Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations and Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information or Safeguards Information and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information or Safeguards Information, 7482-7488 [E9-3282]
Download as PDF
7482
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 17, 2009 / Notices
System Acquisition: Towards a
Petascale Computing Environment
for Science and Engineering)
• Discussion Item: Review of MREFC
Process
Æ NSB Update
Æ NSF Implementation Plan
Æ Discussion and Next Steps
Committee on Science and Engineering
Indicators (SEI)
Open Session: 10:45 a.m.–12:15 p.m.
• Chairman’s Remarks
• Science and Engineering Indicators
2010 cover
• Chapter Review Assignments and
Responsibilities
• Plans for the Indicators Digest
• Discussion of Companion Piece Topic
• New Data for Science and Engineering
Indicators 2012
• Chairman’s Summary
Committee on Education and Human
Resources (CEH)
Investing in the Future: NSF Cost
Sharing Policies for a Robust
Federal Research Enterprise
Æ Presentation, NSF Implementation
of NSB Recommendations on NSF
Cost Sharing Policy
Æ Discussion of Strategy for
Community Engagement
• CSB Subcommittee on Facilities,
Charge
• NSF Strategic Plan
Æ Status of NSF Strategic Plan Update
Æ NSB Input on Key Issues for
Consideration in Developing the
Next NSF Strategic Plan
• NSF Budget Update
Æ FY 2009 Appropriation
Plenary Closed
Closed Session: 1:40 p.m.–2 p.m.
• Approval of December 2008 Minutes
• Awards and Agreements
• Closed Committee Reports
Plenary Open
Open Session: 2 p.m.–3:30 p.m.
•
•
•
•
Approval of December 2008 Minutes
Chairman’s Report
Director’s Report
Open Committee Reports
Brandon Powell,
Staff Assistant.
[FR Doc. E9–3298 Filed 2–13–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555–01–P
Executive Committee
Open Session: 9:30 a.m.–10 a.m.
• Approval of Minutes for the December
2008 Meeting
• Executive Committee Chairman’s
Remarks
• Approval of Closed Session Agenda
Items memo for May 13–14, 2009
meeting
• Discussion of Proposed NSB Priority
Setting Process
• Updates or New Business from
Committee Members
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2009–0051]
Committee on Programs and Plans (CPP)
Task Force on the NSB 60th
Anniversary
Notice; Applications and Amendments
to Facility Operating Licenses
Involving Proposed No Significant
Hazards Considerations and
Containing Sensitive Unclassified NonSafeguards Information or Safeguards
Information and Order Imposing
Procedures for Access to Sensitive
Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information or Safeguards Information
Closed Session: 2:15 p.m.–4 p.m.
Open Session: 10:15 a.m.–10:30 a.m.
I. Background
• Approval of Minutes for the December
9, 2008 Meeting
• Task Force Chairman’s Remarks
• Further Discussion and Comments
Relating to NSB 60th Anniversary
Pursuant to section 189a. (2) of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
(the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (the Commission or NRC
staff) is publishing this notice. The Act
requires the Commission 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 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 sensitive
unclassified non-safeguards information
(SUNSI) or safeguards information
(SGI).
Open Session: 1:15 p.m.–2:15 p.m.
• Approval of December 2008 Minutes
• Committee Chairman’s Remarks
• Update on the Next Generation of
STEM Innovators Workshop
• Presentations on STEM Learning and
Basic Research in Cognitive and
Developmental Sciences
• Committee Chairman’s Remarks
• Award Recommendations for Three
Science of Learning Centers (SLCs):
Introduction & Overview
Æ NSB Action Item: Science of
Learning Center #1
Æ NSB Action Item: Science of
Learning Center #2
Æ NSB Action Item: Science of
Learning Center #3
Committee on Strategy and Budget
(CSB)
Closed Session: 4:15 p.m.–5:30 p.m.
• NSF Budget Update
Æ NSF Plans for Use of FY 2009
Economic Stimulus Funding
Æ FY 2010 Budget Request Update
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
• Approval of CSB Minutes, December
10, 2008
• Committee Chairman’s Remarks
• CSB Task Force on Cost Sharing (CS)
Æ Approval of December 2008
Teleconference Minutes
Æ Task Force Chairman’s Remarks
Æ Discussion of Draft Report,
Jkt 217001
• Approval of Minutes of the December
9, 2008 Meeting
• Committee Chairman’s Opening
Remarks
• Inspector General Update
• Chief Financial Officer Update
• NSB Revisions of Award Delegation
Thresholds to NSF
• FY 2009 Audit Plan
• Chairman’s Closing Remarks
Closed Session: 11:30 a.m.–12 p.m.
Open Session: 8 a.m.–9:30 a.m.
19:45 Feb 13, 2009
Open Session: 10:30 a.m.–11:30 a.m.
Committee on Audit and Oversight
(A&O)
Committee on Strategy and Budget
(CSB)
VerDate Nov<24>2008
Committee on Audit and Oversight
(A&O)
• OIG FY 2010 Budget
• Pending Investigations
Plenary Executive Closed
Closed Session: 1:30 p.m.–1:40 p.m.
• Approval of December 2008 Minutes
• Approval of Honorary Awards
Recipients
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of
Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses, Proposed No Significant
HazardsConsideration 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
E:\FR\FM\17FEN1.SGM
17FEN1
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 17, 2009 / Notices
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 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, TWB–
05–B01M, 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. 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 01 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland.
Within 60 days after the date of
publication of this notice, any person(s)
whose interest may be affected by this
action may file a request for a hearing
and a petition to intervene with respect
to issuance of the amendment to the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:45 Feb 13, 2009
Jkt 217001
subject facility operating license.
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 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland, or at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/cfr/part002/part0020309.html. 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.html. If a request for a
hearing or petition for leave to intervene
is filed within 60 days, 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 set forth 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/requestor
intends to rely in proving the contention
at the hearing. The petitioner/requestor
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7483
must also provide references to those
specific sources and documents of
which the petitioner is aware and on
which the petitioner/requestor 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/
requestor 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, 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 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.
All documents filed in NRC
adjudicatory proceedings, including a
request for hearing, a petition for leave
to intervene, 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 participating
under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in
accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule,
which the NRC promulgated in August
28, 2007 (72 FR 49139). 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.
Participants may not submit paper
copies of their filings unless they seek
a waiver in accordance with the
procedures described below.
E:\FR\FM\17FEN1.SGM
17FEN1
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
7484
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 17, 2009 / Notices
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
hearing.docket@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
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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:45 Feb 13, 2009
Jkt 217001
Us’’ link located on the NRC Web site
at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html or by calling the NRC
Meta-System Help Desk, which is
available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.,
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday.
The Meta-System Help Desk can be
contacted by telephone at 1–866–672–
7640 or by e-mail at
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov.
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 or the presiding officer of
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).
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 submission.
For further details with respect to this
amendment action, see the application
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
for amendment which is available for
public inspection at the Commission’s
PDR, located at One White Flint North,
Public File Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville
Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
Publicly available records will be
accessible from the ADAMS Public
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet
at the NRC Web site, https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. If
you do not have access to ADAMS or if
there are problems in accessing the
documents located in ADAMS, contact
the PDR Reference staff at 1 (800) 397–
4209, (301) 415–4737 or by e-mail to
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating
Company, et al., Docket No. 50–412,
Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 2
(BVPS–2), Beaver County, Pennsylvania
Date of Amendment Request: October
10, 2008.
Description of Amendment Request:
This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards
information. The proposed amendment
would modify TechnicalSpecifications
(TSs) to allow an additional method of
repair for steam generator (SG) tubes,
involving the use of Westinghouse leak
limiting Alloy 800 sleeves, and as well
as, clarify an existing reporting
requirement concerning SG tube
inspections.
Basis for Proposed No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination:
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the
licensee has provided its analysis of the
issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented
below:
1. Does the proposed change involve a
significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No. The leak limiting Alloy 800
sleeves are designed using the applicable
American Society of Mechanical Engineers
(ASME) Boiler andPressure Vessel Code and,
therefore, meet the design objectives of the
original SG tubing. The applied stresses and
fatigue usage for the sleeves are bounded by
the limits established in the ASME Code.
Mechanical testing has shown that the
structural strength of sleeves under normal,
upset, emergency, and faulted conditions
provides margin to the acceptance limits.
These acceptance limits bound the most
limiting (three times normal operating
pressure differential) burst margin
recommended by NRC Regulatory Guide
1.121, ‘‘Bases for Plugging Degraded PWR
Steam Generator Tubes.’’ Burst testing of
sleeve/tube assemblies has confirmed the
analytical results and demonstrated that no
unacceptable levels of primary to secondary
leakage are expected during any plant
condition.
The leak limiting Alloy 800 sleeve depthbased structural limit is determined using
E:\FR\FM\17FEN1.SGM
17FEN1
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 17, 2009 / Notices
NRC guidance and the pressure stress
equation of ASME Code,Section III with
additional margin added to account for the
configuration of long axial cracks.
Calculations show that a depth-based limit of
45 percent through-wall degradation is
acceptable. However, the proposed
amendment provides additional margin by
requiring an Alloy 800 sleeved tube to be
plugged on detection of any flaw in the
sleeve or in the pressure boundary portion of
the original tube wall in the sleeve to tube
joint. Degradation of the original tube
adjacent to the nickel band of an Alloy 800
sleeve, regardless of depth, would not
prevent the sleeve from satisfying design
requirements. Thus, flaw detection
capabilities within the original tube adjacent
to the sleeve nickel band are not necessary
in order to justify continued operation of the
sleeved tube.
Evaluation of repaired SG tube testing and
analysis indicates no detrimental effects on
the leak limiting Alloy 800 sleeve or sleeved
tube assembly from reactor system flow,
primary or secondary coolant chemistries,
thermal conditions or transients, or pressure
conditions as may be experienced at BVPS–
2. Corrosion testing and historical
performance of sleeve/tube assemblies
indicates no evidence of sleeve or tube
corrosion considered detrimental under
anticipated service conditions.
Implementation of the proposed change
has no significant effect on either the
configuration of the plant or the manner in
which it is operated. The consequences of a
hypothetical failure of the leak limiting Alloy
800 sleeve/tube assembly are bounded by the
current SG tube rupture (SGTR) analysis
described in the BVPS–2 Updated Final
Safety Analysis Report because the total
number of plugged SG tubes (including
equivalency associated with installed
sleeves) is required to be consistent with
accident analysis assumptions. A main steam
line break or feedwater line break would not
cause a SGTR since the sleeves are analyzed
for a maximum accident differential pressure
greater than that predicted in the BVPS–2
safety analysis. The sleeve/tube assembly
leakage during plant operation would be
minimal and is well within the allowable TS
leakage limits and accident analysis
assumptions, neither of which would be
changed to compensate for the proposed
repair method.
Proposed changes to TS 5.6.6.2.4 only
affect a reporting requirement and do not
affect plant design, operation or
maintenance. They are intended as
clarifications that would reinforce the
original intent of the reporting requirement.
Therefore, the proposed change does not
involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed amendment create
the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No. The leak limiting Alloy 800
sleeves are designed using the applicable
ASME Code as guidance, and therefore meet
the objectives of the original SG tubing. As
a result, the functions of the SG will not be
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:45 Feb 13, 2009
Jkt 217001
significantly affected by the installation of
the proposed sleeve. Therefore, the only
credible failure mode for the sleeve and/or
tube is to rupture, which has already been
evaluated. The continued integrity of the
installed sleeve/tube assembly is periodically
verified as required by the TSs and a sleeved
tube will be plugged on detection of a flaw
in the sleeve or in the pressure boundary
portion of the original tube wall in the sleeve
to tube joint.
Proposed changes to TS 5.6.6.2.4 only
affect a reporting requirement and do not
affect plant design, operation or
maintenance. They are editorial in nature
and are intended as clarifications that would
reinforce the original intent of the reporting
requirement.
Implementation of the proposed change
has no significant effect on either the
configuration of the plant or the manner in
which it is operated.
Therefore, the proposed change does not
create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any previously
evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve
a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No. The repair of degraded SG
tubes with leak limiting Alloy 800 sleeves
restores the structural integrity of the
degraded tube under normal operating and
postulated accident conditions. The
reduction in reactor coolant system flow due
to the addition of Alloy 800 sleeves is not
significant because the cumulative effect of
all repaired (sleeved) and plugged tubes will
continue to allow reactor coolant flow to be
greater than the flow limit established in the
TS limiting condition of operation 3.4.1. The
design safety factors utilized for the sleeves
are consistent with the safety factors in the
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code used
in the original SG design. Tubes with sleeves
would also be subject to the same safety
factors as the original tubes which are
described in the performance criteria for SG
tube integrity in the existing TSs. These
performance criteria are not being changed to
compensate for the proposed repair method.
The sleeve and portions of the installed
sleeve/tube assembly that represent the
reactor coolant pressure boundary will be
monitored and a sleeved tube will be plugged
on detection of a flaw in the sleeve or in the
pressure boundary portion of the original
tube wall in the leak limiting sleeve/tube
assembly. Use of the previously identified
design criteria and design verification testing
ensures that the margin of safety is not
significantly different from the original SG
tubes.
Proposed changes to TS 5.6.6.2.4 only
affect a reporting requirement and do not
affect plant design, operation or
maintenance. They are editorial in nature
and are intended as clarifications that would
reinforce the original intent of the reporting
requirement.
Therefore, the proposed change does not
involve a significant reduction in a margin of
safety.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) staff has reviewed the licensee’s
analysis and, based on this review, it
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7485
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: David W.
Jenkins, FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating
Company, FirstEnergy Corporation, 76
South Main Street, Akron, OH 44308.
NRC Branch Chief: Mark G. Kowal.
Order Imposing Procedures for Access
to Sensitive Unclassified NonSafeguards Information (SUNSI) and
Safeguards Information (SGI) for
Contention Preparation
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating
Company, et al., Docket No. 50–412,
Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 2
(BVPS–2), Beaver County, Pennsylvania
1. This order contains instructions
regarding how potential parties to the
proceedings listed above may request
access to documents containing
sensitive unclassified information
(SUNSI and SGI).
2. Within ten (10) days after
publication of this notice of opportunity
for hearing, any potential party as
defined in 10 CFR 2.4 who believes
access to SUNSI or SGI is necessary for
a response to the notice may request
access to SUNSI or SGI. A ‘‘potential
party’’ is any person who intends or
may intend to participate as a party by
demonstrating standing and the filing of
an admissible contention under 10 CFR
2.309. Requests submitted later than ten
(10) days will not be considered absent
a showing of good cause for the late
filing, addressing why the request could
not have been filed earlier.
3. The requester shall submit a letter
requesting permission to access SUNSI
and/or SGI 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, Washington, DC
20555–0001. The expedited delivery or
courier mail address for both offices is
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD
20852. The e-mail address for the Office
of the Secretary and the Office of the
General Counsel are
hearing.docket@nrc.gov and
ogcmailcenter.resource@nrc.gov,
respectively.1 The request must include
the following information:
1 See footnote 6. 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
E:\FR\FM\17FEN1.SGM
Continued
17FEN1
7486
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 17, 2009 / Notices
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
a. A description of the [licensing/
enforcement] action with a citation to
this Federal Register [notice of hearing/
notice of opportunity for hearing];
b. 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 (a)/if the enforcement
action is not sustained];
c. If the request is for SUNSI, the
identity of the individual requesting
access to SUNSI and the requester’s
need for the information in order to
meaningfully participate in this
adjudicatory proceeding, particularly
why publicly available versions of the
application would not be sufficient to
provide the basis and specificity for a
proffered contention;
d. If the request is for SGI, the identity
of the individual requesting access to
SGI and the identity of any expert,
consultant or assistant who will aid the
requester in evaluating the SGI, and
information that shows:
(i) Why the information is
indispensable to meaningful
participation in this licensing
proceeding; and
(ii) The technical competence
(demonstrable knowledge, skill,
experience, training or education) of the
requester to understand and use (or
evaluate) the requested information to
provide the basis and specificity for a
proffered contention. The technical
competence of a potential party or its
counsel may be shown by reliance on a
qualified expert, consultant or assistant
who demonstrates technical competence
as well as trustworthiness and
reliability, and who agrees to sign a nondisclosure affidavit and be bound by the
terms of a protective order; and
e. If the request is for SGI, Form SF–
85, ‘‘Questionnaire for Non-Sensitive
Positions,’’ Form FD–258 (fingerprint
card), and a credit check release form
completed by the individual who seeks
access to SGI and each individual who
will aid the requester in evaluating the
SGI. For security reasons, Form SF–85
can only be submitted electronically,
through a restricted-access database. To
obtain online access to the form, the
requester should contact the NRC’s
Office of Administration at 301–492–
3524.2 The other completed forms must
be signed in original ink, accompanied
by a check or money order payable in
and/or SGI under these procedures should be
submitted as described in this paragraph.
2 The requester will be asked to provide his or her
full name, social security number, date and place
of birth, telephone number, and email address.
After providing this information, the requester
usually should be able to obtain access to the online
form within one business day.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:45 Feb 13, 2009
Jkt 217001
the amount of $191.00 to the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission for
each individual, and mailed to the:
Office of Administration, Security
Processing Unit, Mail Stop T–6E46, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0012.
These forms will be used to initiate
the background check, which includes
fingerprinting as part of a criminal
history records check. Note: copies of
these forms do not need to be included
with the request letter to the Office of
the Secretary, but the request letter
should state that the forms and fees
have been submitted as described above.
4. To avoid delays in processing
requests for access to SGI, all forms
should be reviewed for completeness
and accuracy (including legibility)
before submitting them to the NRC.
Incomplete packages will be returned to
the sender and will not be processed.
5. Based on an evaluation of the
information submitted under items 2
and 3.a through 3.d, above, the NRC
staff will determine within ten days of
receipt of the written access 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) there is a
legitimate need for access to SUNSI or
need to know the SGI requested. For
SGI, the need to know determination is
made based on whether the information
requested is necessary (i.e.,
indispensable) for the proposed
recipient to proffer and litigate a
specific contention in this NRC
proceeding 3 and whether the proposed
recipient has the technical competence
(demonstrable knowledge, skill,
training, education, or experience) to
evaluate and use the specific SGI
requested in this proceeding.
6. If standing and need to know SGI
are shown, the NRC staff will further
determine based upon completion of the
background check whether the proposed
recipient is trustworthy and reliable.
The NRC staff will conduct (as
necessary) an inspection to confirm that
the recipient’s information protection
systems are sufficient to protect SGI
from inadvertent release or disclosure.
Recipients may opt to view SGI at the
NRC’s facility rather than establish their
own SGI protection program to meet SGI
protection requirements.
3 Broad SGI requests under these procedures are
thus highly unlikely to meet the standard for need
to know; furthermore, staff redaction of information
from requested documents before their release may
be appropriate to comport with this requirement.
These procedures do not authorize unrestricted
disclosure or less scrutiny of a requester’s need to
know than ordinarily would be applied in
connection with an already-admitted contention.
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7. A request for access to SUNSI or
SGI will be granted if:
a. The request has demonstrated that
there is a reasonable basis to believe that
a potential party is likely to establish
standing to intervene or to otherwise
participate as a party in this proceeding;
b. The proposed recipient of the
information has demonstrated a need for
SUNSI or a need to know for SGI, and
that the proposed recipient of SGI is
trustworthy and reliable;
c. The proposed recipient of the
information has executed a NonDisclosure Agreement or Affidavit and
agrees to be bound by the terms of a
Protective Order setting forth terms and
conditions to prevent the unauthorized
or inadvertent disclosure of SUNSI and/
or SGI; and
d. The presiding officer has issued a
protective order concerning the
information or documents requested.4
Any protective order issued shall
provide that the petitioner must file
SUNSI or SGI contentions 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 or SGI
contentions by that later deadline.
8. If the request for access to SUNSI
or SGI is granted, the terms and
conditions for access to sensitive
unclassified information will be set
forth in a draft protective order and
affidavit of non-disclosure appended to
a joint motion by the NRC staff, any
other affected parties to this
proceeding,5 and the petitioner(s). If the
diligent efforts by the relevant parties or
petitioner(s) fail to result in an
agreement on the terms and conditions
for a draft protective order or nondisclosure affidavit, the relevant parties
to the proceeding or the petitioner(s)
should notify the presiding officer
within ten (10) days, describing the
obstacles to the agreement.
9. If the request for access to SUNSI
is denied by the NRC staff or a request
for access to SGI is denied by NRC staff
either after a determination on standing
and need to know or, later, after a
4 If a presiding officer has not yet been
designated, the Chief Administrative Judge will
issue such orders, or will appoint a presiding officer
to do so.
5 Parties/persons other than the requester and the
NRC staff will be notified by the NRC staff of a
favorable access determination (and may participate
in the development of such a motion and protective
order) if it concerns SUNSI and if the party/person’s
interest independent of the proceeding would be
harmed by the release of the information (e.g., as
with proprietary information).
E:\FR\FM\17FEN1.SGM
17FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 17, 2009 / Notices
determination on trustworthiness and
reliability, the NRC staff shall briefly
state the reasons for the denial. Before
the Office of Administration makes an
adverse determination regarding access,
the proposed recipient must be
provided an opportunity to correct or
explain information. The requester may
challenge the NRC staff’s adverse
determination with respect to access to
SUNSI or with respect to standing or
need to know for SGI by filing a
challenge within ten (10) 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. In the
same manner, an SGI requester may
challenge an adverse determination on
trustworthiness and reliability by filing
a challenge within fifteen (15) days of
receipt of that determination.
In the same manner, 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 ten (10) days of the
notification by the NRC staff of its grant
of such a request.
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
7487
such NRC staff determinations (whether
granting or denying access) is governed
by 10 CFR 2.311.6
10. 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/or SGI, and motions for
protective orders, in a timely fashion in
order to minimize any unnecessary
delays in identifying those [intervenors/
petitioners] who have standing and who
have propounded contentions meeting
the specificity and basis requirements in
10 CFR Part 2. Attachment 1 to this
Order summarizes the general target
schedule for processing and resolving
requests under these procedures.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day
of February 2009.
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 (SUNSI) AND SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION (SGI) IN THIS PROCEEDING
Day
Event/activity
0 ...................
Publication of [FEDERAL REGISTER notice/other notice of proposed action and opportunity for hearing], including order with instructions for access requests.
Deadline for submitting requests for access to SUNSI and/or SGI with information: Supporting the standing of a potential party
identified by name and address; describing the need for the information in order for the potential party to participate meaningfully in an adjudicatory proceeding; demonstrating that access should be granted (e.g., showing technical competence for access to SGI); and, for SGI, including application fee for fingerprint/background check.
Deadline for submitting petition for intervention containing: (i) Demonstration of standing; (ii) all contentions whose formulation
does not require access to SUNSI and/or SGI (+25 Answers to petition for intervention; +7 petitioner/requestor reply).
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 (1) need for SUNSI or (2) need to know for SGI. (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). If NRC staff makes the finding of need to know for SGI and likelihood of standing, NRC staff begins background check (including fingerprinting for a criminal history records check), information processing (preparation of redactions or review of redacted documents), and readiness inspections.
If NRC staff finds no ‘‘need,’’ ‘‘need to know,’’ or 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.
Deadline for NRC staff reply to motions to reverse NRC staff determination(s).
(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.
(Receipt +180) If NRC staff finds standing, need to know for SGI, and trustworthiness and reliability, deadline for NRC staff to
file motion for Protective Order and draft Non-disclosure Affidavit (or to make a determination that the proposed recipient of
SGI is not trustworthy or reliable). NOTE: Before the Office of Administration makes an adverse determination regarding access, the proposed recipient must be provided an opportunity to correct or explain information.
Deadline for petitioner to seek reversal of a final adverse NRC staff determination either before the presiding officer or another
designated officer.
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.
Deadline for filing executed Non-Disclosure Affidavits. Access provided to SUNSI and/or SGI consistent with decision issuing the
protective order.
Deadline for submission of contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI and/or SGI. 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 or SGI contentions
by that later deadline.
10 .................
60 .................
20 .................
25 .................
30 .................
40 .................
190 ...............
205 ...............
A ...................
A + 3 ............
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
A + 28 ..........
6 As of October 15, 2007, the NRC’s final ‘‘EFiling Rule’’ became effective. See Use of Electronic
Submissions in Agency Hearings (72 FR 49139;
Aug. 28, 2007). Requesters should note that the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:45 Feb 13, 2009
Jkt 217001
filing requirements of that rule apply to appeals of
NRC staff determinations (because they must be
served on a presiding officer or the Commission, as
applicable), but not to the initial SUNSI/SGI
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
requests submitted to the NRC staff under these
procedures.
E:\FR\FM\17FEN1.SGM
17FEN1
7488
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 17, 2009 / Notices
ATTACHMENT 1—GENERAL TARGET SCHEDULE FOR PROCESSING AND RESOLVING REQUESTS FOR ACCESS TO SENSITIVE
UNCLASSIFIED NON-SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION (SUNSI) AND SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION (SGI) IN THIS PROCEEDING—Continued
Day
A + 53 ..........
A + 60 ..........
B ...................
Event/activity
(Contention receipt +25) Answers to contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI and/or SGI.
(Answer receipt +7) Petitioner/Intervenor reply to answers.
Decision on contention admission.
415–4737, or by e-mail at
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
[FR Doc. E9–3282 Filed 2–13–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Nanette V. Gilles, Division of New
Reactor Licensing, Office of the New
Reactors, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001; telephone 301–415–1180 or e-mail
at Nanette.Gilles@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NRC
posts its issued staff guidance on the
NRC external Web page (https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/isg/).
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2008–0472]
Office of New Reactors; Notice of
Availability of the Final Interim Staff
Guidance COL/ESP–ISG–04 on the
Definition of Construction and on
Limited Work Authorizations
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC).
ACTION: Notice of availability.
SUMMARY: The NRC is issuing its Final
Interim Staff Guidance (ISG) COL/ESP–
ISG–004 (ML090060897). This ISG
provides guidance regarding the
definition of construction and the
delineation of preconstruction activities
and those activities requiring prior
approval of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC or the Commission).
In addition, this ISG provides guidance
regarding the information to be
submitted by any applicant for a limited
work authorization (LWA).
The NRC staff issues ISGs to facilitate
timely implementation of the current
staff guidance and to facilitate activities
associated with review of applications
for early site permits and combined
licenses for the Office of New Reactors.
The NRC staff will also incorporate
COL/ESP–ISG–004 into the next
revisions of the Regulatory Guide 1.206,
‘‘Combined License Applications for
Nuclear Power Plants,’’ and related
guidance documents.
ADDRESSES: The NRC maintains an
Agencywide Documents Access and
ManagementSystem (ADAMS), which
provides text and image files of NRC’s
public documents. These documents
may be accessed through the NRC’s
Public Electronic Reading Room on the
Internet at https://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/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 Public Document Room
reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:45 Feb 13, 2009
Jkt 217001
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day
of February 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Patrick M. Madden,
Deputy Director, Division of New Reactor
Licensing, Office of New Reactors.
[FR Doc. E9–3397 Filed 2–13–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
[Docket No. 50–289; NRC–2008–0645]
Exelon Generation Company, LLC;
Exelon Generation Company, LLC,
Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit
1; Notice of Availability of the Draft
Supplement 37 to the Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants,
and Public Meeting for the License
Renewal of Three Mile Island Nuclear
Station, Unit 1
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of Availability;
Correction.
SUMMARY: This document corrects a
notice appearing in the Federal Register
on December 9, 2008 (73 FR 74766), that
announces a public meeting for the
license renewal of Three Mile Island
Nuclear Station, Unit 1. This action is
necessary to update the date and
location of the meeting.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Sarah Lopas, Environmental Project
Manager, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation, telephone (301) 415–1147,
e-mail: sarah.lopas@nrc.gov.
Frm 00099
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day
of February, 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
David L. Pelton,
Chief, Reactor Projects Branch 1, Division
of License Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E9–3285 Filed 2–13–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 52–038; NRC–2008–0581]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
PO 00000
On page
74766, in the third column, fifteenth
line, the meeting date is corrected to
read from ‘‘January 28, 2009’’ to
‘‘February 24, 2009.’’ As previously
stated in corrected Federal Register
notice 74 FR 470, the location of the
meeting is ‘‘The Sheraton Harrisburg
Hershey Hotel, 4650 Lindle Road,
Harrisburg, PA 17111.’’
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Nine Mile Point 3 Nuclear Project, LLC
and Unistar Nuclear Operating
Services, LLC; Nine Mile Point 3
Nuclear Power Plant Combined
License Application; Notice of
Cancellation of Environmental Scoping
Process and Public Scoping Meeting
Nine Mile Point 3 Nuclear Project,
LLC and Unistar Nuclear Operating
Services, LLC have submitted an
application for a combined license
(COL) to build Nine Mile Point Unit 3
(NMP3), located on approximately 921
acres in Oswego County, New York on
Lake Ontario, approximately five miles
north-northeast of Oswego, New York.
Nine Mile Point 3 Nuclear Project, LLC
and Unistar Nuclear Operating Services,
LLC submitted the application for the
COL to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) on September 30,
2008, pursuant to Title 10 of the Code
of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 52.
A notice of intent to prepare an
environmental impact statement and
conduct scoping process was published
in the Federal Register on January 30,
2009 (74 FR 5688–5689). On February 9,
2009, Unistar submitted a letter to the
NRC requesting that the NRC consider
Unistar’s interest in maintaining some
E:\FR\FM\17FEN1.SGM
17FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 17, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7482-7488]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-3282]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2009-0051]
Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations and
Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information or
Safeguards Information and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to
Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information or Safeguards
Information
I. Background
Pursuant to section 189a. (2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the
Commission or NRC staff) is publishing this notice. The Act requires
the Commission 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 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 sensitive
unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI) or safeguards
information (SGI).
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses, Proposed No Significant HazardsConsideration 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
[[Page 7483]]
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 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, TWB-05-B01M, 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. 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 01 F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any
person(s) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a
request for a hearing and a petition to intervene with respect to
issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license.
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 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, or
at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part002/part002-
0309.html. 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.html. If a request for a hearing or petition for
leave to intervene is filed within 60 days, 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 set forth 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/
requestor 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/requestor 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/requestor 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, 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 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.
All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a
request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, 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 participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c),
must be filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule, which the NRC
promulgated in August 28, 2007 (72 FR 49139). 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. Participants may not submit paper copies of their
filings unless they seek a waiver in accordance with the procedures
described below.
[[Page 7484]]
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
hearing.docket@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 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 Meta-System Help
Desk, which is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time,
Monday through Friday. The Meta-System Help Desk can be contacted by
telephone at 1-866-672-7640 or by e-mail at MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov.
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 or the presiding
officer of 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).
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 submission.
For further details with respect to this amendment action, see the
application for amendment which is available for public inspection at
the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File
Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
Publicly available records will be accessible from the ADAMS Public
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. If you do not have access to ADAMS
or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS,
contact the PDR Reference staff at 1 (800) 397-4209, (301) 415-4737 or
by e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company, et al., Docket No. 50-412,
Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 2 (BVPS-2), Beaver County,
Pennsylvania
Date of Amendment Request: October 10, 2008.
Description of Amendment Request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information. The proposed
amendment would modify TechnicalSpecifications (TSs) to allow an
additional method of repair for steam generator (SG) tubes, involving
the use of Westinghouse leak limiting Alloy 800 sleeves, and as well
as, clarify an existing reporting requirement concerning SG tube
inspections.
Basis for Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration
Determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented below:
1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No. The leak limiting Alloy 800 sleeves are designed
using the applicable American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
Boiler andPressure Vessel Code and, therefore, meet the design
objectives of the original SG tubing. The applied stresses and
fatigue usage for the sleeves are bounded by the limits established
in the ASME Code. Mechanical testing has shown that the structural
strength of sleeves under normal, upset, emergency, and faulted
conditions provides margin to the acceptance limits.
These acceptance limits bound the most limiting (three times
normal operating pressure differential) burst margin recommended by
NRC Regulatory Guide 1.121, ``Bases for Plugging Degraded PWR Steam
Generator Tubes.'' Burst testing of sleeve/tube assemblies has
confirmed the analytical results and demonstrated that no
unacceptable levels of primary to secondary leakage are expected
during any plant condition.
The leak limiting Alloy 800 sleeve depth-based structural limit
is determined using
[[Page 7485]]
NRC guidance and the pressure stress equation of ASME Code,Section
III with additional margin added to account for the configuration of
long axial cracks. Calculations show that a depth-based limit of 45
percent through-wall degradation is acceptable. However, the
proposed amendment provides additional margin by requiring an Alloy
800 sleeved tube to be plugged on detection of any flaw in the
sleeve or in the pressure boundary portion of the original tube wall
in the sleeve to tube joint. Degradation of the original tube
adjacent to the nickel band of an Alloy 800 sleeve, regardless of
depth, would not prevent the sleeve from satisfying design
requirements. Thus, flaw detection capabilities within the original
tube adjacent to the sleeve nickel band are not necessary in order
to justify continued operation of the sleeved tube.
Evaluation of repaired SG tube testing and analysis indicates no
detrimental effects on the leak limiting Alloy 800 sleeve or sleeved
tube assembly from reactor system flow, primary or secondary coolant
chemistries, thermal conditions or transients, or pressure
conditions as may be experienced at BVPS-2. Corrosion testing and
historical performance of sleeve/tube assemblies indicates no
evidence of sleeve or tube corrosion considered detrimental under
anticipated service conditions.
Implementation of the proposed change has no significant effect
on either the configuration of the plant or the manner in which it
is operated. The consequences of a hypothetical failure of the leak
limiting Alloy 800 sleeve/tube assembly are bounded by the current
SG tube rupture (SGTR) analysis described in the BVPS-2 Updated
Final Safety Analysis Report because the total number of plugged SG
tubes (including equivalency associated with installed sleeves) is
required to be consistent with accident analysis assumptions. A main
steam line break or feedwater line break would not cause a SGTR
since the sleeves are analyzed for a maximum accident differential
pressure greater than that predicted in the BVPS-2 safety analysis.
The sleeve/tube assembly leakage during plant operation would be
minimal and is well within the allowable TS leakage limits and
accident analysis assumptions, neither of which would be changed to
compensate for the proposed repair method.
Proposed changes to TS 5.6.6.2.4 only affect a reporting
requirement and do not affect plant design, operation or
maintenance. They are intended as clarifications that would
reinforce the original intent of the reporting requirement.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No. The leak limiting Alloy 800 sleeves are designed
using the applicable ASME Code as guidance, and therefore meet the
objectives of the original SG tubing. As a result, the functions of
the SG will not be significantly affected by the installation of the
proposed sleeve. Therefore, the only credible failure mode for the
sleeve and/or tube is to rupture, which has already been evaluated.
The continued integrity of the installed sleeve/tube assembly is
periodically verified as required by the TSs and a sleeved tube will
be plugged on detection of a flaw in the sleeve or in the pressure
boundary portion of the original tube wall in the sleeve to tube
joint.
Proposed changes to TS 5.6.6.2.4 only affect a reporting
requirement and do not affect plant design, operation or
maintenance. They are editorial in nature and are intended as
clarifications that would reinforce the original intent of the
reporting requirement.
Implementation of the proposed change has no significant effect
on either the configuration of the plant or the manner in which it
is operated.
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility
of a new or different kind of accident from any previously
evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No. The repair of degraded SG tubes with leak limiting
Alloy 800 sleeves restores the structural integrity of the degraded
tube under normal operating and postulated accident conditions. The
reduction in reactor coolant system flow due to the addition of
Alloy 800 sleeves is not significant because the cumulative effect
of all repaired (sleeved) and plugged tubes will continue to allow
reactor coolant flow to be greater than the flow limit established
in the TS limiting condition of operation 3.4.1. The design safety
factors utilized for the sleeves are consistent with the safety
factors in the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code used in the
original SG design. Tubes with sleeves would also be subject to the
same safety factors as the original tubes which are described in the
performance criteria for SG tube integrity in the existing TSs.
These performance criteria are not being changed to compensate for
the proposed repair method. The sleeve and portions of the installed
sleeve/tube assembly that represent the reactor coolant pressure
boundary will be monitored and a sleeved tube will be plugged on
detection of a flaw in the sleeve or in the pressure boundary
portion of the original tube wall in the leak limiting sleeve/tube
assembly. Use of the previously identified design criteria and
design verification testing ensures that the margin of safety is not
significantly different from the original SG tubes.
Proposed changes to TS 5.6.6.2.4 only affect a reporting
requirement and do not affect plant design, operation or
maintenance. They are editorial in nature and are intended as
clarifications that would reinforce the original intent of the
reporting requirement.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant
reduction in a margin of safety.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (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: David W. Jenkins, FirstEnergy Nuclear
Operating Company, FirstEnergy Corporation, 76 South Main Street,
Akron, OH 44308.
NRC Branch Chief: Mark G. Kowal.
Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information (SUNSI) and Safeguards Information (SGI) for
Contention Preparation
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company, et al., Docket No. 50-412,
Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 2 (BVPS-2), Beaver County,
Pennsylvania
1. This order contains instructions regarding how potential parties
to the proceedings listed above may request access to documents
containing sensitive unclassified information (SUNSI and SGI).
2. Within ten (10) days after publication of this notice of
opportunity for hearing, any potential party as defined in 10 CFR 2.4
who believes access to SUNSI or SGI is necessary for a response to the
notice may request access to SUNSI or SGI. A ``potential party'' is any
person who intends or may intend to participate as a party by
demonstrating standing and the filing of an admissible contention under
10 CFR 2.309. Requests submitted later than ten (10) days will not be
considered absent a showing of good cause for the late filing,
addressing why the request could not have been filed earlier.
3. The requester shall submit a letter requesting permission to
access SUNSI and/or SGI 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, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The expedited
delivery or courier mail address for both offices is U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The
e-mail address for the Office of the Secretary and the Office of the
General Counsel are hearing.docket@nrc.gov and
ogcmailcenter.resource@nrc.gov, respectively.\1\ The request must
include the following information:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See footnote 6. 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 and/or SGI under these procedures should be submitted
as described in this paragraph.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 7486]]
a. A description of the [licensing/enforcement] action with a
citation to this Federal Register [notice of hearing/notice of
opportunity for hearing];
b. 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 (a)/if the enforcement action is not
sustained];
c. If the request is for SUNSI, the identity of the individual
requesting access to SUNSI and the requester's need for the information
in order to meaningfully participate in this adjudicatory proceeding,
particularly why publicly available versions of the application would
not be sufficient to provide the basis and specificity for a proffered
contention;
d. If the request is for SGI, the identity of the individual
requesting access to SGI and the identity of any expert, consultant or
assistant who will aid the requester in evaluating the SGI, and
information that shows:
(i) Why the information is indispensable to meaningful
participation in this licensing proceeding; and
(ii) The technical competence (demonstrable knowledge, skill,
experience, training or education) of the requester to understand and
use (or evaluate) the requested information to provide the basis and
specificity for a proffered contention. The technical competence of a
potential party or its counsel may be shown by reliance on a qualified
expert, consultant or assistant who demonstrates technical competence
as well as trustworthiness and reliability, and who agrees to sign a
non-disclosure affidavit and be bound by the terms of a protective
order; and
e. If the request is for SGI, Form SF-85, ``Questionnaire for Non-
Sensitive Positions,'' Form FD-258 (fingerprint card), and a credit
check release form completed by the individual who seeks access to SGI
and each individual who will aid the requester in evaluating the SGI.
For security reasons, Form SF-85 can only be submitted electronically,
through a restricted-access database. To obtain online access to the
form, the requester should contact the NRC's Office of Administration
at 301-492-3524.\2\ The other completed forms must be signed in
original ink, accompanied by a check or money order payable in the
amount of $191.00 to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for each
individual, and mailed to the: Office of Administration, Security
Processing Unit, Mail Stop T-6E46, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The requester will be asked to provide his or her full name,
social security number, date and place of birth, telephone number,
and email address. After providing this information, the requester
usually should be able to obtain access to the online form within
one business day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These forms will be used to initiate the background check, which
includes fingerprinting as part of a criminal history records check.
Note: copies of these forms do not need to be included with the request
letter to the Office of the Secretary, but the request letter should
state that the forms and fees have been submitted as described above.
4. To avoid delays in processing requests for access to SGI, all
forms should be reviewed for completeness and accuracy (including
legibility) before submitting them to the NRC. Incomplete packages will
be returned to the sender and will not be processed.
5. Based on an evaluation of the information submitted under items
2 and 3.a through 3.d, above, the NRC staff will determine within ten
days of receipt of the written access 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) there is a
legitimate need for access to SUNSI or need to know the SGI requested.
For SGI, the need to know determination is made based on whether the
information requested is necessary (i.e., indispensable) for the
proposed recipient to proffer and litigate a specific contention in
this NRC proceeding \3\ and whether the proposed recipient has the
technical competence (demonstrable knowledge, skill, training,
education, or experience) to evaluate and use the specific SGI
requested in this proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Broad SGI requests under these procedures are thus highly
unlikely to meet the standard for need to know; furthermore, staff
redaction of information from requested documents before their
release may be appropriate to comport with this requirement. These
procedures do not authorize unrestricted disclosure or less scrutiny
of a requester's need to know than ordinarily would be applied in
connection with an already-admitted contention.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. If standing and need to know SGI are shown, the NRC staff will
further determine based upon completion of the background check whether
the proposed recipient is trustworthy and reliable. The NRC staff will
conduct (as necessary) an inspection to confirm that the recipient's
information protection systems are sufficient to protect SGI from
inadvertent release or disclosure. Recipients may opt to view SGI at
the NRC's facility rather than establish their own SGI protection
program to meet SGI protection requirements.
7. A request for access to SUNSI or SGI will be granted if:
a. The request has demonstrated that there is a reasonable basis to
believe that a potential party is likely to establish standing to
intervene or to otherwise participate as a party in this proceeding;
b. The proposed recipient of the information has demonstrated a
need for SUNSI or a need to know for SGI, and that the proposed
recipient of SGI is trustworthy and reliable;
c. The proposed recipient of the information has executed a Non-
Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit and agrees to be bound by the terms
of a Protective Order setting forth terms and conditions to prevent the
unauthorized or inadvertent disclosure of SUNSI and/or SGI; and
d. The presiding officer has issued a protective order concerning
the information or documents requested.\4\ Any protective order issued
shall provide that the petitioner must file SUNSI or SGI contentions 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 or SGI contentions by that later
deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ If a presiding officer has not yet been designated, the
Chief Administrative Judge will issue such orders, or will appoint a
presiding officer to do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. If the request for access to SUNSI or SGI is granted, the terms
and conditions for access to sensitive unclassified information will be
set forth in a draft protective order and affidavit of non-disclosure
appended to a joint motion by the NRC staff, any other affected parties
to this proceeding,\5\ and the petitioner(s). If the diligent efforts
by the relevant parties or petitioner(s) fail to result in an agreement
on the terms and conditions for a draft protective order or non-
disclosure affidavit, the relevant parties to the proceeding or the
petitioner(s) should notify the presiding officer within ten (10) days,
describing the obstacles to the agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Parties/persons other than the requester and the NRC staff
will be notified by the NRC staff of a favorable access
determination (and may participate in the development of such a
motion and protective order) if it concerns SUNSI and if the party/
person's interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by
the release of the information (e.g., as with proprietary
information).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. If the request for access to SUNSI is denied by the NRC staff or
a request for access to SGI is denied by NRC staff either after a
determination on standing and need to know or, later, after a
[[Page 7487]]
determination on trustworthiness and reliability, the NRC staff shall
briefly state the reasons for the denial. Before the Office of
Administration makes an adverse determination regarding access, the
proposed recipient must be provided an opportunity to correct or
explain information. The requester may challenge the NRC staff's
adverse determination with respect to access to SUNSI or with respect
to standing or need to know for SGI by filing a challenge within ten
(10) 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. In the same manner, an SGI requester may challenge an
adverse determination on trustworthiness and reliability by filing a
challenge within fifteen (15) days of receipt of that determination.
In the same manner, 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 ten (10) days of the notification by the
NRC staff of its grant of such a request.
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.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ As of October 15, 2007, the NRC's final ``E-Filing Rule''
became effective. See Use of Electronic Submissions in Agency
Hearings (72 FR 49139; Aug. 28, 2007). Requesters should note that
the filing requirements of that rule apply to appeals of NRC staff
determinations (because they must be served on a presiding officer
or the Commission, as applicable), but not to the initial SUNSI/SGI
requests submitted to the NRC staff under these procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 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/or SGI, and motions for protective
orders, in a timely fashion in order to minimize any unnecessary delays
in identifying those [intervenors/petitioners] who have standing and
who have propounded contentions meeting the specificity and basis
requirements in 10 CFR Part 2. Attachment 1 to this Order summarizes
the general target schedule for processing and resolving requests under
these procedures.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of February 2009.
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
(SUNSI) and Safeguards Information (SGI) in This Proceeding
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Event/activity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0........................... Publication of [Federal Register notice/
other notice of proposed action and
opportunity for hearing], including order
with instructions for access requests.
10.......................... Deadline for submitting requests for
access to SUNSI and/or SGI with
information: Supporting the standing of a
potential party identified by name and
address; describing the need for the
information in order for the potential
party to participate meaningfully in an
adjudicatory proceeding; demonstrating
that access should be granted (e.g.,
showing technical competence for access
to SGI); and, for SGI, including
application fee for fingerprint/
background check.
60.......................... Deadline for submitting petition for
intervention containing: (i)
Demonstration of standing; (ii) all
contentions whose formulation does not
require access to SUNSI and/or SGI (+25
Answers to petition for intervention; +7
petitioner/requestor reply).
20.......................... 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 (1) need for SUNSI or (2) need to
know for SGI. (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). If NRC
staff makes the finding of need to know
for SGI and likelihood of standing, NRC
staff begins background check (including
fingerprinting for a criminal history
records check), information processing
(preparation of redactions or review of
redacted documents), and readiness
inspections.
25.......................... If NRC staff finds no ``need,'' ``need to
know,'' or 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.
190......................... (Receipt +180) If NRC staff finds
standing, need to know for SGI, and
trustworthiness and reliability, deadline
for NRC staff to file motion for
Protective Order and draft Non-disclosure
Affidavit (or to make a determination
that the proposed recipient of SGI is not
trustworthy or reliable). Note: Before
the Office of Administration makes an
adverse determination regarding access,
the proposed recipient must be provided
an opportunity to correct or explain
information.
205......................... Deadline for petitioner to seek reversal
of a final adverse NRC staff
determination either before the presiding
officer or another designated officer.
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 and/or SGI consistent with decision
issuing the protective order.
A + 28...................... Deadline for submission of contentions
whose development depends upon access to
SUNSI and/or SGI. 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 or SGI
contentions by that later deadline.
[[Page 7488]]
A + 53...................... (Contention receipt +25) Answers to
contentions whose development depends
upon access to SUNSI and/or SGI.
A + 60...................... (Answer receipt +7) Petitioner/Intervenor
reply to answers.
B........................... Decision on contention admission.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. E9-3282 Filed 2-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P