Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment on the Proposed Models for Plant-Specific Adoption of Technical Specification Task Force Traveler-508, Revision 1, “Revise Control Room Habitability Actions To Address Lessons Learned From TSTF-448 Implementation”, 52986-52991 [E9-24773]

Download as PDF 52986 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 198 / Thursday, October 15, 2009 / Notices Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Officer, Mr. Sam Duraiswamy, (Telephone: 301–415–7364, E-mail: Sam.Duraiswamy@nrc.gov) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public. Detailed procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings were published in the Federal Register on October 6, 2008, (73 FR 58268– 58269). Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes in the agenda. Dated: October 8, 2009. Antonio F. Dias, Chief, Reactor Safety Branch B, Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards. [FR Doc. E9–24771 Filed 10–14–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P Dated: October 7, 2009. Antonio F. Dias, Chief, Reactor Safety Branch B, Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards. [FR Doc. E9–24782 Filed 10–14–09; 8:45 am] NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) Meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee; Notice of Meeting BILLING CODE 7590–01–P mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES The ACRS Subcommittee on Radiation Protection and Nuclear Materials will hold a meeting on November 4, 2009, Room T2–B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The meeting will be open to public attendance. The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Wednesday, November 4, 2009—1:30 p.m.–5 p.m. The Subcommittee will review proposed changes to NUREG–1520 ‘‘Standard Review Plan for Review of a License Application for a Fuel Cycle Facility.’’ The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with NRC staff and other interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated VerDate Nov<24>2008 19:13 Oct 14, 2009 Jkt 220001 Federal Official, Dr. John H. Flack, (telephone: 301–415–0426, e-mail: John.Flack@nrc.gov) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Thirty-five hard copies of each presentation or handout should be provided to the Designated Federal Official 30 minutes before the meeting. In addition, one electronic copy of each presentation should be e-mailed to the Designated Federal Official 1 day before the meeting. If an electronic copy cannot be provided within this timeframe, presenters should provide the Designated Federal Official with a CD containing each presentation at least 30 minutes before the meeting. Electronic recordings will be permitted. Detailed procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings were published in the Federal Register on October 6, 2008 (73 FR 58268– 58269). Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 7 a.m. and 3:45 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) Meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee; Notice of Meeting The ACRS U.S. Evolutionary Power Reactor (EPR) Subcommittee will hold a meeting on November 3, 2009, 11545 Rockville Pike, T2–B3, Rockville, Maryland. The entire meeting will be open to public attendance. The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Tuesday, November 3, 2009, 8:30 a.m.– 5 p.m. The Subcommittee will review selected chapters of the Safety Evaluation with Open Items concerning the U.S. EPR Design Certification Application. The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with representatives of AREVA, the NRC staff and other PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the full Committee. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official, Mr. Derek Widmayer (Telephone 301–415–7366, E-mail: Derek.Widmayer@nrc.gov) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Thirty-five hard copies of each presentation or handout should be provided to the Designated Federal Official 30 minutes before the meeting. In addition, one electronic copy of each presentation should be e-mailed to the Designated Federal Official 1 day before the meeting. If an electronic copy cannot be provided within this timeframe, presenters should provide the Designated Federal Official with a CD containing each presentation at least 30 minutes before the meeting. Electronic recordings will be permitted. Detailed procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings were published in the Federal Register on October 6, 2008 (73 FR 58268– 58269). Further information regarding this meeting can be obtained by contacting the Designated Federal Official between 8 a.m. and 5:15 p.m. (ET). Persons planning to attend this meeting are urged to contact the above named individual at least two working days prior to the meeting to be advised of any potential changes to the agenda. Dated: October 8, 2009. Antonio Dias, Chief, Reactor Safety Branch B, Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards. [FR Doc. E9–24781 Filed 10–14–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC–2009–0455] Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment on the Proposed Models for Plant-Specific Adoption of Technical Specification Task Force Traveler-508, Revision 1, ‘‘Revise Control Room Habitability Actions To Address Lessons Learned From TSTF–448 Implementation’’ AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Notice of opportunity for public comment. E:\FR\FM\15OCN1.SGM 15OCN1 mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 198 / Thursday, October 15, 2009 / Notices SUMMARY: The NRC is requesting public comment on the enclosed proposed model safety evaluation, model no significant hazards consideration determination, and model application for plant-specific adoption of Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler-508, Revision 1, ‘‘Revise Control Room Habitability Actions to Address Lessons Learned from TSTF– 448 Implementation.’’ The TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, is available in the Agencywide Documents Access Management System (ADAMS) under Accession Number ML091690643. The proposed changes would revise Technical Specification (TS) [3.7.10, ‘‘Control Room Emergency Filtration System]’’ the Bases for TS [3.7.10], and TS [5.5.18], ‘‘Control Room Envelope Habitability Program,’’ to pursue TS improvements consistent with the justification in TSTF–448, Revision 3, ‘‘Control Room Habitability,’’ while addressing inconsistencies with TSTF Traveler-448. This model safety evaluation will facilitate expedited approval of plant-specific adoption of TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1. DATES: Comment period expires November 16, 2009. Comments received after this date will be considered, if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following methods. Please include Docket ID NRC–2009– 0455 in the subject line of your comments. Comments submitted in writing or in electronic form will be posted on the NRC Web site and on the Federal rulemaking Web site Regulations.gov. Because your comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information, the NRC cautions you against including any information in your submission that you do not want to be publicly disclosed. The NRC requests that any party soliciting or aggregating comments received from other persons for submission to the NRC inform those persons that the NRC will not edit their comments to remove any identifying or contact information, and therefore, they should not include any information in their comments that they do not want publicly disclosed. Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for documents filed under Docket ID NRC–2009–0455. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher, 301–492–3668; e-mail Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. VerDate Nov<24>2008 19:13 Oct 14, 2009 Jkt 220001 Mail comments to: Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rulemaking and Directives Branch (RDB), Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWB–05– B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 0001, or by fax to RDB at (301) 492– 3446. You can access publicly available documents related to this notice using the following methods: NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR): The public may examine and have copied for a fee publicly available documents at the NRC’s PDR, Public File Area O1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC are available electronically at the NRC’s Electronic Reading Room at https://www.nrc.gov/ reading-rm/adams.html. From this page, the public can gain entry into ADAMS, which provides text and image files of NRC’s public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC’s PDR reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The Proposed Model Safety Evaluation for PlantSpecific Adoption of TSTF Traveler508, Revision 1, is available electronically under ADAMS Accession Number ML092570577. Federal Rulemaking Web site: Public comments and supporting materials related to this notice can be found at https://www.regulations.gov by searching on Docket ID: NRC–2009–0455. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Michelle C. Honcharik, Senior Project Manager, Special Projects Branch, Mail Stop: O–12D1, Division of Policy and Rulemaking, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 0001; telephone 301–415–1774 or e-mail at michelle.honcharik@nrc.gov. For technical questions please contact Mr. Matthew Hamm, Reactor Systems Engineer, Technical Specifications Branch, Division of Inspection and Regional Support, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone 301–415– 1472 or e-mail at matthew.hamm@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 52987 Background This notice provides an opportunity for the public to comment on proposed changes to the Standard TS (STS) after a preliminary assessment and finding by the NRC staff that the agency will likely offer the changes for adoption by licensees. This notice solicits comment on a proposed change to the STS that modifies the TS. The NRC staff will evaluate any comments received for the proposed change to the STS and reconsider the change or announce the availability of the change for adoption by licensees. Licensees opting to apply for this TS change are responsible for reviewing the NRC staff’s evaluation, referencing the applicable technical justifications, and providing any necessary plant-specific information. The NRC will process and note each amendment application responding to the notice of availability according to applicable NRC rules and procedures. Applicability TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, is applicable to pressurized and boiling water reactors. The Traveler revises the TS and TS Bases for TS [3.7.10] Condition B, TS [3.7.10] Condition [E], and TS [5.5.18], ‘‘Control Room Habitability Program.’’ The proposed change does not prevent licensees from requesting an alternate approach or proposing changes other than those proposed in TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1. However, significant deviations from the approach recommended in this notice or the inclusion of additional changes to the license require additional NRC staff review. This may increase the time and resources needed for the review or result in NRC staff rejection of the LAR. Licensees desiring significant deviations or additional changes should instead submit an LAR that does not claim to adopt TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day of October 2009. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Stacey L. Rosenberg, Chief, Special Projects Branch, Division of Policy and Rulemaking, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. The following example of an application was prepared by the NRC staff to facilitate the adoption of technical specifications task force (TSTF) Traveler-508, Revision 1, ‘‘Revise control room habitability actions to address lessons learned from TSTF–448 implementation.’’ The model provides the expected level of detail and content for an application to adopt Traveler-508, Revision 1. Licensees remain responsible for ensuring that their actual application fulfills their administrative requirements as well as NRC regulations. E:\FR\FM\15OCN1.SGM 15OCN1 52988 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 198 / Thursday, October 15, 2009 / Notices mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555. Subject: PLANT NAME DOCKET NO. 50–[xxx] APPLICATION FOR TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION IMPROVEMENT TO ADOPT TSTF TRAVELER–508, REVISION 1, ‘‘REVISE CONTROL ROOM HABITABILITY ACTIONS TO ADDRESS LESSONS LEARNED FROM TSTF–448 IMPLEMENTATION. 2. Proposed Technical Specification Changes (Mark-Up) 3. Proposed Technical Specification Bases Changes (Mark-Up) 4. Proposed Technical Specification Change (Re-Typed) 5. Proposed Technical Specification Bases Changes (Re-Typed) cc: [NRR Project Manager] [Regional Office] [Resident Inspector] [State Contact] Robert Elliot, NRR/DIRS/ITSB Branch Chief. Dear Sir or Madam: In accordance with the provisions of Section 50.90 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), [LICENSEE] is submitting a request for an amendment to the Technical Specifications (TS) for [PLANT NAME, UNIT NOS.]. The proposed changes would address inconsistencies in [PLANT NAME] TS due to the adoption of TSTF Traveler-448, Revision 3, TS changes. The changes are consistent with NRC-approved Industry Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Standard Technical Specification Change Traveler-508 Revision 1. The availability of this TS improvement was announced in the Federal Register on [DATE] ([ ] FR [ ]) as part of the consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP). Attachment 1 provides a description of the proposed change. Attachment 2 provides the existing TS pages marked to show the proposed change. Attachment 3 provides the existing TS Bases pages marked up to show the proposed change. Attachment 4 provides the proposed TS changes in final typed format. Attachment 5 provides the proposed TS Bases changes in final typed format. [LICENSEE] requests approval of the proposed license amendment by [DATE], with the amendment being implemented [BY DATE OR WITHIN X DAYS]. In accordance with 10 CFR 50.91, ‘‘Notice for Public Comment; State Consultation,’’ a copy of this application, with attachments, is being provided to the designated [STATE] Official. I declare [or certify, verify, state] under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on [Date] [Signature] If you should have any questions about this submittal, please contact [NAME, TELEPHONE NUMBER]. Attachment 1—Evaluation of Proposed Change Sincerely, [Name, Title] Attachments: 1. Evaluation of Proposed Change VerDate Nov<24>2008 19:13 Oct 14, 2009 Jkt 220001 1.0 Description This letter is a request to amend Operating License(s) [LICENSE NUMBER(S)] for [PLANT/UNIT NAME(S)]. The proposed changes would revise Technical Specification (TS) [3.7.10, ‘‘Control Room Emergency Filtration System]’’ the Bases for TS [3.7.10], and TS [5.5.18], ‘‘Control Room Envelope Habitability Program,’’ to pursue TS improvements consistent with the justification in Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) change Traveler-448, Revision 3, ‘‘Control Room Habitability,’’ while addressing inconsistencies with TSTF–448. TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, ‘‘Revise Control Room Habitability Actions to Address Lessons Learned from TSTF–448 Implementation,’’ was announced for availability in the Federal Register on [DATE] as part of the consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP). 2.0 Proposed Changes Consistent with NRC-approved TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, the following changes are proposed for TS [3.7.10] Condition B: • Delete the mode restrictions in the Condition statement. • Add new Required Action B.[2] which requires immediate suspension of movement of [recently] irradiated fuel. • [add new Required Action B.[3], which requires immediate initiation of actions to suspend OPDRVs.] • Renumber Required Actions in Condition B. • Change language in renumbered Required Action B.[4] from, ‘‘verify mitigating actions ensure CRE occupant exposures to radiological, chemical, and smoke hazards will not exceed limits.’’ to ‘‘verify mitigating actions ensure CRE occupant radiological exposures will not exceed limits, and CRE occupants are protected from chemical and smoke hazards.’’ Consistent with NRC-approved TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, the following PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 changes are proposed for TS [3.7.10] Condition [E]: • Add the phrase ‘‘for conditions other than Condition B.’’ to the end of the first Condition statement. • Change the second Condition statement to ‘‘[Required Actions and associated Completion Times of Condition B not met [in MODE 5 or 6, or] during movement of [recently] irradiated fuel assemblies./Required Actions and associated Completion Times of Condition B not met during movement of [recently] irradiated fuel assemblies in the [secondary/primary or secondary] containment or during OPDRVs.]’’ Consistent with NRC-approved TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, the following changes are proposed for TS [5.5.18], ‘‘Control Room Habitability Program’’: • Revise the last sentence of Paragraph [d] of TS [5.5.18], ‘‘Control Room Habitability Program’’ from ‘‘The results shall be trended and used as part of the [18] month assessment of the CRE boundary.’’ to ‘‘The results shall be trended and used as part of the periodic assessment of the CRE boundary.’’ This application is being made in accordance with the CLIIP. [LICENSEE] is [not] proposing variations or deviations from the TS changes described in TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, or the NRC staff’s model safety evaluation published on [DATE] ([ ] FR [ ]) as part of the CLIIP Notice of Availability. [Discuss any differences with TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, and the effect of any changes on the NRC staff’s model safety evaluation.] 3.0 Background The background for this application is as stated in the model safety evaluation in NRC’s Notice of Availability published on [DATE ] ([ ] FR [ ]) and TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1. 4.0 Technical Analysis [LICENSEE] has reviewed TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, and the model safety evaluation published on [DATE] ([ ] FR [ ]) as part of the CLIIP Notice of Availability. [LICENSEE] has concluded that the justifications presented in TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, and the model safety evaluation prepared by the NRC staff are applicable to [PLANT, UNIT NOS.], and justify this amendment for the incorporation of the changes to the [PLANT] TS. [LICENSEE] [will] adopt[ed] and implement[ed] changes to the TS for [PLANT, UNIT NOS.] based on TSTF Traveler-448, Revision 3, [on DATE— or—concurrent with adoption and E:\FR\FM\15OCN1.SGM 15OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 198 / Thursday, October 15, 2009 / Notices implementation of TS changes based on TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1]. [Provide discussion and justification for any plant-specific items not addressed in the NRC staff’s model safety evaluation.] 5.0 Regulatory Analysis 5.1 No Significant Hazards Determination 7.0 [LICENSEE] has reviewed the no significant hazards determination published on [DATE] ([ ] FR [ ]) as part of the CLIIP Notice of Availability. [LICENSEE] and has concluded that the determination presented in the notice is applicable to [PLANT, UNIT NO.]. [LICENSEE] has evaluated the proposed changes to the TS using the criteria in 10 CFR 50.92 and has determined that the proposed changes do not involve a significant hazards consideration. An analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration is presented below: [LICENSEE INSERT ANALYSIS HERE.] 5.2 Applicable Regulatory Requirements/Criteria A description of this proposed change and its relationship to applicable regulatory requirements and guidance was provided in the NRC Notice of Availability published on [DATE] ([ ] FR [ ]), and TSTF–508, Revision 1. [LICENSEE] has reviewed the NRC staff’s model safety evaluation published on [DATE] ([ ] FR[ ]) as part of the CLIIP Notice of Availability and concluded that the regulatory evaluation section is applicable to [PLANT, UNIT NO.] mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 6.0 Environmental Evaluation [LICENSEE] has reviewed the environmental consideration included in the model SE published in the Federal Register on [DATE] ([ ] FR [ ]) as part of the CLIIP. [LICENSEE] has concluded that the staff’s findings presented therein are applicable to [PLANT] and the determination is hereby incorporated by reference for this application. The proposed change would change a requirement with respect to installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area, as defined in 10 CFR part 20, and would change an inspection or surveillance requirement. However, the proposed change does not involve (i) a significant hazards consideration, (ii) a significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluent that may be released offsite, or (iii) a significant increase in individual or cumulative VerDate Nov<24>2008 19:13 Oct 14, 2009 occupational radiation exposure. Accordingly, the proposed change meets the eligibility criterion for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the proposed change. Jkt 220001 References 1. Federal Register Notice, Notice of Availability published on [DATE] ([ ] FR [ ]). 2. TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, ‘‘Revise Control Room Habitability Actions to Address Lessons Learned from TSTF–448 Implementation.’’ [3. Other References] Proposed Model Safety Evaluation for Plant-Specific Adoption of TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, ‘‘Revise Control Room Habitability Actions To Address Lessons Learned From TSTF– 448 Implementation’’ 1.0 Introduction By letter dated [DATE], [LICENSEE] (the licensee) proposed changes to the technical specifications (TS) for [PLANT NAME]. The proposed changes would allow [PLANT NAME] to address inconsistencies in Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Improved Standard Technical Specification (STS) Change Traveler448, Revision 3. The proposed changes would revise TS [3.7.10] Condition B as follows: • Delete the mode restrictions in the Condition statement. • Add new Required Action B.[2] which requires immediate suspension of movement of [recently] irradiated fuel. • [add new Required Action B.[3], which requires immediate initiation of actions to suspend OPDRVs.] • Renumber Required Actions in Condition B. • Change language in renumbered Required Action B.[4] from, ‘‘verify mitigating actions ensure CRE occupant exposures to radiological, chemical, and smoke hazards will not exceed limits.’’ to ‘‘verify mitigating actions ensure CRE occupant radiological exposures will not exceed limits, and CRE occupants are protected from chemical and smoke hazards.’’ The proposed changes would revise TS [3.7.10] Condition [E] as follows: • Add the phrase ‘‘for conditions other than Condition B.’’ to the end of the first Condition statement. • Change the second Condition statement to ‘‘[Required Actions and associated Completion Times of Condition B not met [in MODE 5 or 6, PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 52989 or] during movement of [recently] irradiated fuel assemblies./Required Actions and associated Completion Times of Condition B not met during movement of [recently] irradiated fuel assemblies in the [secondary/primary or secondary] containment or during OPDRVs.]’’ The proposed changes would revise TS [5.5.18], ‘‘Control Room Habitability Program’’ as follows: • Revise the last sentence of paragraph [d] of TS [5.5.18], ‘‘Control Room Habitability Program’’ from ‘‘The results shall be trended and used as part of the [18] month assessment of the CRE boundary.’’ to ‘‘The results shall be trended and used as part of the periodic assessment of the CRE boundary.’’ The licensee stated that the application is consistent with NRCapproved Revision 1 to TSTF Traveler508, Revise Control Room Habitability Actions to Address Lessons Learned from TSTF–448 Implementation.’’ [Discuss any differences with TSTF– 508, Revision 1.] The availability of this TS improvement was announced in the Federal Register on [Date] ([ ] FR [ ]) as part of the consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP). 2.0 Regulatory Evaluation Section 182a of the Atomic Energy Act (the ‘‘Act’’) requires applicants for nuclear power plant operating licenses to include TS as part of the license. The TS ensure the operational capability of structures, systems and components that are required to protect the health and safety of the public. The Commission’s regulatory requirements related to the content of the TS are contained in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.36. This regulation requires that the TS include items in the following specific categories: (1) Safety limits, limiting safety systems settings, and limiting control settings (10 CFR 50.36(c).(1)); (2) limiting conditions for operation (10 CFR 50.36(c).(2)); (3) surveillance requirements (10 CFR 50.36(c)(3)); (4) design features (10 CFR 50.36(c)(4)); and (5) administrative controls (10 CFR 50.36(c).(5)). In general, there are two classes of changes to TS: (1) Changes needed to reflect modifications to the design basis (TS are derived from the design basis), and (2) voluntary changes to take advantage of the evolution in policy and guidance as to the required content and preferred format of TS over time. This amendment deals with the second class of changes. Licensees may revise the TS to adopt current improved STS format and content provided that plant-specific review supports a finding of continued E:\FR\FM\15OCN1.SGM 15OCN1 52990 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 198 / Thursday, October 15, 2009 / Notices adequate safety because: (1) The change is editorial, administrative or provides clarification (i.e., no requirements are materially altered); (2) the change is more restrictive than the licensee’s current requirement; or (3) the change is less restrictive than the licensee’s current requirement, but nonetheless still affords adequate assurance of safety when judged against current regulatory standards. The detailed application of this general framework, and additional specialized guidance, are discussed in Section 3.0 in the context of specific proposed changes. 3.0 Technical Evaluation The NRC staff has found changes made by TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, to the STS, as amended by TSTF Traveler-448, Revision 3, to satisfy applicable regulatory requirements, as described above in Section 2.0. The NRC staff reviewed the licensee’s proposed TS changes against the corresponding changes made by TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1. mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 3.1 Proposed Changes The NRC staff compared the proposed TS changes to the STS and the STS markups and evaluations in TSTF Traveler-508. [The NRC staff verified that differences from the STS as amended by TSTF Traveler-448 were adequately justified on the basis of plant-specific design or retention of current licensing basis.] The NRC staff also reviewed the proposed changes to the TS Bases for consistency with the STS Bases and the plant-specific design and licensing bases, although approval of the TS Bases is not a condition for accepting the proposed amendment. 3.2 TS [3.7.10, ‘‘Control Room Emergency Ventilation System (CREVS)] Condition B As stated in Section 1.0, the licensee proposed several changes to Condition B. The first proposed change would delete the phrase ‘‘in MODE 1, 2, 3, or 4’’ from the Condition B statement. This change would mean the licensee would have to complete the Required Actions of Condition B within the associated Completion Times while in all MODES and situations listed in the APPLICABILITY statement. The licensee also proposed adding new Required Action B.2 and a Note as well as renumbering Required Actions B.2 and B.3. New Required Action B.2 requires the licensee to immediately suspend movement of [recently] irradiated fuel assemblies when one or more [CREVS] is inoperable due to an inoperable Control Room Envelope (CRE) boundary. The Note above new VerDate Nov<24>2008 19:13 Oct 14, 2009 Jkt 220001 Required Action B.[2] states ‘‘Not required following completion of Required Action B.[3].’’ [The licensee also proposed adding new Required Action B.3 and a Note. New Required Action B.3 requires the licensee to immediately initiate action to suspend Operations with the Potential to Drain the Reactor Vessel (OPDRVs) when one or more [CREVS] is inoperable due to an inoperable Control Room Envelope (CRE) boundary. The Note above new Required Action B.3 states ‘‘Not required following completion of Required Action B.[4].] Finally, the licensee proposed rewording the renumbered Required Action [3] from ‘‘Verify mitigating actions ensure CRE occupant exposures to radiological, chemical, and smoke hazards will not exceed limits’’ to ‘‘Verify mitigating actions ensure CRE occupant radiological exposures will not exceed limits, and CRE occupants are protected from chemical and smoke hazards.’’ The NRC staff reviewed the licensee’s proposed TS changes. The NRC staff determined that the removal of MODE restrictions and the addition of the [two] new Required Action[s] constituted a relaxation compared to the STS as amended by TSTF Traveler-448. The NRC staff also determined that the STS as amended by TSTF Traveler-448 were overly restrictive in that movement of [irradiated] fuel [and OPDRVs] is [are] not allowed when a CRE is inoperable, even if compensatory measures are taken to confirm CRE occupants will be protected in the event of a Design Basis Accident (DBA). The NRC staff determined that the relaxation is justified and acceptable because the addition of the new Required Action[s] ensure that CRE occupants would continue to be protected from radiological, chemical, and smoke hazards during the time a CRE may be inoperable. The NRC staff also determined that changing the language of Required Action B.[3] was acceptable since quantifiable limits on smoke and chemicals hazards do not exist in the safety evaluation for TSTF Traveler-448, and the proposed change addresses the inconsistency between the STS as amended by TSTF Traveler-448 and the model safety evaluation for TSTF Traveler-448. 3.3 TS [3.7.10, ‘‘Control Room Emergency Ventilation System (CREVS)’’] Condition [E] The licensee proposed rewording the two condition statements separated by the OR operator that make up Condition [E] of TS [3.7.10]. The proposed changes are necessary to make the conditions consistent with the removal of the PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 MODE restrictions of Condition B. Condition [E] is currently worded as such: ‘‘[Two CREVS trains inoperable [in MODE 5 or 6, or] during movement of [recently] irradiated fuel assemblies [in the secondary containment or during OPDRVs] OR One or more CREVS trains inoperable due to an inoperable CRE boundary [in MODE 5 or 6, or] during movement of [recently] irradiated fuel assemblies [in the secondary containment or during OPDRVs].’’ The proposed rewording is: ‘‘[Two CREVS trains inoperable [in MODE 5 or 6, or] during movement of [recently] irradiated fuel assemblies [in the secondary containment or during OPDRVs] for reasons other than Condition B OR Required Actions and associated Completion Times of Condition B not met [in MODE 5 or 6, or] during movement of [recently ] irradiated fuel assemblies [in the secondary containment or during OPDRVs].’’ The NRC staff reviewed the proposed rewording of Condition [E] and determined that the rewording was editorial because it was necessary to maintain consistency with the changes made to Condition B and no requirements or restrictions on operations were altered. Therefore the proposed changes are acceptable. 3.4 S [5.5.18], ‘‘Control Room Habitability Program’’ The licensee proposed replacing the term ‘‘18 month’’ with the term ‘‘periodic’’ in the last sentence of TS [5.5.18] Paragraph d. The NRC staff determined that the term ‘‘18 month’’ in the last sentence of Paragraph d of TS [5.518] was inconsistent with the licensee’s Control Room Habitability Program. The NRC staff determined that the STS, as amended by TSTF Traveler448 incorrectly used the term ‘‘18 month’’ to describe the assessment referred to in the last sentence of Paragraph d of the Control Room Habitability Program. The NRC staff determined that the proposed change is editorial since no requirements are materially altered and the change will address an inconsistency in TSTF Traveler-448. Therefore the change is acceptable. 4.0 State Consultation In accordance with the Commission’s regulations, the [STATE NAME] State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. The State official had [(1) no comments or (2) the following comments—with subsequent disposition by the NRC staff]. E:\FR\FM\15OCN1.SGM 15OCN1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 198 / Thursday, October 15, 2009 / Notices 5.0 Environmental Consideration The amendment[s] change[s] a requirement with respect to the installation or use of a facility component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR part 20 or surveillance requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding published [DATE] ([ ] FR [ ]). Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of the amendment. 6.0 Conclusion The NRC staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) There is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner; (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission’s regulations; and (3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public. mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES 7.0 References 1. License Amendment Request dated [DATE], [Title of Amendment Request], ADAMS Accession No. [MLXXXXXXXXX]. 2. Federal Register Notice of Availability for TSTF Traveler-448 Revision 3, ‘‘Control Room Habitability,’’ dated January 17, 2007 (72 FR 2022). 3. Federal Register Notice of Availability for TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, ‘‘Revise Control Room Habitability Actions to Address Lessons Learned from TSTF–448 Implementation,’’ dated [DATE] ([ ] FR [ ]).]. VerDate Nov<24>2008 19:13 Oct 14, 2009 Jkt 220001 Proposed Model No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination for PlantSpecific Adoption of TSTF Traveler508, Revision 1, ‘‘Revise Control Room Habitability Actions To Address Lessons Learned From TSTF–448 Implementation’’ Description of Amendment Request: [Plant name] requests adoption of an approved change to the standard technical specifications (STS), as amended by Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Standard Technical Specification Change Traveler-448, Revision 3, ‘‘Control Room Habitability’’ and TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, ‘‘Revise Control Room Habitability Actions to Address Lessons Learned from TSTF–448 Implementation.’’ TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, revised the STS, as previously amended by TSTF Traveler-448, Revision 3, to address inconsistencies with TSTF Traveler-448, Revision 3. The licensee’s proposed changes are consistent with NRCapproved TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1. Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by Title10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.91(a), the [LICENSEE] analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration is presented below: Criterion 1: Does the Proposed Change Involve a Significant Increase in the Probability or Consequences of an Accident Previously Evaluated? Response: No. The proposed changes do not adversely affect accident initiators or precursors nor alter the design assumptions, conditions, or configuration of the facility. The proposed changes do not alter or prevent the ability of structures, systems, and components (SSCs) to perform their intended function to mitigate the consequences of an initiating event within the assumed acceptance limits. This is a revision to the TSs for the control room ventilation system, which is a mitigation system designed to minimize unfiltered air inleakage into the control room envelope (CRE) and to filter the CRE atmosphere to protect the CRE occupants following accidents previously analyzed. An important part of the system is the CRE boundary. Under the proposed change, the movement of irradiated fuel and operations with the potential to drain the reactor vessel may be resumed following confirmation that the CRE occupants will be protected in the event of a DBA. This ensures that the consequences of an accident previously evaluation are not significantly increased. The CRE ventilation system is not an initiator or precursor to any accident previously evaluated. Therefore, the probability of any accident previously evaluated is not increased. The consequences of an accident during the proposed Actions are not significantly increased as the Actions require verification that the CRE occupants PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 52991 are protected by the required mitigating actions. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. Criterion 2: Does the Proposed Change Create the Possibility of a New or Different Kind of Accident from any Previously Evaluated? Response: No. This revision will not impact the accident analysis. The changes will not alter the requirements of the CRE ventilation system or its function during accident conditions. No new or different accidents result from performing the new surveillance or following the new program. The changes do not involve a physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no new or different type of equipment will be installed) or a significant change in the methods governing normal plant operation. The changes do not alter assumptions made in the safety analysis. The proposed changes are consistent with the safety analysis assumptions and current plant operating practice. Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. Criterion 3: Does the Proposed Change Involve a Significant Reduction in the Margin of Safety? Response: No. The proposed changes do not alter the manner in which safety limits, limiting safety system settings or limiting conditions for operation are determined. The safety analysis acceptance criteria are not affected by these changes. The proposed changes will not result in plant operation in a configuration outside the design basis. Compensatory measures are required to be established in order to maintain plant operation in a configuration that is within the design basis. The proposed changes do not adversely affect systems that respond to safely shutdown the plant and to maintain the plant in a safe shutdown condition. Therefore, the proposed amendment would not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. Based on the NRC staff’s review of the licensee’s analysis, the NRC staff concludes that the proposed amendment presents no significant hazards consideration under the standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c) and, accordingly, a finding of ‘‘no significant hazards consideration’’ is justified. [FR Doc. E9–24773 Filed 10–14–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT [(OMB Control No. 3206–0138; Form RI 30– 9)] Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request for Review of a Revised Information Collection AGENCY: Office of Personnel Management. E:\FR\FM\15OCN1.SGM 15OCN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 198 (Thursday, October 15, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52986-52991]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-24773]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2009-0455]


Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment on the Proposed Models 
for Plant-Specific Adoption of Technical Specification Task Force 
Traveler-508, Revision 1, ``Revise Control Room Habitability Actions To 
Address Lessons Learned From TSTF-448 Implementation''

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of opportunity for public comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 52987]]

SUMMARY: The NRC is requesting public comment on the enclosed proposed 
model safety evaluation, model no significant hazards consideration 
determination, and model application for plant-specific adoption of 
Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler-508, Revision 1, 
``Revise Control Room Habitability Actions to Address Lessons Learned 
from TSTF-448 Implementation.'' The TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, is 
available in the Agencywide Documents Access Management System (ADAMS) 
under Accession Number ML091690643. The proposed changes would revise 
Technical Specification (TS) [3.7.10, ``Control Room Emergency 
Filtration System]'' the Bases for TS [3.7.10], and TS [5.5.18], 
``Control Room Envelope Habitability Program,'' to pursue TS 
improvements consistent with the justification in TSTF-448, Revision 3, 
``Control Room Habitability,'' while addressing inconsistencies with 
TSTF Traveler-448. This model safety evaluation will facilitate 
expedited approval of plant-specific adoption of TSTF Traveler-508, 
Revision 1.

DATES: Comment period expires November 16, 2009. Comments received 
after this date will be considered, if it is practical to do so, but 
the Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments 
received on or before this date.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following methods. 
Please include Docket ID NRC-2009-0455 in the subject line of your 
comments. Comments submitted in writing or in electronic form will be 
posted on the NRC Web site and on the Federal rulemaking Web site 
Regulations.gov. Because your comments will not be edited to remove any 
identifying or contact information, the NRC cautions you against 
including any information in your submission that you do not want to be 
publicly disclosed.
    The NRC requests that any party soliciting or aggregating comments 
received from other persons for submission to the NRC inform those 
persons that the NRC will not edit their comments to remove any 
identifying or contact information, and therefore, they should not 
include any information in their comments that they do not want 
publicly disclosed.
    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and 
search for documents filed under Docket ID NRC-2009-0455. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher, 301-492-3668; e-mail 
Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
    Mail comments to: Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rulemaking and 
Directives Branch (RDB), Division of Administrative Services, Office of 
Administration, Mail Stop: TWB-05-B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, or by fax to RDB at (301) 492-
3446.
    You can access publicly available documents related to this notice 
using the following methods:
    NRC's Public Document Room (PDR): The public may examine and have 
copied for a fee publicly available documents at the NRC's PDR, Public 
File Area O1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, 
Rockville, Maryland.
    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): 
Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC are 
available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this page, the public can gain 
entry into ADAMS, which provides text and image files of NRC's public 
documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems 
in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC's PDR 
reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to 
pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The Proposed Model Safety Evaluation for Plant-
Specific Adoption of TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, is available 
electronically under ADAMS Accession Number ML092570577.
    Federal Rulemaking Web site: Public comments and supporting 
materials related to this notice can be found at https://www.regulations.gov by searching on Docket ID: NRC-2009-0455.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Michelle C. Honcharik, Senior 
Project Manager, Special Projects Branch, Mail Stop: O-12D1, Division 
of Policy and Rulemaking, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone 
301-415-1774 or e-mail at michelle.honcharik@nrc.gov. For technical 
questions please contact Mr. Matthew Hamm, Reactor Systems Engineer, 
Technical Specifications Branch, Division of Inspection and Regional 
Support, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone 301-415-1472 or e-mail 
at matthew.hamm@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    This notice provides an opportunity for the public to comment on 
proposed changes to the Standard TS (STS) after a preliminary 
assessment and finding by the NRC staff that the agency will likely 
offer the changes for adoption by licensees. This notice solicits 
comment on a proposed change to the STS that modifies the TS. The NRC 
staff will evaluate any comments received for the proposed change to 
the STS and reconsider the change or announce the availability of the 
change for adoption by licensees. Licensees opting to apply for this TS 
change are responsible for reviewing the NRC staff's evaluation, 
referencing the applicable technical justifications, and providing any 
necessary plant-specific information. The NRC will process and note 
each amendment application responding to the notice of availability 
according to applicable NRC rules and procedures.

Applicability

    TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, is applicable to pressurized and 
boiling water reactors. The Traveler revises the TS and TS Bases for TS 
[3.7.10] Condition B, TS [3.7.10] Condition [E], and TS [5.5.18], 
``Control Room Habitability Program.''
    The proposed change does not prevent licensees from requesting an 
alternate approach or proposing changes other than those proposed in 
TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1. However, significant deviations from the 
approach recommended in this notice or the inclusion of additional 
changes to the license require additional NRC staff review. This may 
increase the time and resources needed for the review or result in NRC 
staff rejection of the LAR. Licensees desiring significant deviations 
or additional changes should instead submit an LAR that does not claim 
to adopt TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day of October 2009.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Stacey L. Rosenberg,
Chief, Special Projects Branch, Division of Policy and Rulemaking, 
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

    The following example of an application was prepared by the NRC 
staff to facilitate the adoption of technical specifications task 
force (TSTF) Traveler-508, Revision 1, ``Revise control room 
habitability actions to address lessons learned from TSTF-448 
implementation.'' The model provides the expected level of detail 
and content for an application to adopt Traveler-508, Revision 1. 
Licensees remain responsible for ensuring that their actual 
application fulfills their administrative requirements as well as 
NRC regulations.


[[Page 52988]]


U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Document Control Desk, Washington, 
DC 20555.

Subject: PLANT NAME
    DOCKET NO. 50-[xxx]
    APPLICATION FOR TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION IMPROVEMENT TO ADOPT TSTF 
TRAVELER-508, REVISION 1, ``REVISE CONTROL ROOM HABITABILITY ACTIONS TO 
ADDRESS LESSONS LEARNED FROM TSTF-448 IMPLEMENTATION.

    Dear Sir or Madam:
    In accordance with the provisions of Section 50.90 of Title 10 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), [LICENSEE] is submitting a 
request for an amendment to the Technical Specifications (TS) for 
[PLANT NAME, UNIT NOS.]. The proposed changes would address 
inconsistencies in [PLANT NAME] TS due to the adoption of TSTF 
Traveler-448, Revision 3, TS changes. The changes are consistent with 
NRC-approved Industry Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) 
Standard Technical Specification Change Traveler-508 Revision 1. The 
availability of this TS improvement was announced in the Federal 
Register on [DATE] ([ ] FR [ ]) as part of the consolidated line item 
improvement process (CLIIP).
    Attachment 1 provides a description of the proposed change. 
Attachment 2 provides the existing TS pages marked to show the proposed 
change. Attachment 3 provides the existing TS Bases pages marked up to 
show the proposed change. Attachment 4 provides the proposed TS changes 
in final typed format. Attachment 5 provides the proposed TS Bases 
changes in final typed format.
    [LICENSEE] requests approval of the proposed license amendment by 
[DATE], with the amendment being implemented [BY DATE OR WITHIN X 
DAYS].
    In accordance with 10 CFR 50.91, ``Notice for Public Comment; State 
Consultation,'' a copy of this application, with attachments, is being 
provided to the designated [STATE] Official.
    I declare [or certify, verify, state] under penalty of perjury that 
the foregoing is true and correct.
    Executed on [Date] [Signature]
    If you should have any questions about this submittal, please 
contact [NAME, TELEPHONE NUMBER].

 Sincerely,

 [Name, Title]

Attachments: 1. Evaluation of Proposed Change
    2. Proposed Technical Specification Changes (Mark-Up)
    3. Proposed Technical Specification Bases Changes (Mark-Up)
    4. Proposed Technical Specification Change (Re-Typed)
    5. Proposed Technical Specification Bases Changes (Re-Typed)
cc: [NRR Project Manager]
    [Regional Office]
    [Resident Inspector]
    [State Contact]
    Robert Elliot, NRR/DIRS/ITSB Branch Chief.

Attachment 1--Evaluation of Proposed Change

1.0 Description

    This letter is a request to amend Operating License(s) [LICENSE 
NUMBER(S)] for [PLANT/UNIT NAME(S)]. The proposed changes would revise 
Technical Specification (TS) [3.7.10, ``Control Room Emergency 
Filtration System]'' the Bases for TS [3.7.10], and TS [5.5.18], 
``Control Room Envelope Habitability Program,'' to pursue TS 
improvements consistent with the justification in Technical 
Specification Task Force (TSTF) change Traveler-448, Revision 3, 
``Control Room Habitability,'' while addressing inconsistencies with 
TSTF-448.
    TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, ``Revise Control Room Habitability 
Actions to Address Lessons Learned from TSTF-448 Implementation,'' was 
announced for availability in the Federal Register on [DATE] as part of 
the consolidated line item improvement process (CLIIP).

2.0 Proposed Changes

    Consistent with NRC-approved TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, the 
following changes are proposed for TS [3.7.10] Condition B:
     Delete the mode restrictions in the Condition statement.
     Add new Required Action B.[2] which requires immediate 
suspension of movement of [recently] irradiated fuel.
     [add new Required Action B.[3], which requires immediate 
initiation of actions to suspend OPDRVs.]
     Renumber Required Actions in Condition B.
     Change language in renumbered Required Action B.[4] from, 
``verify mitigating actions ensure CRE occupant exposures to 
radiological, chemical, and smoke hazards will not exceed limits.'' to 
``verify mitigating actions ensure CRE occupant radiological exposures 
will not exceed limits, and CRE occupants are protected from chemical 
and smoke hazards.''
    Consistent with NRC-approved TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, the 
following changes are proposed for TS [3.7.10] Condition [E]:
     Add the phrase ``for conditions other than Condition B.'' 
to the end of the first Condition statement.
     Change the second Condition statement to ``[Required 
Actions and associated Completion Times of Condition B not met [in MODE 
5 or 6, or] during movement of [recently] irradiated fuel assemblies./
Required Actions and associated Completion Times of Condition B not met 
during movement of [recently] irradiated fuel assemblies in the 
[secondary/primary or secondary] containment or during OPDRVs.]''
    Consistent with NRC-approved TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, the 
following changes are proposed for TS [5.5.18], ``Control Room 
Habitability Program'':
     Revise the last sentence of Paragraph [d] of TS [5.5.18], 
``Control Room Habitability Program'' from ``The results shall be 
trended and used as part of the [18] month assessment of the CRE 
boundary.'' to ``The results shall be trended and used as part of the 
periodic assessment of the CRE boundary.''
    This application is being made in accordance with the CLIIP. 
[LICENSEE] is [not] proposing variations or deviations from the TS 
changes described in TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, or the NRC staff's 
model safety evaluation published on [DATE] ([ ] FR [ ]) as part of the 
CLIIP Notice of Availability. [Discuss any differences with TSTF 
Traveler-508, Revision 1, and the effect of any changes on the NRC 
staff's model safety evaluation.]

3.0 Background

    The background for this application is as stated in the model 
safety evaluation in NRC's Notice of Availability published on [DATE ] 
([ ] FR [ ]) and TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1.

4.0 Technical Analysis

    [LICENSEE] has reviewed TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, and the 
model safety evaluation published on [DATE] ([ ] FR [ ]) as part of the 
CLIIP Notice of Availability. [LICENSEE] has concluded that the 
justifications presented in TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, and the 
model safety evaluation prepared by the NRC staff are applicable to 
[PLANT, UNIT NOS.], and justify this amendment for the incorporation of 
the changes to the [PLANT] TS.
    [LICENSEE] [will] adopt[ed] and implement[ed] changes to the TS for 
[PLANT, UNIT NOS.] based on TSTF Traveler-448, Revision 3, [on DATE--
or--concurrent with adoption and

[[Page 52989]]

implementation of TS changes based on TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1].
    [Provide discussion and justification for any plant-specific items 
not addressed in the NRC staff's model safety evaluation.]

5.0 Regulatory Analysis

5.1 No Significant Hazards Determination
    [LICENSEE] has reviewed the no significant hazards determination 
published on [DATE] ([ ] FR [ ]) as part of the CLIIP Notice of 
Availability. [LICENSEE] and has concluded that the determination 
presented in the notice is applicable to [PLANT, UNIT NO.]. [LICENSEE] 
has evaluated the proposed changes to the TS using the criteria in 10 
CFR 50.92 and has determined that the proposed changes do not involve a 
significant hazards consideration. An analysis of the issue of no 
significant hazards consideration is presented below:
    [LICENSEE INSERT ANALYSIS HERE.]
5.2 Applicable Regulatory Requirements/Criteria
    A description of this proposed change and its relationship to 
applicable regulatory requirements and guidance was provided in the NRC 
Notice of Availability published on [DATE] ([ ] FR [ ]), and TSTF-508, 
Revision 1. [LICENSEE] has reviewed the NRC staff's model safety 
evaluation published on [DATE] ([ ] FR[ ]) as part of the CLIIP Notice 
of Availability and concluded that the regulatory evaluation section is 
applicable to [PLANT, UNIT NO.]

6.0 Environmental Evaluation

    [LICENSEE] has reviewed the environmental consideration included in 
the model SE published in the Federal Register on [DATE] ([ ] FR [ ]) 
as part of the CLIIP. [LICENSEE] has concluded that the staff's 
findings presented therein are applicable to [PLANT] and the 
determination is hereby incorporated by reference for this application.
    The proposed change would change a requirement with respect to 
installation or use of a facility component located within the 
restricted area, as defined in 10 CFR part 20, and would change an 
inspection or surveillance requirement. However, the proposed change 
does not involve (i) a significant hazards consideration, (ii) a 
significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts 
of any effluent that may be released offsite, or (iii) a significant 
increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. 
Accordingly, the proposed change meets the eligibility criterion for 
categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Therefore, 
pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or 
environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the 
proposed change.

7.0 References

1. Federal Register Notice, Notice of Availability published on [DATE] 
([ ] FR [ ]).
2. TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, ``Revise Control Room Habitability 
Actions to Address Lessons Learned from TSTF-448 Implementation.''
[3. Other References]

Proposed Model Safety Evaluation for Plant-Specific Adoption of TSTF 
Traveler-508, Revision 1, ``Revise Control Room Habitability Actions To 
Address Lessons Learned From TSTF-448 Implementation''

1.0 Introduction

    By letter dated [DATE], [LICENSEE] (the licensee) proposed changes 
to the technical specifications (TS) for [PLANT NAME]. The proposed 
changes would allow [PLANT NAME] to address inconsistencies in 
Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Improved Standard Technical 
Specification (STS) Change Traveler-448, Revision 3.
    The proposed changes would revise TS [3.7.10] Condition B as 
follows:
     Delete the mode restrictions in the Condition statement.
     Add new Required Action B.[2] which requires immediate 
suspension of movement of [recently] irradiated fuel.
     [add new Required Action B.[3], which requires immediate 
initiation of actions to suspend OPDRVs.]
     Renumber Required Actions in Condition B.
     Change language in renumbered Required Action B.[4] from, 
``verify mitigating actions ensure CRE occupant exposures to 
radiological, chemical, and smoke hazards will not exceed limits.'' to 
``verify mitigating actions ensure CRE occupant radiological exposures 
will not exceed limits, and CRE occupants are protected from chemical 
and smoke hazards.''
    The proposed changes would revise TS [3.7.10] Condition [E] as 
follows:
     Add the phrase ``for conditions other than Condition B.'' 
to the end of the first Condition statement.
     Change the second Condition statement to ``[Required 
Actions and associated Completion Times of Condition B not met [in MODE 
5 or 6, or] during movement of [recently] irradiated fuel assemblies./
Required Actions and associated Completion Times of Condition B not met 
during movement of [recently] irradiated fuel assemblies in the 
[secondary/primary or secondary] containment or during OPDRVs.]''
    The proposed changes would revise TS [5.5.18], ``Control Room 
Habitability Program'' as follows:
     Revise the last sentence of paragraph [d] of TS [5.5.18], 
``Control Room Habitability Program'' from ``The results shall be 
trended and used as part of the [18] month assessment of the CRE 
boundary.'' to ``The results shall be trended and used as part of the 
periodic assessment of the CRE boundary.''
    The licensee stated that the application is consistent with NRC-
approved Revision 1 to TSTF Traveler-508, Revise Control Room 
Habitability Actions to Address Lessons Learned from TSTF-448 
Implementation.'' [Discuss any differences with TSTF-508, Revision 1.] 
The availability of this TS improvement was announced in the Federal 
Register on [Date] ([ ] FR [ ]) as part of the consolidated line item 
improvement process (CLIIP).

2.0 Regulatory Evaluation

    Section 182a of the Atomic Energy Act (the ``Act'') requires 
applicants for nuclear power plant operating licenses to include TS as 
part of the license. The TS ensure the operational capability of 
structures, systems and components that are required to protect the 
health and safety of the public. The Commission's regulatory 
requirements related to the content of the TS are contained in Title 10 
of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.36. This 
regulation requires that the TS include items in the following specific 
categories: (1) Safety limits, limiting safety systems settings, and 
limiting control settings (10 CFR 50.36(c).(1)); (2) limiting 
conditions for operation (10 CFR 50.36(c).(2)); (3) surveillance 
requirements (10 CFR 50.36(c)(3)); (4) design features (10 CFR 
50.36(c)(4)); and (5) administrative controls (10 CFR 50.36(c).(5)).
    In general, there are two classes of changes to TS: (1) Changes 
needed to reflect modifications to the design basis (TS are derived 
from the design basis), and (2) voluntary changes to take advantage of 
the evolution in policy and guidance as to the required content and 
preferred format of TS over time. This amendment deals with the second 
class of changes.
    Licensees may revise the TS to adopt current improved STS format 
and content provided that plant-specific review supports a finding of 
continued

[[Page 52990]]

adequate safety because: (1) The change is editorial, administrative or 
provides clarification (i.e., no requirements are materially altered); 
(2) the change is more restrictive than the licensee's current 
requirement; or (3) the change is less restrictive than the licensee's 
current requirement, but nonetheless still affords adequate assurance 
of safety when judged against current regulatory standards. The 
detailed application of this general framework, and additional 
specialized guidance, are discussed in Section 3.0 in the context of 
specific proposed changes.

3.0 Technical Evaluation

    The NRC staff has found changes made by TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 
1, to the STS, as amended by TSTF Traveler-448, Revision 3, to satisfy 
applicable regulatory requirements, as described above in Section 2.0. 
The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's proposed TS changes against the 
corresponding changes made by TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1.
3.1 Proposed Changes
    The NRC staff compared the proposed TS changes to the STS and the 
STS markups and evaluations in TSTF Traveler-508. [The NRC staff 
verified that differences from the STS as amended by TSTF Traveler-448 
were adequately justified on the basis of plant-specific design or 
retention of current licensing basis.] The NRC staff also reviewed the 
proposed changes to the TS Bases for consistency with the STS Bases and 
the plant-specific design and licensing bases, although approval of the 
TS Bases is not a condition for accepting the proposed amendment.
3.2 TS [3.7.10, ``Control Room Emergency Ventilation System (CREVS)] 
Condition B
    As stated in Section 1.0, the licensee proposed several changes to 
Condition B. The first proposed change would delete the phrase ``in 
MODE 1, 2, 3, or 4'' from the Condition B statement. This change would 
mean the licensee would have to complete the Required Actions of 
Condition B within the associated Completion Times while in all MODES 
and situations listed in the APPLICABILITY statement. The licensee also 
proposed adding new Required Action B.2 and a Note as well as 
renumbering Required Actions B.2 and B.3. New Required Action B.2 
requires the licensee to immediately suspend movement of [recently] 
irradiated fuel assemblies when one or more [CREVS] is inoperable due 
to an inoperable Control Room Envelope (CRE) boundary. The Note above 
new Required Action B.[2] states ``Not required following completion of 
Required Action B.[3].'' [The licensee also proposed adding new 
Required Action B.3 and a Note. New Required Action B.3 requires the 
licensee to immediately initiate action to suspend Operations with the 
Potential to Drain the Reactor Vessel (OPDRVs) when one or more [CREVS] 
is inoperable due to an inoperable Control Room Envelope (CRE) 
boundary. The Note above new Required Action B.3 states ``Not required 
following completion of Required Action B.[4].] Finally, the licensee 
proposed rewording the renumbered Required Action [3] from ``Verify 
mitigating actions ensure CRE occupant exposures to radiological, 
chemical, and smoke hazards will not exceed limits'' to ``Verify 
mitigating actions ensure CRE occupant radiological exposures will not 
exceed limits, and CRE occupants are protected from chemical and smoke 
hazards.''
    The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's proposed TS changes. The NRC 
staff determined that the removal of MODE restrictions and the addition 
of the [two] new Required Action[s] constituted a relaxation compared 
to the STS as amended by TSTF Traveler-448. The NRC staff also 
determined that the STS as amended by TSTF Traveler-448 were overly 
restrictive in that movement of [irradiated] fuel [and OPDRVs] is [are] 
not allowed when a CRE is inoperable, even if compensatory measures are 
taken to confirm CRE occupants will be protected in the event of a 
Design Basis Accident (DBA). The NRC staff determined that the 
relaxation is justified and acceptable because the addition of the new 
Required Action[s] ensure that CRE occupants would continue to be 
protected from radiological, chemical, and smoke hazards during the 
time a CRE may be inoperable. The NRC staff also determined that 
changing the language of Required Action B.[3] was acceptable since 
quantifiable limits on smoke and chemicals hazards do not exist in the 
safety evaluation for TSTF Traveler-448, and the proposed change 
addresses the inconsistency between the STS as amended by TSTF 
Traveler-448 and the model safety evaluation for TSTF Traveler-448.
3.3 TS [3.7.10, ``Control Room Emergency Ventilation System (CREVS)''] 
Condition [E]
    The licensee proposed rewording the two condition statements 
separated by the OR operator that make up Condition [E] of TS [3.7.10]. 
The proposed changes are necessary to make the conditions consistent 
with the removal of the MODE restrictions of Condition B. Condition [E] 
is currently worded as such: ``[Two CREVS trains inoperable [in MODE 5 
or 6, or] during movement of [recently] irradiated fuel assemblies [in 
the secondary containment or during OPDRVs] OR One or more CREVS trains 
inoperable due to an inoperable CRE boundary [in MODE 5 or 6, or] 
during movement of [recently] irradiated fuel assemblies [in the 
secondary containment or during OPDRVs].'' The proposed rewording is: 
``[Two CREVS trains inoperable [in MODE 5 or 6, or] during movement of 
[recently] irradiated fuel assemblies [in the secondary containment or 
during OPDRVs] for reasons other than Condition B OR Required Actions 
and associated Completion Times of Condition B not met [in MODE 5 or 6, 
or] during movement of [recently ] irradiated fuel assemblies [in the 
secondary containment or during OPDRVs].''
    The NRC staff reviewed the proposed rewording of Condition [E] and 
determined that the rewording was editorial because it was necessary to 
maintain consistency with the changes made to Condition B and no 
requirements or restrictions on operations were altered. Therefore the 
proposed changes are acceptable.
3.4 S [5.5.18], ``Control Room Habitability Program''
    The licensee proposed replacing the term ``18 month'' with the term 
``periodic'' in the last sentence of TS [5.5.18] Paragraph d. The NRC 
staff determined that the term ``18 month'' in the last sentence of 
Paragraph d of TS [5.518] was inconsistent with the licensee's Control 
Room Habitability Program. The NRC staff determined that the STS, as 
amended by TSTF Traveler-448 incorrectly used the term ``18 month'' to 
describe the assessment referred to in the last sentence of Paragraph d 
of the Control Room Habitability Program. The NRC staff determined that 
the proposed change is editorial since no requirements are materially 
altered and the change will address an inconsistency in TSTF Traveler-
448. Therefore the change is acceptable.

4.0 State Consultation

    In accordance with the Commission's regulations, the [STATE NAME] 
State official was notified of the proposed issuance of the amendment. 
The State official had [(1) no comments or (2) the following comments--
with subsequent disposition by the NRC staff].

[[Page 52991]]

5.0 Environmental Consideration

    The amendment[s] change[s] a requirement with respect to the 
installation or use of a facility component located within the 
restricted area as defined in 10 CFR part 20 or surveillance 
requirements. The NRC staff has determined that the amendment involves 
no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in 
the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and that 
there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative 
occupational radiation exposure. The Commission has previously issued a 
proposed finding that the amendment involves no significant hazards 
consideration and there has been no public comment on such finding 
published [DATE] ([ ] FR [ ]). Accordingly, the amendment meets the 
eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 
51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact 
statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection 
with the issuance of the amendment.

6.0 Conclusion

    The NRC staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed 
above, that: (1) There is reasonable assurance that the health and 
safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the 
proposed manner; (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance 
with the Commission's regulations; and (3) the issuance of the 
amendments will not be inimical to the common defense and security or 
to the health and safety of the public.

7.0 References

1. License Amendment Request dated [DATE], [Title of Amendment 
Request], ADAMS Accession No. [MLXXXXXXXXX].
2. Federal Register Notice of Availability for TSTF Traveler-448 
Revision 3, ``Control Room Habitability,'' dated January 17, 2007 (72 
FR 2022).
3. Federal Register Notice of Availability for TSTF Traveler-508, 
Revision 1, ``Revise Control Room Habitability Actions to Address 
Lessons Learned from TSTF-448 Implementation,'' dated [DATE] ([ ] FR [ 
]).].

Proposed Model No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination for 
Plant-Specific Adoption of TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, ``Revise 
Control Room Habitability Actions To Address Lessons Learned From TSTF-
448 Implementation''

    Description of Amendment Request: [Plant name] requests adoption of 
an approved change to the standard technical specifications (STS), as 
amended by Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Standard Technical 
Specification Change Traveler-448, Revision 3, ``Control Room 
Habitability'' and TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, ``Revise Control Room 
Habitability Actions to Address Lessons Learned from TSTF-448 
Implementation.'' TSTF Traveler-508, Revision 1, revised the STS, as 
previously amended by TSTF Traveler-448, Revision 3, to address 
inconsistencies with TSTF Traveler-448, Revision 3. The licensee's 
proposed changes are consistent with NRC-approved TSTF Traveler-508, 
Revision 1.
    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration 
determination: As required by Title10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.91(a), the [LICENSEE] analysis of the 
issue of no significant hazards consideration is presented below:

    Criterion 1: Does the Proposed Change Involve a Significant 
Increase in the Probability or Consequences of an Accident 
Previously Evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed changes do not adversely affect accident initiators 
or precursors nor alter the design assumptions, conditions, or 
configuration of the facility. The proposed changes do not alter or 
prevent the ability of structures, systems, and components (SSCs) to 
perform their intended function to mitigate the consequences of an 
initiating event within the assumed acceptance limits. This is a 
revision to the TSs for the control room ventilation system, which 
is a mitigation system designed to minimize unfiltered air inleakage 
into the control room envelope (CRE) and to filter the CRE 
atmosphere to protect the CRE occupants following accidents 
previously analyzed. An important part of the system is the CRE 
boundary. Under the proposed change, the movement of irradiated fuel 
and operations with the potential to drain the reactor vessel may be 
resumed following confirmation that the CRE occupants will be 
protected in the event of a DBA. This ensures that the consequences 
of an accident previously evaluation are not significantly 
increased. The CRE ventilation system is not an initiator or 
precursor to any accident previously evaluated. Therefore, the 
probability of any accident previously evaluated is not increased. 
The consequences of an accident during the proposed Actions are not 
significantly increased as the Actions require verification that the 
CRE occupants are protected by the required mitigating actions.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    Criterion 2: Does the Proposed Change Create the Possibility of 
a New or Different Kind of Accident from any Previously Evaluated?
    Response: No.
    This revision will not impact the accident analysis. The changes 
will not alter the requirements of the CRE ventilation system or its 
function during accident conditions. No new or different accidents 
result from performing the new surveillance or following the new 
program. The changes do not involve a physical alteration of the 
plant (i.e., no new or different type of equipment will be 
installed) or a significant change in the methods governing normal 
plant operation. The changes do not alter assumptions made in the 
safety analysis. The proposed changes are consistent with the safety 
analysis assumptions and current plant operating practice.
    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the 
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident 
previously evaluated.
    Criterion 3: Does the Proposed Change Involve a Significant 
Reduction in the Margin of Safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed changes do not alter the manner in which safety 
limits, limiting safety system settings or limiting conditions for 
operation are determined. The safety analysis acceptance criteria 
are not affected by these changes. The proposed changes will not 
result in plant operation in a configuration outside the design 
basis. Compensatory measures are required to be established in order 
to maintain plant operation in a configuration that is within the 
design basis. The proposed changes do not adversely affect systems 
that respond to safely shutdown the plant and to maintain the plant 
in a safe shutdown condition.
    Therefore, the proposed amendment would not involve a 
significant reduction in a margin of safety.
    Based on the NRC staff's review of the licensee's analysis, the 
NRC staff concludes that the proposed amendment presents no 
significant hazards consideration under the standards set forth in 
10 CFR 50.92(c) and, accordingly, a finding of ``no significant 
hazards consideration'' is justified.

[FR Doc. E9-24773 Filed 10-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.