[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 6, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9553-9559]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03235]
[[Page 9553]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2018-0027]
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 North Anna Power Station, Units 1 and 2, and Vogtle Electric
Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4. 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 April 5, 2018. A request for a hearing
must be filed by May 7, 2018. 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 March 16, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0027. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-
9127; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document.
Mail comments to: May Ma, Office of Administration, Mail
Stop: TWFN-3-D1, 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 NRC-2018-0027, 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 Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0027.
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-2018-0027, 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 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, 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-
[[Page 9554]]
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 website 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 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 no later
than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. 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
[[Page 9555]]
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 website
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 website 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 website 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 website 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 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
https://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.
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026,
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia
Date of amendment request: December 15, 2017. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17349A924.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The
requested amendment proposes consistency changes to combined license
Appendix C (and to plant-specific Tier 1 information) and associated
Tier 2* and Tier 2 information to clarify the thickness of the Nuclear
Island (NI) Basemat, to revise wall thicknesses and descriptions in the
Auxiliary Building, and to clarify floor thicknesses in the Annex
Building. Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 52.63(b)(1), an
exemption from elements of the design as certified in the 10 CFR part
52, Appendix D, design certification rule is also requested for the
plant-specific Design Control Document Tier 1 material departures.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented below:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes do not affect the operation or reliability
of any system,
[[Page 9556]]
structure or component (SSC) required to maintain a normal power
operating condition or to mitigate anticipated transients without
safety-related systems. The change to the NI Basemat and Auxiliary
Building dimensions is a consistency change, and involves no design
changes or technical reanalysis. The change to the Annex Building
concrete thickness acceptance criteria is a clarification and does
not involve a change to the design of the Annex Building or
reanalysis of the Annex Building. The change to the Annex Building
kitchen and restroom floor thickness involves only structural
changes, and does not affect the performance of any SSC relied upon
to maintain normal power operation, or to effect safe shutdown using
nonsafety-related equipment. The change to the Annex Building
kitchen and restroom floor thickness does not adversely affect
occupational radiation dose to personnel in these areas because
calculations show the dose rates in the Annex Building during normal
operations and in post-accident conditions are maintained within
regulatory limits. Therefore, the requested 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 changes do not affect the operation of any safety-
related SSC relied upon to mitigate design basis accidents. The
proposed changes to the NI Basemat and the Auxiliary Building
resolve inconsistencies to reflect NI existing structural design,
which has been analyzed and shown to comply with seismic and
structural criteria. The change to the Annex Building concrete
thickness acceptance criteria is a clarification, and does not
involve a change to the design of the Annex Building or reanalysis
of the Annex Building. The seismic Category II section of the Annex
Building has been shown to maintain its structural integrity
following a design basis earthquake. The proposed changes to the
Annex Building kitchen and restroom floor thickness do not affect
the structural integrity or seismic response of the Annex Building.
The design of these structures continues to meet the requirements of
10 CFR 50 Appendix A General Design Criterion 2, Design Bases for
Protection Against Natural Phenomena. Therefore, the proposed
changes do 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 changes do not affect existing safety margins. The
proposed changes to the NI Basemat and the Auxiliary Building
resolve inconsistencies to reflect NI existing structural design.
The change to the Annex Building concrete thickness acceptance
criteria is a clarification, and does not involve a change to the
design of the Annex Building or reanalysis of the Annex Building.
The proposed changes to the Annex Building kitchen and restroom
floor thickness do not involve a reduction to the structural
integrity of the seismic Category II portion of the building, as
adequate reinforcement is provided in the floor of the kitchen and
restroom areas of the [Control Support Area (CSA)] to support the
design function of the Annex Building. No margin to the specified
acceptable fuel design limits is affected by the proposed changes.
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: M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP,
1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, Alabama 35203-2015.
NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon-Herrity.
Virginia Electric and Power Company, Docket Nos. 50-338 and 50-339,
North Anna Power Station (NAPS), Units 1 and 2, Louisa County, Virginia
Date of amendment request: May 2, 2017. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17129A446.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The
amendments would revise Technical Specification (TS) 3.7.18, ``Spent
Fuel Pool Storage,'' and TS 4.3.1, ``Criticality,'' to allow the
storage of fuel assemblies with a maximum enrichment of up to 5.0
weight percent uranium 235 (U-235) in the NAPS spent fuel pool (SFP)
storage racks and the new fuel storage racks (NFSR). The amendments
would further revise the allowable fuel assembly parameters and storage
patterns for fuel in the SFP.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented below:
1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change does not involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The proposed change will not affect the plant equipment or
structure, including the SFP, NFSR, or fuel handling equipment,
including how equipment is operated and maintained. There are no
changes to the equipment for fuel handling or how fuel assemblies
are handled, including how fuel assemblies are inserted into and
removed from SFP and NFSR storage locations. There will be no
changes to administrative means to verify correct fuel assembly
storage in the SFP, which will now also be used to verify required
[Rod Cluster Control Assembly (RCCA)] storage in selected Region 2
assemblies, or the required response to a fuel assembly misloading
or drop event. There are no changes to how RCCAs will be handled,
including how RCCAs are inserted into or removed from a fuel
assembly or other location such as a[n] SFP storage location. Also,
since the proposed change does not modify plant equipment or its
operation and maintenance, including equipment used to maintain SFP
soluble boron levels, the proposed change will not impact a boron
dilution event or plant response to it.
The criticality safety evaluation concluded that the NFSR
limiting accident is the optimum moderation condition with each
storage location loaded with a maximum reactivity fuel assembly. The
NFSR will maintain keff <0.98 for this postulated
scenario including all uncertainties and biases. The NFSR also
maintains keff <=0.95 for the fully flooded scenario
including all uncertainties and biases. Thus, the consequences of an
accident previously evaluated regarding the NFSR is not
significantly increased. There is no change to the plant equipment
or its operation and maintenance due to the proposed change. Thus,
the probability of a flooding accident that could impact the NFSR is
not significantly increased.
Regarding the SFP, there will now be two storage Regions. The
process of choosing fuel assembly storage locations will not change,
except that the storage arrangement (checkerboard) and burnup
requirements will be revised and assemblies containing an RCCA can
be stored in Region 2 without consideration of the burnup curves.
The physical handling, insertion, removal, and storage of fuel
assemblies in SFP racks will not change. The NAPS program for
choosing fuel assembly storage locations, for fuel handling, and for
assuring that the fuel assemblies are placed into correct locations
will remain in place. Thus, the probability of a fuel assembly
misloading or a fuel assembly drop in the SFP will not significantly
increase due to the proposed change.
A number of postulated accidents for the SFP were reviewed for
the proposed change which included postulated fuel assembly
misloading and drop scenarios. The criticality safety evaluation for
the SFP concluded that the limiting accident, which bounds all other
scenarios, is a multiple misload of a maximum reactivity fuel
assembly into each SFP storage location. The criticality safety
evaluation concluded that a[n] SFP soluble boron concentration of
2600 [parts per million (ppm)] will maintain keff <=0.95
including all uncertainties and biases for this postulated scenario.
The current TS, which is not being changed, requires a minimum
concentration of 2600 ppm soluble boron at all times that fuel is in
the SFP. Since there is no change to the plant equipment that
maintains boron concentration or how the boron
[[Page 9557]]
concentration is maintained, the probability of an accident
involving an incorrect amount of SFP soluble boron is not
significantly increased. Also, since keff would remain
<=0.95, there is no significant increase in the consequences of a
postulated accident.
There are no changes to plant equipment, including its operation
and maintenance, as a result of the proposed change, including
equipment associated with maintaining SFP soluble boron
concentration or possible flow paths that could contribute to a
boron dilution event. Thus, no new avenues for a boron dilution
event will be created. There will be no change regarding how the
plant maintains boron concentration or responds to a boron dilution
event. The criticality safety evaluation for the postulated boron
dilution event shows that, like the existing analysis, the SFP
maintains keff <=0.95 at 900 ppm soluble boron. Thus,
there is no significant increase in the probability or consequences
of a boron dilution accident.
In each of the above scenarios the proposed change does not
significantly increase the probability of an accident previously
evaluated. In each postulated accident keff continues to
be less than or equal to the licensing limit of 0.95, or less than
0.98 for the NFSR optimum moderation scenario.
The NAPS SFP is currently licensed to store a fuel assembly in
each of the 1737 spent fuel rack storage locations. Thus, the SFP
seismic/structural loading requirements for the proposed change are
bounded by the existing TS which have been shown to protect the fuel
during normal and accident conditions, including during a postulated
seismic event. Thus, there is no increase in the consequences of a
seismic event.
The proposed license amendment makes no changes to any safety
analysis limits, including core power level, operating temperature
or pressure, or peaking factors. There are no changes being made to
any fuel burnup limits. Thus, it is concluded that:
There is no increase in the radiological consequences
in response to postulated accidents,
there is no change to the maximum allowable SFP heat
load,
there is no impact on fuel rod integrity during normal
or accident conditions, and
there is no impact on the ability of RCCAs to fully
insert during normal or accident conditions.
Thus, it is concluded that the probability or consequences of a
previously evaluated accident do not significantly increase.
2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
There is no change to any plant equipment, including how
equipment is operated and maintained. Equipment used to handle fuel
assemblies (or any heavy load) over the NFSR or the SFP, or how the
fuel assemblies are stored, inserted into and removed from fuel
storage locations is not changed. There is no change to how RCCAs
will be inserted into or removed from a fuel assembly or other
location, or otherwise how RCCAs are handled. Any fuel assemblies
containing a[n] RCCA may now be stored in Region 2 without being in
the ``Acceptable'' region of the burnup curves. However, if such an
assembly was stored in Region 2 without the RCCA, it would be
treated as any other fuel misload event in which an assembly is
stored in Region 2 without meeting the requirements of the burnup
curves. Thus, there are no new accidents created over and above the
existing postulated accidents of a fuel misload or a fuel assembly
drop in the SFP, or a flooding event in the NFSR area.
Also, since there is no change to the plant equipment or how
equipment is operated and maintained, the probability of a new type
of accident that could impact the SFP or NFSR is not significantly
increased.
Since the proposed change will not change fuel/RCCA handling
equipment or how fuel assemblies and RCCAs are handled and stored,
nor will it change any other plant equipment, there is no mechanism
for creating a new or different kind of accident not previously
evaluated. Thus, the proposed change does not create the possibility
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in
a margin of safety.
The licensing requirement for the SFP is that keff
remain <=0.95 under normal and all postulated accident conditions
with credit for soluble boron. The criticality safety evaluation
concluded that this requirement is met for the bounding postulated
accident of a multiple misload of a maximum reactivity fuel assembly
into each SFP storage location, and for the postulated boron
dilution event.
In addition the criticality safety evaluation concluded the
following regarding normal conditions with 0 ppm soluble boron in
the SFP:
The SFP will maintain keff <1.0.
For a fuel handling event that brings two fresh 5.0
weight percent U-235 fuel assemblies, not stored in a spent fuel
rack or dry shielded container, [near] each other, keff
is maintained <0.95 with 0 ppm of soluble boron in the SFP water for
a distance >12 inches. With credit for soluble boron keff
is maintained <0.95 for any distance less than 12 inches apart.
The criticality safety evaluation also allows the following
storage configurations. In each case the storage configuration
either reduces or does not increase reactivity assuring that
keff margin is maintained:
Storing a[n] RCCA and/or cell blocker in a Region 1
empty location.
Storing non-fuel components in any spent fuel rack
storage location where fuel assemblies are allowed.
Storing non-fuel components in the guide tubes of any
fuel assembly.
The criticality safety evaluation evaluated Non-standard Fuel
Assemblies stored in the NAPS SFP to determine whether they need to
contain a[n] RCCA for Region 2 storage. This information is used to
maintain keff margin when storing Non-standard Fuel
Assemblies.
The licensing requirements for the NFSR is that keff
remain <=0.95 for the fully flooded scenario, and <0.98 for the
optimum moderation scenario. The criticality safety evaluation
concluded that these requirements are met assuming each storage
location is loaded with a maximum reactivity fuel assembly.
Thus, all the margins of safety are maintained, and 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: Lillian M. Cuoco, Senior Counsel, Dominion
Resources Services, Inc., 120 Tredegar Street, RS-2, Richmond, Virginia
23219.
NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. Markley.
Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information for Contention Preparation
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026,
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia
Virginia Electric and Power Company, Docket Nos. 50-338 and 50-339,
North Anna Power Station, Units 1 and 2, Louisa County, Virginia
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
[[Page 9558]]
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 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, on February 12, 2018.
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.
[[Page 9559]]
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2018-03235 Filed 3-5-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P