Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment To Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing, 42834-42837 [E8-16908]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
42834
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 23, 2008 / Notices
proposed exemption are due within 60
days of the publication of this pendency
notice in the Federal Register.
If you decide to submit written comments
to the Department, your comments should be
limited to the transactions described in the
exemption proposed by the Department.
However, if you have concerns about benefits
or any other matter, you should contact the
appropriate office at GM for further
assistance.
Mrs.
Blessed Chuksorji-Keefe of the
Department by E-mail at GMDCVEBA@dol.gov or at telephone
number (202) 693–8553. (This is not a
toll-free number.)
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
General Information
The attention of interested persons is
directed to the following:
(1) The fact that a transaction is the
subject of an exemption under section
408(a) of the Act and/or section
4975(c)(2) of the Code does not relieve
a fiduciary or other party in interest or
disqualified person from certain other
provisions of the Act and/or the Code,
including any prohibited transaction
provisions to which the exemption does
not apply and the general fiduciary
responsibility provisions of section 404
of the Act, which, among other things,
require a fiduciary to discharge his
duties respecting the plan solely in the
interest of the participants and
beneficiaries of the plan and in a
prudent fashion in accordance with
section 404(a)(1)(b) of the Act; nor does
it affect the requirement of section
401(a) of the Code that the plan must
operate for the exclusive benefit of the
employees of the employer maintaining
the plan and their beneficiaries;
(2) Before an exemption may be
granted under section 408(a) of the Act
and/or section 4975(c)(2) of the Code,
the Department must find that the
exemption is administratively feasible,
in the interests of the plan and of its
participants and beneficiaries, and
protective of the rights of participants
and beneficiaries of the plan;
(3) The proposed exemption, if
granted, will be supplemental to, and
not in derogation of, any other
provisions of the Act and/or the Code,
including statutory or administrative
exemptions and transitional rules.
Furthermore, the fact that a transaction
is subject to an administrative or
statutory exemption is not dispositive of
whether the transaction is in fact a
prohibited transaction; and
(4) The proposed exemption, if
granted, will be subject to the express
condition that the material facts and
representations contained in each
application are true and complete, and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:14 Jul 22, 2008
Jkt 214001
that each application accurately
describes all material terms of the
transaction which is the subject of the
exemption.
Signed at Washington, DC, this 16th day of
July, 2008.
Ivan Strasfeld,
Director of Exemption Determinations,
Employee Benefits Security Administration,
U.S. Department Of Labor.
[FR Doc. E8–16713 Filed 7–22–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–29–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Southern Nuclear Operating Company,
Inc., Georgia Power Company,
Oglethorpe Power Corporation,
Municipal Electric Authority of
Georgia; City of Dalton, GA
[Docket Nos. 50–321 and 50–366 ]
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of
Amendment To Facility Operating
License, Proposed No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination,
and Opportunity for a Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment
to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–
57 and NPF–5 issued to the licensee for
operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear
Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, (HNP) located
in Appling County, Georgia. The
proposed amendment includes two
actions, as follows.
First, the proposed amendment would
respond to existing license condition
2.C(8), ‘‘Design Bases Accident
Radiological Consequences Analyses,’’
by revising the licensing and design
basis, including the Technical
Specifications (TS), for four design basis
accidents (DBAs): the loss-of-coolant,
main steamline break, control rod drop
and fuel handling accidents. The
radiological consequences of these
DBAs are reanalyzed using an
alternative source term (AST)
methodology, pursuant to Title 10 of the
Code of Federal Regulations, Section
50.67, ‘‘Accident Source Term,’’ (10
CFR 50.67) and allowing credit in the
analyses for the function of certain
systems such as the turbine building
ventilation system, standby liquid
control system, the main steam isolation
valve alternate leakage treatment (ALT)
path, and residual heat removal drywell
spray system. The licensee states that
the AST analyses include determination
of the on-site radiological doses,
specifically the main control room,
technical support center and off-site
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
radiological doses resulting from the
DBA analyses. The licensee states that
the analyses demonstrate that, using
AST methodologies, the post-accident
onsite and offsite doses remain within
regulatory acceptance limits. Notice of
this action was previously published in
the Federal Register on May 6, 2008 (73
FR 25046). This renoticing of this action
is provided to include further
supplements to the licensee’s August
29, 2006 application, that are dated
April 1, May 5, June 25 and July 14,
2008, that were submitted subsequent to
the Federal Register Notice of May 6,
2008. This renotice replaces and
supersedes the Federal Register Notice
of May 6, 2008, in its entirety. The
second action would be modification of
license condition 2.C(8) to extend the
implementation date of May 31, 2010
until May 31, 2012 for HNP unit 1 and
until May 31, 2011 for HNP unit 2, as
discussed in the licensee’s letter of July
2, 2008.
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.
The Commission has made a
proposed determination that the
amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration. Under
the Commission’s regulations in Title 10
of the CODE OF FEDERAL
REGULATIONS (10 CFR), Section 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. Based on the following
information as provided in the
licensee’s submittals for the first action
identified above, the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) staff proposes to
determine the following with respect to
the three criteria above:
1. Does the proposed change involve a
significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Adoption of the AST methodology and
allowing credit in the accident analyses for
those plant systems affected by implementing
AST are not expected to initiate DBAs. The
revised accident source term is an input to
the radiological consequence analyses. The
implementation of the AST and changed TS
have been incorporated in the analyses for
the limiting DBAs at HNP. The structures,
systems, and components affected by the
proposed change are mitigative in nature and
would be relied upon after an accident has
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 23, 2008 / Notices
been initiated. Based on the revised analyses,
the proposed changes to the TS (including
revised leakage limits) impose certain
performance criteria on existing systems that
do not increase accident initiation
probability. The proposed changes do not
involve a revision to the parameters or
conditions that could contribute to the
initiation of a DBA as discussed in Chapter
15 of the Unit 2 Final Safety Analysis Report.
Therefore, the proposed change does not
result in an increase in the probability of an
accident previously identified. Plant specific
AST radiological analyses have been
performed and, based on the results of these
analyses, the licensee has demonstrated that
the dose consequences of the limiting events
considered in the analyses are within the
regulatory guidance provided by the NRC for
use with the AST as provided in 10 CFR
50.67, Regulatory Guide 1.183, Alternative
Radiological Source Terms for Evaluating
Design Basis Accidents at Nuclear Power
Reactors (ML003716792) and Standard
Review Plan, Section 15.0.1. Therefore, the
proposed changes do not result in a
significant increase in the consequences of an
accident previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed change create the
possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any previously evaluated?
The use of AST methodology and the
implementation of limited changes to
structures, systems or components (SSC) to
support that methodology, does not alter or
involve any design basis accident initiators.
No major SSCs are added to or removed from
the HNP design. The limited changes in the
design of existing SSCs needed to enable
crediting their function in currently
postulated DBAs and the addition of further
TS are intended to enhance the assurance
that these SSCs will perform their mitigative
function in the event of a DBA. Since the
operation of the SSCs will not be
significantly changed after the AST
implementation, no new failure modes are
created by this proposed change. Therefore,
the proposed change does not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a
significant decrease in the margin of safety?
The principal changes in the licensing and
design bases for this amendment are
associated with demonstrating that the
radiological consequences of DBAs meet
applicable NRC regulatory criteria, as
discussed in criterion 1 above. The licensee
states that the analyzed events have been
carefully selected, and the analyses
supporting these changes have been
performed using approved methodologies
and conservative inputs to ensure that
analyzed events are bounding and safety
margin has been retained. The licensee also
states that the dose consequences of these
limiting events are within the acceptance
criteria presented in 10 CFR 50.67,
Regulatory Guide 1.183, and Standard
Review Plan 15.0.1 and that, because the
proposed changes continue to result in dose
consequences within the applicable
regulatory limits, the changes are considered
to not result in a significant reduction in the
margin of safety.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:14 Jul 22, 2008
Jkt 214001
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), for
the second issue identified above, the
licensee has provided, in its letter dated
July 2, 2008, 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?
This proposed change will authorize SNC
to credit [potassium iodide] KI for an
extended period in the DBA radiological
consequences analyses to address the impact
of [main control room] MCR unfiltered
inleakage. This proposed change does not
result in any functional or operational change
to any systems, structures, or components
and has no impact on any assumed initiator
of any analyzed accident. Therefore, the
proposed change does not result in an
increase in the probability of an accident
previously evaluated.
This proposed change does not introduce
any additional method of mitigating the
thyroid dose to MCR occupants in the event
of a loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) since the
existing license condition has already
introduced this method as part of the
licensing basis for an interim period of time.
The updated LOCA MCR radiological dose,
considering 110 [cubic feet per minute] cfm
unfiltered inleakage and crediting KI,
continues to meet GDC 19 acceptance limits.
In the context of the current licensing basis
with MCR unfiltered inleakage considered,
LOCA continues to be the limiting event for
radiological exposures to the operators in the
MCR. Radiological doses to MCR occupants
are within the regulatory limits of GDC 19
with MCR unfiltered inleakage up to 1000
cfm without the crediting of KI for the main
steam line break accident (MSLB), control
rod drop accident (CRDA), and fuel handling
accident (FHA). Therefore, the proposed
change does not result in a significant
increase in the consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed change create the
possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any previously evaluated?
This proposed change will authorize SNC
to credit KI for an extended period in the
DBA radiological consequences analyses to
address the impact of MCR unfiltered
inleakage. This proposed change does not
result in any functional or operational change
to any systems, structures, or components.
Therefore, the proposed change does not
create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any previously
evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a
significant decrease in the margin of safety?
This proposed change will authorize SNC
to credit KI for an extended period in the
DBA radiological consequences analyses to
address the impact of MCR unfiltered
inleakage. This proposed change does not
result in any functional or operational change
to any systems, structures, or components.
This proposed change extends the use of an
additional method of mitigating the thyroid
dose to MCR occupants in the event of a
LOCA until May 31, 2012. The updated
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
42835
LOCA MCR radiological dose, considering
110 cfm unfiltered inleakage and crediting
KI, continues to meet GDC 19 acceptance
limits. In the context of the current licensing
basis with MCR unfiltered inleakage
considered, LOCA continues to be the
limiting event for radiological exposures to
the operators in the MCR. Radiological doses
to MCR occupants are within the regulatory
limits of GDC 19 with MCR unfiltered
inleakage of up to 1000 cfm without the
crediting of KI for the main steam line break
accident (MSLB), control rod drop accident
(CRDA), and fuel handling accident (FHA).
Therefore, the proposed change does not
involve a significant decrease in the margin
of safety.
The NRC staff finds that, on the basis
discussed above, 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.
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 60day 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 should 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.
Should the Commission take action
prior to the expiration of either the
comment period or the notice period, it
will publish in the Federal Register a
notice of issuance. Should the
Commission make 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.
Written comments may be submitted
by mail to the Chief, Rulemaking,
Directives and Editing Branch, Division
of Administrative Services, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, and should cite the publication
date and page number of this Federal
Register notice. Written comments may
also be delivered to Room 6D59, Two
White Flint North, 11545 Rockville
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
42836
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 23, 2008 / Notices
Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30
a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays.
Documents may be examined, and/or
copied for a fee, at the NRC’s Public
Document Room (PDR), located at One
White Flint North, Public File Area O1
F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland.
The filing of requests for hearing and
petitions for leave to intervene is
discussed below.
Within 60 days after the date of
publication of this notice, the person(s)
may file a request for a 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 a 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/cfr/. 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 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:14 Jul 22, 2008
Jkt 214001
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
requestor’s/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.
If a hearing is requested, the
Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no
significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide
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
held would take place after issuance of
the amendment. If the final
determination is that the amendment
request involves a significant hazards
consideration, any hearing held would
take place before the issuance of any
amendment.
A request for hearing or a petition for
leave to intervene must be filed in
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
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 ten
(10) 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 NRCissued 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/sitehelp/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/applycertificates.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/esubmittals.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
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 142 / Wednesday, July 23, 2008 / Notices
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/esubmittals.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 firstclass 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://
www.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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:14 Jul 22, 2008
Jkt 214001
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 29, 2006, as supplemented
November 6, November 27, 2006,
January 30, June 22, July 16, August 13,
October 18, December 11, 2007, January
24, February 4, February 25 (two letters,
nos. 1389 and 0175), February 27,
March 13, April 1, May 5, June 25, July
2, and July 14, 2008, 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 electronically
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 14th day
of July 2008.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
R. E. Martin,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing
Branch II–1, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E8–16908 Filed 7–22–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
42837
6. Governors’ Executive Session—
Discussion of prior agenda items and
Board Governance.
Tuesday, July 29 at 8:30 a.m. (Closed)
1. Continuation of Monday’s closed
session agenda.
CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Julie S. Moore, Secretary of the Board,
U.S. Postal Service, 475 L’Enfant Plaza,
SW., Washington, DC 20260–1000,
Telephone (202) 268–4800.
Julie S. Moore,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–16688 Filed 7–22–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–12–M
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 58190/July 18, 2008]
Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
Amendment to Emergency Order
Pursuant to Section 12(K)(2) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Taking Temporary Action To Respond
to Market Developments
Pursuant to Section 12(k)(2) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934,1 on
July 15, 2008, the Securities and
Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’)
issued an Emergency Order (the
‘‘Order’’) related to short selling
securities of certain specified
substantial financial firms.2 The Order
takes effect on July 21, 2008. The
Commission delayed the effective date
to create the opportunity to address, and
to allow sufficient time for market
participants to make, adjustments to
their operations to implement the
enhanced requirements. The anticipated
operational accommodations necessary
for implementation of the Order are
addressed herein.
POSTAL SERVICE
A. Bona Fide Market Makers
Board of Governors; Sunshine Act
Meeting
The borrow and arrangement-toborrow requirement of the Order does
not apply to certain bona fide market
makers. (The settlement date delivery
requirement of the Order applies to
these market makers.) The purpose of
this accommodation is to permit market
makers to facilitate customer orders in
a fast-moving market without possible
delays associated with complying with
the borrow and arrangement-to-borrow
requirement of the Order.
It is therefore ordered that, pursuant
to our Section 12(k)(2) powers, the
5 p.m., Monday, July 28;
and 8:30 a.m., Tuesday, July 29, 2008.
PLACE: Washington, DC, at U.S. Postal
Service Headquarters, 475 L’Enfant
Plaza, SW.
STATUS: Closed.
TIME AND DATE:
Matters To Be Considered
Monday, July 28 at 5 p.m. (Closed)
1. Financial Update.
2. Strategic Issues.
3. Financial Outlook.
4. Product Pricing.
5. Personnel Matters and
Compensation Issues.
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1 15
U.S.C. 78l(k)(2).
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58166
(July 15, 2008) at https://www.sec.gov/rules/other/
2008/34-58166.pdf
2 See
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 142 (Wednesday, July 23, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42834-42837]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-16908]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Georgia Power Company,
Oglethorpe Power Corporation, Municipal Electric Authority of
Georgia; City of Dalton, GA
[Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366 ]
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment To Facility
Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration
Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos.
DPR-57 and NPF-5 issued to the licensee for operation of the Edwin I.
Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, (HNP) located in Appling
County, Georgia. The proposed amendment includes two actions, as
follows.
First, the proposed amendment would respond to existing license
condition 2.C(8), ``Design Bases Accident Radiological Consequences
Analyses,'' by revising the licensing and design basis, including the
Technical Specifications (TS), for four design basis accidents (DBAs):
the loss-of-coolant, main steamline break, control rod drop and fuel
handling accidents. The radiological consequences of these DBAs are
reanalyzed using an alternative source term (AST) methodology, pursuant
to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 50.67,
``Accident Source Term,'' (10 CFR 50.67) and allowing credit in the
analyses for the function of certain systems such as the turbine
building ventilation system, standby liquid control system, the main
steam isolation valve alternate leakage treatment (ALT) path, and
residual heat removal drywell spray system. The licensee states that
the AST analyses include determination of the on-site radiological
doses, specifically the main control room, technical support center and
off-site radiological doses resulting from the DBA analyses. The
licensee states that the analyses demonstrate that, using AST
methodologies, the post-accident onsite and offsite doses remain within
regulatory acceptance limits. Notice of this action was previously
published in the Federal Register on May 6, 2008 (73 FR 25046). This
renoticing of this action is provided to include further supplements to
the licensee's August 29, 2006 application, that are dated April 1, May
5, June 25 and July 14, 2008, that were submitted subsequent to the
Federal Register Notice of May 6, 2008. This renotice replaces and
supersedes the Federal Register Notice of May 6, 2008, in its entirety.
The second action would be modification of license condition 2.C(8) to
extend the implementation date of May 31, 2010 until May 31, 2012 for
HNP unit 1 and until May 31, 2011 for HNP unit 2, as discussed in the
licensee's letter of July 2, 2008.
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.
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the
Commission's regulations in Title 10 of the CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS
(10 CFR), Section 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. Based on the
following information as provided in the licensee's submittals for the
first action identified above, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
staff proposes to determine the following with respect to the three
criteria above:
1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Adoption of the AST methodology and allowing credit in the
accident analyses for those plant systems affected by implementing
AST are not expected to initiate DBAs. The revised accident source
term is an input to the radiological consequence analyses. The
implementation of the AST and changed TS have been incorporated in
the analyses for the limiting DBAs at HNP. The structures, systems,
and components affected by the proposed change are mitigative in
nature and would be relied upon after an accident has
[[Page 42835]]
been initiated. Based on the revised analyses, the proposed changes
to the TS (including revised leakage limits) impose certain
performance criteria on existing systems that do not increase
accident initiation probability. The proposed changes do not involve
a revision to the parameters or conditions that could contribute to
the initiation of a DBA as discussed in Chapter 15 of the Unit 2
Final Safety Analysis Report. Therefore, the proposed change does
not result in an increase in the probability of an accident
previously identified. Plant specific AST radiological analyses have
been performed and, based on the results of these analyses, the
licensee has demonstrated that the dose consequences of the limiting
events considered in the analyses are within the regulatory guidance
provided by the NRC for use with the AST as provided in 10 CFR
50.67, Regulatory Guide 1.183, Alternative Radiological Source Terms
for Evaluating Design Basis Accidents at Nuclear Power Reactors
(ML003716792) and Standard Review Plan, Section 15.0.1. Therefore,
the proposed changes do not result in a significant increase in the
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any previously evaluated?
The use of AST methodology and the implementation of limited
changes to structures, systems or components (SSC) to support that
methodology, does not alter or involve any design basis accident
initiators. No major SSCs are added to or removed from the HNP
design. The limited changes in the design of existing SSCs needed to
enable crediting their function in currently postulated DBAs and the
addition of further TS are intended to enhance the assurance that
these SSCs will perform their mitigative function in the event of a
DBA. Since the operation of the SSCs will not be significantly
changed after the AST implementation, no new failure modes are
created by this proposed change. Therefore, the proposed change does
not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
from any previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a significant decrease in
the margin of safety?
The principal changes in the licensing and design bases for this
amendment are associated with demonstrating that the radiological
consequences of DBAs meet applicable NRC regulatory criteria, as
discussed in criterion 1 above. The licensee states that the
analyzed events have been carefully selected, and the analyses
supporting these changes have been performed using approved
methodologies and conservative inputs to ensure that analyzed events
are bounding and safety margin has been retained. The licensee also
states that the dose consequences of these limiting events are
within the acceptance criteria presented in 10 CFR 50.67, Regulatory
Guide 1.183, and Standard Review Plan 15.0.1 and that, because the
proposed changes continue to result in dose consequences within the
applicable regulatory limits, the changes are considered to not
result in a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), for the second issue identified
above, the licensee has provided, in its letter dated July 2, 2008, 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?
This proposed change will authorize SNC to credit [potassium
iodide] KI for an extended period in the DBA radiological
consequences analyses to address the impact of [main control room]
MCR unfiltered inleakage. This proposed change does not result in
any functional or operational change to any systems, structures, or
components and has no impact on any assumed initiator of any
analyzed accident. Therefore, the proposed change does not result in
an increase in the probability of an accident previously evaluated.
This proposed change does not introduce any additional method of
mitigating the thyroid dose to MCR occupants in the event of a loss-
of-coolant accident (LOCA) since the existing license condition has
already introduced this method as part of the licensing basis for an
interim period of time. The updated LOCA MCR radiological dose,
considering 110 [cubic feet per minute] cfm unfiltered inleakage and
crediting KI, continues to meet GDC 19 acceptance limits. In the
context of the current licensing basis with MCR unfiltered inleakage
considered, LOCA continues to be the limiting event for radiological
exposures to the operators in the MCR. Radiological doses to MCR
occupants are within the regulatory limits of GDC 19 with MCR
unfiltered inleakage up to 1000 cfm without the crediting of KI for
the main steam line break accident (MSLB), control rod drop accident
(CRDA), and fuel handling accident (FHA). Therefore, the proposed
change does not result in a significant increase in the consequences
of an accident previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any previously evaluated?
This proposed change will authorize SNC to credit KI for an
extended period in the DBA radiological consequences analyses to
address the impact of MCR unfiltered inleakage. This proposed change
does not result in any functional or operational change to any
systems, structures, or components. Therefore, the proposed change
does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a significant decrease in
the margin of safety?
This proposed change will authorize SNC to credit KI for an
extended period in the DBA radiological consequences analyses to
address the impact of MCR unfiltered inleakage. This proposed change
does not result in any functional or operational change to any
systems, structures, or components. This proposed change extends the
use of an additional method of mitigating the thyroid dose to MCR
occupants in the event of a LOCA until May 31, 2012. The updated
LOCA MCR radiological dose, considering 110 cfm unfiltered inleakage
and crediting KI, continues to meet GDC 19 acceptance limits. In the
context of the current licensing basis with MCR unfiltered inleakage
considered, LOCA continues to be the limiting event for radiological
exposures to the operators in the MCR. Radiological doses to MCR
occupants are within the regulatory limits of GDC 19 with MCR
unfiltered inleakage of up to 1000 cfm without the crediting of KI
for the main steam line break accident (MSLB), control rod drop
accident (CRDA), and fuel handling accident (FHA). Therefore, the
proposed change does not involve a significant decrease in the
margin of safety.
The NRC staff finds that, on the basis discussed above, 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.
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 should 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. Should the
Commission take action prior to the expiration of either the comment
period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a
notice of issuance. Should the Commission make 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.
Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rulemaking,
Directives and Editing Branch, Division of Administrative Services,
Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and
page number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also
be delivered to Room 6D59, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville
[[Page 42836]]
Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal
workdays. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the
NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North,
Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland.
The filing of requests for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene is discussed below.
Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, the
person(s) may file a request for a 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 a 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/cfr/. 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 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 requestor's/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.
If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide 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 held would take place after issuance
of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment
request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held
would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
A request for hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be
filed in 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
ten (10) 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 Viewer\TM\ to
access the Electronic Information Exchange (EIE), a component of the E-
Filing system. The Workplace Forms Viewer\TM\ 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
[[Page 42837]]
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://www.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 29, 2006,
as supplemented November 6, November 27, 2006, January 30, June 22,
July 16, August 13, October 18, December 11, 2007, January 24, February
4, February 25 (two letters, nos. 1389 and 0175), February 27, March
13, April 1, May 5, June 25, July 2, and July 14, 2008, 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 electronically 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 14th day of July 2008.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
R. E. Martin,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-1, Division of
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E8-16908 Filed 7-22-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
