[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 24 (Tuesday, February 7, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9601-9608]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-01933]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2017-0003]
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 three amendment requests. The amendment
requests are for Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1; Virgil C. Summer Nuclear
Station, Units 2 and 3; and Limerick Generating Station, Unit 2. The
NRC proposes to determine that each amendment request involves 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 March 9, 2017. A request for a hearing
must be filed by April 10, 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 February 17, 2017.
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-2017-0003. 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: Lynn Ronewicz, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1927, email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2017-0003, facility name, unit
number(s), plant docket number(s), 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-2017-0003.
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
[[Page 9602]]
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-2017-0003, facility name, unit
number(s), plant docket number(s), 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 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 inform those persons not to
include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be
publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should
state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to
remove such information before making the comment submissions available
to the public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.
II. Background
Pursuant to Section 189a.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act), the 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, 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 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 petition for leave 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. 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/. Alternatively, a copy of
the regulations is available at the NRC's Public Document Room, located
at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, the
Commission or a presiding officer will rule on the petition and, if
appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be issued.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the petition should specifically
explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with
particular reference to the following general requirements for
standing: (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.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), the petition must also set
forth the specific contentions which the petitioner seeks to have
litigated in 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 must 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 the specific sources and
documents on which the petitioner intends to rely to support its
position on the issue. The petition must include sufficient information
to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant or licensee on
a material issue of law or fact. Contentions must 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 the requirements at 10 CFR 2.309(f) 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.
Parties have the opportunity
[[Page 9603]]
to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing with respect to
resolution of that party's admitted contentions, including the
opportunity to present evidence, consistent with the NRC's regulations,
policies, and procedures.
Petitions must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of
publication of this notice. Petitions and motions for leave to file new
or amended contentions that are filed after the 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). The petition must be filed in
accordance with the filing instructions in the ``Electronic Submissions
(E-Filing)'' section of this document.
If a hearing is requested, and the Commission has not made a final
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration, the
Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no
significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve
to establish 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 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 the amendment unless the Commission finds an imminent
danger to the health or safety of the public, in which case it will
issue an appropriate order or rule under 10 CFR part 2.
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 April
10, 2017. The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing
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.
Alternatively, a State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized
Indian Tribe, or agency thereof may participate as a non-party under 10
CFR 2.315(c).
If a hearing is granted, any person who is not a party to the
proceeding and is not affiliated with or represented by a party may, at
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
his or her 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 and petition for leave to intervene (petition), 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 that request to
participate 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. Detailed
guidance on making electronic submissions may be found in the Guidance
for Electronic Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. 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 (1) request a digital identification (ID)
certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or
representative) to digitally sign submissions and access the E-Filing
system for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise
the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a petition or
other adjudicatory document (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. Once a participant has obtained a
digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant
can then submit adjudicatory documents. Submissions must 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 document is 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
document on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and
other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for
and receive a digital ID certificate before adjudicatory documents are
filed so that they can obtain access to the documents via the E-Filing
system.
A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-
Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's 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 6 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
[[Page 9604]]
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 adjudicatory
documents 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://adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the
Commission or the presiding officer. If you do not have an NRC-issued
digital ID certificate as described above, click cancel when the link
requests certificates and you will be automatically directed to the
NRC's electronic hearing dockets where you will be able to access any
publicly-available documents in a particular hearing docket.
Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information,
such as social security numbers, home addresses, or personal phone
numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law
requires submission of such information. For example, in some
instances, individuals provide home addresses in order to demonstrate
proximity to a facility or site. 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.
NextEra Energy Seabrook LLC, Docket No. 50-443, Seabrook Station, Unit
No. 1, Rockingham County, New Hampshire
Date of amendment request: August 1, 2016, as supplemented by
letter dated September 30, 2016. Publicly-available versions are
available in ADAMS under Package Accession Nos. ML16216A250 and
ML16279A047, respectively.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The
amendment would revise the Seabrook Station Updated Final Safety
Analysis Report to include methods for analyzing seismic Category I
structures with concrete affected by an alkali-silica reaction.
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 amendment is requesting approval of changes to the
updated final safety analysis report (UFSAR) to allow a new method
to analyze Alkali-Silica Reaction (ASR) related loads. The new
methodology will verify that affected structures continue to have
the capability to withstand all applied loads used in the original
design of Seabrook structures. The proposed changes do not impact
the physical function of plant structures, systems, or components
(SSCs) or the manner in which SSCs perform their design function.
The proposed changes do not alter or prevent the ability of operable
SSCs to perform their intended function to mitigate the consequences
of an event within assumed acceptance limits.
The ASR-affected structures are not initiators of any accidents
previously evaluated, and there are no accidents previously
evaluated that involve a loss of structural integrity for seismic
Category I structures. Approval of the UFSAR changes will
demonstrate the structures affected by ASR will continue to maintain
the capability to withstand all credible conditions of loading
specified in the UFSAR.
Therefore, the proposed changes do 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 amendment is requesting approval of changes to the
UFSAR to allow the use of a new method to analyze ASR related loads
to verify that affected structures continue to have the capability
to withstand applied loads used in the original design of Seabrook
structures, with the addition of ASR loads and loads previously
considered negligible. Approving the use of the new methodology will
not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
previously evaluated. The new methodology will demonstrate that
structures continue to satisfy the design requirements of the code
of construction and other applicable requirements with the
additional load from ASR. Structures will respond to applied loads
consistent with their original design.
The proposed changes to the UFSAR do not challenge the integrity
or performance of any safety-related systems. The changes do not
alter the design, physical configuration, or method of operation of
any plant SSC. No physical changes are made to the plant, other than
as a result of the revised monitoring program, so no new causal
mechanisms are introduced.
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility
of a new or different kind of accident from any previously
evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed amendment is requesting approval of changes to the
UFSAR to allow the use of a new method to analyze ASR related loads
to verify that affected structures continue to have the capability
to withstand all applied loads used in the original design of
Seabrook structures.
The proposed methods for re-evaluating seismic Category I
structures will demonstrate that structures satisfy the acceptance
criteria in the current licensing basis when the loads associated
with ASR expansion are included with other design loads and load
combinations. The safety margin provided by the design codes in the
current licensing basis will not be reduced since the proposed
change is not requesting any change to the codes of record.
The proposed changes to the UFSAR do not affect the margin of
safety associated with confidence in the ability of the fission
product barriers (i.e., fuel cladding, reactor coolant system
pressure boundary, and containment structure) to limit the level of
radiation dose to the public. The proposed changes do not alter any
safety analyses assumptions, safety limits, limiting safety system
settings, or methods of operating the plant. The changes do not
adversely impact plant operating margins or the reliability of
equipment credited in the safety analyses. The proposed changes do
not adversely affect systems that respond to safely shutdown the
plant and to maintain the plant in a safe shutdown condition.
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: William Blair, Managing Attorney--Nuclear,
Florida Power & Light Company, P.O. Box 14000, Juno Beach, Florida
33408-0420.
Acting NRC Branch Chief: Stephen S. Koenick.
[[Page 9605]]
South Carolina Electric and Gas Company, Docket Nos. 52-027 and 52-028,
Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Units 2 and 3, Fairfield County,
South Carolina
Date of amendment request: November 28, 2016. A publicly-available
version is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML16334A199.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The
requested amendment requires a change to the Combined License (COL)
Appendix A, as well as plant-specific Tier 2, Tier 2 *, and COL
Appendix C (and corresponding plant-specific Tier 1). The proposed
changes would revise the licenses basis documents to add design detail
to the automatic depressurization system (ADS) blocking device and to
add the blocking device to the design of the in-containment refueling
water storage tank injection squib valves actuation logic. An exemption
request relating to the proposed changes to the AP1000 Design Control
Document Tier 1 is included with the request.
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, with NRC staff edits in square
brackets:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The AP1000 accident analysis previously evaluated a loss of
coolant accident caused by an inadvertent ADS valve actuation.
Adding design detail to the ADS blocking device, and applying the
blocking device to the IRWST [in-containment refueling water storage
tank] injection valves, does not impact this analysis. Using a
blocking device on the ADS and IRWST injection valves is a design
feature which further minimizes the probability of a loss of coolant
accident caused by a spurious valve actuation. Furthermore, because
the blocking device is designed to prevent a spurious valve
actuation due to a software CCF [common cause failure] and does not
adversely impact any existing design feature, it does not involve a
significant increase in the probability of an accident previously
evaluated.
The proposed amendment does not affect the prevention and
mitigation of abnormal events, (e.g., accidents, anticipated
operation occurrences, earthquakes, floods, turbine missiles, and
fires) or their safety or design analyses. This change does not
involve containment of radioactive isotopes or any adverse effect on
a fission product barrier. There is no impact on previously
evaluated accidents source terms. The PMS [protection and safety
monitoring system] is still able to actuate ADS and IRWST injection
valves for plant conditions which require their actuation.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant
increase in the 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 changes do not involve a new failure mechanism or
malfunction, which affects an SSC [structure, system, or component]
accident initiator, or interface with any SSC accident initiator or
initiating sequence of events considered in the design and licensing
bases. There is no adverse effect on radioisotope barriers or the
release of radioactive materials. The proposed amendment does not
adversely affect any accident, including the possibility of creating
a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of
a new or different type of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The blocking device is independent of PMS processor hardware and
software. It is designed to allow for ADS and IRWST injection
actuations when the plant parameters indicate an actual LOCA [loss-
of-coolant accident] event. Therefore, the ADS and IRWST are still
able to perform their safety functions when required. A postulated
failure of a blocking device which would prevent necessary ADS and
IRWST injection valve opening would be detected by the proposed
periodic surveillance testing within the TSs [Technical
Specifications]. Failure of the ADS actuation or IRWST injection
valve opening in a division could also result from concurrent
failure of the two Core Makeup Tanks (CMTs) level sensors in one
division, with both sensors reading above the blocking setpoint.
Failures of the level sensors would be immediately detected due to
the deviations in redundant measurements. Furthermore, the proposed
TS actions require that the four divisions of blocking devices be
capable of automatically unblocking for each CMT. In addition, the
TS require that the blocking devices be unblocked in plant modes
which allow for the operability of less than two CMTs.
The blocking device will continue to comply with the existing
UFSAR [Updated Final Safety Analysis Report] regulatory requirements
and industry standards. The proposed changes would not affect any
safety-related design code, function, design analysis, safety
analysis input or result, or existing design/safety margin. No
safety analysis or design basis acceptance limit/criterion is
challenged or exceeded by the requested changes.
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: Kathryn M. Sutton, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius
LLC, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004-2514.
NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon-Herrity.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-353, Limerick Generating
Station, Unit 2, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania
Date of amendment request: December 16, 2016. A publicly-available
version is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML16351A078.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The
amendment would revise the Limerick Generating Station (LGS), Unit 2,
Technical Specifications related to the safety limit minimum critical
power ratios. The proposed changes result from a cycle-specific
analysis performed to support the operation of LGS, Unit 2, in the
upcoming Cycle 15.
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, with NRC staff edits in square
brackets:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The derivation of the cycle specific Safety Limit Minimum
Critical Power Ratios (SLMCPRs) for incorporation into the Technical
Specifications (TS), and their use to determine cycle specific
thermal limits, has been performed using the methodology discussed
in NEDE-24011-P-A, ``General Electric Standard Application for
Reactor Fuel,'' Revision 23 [ADAMS Accession No. ML16250A047].
The basis of the SLMCPR calculation is to ensure that during
normal operation and during abnormal operational transients, at
least 99.9% of all fuel rods in the core do not experience
transition boiling if the limit is not violated. The new SLMCPRs
preserve the existing margin to transition boiling.
The MCPR [minimum critical power ratio] safety limit is
reevaluated for each reload using NRC-approved methodologies. The
analyses for LGS, Unit 2 Cycle 15, have concluded that a two
recirculation loop MCPR safety limit of >= 1.10, based on the
[[Page 9606]]
application of Global Nuclear Fuel's NRC-approved MCPR safety limit
methodology, will ensure that this acceptance criterion is met. For
single recirculation loop operation, a MCPR safety limit of >= 1.14
also ensures that this acceptance criterion is met. The MCPR
operating limits are presented and controlled in accordance with the
LGS, Unit 2, Core Operating Limits Report (COLR).
The requested TS changes do not involve any plant modifications
or operational changes that could affect system reliability or
performance or that could affect the probability of operator error.
The requested changes do not affect any postulated accident
precursors, do not affect any accident mitigating systems, and do
not introduce any new accident initiation mechanisms.
Therefore, the proposed TS changes do 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 SLMCPR is a TS numerical value, calculated to ensure that
during normal operation and during anticipated operational
transients, at least 99.9% of all fuel rods in the core do not
experience transition boiling if the limit is not violated. The new
SLMCPRs are calculated using [the] NRC-approved methodology
discussed in NEDE-24011-P-A, ``General Electric Standard Application
for Reactor Fuel,'' Revision 23. The proposed changes do not involve
any new modes of operation, any changes to setpoints, or any plant
modifications. The proposed revised MCPR safety limits have been
shown to be acceptable for Cycle 15 operation. The core operating
limits will continue to be developed using NRC-approved methods. The
proposed MCPR safety limits or methods for establishing the core
operating limits do not result in the creation of any new precursors
to an accident.
Therefore, this change does not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
There is no reduction in the margin of safety previously
approved by the NRC as a result of the proposed change to the
SLMCPRs. The new SLMCPRs are calculated using methodology discussed
in NEDE-24011-P-A, ``General Electric Standard Application for
Reactor Fuel,'' Revision 23. The SLMCPRs ensure that during normal
operation and during anticipated operational transients, at least
99.9% of all fuel rods in the core do not experience transition
boiling if the limit is not violated, thereby preserving the fuel
cladding integrity.
Therefore, the proposed TS changes do not involve a significant
reduction in the margin of safety previously approved by the NRC.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, and with the changes noted above in square brackets, 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: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel,
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville,
Illinois 60555.
Acting NRC Branch Chief: Stephen S. Koenick.
Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information for Contention Preparation
NextEra Energy Seabrook LLC, Docket No. 50-443, Seabrook Station, Unit
No. 1, Rockingham County, New Hampshire
South Carolina Electric and Gas Company, Docket Nos. 52-027 and 52-028,
Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Units 2 and 3, Fairfield County,
South Carolina
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-353, Limerick Generating
Station, Unit 2, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania
A. This Order contains instructions regarding how potential parties
to this proceeding may request access to documents containing Sensitive
Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI).
B. Within 10 days after publication of this notice of hearing and
opportunity to petition for leave to intervene, any potential party who
believes access to SUNSI is necessary to respond to this notice may
request access to SUNSI. 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, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 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. Filing of Contentions. Any contentions in these proceedings that
are based upon the information received as a result of the request made
for
[[Page 9607]]
SUNSI must be filed by the requestor no later than 25 days after
receipt of (or access to) that information. However, if more than 25
days remain between the petitioner's receipt of (or access to) the
information and the deadline for filing all other contentions (as
established in the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the
petitioner may file its SUNSI contentions by that later deadline.
G. Review of Denials of Access.
(1) If the request for access to SUNSI is denied by the NRC staff
after a determination on standing and requisite need, 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) if another officer has been
designated to rule on information access issues, with that officer.
(3) Further appeals of decisions under this paragraph must be made
pursuant to 10 CFR 2.311.
H. 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 within 5 days of the notification by the
NRC staff of its grant of access and must be filed with: (a) The
presiding officer designated in this proceeding; (b) if no presiding
officer has been appointed, the Chief Administrative Judge, or if he or
she is unavailable, another administrative judge, or an Administrative
Law Judge with jurisdiction pursuant to 10 CFR 2.318(a); or (c) if
another officer has been designated to rule on information access
issues, with that officer.
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. The Commission expects that the NRC staff and presiding officers
(and any other reviewing officers) will consider and resolve requests
for access to SUNSI, and motions for protective orders, in a timely
fashion in order to minimize any unnecessary delays in identifying
those petitioners who have standing and who have propounded contentions
meeting the specificity and basis requirements in 10 CFR part 2. The
attachment 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 24th of January, 2017.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
Attachment 1--General Target Schedule for Processing and Resolving
Requests for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information
in This Proceeding
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Event/activity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0........................ Publication of Federal Register notice of
hearing and opportunity to petition for
leave to intervene, including order with
instructions for access requests.
10....................... Deadline for submitting requests for access
to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information (SUNSI) with information:
Supporting the standing of a potential party
identified by name and address; describing
the need for the information in order for
the potential party to participate
meaningfully in an adjudicatory proceeding.
60....................... Deadline for submitting petition for
intervention containing: (i) Demonstration
of standing; 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 opportunity to request a hearing
and petition for leave to intervene), 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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 9608]]
[FR Doc. 2017-01933 Filed 2-6-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P