[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 190 (Tuesday, October 1, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60321-60331]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23609]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2013-0224]
Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility
Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant
Hazards Considerations
Background
Pursuant to Section 189a. (2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
[[Page 60322]]
Commission (the NRC) is publishing this regular biweekly 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 biweekly notice includes all notices of amendments issued, or
proposed to be issued from September 5, 2013 to September 18, 2013. The
last biweekly notice was published on September 17, 2013 (78 FR 57180).
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-2013-0224. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-
3422; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact
the individual(s) 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-06-A44MP, 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-2013-0224 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-2013-0224.
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]. Documents may be viewed in
ADAMS by performing a search on the document date and docket number.
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-2013-0224 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.
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 section 50.92 of Title 10 of the Code
of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), 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 ``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 by the above date, the Commission or a presiding officer
designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of
the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will
[[Page 60323]]
rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief
Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will
issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene
shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in
the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of
the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons
why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the
following general requirements: (1) the name, address, and telephone
number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the
requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the
proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's
property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the
possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the
proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must
also identify the specific contentions which the 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, 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 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 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
[[Page 60324]]
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 the
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 following three
factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(iii).
For further details with respect to this license amendment
application, 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/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to
ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in
ADAMS, should contact the NRC's PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209,
301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected].
Luminant Generation Company LLC, Docket Nos. 50-445, and 50-446,
Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, Somervell County,
Texas
Date of amendment request: August 29, 2013.
Brief description of amendments: The amendment would revise
Technical Specification (TS) 3.4.17, ``Steam Generator (SG) Tube
Integrity,'' TS 5.5.9, ``Unit 1 Model D76 and Unit 2 Model D5 Steam
Generator (SG) Program'', and TS 5.6.9, ``Unit 1 Model D76 and Unit 2
Model D5 Steam Generator Tube Inspection Report.'' The proposed changes
address implementation issues associated with inspection periods, and
address other administrative changes and clarifications. The proposed
amendment is consistent with NRC-approved Technical Specifications Task
Force (TSTF) change traveler TSTF-510, Revision 2, ``Revision to Steam
Generator Program Inspection Frequencies and Tube Sample Selection.''
The availability of this improvement was announced in the Federal
Register on October 27, 2011 (76 FR 66763), as part of the consolidated
line item improvement process.
Luminant Generation Company LLC has proposed minor non-technical
variations from the TS changes proposed in TSTF-510, Revision 2.
Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant (CPNPP), Units 1 and 2, TSs utilize
different numbering and titles than the Standard Technical
Specifications on which TSTF-510 is based, since SGs for CPNPP, Units 1
and 2, are of different models. These differences are administrative in
nature and do not affect the applicability of TSTF-510 to the CPNPP,
Units 1 and 2, TSs.
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 change involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change revises the Steam Generator (SG) Program to
modify the frequency of verification of SG tube integrity and SG
tube sample selection. A steam generator tube rupture (SGTR) event
is one of the design basis accidents that are analyzed as part of a
plant's licensing basis. The proposed SG tube inspection frequency
and sample selection criteria will continue to ensure that the SG
tubes are inspected such that the probability of a SGTR is not
increased. The consequences of a SGTR are bounded by the
conservative assumptions in the design basis accident analysis. The
proposed change will not cause the consequences of a SGTR to exceed
those assumptions.
Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed change does not
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of
an 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 proposed changes to the Steam Generator Program will not
introduce any adverse changes to the plant design basis or
postulated accidents resulting from potential tube degradation. The
proposed change does not affect the design of the SGs or their
method of operation. In addition, the proposed change does not
impact any other plant system or component.
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility
of a new or different type of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
Response: No.
The SG tubes in pressurized water reactors are an integral part
of the reactor coolant pressure boundary and, as such, are relied
upon to maintain the primary system's pressure and inventory. As
part of the reactor coolant pressure boundary, the SG tubes are
unique in that they are also relied upon as a heat transfer surface
between the primary
[[Page 60325]]
and secondary systems such that residual heat can be removed from
the primary system. In addition, the SG tubes also isolate the
radioactive fission products in the primary coolant from the
secondary system. In summary, the safety function of a SG is
maintained by ensuring the integrity of its tubes. Steam generator
tube integrity is a function of the design, environment, and the
physical condition of the tube. The proposed change does not affect
tube design or operating environment. The proposed change will
continue to require monitoring of the physical condition of the SG
tubes such that there will not be a reduction in the margin of
safety compared to the current requirements.
Therefore, it is concluded that 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
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Timothy P. Matthews, Esq., Morgan, Lewis and
Bockius, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004.
NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. Markley.
South Carolina Electric and Gas Docket Nos. 52-027, and 52-028, Virgil
C. Summer Nuclear Station (VCSNS), Units 2 and 3, Fairfield County,
South Carolina
Date of amendment request: July 2, 2013.
Description of amendment request: The proposed change would amend
Combined License Nos. NPF-93 and NPF-94 for the VCSNS, Units 2 and 3 by
departing from the Combined License Appendix C information. The changes
correct editorial errors and promote consistency with the Updated Final
Safety Analysis Report Tier 2 information.
Because, this proposed change requires a departure from Tier 1
information in the Westinghouse Advanced Passive 1000 DCD, the licensee
also requested an exemption from the requirements of the Generic DCD
Tier 1 in accordance with 52.63(b)(1).
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 amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed editorial and consistency plant-specific Tier 1
[sic, Appendix C] update does not involve a technical change, e.g.,
there is no design parameter or requirement, calculation, analysis,
function, or qualification change. No structure, system, component
(SSC) design or function would be affected. No design or safety
analysis would be affected. The proposed changes do not affect any
accident initiating event or component failure, thus the
probabilities of the accidents previously evaluated are not
affected. No function used to mitigate a radioactive material
release and no radioactive material release source term is involved,
thus the radiological releases in the accident analyses are not
affected.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve an increase
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously
evaluated.
2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed editorial and consistency plant-specific Tier 1
[sic, Appendix C] update would not affect the design or function of
any SSC, but will instead provide consistency between the SSC
designs and functions currently presented in the UFSAR and the Tier
1 [sic, Appendix C] information. The proposed (non-technical)
changes would not introduce a new failure mode, fault, or sequence
of events that could result in a radioactive material release.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed editorial and consistency plant-specific Tier 1
[sic, Appendix C] update is nontechnical, thus would not affect any
design parameter, function, or analysis. There would be no change to
an existing design basis, design function, regulatory criterion, or
analysis. No safety analysis or design basis acceptance limit/
criterion is involved.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not reduce the 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. Kathryn M. Sutton, Morgan, Lewis &
Bockius LLC, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004-2514.
NRC Branch Chief: Lawrence Burkhart.
South Carolina Electric and Gas Docket Nos. 52-027, and 52-028, Virgil
C. Summer Nuclear Station (VCSNS), Units 2 and 3, Fairfield County,
South Carolina
Date of amendment request: July 17, 2013.
Description of amendment request: The proposed change would amend
Combined License Nos. NPF-93 and NPF-94 for the VCSNS, Units 2 and 3 by
departing from Tier 2 and Tier 2* material related to fire area
boundaries and contained within the updated final safety analysis
report (UFSAR). The proposed changes would alter the layout of the
Annex Building and Turbine Building, change Turbine Building Stairwell
S08, and clarify a UFSAR figure of the Annex Building heating,
ventilation, and air conditioning shafts.
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 amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed Annex Building and Turbine Building layout changes,
Turbine Building stairwell changes to support egress functions, and
an Annex Building ventilation shaft Updated Final Safety Analysis
Report (UFSAR) figure clarification would not affect any safety-
related equipment or function. The modified configurations would
continue to maintain the associated fire protection (i.e., barrier)
functions. The safe shutdown fire analysis is not affected, and the
fire protection analysis results remain acceptable. The affected
rooms and equipment do not contain or interface with safety-related
equipment. The proposed changes do not involve any accident
initiating event, thus the probabilities of the accidents previously
evaluated are not affected. The affected rooms do not represent a
radioactive material barrier, and this activity does not involve the
containment of radioactive material. The radioactive material source
terms and release paths used in the safety analyses are unchanged,
thus the radiological releases in the accident analyses are not
affected. Therefore, the consequences of an accident previously
evaluated are not affected.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed Annex Building and Turbine Building layout changes,
Turbine Building stairwell changes to support egress functions,
[[Page 60326]]
and an Annex Building ventilation shaft UFSAR figure clarification
would not change the performance of the fire barriers. Fire zone
loadings and associated fire analyses remain within their acceptance
limits. The affected rooms do not contain equipment whose failure
could initiate an accident. The fire boundary changes do not create
a new failure or sequence of events that could initiate a new or
different kind of accident.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed Annex Building and Turbine Building layout changes,
Turbine Building stairwell changes to support egress functions, and
an Annex Building ventilation shaft UFSAR figure clarification would
not change the fire protection performance of any fire barrier. No
safety or fire requirement acceptance criterion would be exceeded or
challenged. The safe shutdown fire analysis is not affected. No
safety-related equipment, area, or function is involved. The amounts
of combustible material loadings in the affected fire zones remain
within their applicable limits. The proposed fire boundary changes
comply with existing design codes and regulatory criteria, and do
not affect any safety analysis.
Therefore, the proposed amendment 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
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Ms. Kathryn M. Sutton, Morgan, Lewis &
Bockius LLC, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004-2514.
NRC Branch Chief: Lawrence Burkhart.
South Carolina Electric and Gas Docket Nos. 52-027, and 52-028, Virgil
C. Summer Nuclear Station (VCSNS), Units 2 and 3, Fairfield County,
South Carolina
Date of amendment request: August 7, 2013.
Description of amendment request: The proposed change would amend
Combined License Nos. NPF-93 and NPF-94 for the VCSNS, Units 2 and 3 by
departing from the Combined License Appendix C information and the
plant-specific Design Control Document (DCD) Tier 2 and Tier 2*
material by changing the Turbine Building structures and layout by: (1)
Changing the door location on the motor-driven fire pump room in the
Turbine Building, (2) clarifying the column line designations for the
southwest and southeast walls of the Turbine Building first bay, (3)
changing the floor to ceiling heights at three different elevations in
the Turbine Building main area, and (4) increasing elevations and wall
thickness in certain walls of the Turbine Building first Bay.
Because, this proposed change requires a departure from Tier 1
information in the Westinghouse Advanced Passive 1000 DCD, the licensee
also requested an exemption from the requirements of the Generic DCD
Tier 1 in accordance with 52.63(b)(1).
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 amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes to the Turbine Building configuration do
not alter the assumed initiators to any analyzed event. Changing the
door location does not affect the operation of any systems or
equipment inside or outside the Turbine Building that could initiate
an analyzed accident. Clarifying the column line designations does
not affect the operation of any systems or equipment inside or
outside the Turbine Building that could initiate an analyzed
accident. The changes in elevation and wall thickness do not affect
the operation of any systems or equipment inside or outside the
Turbine Building that could initiate an analyzed accident. In
preparing this license amendment, it was considered if the changes
to the Turbine Building door location, column line designations,
wall thickness, and floor elevations would have an adverse impact on
the ability of the Turbine Building structure to perform its design
function to protect the systems, equipment, and components within
this building. It was concluded that there was no adverse impact,
because design of this structure, including the redesigned first bay
wall heights and thicknesses, will continue to be in accordance with
the same codes and standards as stated in the VCSNS, Units 2 and 3
Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). The Turbine Building
first bay continues to maintain its seismic Category II rating.
Based on the above, the probability of an accident previously
evaluated will not be increased by these proposed changes. The
proposed Turbine Building configuration changes will not affect
radiological dose consequence analysis. The affected portions of the
Turbine Building are unrelated to radiological analyses. Therefore,
no accident source term parameter or fission product barrier is
impacted by these changes. Structures, systems, and components
(SSCs) required for mitigation of analyzed accidents are not
affected by these changes, and the function of the Turbine Building
to provide weather protection for SSCs inside the building is not
adversely affected by these changes. Mitigation of a high energy
line break (HELB) in the Turbine Building first bay is not adversely
affected by this change, because additional vent area will be added
to the south wall of the first bay above the Auxiliary Building
roof. This additional vent area will exceed the vent area that is
blocked by the change to the Turbine Building main area elevations.
Consequently, this activity will not increase the consequences of
any analyzed accident, including the main steam line limiting break.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed Turbine Building configuration changes to the
location of a door leading to the Motor-Driven Fire Pump room,
column line designations, floor elevations in the main area, and
wall heights and thicknesses in the first bay do not change the
design function of the Turbine Building or any of the systems or
equipment in the Turbine Building or in any other Nuclear Island
structures. In assessing the proposed changes, it was considered if
they would lead to a different type of possible accident than those
previously evaluated. The proposed changes do not adversely affect
any system design functions or methods of operation. The proposed
changes do not introduce any new equipment or components or change
the operation of any existing systems or equipment in a manner that
would result in a new failure mode, malfunction, or sequence of
events that could affect safety-related or nonsafety-relate
equipment. This activity will not create a new sequence of events
that would result in significant fuel cladding failures. With the
implementation of these changes to the design of this structure,
including the redesigned first bay wall heights and thicknesses, the
structure will continue to be in accordance with the same codes and
standards as stated in the VCSNS, Units 2 and 3 UFSAR. The Turbine
Building First Bay continues to maintain its seismic Category II
rating. Based on the above, it was concluded that the proposed
changes would not lead to a different type of possible accident than
those previously considered.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The margin of safety for the design of the Turbine Building,
including the seismic Category II Turbine Building first bay, is
determined by the use of the current codes and standards and
adherence to the assumptions used in the analyses of this structure
and the events associated with this structure. The relocated door to
the motor-driven fire pump room will continue to meet the current 3-
hour fire rating requirements.
[[Page 60327]]
The revised column line designations do not represent a physical
plant modification, and have no adverse impact on plant construction
or operation. The design of the Turbine Building, including the
increased elevations in the main area and the increased height and
thickness of the redesigned first bay walls, will continue to be in
accordance with the same codes and standards as stated in the UFSAR.
The increased elevation of the first bay roof to allow the
installation of blow-out panels will provide additional gross vent
area for the first bay, which more than compensates for the current
vent area that will be blocked by the change in the Turbine Building
main area elevations. Consequently, this activity will not adversely
affect the first bay's ability to relieve pressure in the event of
the limiting main steam line break, and consequently this activity
will not reduce the current margin of safety associated with this
event to the design pressure limits for Wall 11 of the Nuclear
Island and the walls of the first bay. The first bay will continue
to maintain a seismic Category II rating. Adhering to the same codes
and standards for the Turbine Building structural design and
maintaining a seismic Category II rating for the Turbine Building
first bay preserves the current structural safety margins.
Therefore, the proposed amendment 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
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Ms. Kathryn M. Sutton, Morgan, Lewis &
Bockius LLC, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004-2514.
NRC Branch Chief: Lawrence Burkhart.
Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and
Combined Licenses
During the period since publication of the last biweekly notice,
the Commission has issued the following amendments. The Commission has
determined for each of these amendments that the application complies
with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,
as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The
Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the
Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set
forth in the license amendment.
A notice of consideration of issuance of amendment to facility
operating license or combined license, as applicable, proposed no
significant hazards consideration determination, and opportunity for a
hearing in connection with these actions, was published in the Federal
Register as indicated.
Unless otherwise indicated, the Commission has determined that
these amendments satisfy the criteria for categorical exclusion in
accordance with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b),
no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be
prepared for these amendments. If the Commission has prepared an
environmental assessment under the special circumstances provision in
10 CFR 51.22(b) and has made a determination based on that assessment,
it is so indicated.
For further details with respect to the action see (1) the
applications for amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3) the Commission's
related letter, Safety Evaluation and/or Environmental Assessment as
indicated. All of these items are available for public inspection at
the Commission's Public Document Room (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 the Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System (ADAMS) in the NRC 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].
Florida Power and Light Company, Docket No. 50-250, Turkey Point
Nuclear Generating, Unit 3, Miami-Dade County, Florida
Date of application for amendment: March 8, 2013, as supplemented
by letter dated July 12, 2013.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment allows a one-time
(temporary) 2-month extension of Technical Specifications (TSs)
Surveillance Requirement 4.5.1.1.d involving an operability
demonstration of emergency core cooling system accumulator check
valves.
Date of issuance: September 10, 2013.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 60 days of issuance.
Amendment No.: 258.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-31: Amendment revised
the license and the TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: May 28, 2013 (78 FR
31982). The supplement dated July 12, 2013, did not expand the scope of
the application as originally noticed, and did not change the NRC
staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination as published in the Federal Register.
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated September 10, 2013.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Nebraska Public Power District, Docket No. 50-298, Cooper Nuclear
Station, Nemaha County, Nebraska
Date of amendment request: February 12, 2013.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment modified the Cooper
Nuclear Station license condition 2.E to require incorporation of the
commitments listed in appendix A of NUREG-1944 in the updated safety
analysis report to be managed in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59.
Date of issuance: September 12, 2013.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 30 days of issuance.
Amendment No.: 247.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-46: Amendment revised
the Facility Operating License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 5, 2013 (78 FR
40519).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated September 12, 2013.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC, Docket No. 50-331, Duane Arnold
Energy Center, Linn County, Iowa
Date of application for amendment: August 5, 2011, as supplemented
by letters dated October 14, 2011, April 23, 2012, May 23, 2012, July
9, 2012, October 15, 2012, January 11, 2013, February 12, 2013, March
6, 2013, May 1, 2013, May 29, 2013, two supplements dated July 2, 2013,
and August 5, 2013, and August 28, 2013.
Brief description of amendment: The proposed amendment would
transition the DAEC fire protection program to a new risk-informed,
performance-based alternative per 10 CFR 50.48(c) which incorporates by
reference the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard 805
(NFPA 805), ``Performance-Based Standard for Fire Protection for Light
Water Reactor Electric Generating Plants--2001.''
Date of issuance: September 10, 2013.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 180 days from the date of issuance.
[[Page 60328]]
Amendment No.: 286.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-49: Amendments revise
the Renewed Facility Operating License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 2, 2012 (77 FR
60151). The supplemental information dated October 14, 2011, April 23,
2012, May 23, 2012, July 9, 2012, October 15, 2012, January 11, 2013,
February 12, 2013, March 6, 2013, May 1, 2013, May 29, 2013, two
supplements dated July 2, 2013, and August 5, 2013, and August 28,
2013, provided additional information that clarified the application,
did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and
did not change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards
consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated September 10, 2013.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Northern States Power Company--Minnesota, Docket No. 50-306, Prairie
Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit 2, Goodhue County, Minnesota
Date of application for amendment: July 25, 2012, as supplemented
by letter dated July 25, 2013.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised technical
specification TS 5.5.14 to except the licensee from the requirement to
perform an appendix J Type A test, containment integrated leakage rate
test (ILRT), following modifications to the containment pressure
boundary resulting from the replacement of the Prairie Island Nuclear
Generating Plant, Unit 2 steam generators, scheduled for fall 2013.
Date of issuance: September 11, 2013.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 60 days of issuance.
Amendment No.: 297.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-60: Amendment revises
the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: September 14, 2012 (77
FR 56880).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated September 11, 2013.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Docket Nos. 50-275, and 50-323,
Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, San Luis Obispo
County, California
Date of application for amendments: September 12, 2012.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised Technical
Specification (TS) 5.5.7, ``Reactor Coolant Pump Flywheel Inspection
Program,'' to extend the reactor coolant pump (RCP) motor flywheel
examination frequency from the currently approved 10-year examination
frequency to an interval not to exceed 20 years, in accordance with
NRC-approved Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) change traveler
TSTF-421-A, Revision 0, ``Revision to RCP Flywheel Inspection Program
(WCAP-15666),'' that has been approved generically for the Westinghouse
Standard Technical Specifications (STS), NUREG-1431.
A notice announcing the availability of this proposed TS change
using the Consolidated Line Item Improvement Process was published in
the Federal Register on October 22, 2003 (68 FR 60422). The TSTF-421
model safety evaluation, model no significant hazards consideration
determination, and model license amendment request were published in
the Federal Register on June 24, 2003 (68 FR 37590).
Date of issuance: September 5, 2013.
Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 120 days from the date of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: Unit 1--216; Unit 2--218.
Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-80 and DPR-82: The amendments
revised the Facility Operating Licenses and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 27, 2012 (77
FR 70841).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated September 5, 2013.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
STP Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 50-498, and 50-499, South
Texas Project, Units 1 and 2, Matagorda County, Texas
Date of amendment request: April 25, 2013.
Brief description of amendment: The existing Technical
Specification (TS) 5.1, ``Site,'' Figures 5.1-1 through 5.1-4 for South
Texas Project (STP), Units 1 and 2, identifies a Visitor's Center;
however, the Visitor's Center has been demolished. In addition, Figures
5.1-1, 5.1-3, and 5.1-4 identify the Emergency Operations Facility
(EOF) within the Nuclear Training Facility; however, the EOF was
relocated to Center of Energy Development building located in Bay City,
Texas, approximately 12.5 air miles from the plant site in 2009. The
amendments revise Figures 5.1-1 through 5.1-4 to remove references to
the Visitor's Center and EOF and is administrative in nature.
Date of issuance: September 9, 2013.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 30 days of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: Unit 1--201; Unit 2--189.
Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-76 and NPF-80: The amendments
revised the Facility Operating Licenses and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 25, 2013 (78 FR
38085).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated September 9, 2013.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and
Combined Licenses and Final Determination of No Significant Hazards
Consideration and Opportunity for a Hearing (Exigent Public
Announcement or Emergency Circumstances)
During the period since publication of the last biweekly notice,
the Commission has issued the following amendments. The Commission has
determined for each of these amendments that the application for the
amendment complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules
and regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings as
required by the Act and the Commission's rules and regulations in 10
CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendment.
Because of exigent or emergency circumstances associated with the
date the amendment was needed, there was not time for the Commission to
publish, for public comment before issuance, its usual notice of
consideration of issuance of amendment, proposed no significant hazards
consideration determination, and opportunity for a hearing.
For exigent circumstances, the Commission has either issued a
Federal Register notice providing opportunity for public comment or has
used local
[[Page 60329]]
media to provide notice to the public in the area surrounding a
licensee's facility of the licensee's application and of the
Commission's proposed determination of no significant hazards
consideration. The Commission has provided a reasonable opportunity for
the public to comment, using its best efforts to make available to the
public means of communication for the public to respond quickly, and in
the case of telephone comments, the comments have been recorded or
transcribed as appropriate and the licensee has been informed of the
public comments.
In circumstances where failure to act in a timely way would have
resulted, for example, in derating or shutdown of a nuclear power plant
or in prevention of either resumption of operation or of increase in
power output up to the plant's licensed power level, the Commission may
not have had an opportunity to provide for public comment on its no
significant hazards consideration determination. In such case, the
license amendment has been issued without opportunity for comment. If
there has been some time for public comment but less than 30 days, the
Commission may provide an opportunity for public comment. If comments
have been requested, it is so stated. In either event, the State has
been consulted by telephone whenever possible.
Under its regulations, the Commission may issue and make an
amendment immediately effective, notwithstanding the pendency before it
of a request for a hearing from any person, in advance of the holding
and completion of any required hearing, where it has determined that no
significant hazards consideration is involved.
The Commission has applied the standards of 10 CFR 50.92 and has
made a final determination that the amendment involves no significant
hazards consideration. The basis for this determination is contained in
the documents related to this action. Accordingly, the amendments have
been issued and made effective as indicated.
Unless otherwise indicated, the Commission has determined that
these amendments satisfy the criteria for categorical exclusion in
accordance with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b),
no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be
prepared for these amendments. If the Commission has prepared an
environmental assessment under the special circumstances provision in
10 CFR 51.12(b) and has made a determination based on that assessment,
it is so indicated.
For further details with respect to the action see (1) the
application for amendment, (2) the amendment to Facility Operating
License or Combined License, as applicable, and (3) the Commission's
related letter, Safety Evaluation and/or Environmental Assessment, as
indicated. All of these items are available for public inspection at
the NRC's Public Document Room (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 the Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS) in the NRC 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].
The Commission is also offering an opportunity for a hearing with
respect to the issuance of the amendment. 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, and electronically on the Internet at the NRC's Web
site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If there are
problems in accessing the document, contact the PDR's Reference staff
at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected].
If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed
by the above date, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by
the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or
petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or
an appropriate order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene
shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in
the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of
the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons
why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the
following general requirements: (1) the name, address, and telephone
number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the
requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the
proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's
property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the
possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the
proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must
also identify 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 petitioner
intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The
petitioner must also provide references to those specific sources and
documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the petitioner
intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The
petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine
dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact.
Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the
amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if
proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A 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. Since the Commission has made a final determination that the
amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, if a hearing
is requested, it will not stay the effectiveness of the amendment. Any
hearing held would take place while the amendment is in effect.
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
[[Page 60330]]
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 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 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 NRCs' 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 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 the
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.
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), Docket No. 50-259, Browns Ferry
Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, Limestone County, Alabama
Date of amendment request: August 14, 2013, as supplemented by
letters dated August 21 and September 6, 2013.
Brief description of amendment request: The amendment changes
Technical Specification (TS) 3.4.9, ``RCS [Reactor Coolant System]
Pressure and Temperature (P/T) Limits,'' to delete the Notes that cover
the RCS P/T limit curves on Figure 3.4.9-1, ``Pressure/Temperature
Limits for Mechanical Heatup, Cooldown Following Shutdown, and Reactor
Critical Operation,'' and Figure 3.4.9-2, ``Pressure/Temperature Limits
for Reactor In-Service Leak and Hydraulic Testing,'' that are valid for
16 effective full-power years (EFPY) of operation and allows the usage
of the figures up
[[Page 60331]]
to 16 EFPY. The current notes state, ``Do Not Use This Figure. This
curve applies to operations > [greater than] 12 EFPY. For current
operation, use previous curve, which is valid up to 12 EFPY.'' TVA
requested this change under exigent circumstances, which required an
NRC expedited review of the requested change to support approval by
September 19, 2013. The supplemental letters dated August 21 and
September 6, 2013, provided additional information that clarified the
application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally
noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no
significant hazards consideration (NSHC) determination as published in
the Federal Register.
Date of issuance: September 13, 2013.
Effective date: The license amendment is effective as of its date
of issuance.
Amendment No.: 284.
Facility Operating License No. DPR-33: Amendment revised the TSs.
Public comments requested as to proposed no significant hazards
consideration: Yes, a notice was published on August 23, 2013 (78 FR
52571). The notice provided an opportunity to submit comments on the
Commission's proposed NSHC determination. No comments have been
received. The notice also provided an opportunity to request a hearing
by October 22, 2013, but indicated that if the Commission makes a final
NSHC determination, any such hearing would take place after issuance of
the amendment.
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment, finding of
exigent circumstances, state consultation, and final NSHC determination
are contained in a safety evaluation dated September 13, 2013.
Attorney for licensee: General Counsel, Tennessee Valley Authority,
400 West Summit Hill Drive, ET 11A, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902.
NRC Acting Branch Chief: Douglas A. Broaddus.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day of September 2013.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John D. Monninger,
Deputy Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2013-23609 Filed 9-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P