Duke Energy Florida, Inc.; Crystal River Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit 3, 27939-27940 [2014-11231]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 94 / Thursday, May 15, 2014 / Notices strongly encourages comments and other submissions on its Web site (www.mcrmc.gov). Christopher Nuneviller, Associate Director, Administration and Operations. [FR Doc. 2014–11207 Filed 5–14–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE;P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC–2014–0114] In the Matter of All Operating Reactor Licensees Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Director’s decision under 10 CFR 2.206; issuance. AGENCY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has issued a director’s decision with regard to a petition dated July 27, 2011, filed by Mr. Geoff Fettus, Senior Project Attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council (the petitioner), requesting that the NRC take action with regard to all operating reactor licensees. The petitioner’s requests, the director’s decision, the letter to the petitioner, and the letter to the licensees (which includes a listing of all operating reactor licensees affected by this proposed director’s decision) are discussed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2014–0114 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may access publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for NRC–2014–0114. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. • NRC’s Agency wide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may access publicly available documents online in the NRC Library at http://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The Proposed Director’s Decision and the Letter to the Petitioner are available in ADAMS under Accession Nos. TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:18 May 14, 2014 Jkt 232001 ML13282A373 and ML13282A358. The Letter to the Licensees, which includes a listing of all operating reactor licensees affected by this proposed director’s decision, is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML13282A372. • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the Deputy Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, has issued a director’s decision (ADAMS Accession No. ML14098A166) on a petition filed by the petitioner on July 27, 2011, (ADAMS Accession No. ML11216A085). A listing of all operating reactor licensees affected by this proposed director’s decision is available in the Letter to Licensees, available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML13282A372. The petitioner requested that the NRC order licensees to comply with 12 specific recommendations in the NRC Near-Term Task Force (NTTF) Report, ‘‘Recommendations for Enhancing Reactor Safety in the 21st Century,’’ issued July 12, 2011, (ADAMS Accession No. ML111861807). As the basis of the request, the petitioner cited the NTTF Report as the rationale for and basis of the petition. The NRC sent a copy of the proposed director’s decision to the petitioner and the licensees for comment on March 11, 2014. The petitioner and the licensees were asked to provide comments within 15 days on any part of the proposed director’s decision that was considered to be erroneous or any issues in the petition that were not addressed. The staff did not receive any comments on the proposed director’s decision. The Deputy Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation has determined that the request, to order licensees to comply with 12 specific recommendations in the NRC NTTF Report, ‘‘Recommendations for Enhancing Reactor Safety in the 21st Century,’’ issued July 12, 2011, was resolved through the issuance of orders, written statements in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), rulemaking, and the Emergency Response Data System initiative. The reasons for this decision are explained in the director’s decision (DD–14–02) pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission’s regulations. The NRC will file a copy of the director’s decision with the Secretary of the Commission for the Commission’s review in accordance with 10 CFR PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 27939 2.206. As provided by this regulation, the director’s decision will constitute the final action of the Commission 25 days after the date of the decision unless the Commission, on its own motion, institutes a review of the director’s decision in that time. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of May 2014. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Jennifer L. Uhle, Deputy Director for Reactor Safety Programs, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 2014–11232 Filed 5–14–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50–302; License No. DPR–72; NRC–2010–0096] Duke Energy Florida, Inc.; Crystal River Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit 3 Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Director’s decision; issuance. AGENCY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is giving notice that the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) has issued a director’s decision with regard to a petition dated December 9, 2009, as supplemented on January 7 and August 6, 2010, filed by Thomas Saporitio (the petitioner). ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2010–0096 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may access publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2010–0096. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. • NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ adams.html. To begin the search, select ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\15MYN1.SGM 15MYN1 TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 27940 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 94 / Thursday, May 15, 2014 / Notices email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced in this document (if that document is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that a document is referenced. • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Gratton, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415–1055; email: Christopher.Gratton@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the Director, of NRR, has issued a director’s decision with regard to a petition dated December 5, 2009, filed by Thomas Saporito (ADAMS Accession No. ML093430702). The petition was supplemented on January 7, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML100200966) and consolidated with an additional August 6, 2010, petition (ADAMS Accession No. ML102220032). The petition concerns the operation of the Crystal River Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit 3 (CR–3). In the December 5, 2009, petition, the petitioner raised concerns about the delamination (i.e., the separation of the different layers) of the CR–3 containment that occurred during the fall 2009 refueling outage. The petitioner considers this condition to be potentially unsafe and to be in violation of Federal regulations. In the petition, a number of references to the condition of the CR–3 containment were cited that the petitioner believes prohibit operation of the facility. The petition requested that CR–3 perform the following actions, as summarized below: 1. Physically remove the outer 25 centimeters (10 inches) of concrete surrounding the CR–3 containment building. 2. Test samples of the concrete removed from the CR–3 containment building for composition and compare the test results to a sample of concrete from a similarly designed facility. 3. Keep the CR–3 in cold shutdown mode until such time as the licensee can demonstrate full compliance with its NRC operating license for CR–3 within the safety margins delineated in the licensee’s final safety analysis report (FSAR) and within the CR–3 sitespecific technical specifications. 4. Provide the public with an opportunity to intervene at a public hearing before the NRC’s Atomic Safety and Licensing Board to challenge any VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:18 May 14, 2014 Jkt 232001 certification made by the licensee to the NRC that it has reestablished full regulatory compliance. The petition of December 5, 2009, provided the following basis for CR–3 remaining in cold shutdown, as summarized below: 1. The licensee has not determined the root cause of the separation. 2. No method of non-destructive or destructive testing is sufficient to satisfy the FSAR requirements. 3. The removal of the top 10 inches of concrete of the entire containment outer wall would allow for proper visual inspection. 4. The removal of the top 10 inches of concrete of the entire containment outer wall would ensure the best adhesion of the new concrete pour to the existing inner wall. 5. The licensee’s FSAR requires that the CR–3 containment building be comprised of a monolithic concrete perimeter wall. The only way the licensee can fully achieve compliance with its FSAR is to remove 10 inches of concrete from the entire outer wall for proper visual inspect and repair activities. On January 7, 2010, the petitioner participated in a teleconference with the staff’s petition review board. The meeting gave the petitioner an opportunity to provide additional information and to clarify issues raised in the petition. The information provided during this teleconference was considered a supplement to the December 9, 2009, petition. On August 6, 2010, the petitioner sent in an additional petition related to the original December 5, 2009, petition; however, it was not accepted for review under Section 2.206 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) process. By letter dated September 3, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML102290577), the NRC informed the petitioner that the August 6, 2010, petition would be considered a supplement to the December 5, 2009, petition. The NRC sent a copy of the proposed director’s decision to the petitioner and to Duke Energy Florida, Inc., for comment on January 24, 2014. The staff did not receive any comments on the proposed director’s decision. The Director of NRR has determined that the request, to require CR–3 to remain in cold shutdown mode, is moot and no action will be taken. The reasons for this decision are explained in the director’s decision 14–03, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206, the complete text of which is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML14097A185. PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 The NRC will take no action on the request to require CR–3 to remain in cold shutdown because on February 20, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No. ML13056A005), the licensee provided the certification required by 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1)(i) and (ii) to the NRC staff that CR–3 had permanently ceased power operations and that all fuel had been permanently removed from the reactor vessel. Upon docketing of these two certifications, the licensee’s 10 CFR Part 50 license no longer authorized operation of the CR–3 reactor or emplacement or retention of fuel into the reactor vessel. Accordingly, the licensee is prohibited by regulation from restarting CR–3 or loading fuel into the reactor vessel. Because the licensee is no longer authorized to operate the reactor, CR–3 may not enter a mode of operation that requires the containment to be in an operable condition. A copy of the director’s decision will be filed with the Secretary of the Commission for the Commission’s review in accordance with 10 CFR 2.206 of the Commission’s regulations. As provided for by this regulation, the director’s decision will constitute the final action of the Commission 25 days after the date of the decision, unless the Commission, on its own motion, institutes a review of the director’s decision in that time. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of May 2014. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Jennifer L. Uhle, Deputy Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 2014–11231 Filed 5–14–14; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD Proposed Collection; Comment Request Summary: In accordance with the requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 which provides opportunity for public comment on new or revised data collections, the Railroad Retirement Board (RRB) will publish periodic summaries of proposed data collections. Comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed information collection is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information has practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the RRB’s estimate of the burden of the collection of the information; (c) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (d) E:\FR\FM\15MYN1.SGM 15MYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 94 (Thursday, May 15, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27939-27940]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11231]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-302; License No. DPR-72; NRC-2010-0096]


Duke Energy Florida, Inc.; Crystal River Nuclear Generating 
Plant, Unit 3

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Director's decision; issuance.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is giving notice 
that the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) has 
issued a director's decision with regard to a petition dated December 
9, 2009, as supplemented on January 7 and August 6, 2010, filed by 
Thomas Saporitio (the petitioner).

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2010-0096 when contacting the 
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You 
may access publicly-available information related to this document 
using any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2010-0096. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-
3422; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact 
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 
this document.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly available documents online in the 
ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and 
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, 
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by

[[Page 27940]]

email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number for each 
document referenced in this document (if that document is available in 
ADAMS) is provided the first time that a document is referenced.
     NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public 
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Gratton, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1055; email: 
Christopher.Gratton@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that the Director, of 
NRR, has issued a director's decision with regard to a petition dated 
December 5, 2009, filed by Thomas Saporito (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML093430702). The petition was supplemented on January 7, 2010 (ADAMS 
Accession No. ML100200966) and consolidated with an additional August 
6, 2010, petition (ADAMS Accession No. ML102220032). The petition 
concerns the operation of the Crystal River Nuclear Generating Plant, 
Unit 3 (CR-3).
    In the December 5, 2009, petition, the petitioner raised concerns 
about the delamination (i.e., the separation of the different layers) 
of the CR-3 containment that occurred during the fall 2009 refueling 
outage. The petitioner considers this condition to be potentially 
unsafe and to be in violation of Federal regulations. In the petition, 
a number of references to the condition of the CR-3 containment were 
cited that the petitioner believes prohibit operation of the facility.
    The petition requested that CR-3 perform the following actions, as 
summarized below:
    1. Physically remove the outer 25 centimeters (10 inches) of 
concrete surrounding the CR-3 containment building.
    2. Test samples of the concrete removed from the CR-3 containment 
building for composition and compare the test results to a sample of 
concrete from a similarly designed facility.
    3. Keep the CR-3 in cold shutdown mode until such time as the 
licensee can demonstrate full compliance with its NRC operating license 
for CR-3 within the safety margins delineated in the licensee's final 
safety analysis report (FSAR) and within the CR-3 site-specific 
technical specifications.
    4. Provide the public with an opportunity to intervene at a public 
hearing before the NRC's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board to challenge 
any certification made by the licensee to the NRC that it has 
reestablished full regulatory compliance.
    The petition of December 5, 2009, provided the following basis for 
CR-3 remaining in cold shutdown, as summarized below:
    1. The licensee has not determined the root cause of the 
separation.
    2. No method of non-destructive or destructive testing is 
sufficient to satisfy the FSAR requirements.
    3. The removal of the top 10 inches of concrete of the entire 
containment outer wall would allow for proper visual inspection.
    4. The removal of the top 10 inches of concrete of the entire 
containment outer wall would ensure the best adhesion of the new 
concrete pour to the existing inner wall.
    5. The licensee's FSAR requires that the CR-3 containment building 
be comprised of a monolithic concrete perimeter wall. The only way the 
licensee can fully achieve compliance with its FSAR is to remove 10 
inches of concrete from the entire outer wall for proper visual inspect 
and repair activities.
    On January 7, 2010, the petitioner participated in a teleconference 
with the staff's petition review board. The meeting gave the petitioner 
an opportunity to provide additional information and to clarify issues 
raised in the petition. The information provided during this 
teleconference was considered a supplement to the December 9, 2009, 
petition.
    On August 6, 2010, the petitioner sent in an additional petition 
related to the original December 5, 2009, petition; however, it was not 
accepted for review under Section 2.206 of Title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (10 CFR) process. By letter dated September 3, 2010 
(ADAMS Accession No. ML102290577), the NRC informed the petitioner that 
the August 6, 2010, petition would be considered a supplement to the 
December 5, 2009, petition.
    The NRC sent a copy of the proposed director's decision to the 
petitioner and to Duke Energy Florida, Inc., for comment on January 24, 
2014. The staff did not receive any comments on the proposed director's 
decision.
    The Director of NRR has determined that the request, to require CR-
3 to remain in cold shutdown mode, is moot and no action will be taken. 
The reasons for this decision are explained in the director's decision 
14-03, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206, the complete text of which is 
available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML14097A185.
    The NRC will take no action on the request to require CR-3 to 
remain in cold shutdown because on February 20, 2013 (ADAMS Accession 
No. ML13056A005), the licensee provided the certification required by 
10 CFR 50.82(a)(1)(i) and (ii) to the NRC staff that CR-3 had 
permanently ceased power operations and that all fuel had been 
permanently removed from the reactor vessel. Upon docketing of these 
two certifications, the licensee's 10 CFR Part 50 license no longer 
authorized operation of the CR-3 reactor or emplacement or retention of 
fuel into the reactor vessel. Accordingly, the licensee is prohibited 
by regulation from restarting CR-3 or loading fuel into the reactor 
vessel. Because the licensee is no longer authorized to operate the 
reactor, CR-3 may not enter a mode of operation that requires the 
containment to be in an operable condition.
    A copy of the director's decision will be filed with the Secretary 
of the Commission for the Commission's review in accordance with 10 CFR 
2.206 of the Commission's regulations. As provided for by this 
regulation, the director's decision will constitute the final action of 
the Commission 25 days after the date of the decision, unless the 
Commission, on its own motion, institutes a review of the director's 
decision in that time.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of May 2014.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jennifer L. Uhle,
 Deputy Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2014-11231 Filed 5-14-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P