FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License and Opportunity for a Hearing, 29787-29791 [E8-11470]

Agencies

• NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 100 (Thursday, May 22, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29787-29791]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-11470]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-346]


FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company; Notice of Consideration of 
Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License and Opportunity for 
a Hearing

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, or the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. 
NPF-3 issued to FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (the licensee) 
for operation of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1 
(DBNPS), located in Ottawa County, Ohio.
    The proposed amendment requested by the licensee's August 3, 2007, 
license amendment request (LAR) would represent a full conversion from 
the current technical specifications (CTS) to a set of improved 
technical specifications (ITS) based on NUREG-1430, ``Standard 
Technical Specifications (STS) Babcock and Wilcox Plants,'' Revision 
3.1 dated December 2005 and certain generic changes to the NUREG. The 
attachment to the licensee's August 3, 2007, LAR consists of 17 
volumes.
    Volume 1 provides details concerning the application of the 
selection criteria to the individual DBNPS CTS. Each CTS Specification 
is evaluated, and a determination is made as to whether or not the CTS 
Specification meets the criteria in Title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.36(d)(2)(ii) for retention in the 
proposed ITS. Volume 2 contains the licensee's evaluation of 
environmental considerations for the proposed ITS conversion LAR. 
Volumes 3-16 provide details and safety analyses to support the 
proposed changes. Volume 17 contains copies of the DBNPS CTS markup 
pages that have been annotated to show the differences between the CTS 
and the proposed ITS.
    NUREG-1430 has been developed by the Commission's staff through 
working groups composed of both NRC staff members and industry 
representatives. It has been endorsed by the NRC staff as part of an 
industry-wide initiative to standardize and improve the technical 
specifications (TSs) for nuclear power plants.
    In addition to the conversion, the licensee proposed or the NRC 
staff identified 24 beyond scope items (BSIs) where the requirements 
are different from the CTS and the STS of NUREG-1430. The BSIs are 
identified later in this notice.
    This notice is based on the application dated August 3, 2007, and 
the information provided to the NRC through the DBNPS ITS Conversion 
Web page hosted by Excel Services Corporation. To expedite its review 
of the application, the NRC staff issued its requests for additional 
information (RAIs) through the DBNPS ITS Conversion Web page and the 
licensee addressed the RAIs by providing responses on the Web page. 
Entry into the database is protected so that only licensee and NRC 
reviewers can enter information into the database to add RAIs (NRC) or 
provide responses to the RAIs (licensee); however, the public can enter 
the database to read the questions asked and the responses provided. To 
be in compliance with the regulations for written communications for 
LARs and to have the database on the DBNPS docket before the amendment 
is issued, the licensee will submit a copy of the database in a 
submittal to the NRC after there are no further RAIs and before the 
amendment is issued. The public can access the Web site by going to 
https://www.excelservices.com. Once at the Web site, click on ``Davis 
Besse'' on the left side of the screen. Upon clicking the link, the Web 
site will inform you that ``you are about to enter the DAVIS BESSE 
Improved Technical Specification Licensing On-Line Question and Answer 
Database.'' At this point, click on ``Click Here to continue.'' This 
will bring you to the ITS Licensing Database. The RAIs and responses to 
RAIs are organized by ITS Sections 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1 through 3.9, 4.0, 
and 5.0. For every listed ITS section, there is a RAI which can be read 
by clicking on the ITS section number. The RAI question(s) and the 
licensee's response(s) are contained on the same Web page.
    The licensee has categorized the proposed changes to the CTS into 
five general groupings within the discussion of changes (DOC) section 
of the application. These groupings are characterized as administrative 
changes (i.e., ITS x.x, DOC A.xx), more restrictive changes (i.e., ITS 
x.x, DOC M.xx), relocated specifications (i.e., ITS x.x, DOC R.xx), 
removed detail changes (i.e., ITS x.x, DOC LA.xx), and less restrictive 
changes (i.e., ITS x.x, DOC L.xx). This is to say that the DOCs are 
numbered sequentially with each letter designator for each ITS Chapter, 
Section, or Specification, and the designations are A.xx for 
administrative changes, M.xx for more restrictive changes, R.xx for 
relocated specifications, LA.xx for removed detail changes, and L.xx 
for less restrictive changes. These changes to the requirements of the 
CTS do not result in operations that will alter assumptions relative to 
mitigation of an analyzed accident or transient event.
    Administrative changes are those that involve restructuring, 
renumbering, rewording interpretation and complex rearranging of 
requirements and other changes not affecting technical content or 
substantially revising an operating requirement. The reformatting, 
renumbering, and rewording process reflects the attributes of NUREG-
1430

[[Page 29788]]

and does not involve technical changes to the CTS. The proposed changes 
include: (a) Providing the appropriate numbers, etc., for NUREG-1430 
bracketed information (information that must be supplied on a plant-
specific basis, and which may change from plant to plant), (b) 
identifying plant-specific wording for system names, etc., and (c) 
changing NUREG-1430 section wording to conform to existing licensee 
practices. Such changes are administrative in nature and do not impact 
initiators of analyzed events or assumed mitigation of accident or 
transient events.
    More restrictive changes are those involving more stringent 
requirements compared to the CTS for operation of the facility. These 
more stringent requirements do not result in operation that will alter 
assumptions relative to the mitigation of an accident or transient 
event. The more restrictive requirements will not alter the operation 
of process variables, structures, systems, and components described in 
the safety analyses. For each requirement in the STS that is more 
restrictive than the CTS that the licensee proposes to adopt in the 
ITS, the licensee has provided an explanation as to why it has 
concluded that adopting the more restrictive requirement is desirable 
to ensure safe operation of the facility because of specific design 
features of the plant.
    Relocated changes are those involving relocation of requirements 
and surveillances for structures, systems, components, or variables 
that do not meet the criteria for inclusion in TSs. Relocated changes 
are those CTS requirements that do not satisfy or fall within any of 
the four criteria specified in the 10 CFR 50.36(d)(2)(ii) and may be 
relocated to appropriate licensee-controlled documents.
    The licensee's application of the screening criteria is described 
in the attachment to the licensee's August 3, 2007 letter, which is 
entitled, ``Application of Selection Criteria to the Davis-Besse 
Nuclear Power Station Technical Specifications,'' in Attachment 1 of 
the submittal. The affected structures, systems, components or 
variables are not assumed to be initiators of analyzed events and are 
not assumed to mitigate accident or transient events. The requirements 
and surveillances for these affected structures, systems, components, 
or variables will be relocated from the TSs to administratively-
controlled documents such as the quality assurance program, the Updated 
Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR), the ITS Bases, the technical 
requirements manual (TRM) that is incorporated by reference in the 
UFSAR, the core operating limits report, the offsite dose calculation 
manual, the inservice testing program, the inservice inspection 
program, or other licensee-controlled documents. Changes made to these 
documents will be made pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59 or other appropriate 
control mechanisms, and may be made without prior NRC review and 
approval. In addition, the affected structures, systems, components, or 
variables are addressed in existing surveillance procedures that are 
also controlled pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59.
    Removed detail changes are changes to the CTS that eliminate detail 
and relocate the detail to a licensee-controlled document. Typically, 
this involves details of system design and function, or procedural 
detail on methods of conducting a surveillance requirement (SR). These 
changes are supported, in aggregate, by a single generic no significant 
hazards consideration (NSHC).
    Less restrictive changes are those where CTS requirements are 
relaxed or eliminated, or new plant operational flexibility is 
provided. The more significant ``less restrictive'' requirements are 
justified on a case-by-case basis. When requirements have been shown to 
provide little or no safety benefit, their removal from the TSs may be 
appropriate. In most cases, relaxations previously granted to 
individual plants on a plant-specific basis were the result of: (a) 
Generic NRC actions, (b) new NRC staff positions that have evolved from 
technological advancements and operating experience, or (c) resolution 
of the Owners Groups' comments on the improved STSs. Generic 
relaxations contained in NUREG-1430 were reviewed by the NRC staff and 
found to be acceptable because they are consistent with current 
licensing practices and NRC regulations. The licensee's design is being 
reviewed to determine if the specific design basis and licensing basis 
are consistent with the technical basis for the model requirements in 
NUREG-1430, thus providing a basis for the ITS, or if relaxation of the 
requirements in the CTS is warranted based on the justification 
provided by the licensee.
    These administrative, relocated, more restrictive, removed detail 
and less restrictive changes to the requirements of the CTS do not 
result in operations that will alter assumptions relative to mitigation 
of an analyzed accident or transient event.
    In addition to the proposed changes solely involving the 
conversion, there are also changes proposed that are different from the 
requirements in both the CTS and the STS NUREG-1430. To date 24 BSIs 
have been identified. These BSIs to the conversion are as follows (note 
that the words below that are capitalized are terms that are defined in 
the ITS):
    1. BSI-1 proposes a change to the CTS by not requiring a CHANNEL 
CHECK of 2 relays (ITS 3.3.8, DOC L03). CTS 4.3-2 Functional Unit 4.b 
requires a CHANNEL CHECK of the Essential Bus Feeder Breaker Trip 
Degraded Voltage Relay (DVR) and Functional Unit 4.c requires a CHANNEL 
CHECK of the Diesel Generator Start and Load Shed on Essential Bus, 
Loss of Voltage Relay (LVR). ITS 3.3.8 does not require a CHANNEL 
CHECK.
    2. BSI-2 proposes a change to the CTS by changing the Allowable 
Values for three Functional Units (ITS 3.3.11, DOC M02). CTS Table 3.3-
12 Functional Unit 1, Steam Line Pressure-Low, specifies an Allowable 
Value of >= 591.6 psig for the CHANNEL FUNCTIONAL TEST and >= 586.6 
psig for CHANNEL CALIBRATION. CTS Table 3.3-12 Functional Unit 2, Steam 
Generator Level-Low, specifies an Allowable Value of >= 16.9 inches for 
the CHANNEL FUNCTIONAL TEST. CTS Table 3.3-12 Functional Unit 3, Steam 
Generator Feedwater Differential Pressure-High, specifies an Allowable 
Value of <= 197.6 psig for the CHANNEL FUNCTIONAL TEST and <= 199.6 
psig for CHANNEL CALIBRATION. ITS Table 3.3.11-1 Functions 1, 3, and 2 
specify Allowable Values of >= 600.2 psig, >= 17.3 inches, and <= 176.8 
psig, respectively.
    3. BSI-3 proposes a change to the CTS by increasing the departure 
from nucleate boiling reactor coolant pressure parameter limits (ITS 
3.4.1, DOC M01). CTS Table 3.2.-2 requires measured reactor coolant 
system pressure to be >= 2062.7 psig for four reactor coolant pump 
operation and >= 2058.7 psig for three reactor coolant pump operation. 
ITS LCO 3.4.1 requires Reactor Coolant System (RCS) loop pressure to be 
>= 2064.8 psig for four reactor coolant pump operation and >= 2060.8 
psig for three reactor coolant pump operation.
    4. BSI-4 proposes a change to the CTS by extending the Completion 
Time to reduce the trip setpoints from ``4 hours'' to ``10 hours'' (ITS 
3.4.4., DOC L01). CTS 3.4.1.1 Action a, requires a reduction of the 
High Flux trip setpoint from the four reactor coolant pumps (RCPs) 
operating to three RCPs operating trip setpoint within 4 hours when 
shifting from four RCPs operating to three RCPs operating. ITS 3.4.4 
Action A requires the reduction in the trip setpoints within 10 hours.

[[Page 29789]]

    5. BSI-5 proposes a change to the CTS by allowing a wider range for 
the core flooding tank (CFT) borated water volume and nitrogen cover 
pressure (ITS 3.5.1, DOC L01). CTS LCO 3.5.1.b requires each CFT 
contained water volume be between 7555 gallons and 8004 gallons of 
borated water. CTS LCO 3.5.1.d requires each CFT nitrogen cover 
pressure be between 575 psig and 625 psig. In the ITS, SR 3.5.1.2 
requires the borated water volume to be between 7480 gallons and 8078 
gallons and ITS SR 3.5.1.3 requires the nitrogen cover pressure be 
between 567 psig and 633 psig.
    6. BSI-6 proposes a change to the CTS by delaying performance of a 
RCS flow Surveillance until adequate conditions exist to perform the 
Surveillance (ITS 3.4.1, DOC L02). CTS 4.2.5.2 requires RCS total flow 
rate be determined to be within limits once per 18 months. ITS SR 
3.4.1.4 requires the same Surveillance but includes a Note to allow the 
performance to be delayed for up to 7 days after stable thermal 
conditions are established at >= 70 percent RTP.
    7. BSI-7 proposes a change to the CTS by requiring the emergency 
diesel generators (EDGs) to be tested for a longer duration, at higher 
loading, and within a power factor limit, with an allowance to not meet 
the load or power factor requirements due to momentary transients (ITS 
3.8.1, DOC M06). CST 4.8.1.1.2.d.3 requires verification that the 
diesel generator operates for >= 60 minutes while loaded to >= 2000 kW. 
ITS SR 3.8.1.13 requires an endurance and load test for each EDG. The 
endurance and load test requires that the EDGs be operated for >= 8 
hours, with >= 2 hours loaded between 2730 kW and 2860 kW and the 
remaining 6 hours loaded between 2340 kW and 2600 kW. This Surveillance 
is modified by Note 1 and Note 3. Note 1 states, ``momentary transients 
outside the load and power factor ranges do not invalidate this test.'' 
Note 3 states, ``If part b is performed with EDG synchronized with 
offsite power, it shall be performed within the power factor limit. 
However, if grid conditions do not permit, the power factor limit is 
not required to be met. Under this condition the power factor shall be 
maintained as close to the limit as practicable.''
    8. BSI-8 proposes a change to incorporate Technical Specification 
Task Force (TSTF) Traveler 451T, ``Correct the Battery Monitoring and 
Maintenance Program and the Bases of SR 3.8.4.2'' (ITS 5.5.16, DOC 
A.6).
    9. BSI-9 proposes a change to the CTS by extending the Completion 
Time of the High Flux and Flux-[Delta]Flux-Flow trip setpoints from 4 
hours to 10 hours (ITS 3.2.5, DOC L02). CTS 3.2.2 Action a states the 
High Flux and Flux-[Delta]Flux-Flow trip setpoints must be reduced 1 
percent for each 1 percent Nuclear Heat Flux Hot Channel Factor exceeds 
its limit within 4 hours. CTS 3.2.3 Action A states the High Flux and 
Flux-[Delta]Flux-Flow trip setpoints must be reduced to 1 percent for 
each 1 percent Nuclear Enthalpy Rise Hot Channel Factor exceeds its 
limit within 4 hours. ITS 3.2.5 Required Actions A.2 and B.2 requires 
the trip setpoints to be reduced similarly within 10 hours.
    10. BSI-10 proposes a change to the CTS by allowing the suspension 
of the RCS minimum temperature for criticality limit during performance 
of a MODE 2 PHYSICS TEST (ITS 3.1.0, DOC L03). However, it places a 
limitation on the RCS lowest loop average temperature that is allowed 
during the test. CTS 3.10.2 states that limitations of certain 
Specifications may be suspended during the performance of PHYSICS 
TESTS. ITS 3.1.9 provides an additional exception to LCO 3.4.2, ``RCS 
Minimum Temperature for Criticality,'' provided the RCS lowest loop 
average temperature is >= 520[deg]F (ITS LCO 3.1.9 part e). A 
Surveillance to verify RCS lowest loop average temperature is >= 
520[deg]F every 30 minutes (ITS SR 3.1.9.2) has been added. In 
addition, ITS 3.1.9 ACTION C has been added to cover the situation when 
RCS lowest loop average temperature is not within limit. The Required 
Action is to suspend PHYSICS TESTS exceptions within 30 minutes.
    11. BSI-11 proposes a change to the CTS requirement by specifying a 
power factor limit if EDG testing is conducted by synchronizing with 
the offsite sources, and a change to the CTS by requiring the EDG to 
maintain a frequency <= 66.75 Hz following the load reject instead of 
not tripping the EDG (ITS 3.8.1, DOC M05 and DOC M08). CTS 
4.8.1.1.2.d.1 requires verifying that the EDG is capable of rejecting a 
load equal to the largest single emergency load supplied by the 
generator without tripping. This surveillance does not specify that an 
EDG shall be tested at a specific power factor. ITS SR 3.8.1.10 
requires the verification that each EDG can reject a load equal to or 
greater than its associated single largest post-accident load. The SR 
additionally states in Note 2 ``If performed with the EDG synchronized 
with offsite power, it shall be performed within the power factor 
limit. However, if grid conditions do not permit, the power factor 
limit is not required to be met. Under this condition the power factor 
shall be maintained as close to the limit as practicable.'' CTS 
4.8.1.1.2.d.1 requires verification that each EDG can reject a load 
equivalent to the largest single emergency load without tripping the 
EDG. ITS SR 3.8.1.10 also requires verification that each EDG can 
reject a load equivalent to the largest single emergency load, except 
the acceptance criterion is that the EDG frequency is maintained <= 
66.75 Hz following the load reject, which is below the EDG overspeed 
trip setpoint.
    12. BSI-12 proposes a change to the CTS by extending the time to 
restore rod groups from 2 hours to 4 hours (ITS 3.2.1, DOC L01). CTS 
3.1.3.6 Actions require entry with any group sequence or overlap 
outside the limits. CTS 3.1.3.6 Action A requires restoration of the 
regulating groups to within the limits within 2 hours. ITS 3.2.1 ACTION 
C requires the restoration of regulating rod group to within the limits 
within 4 hours.
    13. BSI-13 proposes the following changes related to draft TSTF-
493:
    a. Adds Footnotes (c) and (d) to ITS Table 3.3.1-1 Functional Unit 
1a (ITS 3.3.1, Attachment 1 Volume 8, page 43 of 636 of application).
    b. Allows Method 1 or Method 2 of ISA 67.04-Part II--1994 or ISA 
67.04.02--2000 for all RPS Functional Units in the ITS Bases (ITS 3.3.1 
Attachment 1 Volume 8, page 59 of 636 of application).
    c. Allows modification to where the Nominal trip setpoints are 
specified in the TS Bases (ITS 3.3.1 Attachment 1 Volume 8, pages 60 
and 62 of 636 of application).
    d. Adds a statement to the TS Bases in the ITS for SR 3.3.1.5 and 
SR 3.3.1.7 for the High Flux--Low Setpoint, concerning instrument 
uncertainties and other uncertainties (ITS 3.3.1 Attachment 1 Volume 8, 
page 65 of 636 of application).
    e. Adds a statement concerning setpoint methodology to the Bases in 
the ITS (ITS 3.3.1 Attachment 1 Volume 8, pages 81--84 of 636 of 
application).
    f. Allows Method 1 or Method 2 of ISA 67.04-Part II--1994 or ISA 
67.04.02--2000 for all Safety Features Actuation System (SFAS) 
Functional Units in the ITS Bases (ITS 3.3.5 Attachment 1 Volume 8, 
page 209 of 636 of application).
    g. Allows Method 1 or Method 2 of ISA 67.04-Part II--1994 or ISA 
67.04.02--2000 for all Steam/Feedwater Rupture Control System (SFRCS) 
Functional Units in the ITS Bases (ITS 3.3.11 Attachment 1 Volume 8, 
pages 394-395 of 636 of application).
    14. BSI-14 proposes to retain the heat balance evaluation criteria 
in a licensee controlled document instead of the technical 
specifications (ITS 3.3.1

[[Page 29790]]

Attachment 1 Volume 8, page 36 of 636 of application).
    15. BSI-15 proposes to relocate the Anticipatory Reactor Trip 
System Instrumentation LCO and Surveillances out of the Technical 
Specifications (ITS 3.3.1 DOC R01).
    16. BSI-16 is not used.
    17. BSI-17 proposes to reference the RPS cabinet vice the 
preamplifier in the TS Bases discussion of the source range CHANNEL 
CALIBRATION (ITS 3.3.9 Attachment 1 Volume 8, page 330 of 636 of 
application).
    18. BSI-18 proposes to remove the source range and immediate range 
nuclear instrument overlap check (ITS 3.3.9 DOC LA03).
    19. BSI-19 proposes the following changes concerning the 
Containment Purge and Exhaust Isolation TSs:
    a. Adds the term ``recently'' to modify the APPLICABILITY of LCO 
3.3.15 (ITS 3.3.15 DOC L01).
    b. Adds the term ``when the Containment Purge and Exhaust System is 
in service'' to the APPLICABILITY of ITS LCO 3.3.15 (ITS 3.3.15 
Attachment 1 Volume 8, page 500 of 636 of application).
    c. Removes the STS calibration data in ITS LCO 3.3.15 (ITS 3.3.15 
DOC M02).
    d. Revises the TS Bases discussion in the STS concerning LCO 3.3.15 
(ITS 3.3.15 Attachment 1 Volume 8, page 504 of 636 of application).
    e. Revises the TS Bases discussion with respect to the CTS and STS 
concerning LCO 3.9.4 (ITS 3.3.15 Attachment 1 Volume 8, page 507 of 636 
of application).
    f. Revises the surveillance requirements associated with the 
containment purge and exhaust system radiation monitors (ITS 3.3.15 DOC 
M02).
    20. BSI-20 proposes to revise the CHANNEL adjustment discussion in 
the ITS Bases concerning the calibration SRs for the Fuel Pool Area 
Emergency Ventilation System Actuation Area Monitor (ITS 3.3.14 
Attachment 1 Volume 8, page 488 of 636 of application), and proposes to 
omit an allowable value for the channel calibration for SR 3.3.16.3 
concerning the Station Vent Normal Range Monitoring (ITS 3.3.16 DOC 
M02).
    21. BSI-21 proposes to deviate from the STS by not placing the 
Control Room Emergency Ventilation System in operation during the 
movement of irradiated fuel for an inoperable channel, and not 
immediately suspending irradiated fuel movements if two channels are 
inoperable and compensatory actions are not immediately carried out 
(ITS 3.3.16 DOC M03 and ITS 3.7.10 DOC M012).
    22. BSI-22 proposes a new definition of Loss of Power Start (LOPS) 
operability in the TS Bases (ITS 3.3.8 Attachment 1 Volume 8, page 298 
of 636 of application).
    23. BSI-23 proposes to only have monitoring instrumentation to 
support maintaining the unit in a safe shutdown condition from 
locations other than the control room (ITS 3.3.18 Attachment 1 Volume 
8, pages 605-611 of 636 of application), and proposes to delete the 
APPLICABILITY requirement and the CTS SR for control circuits and 
transfer switches required for a serious control room or cable 
spreading room fire (ITS 3.3.18 Attachment 1 Volume 8, page 601 of 636 
of application).
    24. BSI-24 proposes to make the LCO for the Fuel Handling Exhaust--
High Radiation Monitors applicable only during movement of irradiated 
fuel assemblies in the spent fuel pool (ITS 3.3.14 Attachment 1 Volume 
8, page 482 of 636 of application).
    Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission 
will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 
amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations.
    Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, the 
person(s) may file a request for hearing with respect to issuance of 
the amendment to the subject facility operating license and any 
person(s) whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who 
wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding must file written 
request via electronic submission through the NRC E-Filing system for a 
hearing and a petition for leave to intervene. Requests for a hearing 
and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with 
the Commission's ``Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing 
Proceedings'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested person(s) should consult a 
current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the Commission's 
PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1F21, 11555 
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available 
records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and 
Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the 
Internet at the NRC Web site, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-
collections/. If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to 
intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or a presiding 
officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative 
Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the 
request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative 
Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a 
hearing or an appropriate order.
    As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene 
shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner/
requestor in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by 
the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain 
the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular 
reference to the following general requirements: (1) The name, address 
and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of 
the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to 
the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/
petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; 
and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be 
entered in the proceeding on the requestors/petitioner's interest. The 
petition must also identify the specific contentions which the 
petitioner/requestor seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.
    Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue 
of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the 
petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for 
the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert 
opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner 
intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The 
petitioner/requestor must also provide references to those specific 
sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the 
petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. 
The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine 
dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. 
Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the 
amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if 
proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner/requestor 
who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one 
contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
    Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, 
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, 
and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the 
hearing.
    A request for hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be 
filed in

[[Page 29791]]

accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule, which the NRC promulgated on 
August 28, 2007 (72 FR 49139). The E-Filing process requires 
participants to submit and serve documents over the Internet or in some 
cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not 
submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek a waiver in 
accordance with the procedures described below.
    To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 
five (5) days prior to the filing deadline, the petitioner/requestor 
must contact the Office of the Secretary by e-mail at 
hearingdocket@nrc.gov, or by calling (301) 415-1677, to request (1) a 
digital ID certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or 
representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal 
server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and/or (2) 
creation of an electronic docket for the proceeding (even in instances 
in which the petitioner/requestor (or its counsel or representative) 
already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Each petitioner/
requestor will need to download the Workplace Forms ViewerTM 
to access the Electronic Information Exchange (EIE), a component of the 
E-Filing system. The Workplace Forms ViewerTM is free and is 
available at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/install-
viewer.html. Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is 
available on NRC's public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-
submittals/apply-certificates.html.
    Once a petitioner/requestor has obtained a digital ID certificate, 
had a docket created, and downloaded the EIE viewer, it can then submit 
a request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions 
should be in Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC 
guidance available on the NRC public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/
site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the 
time the filer submits its documents through EIE. To be timely, an 
electronic filing must be submitted to the EIE 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 e-mail notice confirming receipt of the document. The 
EIE system also distributes an e-mail notice that provides access to 
the document to the NRC Office of the General Counsel and any others 
who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to 
participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the 
documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and 
other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for 
and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition 
to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document 
via the E-Filing system.
    A person filing electronically may seek assistance through the 
``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/
site-help/e-submittals.html or by calling the NRC technical help line, 
which is available between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Eastern Time, 
Monday through Friday. The help line number is (800) 397-4209 or 
locally, (301) 415-4737. Participants who believe that they have a good 
cause for not submitting documents electronically must file a motion, 
in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing 
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper 
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail 
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: 
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or 
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth 
Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. 
Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for 
serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered 
complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or 
by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing 
the document with the provider of the service.
    Non-timely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be 
entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding 
officer, or the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition 
and/or request should be granted and/or the contentions should be 
admitted, based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 
2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii). To be timely, filings must be submitted no later 
than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.
    Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in 
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at 
https://ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp, unless excluded pursuant 
to an order of the Commission, an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, or 
a Presiding Officer. Participants are requested not to include personal 
privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, 
or home phone numbers in their filings. 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 submissions.
    For further details with respect to this license amendment 
application, see the application for amendment dated August 3, 2007, 
which is available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, 
located at One White Flint North, File Public Area O1 F21, 11555 
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available 
records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and 
Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the 
Internet at the NRC Web site, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. 
Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in 
accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR 
Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-
mail to pdr@nrc.gov.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of May 2008.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Thomas J. Wengert,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch III-2, Division of Operating 
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E8-11470 Filed 5-21-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P