Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing, 8273-8276 [E9-3896]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 24, 2009 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES addressed to: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for National Science Foundation, 725–17th Street, NW., Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503, and to Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 295, Arlington, Virginia 22230 or send e-mail to splimpto@nsf.gov. Comments regarding these information collections are best assured of having their full effect if received within 30 days of this notification. Copies of the submission(s) may be obtained by calling 703–292–7556. NSF may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title: Grantee Reporting Requirements for Science and Technology Centers (STC): Integrative Partnerships OMB Control Number: 3145–0194. Abstract: Proposed Project The Science and Technology Centers (STC): Integrative Partnerships Program supports innovation in the integrative conduct of research, education and knowledge transfer. Science and Technology Centers build intellectual and physical infrastructure within and between disciplines, weaving together knowledge creation, knowledge integration, and knowledge transfer. STCs conduct world-class research through partnerships of academic institutions, national laboratories, industrial organizations, and/or other public/private entities. New knowledge thus created is meaningfully linked to society. STCs enable and foster excellent education, integrate research and education, and create bonds between learning and inquiry so that discovery and creativity more fully support the learning process. STCs capitalize on diversity through participation in center activities and demonstrate leadership in the involvement of groups underrepresented in science and engineering. Centers selected will be required to submit annual reports on progress and plans, which will be used as a basis for performance review and determining the level of continued funding. To support this review and the VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:23 Feb 23, 2009 Jkt 217001 management of a Center, STCs will be required to develop a set of management and performance indicators for submission annually to NSF via an NSF evaluation technical assistance contractor. These indicators are both quantitative and descriptive and may include, for example, the characteristics of center personnel and students; sources of financial support and in-kind support; expenditures by operational component; characteristics of industrial and/or other sector participation; research activities; education activities; knowledge transfer activities; patents, licenses; publications; degrees granted to students involved in Center activities; descriptions of significant advances and other outcomes of the STC effort. Part of this reporting will take the form of a database which will be owned by the institution and eventually made available to an evaluation contractor. This database will capture specific information to demonstrate progress towards achieving the goals of the program. Such reporting requirements will be included in the cooperative agreement which is binding between the academic institution and the NSF. Each Center’s annual report will address the following categories of activities: (1) Research, (2) education, (3) knowledge transfer, (4) partnerships, (5) diversity, (6) management and (7) budget issues. For each of the categories the report will describe overall objectives for the year, problems the Center has encountered in making progress towards goals, anticipated problems in the following year, and specific outputs and outcomes. Use of the Information: NSF will use the information to continue funding of the Centers, and to evaluate the progress of the program. Estimate of Burden: 100 hours per center for seventeen centers for a total of 1700 hours. Respondents: Non-profit institutions; federal government. Estimated Number of Responses per Report: One from each of the seventeen centers. Comments: Comments are invited on (a) whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and (d) ways to PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 8273 minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology. Dated: February 18, 2009. Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports Clearance Officer, National Science Foundation. [FR Doc. E9–3846 Filed 2–23–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7555–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No 50–414; NRC–2009–0074] Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF–52 issued to Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (the licensee), for operation of the Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 2, located in York County, South Carolina. The proposed amendment requested to update the Leak-Before-Break evaluation for Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 2. This request is being submitted in conjunction with Duke Energy Carolinas LLC’s proposal to apply full structural weld overlays to the reactor vessel hot leg nozzle-to-safe end welds in the upcoming spring 2009 refueling outage. Before issuance of the proposed license amendments, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission’s regulations. The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission’s regulations in Title 10 of the CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (10 CFR), Section 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided E:\FR\FM\24FEN1.SGM 24FEN1 8274 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 24, 2009 / Notices mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below: 1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The applicable accident is a Large Break Loss of Coolant Accident (LBLOCA). Since the application of FSWOLs [full structural weld overlays] will enhance the integrity of the reactor coolant system, the probability of a previously evaluated accident is not increased. The consequences of a LBLOCA have been previously evaluated and found to be acceptable. Application of FSWOLs to the welds will cause no change to the dose analysis associated with a LBLOCA, and therefore, does not affect the consequences. For the above reasons, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The proposed amendment will allow application of FSWOLs to mitigate potential PWSCC [Primary Water Stress Corrosion Cracking] of the welds. These welds provide a primary pressure boundary function. This amendment request does not change the function of the welds, or the way the plant is operated; it allows the application of FSWOLs that will enhance the ability of the welds to perform the pressure boundary function. Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. 3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response: No. Margin of safety is related to the ability of the fission product barriers to perform their design functions during and following accident conditions. These barriers include the fuel cladding, the reactor coolant system, and the containment. This amendment request does not involve a change to the fuel cladding or the containment. This amendment request updates the LBB [Leak Before Break] evaluation to account for the application of FSWOLs to the reactor vessel hot leg nozzle-to-safe end welds for Catawba Unit 2. The effect of applying a weld overlay repair has been evaluated with respect to the LBB evaluation at this location. This evaluation addresses mitigation of PWSCC in these welds. This evaluation allows the application of a PWSCC resistant overlay that has the added benefit of producing compressive stresses on the inner portion of the welds. Crack growth evaluations performed as part of the evaluation indicate that no PWSCC is expected after the application of the overlay and fatigue crack growth is minimal. The effect of the adverse morphology due to PWSCC cracking was also evaluated. When considering the combined effects of flaw size, increased thickness, and VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:23 Feb 23, 2009 Jkt 217001 adverse morphology, the leakage was shown to be largely unaffected due to the offsetting effects of these factors. The evaluation described above shows that these welds will perform as originally intended and that the adverse effects of PWSCC will be mitigated. Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee’s analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. 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 O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any person(s) PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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 O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System’s (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, https://www.nrc.gov/ reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order. As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements: (1) The name, address and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the requestor’s/petitioner(s right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor’s/petitioner’s property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestor’s/petitioner’s interest. The petition must also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/ requestor seeks to have litigated at the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to E:\FR\FM\24FEN1.SGM 24FEN1 mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 24, 2009 / Notices rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner/requestor must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party. Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing. If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment. 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 on 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. To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least ten (10) days prior to the filing deadline, the VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:23 Feb 23, 2009 Jkt 217001 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 Us’’ link located on the NRC Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html or by calling the NRC PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 8275 electronic filing Help Desk, which is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday excluding government holidays. The electronic filing 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, unless an NRC regulation or other law requires submission of such information. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, Participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submissions. E:\FR\FM\24FEN1.SGM 24FEN1 8276 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 24, 2009 / Notices For further details with respect to this license amendment application, see the application for amendment dated November 20, 2008, which is available for public inspection at the Commission’s PDR, located at One White Flint North, File Public Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System’s (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of February 2009. For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Robert Martin, Acting Chief, Plant Licensing Branch II–1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E9–3896 Filed 2–23–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50–413 and 50–414; NRC– 2009–0073] mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License No. NPF–35 and Facility Operating License No. NPF–52 issued to Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (the licensee), for operation of the Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, located in York County, South Carolina. The proposed amendments revise the Technical Specifications (TSs) to change the logic configuration of TS Table 3.3.2–1, ‘‘Engineered Safety Feature Actuation System Instrumentation,’’ Function 5.b.(5), ‘‘Turbine Trip and Feedwater Isolation, Feedwater Isolation, Doghouse Water Level—High High.’’ The existing one-out-of-one (1/1) logic per train per doghouse is being modified to a two-out-of-three (2⁄3) logic per train per doghouse. The proposed change will improve the overall reliability of this function and will VerDate Nov<24>2008 17:23 Feb 23, 2009 Jkt 217001 reduce the potential for spurious actuations. Before issuance of the proposed license amendments, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission’s regulations. The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission’s regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. 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: Criterion 1: Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The doghouse water level instrumentation is considered accident mitigation equipment. As such, changes in the logic configuration for this instrumentation cannot have an impact on the probability of an accident. The instrumentation will continue to comply with all applicable regulatory requirements and design criteria following approval of the proposed changes (e.g., train separation, redundancy, and single failure). The instrumentation will actually be made more reliable as a result of the proposed modifications. Therefore, since the instrumentation will continue to function as designed, all plant parameters will remain within their design limits. As a result, the proposed changes will not increase the consequences of an accident. Based on this discussion, the proposed amendments do not significantly increase the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. Criterion 2: Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The proposed modification to the logic configuration for the doghouse water level instrumentation will result in it being better enabled to fulfill its design function in response to accident conditions. The instrumentation will continue to meet its seismic and equipment qualification requirements. The proposed modifications do not involve a change in the methods governing normal plant operation. The PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 change does not alter assumptions made in the safety analysis (this instrumentation is not credited in the safety analysis). Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated. Criterion 3: Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response: No. Margin of safety is related to the confidence in the ability of the fission product barriers to perform their accident mitigation functions. These barriers include the fuel and fuel cladding, the reactor coolant system, and the containment and containment related systems. The proposed modifications will not impact the reliability of these barriers to function. The proposed modifications will actually enhance the reliability of the doghouse water level instrumentation in responding to a feedwater line break in a doghouse. Radiological doses to plant operators or to the public will not be impacted as a result of the proposed change. The affected instrumentation is not credited in the UFSAR [Update Final Safety Analysis Report] Chapter 15 accident analyses, nor is it Maintenance Rule High Safety significant. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee’s analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. 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, E:\FR\FM\24FEN1.SGM 24FEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 24, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8273-8276]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-3896]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No 50-414; NRC-2009-0074]


 Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC; Notice of Consideration of Issuance 
of Amendments to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant 
Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of amendment to Facility Operating License No. 
NPF-52 issued to Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (the licensee), for 
operation of the Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 2, located in York 
County, South Carolina.
    The proposed amendment requested to update the Leak-Before-Break 
evaluation for Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 2. This request is being 
submitted in conjunction with Duke Energy Carolinas LLC's proposal to 
apply full structural weld overlays to the reactor vessel hot leg 
nozzle-to-safe end welds in the upcoming spring 2009 refueling outage.
    Before issuance of the proposed license amendments, the Commission 
will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 
amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations.
    The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment 
request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the 
Commission's regulations in Title 10 of the CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS 
(10 CFR), Section 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in 
accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or
    (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As 
required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided

[[Page 8274]]

its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, 
which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The applicable accident is a Large Break Loss of Coolant 
Accident (LBLOCA). Since the application of FSWOLs [full structural 
weld overlays] will enhance the integrity of the reactor coolant 
system, the probability of a previously evaluated accident is not 
increased. The consequences of a LBLOCA have been previously 
evaluated and found to be acceptable. Application of FSWOLs to the 
welds will cause no change to the dose analysis associated with a 
LBLOCA, and therefore, does not affect the consequences.
    For the above reasons, the proposed amendment does not involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed amendment will allow application of FSWOLs to 
mitigate potential PWSCC [Primary Water Stress Corrosion Cracking] 
of the welds. These welds provide a primary pressure boundary 
function. This amendment request does not change the function of the 
welds, or the way the plant is operated; it allows the application 
of FSWOLs that will enhance the ability of the welds to perform the 
pressure boundary function. Therefore, the proposed amendment does 
not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident 
from any accident previously evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    Margin of safety is related to the ability of the fission 
product barriers to perform their design functions during and 
following accident conditions. These barriers include the fuel 
cladding, the reactor coolant system, and the containment. This 
amendment request does not involve a change to the fuel cladding or 
the containment. This amendment request updates the LBB [Leak Before 
Break] evaluation to account for the application of FSWOLs to the 
reactor vessel hot leg nozzle-to-safe end welds for Catawba Unit 2.
    The effect of applying a weld overlay repair has been evaluated 
with respect to the LBB evaluation at this location. This evaluation 
addresses mitigation of PWSCC in these welds. This evaluation allows 
the application of a PWSCC resistant overlay that has the added 
benefit of producing compressive stresses on the inner portion of 
the welds. Crack growth evaluations performed as part of the 
evaluation indicate that no PWSCC is expected after the application 
of the overlay and fatigue crack growth is minimal. The effect of 
the adverse morphology due to PWSCC cracking was also evaluated. 
When considering the combined effects of flaw size, increased 
thickness, and adverse morphology, the leakage was shown to be 
largely unaffected due to the offsetting effects of these factors.
    The evaluation described above shows that these welds will 
perform as originally intended and that the adverse effects of PWSCC 
will be mitigated. Therefore, the proposed amendment does not 
involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the 
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
    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 O1 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 O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. 
Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide 
Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic 
Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, https://www.nrc.gov/
reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing or petition 
for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or a 
presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief 
Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, 
will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the 
Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 
will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order.
    As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene 
shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in 
the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of 
the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons 
why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the 
following general requirements: (1) The name, address and telephone 
number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the 
requestor's/petitioner(s right under the Act to be made a party to the 
proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's 
property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the 
possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the 
proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must 
also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/requestor 
seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.
    Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue 
of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the 
petitioner/requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for 
the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert 
opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner 
intends to

[[Page 8275]]

rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner/requestor 
must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of 
which the petitioner is aware and on which the petitioner intends to 
rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The petition must 
include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists 
with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions 
shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under 
consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would 
entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner/requestor who fails to 
satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one contention will 
not be permitted to participate as a party.
    Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, 
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, 
and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the 
hearing.
    If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final 
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The 
final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If 
the final determination is that the amendment request involves no 
significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the 
amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the 
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance 
of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment 
request involves a significant hazards consideration, any hearing held 
would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
    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 on 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.
    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 ViewerTM 
to access the Electronic Information Exchange (EIE), a component of the 
E-Filing system. The Workplace Forms ViewerTM is free and is 
available at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/install-
viewer.html. Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is 
available on NRC's public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-
submittals/apply-certificates.html.
    Once a petitioner/requestor has obtained a digital ID certificate, 
had a docket created, and downloaded the EIE viewer, it can then submit 
a request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions 
should be in Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC 
guidance available on the NRC public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/
site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the 
time the filer submits its documents through EIE. To be timely, an 
electronic filing must be submitted to the EIE system no later than 
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a 
transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends 
the submitter an e-mail notice confirming receipt of the document. The 
EIE system also distributes an e-mail notice that provides access to 
the document to the NRC Office of the General Counsel and any others 
who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to 
participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the 
documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and 
other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for 
and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition 
to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document 
via the E-Filing system.
    A person filing electronically may seek assistance through the 
``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/
site-help/e-submittals.html or by calling the NRC electronic filing 
Help Desk, which is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, 
Monday through Friday excluding government holidays. The electronic 
filing 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, unless an NRC regulation or 
other law requires submission of such information. With respect to 
copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose 
of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use 
application, Participants are requested not to include copyrighted 
materials in their submissions.

[[Page 8276]]

    For further details with respect to this license amendment 
application, see the application for amendment dated November 20, 2008, 
which is available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR, 
located at One White Flint North, File Public Area O1 F21, 11555 
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available 
records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents 
Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room 
on the Internet at the NRC Web site, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter 
problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact 
the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-
4737, or by e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of February 2009.
    For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert Martin,
Acting Chief, Plant Licensing Branch II-1, Division of Operating 
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E9-3896 Filed 2-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.