Luminant Generation Company LLC; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI) for Contention Preparation, 36533-36538 [E9-17568]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 140 / Thursday, July 23, 2009 / Notices
ATTACHMENT I: COUNTIES IMPACTED
BY AUTOMOTIVE-RELATED RESTRUCTURING—Continued
FIPS
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
ATTACHMENT I: COUNTIES IMPACTED
BY AUTOMOTIVE-RELATED RESTRUCTURING—Continued
FIPS
31047
31051
31141
31159
34023
34039
36029
36063
36067
36089
39001
39003
39011
39019
39021
39025
39027
39033
39035
39039
39043
39051
39061
39063
39065
39069
39071
39077
39079
39083
39091
39093
39095
39097
39113
39117
39121
39125
39131
39135
39137
39139
39141
39143
39147
39149
39153
39155
39159
39161
39169
39171
39173
39175
40095
40109
42003
42117
45007
45019
45021
45035
45067
45083
47001
47003
47007
47009
47015
47031
County name
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
State
Dawson ..................
Dixon ......................
Platte ......................
Seward ...................
Middlesex ...............
Union ......................
Erie .........................
Niagara ...................
Onondaga ...............
St. Lawrence ..........
Adams ....................
Allen .......................
Auglaize ..................
Carroll .....................
Champaign .............
Clermont .................
Clinton ....................
Crawford .................
Cuyahoga ...............
Defiance .................
Erie .........................
Fulton .....................
Hamilton .................
Hancock .................
Hardin .....................
Henry ......................
Highland .................
Huron ......................
Jackson ..................
Knox .......................
Logan .....................
Lorain .....................
Lucas ......................
Madison ..................
Montgomery ...........
Morrow ...................
Noble ......................
Paulding .................
Pike ........................
Preble .....................
Putnam ...................
Richland .................
Ross .......................
Sandusky ................
Seneca ...................
Shelby ....................
Summit ...................
Trumbull .................
Union ......................
Van Wert ................
Wayne ....................
Williams ..................
Wood ......................
Wyandot .................
Marshall ..................
Oklahoma ...............
Allegheny ................
Tioga ......................
Anderson ................
Charleston ..............
Cherokee ................
Dorchester ..............
Marion ....................
Spartanburg ............
Anderson ................
Bedford ...................
Bledsoe ..................
Blount .....................
Cannon ...................
Coffee .....................
NE
NE
NE
NE
NJ
NJ
NY
NY
NY
NY
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OK
OK
PA
PA
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
SC
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:01 Jul 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
47041
47045
47051
47053
47055
47061
47063
47065
47069
47073
47077
47079
47087
47097
47099
47105
47113
47117
47119
47107
47109
47121
47123
47131
47133
47135
47141
47143
47147
47149
47151
47159
47177
47185
48029
48439
49003
51023
51710
51155
51173
51177
55059
55075
55105
54079
County name
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
State
DeKalb ....................
Dyer ........................
Franklin ...................
Gibson ....................
Giles .......................
Grundy ....................
Hamblen .................
Hamilton .................
Hardeman ...............
Hawkins ..................
Henderson ..............
Henry ......................
Jackson ..................
Lauderdale .............
Lawrence ................
Loudon ...................
Madison ..................
Marshall ..................
Maury .....................
McMinn ...................
McNairy ..................
Meigs ......................
Monroe ...................
Obion ......................
Overton ...................
Perry .......................
Putnam ...................
Rhea .......................
Robertson ...............
Rutherford ..............
Scott .......................
Smith ......................
Warren ....................
White ......................
Bexar ......................
Tarrant ....................
Box Elder ................
Botetourt .................
Norfolk (city) ...........
Pulaski ....................
Smyth .....................
Spotsylvania ...........
Kenosha .................
Marinette ................
Rock .......................
Putnam ...................
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TN
TX
TX
UT
VA
VA
VA
VA
VA
WI
WI
WI
WV
6. Supplementary Information Section
B ‘‘Green Industries and Occupations’’:
Is revised to provide further information
on the industries on which applicants
may focus by adding the language
designated below as ‘‘new text’’ to the
existing language in that section:
a. New Text: ‘‘We will also evaluate
applications for projects that include
emerging green occupations from
industries that have not been discussed
in this section.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Janice Sheelor, Grants Management
Specialist, Division of Federal
Assistance, at (202) 693–3538.
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36533
Signed at Washington, DC, this 17th day of
July 2009.
Donna Kelly,
Grant Officer, Employment & Training
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9–17458 Filed 7–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50–445 and 50–446 NRC–
2009–0318]
Luminant Generation Company LLC;
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of
Amendment to Facility Operating
License, Proposed No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination,
and Opportunity for a Hearing and
Order Imposing Procedures for Access
to Sensitive Unclassified NonSafeguards Information (SUNSI) for
Contention Preparation
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC, the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment
to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF–
87 and NPF–89 issued to Luminant
Generation Company LLC for operation
of the Comanche Peak Steam Electric
Station (CPSES), Units 1 and 2, located
in Somervell County, Texas.
The proposed amendment would
revise Technical Specification (TS)
5.5.9.2, ‘‘Unit 1 Model D76 and Unit 2
Model D5 Steam Generator (SG)
Program,’’ to exclude portions of the
CPSES, Unit 2 Model D5 SG below the
top of the SG tubesheet from periodic
SG tube inspections. In addition, the
proposed amendment would revise TS
5.6.9, ‘‘Unit 1 Model D76 and Unit 2
Model D5 Steam Generator Tube
Inspection Report,’’ to include reporting
requirements specific to the permanent
alternate repair criteria for CPSES, Unit
2. The amendment request is supported
by Westinghouse WCAP–17072–P, ‘‘H*:
Alternate Repair Criteria for the Tube
Sheet Expansion Region in Steam
Generators with Hydraulically
Expanded Tubes (Model D5),’’ May
2009. The amendment application dated
June 8, 2009, contains sensitive
unclassified non-safeguards information
(SUNSI).
Before issuance of the proposed
license amendment, the Commission
will have made findings required by the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
(the Act), and the Commission’s
regulations.
The Commission has made a
proposed determination that the
amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration. Under
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
36534
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 140 / Thursday, July 23, 2009 / Notices
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
the Commission’s regulations in Title 10
of the Code of Federal Regulations (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. 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. Do the proposed changes involve a
significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
Of the accidents previously evaluated, the
limiting transients with consideration to the
proposed change to the SG tube inspection
and repair criteria are the steam generator
tube rupture (SGTR) event, the steam line
break (SLB), and the feed line break (FLB)
postulated accidents.
During the SGTR event, the required
structural integrity margins of the SG tubes
and the tube-to-tubesheet joint over the H*
[the structural integrity of the primary-tosecondary pressure boundary is unaffected
by degradation of any magnitude below a
specific depth, designated as H*] distance
will be maintained. Tube rupture in tubes
with cracks within the tubesheet is precluded
by the constraint provided by the presence of
the tubesheet and the tube-to-tubesheet joint.
Tube burst cannot occur within the thickness
of the tubesheet. The tube-to-tubesheet joint
constraint results from the hydraulic
expansion process, thermal expansion
mismatch between the tube and tubesheet,
differential pressure between the primary
and secondary side, and tubesheet rotation.
Based on this design, the structural margins
against burst, as discussed in Regulatory
Guide (RG) 1.121, ‘‘Bases for Plugging
Degraded PWR [Pressurized-Water Reactor]
Steam Generator Tubes,’’ and TS 5.5.9.2 are
maintained for both normal and postulated
accident conditions.
The proposed change has no impact on the
structural or leakage integrity of the portion
of the tube outside of the tubesheet. The
proposed change maintains structural and
leakage integrity of the SG tubes consistent
with the performance criteria in TS 5.5.9.2.
Therefore, the proposed change results in no
significant increase in the probability of the
occurrence of a SGTR accident.
At normal operating pressures, leakage
from tube degradation below the proposed
limited inspection depth is limited by the
tube-to-tubesheet crevice. Consequently,
negligible normal operating leakage is
expected from degradation below the
inspected depth within the tubesheet region.
The consequences of an SGTR event are not
affected by the primary-to-secondary leakage
flow during the event as primary-tosecondary leakage flow through a postulated
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:01 Jul 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
tube that has been pulled out of the tubesheet
is essentially equivalent to a severed tube.
Therefore, the proposed change does not
result in a significant increase in the
consequences of a SGTR.
The probability of a SLB is unaffected by
the potential failure of a steam generator tube
as the failure of tube is not an initiator for
[an] SLB event.
The leakage factor of 1.94 for Comanche
Peak Unit 2 [CPSES, Unit 2], for a postulated
SLB/FLB, has been calculated as shown in
Table 9–7 of Reference 8.1 [Westinghouse
WCAP–17072–P]. However, Luminant Power
[Luminant Generation Company LLC] will
apply a factor of 2.03 to the normal operating
leakage associated with the tubesheet
expansion region in the condition monitoring
(CM) and operational assessment (OA). The
leakage factor of 2.03 is a bounding value for
all SGs, both hot and cold legs, in Table 9–
7 of Reference 8.1. Through application of
the limited tubesheet inspection scope, the
existing operating leakage limit provides
assurance that excessive leakage (i.e., greater
than accident analysis assumptions) will not
occur. The accident-induced leak rate limit
for Comanche Peak Unit 2 is 1.0 gpm [gallons
per minute]. The TS operational leak rate
limit through any one steam generator is 150
gpd [gallons per day] (0.1 gpm).
Consequently, there is significant margin
between accident leakage and allowable
operational leakage. The SLB/FLB overall
leakage factor is only 2.03 resulting in
significant margin between the
conservatively estimated accident induced
leakage and the allowable accident leakage.
No leakage factor was applied to the locked
rotor or control rod ejection transients due to
their short duration.
For the CM assessment, the component of
leakage from the prior cycle from below the
H* distance will be multiplied by a factor of
2.03 and added to the total leakage from any
other source and compared to the allowable
accident induced leakage limit. For the OA,
the difference in the leakage between the
allowable leakage and the accident induced
leakage from sources other than the tubesheet
expansion region will be divided by 2.03 and
compared to the observed operational
leakage.
The previously analyzed accidents are
initiated by the failure of plant structures,
systems, or components. The proposed
change that alters the steam generator (SG)
inspection and reporting criteria does not
have a detrimental impact on the integrity of
any plant structure, system, or component
that initiates an analyzed event. The
proposed change will not alter the operation
of, or otherwise increase the failure
probability of any plant equipment that
initiates an analyzed accident.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not
involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Do the proposed changes create the
possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change that alters the steam
generator inspection and reporting criteria
does not introduce any new equipment,
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
create new failure modes for existing
equipment, or create any new limiting single
failures. Plant operation will not be altered,
and all safety functions will continue to
perform as previously assumed in accident
analyses. Therefore, the proposed change
does not create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any
previously evaluated.
3. Do the proposed changes involve a
significant reduction in the margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change defines the safety
significant portion of the tube that must be
inspected and repaired. WCAP–17072–P
identifies the specific inspection depth below
which any type tube degradation is shown to
have no impact on the performance criteria
in NEI [Nuclear Energy Institute] 97–06 Rev.
2, ‘‘Steam Generator Program Guidelines.’’
The proposed change that alters the steam
generator inspection and reporting criteria
maintains the required structural margins of
the SG tubes for both normal and accident
conditions. Nuclear Energy Institute 97–06,
‘‘Steam Generator Program Guidelines,’’ and
NRC Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.121, ‘‘Bases for
Plugging Degraded PWR Steam Generator
Tubes,’’ are used as the bases in the
development of the limited hot leg tubesheet
inspection depth methodology for
determining that SG tube integrity
considerations are maintained within
acceptable limits. RG 1.121 describes a
method acceptable to the NRC for meeting
General Design Criteria (GDC) 14, ‘‘Reactor
Coolant Pressure Boundary,’’ GDC 15,
‘‘Reactor Coolant System Design,’’ GDC 31,
‘‘Fracture Prevention of Reactor Coolant
Pressure Boundary,’’ and GDC 32,
‘‘Inspection of Reactor Coolant Pressure
Boundary,’’ by reducing the probability and
consequences of [an] SGTR. RG 1.121
concludes that by determining the limiting
safe conditions for tube wall degradation, the
probability and consequences of [an] SGTR
are reduced. RG 1.121 uses safety factors on
loads for tube burst that are consistent with
the requirements of Section III of the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers
(ASME) Code.
For axially oriented cracking located
within the tubesheet, tube burst is precluded
due to the presence of the tubesheet. For
circumferentially oriented cracking,
Westinghouse WCAP–17072–P defines a
length of degradation-free expanded tubing
that provides the necessary resistance to tube
pullout due to the pressure induced forces,
with applicable safety factors applied.
Application of the limited hot and cold leg
tubesheet inspection criteria will preclude
unacceptable primary-to-secondary leakage
during all plant conditions. Using the
methodology for determining leakage as
described in WCAP–17072–P, it is shown
that significant margin exists between
conservatively estimated accident induced
leakage and the allowable accident leakage
(1.0 gpm) if all four generators are assumed
to be leaking at the Technical Specification
3.4.13 leakage limit at the beginning of the
design basis accident.
Therefore, the proposed change does not
involve a significant reduction in any margin
of safety.
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 140 / Thursday, July 23, 2009 / Notices
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 and
Directives Branch (RDB), 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. Written comments may also be
faxed to the RDB at 301–492–3446.
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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:01 Jul 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
accordance with the Commission’s
‘‘Rules of Practice for Domestic
Licensing Proceedings’’ in 10 CFR Part
2. Interested person(s) should consult a
current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is
available at the Commission’s PDR,
located at One White Flint North, Public
File Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
Publicly available records will be
accessible from the Agencywide
Documents Access and Management
System’s (ADAMS) Public Electronic
Reading Room on the Internet at the
NRC Web site, https://www.nrc.gov/
reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a
request for a hearing or petition for
leave to intervene is filed by the above
date, the Commission or a presiding
officer designated by the Commission or
by the Chief Administrative Judge of the
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
Panel, will rule on the request and/or
petition; and the Secretary or the Chief
Administrative Judge of the Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board will issue a
notice of a hearing or an appropriate
order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a
petition for leave to intervene shall set
forth with particularity the interest of
the petitioner in the proceeding, and
how that interest may be affected by the
results of the proceeding. The petition
should specifically explain the reasons
why intervention should be permitted
with particular reference to the
following general requirements: (1) The
name, address and telephone number of
the requestor or petitioner; (2) the
nature of the requestor’s/petitioner’s
right under the Act to be made a party
to the proceeding; (3) the nature and
extent of the requestor’s/petitioner’s
property, financial, or other interest in
the proceeding; and (4) the possible
effect of any decision or order which
may be entered in the proceeding on the
requestor’s/petitioner’s interest. The
petition must also identify the specific
contentions which the petitioner/
requestor seeks to have litigated at the
proceeding.
Each contention must consist of a
specific statement of the issue of law or
fact to be raised or controverted. In
addition, the petitioner/requestor shall
provide a brief explanation of the bases
for the contention and a concise
statement of the alleged facts or expert
opinion which support the contention
and on which the petitioner intends to
rely in proving the contention at the
hearing. The petitioner/requestor must
also provide references to those specific
sources and documents of which the
petitioner is aware and on which the
petitioner intends to rely to establish
those facts or expert opinion. The
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36535
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 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
an exemption 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 should 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:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
36536
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 140 / Thursday, July 23, 2009 / Notices
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 using
the agency’s adjudicatory e-filing system
may seek assistance through the
‘‘Contact Us’’ link located on the NRC
Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/sitehelp/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,
excluding government holidays. The
Meta-System Help Desk can be
contacted by telephone at 1–866–672–
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:01 Jul 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
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 an
exemption request, in accordance with
10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper
filing requesting authorization to
continue to submit documents in paper
format. Such filings must be submitted
by: (1) First class mail addressed to the
Office of the Secretary of the
Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, Attention: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier,
express mail, or expedited delivery
service to the Office of the Secretary,
Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North,
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland, 20852, Attention:
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff.
Participants filing a document in this
manner are responsible for serving the
document on all other participants.
Filing is considered complete by firstclass mail as of the time of deposit in
the mail, or by courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service upon
depositing the document with the
provider of the service.
Non-timely requests and/or petitions
and contentions will not be entertained
absent a determination by the
Commission, the presiding officer, or
the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
that the request and/or petition 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.
For further details with respect to this
license amendment application, see the
application for amendment dated June
8, 2009, which is available for public
inspection at the Commission’s PDR,
located at One White Flint North, File
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Public Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville
Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
Publicly available records will be
accessible from the Agencywide
Documents Access and Management
System’s (ADAMS) Public Electronic
Reading Room on the Internet at the
NRC Web site, https://www.nrc.gov/
reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who
do not have access to ADAMS or who
encounter problems in accessing the
documents located in ADAMS should
contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by
telephone at 1–800–397–4209, 301–
415–4737, or by e-mail to
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
Attorney for licensee: Timothy P.
Matthews, Esq., Morgan, Lewis and
Bockius, 1800 M Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20036.
Order Imposing Procedures for Access
to Sensitive Unclassified NonSafeguards Information (SUNSI) for
Contention Preparation
1. This order contains instructions
regarding how potential parties to this
proceeding may request access to
documents containing sensitive
unclassified information.
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 is necessary for a
response to the notice may request
access to such information. 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
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,
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 140 / Thursday, July 23, 2009 / Notices
respectively.1 The request must include
the following information:
a. A description of the licensing
action with a citation to this Federal
Register 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 potential
licensing action;
c. 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;
4. Based on an evaluation of the
information submitted under items 2
and 3.a through 3.c, 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.
5. A request for access to SUNSI 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;
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
d. The presiding officer has issued a
protective order concerning the
information or documents requested.2
Any protective order issued shall
provide that the petitioner must file
SUNSI 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
contentions by that later deadline.
6. If the request for access to SUNSI
is granted, the terms and conditions for
access to such 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,3 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 five (5) days, describing the
obstacles to the agreement.
7. If the request for access to SUNSI
is denied by the NRC staff, the NRC staff
shall briefly state the reasons for the
denial. The requester may challenge the
NRC staff’s adverse determination with
respect to access to SUNSI (including
with respect to standing) by filing a
challenge within five (5) days of receipt
of that determination with (a) the
presiding officer designated in this
proceeding; (b) if no presiding officer
has been appointed, the Chief
Administrative Judge, or if he or she is
unavailable, another administrative
judge, or an administrative law judge
36537
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, 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 five (5) 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 2.311.4
8. The Commission expects that the
NRC staff and presiding officers (and
any other reviewing officers) will
consider and resolve requests for access
to SUNSI, and motions for protective
orders, in a timely fashion in order to
minimize any unnecessary delays in
identifying those petitioners who have
standing and who have propounded
contentions meeting the specificity and
basis requirements in 10 CFR Part 2.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day
of July 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
Attachment 1—General Target
Schedule for Processing and Resolving
Requests for Access to Sensitive
Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information (SUNSI) in This
Proceeding
Day
Event
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 with information: supporting the standing of a potential
party identified by name and address; and describing the need for the information in order for the potential
party to participate meaningfully in an adjudicatory proceeding.
Deadline for submitting petition for intervention containing: (i) Demonstration of standing; (ii) all contentions
whose formulation does not require access to SUNSI (+25 Answers to petition for intervention; +7 petitioner/requestor reply).
10 .........................................
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
[20,30 or 60] .........................
1 See footnote 4. While a request for hearing or
petition to intervene in this proceeding must
comply with the filing requirements of the NRC’s
‘‘E-Filing Rule,’’ the initial request to access SUNSI
under these procedures should be submitted as
described in this paragraph.
2 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.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:01 Jul 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
3 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).
4 As of October 15, 2007, the NRC’s final ‘‘EFiling Rule’’ became effective. See Use of Electronic
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Submissions in Agency Hearings (August 28, 2007;
72 FR 49139). 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 requests
submitted to the NRC staff under these procedures.
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
36538
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 140 / Thursday, July 23, 2009 / Notices
Day
Event
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 need for SUNSI. NRC staff also informs any party to
the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the release of the information. If NRC staff makes the finding of need for SUNSI and likelihood of standing, NRC staff begins document
processing (preparation of redactions or review of redacted documents).
If NRC staff finds no ‘‘need’’ for SUNSI 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.
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 consistent with decision issuing
the protective order.
Deadline for submission of contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI. However, if more
than 25 days remain between the petitioner’s receipt of (or access to) the information and the deadline for filing
all other contentions (as established in the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the petitioner may file
its SUNSI contentions by that later deadline.
Answers to contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI.
25 .........................................
30 .........................................
40 .........................................
A ...........................................
A+3 .......................................
A+28 .....................................
A+53 (Contention receipt
+25).
A+60 (Answer receipt +7) ....
B ...........................................
Petitioner/Intervenor reply to answers.
Decision on contention admission.
[FR Doc. E9–17568 Filed 7–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. CP2009–50; Order No. 251]
Global Expedited Package Services
Contract
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a
recently-filed Postal Service request to
include an additional Priority Mail
Contract 1 on the Competitive Product
List. This notice addresses procedural
steps associated with this filing.
DATES: Comments are due July 27, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
electronically via the Commission’s
Filing Online system at https://
www.prc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel,
202–789–6820 and
stephen.sharfman@prc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
II. Notice of Filing
III. Ordering Paragraphs
I. Introduction
On July 16, 2009, the Postal Service
filed a notice announcing that it has
entered into an additional Global
Expedited Package Services 1 (GEPS 1)
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:01 Jul 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
contract.1 GEPS 1 provides volumebased incentives for mailers that send
large volumes of Express Mail
International (EMI) and/or Priority Mail
International (PMI). The Postal Service
believes the instant contract is
functionally equivalent to previously
submitted GEPS 1 contracts, and is
supported by the Governors’ Decision
filed in Docket No. CP2008–4.2 Notice at
1. It further notes that in Order No. 86,
which established GEPS 1 as a product,
the Commission held that additional
contracts may be included as part of the
GEPS 1 product if they meet the
requirements of 39 U.S.C. 3633, and if
they are functionally equivalent to the
initial GEPS 1 contract filed in Docket
No. CP2008–5.3 Notice at 1.
The instant contract. The Postal
Service filed the instant contract
pursuant to 39 CFR 3015.5. In addition,
the Postal Service contends that the
contract is in accordance with Order No.
86. The Postal Service states that the
1 Notice of United States Postal Service Filing of
Functionally Equivalent Global Expedited Package
Services 1 Negotiated Service Agreement, July 16,
2009 (Notice).
2 See Docket No. CP2008–4, Notice of United
States Postal Service of Governors’ Decision
Establishing Prices and Classifications for Global
Expedited Package Services Contents, May 20,
2008. The docket referenced in the caption should
be the docket in which the Governors’ Decision is
filed. In this instance, that was Docket No. CP2008–
4. The contract being suspended was filed in Docket
No. CP2008–5.
3 See Docket No. CP2008–5, Order Concerning
Global Expedited Package Services Contracts, June
27, 2008, at 7 (Order No. 86).
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
instant contract replaces the contract for
the customer in Docket No. CP2008–5
which will end on August 1, 2009. Id.
at 2. It submitted the contract and
supporting material under seal, and
attached a redacted copy of the contract
and certified statement required by 39
CFR 3015.5(c)(2) to the Notice as
Attachments 1 and 2, respectively. Id. at
1–2. The term of the instant contract is
1 year from the date the Postal Service
notifies the customer that all necessary
regulatory approvals have been
received.
The Notice advances reasons why the
instant GEPS 1 contract fits within the
Mail Classification Schedule language
for GEPS 1. The Postal Service contends
that the instant contract is functionally
equivalent to the GEPS 1 contracts filed
previously. It states that in Governors’
Decision No. 08–7, a pricing formula
and classification system were
established to ensure that each contract
meets the statutory and regulatory
requirements of 39 U.S.C. 3633. The
Postal Service contends that the instant
contract demonstrates its functional
equivalence with the previous GEPS 1
contracts because of several factors: The
customers are small or medium-sized
businesses that mail directly to foreign
destinations using EMI and/or PMI, the
contract term of one year applies to all
GEPS 1 contracts, the contracts have
similar cost and market characteristics,
and each requires payment through
permit imprint. Id. at 4. It asserts that
even though prices may be different
E:\FR\FM\23JYN1.SGM
23JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 140 (Thursday, July 23, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36533-36538]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-17568]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446 NRC-2009-0318]
Luminant Generation Company LLC; Notice of Consideration of
Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License, Proposed No
Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a
Hearing and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive
Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI) for Contention
Preparation
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos.
NPF-87 and NPF-89 issued to Luminant Generation Company LLC for
operation of the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES), Units 1
and 2, located in Somervell County, Texas.
The proposed amendment would revise Technical Specification (TS)
5.5.9.2, ``Unit 1 Model D76 and Unit 2 Model D5 Steam Generator (SG)
Program,'' to exclude portions of the CPSES, Unit 2 Model D5 SG below
the top of the SG tubesheet from periodic SG tube inspections. In
addition, the proposed amendment would revise TS 5.6.9, ``Unit 1 Model
D76 and Unit 2 Model D5 Steam Generator Tube Inspection Report,'' to
include reporting requirements specific to the permanent alternate
repair criteria for CPSES, Unit 2. The amendment request is supported
by Westinghouse WCAP-17072-P, ``H*: Alternate Repair Criteria for the
Tube Sheet Expansion Region in Steam Generators with Hydraulically
Expanded Tubes (Model D5),'' May 2009. The amendment application dated
June 8, 2009, contains sensitive unclassified non-safeguards
information (SUNSI).
Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission
will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations.
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under
[[Page 36534]]
the Commission's regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), Sec. 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:
1. Do the proposed changes involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
Of the accidents previously evaluated, the limiting transients
with consideration to the proposed change to the SG tube inspection
and repair criteria are the steam generator tube rupture (SGTR)
event, the steam line break (SLB), and the feed line break (FLB)
postulated accidents.
During the SGTR event, the required structural integrity margins
of the SG tubes and the tube-to-tubesheet joint over the H* [the
structural integrity of the primary-to-secondary pressure boundary
is unaffected by degradation of any magnitude below a specific
depth, designated as H*] distance will be maintained. Tube rupture
in tubes with cracks within the tubesheet is precluded by the
constraint provided by the presence of the tubesheet and the tube-
to-tubesheet joint. Tube burst cannot occur within the thickness of
the tubesheet. The tube-to-tubesheet joint constraint results from
the hydraulic expansion process, thermal expansion mismatch between
the tube and tubesheet, differential pressure between the primary
and secondary side, and tubesheet rotation. Based on this design,
the structural margins against burst, as discussed in Regulatory
Guide (RG) 1.121, ``Bases for Plugging Degraded PWR [Pressurized-
Water Reactor] Steam Generator Tubes,'' and TS 5.5.9.2 are
maintained for both normal and postulated accident conditions.
The proposed change has no impact on the structural or leakage
integrity of the portion of the tube outside of the tubesheet. The
proposed change maintains structural and leakage integrity of the SG
tubes consistent with the performance criteria in TS 5.5.9.2.
Therefore, the proposed change results in no significant increase in
the probability of the occurrence of a SGTR accident.
At normal operating pressures, leakage from tube degradation
below the proposed limited inspection depth is limited by the tube-
to-tubesheet crevice. Consequently, negligible normal operating
leakage is expected from degradation below the inspected depth
within the tubesheet region. The consequences of an SGTR event are
not affected by the primary-to-secondary leakage flow during the
event as primary-to-secondary leakage flow through a postulated tube
that has been pulled out of the tubesheet is essentially equivalent
to a severed tube. Therefore, the proposed change does not result in
a significant increase in the consequences of a SGTR.
The probability of a SLB is unaffected by the potential failure
of a steam generator tube as the failure of tube is not an initiator
for [an] SLB event.
The leakage factor of 1.94 for Comanche Peak Unit 2 [CPSES, Unit
2], for a postulated SLB/FLB, has been calculated as shown in Table
9-7 of Reference 8.1 [Westinghouse WCAP-17072-P]. However, Luminant
Power [Luminant Generation Company LLC] will apply a factor of 2.03
to the normal operating leakage associated with the tubesheet
expansion region in the condition monitoring (CM) and operational
assessment (OA). The leakage factor of 2.03 is a bounding value for
all SGs, both hot and cold legs, in Table 9-7 of Reference 8.1.
Through application of the limited tubesheet inspection scope, the
existing operating leakage limit provides assurance that excessive
leakage (i.e., greater than accident analysis assumptions) will not
occur. The accident-induced leak rate limit for Comanche Peak Unit 2
is 1.0 gpm [gallons per minute]. The TS operational leak rate limit
through any one steam generator is 150 gpd [gallons per day] (0.1
gpm). Consequently, there is significant margin between accident
leakage and allowable operational leakage. The SLB/FLB overall
leakage factor is only 2.03 resulting in significant margin between
the conservatively estimated accident induced leakage and the
allowable accident leakage.
No leakage factor was applied to the locked rotor or control rod
ejection transients due to their short duration.
For the CM assessment, the component of leakage from the prior
cycle from below the H* distance will be multiplied by a factor of
2.03 and added to the total leakage from any other source and
compared to the allowable accident induced leakage limit. For the
OA, the difference in the leakage between the allowable leakage and
the accident induced leakage from sources other than the tubesheet
expansion region will be divided by 2.03 and compared to the
observed operational leakage.
The previously analyzed accidents are initiated by the failure
of plant structures, systems, or components. The proposed change
that alters the steam generator (SG) inspection and reporting
criteria does not have a detrimental impact on the integrity of any
plant structure, system, or component that initiates an analyzed
event. The proposed change will not alter the operation of, or
otherwise increase the failure probability of any plant equipment
that initiates an analyzed accident.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Do the proposed changes create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change that alters the steam generator inspection
and reporting criteria does not introduce any new equipment, create
new failure modes for existing equipment, or create any new limiting
single failures. Plant operation will not be altered, and all safety
functions will continue to perform as previously assumed in accident
analyses. Therefore, the proposed change does not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any
previously evaluated.
3. Do the proposed changes involve a significant reduction in
the margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change defines the safety significant portion of
the tube that must be inspected and repaired. WCAP-17072-P
identifies the specific inspection depth below which any type tube
degradation is shown to have no impact on the performance criteria
in NEI [Nuclear Energy Institute] 97-06 Rev. 2, ``Steam Generator
Program Guidelines.''
The proposed change that alters the steam generator inspection
and reporting criteria maintains the required structural margins of
the SG tubes for both normal and accident conditions. Nuclear Energy
Institute 97-06, ``Steam Generator Program Guidelines,'' and NRC
Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.121, ``Bases for Plugging Degraded PWR Steam
Generator Tubes,'' are used as the bases in the development of the
limited hot leg tubesheet inspection depth methodology for
determining that SG tube integrity considerations are maintained
within acceptable limits. RG 1.121 describes a method acceptable to
the NRC for meeting General Design Criteria (GDC) 14, ``Reactor
Coolant Pressure Boundary,'' GDC 15, ``Reactor Coolant System
Design,'' GDC 31, ``Fracture Prevention of Reactor Coolant Pressure
Boundary,'' and GDC 32, ``Inspection of Reactor Coolant Pressure
Boundary,'' by reducing the probability and consequences of [an]
SGTR. RG 1.121 concludes that by determining the limiting safe
conditions for tube wall degradation, the probability and
consequences of [an] SGTR are reduced. RG 1.121 uses safety factors
on loads for tube burst that are consistent with the requirements of
Section III of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
Code.
For axially oriented cracking located within the tubesheet, tube
burst is precluded due to the presence of the tubesheet. For
circumferentially oriented cracking, Westinghouse WCAP-17072-P
defines a length of degradation-free expanded tubing that provides
the necessary resistance to tube pullout due to the pressure induced
forces, with applicable safety factors applied. Application of the
limited hot and cold leg tubesheet inspection criteria will preclude
unacceptable primary-to-secondary leakage during all plant
conditions. Using the methodology for determining leakage as
described in WCAP-17072-P, it is shown that significant margin
exists between conservatively estimated accident induced leakage and
the allowable accident leakage (1.0 gpm) if all four generators are
assumed to be leaking at the Technical Specification 3.4.13 leakage
limit at the beginning of the design basis accident.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant
reduction in any margin of safety.
[[Page 36535]]
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
and Directives Branch (RDB), 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. Written comments may also
be faxed to the RDB at 301-492-3446. 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 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 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 an exemption 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
should 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
[[Page 36536]]
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 using the agency's adjudicatory e-
filing system 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, excluding government holidays. 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 an exemption request, in
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention:
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth
Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff.
Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for
serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered
complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or
by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing
the document with the provider of the service.
Non-timely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be
entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding
officer, or the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the request and/
or petition 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.
For further details with respect to this license amendment
application, see the application for amendment dated June 8, 2009,
which is available for public inspection at the Commission's PDR,
located at One White Flint North, File Public Area O1 F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available
records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the
Internet at the NRC Web site, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in
accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR
Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-
mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
Attorney for licensee: Timothy P. Matthews, Esq., Morgan, Lewis and
Bockius, 1800 M Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036.
Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information (SUNSI) for Contention Preparation
1. This order contains instructions regarding how potential parties
to this proceeding may request access to documents containing sensitive
unclassified information.
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 is necessary for a response to the notice
may request access to such information. 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 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,
[[Page 36537]]
respectively.\1\ The request must include the following information:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See footnote 4. While a request for hearing or petition to
intervene in this proceeding must comply with the filing
requirements of the NRC's ``E-Filing Rule,'' the initial request to
access SUNSI under these procedures should be submitted as described
in this paragraph.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. A description of the licensing action with a citation to this
Federal Register 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 potential licensing action;
c. 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;
4. Based on an evaluation of the information submitted under items
2 and 3.a through 3.c, 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.
5. A request for access to SUNSI 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;
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
d. The presiding officer has issued a protective order concerning
the information or documents requested.\2\ Any protective order issued
shall provide that the petitioner must file SUNSI 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 contentions by that later deadline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. If the request for access to SUNSI is granted, the terms and
conditions for access to such 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,\3\ 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 five (5) days, describing
the obstacles to the agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. If the request for access to SUNSI is denied by the NRC staff,
the NRC staff shall briefly state the reasons for the denial. The
requester may challenge the NRC staff's adverse determination with
respect to access to SUNSI (including with respect to standing) by
filing a challenge within five (5) days of receipt of that
determination with (a) the presiding officer designated in this
proceeding; (b) if no presiding officer has been appointed, the Chief
Administrative Judge, or if he or she is unavailable, another
administrative judge, or an administrative law judge with jurisdiction
pursuant to 10 CFR 2.318(a); or (c) if another officer has been
designated to rule on information access issues, with that officer.
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 five (5) 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.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ As of October 15, 2007, the NRC's final ``E-Filing Rule''
became effective. See Use of Electronic Submissions in Agency
Hearings (August 28, 2007; 72 FR 49139). 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
requests submitted to the NRC staff under these procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. The Commission expects that the NRC staff and presiding officers
(and any other reviewing officers) will consider and resolve requests
for access to SUNSI, and motions for protective orders, in a timely
fashion in order to minimize any unnecessary delays in identifying
those petitioners who have standing and who have propounded contentions
meeting the specificity and basis requirements in 10 CFR Part 2.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of July 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
Attachment 1--General Target Schedule for Processing and Resolving
Requests for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information (SUNSI) in This Proceeding
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Event
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 with information:
supporting the standing of a potential
party identified by name and address;
and describing the need for the
information in order for the potential
party to participate meaningfully in an
adjudicatory proceeding.
[20,30 or 60]................ Deadline for submitting petition for
intervention containing: (i)
Demonstration of standing; (ii) all
contentions whose formulation does not
require access to SUNSI (+25 Answers to
petition for intervention; +7 petitioner/
requestor reply).
[[Page 36538]]
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 need for SUNSI.
NRC staff also informs any party to the
proceeding whose interest independent of
the proceeding would be harmed by the
release of the information. If NRC staff
makes the finding of need for SUNSI and
likelihood of standing, NRC staff begins
document processing (preparation of
redactions or review of redacted
documents).
25........................... If NRC staff finds no ``need'' for SUNSI
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.
A............................ If access granted: Issuance of presiding
officer or other designated officer
decision on motion for protective order
for access to sensitive information
(including schedule for providing access
and submission of contentions) or
decision reversing a final adverse
determination by the NRC staff.
A+3.......................... Deadline for filing executed Non-
Disclosure Affidavits. Access provided
to SUNSI consistent with decision
issuing the protective order.
A+28......................... Deadline for submission of contentions
whose development depends upon access to
SUNSI. However, if more than 25 days
remain between the petitioner's receipt
of (or access to) the information and
the deadline for filing all other
contentions (as established in the
notice of hearing or opportunity for
hearing), the petitioner may file its
SUNSI contentions by that later
deadline.
A+53 (Contention receipt +25) Answers to contentions whose development
depends upon access to SUNSI.
A+60 (Answer receipt +7)..... Petitioner/Intervenor reply to answers.
B............................ Decision on contention admission.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. E9-17568 Filed 7-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P