[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 234 (Tuesday, December 6, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 87958-87964]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28521]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2016-0240]
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; notice of opportunity to comment,
request a hearing, and petition for leave to intervene; order imposing
procedures.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) received and is
considering approval of two amendment requests. The amendment requests
are for Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1; and Virgil C. Summer Nuclear
Station, Units 2 and 3. For each amendment request, the NRC proposes to
determine that they involve no significant hazards consideration.
Because each amendment request contains sensitive unclassified non-
safeguards information (SUNSI) an order imposes procedures to obtain
access to SUNSI for contention preparation.
DATES: Comments must be filed by January 5, 2017. A request for a
hearing must be filed by February 6, 2017. Any potential party as
defined in Sec. 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 December 16, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods.
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0240. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-
3463; 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, Office of Administration,
Mail Stop: OWFN-12-H08, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555-0001.
For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting
comments, see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Janet Burkhardt, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1384; email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID facility name, unit number(s), plant
docket number, application date, and subject when contacting the NRC
about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain
publicly-available information related to this action by any of the
following methods:
Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0240.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection 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 (if it is available
in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this
document.
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-2016-0240, facility name, unit
number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject in your
comment submission.
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your
comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter 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
[[Page 87959]]
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
into ADAMS.
II. Background
Pursuant to Section 189a.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act), the NRC is publishing this notice. The Act requires
the Commission to 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.
III. 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, (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 if 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. If the Commission
takes action prior to the expiration of either the comment period or
the notice period, it will publish a notice of issuance in the Federal
Register. If the Commission makes 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.
A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To Intervene
Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any
persons (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may
file a request for a hearing and a petition to intervene (petition)
with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in accordance with
the Commission's ``Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure'' in 10 CFR
part 2. Interested persons 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's 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 petition 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 petition; and the Secretary or the Chief
Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition 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
petitioner; (2) the nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to
be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the
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 petitioner's interest. The petition
must also set forth the specific contentions which the 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
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 to support
its position on the issue. 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 proceeding. The contention must be one
which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A 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 with respect to resolution of that person's admitted
contentions consistent with the NRC's regulations, policies, and
procedures.
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) through (iii).
A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian
Tribe, or agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to
participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1).
The petition should state the nature and extent of the petitioner's
interest in the proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the
Commission by February 6, 2017. The petition must be filed in
accordance with the filing
[[Page 87960]]
instructions in the ``Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)'' section of
this document, and should meet the requirements for petitions set forth
in this section, except that under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local
governmental body, or Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency
thereof does not need to address the standing requirements in 10 CFR
2.309(d) if the facility is located within its boundaries. A State,
local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency
thereof may also have the opportunity to participate under 10 CFR
2.315(c).
If a hearing is granted, any person who does not wish, or is not
qualified, to become a party to the proceeding may, in the discretion
of the presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited appearance
pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a
limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of position on
the issues, but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding. A
limited appearance may be made at any session of the hearing or at any
prehearing conference, subject to the limits and conditions as may be
imposed by the presiding officer. Details regarding the opportunity to
make a limited appearance will be provided by the presiding officer if
such sessions are scheduled.
B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)
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 (hereinafter
``petition''), 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, as amended at 77
FR 46562; August 3, 2012). 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 petition (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/getting-started.html. System requirements for accessing
the E-Submittal server are available on the NRC's public Web site at
http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/adjudicatory-sub.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 Electronic Filing Help Desk will not be
able to offer assistance in using unlisted software.
Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a
docket has been created, the participant can then submit a petition.
Submissions should be in Portable Document Format (PDF). Additional
guidance on PDF submissions is available on the NRC's public Web site
at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.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 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 NRC's adjudicatory E-
Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Electronic
Filing Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC's
public 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 Electronic Filing Help Desk is available between 9 a.m.
and 7 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
stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and
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, 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, in some instances, a petition 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
[[Page 87961]]
not to include copyrighted materials in their submission.
The Commission will issue a notice or order granting or denying a
hearing request or intervention petition, designating the issues for
any hearing that will be held and designating the Presiding Officer. A
notice granting a hearing will be published in the Federal Register and
served on the parties to the hearing.
For further details with respect to these license amendment
applications, see the application for amendment which is available for
public inspection in ADAMS and at the NRC's PDR. For additional
direction on accessing information related to this document, see the
``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' section of this
document.
NextEra Energy, Point Beach, LLC, Docket No. 50-266, Point Beach
Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, Town of Two Creeks, Manitowoc County, Wisconsin
Date of amendment request: July 29, 2016. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML16237A066.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguard information (SUNSI). The amendment
would revise technical specification (TS) 3.4.13, RCS [Reactor Coolant
System] Operational Leakage; TS 5.5.8, Steam Generator (SG) Program;
and TS 5.6.8, Steam Generator Tube Inspection Report, to exclude a
portion of the tubes below the top of the SG tube sheet from periodic
inspections and plugging.
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. The proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The proposed changes to TS 3.4.13, TS 5.5.8, and TS 5.6.8 have
no effect on accident probabilities or consequences. The previously
analyzed accidents are initiated by the failure of plant structures,
systems, or components. The proposed change that alters the steam
generator (SG) inspection and reporting criteria does not have a
detrimental impact on the integrity of any plant structure, system,
or component that initiates an analyzed event. The proposed change
will not alter the operation of, or otherwise increase the failure
probability of any plant equipment that initiates an analyzed
accident.
Of the applicable accidents previously evaluated, the limiting
transients with consideration to the proposed change to the SG tube
inspection and repair criteria are: The steam generator tube rupture
(SGTR) event, the steam line break (SLB), locked rotor and control
rod ejection postulated accidents. Loss of Coolant Accident
conditions cause a compressive load to act on a tube. This accident
attempts to displace the tube into the tubesheet rather than pull it
out, and, therefore, is not a factor in this amendment request.
Another faulted load consideration is a safe shutdown earthquake;
however, seismic analysis has shown that axial loading of the tubes
is negligible during this event (Section 5.0 of Reference 10).
Addressing the SGTR event, the required structural integrity
margins of the SG tubes and the tube-to-tubesheet joint over the H*
distance will be maintained. Tube rupture in tubes with cracks
within the tubesheet is precluded by the constraint provided by the
presence of the tubesheet and the tube-to-tubesheet joint. Tube
burst cannot occur within the thickness of the tubesheet. The tube-
to-tubesheet joint constraint results from the hydraulic expansion
process, thermal expansion mismatch between the tube and tubesheet,
from the differential pressure between the primary and secondary
side, and tubesheet rotation. Based on this design, the structural
margins against burst/tube pullout, as discussed in Regulatory Guide
(RG) 1.121, ``Bases for Plugging Degraded PWR [pressurized-water
reactor] Steam Generator Tubes,'' and TS 5.5.8 are maintained for
both normal and postulated accident conditions. The final H*
distance to preclude tube pullout from the tubesheet at 0.95
probability at 95% confidence is 20.60 inches.
The proposed change has no impact on the structural or leakage
integrity of the portion of the tube outside of the tubesheet. The
proposed change maintains structural and leakage integrity of the SG
tubes consistent with the performance criteria in TS 5.5.8.
Therefore, the proposed change results in no significant increase in
the probability of the occurrence of a SGTR accident.
At normal operating pressures, leakage from tube degradation
below the proposed limited inspection depth is limited by the tube-
to-tubesheet crevice. Consequently, negligible normal operating
leakage is expected from degradation below the inspected depth
within the tubesheet region. The consequences of an SGTR event are
not affected by the primary-to-secondary leakage flow during the
event as primary-to-secondary leakage flow through a postulated tube
that has been pulled out of the tubesheet is essentially equivalent
to a severed tube. Therefore, the proposed change does not result in
a significant increase in the consequences of a SGTR.
Concerning a postulated SLB event, NextEra will apply a leakage
factor of 5.22 to the normal operating leakage associated with the
tubesheet expansion region in the condition monitoring (CM) and
operational assessment (OA). The leakage factor of 5.22 is a
bounding value for all SGs, both hot and cold legs. The accident-
induced leak rate limit for Point Beach Unit 1 is 500 gpd [gallons
per day] at accident conditions. As a result, the TS operational
leak rate limit is reduced from 150 gpd to 72 gpd through any one
steam generator to help to ensure that accident induced leakage in
excess of SLB accident analysis assumptions will not occur.
For the CM assessment, the component of leakage from the prior
cycle from below the H* distance will be multiplied by a factor of
5.22 and added to the total leakage from any other source and
compared to the allowable accident induced leakage limit. For the
OA, the difference in the leakage between the allowable leakage and
the accident induced leakage from sources other than the tubesheet
expansion region will be divided by 5.22 and compared to the
observed operational leakage.
No leakage factor will be applied to the locked rotor or control
rod ejection transients due to their short duration.
Based on the above, the proposed changes do not involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated.
2. The proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
The proposed changes to TS 3.4.13, TS 5.5.8, and TS 5.6.8 that
alter the SG inspection and reporting criteria do not introduce any
new equipment, create new failure modes for existing equipment, or
create any new limiting single failures. Plant operation will not be
altered, and all safety functions will continue to perform as
previously assumed in accident analyses. Tube bundle integrity is
maintained for all plant conditions upon implementation of the
permanent alternate repair criteria.
Therefore, based on the above, the proposed change does not
create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from
any previously evaluated.
3. The proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction
in the margin of safety.
The proposed changes to TS 3.4.13, TS 5.5.8, and TS 5.6.8 define
the safety significant portion of the tube that must be inspected
and repaired. WCAP-18089-P identifies the specific inspection depth
from the top of the tubesheet below which any type of tube
degradation is shown to have no impact on the performance criteria
in NEI 97-06 Rev. 3, ``Steam Generator Program Guidelines.''
The proposed change that alters the SG inspection and reporting
criteria maintains the required structural margins of the SG tubes
for both normal and accident conditions. Nuclear Energy Institute
97-06, ``Steam Generator Program Guidelines,'' and NRC Regulatory
Guide (RG) 1.121, ``Bases for Plugging Degraded PWR Steam Generator
Tubes'' are used as the bases in the development of the limited
tubesheet inspection depth methodology for determining that SG tube
integrity considerations are maintained within acceptable limits. RG
1.121 describes a method acceptable to the NRC for meeting General
Design Criteria (GDC) 14, ``Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary,'' GDC
15, ``Reactor Coolant System Design,'' GDC 31, ``Fracture Prevention
of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary,'' and GDC 32, ``Inspection of
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary,'' by reducing the probability and
consequences of a SGTR. RG 1.121 concludes that by determining the
limiting safe conditions for tube wall degradation, the probability
and consequences of a SGTR are
[[Page 87962]]
reduced. This RG uses safety factors on loads for tube burst that
are consistent with the requirements of Section III of the American
Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code.
For axially oriented cracking located within the tubesheet, tube
burst is precluded due to the presence of the tubesheet. For
circumferentially oriented cracking, Westinghouse WCAP-18089-P
defines a length of degradation-free expanded tubing that provides
the necessary resistance to tube pullout due to the pressure induced
forces, with applicable safety factors applied. Application of the
limited hot and cold leg tubesheet inspection criteria will preclude
unacceptable primary-to-secondary leakage during all plant
conditions. Using the methodology for determining leakage as
described in WCAP-18089-P, it is shown that significant adequate
margin exists between conservatively estimated accident induced
leakage and the allowable accident leakage (500 gpd at operating
conditions) if either SG is assumed to be leaking at the TS leakage
limit of 72 gpd at the beginning of the design basis accident.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant
reduction in any 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: William Blair, Managing Attorney--Nuclear,
Florida Power & Light Company, P. O. Box 14000, 700 Universe Boulevard,
Juno Beach, Florida 33408-0420.
NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona.
South Carolina Electric and Gas Company 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: September 20, 2016. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML16267A163.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The
amendment request proposes changes to the Updated Final Safety Analysis
Report (UFSAR) in the form of departures from the incorporated plant-
specific Design Control Document Tier 2* information. Specifically, the
proposed change clarifies in the UFSAR how the quality and strength of
a specific set of couplers welded to stainless steel embedment plates
already installed and embedded in concrete are demonstrated through
visual examination and static tension testing, in lieu of the
nondestructive examination requirements of American Institute of Steel
Construction (AISC) N690, ``Specification for Safety-Related Steel
Structures for Nuclear Facilities.''
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 change describes how evaluation of coupler
strength, and by extension, weld strength and quality are used to
demonstrate the capacity of partial joint penetration (PJP) welds
joining weldable couplers to stainless steel embedment plates as
being able to perform their design function in lieu of satisfying
the AISC N690-1994, Section Q1.26.2.2, Section Q1.26.2.3, and
Section Q1.26.3 requirements for non-destructive examination (NDE)
on 10 percent weld populations, reexamination, and repair,
respectively. The proposed change does not affect the operation of
any systems or equipment that initiate an analyzed accident or alter
any structures, systems, and components (SSCs) accident initiator or
initiating sequence of events.
The change has no adverse effect on the design function of the
mechanical couplers or the SSCs to which the mechanical couplers are
welded. The probabilities of the accidents evaluated in the Updated
Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) are not affected.
The change does not impact the support, design, or operation of
mechanical and fluid systems. The change does not impact the
support, design, or operation of any safety-related structures.
There is no change to plant systems or the response of systems to
postulated accident conditions. There is no change to the predicted
radioactive releases due to normal operation or postulated accident
conditions. The plant response to previously evaluated accidents or
external events is not adversely affected, nor does the proposed
change create any new accident precursors.
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 change describes how evaluation of coupler
strength, and by extension, weld strength and quality are used to
demonstrate the capacity of PJP welds joining weldable couplers to
stainless steel embedment plates as being able to perform their
design function in lieu of satisfying the AISC N690-1994, Section
Q1.26.2.2, Section Q1.26.2.3, and Section Q1.26.3 requirements for
non-destructive examination on 10 percent weld populations,
reexamination, and repair, respectively.
The proposed change does not affect the operation of any systems
or equipment that may initiate a new or different kind of accident,
or alter any SSC such that a new accident initiator or initiating
sequence of events is created.
The proposed change does not adversely affect the design
function of the mechanical couplers, the structures in which the
couplers are used, or any other SSC design functions or methods of
operation in a manner that results in a new failure mode,
malfunction, or sequence of events that affect safety-related or
nonsafety-related equipment. This activity does not allow for a new
fission product release path, result in a new fission product
barrier failure mode, or create a new sequence of events that result
in significant fuel cladding failures.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change describes how evaluation of coupler
strength, and by extension, weld strength and quality are used to
demonstrate the capacity of the PJP welds joining weldable couplers
to stainless steel embedment plates as being able to perform their
design function in lieu of satisfying the AISC N690-1994, Section
Q1.26.2.2, Section Q1.26.2.3, and Section Q1.26.3 requirements for
non-destructive examination on 10 percent weld populations,
reexamination, and repair, respectively. The proposed change
satisfies the same design functions as stated in the UFSAR. This
change does not adversely affect compliance with any design
function, design analysis, safety analysis input or result, or
design/safety margin. No safety analysis or design basis acceptance
limit/criterion is challenged or exceeded by the proposed change.
Because no safety analysis or design basis acceptance limit/
criterion is challenged or exceeded by this change, no significant
margin of safety is reduced.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant
reduction in a margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Kathryn M. Sutton, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius
LLC, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004-2514.
NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. Markley.
[[Page 87963]]
Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information for Contention Preparation
NextEra Energy, Point Beach, LLC, Docket No. 50-266, Point Beach
Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, Town of Two Creeks, Manitowoc County, Wisconsin
South Carolina Electric and Gas Company Docket Nos. 52-027 and 52-028,
Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station (VCSNS) Units 2 and 3, Fairfield
County, South Carolina
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 requester shall submit a letter requesting permission to
access SUNSI to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff, and provide a copy to the Associate General
Counsel for Hearings, Enforcement and Administration, Office of the
General Counsel, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The expedited delivery or
courier mail address for both offices is: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 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 requester'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. 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 requester 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) an officer if that officer has been
designated to rule on information access issues.
G. Review of Grants of Access. A party other than the requester may
challenge an NRC staff determination granting access to SUNSI whose
release would harm that party's interest independent of the proceeding.
Such a challenge must be filed 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\ Requesters should note that the filing requirements of the
NRC's E-Filing Rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77
FR 46562; August 3, 2012) 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. 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 proposed 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 22nd day of November, 2016.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[[Page 87964]]
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; and
(ii) all contentions whose formulation does not
require access to SUNSI (+25 Answers to petition
for intervention; +7 petitioner/requestor reply).
20.................. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff
informs the requester of the staff's
determination whether the request for access
provides a reasonable basis to believe standing
can be established and shows need for SUNSI. (NRC
staff also informs any party to the proceeding
whose interest independent of the proceeding
would be harmed by the release of the
information.) If NRC staff makes the finding of
need for SUNSI and likelihood of standing, NRC
staff begins document processing (preparation of
redactions or review of redacted documents).
25.................. If NRC staff finds no ``need'' or no likelihood of
standing, the deadline for petitioner/requester
to file a motion seeking a ruling to reverse the
NRC staff's denial of access; NRC staff files
copy of access determination with the presiding
officer (or Chief Administrative Judge or other
designated officer, as appropriate). If NRC staff
finds ``need'' for SUNSI, the deadline for any
party to the proceeding whose interest
independent of the proceeding would be harmed by
the release of the information to file a motion
seeking a ruling to reverse the NRC staff's grant
of access.
30.................. Deadline for NRC staff reply to motions to reverse
NRC staff determination(s).
40.................. (Receipt +30) If NRC staff finds standing and need
for SUNSI, deadline for NRC staff to complete
information processing and file motion for
Protective Order and draft Non-Disclosure
Affidavit. Deadline for applicant/licensee to
file Non-Disclosure Agreement for SUNSI.
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. 2016-28521 Filed 12-5-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P