[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 156 (Tuesday, August 13, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49298-49305]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19320]
[[Page 49298]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2013-0171]
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, opportunity
to request a hearing and petition for leave to intervene; order.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Comments must be filed by September 12, 2013. A request for a
hearing or petition for leave to intervene must be filed by October 15,
2013. Any potential party as defined in Section 2.4 of Title 10 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), who believes access to SUNSI is
necessary to respond to this notice must request document access by
August 23, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comment by any of the following methods
(unless this document describes a different method for submitting
comments on a specific subject):
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-0171. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-
3422; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document.
Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules,
Announcements, and Directives Branch (RADB), Office of Administration,
Mail Stop: 3WFN, 06A44M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001.
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-2013-0171 when contacting the NRC
about the availability of information regarding this document. You may
access publicly-available information related to this action by the
following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-0171.
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-2013-0171 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 posts 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 (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) 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
[[Page 49299]]
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 ``Agency
Rules of Practice and Procedure'' 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 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 (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
[[Page 49300]]
for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in Portable Document
Format (PDF) in accordance with the NRC's 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 to
[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.
However, a request to intervene will require including information on
local residence in order to demonstrate a proximity assertion of
interest in the proceeding. 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 three factors in 10
CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(iii).
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's Library at http://www.nrc.gov/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].
Carolina Power and Light Company, Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324,
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2, Brunswick County, North
Carolina
Date of amendment request: September 25, 2012, as supplemented by
letter dated December 17, 2012. A publicly available version is in
ADAMS under Accession No. ML12285A428.
Description of amendment request: This license amendment request
(LAR) contains sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information
(SUNSI). The LAR requests NRC review and approval for adoption of a new
risk-informed, performance-based (RI-PB) fire protection licensing
basis for Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2. The request is
submitted in accordance with the requirements in 10 CFR 50.48(a) and
(c), and the guidance in NRC Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.205, ``Risk-
Informed Performance-Based Fire Protection for Existing Light-Water
Nuclear Power Plants,'' National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)
805, ``Performance-Based Standard for Fire Protection for Light Water
Reactor Electric Generating Plants (2001),'' and Nuclear Energy
Institute (NEI) 04-02, ``Guidance for Implementing a Risk-Informed,
Performance-Based Fire Protection Program under 10 CFR 50.48(c).''
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:
Criterion 1: Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
Operation of the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant (BSEP), Units 1
and 2 in accordance with the proposed amendment does not result in a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents
previously evaluated. The proposed amendment does not affect
accident initiators or precursors as described in the BSEP Updated
Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR), nor does it adversely alter
design assumptions, conditions, or configurations of the facility,
and it does not adversely impact the ability of structures, systems,
or components (SSCs) to perform their intended function to mitigate
the consequences of an initiating event within the assumed
acceptance limits. The proposed changes do not affect the way in
which safety-related systems perform their functions as required by
the accident analysis. The SSCs required to safely shut down the
reactor and to maintain it in a safe shutdown condition will remain
capable of performing their design functions.
[[Page 49301]]
The purpose of this amendment is to permit BSEP, Units 1 and 2
to adopt a new risk-informed, performance-based fire protection
licensing basis that complies with the requirements in 10 CFR
50.48(a) and 10 CFR 50.48(c), as well as the guidance contained in
Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.205. The NRC considers that NFPA 805
provides an acceptable methodology and performance criteria for
licensees to identify fire protection requirements that are an
acceptable alternative to the 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, fire
protection features (69 FR 33536; June 16, 2004). Engineering
analyses, which may include engineering evaluations, probabilistic
risk assessments, and fire modeling calculations, have been
performed to demonstrate that the performance-based requirements of
NFPA 805 have been met.
NFPA 805, taken as a whole, provides an acceptable alternative
for satisfying General Design Criterion 3 (GDC 3) of Appendix A to
10 CFR Part 50, meets the underlying intent of the NRC's existing
fire protection regulations and guidance, and achieves defense-in-
depth along with the goals, performance objectives, and performance
criteria specified in NFPA 805, Chapter 1. In addition, if there are
any increases in core damage frequency (CDF) or risk as a result of
the transition to NFPA 805, the increase will be small, governed by
the delta risk requirements of NFPA 805, and consistent with the
intent of the Commission's Safety Goal Policy.
Based on the above, the implementation of this amendment to
transition the Fire Protection Plan at BSEP, Units 1 and 2 to one
based on NFPA 805, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.48(c), does not
result in a significant increase in the probability of any accident
previously evaluated.
In addition, all equipment required to mitigate an accident
remains capable of performing the assumed function.
Therefore, the consequences of any accident previously evaluated
are not significantly increased with the implementation of this
amendment.
Criterion 2: Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
Operation of BSEP, Units 1 and 2 in accordance with the proposed
amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind
of accident from any accident previously evaluated. Any scenario or
previously analyzed accident with offsite dose consequences was
included in the evaluation of design basis accidents (DBA)
documented in the UFSAR as a part of the transition to NFPA 805. The
proposed amendment does not impact these accident analyses. The
proposed change does not alter the requirements or functions for
systems required during accident conditions, nor does it alter the
required mitigation capability of the fire protection program, or
its functioning during accident conditions as assumed in the
licensing basis analyses and/or DBA radiological consequences
evaluations.
The proposed amendment does not adversely affect accident
initiators nor alter design assumptions, or conditions of the
facility. The proposed amendment does not adversely affect the
ability of SSCs to perform their design function. SSCs required to
maintain the unit in a safe and stable condition remains capable of
performing their design functions. The purpose of the proposed
amendment is to permit BSEP, Units 1 and 2 to adopt a new fire
protection licensing basis which complies with the requirements in
10 CFR 50.48(a) and (c) and the guidance in Revision 1 of RG 1.205.
As indicated in the Statements of Consideration, the NRC considers
that NFPA 805 provides an acceptable methodology and performance
criteria for licensees to identify fire protection systems and
features that are an acceptable alternative to the 10 CFR Part 50,
Appendix R fire protection features.
The requirements in NFPA 805 address only fire protection and
the impacts of fire effects on the plant have been evaluated. The
proposed fire protection program changes do not involve new failure
mechanisms or malfunctions that could initiate a new or different
kind of accident beyond those already analyzed in the UFSAR. Based
on this, as well as the discussion above, the implementation of this
amendment to transition the Fire Protection Plan at BSEP, Units 1
and 2 to one based on NFPA 805, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.48(c),
does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously evaluated.
Criterion 3: Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
Operation of BSEP, Units 1 and 2 in accordance with the proposed
amendment does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of
safety. The transition to a new risk-informed, performance-based
fire protection licensing basis that complies with the requirements
in 10 CFR 50.48(a) and 10 CFR 50.48(c) does not alter the manner in
which safety limits, limiting safety system settings, or limiting
conditions for operation are determined. The safety analysis
acceptance criteria are not affected by this change. The proposed
amendment does not adversely affect existing plant safety margins or
the reliability of equipment assumed in the UFSAR to mitigate
accidents.
The proposed change does not adversely impact systems that
respond to safely shut down the plant and maintain the plant in a
safe shutdown condition. In addition, the proposed amendment will
not result in plant operation in a configuration outside the design
basis for an unacceptable period of time without implementation of
appropriate compensatory measures. The purpose of the proposed
amendment is to permit BSEP, Units 1 and 2 to adopt a new fire
protection licensing basis which complies with the requirements in
10 CFR 50.48(a) and (c) and the guidance in Regulatory Guide 1.205.
The NRC considers that NFPA 805 provides an acceptable methodology
and performance criteria for licensees to identify fire protection
systems and features that are an acceptable alternative to the 10
CFR Part 50, Appendix R required fire protection features (69 FR
33536, June 16, 2004).
The risk evaluations for plant changes, in part as they relate
to the potential for reducing a safety margin, were measured
quantitatively for acceptability using the delta risk guidance
contained in RG 1.205. Engineering analyses, which may include
engineering evaluations, probabilistic safety assessments, and fire
modeling calculations, have been performed to demonstrate that the
performance-based methods of NFPA 805 do not result in a significant
reduction in the margin of safety.
As such, the proposed changes are evaluated to ensure that risk
and safety margins are kept within acceptable limits. Based on the
above, the implementation of this amendment to transition the Fire
Protection Plan at BSEP, Units 1 and 2 to one based on NFPA 805, in
accordance with 10 CFR 50.48(c), will not significantly reduce 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: Ms. Lara S. Nichols, 550 South Tryon Street,
M/C DEC45A, Charlotte NC 28202.
NRC Branch Chief: Jessie Quichocho.
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket Nos. 50-259, 50-260, and 50-296,
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN), Units 1, 2, and 3, Limestone County,
Alabama
Date of amendment request: February 28, 2013. A publicly available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML13070A307.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The proposed
license amendment would add three AREVA NP analysis methodologies to
the list of approved methods to be used in determining core operating
limits in Technical Specification (TS) 5.6.5, Core Operating Limits
Report (COLR). This proposed change would support a planned transition
to AREVA ATRIUM-10XM (XM) fuel design. In addition, the amendment would
also revise TS 2.1.1.2 to change the safety limit minimum critical
power ratio value for BFN Unit 2.
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:
[[Page 49302]]
1. Does the proposed Technical Specification change involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated?
Response: No.
Changing the fuel design, adding the additional approved
methodologies to the Technical Specifications, and revising the unit
2 SLMCPR [Safety Limit Minimum Critical Power Ratio] value in the
Technical Specifications will not increase the probability of a LOCA
[Loss-of-Coolant Accident]. The fuel cannot increase the probability
of a primary coolant system breach or rupture, as there is no
interaction between the fuel and the system piping. The fuel will
continue to meet the 10 CFR 50.46 limits for peak clad temperature,
oxidation fraction, and hydrogen generation. Therefore, the
consequences of a LOCA will not be increased.
Similarly, changing fuel type and revising the Technical
Specifications as proposed cannot increase the probability of an
abnormal operating occurrence (AOO). As a passive component, the
fuel does not interact with plant operating or control systems.
Therefore, the fuel change cannot affect the initiators of the
previously evaluated AOO transient events. Thermal limits for the
new fuel will be determined on a reload specific basis, ensuring the
specified acceptable fuel design limits continue to be met.
Therefore, the consequences of a previously evaluated AOO will not
increase.
The refueling accident is potentially affected by a change in
fuel design, due to the mechanical interaction between the fuel and
the refueling equipment. However, the probability of the refueling
accident with XM fuel is not increased because the upper bail handle
is designed to be mechanically compatible with existing fuel
handling equipment. The design weight of the XM design is similar to
other designs in use at BFN, and is well within the design
capability of the refueling equipment. The consequences of the
refueling accident are similar to the current ATRIUM-10 fuel,
remaining well within the design basis (7x7 fuel) evaluation in the
UFSAR [Updated Final Safety Analysis Report].
The probability of a control rod drop accident does not increase
because the XM fuel channel is mechanically compatible with the co-
resident ATRIUM-10 fuel, and the existing control blade designs. The
mechanical interaction and friction forces between the XM fuel
channel, and control blades, would not be higher than previous
designs. In addition, routine plant testing includes confirmation of
adequate control blade to control rod drive coupling. The
probability of a rod drop accident is not increased with the use of
XM fuel. Control rod drop accident consequences are evaluated on a
cycle specific basis, confirming the number of calculated fuel rod
failures remains with the UFSAR design basis.
The dose consequences of all the previously evaluated UFSAR
accidents remain with the limits of 10 CFR 50.67.
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 XM fuel product has been designed to maintain neutronic,
thermal-hydraulic, and mechanical compatibility with the NSSS
[nuclear steam supply system] vendor fuel designs. The XM fuel has
been designed to meet fuel licensing criteria specified in NUREG-
0800, ``Standard Review Plan for Review of Safety Analysis Reports
for Nuclear Power Plants.'' Compliance with these criteria ensures
the fuel will not fail in an unexpected manner.
A change in fuel design and revising the Technical
Specifications as proposed cannot create any new accident initiators
because the fuel is a passive component, having no direct influence
on the performance of operating plant systems and equipment. Hence,
a fuel design change cannot create a new type of malfunction leading
to a new or different kind of transient or accident.
Consequently, the proposed fuel design change does not create
the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any
accident previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed Technical Specification change involve a
significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The XM fuel is designed to comply with the fuel licensing
criteria specified in NUREG-0800. Reload specific and cycle
independent safety analyses are performed ensuring no fuel failures
will occur as the result of abnormal operational transients, and
dose consequences for accidents remain with the bounds of 10 CFR
50.67. All regulatory margins and requirements are maintained.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant
reduction in a margin of safety.
Based on the above, TVA concludes the proposed amendment does
not involve a significant hazards consideration under the standards
set forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c), and, accordingly, a finding of ``no
significant hazards consideration'' is justified.
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 Branch Chief: Jessie F. Quichocho.
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket Nos. 50-259, 50-260, and 50-296,
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN), Units 1, 2 and 3, Limestone County,
Alabama
Date of amendment request: March 27, 2013 (publicly available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML13092A392), as supplemented
by letter dated May 16, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No. ML13141A291).
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The proposed
license amendment requests NRC approval to adopt a new fire protection
licensing basis that complies with the requirements in 10 CFR 50.48(a),
10 CFR 50.48(c), and the guidance in Regulatory Guide 1.205, Revision
1, ``Risk-Informed, Performance Based Fire Protection for Existing
Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants.'' This license amendment request also
follows the guidance in Nuclear Energy Institute 04-02, Revision 2,
``Guidance for Implementing a Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Fire
Protection Program Under 10 CFR 50.48(c).'' If approved, the BFN fire
protection program would transition to a new risk-informed,
performance-based alternative in accordance with 10 CFR 50.48(c), which
incorporates by reference National Fire Protection Association Standard
805.
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.
Operation of Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) in accordance with
the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of accidents previously evaluated.
The Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) documents the
analyses of design basis accidents (DBAs) at BFN. The proposed
amendment does not adversely affect accident initiators nor alter
design assumptions, conditions, or configurations of the facility
and does not adversely affect the ability of structures, systems,
and components (SSCs) to perform their design function. SSCs
required to safely shut down the reactor and to maintain it in a
safe shutdown (SSD) condition will remain capable of performing
their design functions.
The purpose of this amendment is to permit BFN to adopt a new
fire protection licensing basis which complies with the requirements
in 10 CFR 50.48(a) and (c) and the guidance in Revision 1 of
Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.205. The NRC considers that National Fire
Protection Association (NFPA) 805 provides an acceptable methodology
and performance criteria for licensees to identify fire protection
systems and features that are an acceptable alternative to the 10
CFR Part
[[Page 49303]]
50, Appendix R fire protection features. Engineering analyses, in
accordance with NFPA 805, have been performed to demonstrate that
the risk-informed, performance-based (RI-PB) requirements per NFPA
805 have been met.
NFPA 805, taken as a whole, provides an acceptable alternative
to 10 CFR 50.48(b) and satisfies 10 CFR 50.48(a) and General Design
Criterion 3 of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50 and meets the underlying
intent of the NRC's existing fire protection regulations and
guidance, achieves defense-in-depth (DID) and the goals, performance
objectives, and performance criteria specified in Chapter 1 of NFPA
805. Additionally, 10 CFR 50.48(c) allows self approval of fire
protection program changes post-transition. If there are any
increases post-transition in core damage frequency or risk, the
increase will be small and consistent with the intent of the
Commission's Safety Goal Policy.
The improved modeling associated with the elimination of
Containment Accident Pressure credit does not change the design
functions of the systems. By maintaining these functions, the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated is
not significantly increased.
Based on this, the implementation of this amendment does not
involve a significant increase in the probability of any accident
previously evaluated. Equipment required to mitigate an accident
remains capable of performing the assumed function. Therefore, the
implementation of this amendment does not involve a significant
increase in 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.
Operation of BFN in accordance with the proposed amendment does
not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
from any accident previously evaluated. The proposed change does not
alter the requirements or function for systems required during
accident conditions. Implementation of the new fire protection
licensing basis which complies with the requirements in 10 CFR
50.48(a) and (c) and the guidance in Revision 1 of RG 1.205 will not
result in new or different accidents. The proposed amendment does
not adversely affect accident initiators nor alter design
assumptions, conditions, or configurations of the facility.
The proposed amendment does not adversely affect the ability of
SSCs to perform their design function. SSCs required to safely shut
down the reactor and maintain it in a safe shutdown condition remain
capable of performing their design functions.
The purpose of this amendment is to permit BFN to adopt a new
fire protection licensing basis which complies with the requirements
in 10 CFR 50.48(a) and (c) and the guidance in Revision 1 of RG
1.205. The NRC considers that NFPA 805 provides an acceptable
methodology and performance criteria for licensees to identify fire
protection systems and features that are an acceptable alternative
to the 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R fire protection features.
The requirements in NFPA 805 address only fire protection and
the impacts of fire on the plant that have already been evaluated.
Based on this, the implementation of this amendment does not create
the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any kind
of accident previously evaluated. The proposed changes do not
involve new failure mechanisms or malfunctions that can initiate a
new accident.
The improved modeling associated with the elimination of
Containment Accident Pressure credit does not change the design
functions of the systems. The systems are not accident initiators
and by maintaining their current functions, they do not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident.
Therefore, the implementation of this amendment does not create
the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any
accident previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed technical specification change involve a
significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
Operation of BFN in accordance with the proposed amendment does
not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety. The
proposed amendment does not alter the manner in which safety limits,
limiting safety system settings, or limiting conditions for
operation are determined. The safety analysis acceptance criteria
are not affected by this change. The proposed amendment does not
adversely affect existing plant safety margins or the reliability of
equipment assumed to mitigate accidents in the UFSAR. The proposed
amendment does not adversely affect the ability of SSCs to perform
their design function. SSCs required to safely shut down the reactor
and to maintain it in a safe shutdown condition remain capable of
performing their design function.
The purpose of this amendment is to permit BFN to adopt a new
fire protection licensing basis which complies with the requirements
in 10 CFR 50.48(a) and (c) and the guidance in Revision 1 of RG
1.205. The NRC considers that NFPA 805 provides an acceptable
methodology and performance criteria for licensees to identify fire
protection systems and features that are an acceptable alternative
to the 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R fire protection features.
Engineering analyses, which may include engineering evaluations,
probabilistic safety assessments, and fire modeling calculations,
have been performed to demonstrate that the performance-based
methods do not result in a significant reduction in the margin of
safety.
The improved modeling associated with the elimination of
Containment Accident Pressure credit does not change the design
functions within the applicable limits.
Based on this, the implementation of this amendment does not
significantly reduce the margin of safety. The proposed changes are
evaluated to ensure that the risk and safety margins are kept within
acceptable limits. Therefore, the transition does not involve a
significant reduction in the margin of safety. The requirements of
NFPA 805 are structured to implement the NRC's mission to protect
public health and safety, promote the common defense and security,
and protect the environment. NFPA 805 is also consistent with the
key principles for evaluating license basis changes, as described in
RG 1.174, is consistent with the DID philosophy, and maintains
sufficient safety margins.
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 Branch Chief: Jessie F. Quichocho.
Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information for Contention Preparation
Carolina Power and Light Company, Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324,
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2, Brunswick County, North
Carolina
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket Nos. 50-259, 50-260, and 50-296,
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, and 3, Limestone County,
Alabama
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket Nos. 50-259, 50-260, and 50-296,
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 and 3, Limestone County, Alabama
A. This Order contains instructions regarding how potential parties
to this proceeding may request access to documents containing 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 of this notice 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
[[Page 49304]]
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 5th day of August 2013.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Rochelle C. Bavol,
Acting 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 petitioner/
requestor reply).
[[Page 49305]]
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. 2013-19320 Filed 8-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P