[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 3, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31190-31197]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12919]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2018-0116]
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 Oconee Nuclear Station, Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3; Duane
Arnold Energy Center; and Callaway Plant, Unit No. 1. 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 August 2, 2018. A request for a
hearing must be filed by September 3, 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 July 13, 2018.
[[Page 31191]]
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-2018-0116. 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-7-A60M, 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: Shirley Rohrer, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-5411; email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0116, 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-2018-0116.
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 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-2018-0116, 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-
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
[[Page 31192]]
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 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
[[Page 31193]]
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.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287,
Oconee Nuclear Station, Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3, Oconee County, South
Carolina
Date of amendment request: October 20, 2017. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17299A125.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The
amendments would revise the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report
(UFSAR) to provide off-nominal success criteria for maintaining the
reactor in a safe shutdown condition when using the Standby Shutdown
Facility (SSF) to mitigate a Turbine Building (TB) flood occurring when
an Oconee Nuclear Station unit is not at nominal full power conditions.
The amendments would also revise the UFSAR to allow the use of the Main
Steam (MS) Atmospheric Dump Valves (ADVs), when available, to enhance
SSF mitigation capabilities.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented below:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change provides off-nominal success criteria for
SSF mitigated TB flood events occurring during off-nominal initial
conditions. The proposed change does not impact the current success
criteria for SSF events occurring during nominal full power initial
conditions. The LAR [license amendment request] also requests NRC
approval to use the MS ADVs, when available, to enhance SSF
mitigation capabilities. The proposed change does not adversely
impact containment integrity, radiological release pathways, fuel
design, filtration systems, main steam relief valve set points, or
radwaste systems. No new radiological release pathways are created.
During licensing of the SSF design, SSF performance was evaluated
assuming the events that were to be mitigated by the SSF were
initiated from nominal full power conditions. Duke Energy analyses
demonstrate that SSF mitigated Turbine Building flood events
occurring during off-nominal full power conditions can be mitigated
acceptably when the proposed off-nominal success criteria are met.
As such, the proposed change does not have a significant impact on
the dose consequences of an accident previously evaluated. The SSF
is not an event initiator; therefore, it does not affect the
frequency of occurrence of accidents previously evaluated in the
UFSAR. The use of off-nominal success criteria is not a precursor to
a TB flood event; therefore, the proposed change does not involve a
significant increase in the probability of any event requiring
operation of the SSF. The proposed off-nominal success criteria will
continue to ensure the SSF can maintain the unit(s) in a safe
shutdown condition. As such, the proposed change does not involve a
significant increase in the consequences of any event requiring
operation of the SSF.
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 UFSAR change requests approval to modify the SSF
licensing basis for off-nominal conditions by using off-nominal
success criteria for SSF mitigated TB flood events occurring during
off-nominal conditions. Duke Energy analyses demonstrate that
meeting the off-nominal success criteria is an acceptable method of
mitigating the TB flood event and does not create the possibility of
a new or different
[[Page 31194]]
kind of accident. The LAR also requests NRC approval to use the main
steam atmospheric dump valves, when available, to enhance the
mitigation of SSF events. The proposed change does not change the
design function or operation of the SSF. The SSF is designed with
the capability to mitigate a TB flood and meet specific success
criteria for the entire 72 hour mission time. These changes do not
adversely affect this mission time.
The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident since the proposed change does not
introduce credible new failure mechanisms, malfunctions, or accident
initiators not considered in the design and licensing bases.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change requests approval of an off-nominal set of
success criteria for SSF mitigated TB flood events occurring during
off-nominal power conditions. Duke Energy analyses demonstrate there
is adequate margin to prevent lift of pressurizer safety valves
while water-solid. The proposed change does not involve operating
installed equipment (ADVs) in a new or different manner. The ADVs
are periodically tested and have been used successfully for a plant
cooldown. Use of the ADVs to enhance the mitigation of SSF events
serves to improve plant safety by preventing the pressurizer from
reaching water-solid conditions and by reducing the pressure at
which the MS system is controlled. ADV use also allows plant
stabilization to occur more quickly and at lower temperatures, and
eliminates repeated cycling of the MS relief valves. The proposed
change does not involve a change to any set points for parameters
which initiate protective or mitigation action and does not have any
impact on the fission product barriers or safety limits. 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: Kate Nolan, Deputy General Counsel, Duke
Energy Carolinas, 550 South Tryon Street, Charlotte, North Carolina
28202.
NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. Markley.
NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC, Docket No. 50-331, Duane Arnold
Energy Center, Linn County, Iowa
Date of amendment request: December 15, 2017. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17352A335.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The
amendment would modify Technical Specification (TS) 3.6.1.7,
``Suppression Chamber-to-Drywell Vacuum Breakers,'' by revising the
required number of operable vacuum breakers for opening from six to
five.
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.
Operable suppression chamber-to-drywell vacuum breakers are
required for accident mitigation. Failure of the vacuum breakers is
not assumed as an accident initiator for any accident previously
evaluated. Therefore, any potential failure of a vacuum breaker to
perform when necessary will not affect the probability of an
accident previously evaluated.
The proposed change maintains a sufficient number of operable
vacuum breakers to meet the limiting design basis accident
conditions. The consequences of an accident previously evaluated
while utilizing the proposed change are no different than the
consequences of an accident prior to the proposed change. As a
result, the consequences of an accident previously evaluated are not
significantly increased [sic].
Therefore, the proposed TS change does not involve an increase
in the probability or consequences of a previously evaluated
accident.
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 alter the protection system design,
create new failure modes, or change any modes of operation. The
proposed change does not involve a physical alteration of the plant;
and no new or different kind of equipment will be installed.
Consequently, there are no new initiators that could result in a new
or different kind of accident.
Therefore, 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 to the minimum number of operable
suppression chamber-to-drywell vacuum breakers for opening ensures
that an excessive negative differential pressure between the
suppression chamber and the drywell will be prevented during the
most limiting postulated design-basis event. The minimum number of
operable suppression chamber-to-drywell vacuum breakers for opening
is set appropriately to ensure adequate margin based on the number
of available vacuum breakers not having an effect on the containment
system analysis report. 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, P.O. Box 14000, Juno Beach,
Florida 33408-0420.
NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona.
Union Electric Company, Docket No. 50-483, Callaway Plant, Unit No. 1,
Callaway County, Missouri
Date of amendment request: March 9, 2018. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Package Accession No. ML18068A685.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The
amendment would revise the Technical Specifications (TSs) to add TS
3.7.20, ``Class 1E Electrical Equipment Air Conditioning (A/C)
System,'' to the Callaway Plant TSs. This proposed change would enhance
the capability of one Class 1E electrical equipment A/C train to
provide adequate area cooling for both trains of Class 1E electrical
equipment during normal and accident conditions.
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 safety-related Class 1E Electrical Equipment A/C system is
designed to perform its area cooling function for the Class 1E
electrical equipment during normal and accident conditions. Since
the supported Class 1E electrical equipment is utilized and required
to be available for accident mitigation, the Class 1E Electrical
Equipment A/C system performs an accident mitigation function. The
system itself, however, is not involved in the initiation of
accidents previously evaluated in the FSAR [Final Safety Analysis
Report]. That is, failure of the Class 1E Electrical Equipment A/C
system itself is not an initiator of such accidents, and
consequently, the proposed addition of TS 3.7.20 does not involve an
increase in the probability of an accident previously evaluated.
[[Page 31195]]
The proposed addition of TS 3.7.20 creates an LCO [Limiting
Condition for Operation] requirement for Operability of both Class
1E electrical equipment A/C trains during applicable plant
conditions. The LCO requirement for both trains to be Operable
provides redundancy and single-failure protection, thus maximizing
the availability of the Class 1E Electrical Equipment A/C system
function(s). This serves to preserve assumptions regarding the
Operability and/or availability of the Class 1E electrical equipment
supported by the Class 1E Electrical Equipment A/C system.
In addition to the proposed LCO requiring the Operability of
both Class 1E electrical equipment A/C trains, a Condition and
associated Required Actions are proposed to address the
inoperability of one of the Class 1E electrical equipment A/C
trains. The proposed Required Action(s) provides for more than
merely specifying a Completion Time for restoring the inoperable
train. Proposed Actions A.1 and A.2 together ensure a continuation
of the Class 1E electrical equipment cooling function for both
trains of equipment by requiring mitigating actions to be taken and
periodic verification that room area temperatures remain within the
specified limit. These Required Actions are met through enhanced
ventilation capability provided by plant modifications that enable
the remaining single Operable Class 1E electrical equipment A/C
train to provide adequate cooling to the areas of both trains of
Class 1E electrical equipment. This ensures continued area cooling
during the period of time permitted for restoring the inoperable
Class 1E electrical equipment A/C train.
The addition of TS 3.7.20 to the plant's Technical
Specifications thus supports the availability of the Class 1E
Electrical Equipment A/C cooling function, consistent with the
assumptions of the plant's accident analysis. This support of the
intended accident mitigation capability means that the proposed
change does not involve a significant increase in the consequences
of an accident previously evaluated.
In regard to the accident analyses and assumed overall
protection system capability/response, protection system performance
will remain within the bounds of the previously performed accident
analyses since no hardware changes are being made to the protection
systems. The same Reactor Trip System (RTS) and Engineered Safety
Feature Actuation System (ESFAS) instrumentation will continue to be
supported and used as assumed so that the protection systems will
continue to function in a manner consistent with the plant design
basis.
With regard to the proposed change to TS 5.5.11.e and the
associated reduction in heater capacity for the heaters in the
Control Room Pressurization System filter trains, the heaters
function to mitigate accidents previously evaluated in the FSAR, but
failure of the heaters themselves (or the filter trains themselves)
is not an initiator of such accidents. Further, even with the
proposed reduction in heater capacity (wattage), the new heater
capacity will still exceed filter operational requirements and the
required safety margin by a significant amount. Therefore, the
proposed change to the heater capacity will not increase the
probability or consequences of an accident described in the Callaway
FSAR.
In consideration of all the above, for both TS changes, the
proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
No new or different accidents are required to be postulated from
addition of proposed TS 3.7.20. No new accident scenarios, transient
precursors, failure mechanisms, or limiting single failures will be
introduced as a result of this amendment. The proposed LCO will
require both Class 1E electrical equipment A/C trains to be
maintained OPERABLE during plant operation, thereby maintaining the
capability of the system to perform its specified safety function
for the supported electrical equipment. The proposed license
amendment includes regulatory commitments to achieve the capability
for one OPERABLE Class 1E electrical equipment A/C train to provide
adequate cooling for both trains of electrical equipment during
normal and accident conditions via design changes, but that
capability will only be utilized per the temporary provisions of a
Condition and Required Action(s) under TS 3.7.20.
The proposed amendment will not alter the design or performance
of the 7300 Process Protection System, Nuclear Instrumentation
System, Solid State Protection System, Balance of Plant Engineered
Safety Features Actuation System, Main Steam and Feedwater Isolation
System, or Load Shedder and Emergency Load Sequencers used in the
plant protection systems. As such, the change does not have a
detrimental impact on the manner in which plant equipment operates
or responds to an actuation signal.
With respect to the proposed change to TS 5.5.11.e and the
associated reduction in heater capacity for the control room
pressurization system filter trains, only the heater wattage/
capacity is being changed. Overall system operation and required
performance is not being changed. No other plant system is affected
by this change (except for the beneficial effect of the reduced heat
load on the Class 1E electrical equipment A/C system), and no new
system operation or required response is introduced by this change.
Based on the above, the proposed amendment will not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
Proposed TS 3.7.20 includes a provision for restoring an
inoperable Class 1E electrical equipment cooling train to Operable
status within a reasonable but required Completion Time, which is
consistent with the many other Technical Specifications for systems
having independent and redundant trains (based on the relatively low
risk associated with such a condition when single-failure protection
is momentarily not ensured for the affected system). In this case,
however, if availability of the Class 1E electrical equipment
supported by the Class 1E electrical equipment A/C system is
considered a margin of safety, the reduction in such a margin of
safety for when a Class 1E electrical equipment cooling train is
declared inoperable is minimized due to the calculated capability of
one A/C train to provide adequate cooling to both trains of Class 1E
electrical equipment during normal and accident conditions (with
proposed Condition A and its Required Actions in effect). The
provision for restoring an inoperable Class 1E electrical equipment
cooling train to Operable status within a reasonable but required
Completion Time also allows a reasonable period to perform
preventive and corrective maintenance, thus increasing or
maintaining system reliability.
With respect to the Class 1E electrical equipment and the area
temperatures assumed for this equipment during normal conditions,
that associated margin of safety is maintained by the requirement
under proposed TS 3.7.20 (for when one Class 1E electrical equipment
A/C train is declared inoperable) to periodically verify that the
area/room temperatures are maintained within the specified limit (of
less than or equal to 90[emsp14][deg]F [degrees Fahrenheit]). In
addition, the capability to remain at or below the post-accident
temperature limit (of 104[emsp14][deg]F) for the Class 1E electrical
equipment rooms will continue to be met, even with only one Class 1E
electrical equipment A/C train OPERABLE, (providing the applicable
Required Action under proposed TS 3.7.20 is met).
It should also be noted that the addition of TS 3.7.20 has no
impact on calculated releases and doses for postulated accidents, or
on ECCS [Emergency Core Cooling System] actuation or RPS [Reactor
Protection System]/ESFAS protection setpoints/limiting safety system
settings, or any other parameter that could affect a margin of
safety.
For the proposed change to TS 5.5.11.e and the associated
reduction in heater capacity for the charcoal filters in the control
room pressurization trains, it should be noted that even with the
proposed reduction, the minimum required heating capacity (for
ensuring an influent air humidity of less than or equal to 70%
relative humidity for the filter absorber train) would still be more
than met. Thus, for this proposed change, there is no significant
reduction in the margin of safety in regard to required
pressurization train performance for the control room emergency
ventilation system.
Therefore, based on the above, 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.
[[Page 31196]]
Attorney for licensee: John O'Neill, Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw
Pittman LLP, 2300 N Street NW, Washington, DC 20037.
NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. Pascarelli.
Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information for Contention Preparation
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287,
Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3, Oconee County, South
Carolina
NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC, Docket No. 50-331, Duane Arnold
Energy Center, Linn County, Iowa
Union Electric Company, Docket No. 50-483, Callaway Plant, Unit No. 1,
Callaway County, Missouri
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 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.
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.
[[Page 31197]]
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 11th day of June, 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.
10....................... Deadline for submitting requests for access
to Sensitive Unclassified
Non[dash]Safeguards Information (SUNSI) with
information: Supporting the standing of a
potential party identified by name and
address; and 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. 2018-12919 Filed 7-2-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P