Exelon 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, 38234-38238 [E9-18367]

Download as PDF 38234 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2009 / Notices hazards consideration, which is presented below: NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50–454, 50–455, 50–456, and 50–457; NRC–2009–0331] PWALKER on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES Exelon 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– 37 and NPF–66 issued to Exelon Generation Company, LLC (the licensee) for operation of the Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, located in Ogle County, Illinois and to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF–72 and NPF–77 issued to the licensee for operation of the Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2, located in Will County, Illinois. The proposed amendment would permanently revise Technical Specification (TS) 5.5.9, ‘‘Steam Generator (SG) Program,’’ to exclude portions of the tube below the top of the SG tubesheet from periodic SG tube inspections and plugging or repair. In addition, this amendment proposes to revise the wording of reporting requirements in TS 5.6.9, ‘‘Steam Generator (SG) Tube Inspection Report.’’ The amendment application dated June 24, 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 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 VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:38 Jul 30, 2009 Jkt 217001 1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? Response: No. 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. Of the various accidents previously evaluated, the proposed changes only affect the steam generator tube rupture (SGTR), postulated steam line break (SLB), feedwater line break (FLB), locked rotor and control rod ejection accident evaluations. Loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) conditions cause a compressive axial load to act on the tube. Therefore, since the LOCA tends to force the tube into the tubesheet rather than pull it out, it is not a factor in this amendment request. Another faulted load consideration is a safe shutdown earthquake (SSE); however, the seismic analysis of Model D5 SGs has shown that axial loading of the tubes is negligible during an SSE. During the SGTR event, the required structural integrity margins of the SG tubes and the tube-to-tubesheet joint over the 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-totubesheet 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, and from the differential pressure between the primary and secondary side, and tubesheet rotation. Based on this design, the structural margins against burst, as discussed in draft Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.121, ‘‘Bases for Plugging Degraded PWR Steam Generator Tubes,’’ and TS 5.5.9, 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 of TS 5.5.9. 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 tube that has been pulled out of the tubesheet PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 is essentially equivalent to a severed tube. Therefore, the proposed change does not result in a significant increase in the consequences of a SGTR. Primary-to-secondary leakage from tube degradation in the tubesheet area during operating and accident conditions is restricted due to contact of the tube with the tubesheet. The leakage is modeled as flow through a porous medium through the use of the Darcy equation. The leakage model is used to develop a relationship between operational leakage and leakage at accident conditions that is based on differential pressure across the tubesheet and the viscosity of the fluid. A leak rate ratio was developed to relate the leakage at operating conditions to leakage at accident conditions. Since the fluid viscosity is based on fluid temperature and it is shown that for the most limiting accident, the fluid temperature does not exceed the normal operating temperature and therefore the viscosity ratio is assumed to be 1.0. Therefore, the leak rate ratio is a function of the ratio of the accident differential pressure and the normal operating differential pressure. The leakage factor of 1.93 for Braidwood Station Unit 2 and Byron Station Unit 2, for a postulated SLB/FLB, has been calculated as shown in Table 9–7 of WCAP–17072–P. However, EGC Braidwood Station Unit 2 and Byron Station Unit 2 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 SG model designs, both hot and cold legs, in Table 9–7 of WCAP–17072–P. 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 assumed accident induced leak rate limit is 0.5 gallons per minute at room temperature (gpmRT) for the faulted SG and 0.218 gpmRT for the unfaulted SGs for accidents that assume a faulted SG. These accidents are the SLB and the locked rotor with a stuck open PORV. The assumed accident induced leak rate limit for accidents that do not assume a faulted SG is 1.0 gpmRT for all SGs. These accidents are the locked rotor and control rod ejection. No leakage factor will be applied to the locked rotor or control rod ejection transients due to their short duration, since the calculated leak rate ratio is less than 1.0. The TS 3.4.13 operational leak rate limit is 150 gallons per day (gpd) (0.104 gpmRT) through any one SG. Consequently, there is sufficient margin between accident leakage and allowable operational leakage. The maximum accident leak rate ratio for the Model D5 design SGs is 1.93 as indicated in WCAP–17072–P Table 9–7. However, EGC will use the more conservative value of 2.03 accident leak rate ratio for the most limiting SG model design identified in WCAP–17072– P Table 9–7. This results in significant margin between the conservatively estimated accident leakage and the allowable accident leakage (0.5 gpmRT). For the CM assessment, the component of leakage from the prior cycle from below the E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1 PWALKER on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2009 / Notices 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. Based on the above, the performance criteria of NEI–97–06, Revision 2, and draft RG 1.121 continue to be met and the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of the applicable accidents previously evaluated. 2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The proposed change does not introduce any changes or mechanisms that create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident. Tube bundle integrity is expected to be maintained for all plant conditions upon implementation of the permanent alternate repair criteria. The proposed change does not introduce any new equipment or any change to existing equipment. No new effects on existing equipment are created nor are any new malfunctions introduced. Therefore, based on the above evaluation, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. 3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response: No. The proposed change defines the safety significant portion of the SG tube that must be inspected and repaired. WCAP–17072–P identifies the specific inspection depth below which any type tube degradation has no impact on the performance criteria in NEI 97–06, Revision 2, ‘‘Steam Generator Program Guidelines.’’ The proposed change that alters the SG inspection and reporting criteria maintains the required structural margins of the SG tubes for both normal and accident conditions. NEI 97–06, and draft RG 1.121 are used as the bases in the development of the limited tubesheet inspection depth methodology for determining that SG tube integrity considerations are maintained within acceptable limits. Draft 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 a SGTR. Draft RG 1.121 concludes that by determining the limiting safe conditions for tube wall degradation, the probability and consequences of a SGTR are reduced. This draft RG 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. VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:38 Jul 30, 2009 Jkt 217001 For axially oriented cracking located within the tubesheet, tube burst is precluded due to the presence of the tubesheet. For circumferentially oriented cracking, 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. The methodology for determining leakage as described in WCAP–17072–P shows that significant margin exists between an acceptable level of leakage during normal operating conditions that ensures meeting the SLB accident-induced leakage assumption and the TS leakage limit of 150 gpd. Based on the above, it is concluded that the proposed changes do not result in any 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 and Directives Branch, TWB–05–B01M, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 38235 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 Chief, Rulemaking and Directives Branch 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, http://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 E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1 PWALKER on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES 38236 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2009 / Notices 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 VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:38 Jul 30, 2009 Jkt 217001 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-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 http://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 http://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 http://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 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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 http://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– 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 http:// 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. E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2009 / Notices PWALKER on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES 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 24, 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 ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http:// 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: Mr. Bradley J. Fewell, Associate General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555. 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: VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:38 Jul 30, 2009 Jkt 217001 Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, and provide a copy to the Associate General Counsel for Hearings, Enforcement and Administration, Office of the General Counsel, Washington, DC 20555–0001. The expedited delivery or courier mail address for both offices is U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The e-mail address for the Office of the Secretary and the Office of the General Counsel are Hearing.Docket@nrc.gov and OGCMailCenter.Resource@nrc.gov, respectively.1 The request must include the following information: 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 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 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. PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 38237 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 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. 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. 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). E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1 38238 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 146 / Friday, July 31, 2009 / Notices 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 27th 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 ........................................... 10 ......................................... Publication of Federal Register notice, 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. 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. 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). 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. 20 ......................................... 25 ......................................... 30 ......................................... 40 ......................................... 60 ......................................... 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. Draft Regulatory Guide: Issuance, Availability SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of Issuance and Availability of Draft Regulatory Guide, DG–4015, Preparation of Environmental The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing for public comment a draft guide in the agency’s ‘‘Regulatory Guide’’ series. This series was developed to describe and make available to the public such information as methods that are acceptable to the NRC staff for implementing specific parts of the NRC’s regulations, techniques that the staff uses in evaluating specific problems or postulated accidents, and data that the staff needs in its review of applications for permits and licenses. The draft regulatory guide (DG), entitled, ‘‘Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal Applications,’’ is temporarily identified by its task number, DG–4015, which should be mentioned in all related correspondence. DG–4015 is 4 As of October 15, 2007, the NRC’s final ‘‘EFiling 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. [FR Doc. E9–18367 Filed 7–30–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Davis, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 0001, telephone: (301) 415–3835 or email to Jennifer.Davis@nrc.gov. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PWALKER on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with NOTICES [NRC–2008–0608] VerDate Nov<24>2008 16:38 Jul 30, 2009 Reports for Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal Applications. Jkt 217001 I. Introduction PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM 31JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 146 (Friday, July 31, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38234-38238]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-18367]



[[Page 38234]]

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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-454, 50-455, 50-456, and 50-457; NRC-2009-0331]


Exelon 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-37 and NPF-66 issued to Exelon Generation Company, LLC (the 
licensee) for operation of the Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, 
located in Ogle County, Illinois and to Facility Operating License Nos. 
NPF-72 and NPF-77 issued to the licensee for operation of the Braidwood 
Station, Units 1 and 2, located in Will County, Illinois.
    The proposed amendment would permanently revise Technical 
Specification (TS) 5.5.9, ``Steam Generator (SG) Program,'' to exclude 
portions of the tube below the top of the SG tubesheet from periodic SG 
tube inspections and plugging or repair. In addition, this amendment 
proposes to revise the wording of reporting requirements in TS 5.6.9, 
``Steam Generator (SG) Tube Inspection Report.'' The amendment 
application dated June 24, 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 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:

    1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    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.
    Of the various accidents previously evaluated, the proposed 
changes only affect the steam generator tube rupture (SGTR), 
postulated steam line break (SLB), feedwater line break (FLB), 
locked rotor and control rod ejection accident evaluations. Loss-of-
coolant accident (LOCA) conditions cause a compressive axial load to 
act on the tube. Therefore, since the LOCA tends to force the tube 
into the tubesheet rather than pull it out, it is not a factor in 
this amendment request. Another faulted load consideration is a safe 
shutdown earthquake (SSE); however, the seismic analysis of Model D5 
SGs has shown that axial loading of the tubes is negligible during 
an SSE.
    During the SGTR event, the required structural integrity margins 
of the SG tubes and the tube-to-tubesheet joint over the 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, and from 
the differential pressure between the primary and secondary side, 
and tubesheet rotation. Based on this design, the structural margins 
against burst, as discussed in draft Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.121, 
``Bases for Plugging Degraded PWR Steam Generator Tubes,'' and TS 
5.5.9, 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 of TS 5.5.9. 
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.
    Primary-to-secondary leakage from tube degradation in the 
tubesheet area during operating and accident conditions is 
restricted due to contact of the tube with the tubesheet. The 
leakage is modeled as flow through a porous medium through the use 
of the Darcy equation. The leakage model is used to develop a 
relationship between operational leakage and leakage at accident 
conditions that is based on differential pressure across the 
tubesheet and the viscosity of the fluid. A leak rate ratio was 
developed to relate the leakage at operating conditions to leakage 
at accident conditions. Since the fluid viscosity is based on fluid 
temperature and it is shown that for the most limiting accident, the 
fluid temperature does not exceed the normal operating temperature 
and therefore the viscosity ratio is assumed to be 1.0. Therefore, 
the leak rate ratio is a function of the ratio of the accident 
differential pressure and the normal operating differential 
pressure.
    The leakage factor of 1.93 for Braidwood Station Unit 2 and 
Byron Station Unit 2, for a postulated SLB/FLB, has been calculated 
as shown in Table 9-7 of WCAP-17072-P. However, EGC Braidwood 
Station Unit 2 and Byron Station Unit 2 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 SG model designs, both hot and cold legs, in Table 9-7 of WCAP-
17072-P. 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 assumed accident induced leak rate limit is 0.5 
gallons per minute at room temperature (gpmRT) for the faulted SG 
and 0.218 gpmRT for the unfaulted SGs for accidents that assume a 
faulted SG. These accidents are the SLB and the locked rotor with a 
stuck open PORV. The assumed accident induced leak rate limit for 
accidents that do not assume a faulted SG is 1.0 gpmRT for all SGs. 
These accidents are the locked rotor and control rod ejection.
    No leakage factor will be applied to the locked rotor or control 
rod ejection transients due to their short duration, since the 
calculated leak rate ratio is less than 1.0.
    The TS 3.4.13 operational leak rate limit is 150 gallons per day 
(gpd) (0.104 gpmRT) through any one SG. Consequently, there is 
sufficient margin between accident leakage and allowable operational 
leakage. The maximum accident leak rate ratio for the Model D5 
design SGs is 1.93 as indicated in WCAP-17072-P Table 9-7. However, 
EGC will use the more conservative value of 2.03 accident leak rate 
ratio for the most limiting SG model design identified in WCAP-
17072-P Table 9-7. This results in significant margin between the 
conservatively estimated accident leakage and the allowable accident 
leakage (0.5 gpmRT).
    For the CM assessment, the component of leakage from the prior 
cycle from below the

[[Page 38235]]

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.
    Based on the above, the performance criteria of NEI-97-06, 
Revision 2, and draft RG 1.121 continue to be met and the proposed 
change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or 
consequences of the applicable accidents previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change does not introduce any changes or mechanisms 
that create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident. 
Tube bundle integrity is expected to be maintained for all plant 
conditions upon implementation of the permanent alternate repair 
criteria. The proposed change does not introduce any new equipment 
or any change to existing equipment. No new effects on existing 
equipment are created nor are any new malfunctions introduced.
    Therefore, based on the above evaluation, the proposed changes 
do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident 
from any accident previously evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change defines the safety significant portion of 
the SG tube that must be inspected and repaired. WCAP-17072-P 
identifies the specific inspection depth below which any type tube 
degradation has no impact on the performance criteria in NEI 97-06, 
Revision 2, ``Steam Generator Program Guidelines.''
    The proposed change that alters the SG inspection and reporting 
criteria maintains the required structural margins of the SG tubes 
for both normal and accident conditions. NEI 97-06, and draft RG 
1.121 are used as the bases in the development of the limited 
tubesheet inspection depth methodology for determining that SG tube 
integrity considerations are maintained within acceptable limits. 
Draft 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 a SGTR. Draft RG 1.121 
concludes that by determining the limiting safe conditions for tube 
wall degradation, the probability and consequences of a SGTR are 
reduced. This draft RG 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, 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. The methodology for determining leakage as described in 
WCAP-17072-P shows that significant margin exists between an 
acceptable level of leakage during normal operating conditions that 
ensures meeting the SLB accident-induced leakage assumption and the 
TS leakage limit of 150 gpd.
    Based on the above, it is concluded that the proposed changes do 
not result in any 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 
and Directives 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. Written comments may also 
be faxed to the Chief, Rulemaking and Directives Branch 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, http://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

[[Page 38236]]

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 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 http://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 http://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 http://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 http://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 
http://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.

[[Page 38237]]

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 24, 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 ADAMS Public Electronic Reading 
Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://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: Mr. Bradley J. Fewell, Associate General 
Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, 
Warrenville, IL 60555.

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, 
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 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.

[[Page 38238]]

    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 27th 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,
                                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...........................  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.
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).
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. E9-18367 Filed 7-30-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P