[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 214 (Monday, November 5, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66486-66492]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26762]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2012-0259]
Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and
Combined Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards
Considerations and Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive
Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: License amendment request, opportunity to comment, and
opportunity to request a hearing, order.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Comments must be filed by December 5, 2012. A request for a
hearing must be filed by January 4, 2013. Any potential party as
defined in section 2.4 of Title of the Code of Federal Regulations (10
CFR), who believes access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information (SUNSI) is necessary to respond to this notice must request
document access by November 15, 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may access information and comment submissions related
to this document, which the NRC possesses and are publicly available,
by searching on http://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-2012-
0259. You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2012-0259. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-492-
3668; email: [email protected].
Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules,
Announcements, and Directives Branch (RADB), Office of Administration,
Mail Stop: TWB-05-B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555-0001.
Fax comments to: RADB at 301-492-3446.
For additional direction on accessing information and submitting
comments, see ``Accessing Information and Submitting Comments'' in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Accessing Information and Submitting Comments
A. Accessing Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2012-0259 when contacting the NRC
about the availability of information regarding this document. You may
access information related to this document, which the NRC possesses
and is publicly available, by the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2012-0259.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may access publicly available documents online in the NRC
Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the
search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and then select ``Begin Web-
based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's
Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-
4737, or by email to [email protected]. The ADAMS accession number
for each document referenced in this notice (if that document is
available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that a document is
referenced.
NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
B. Submitting Comments
Please include Docket ID NRC-2012-0259 in the subject line of your
comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make
your comment submission available to the public in this docket.
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your
comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as entering the comment submissions into
ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove
identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to
include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be
publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should
state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to
remove such information before making the comment submissions available
to the public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.
II. Background
Pursuant to Section 189a.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended
[[Page 66487]]
(the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission or
NRC staff) is publishing this notice. The Act requires the Commission
publish notice of any amendments issued, or proposed to be issued and
grants the Commission the authority to issue and make immediately
effective any amendment to an operating license or combined license, as
applicable, upon a determination by the Commission that such amendment
involves no significant hazards consideration, notwithstanding the
pendency before the Commission of a request for a hearing from any
person.
This notice includes notices of amendments containing SUNSI.
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses and Combined Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards
Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following
amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under
the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 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. The basis
for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown
below.
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.
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 or
combined 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 NRC's PDR, located at One White Flint North,
Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland
20852. The NRC regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC
Library on the NRC's Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to
intervene is filed within 60 days, 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 set forth the specific contentions which the requestor/petitioner
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
requestor/petitioner 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 requestor/
petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing.
The requestor/petitioner must also provide references to those specific
sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the
requestor/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 requestor/petitioner to relief. A requestor/
petitioner 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, and the Commission has not made a final
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration, 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, then any hearing held would take place before
the issuance of any amendment.
All documents filed in the 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's E-Filing rule
[[Page 66488]]
(72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007). 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 10
days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the
Office of the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by
telephone at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital identification (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 (2) advise
the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a request or
petition for hearing (even in instances in which the participant, or
its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID
certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish
an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the
Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is
available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html. System requirements for accessing
the E-Submittal server are detailed in the NRC's ``Guidance for
Electronic Submission,'' which is available on the agency's public Web
site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants
may attempt to use other software not listed on the Web site, but
should note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted
software, and the NRC Meta System Help Desk will not be able to offer
assistance in using unlisted software.
If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC
in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the
document using the NRC's online, Web-based submission form. In order to
serve documents through the Electronic Information Exchange System,
users will be required to install a Web browser plug-in from the NRC's
Web site. Further information on the Web-based submission form,
including the installation of the Web browser plug-in, is available on
the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.
Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a
docket has been created, the participant can then submit a request for
hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in
Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with the NRC guidance
available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the
documents are submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be
timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing 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 email notice confirming receipt of the document. The
E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access
to the document to the NRC's 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 by contacting the NRC Meta System
Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC's Web site
at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email at
[email protected], or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The
NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.,
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.
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. A presiding officer,
having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a
participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer
subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from
use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at
http://ehd1.nrc.gov/ehd/, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the
Commission, or the 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, 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 submission.
Petitions for leave to intervene must be filed no later than 60
days from the date of publication of this notice. Requests for hearing,
petitions for leave to intervene, and motions for leave to file new or
amended contentions that are filed after the 60-day deadline will not
be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the
filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the following three
factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1): (i) The information upon which the
filing is based was not previously available; (ii) the information upon
which the filing is based is materially different from information
previously available; and (iii) the filing has been submitted in a
timely fashion based on the availability of the subsequent information.
For further details with respect to this amendment action, see the
application for amendment which is available for public inspection at
the NRC's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. Publicly
available documents created or received at the NRC are accessible
electronically through ADAMS in the NRC Library at http://www.nrc.gov/
[[Page 66489]]
reading-rm/adams.html. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there
are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the
PDR's Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to
[email protected].
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-374, LaSalle County
Station (LSCS), Unit 2, LaSalle County, Illinois
Date of amendment request: October 11, 2012. A publicly available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML12285A387.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The proposed
amendment would revise Technical Specifications (TS) Section 2.1.1,
``Reactor Core SLs [Safety Limits],'' to reflect an increase of: 1) The
two-recirculation loop minimum critical power ratio (MCPR) SL from >=
1.11 to >= 1.14 and, 2) an increase in the single recirculation loop
MCPR SL from >= 1.12 to >= 1.17. The change is required to support the
LSCS, Unit 2, Cycle 15, operation. Cycle 15 will be the first cycle of
operation with a mixed core containing the following fuel types: Global
Nuclear Fuel (GNF) 2 fuel, and Areva ATRIUM-10 fuel.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: In support of the no significant hazards consideration
determination, an evaluation of each of the criteria set forth in 10
CFR 50.92, ``Issuance of Amendment'' is provided below:
1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The [MCPR SL] is defined in the TS Bases Section B 2.1.1 as that
limit ``that, in the event of an AOO [Anticipated Operational
Occurrence] from the limiting condition of operation, at least 99.9%
of the fuel rods in the core would be expected to avoid boiling
transition.'' The MCPR SL satisfies the requirements of General
Design Criterion 10 of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50 regarding
acceptable fuel design limits. The MCPR SL is reevaluated for each
reload using NRC-approved methodologies. The analyses for LSCS, Unit
2, Cycle 15 have concluded that a two-loop MCPR SL of >= 1.14, based
on the application of [GNF's] NRC-approved MCPR SL methodology, will
ensure that this acceptance criterion is met. For single-loop
operation, a MCPR SL of >= 1.17 also ensures that this acceptance
criterion is met. The MCPR operating limits are presented and
controlled in accordance with the LSCS, Unit 2, Core Operating
Limits Report (COLR).
The requested TS changes do not involve any plant modifications
or operational changes that could affect system reliability or
performance, or that could affect the probability of operator error.
The requested changes do not affect any postulated accident
precursors, do not affect any accident mitigating systems, and do
not introduce any new accident initiation mechanisms.
Therefore, the changes to the [MCPR SL] do not involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of any
accident 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 GNF2 fuel to be used in Cycle 15 is of a design compatible
with the co-resident Areva ATRIUM-10 fuel. Therefore, the
introduction of GNF2 fuel into the Cycle 15 core will not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident. The proposed
change does not involve any new modes of operation, any changes to
setpoints, or any plant modifications. The proposed revised MCPR SLs
have accounted for the mixed fuel core and have been shown to be
acceptable for Cycle 15 operation. Compliance with the criterion for
incipient boiling transition continues to be ensured. The core
operating limits will continue to be developed using NRC approved
methods which also account for the mixed fuel core design. The
proposed MCPR SLs or methods for establishing the core operating
limits do not result in the creation of any new precursors to an
accident.
Therefore, this change does not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
Response: No.
The MCPR SLs have been evaluated in accordance with GNF's NRC-
approved cycle-specific limit methodology to ensure that during
normal operation and during AOO's at least 99.9% of the fuel rods in
the core are not expected to experience transition boiling. The
proposed revised MCPR SLs have accounted for the mixed fuel core and
have been shown to be acceptable for Cycle 15 operation. Compliance
with the criterion for incipient boiling transition continues to be
ensured. On this basis, the implementation of the change to the MCPR
SLs does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant
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
requested amendments involve no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Ms. Tamra Domeyer, Associate General
Counsel, Exelon Nuclear, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555.
NRC Acting Branch Chief: Michael I. Dudek.
Nebraska Public Power District, Docket No. 50-298, Cooper Nuclear
Station, Nemaha County, Nebraska
Date of amendment request: May 30, 2012, as supplemented by letter
dated October 3, 2012. Public versions of the May 30 and October 3,
2012, letters are available in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML121570406
and ML12285A356, respectively.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). This
amendment request was originally noticed on August 7, 2012 (77 FR
47127); however, it is being re-noticed because the original notice did
not provide information about accessing SUNSI information or include
the Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information for Contention Preparation. The proposed
amendment would revise Technical Specification Section 2.0, ``Safety
Limits.'' Specifically, the proposed amendment would revise two
recirculation loop and single recirculation loop Safety Limit Minimum
Critical Power Ratio (SLMCPR) values to reflect results of a cycle-
specific calculation.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: 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. Do the proposed changes involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
Four accidents have been evaluated previously as reflected in
the CNS [Cooper Nuclear Station] Updated Safety Analysis Report
(USAR). These four accidents are (1) loss-of-coolant, (2) control
rod drop, (3) main steam line break, and (4) fuel handling. The
probability of an evaluated accident is derived from the
probabilities of the individual precursors to that accident.
Changing the SLMCPR values does not increase the probability of an
evaluated accident. The change does not require any physical
modifications to the plant or any components, nor does it require a
change in plant operation. Therefore, no individual precursors of an
accident are affected.
The consequences of an evaluated accident are determined by the
operability of plant systems designed to mitigate those
consequences. This proposed change makes no modification to the
design or operation of the systems that are used in mitigation of
accidents. Limits have been established, consistent with Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) approved methods, to ensure that fuel
performance during normal, transient, and accident conditions is
[[Page 66490]]
acceptable. The proposed change to the values of the SLMCPR
continues to conservatively establish this safety limit such that
the fuel is protected during normal operation and during any plant
transients or anticipated operational occurrences.
Based on the above, NPPD [Nebraska Public Power District]
concludes that the proposed change does not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Do the proposed changes create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
Creation of the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from an accident previously evaluated would require
creation of precursors of that accident. New accident precursors may
be created by modification of the plant configuration or changes in
how the plant is operated. The proposed change does not involve a
modification of the plant configuration or in how the plant is
operated. The proposed change to the SLMCPR values assures that
safety criteria are maintained.
Based on the above, NPPD concludes that the proposed change does
not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
from any previously evaluated.
3. Do the proposed changes involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
Response: No.
The values of the proposed SLMCPR provides a margin of safety by
ensuring that no more than 0.1% of fuel rods are expected to be in
boiling transition if the Minimum Critical Power Ratio limit is not
violated. The proposed change will ensure the appropriate level of
fuel protection is maintained. Additionally, operational limits are
established based on the proposed SLMCPR to ensure that the SLMCPR
is not violated during all modes of operation. This will ensure that
the fuel design safety criteria are met (i.e., that at least 99.9%
of the fuel rods do not experience transition boiling during normal
operation as well as anticipated operational occurrences).
Based on the above, NPPD concludes that the proposed changes do
not involve a significant 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.
Attorney for licensee: Mr. John C. McClure, Nebraska Public Power
District, Post Office Box 499, Columbus, NE 68602-0499.
NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. Markley.
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket Nos. 50-260 and 50-296, Browns Ferry
Nuclear Plant (BFN), Units 2 and 3, Limestone County, Alabama
Date of amendment request: July 30, 2012. A publicly available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML12215A005.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The proposed
amendments would delete the BFN, Units 2 and 3, Technical Specification
(TS) Surveillance Requirement 3.5.1.12, which requires the verification
of the capability to automatically transfer the power supply from the
normal source to the alternate source for each Low-Pressure Coolant
Injection (LPCI) subsystem inboard injection valve and each
recirculation pump discharge valve on a 24-month frequency. In
addition, the licensee is requesting approval for the use of a modified
loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) methodology that will require revising
TS 5.6.5.b to include a reference to the modified LOCA methodology.
Also, the request revises TSs 3.3.1.1, 5.6.5.a, and 5.6.5.b to include
the modified LOCA methodology for the oscilliation power range monitor
upscale function period based detection algorithm setpoint limits.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: 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 Technical Specification change involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The 480V RMOV [Reactor Motor-Operational Value] Boards D or E,
the equipment they power, or the automatic power transfer feature
provided for these boards are not precursors to any accident
previously evaluated in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report
(UFSAR). Therefore, the probability of an evaluated accident is not
increased by modifying this equipment.
The proposed deletion of a surveillance requirement to verify
automatic transfer capability for the power supply to the LPCI
inboard injection valves, RHR [residual heat removal] minimum flow
valves and recirculation pump discharge valves does not change the
number of Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) subsystems credited
in the BFN licensing basis. The proposed change does not affect the
operational characteristics or function of systems, structures, or
components (SSCs), the interfaces between credited SSCs and other
plant systems, or the reliability of SSCs. The proposed change does
not impact the capability of credited SSCs to perform their required
safety functions.
The proposed change to the ECCS Evaluation Model meets the
requirements of 10 CFR 50.46(a)(1)(ii) and ensures the limits of 10
CFR 50.46(b) are maintained. The proposed changes to TS 5.6.5a,
5.6.5b and 3.3.1.1 are required to implement AREVA Analytical
Methodologies.
Therefore, the proposed TS changes will not significantly
increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed Technical Specification change create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed deletion of a surveillance requirement to verify
automatic transfer capability for the power supply to the LPCI
inboard injection valves, RHR minimum flow valves and recirculation
pump discharge valves does not introduce new equipment, which could
create a new or different kind of accident.
The proposed change to the ECCS Evaluation Model meets the
requirements of 10 CFR 50.46(a)(1)(ii) and ensures the limits of 10
CFR 50.46(b) are maintained. The proposed changes to TS 5.6.5.a,
5.6.5.b and 3.3.1.1 are required to implement AREVA Analytical
Methodologies.
The proposed change does not alter the manner in which equipment
operation is initiated, nor will the functional demands on credited
equipment be changed. The capability of credited SSCs to perform
their required function will not be affected by the proposed change.
In addition, the proposed change does not affect the interaction of
plant SSCs with other plant SSCs whose failure or malfunction can
initiate an accident or transient. As such, no new failure modes are
being introduced. No new external threats, release pathways, or
equipment failure modes are created. Therefore, the proposed
deletion of a surveillance requirement to verify automatic transfer
capability for the power supply to the LPCI inboard injection
valves, RHR minimum flow valves and recirculation pump discharge
valves will not create a possibility for an accident of a new or
different type than those previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed Technical Specification change involve a
significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change to the ECCS Evaluation Model and the
deletion of a surveillance requirement to verify automatic transfer
capability for the power supply to the LPCI inboard injection
valves, RHR minimum flow valves and recirculation pump discharge
valves does not change the conditions, operating configurations, or
minimum amount of operating equipment credited in the safety
analyses for accident or transient mitigation.
The proposed change does not alter the assumptions contained in
the safety analyses. The proposed change does not alter the manner
in which safety limits, limiting safety system settings or limiting
conditions for operation are determined.
The proposed change does not impact the safety analysis-credited
redundancy or
[[Page 66491]]
availability of SSCs required for accident or transient mitigation,
or the ability of the plant to cope with design basis events as
assumed in safety analyses. In addition, no changes are proposed in
the manner in which the credited SSCs provide plant protection or
which create new modes of plant operation. The requirements of 10
CFR 50.46 and Appendix K continue to be met. Therefore, the proposed
change does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of
safety.
The proposed changes to TS 5.6.5a, 5.6.5b, and 3.3.1.1 are
required to implement AREVA Analytical Methodologies.
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.
Attorney for licensee: General Counsel, Tennessee Valley Authority,
400 West Summit Hill Drive, 6A West Tower, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902.
NRC Acting Branch Chief: Jessie F. Quichocho.
Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information for Contention Preparation
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-374, LaSalle County
Station, Unit 2, LaSalle County, Illinois
Nebraska Public Power District, Docket No. 50-298, Cooper Nuclear
Station, Nemaha County, Nebraska
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket Nos. 50-260 and 50-296, Browns Ferry
Nuclear Plant, Units 2 and 3, Limestone County, Alabama
A. This Order contains instructions regarding how potential parties
to this proceeding may request access to documents containing Sensitive
Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI).
B. Within 10 days after publication of this notice of hearing and
opportunity to petition for leave to intervene, any potential party who
believes access to SUNSI is necessary to respond to this notice may
request such access. A ``potential party'' is any person who intends to
participate as a party by demonstrating standing and filing an
admissible contention under 10 CFR 2.309. Requests for access to SUNSI
submitted later than 10 days after publication will not be considered
absent a showing of good cause for the late filing, addressing why the
request could not have been filed earlier.
C. The requestor 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, Maryland 20852. The email
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\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) A description of the licensing action with a citation to this
Federal Register notice;
(2) The name and address of the potential party and a description
of the potential party's particularized interest that could be harmed
by the action identified in C.(1); and
(3) The identity of the individual or entity requesting access to
SUNSI and the requestor's basis for the need for the information in
order to meaningfully participate in this adjudicatory proceeding. In
particular, the request must explain why publicly available versions of
the information requested would not be sufficient to provide the basis
and specificity for a proffered contention.
D. Based on an evaluation of the information submitted under
paragraph C.(3) the NRC staff will determine within 10 days of receipt
of the 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) The requestor has established a legitimate need for access to
SUNSI.
E. If the NRC staff determines that the requestor satisfies both
D.(1) and D.(2) above, the NRC staff will notify the requestor in
writing that access to SUNSI has been granted. The written notification
will contain instructions on how the requestor may obtain copies of the
requested documents, and any other conditions that may apply to access
to those documents. These conditions may include, but are not limited
to, the signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit, or
Protective Order \2\ setting forth terms and conditions to prevent the
unauthorized or inadvertent disclosure of SUNSI by each individual who
will be granted access to SUNSI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Any motion for Protective Order or draft Non-Disclosure
Affidavit or Agreement for SUNSI must be filed with the presiding
officer or the Chief Administrative Judge if the presiding officer
has not yet been designated, within 30 days of the deadline for the
receipt of the written access request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Filing of Contentions. Any contentions in these proceedings that
are based upon the information received as a result of the request made
for SUNSI must be filed by the requestor no later than 25 days after
the requestor is granted access to that information. However, if more
than 25 days remain between the date the petitioner is granted 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.
G. Review of Denials of Access.
(1) If the request for access to SUNSI is denied by the NRC staff
after a determination on standing and need for access, the NRC staff
shall immediately notify the requestor in writing, briefly stating the
reason or reasons for the denial.
(2) The requestor may challenge the NRC staff's adverse
determination by filing a challenge within 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.
H. Review of Grants of Access. A party other than the requestor 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 with the Chief Administrative Judge
within 5 days of the notification by the NRC staff of its grant of
access.
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.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Requestors should note that the filing requirements of the
NRC's E-Filing Rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007) 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 request submitted to the NRC staff under these
procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 66492]]
I. 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.
Attachment 1 to this Order summarizes the general target schedule for
processing and resolving requests under these procedures.
It is so ordered.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day of October 2012.
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
in This Proceeding
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Event/activity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0............................. Publication of Federal Register notice
of hearing and opportunity to petition
for leave to intervene, including order
with instructions for access requests.
10............................ Deadline for submitting requests for
access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information (SUNSI) with
information: Supporting the standing of
a potential party identified by name
and address; describing the need for
the information in order for the
potential party to participate
meaningfully in an adjudicatory
proceeding.
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 requestor/
petitioner reply).
20............................ Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
staff informs the requestor 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'' or no
likelihood of standing, the deadline
for requestor/petitioner 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.
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.
>A + 60....................... Decision on contention admission.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2012-26762 Filed 11-2-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P