likelihood of standing, NRC staff begins
document processing (preparation of
redactions or review of redacted
documents).
25........................... If NRC staff finds no ``need'' for SUNSI
or likelihood of standing, the deadline
for petitioner/requester to file a
motion seeking a ruling to reverse the
NRC staff's denial of access; NRC staff
files copy of access determination with
the presiding officer (or Chief
Administrative Judge or other designated
officer, as appropriate). If NRC staff
finds ``need'' for SUNSI, the deadline
for any party to the proceeding whose
interest independent of the proceeding
would be harmed by the release of the
information to file a motion seeking a
ruling to reverse the NRC staff's grant
of access.
30........................... Deadline for NRC staff reply to motions
to reverse NRC staff determination(s).
40........................... (Receipt +30) If NRC staff finds standing
and need for SUNSI, deadline for NRC
staff to complete information processing
and file motion for Protective Order and
draft Non-Disclosure Affidavit. Deadline
for applicant/licensee to file Non-
Disclosure Agreement for SUNSI.
60........................... Deadline for submitting petition for
intervention containing: (i)
demonstration of standing; (ii) all
contentions whose formulation does not
require access to SUNSI (+25 Answers to
petition for intervention; +7 petitioner/
requestor reply).
A............................ If access granted: Issuance of presiding
officer or other designated officer
decision on motion for protective order
for access to sensitive information
(including schedule for providing access
and submission of contentions) or
decision reversing a final adverse
determination by the NRC staff.
A+3.......................... Deadline for filing executed Non-
Disclosure Affidavits. Access provided
to SUNSI consistent with decision
issuing the protective order.
A+28......................... Deadline for submission of contentions
whose development depends upon access to
SUNSI. However, if more than 25 days
remain between the petitioner's receipt
of (or access to) the information and
the deadline for filing all other
contentions (as established in the
notice of hearing or opportunity for
hearing), the petitioner may file its
SUNSI contentions by that later
deadline.
A+53 (Contention receipt +25) Answers to contentions whose development
depends upon access to SUNSI.
A+60 (Answer receipt +7)..... Petitioner/Intervenor reply to answers.
B............................ Decision on contention admission.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. E9-18367 Filed 7-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P