Tennessee Valley Authority, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, 42554-42558 [2015-17645]
Download as PDF
42554
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 137 / Friday, July 17, 2015 / Notices
Members of the public and media are
welcome to attend and observe the
evidentiary hearing, which will involve
technical, scientific, and legal questions
and testimony. Participation in the
hearing will be limited to the parties,
their lawyers, and witnesses. Please be
aware that security measures will be
employed at the entrance to the facility,
including searches of hand-carried
items such as briefcases or backpacks.
No signs, banners, posters, or other
displays will be permitted in the
facility.20 No firearms or other weapons
will be allowed in the facility.21
IV. Submitting Written Limited
Appearance Statements
As provided in 10 CFR 2.315(a), any
person (other than a party or the
representative of a party to this
proceeding) may submit a written
statement setting forth his or her
position on matters of concern related to
this proceeding, known as a limited
appearance statement. Although these
statements do not constitute testimony
or evidence, and are not treated as
statements made under oath, they
nonetheless may assist the Board or the
parties in their consideration of the
issues in this proceeding. Anyone who
is considering submitting a limited
appearance statement, however, should
be aware that the jurisdiction of this
Board and the scope of this proceeding
are limited to the Crow Butte License
Renewal Application, and, more
particularly, to the nine admitted
contentions in Appendix A.
Written limited appearance
statements may be submitted by August
28, 2015, and should be sent by mail,
fax, or email both to the Office of the
Secretary and the Chairman of this
Licensing Board:
Office of the Secretary
Mail: Office of the Secretary,
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001.
Fax: (301) 415–1101 (verification
(301) 415–1966).
Email: hearingdocket@nrc.gov.
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Chairman of the Licensing Board
Mail: Administrative Judge Michael
M. Gibson, Chairman, c/o Nicholas
Sciretta & Sachin Desai, Law Clerks,
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
Panel, Mail Stop T–3F23, U.S. Nuclear
20 See Procedures for Providing Security Support
for NRC Public Meetings/Hearings, 66 FR 31,719
(June 12, 2001).
21 A Notice prohibiting the use of weapons at
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board proceedings in
Nebraska will be issued shortly.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:59 Jul 16, 2015
Jkt 235001
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001.
Fax: (301) 415–5599 (verification
(301) 415–4128).
Email: Nicholas.Sciretta@nrc.gov &
Sachin.Desai@nrc.gov.
V. Availability of Documentary
Information Regarding the Proceeding
Documents relating to Crow Butte’s
License Renewal Application are
available on the NRC Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/info-finder/materials/
uranium/licensed-facilities/crowbutte.html. These and other documents
related to this proceeding are available
for public inspection at the
Commission’s Public Document Room,
located in One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland 20852 or electronically from
the publicly available records
component of the NRC’s document
system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible
from the NRC Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.22
Persons who do not have access to
ADAMS or who encounter problems in
accessing the documents located in
ADAMS should contact the NRC Public
Document Room reference staff by
telephone between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00
p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through
Friday except federal holidays at (800)
397–4209 or (301) 415–4737, or by
sending an email to pdr.resource@
nrc.gov.
It is so ordered.
For The Atomic Safety and Licensing
Board.
Rockville, Maryland, July 13, 2015.
Michael M. Gibson,
Chair, Administrative Judge.
Contentions To Be Heard at the Evidentiary
Hearing
Contention A: There is no evidence based
science for the NRC Staff’s conclusion that
ISL mining has ‘‘no non radiological health
impacts,’’ or that non radiological impacts for
possible excursions or spills are ‘‘small.’’
Contention C: The NRC Staff’s
characterization that the impact of surface
waters from an accident is ‘‘minimal since
there are no nearby surface water features,’’
does not accurately address the potential for
environmental harm to the White River.
Contention D (merged with EA Contention
3 & 10): The NRC Staff incorrectly states
there is no communication among the
aquifers, when in fact, the Basal Chadron
aquifer, where mining occurs, and the
aquifer, which provides drinking water to the
Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, communicate
with each other, resulting in the possibility
22 Documents which are determined to contain
sensitive or proprietary information may only be
available in redacted form. All non-sensitive
documents are available in their complete form.
Frm 00088
[FR Doc. 2015–17593 Filed 7–16–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–390; NRC–2015–0170]
Tennessee Valley Authority, Watts Bar
Nuclear Plant, Unit 1
Appendix A
PO 00000
of contamination of the potable water. Based
on this potential communication between the
aquifers, the EA’s environmental justice
analysis, including analysis of cumulative
effects, should be expanded to consider
potential impacts on the aquifer which
provides drinking water to the Pine Ridge
Indian Reservation.
Contention F: Failure to include recent
research.
Contention 1 (Merged Contentions 1 & 2):
Whether the cultural surveys performed and
incorporated into the EA formed a sufficient
basis on which to renew Crow Butte’s permit.
Contention 6: The Final EA violates the
National Environmental Policy Act in
concluding that the short-term impacts from
consumptive ground water use during aquifer
restoration are MODERATE.
Contention 9: The Final EA violates 10
CFR 51.10, 51.70 and 51.71, and the National
Environmental Policy Act and implementing
regulations by failing to include the required
discussion of ground water restoration
mitigation measures.
Contention 12: The Final EA omits a
discussion of the impact of tornadoes on the
license renewal area, and inadequately
discusses the potential impacts from land
application of ISL mining wastewater.
Contention 14: The Final EA violates the
National Environmental Policy Act in its
failure to provide an analysis of the impacts
on the project from earthquakes; especially as
it concerns secondary porosity and adequate
confinement. These failings violate 10 CFR
51.10, 51.70 and 51.71, and the National
Environmental Policy Act, and implementing
regulations.
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: License amendment application;
opportunity to comment, request a
hearing, and petition for leave to
intervene.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an amendment to Facility
Operating License No. NPF–90, issued
to the Tennessee Valley Authority, for
operation of the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant
(WBN), Unit 1. The proposed
amendment modifies the technical
specifications to define support systems
needed in the first 48 hours after a unit
shutdown when steam generators are
not available for heat removal. The
proposed change is required to support
dual unit operation of WBN (a licensing
decision for WBN, Unit 2 is currently
expected to be made in the fall of 2015).
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM
17JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 137 / Friday, July 17, 2015 / Notices
The proposed amendment also requests
changes consistent with Technical
Specification Task Force (TSTF)
Traveler TSTF–273–A, Revision 2, to
provide clarifications related to the
requirements of the Safety Function
Determination Program (SFDP).
DATES: Submit comments by August 17,
2015. Requests for a hearing or petition
for leave to intervene must be filed by
September 15, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods (unless
this document describes a different
method for submitting comments on a
specific subject):
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2015–0170. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol
Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463;
email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For
technical questions, contact the
individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document.
• Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey,
Office of Administration, Mail Stop:
OWFN–12–H08, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001.
For additional direction on obtaining
information and submitting comments,
see ‘‘Obtaining Information and
Submitting Comments’’ in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jeanne Dion, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation, telephone: 301–415–1349,
email: Jeanne.Dion@nrc.gov, and Robert
Schaaf, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation, telephone: 301–415–6020,
email: Robert.Schaaf@nrc.gov. Both are
staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Information and
Submitting Comments
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2015–
0170 when contacting the NRC about
the availability of information for this
action. You may obtain publiclyavailable information related to this
action by any of the following methods:
• Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2015–0170.
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:59 Jul 16, 2015
Jkt 235001
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
Application to Revise the Technical
Specifications for Component Cooling
Water and Essential Raw Cooling Water
to Support Dual Unit Operations is
available in ADAMS under Accession
No. ML15170A474.
• 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.
B. Submitting Comments
Please include Docket ID NRC–2015–
0170 in your comment submission.
The NRC cautions you not to include
identifying or contact information that
you do not want to be publicly
disclosed in your comment submission.
The NRC will post all comment
submissions at https://
www.regulations.gov as well as enter the
comment submissions into ADAMS.
The NRC does not routinely edit
comment submissions to remove
identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating
comments from other persons for
submission to the NRC, then you should
inform those persons not to include
identifying or contact information that
they do not want to be publicly
disclosed in their comment submission.
Your request should state that the NRC
does not routinely edit comment
submissions to remove such information
before making the comment
submissions available to the public or
entering the comment into ADAMS.
II. Introduction
The NRC is considering issuance of an
amendment to Facility Operating
License No. NPF–90, issued to the
Tennessee Valley Authority, for
operation of WBN, Unit 1, located in
Rhea County, Tennessee.
The proposed amendment modifies
the technical specifications to define
support systems needed in the first 48
hours after a unit shutdown when steam
generators are not available for heat
removal. The proposed change is
required to support dual unit operation
of WBN (a licensing decision for WBN
Unit 2 is currently expected to be made
in the fall of 2015). The proposed
amendment also requests changes
consistent with TSTF–273–A, Revision
2, to provide clarifications related to the
requirements of the SFDP.
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
42555
Before any issuance of the proposed
license amendment, the NRC will need
to make the findings required by the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
(the Act), and NRC’s regulations.
The NRC has made a proposed
determination that the license
amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration. Under
the NRC’s regulations in § 50.92 of Title
10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(10 CFR), this means that operation of
the facility in accordance with the
proposed amendment would not (1)
involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated; or (2)
create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any
accident previously evaluated; or (3)
involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR
50.91(a), the licensee has provided its
analysis of the issue of no significant
hazards consideration, which is
presented below:
1. Does the proposed change involve a
significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The likelihood of a malfunction of any
systems, structures or components (SSCs)
supported by containment cooling system
(CCS) and essential raw cooling water
(ERCW) is not significantly increased by
adding new technical specification (TS) for
ERCW and CCS that require alternate CCS
and ERCW system alignments during the first
48 hours after shut down of a unit when the
steam generators are not available for heat
removal. CCS and ERCW provide the means
for transferring residual and decay heat to the
Residual Heat Removal (RHR) System for
process and operating heat from safety
related components during a transient or
accident, as well as during normal operation.
Although the proposed change includes a
design change to allow two ERCW pumps to
be powered from one diesel generator (DG),
the additional ERCW pump is only aligned
to the DG on a non-accident unit during a
design basis event on the other unit, and does
not result in overloading the DG due to the
reduced loading on the non-accident DG. The
CCS and ERCW are not initiators of any
analyzed accident. All equipment supported
by CCS and ERCW has been evaluated to
demonstrate that their performance and
operation remains as described in the FSAR
with no increase in probability of failure or
malfunction.
The SSCs credited to mitigate the
consequences of postulated design basis
accidents remain capable of performing their
design basis function. The change in CCS and
ERCW system alignments has been evaluated
to ensure the RHR System remains capable of
removing normal operating and post-accident
heat. Additionally, all the CCS and ERCW
supported equipment, credited in the
accident analysis to mitigate an accident, has
E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM
17JYN1
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
42556
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 137 / Friday, July 17, 2015 / Notices
been shown to continue to perform their
design function as described in the FSAR.
Therefore, the proposed change does not
involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
The proposed TS changes add explanatory
text to the programmatic description of the
Safety Function Determination Program
(SFDP) in TS 5.7.2.18 to clarify the
requirements that consideration does not
have to be made for a loss of power in
determining loss of function. The Bases for
LCO 3.0.6 is revised to provide clarification
of the ‘‘appropriate LCO for loss of function,’’
and that consideration does not have to be
made for a loss of power in determining loss
of function. The changes are editorial and
administrative in nature, and therefore do not
increase the probability of any accident
previously evaluated. No physical or
operational changes are made to the plant.
The proposed changes do not change how the
plant would mitigate an accident previously
evaluated.
Therefore, the proposed change does not
involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed change create the
possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change does not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously
evaluated. The proposed change does not
introduce any new modes of plant operation,
change the design function of any SSC, or
change the mode of operation of any SSC.
There are no new equipment failure modes
or malfunctions created as the affected SSCs
continue to operate in the same manner as
previously evaluated and have been
evaluated to perform their safety functions
when in the alternate alignments as assumed
in the accident analysis. Additionally,
accident initiators remain as described in the
FSAR and no new accident initiators are
postulated as a result of the alternate CCS
and ERCW alignments.
Therefore, the proposed change does not
create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
The proposed changes [to TS 5.7.2.18] are
editorial and administrative in nature and do
not result in a change in the manner in which
the plant operates. The loss of function of
any specific component will continue to be
addressed in its specific TS LCO, and plant
configuration will be governed by the
required actions of those LCOs. The proposed
changes are clarifications that do not degrade
the availability or capability of safety related
equipment, and therefore do not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously
evaluated. There are no design changes
associated with the proposed changes, and
the changes do not involve a physical
alteration of the plant (i.e., no new or
different type of equipment will be installed).
The changes do not alter assumptions made
in the safety analysis, and are consistent with
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:59 Jul 16, 2015
Jkt 235001
the safety analysis assumptions and current
plant operating practice. Due to the
administrative nature of the changes, they
cannot be an accident initiator.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not
create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a
significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change continues to ensure
that the cooling capability of RHR during
normal operation and during the mitigation
of a design basis event remains within the
evaluated equipment limits and capabilities
assumed in the accident analysis. The
proposed change does not result in any
changes to plant equipment functions,
including setpoints and actuations. The
proposed change does not alter existing
limiting conditions for operation, limiting
safety system settings, or safety limits
specified in the Technical Specifications.
The proposed change to add a new TS for
ERCW and CCS assures the ability of these
systems to support post-accident residual
heat removal.
Therefore, since there is no adverse impact
of this change on the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant
safety analysis, there is no significant
reduction in the margin of safety of the plant.
The proposed changes to TS 5.7.2.18 are
clarifications and are editorial and
administrative in nature. No changes are
made to the LCOs for plant equipment, the
time required for the TS Required Actions to
be completed, or the out of service time for
the components involved. The proposed
changes do not affect the safety analysis
acceptance criteria for any analyzed event,
nor is there a change to any safety analysis
limit. The proposed changes do not alter the
manner in which safety limits, limiting safety
system settings or limiting conditions for
operation are determined, nor is there any
adverse effect on those plant systems
necessary to assure the accomplishment of
protection functions. The proposed changes
will not result in plant operation in a
configuration outside the design basis.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not
involve a significant reduction in a margin of
safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the
licensee’s analysis and, based on this
review, it appears that the three
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
proposes to determine that the license
amendment request involves a No
Significant Hazards Consideration.
The NRC is seeking public comments
on this proposed determination that the
license amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration. Any
comments received within 30 days after
the date of publication of this notice
will be considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not
issue the amendment until the
expiration of 60 days after the date of
publication of this notice. The
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Commission may issue the license
amendment before expiration of the 60day notice period if the Commission
concludes the amendment involves no
significant hazards consideration. In
addition, the Commission may issue the
amendment prior to the expiration of
the 30-day comment period should
circumstances change during the 30-day
comment period such that failure to act
in a timely way would result, for
example, in derating or shutdown of the
facility. Should the Commission take
action prior to the expiration of either
the comment period or the notice
period, it will publish in the Federal
Register a notice of issuance. Should the
Commission make a final No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination,
any hearing will take place after
issuance. The Commission expects that
the need to take this action will occur
very infrequently.
III. Opportunity To Request a Hearing
and Petition for Leave To Intervene
Within 60 days after the date of
publication of this Federal Register
notice, any person whose interest may
be affected by this proceeding and who
desires to participate as a party in the
proceeding must file a written request
for hearing or a petition for leave to
intervene specifying the contentions
which the person seeks to have litigated
in the hearing with respect to the
license amendment request. Requests
for hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene shall be filed in accordance
with the NRC’s ‘‘Agency Rules of
Practice and Procedure’’ in 10 CFR part
2. Interested person(s) should consult a
current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is
available at the NRC’s PDR. The NRC’s
regulations are accessible electronically
from the NRC Library on the NRC’s Web
site at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
doc-collections/cfr/.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a
request for hearing or petition for leave
to intervene must set forth with
particularity the interest of the
petitioner in the proceeding and how
that interest may be affected by the
results of the proceeding. The hearing
request or petition must specifically
explain the reasons why intervention
should be permitted, with particular
reference to the following general
requirements: (1) The name, address,
and telephone number of the requestor
or petitioner; (2) the nature of the
requestor’s/petitioner’s right under the
Act to be made a party to the
proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of
the requestor’s/petitioner’s property,
financial, or other interest in the
proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of
any decision or order which may be
E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM
17JYN1
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 137 / Friday, July 17, 2015 / Notices
entered in the proceeding on the
requestor’s/petitioner’s interest. The
hearing request or petition must also
include the specific contentions that the
requestor/petitioner seeks to have
litigated at the proceeding.
For each contention, the requestor/
petitioner must provide a specific
statement of the issue of law or fact to
be raised or controverted, as well as a
brief explanation of the basis for the
contention. Additionally, the requestor/
petitioner must demonstrate that the
issue raised by each contention is
within the scope of the proceeding and
is material to the findings that the NRC
must make to support the granting of a
license amendment in response to the
application. The hearing request or
petition must also include a concise
statement of the alleged facts or expert
opinion that support the contention and
on which the requestor/petitioner
intends to rely at the hearing, together
with references to those specific sources
and documents. The hearing request or
petition must provide sufficient
information to show that a genuine
dispute exists with the applicant on a
material issue of law or fact, including
references to specific portions of the
application for amendment that the
petitioner disputes and the supporting
reasons for each dispute. If the
requestor/petitioner believes that the
application for amendment fails to
contain information on a relevant matter
as required by law, the requestor/
petitioner must identify each failure and
the supporting reasons for the
requestor’s/petitioner’s belief. Each
contention must be one which, if
proven, would entitle the requestor/
petitioner to relief. A requestor/
petitioner who does not satisfy these
requirements for at least one contention
will not be permitted to participate as a
party.
Those permitted to intervene become
parties to the proceeding, subject to any
limitations in the order granting leave to
intervene, and have the opportunity to
participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing with respect to resolution of
that person’s admitted contentions,
including the opportunity to present
evidence and to submit a crossexamination plan for cross-examination
of witnesses, consistent with NRC
regulations, policies, and procedures.
The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
will set the time and place for any
prehearing conferences and evidentiary
hearings, and the appropriate notices
will be provided.
Hearing requests or petitions for leave
to intervene must be filed no later than
60 days from the date of publication of
this notice. Requests for hearing,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:59 Jul 16, 2015
Jkt 235001
petitions for leave to intervene, and
motions for leave to file new or
amended contentions that are filed after
the 60-day deadline will not be
entertained absent a determination by
the presiding officer that the filing
demonstrates good cause by satisfying
the three factors in 10 CFR
2.309(c)(1)(i)–(iii).
If a hearing is requested, the
Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no
significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide
when the hearing is held. If the final
determination is that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards
consideration, the Commission may
issue the amendment and make it
immediately effective, notwithstanding
the request for a hearing. Any hearing
held would take place after issuance of
the amendment. If the final
determination is that the amendment
request involves a significant hazards
consideration, then any hearing held
would take place before the issuance of
any amendment unless the Commission
finds an imminent danger to the health
or safety of the public, in which case it
will issue an appropriate order or rule
under 10 CFR part 2.
IV. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)
All documents filed in NRC
adjudicatory proceedings, including a
request for hearing, a petition for leave
to intervene, any motion or other
document filed in the proceeding prior
to the submission of a request for
hearing or petition to intervene, and
documents filed by interested
governmental entities participating
under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in
accordance with the NRC’s E-Filing rule
(72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007). The EFiling process requires participants to
submit and serve all adjudicatory
documents over the internet, or in some
cases to mail copies on electronic
storage media. Participants may not
submit paper copies of their filings
unless they seek an exemption in
accordance with the procedures
described below.
To comply with the procedural
requirements of E-Filing, at least ten 10
days prior to the filing deadline, the
participant should contact the Office of
the Secretary by email at
hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone
at 301–415–1677, to request (1) a digital
identification (ID) certificate, which
allows the participant (or its counsel or
representative) to digitally sign
documents and access the E-Submittal
server for any proceeding in which it is
participating; and (2) advise the
Secretary that the participant will be
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
42557
submitting a request or petition for
hearing (even in instances in which the
participant, or its counsel or
representative, already holds an NRCissued digital ID certificate). Based upon
this information, the Secretary will
establish an electronic docket for the
hearing in this proceeding if the
Secretary has not already established an
electronic docket.
Information about applying for a
digital ID certificate is available on the
NRC’s public Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/
getting-started.html. System
requirements for accessing the ESubmittal server are detailed in the
NRC’s ‘‘Guidance for Electronic
Submission,’’ which is available on the
agency’s public Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. Participants may
attempt to use other software not listed
on the Web site, but should note that the
NRC’s E-Filing system does not support
unlisted software, and the NRC Meta
System Help Desk will not be able to
offer assistance in using unlisted
software.
If a participant is electronically
submitting a document to the NRC in
accordance with the E-Filing rule, the
participant must file the document
using the NRC’s online, Web-based
submission form. In order to serve
documents through the Electronic
Information Exchange System, users
will be required to install a Web
browser plug-in from the NRC’s Web
site. Further information on the Webbased submission form, including the
installation of the Web browser plug-in,
is available on the NRC’s public Web
site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html.
Once a participant has obtained a
digital ID certificate and a docket has
been created, the participant can then
submit a request for hearing or petition
for leave to intervene. Submissions
should be in Portable Document Format
(PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance
available on the NRC’s public Web site
at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. A filing is considered
complete at the time the documents are
submitted through the NRC’s E-Filing
system. To be timely, an electronic
filing must be submitted to the E-Filing
system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern
Time on the due date. Upon receipt of
a transmission, the E-Filing system
time-stamps the document and sends
the submitter an email notice
confirming receipt of the document. The
E-Filing system also distributes an email
notice that provides access to the
document to the NRC’s Office of the
General Counsel and any others who
E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM
17JYN1
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
42558
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 137 / Friday, July 17, 2015 / Notices
have advised the Office of the Secretary
that they wish to participate in the
proceeding, so that the filer need not
serve the documents on those
participants separately. Therefore,
applicants and other participants (or
their counsel or representative) must
apply for and receive a digital ID
certificate before a hearing request/
petition to intervene is filed so that they
can obtain access to the document via
the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically using
the NRC’s adjudicatory E-Filing system
may seek assistance by contacting the
NRC Meta System Help Desk through
the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link located on the
NRC’s public Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html, by email to
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a tollfree call at 1–866–672–7640. The NRC
Meta System Help Desk is available
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern
Time, Monday through Friday,
excluding government holidays.
Participants who believe that they
have a good cause for not submitting
documents electronically must file an
exemption request, in accordance with
10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper
filing requesting authorization to
continue to submit documents in paper
format. Such filings must be submitted
by: (1) First class mail addressed to the
Office of the Secretary of the
Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, Attention: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier,
express mail, or expedited delivery
service to the Office of the Secretary,
Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North,
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking
and Adjudications Staff. Participants
filing a document in this manner are
responsible for serving the document on
all other participants. Filing is
considered complete by first-class mail
as of the time of deposit in the mail, or
by courier, express mail, or expedited
delivery service upon depositing the
document with the provider of the
service. A presiding officer, having
granted an exemption request from
using E-Filing, may require a participant
or party to use E-Filing if the presiding
officer subsequently determines that the
reason for granting the exemption from
use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory
proceedings will appear in the NRC’s
electronic hearing docket which is
available to the public at https://
ehd1.nrc.gov/ehd/, unless excluded
pursuant to an order of the Commission,
or the presiding officer. Participants are
requested not to include personal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:59 Jul 16, 2015
Jkt 235001
privacy information, such as social
security numbers, home addresses, or
home phone numbers in their filings,
unless an NRC regulation or other law
requires submission of such
information. However, in some
instances, a request to intervene will
require including information on local
residence in order to demonstrate a
proximity assertion of interest in the
proceeding. With respect to copyrighted
works, except for limited excerpts that
serve the purpose of the adjudicatory
filings and would constitute a Fair Use
application, participants are requested
not to include copyrighted materials in
their submission.
For further details with respect to this
action, see the application for license
amendment dated June 17, 2015.
Attorney for licensee: General
Counsel, Tennessee Valley Authority,
400 West Summit Hill Drive, ET 11A,
Knoxville, Tennessee 37902.
NRC Branch Chief: Jessie F.
Quichocho.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day
of July 2015.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jeanne Dion,
Project Manager, Watts Bar Special Projects
Branch, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2015–17645 Filed 7–16–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 52–016; NRC–2008–0250]
UniStar Nuclear Energy Combined
License Application for Calvert Cliffs
Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 3
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Application for combined
license; withdrawal.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is withdrawing the
UniStar Nuclear Energy Combined
License Application for Calvert Cliffs
Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 3. This
document is being withdrawn because
UniStar requested withdrawal of its
application.
SUMMARY:
The effective date of the
withdrawal of UniStar’s combined
license application for Calvert Cliffs
Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 3 is July 17,
2015.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID
NRC–2008–0250 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of
information regarding this document.
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
You may obtain publicly-available
information related to this document
using any of the following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2008–0250. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol
Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463;
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
https://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
email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
ADAMS accession number for each
document referenced (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:
Surinder Arora, Office of New Reactors,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone:
301–415–1421, email: Surinder.Arora@
nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: By letter
dated July 13, 2007 (ADAMS Accession
No. ML071980292), as supplemented by
letters, dated March 14, 2008 (ADAMS
Accession No(s). ML080990114 and
ML080780459) and May 15, 2008
(ADAMS Accession No. ML081410279),
UniStar Nuclear (UniStar), submitted an
application to the NRC for a combined
license (COL) for a single unit of the
U.S. Evolutionary Power Reactor (U.S.
EPR) in accordance with the
requirements contained in part 52,
‘‘Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals
for Nuclear Power Plants,’’ of Title 10 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (10
CFR). This new reactor was identified as
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit
3 (CCNPP3) located in Lusby, in Calvert
County, Maryland.
The notices of receipt and availability
of the UniStar’s COL application were
previously published in the Federal
Register on August 15, 2007 (72 FR
45832) and May 2, 2008 (73 FR 24321).
Subsequently a notice announcing the
E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM
17JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 137 (Friday, July 17, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42554-42558]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-17645]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-390; NRC-2015-0170]
Tennessee Valley Authority, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 1
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: License amendment application; opportunity to comment, request
a hearing, and petition for leave to intervene.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-90,
issued to the Tennessee Valley Authority, for operation of the Watts
Bar Nuclear Plant (WBN), Unit 1. The proposed amendment modifies the
technical specifications to define support systems needed in the first
48 hours after a unit shutdown when steam generators are not available
for heat removal. The proposed change is required to support dual unit
operation of WBN (a licensing decision for WBN, Unit 2 is currently
expected to be made in the fall of 2015).
[[Page 42555]]
The proposed amendment also requests changes consistent with Technical
Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-273-A, Revision 2, to
provide clarifications related to the requirements of the Safety
Function Determination Program (SFDP).
DATES: Submit comments by August 17, 2015. Requests for a hearing or
petition for leave to intervene must be filed by September 15, 2015.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods
(unless this document describes a different method for submitting
comments on a specific subject):
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0170. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-
3463; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact
the individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
of this document.
Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Office of Administration,
Mail Stop: OWFN-12-H08, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555-0001.
For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting
comments, see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeanne Dion, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation, telephone: 301-415-1349, email: Jeanne.Dion@nrc.gov, and
Robert Schaaf, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, telephone: 301-
415-6020, email: Robert.Schaaf@nrc.gov. Both are staff of the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2015-0170 when contacting the NRC
about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain
publicly-available information related to this action by any of the
following methods:
Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0170.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://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 email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
Application to Revise the Technical Specifications for Component
Cooling Water and Essential Raw Cooling Water to Support Dual Unit
Operations is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15170A474.
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.
B. Submitting Comments
Please include Docket ID NRC-2015-0170 in your comment submission.
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your
comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at https://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into
ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove
identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to
include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be
publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should
state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to
remove such information before making the comment submissions available
to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.
II. Introduction
The NRC is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility
Operating License No. NPF-90, issued to the Tennessee Valley Authority,
for operation of WBN, Unit 1, located in Rhea County, Tennessee.
The proposed amendment modifies the technical specifications to
define support systems needed in the first 48 hours after a unit
shutdown when steam generators are not available for heat removal. The
proposed change is required to support dual unit operation of WBN (a
licensing decision for WBN Unit 2 is currently expected to be made in
the fall of 2015). The proposed amendment also requests changes
consistent with TSTF-273-A, Revision 2, to provide clarifications
related to the requirements of the SFDP.
Before any issuance of the proposed license amendment, the NRC will
need to make the findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act), and NRC's regulations.
The NRC has made a proposed determination that the license
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under
the NRC's regulations in Sec. 50.92 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), this means that operation of the facility in
accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or
(3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. As required
by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue
of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:
1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The likelihood of a malfunction of any systems, structures or
components (SSCs) supported by containment cooling system (CCS) and
essential raw cooling water (ERCW) is not significantly increased by
adding new technical specification (TS) for ERCW and CCS that
require alternate CCS and ERCW system alignments during the first 48
hours after shut down of a unit when the steam generators are not
available for heat removal. CCS and ERCW provide the means for
transferring residual and decay heat to the Residual Heat Removal
(RHR) System for process and operating heat from safety related
components during a transient or accident, as well as during normal
operation. Although the proposed change includes a design change to
allow two ERCW pumps to be powered from one diesel generator (DG),
the additional ERCW pump is only aligned to the DG on a non-accident
unit during a design basis event on the other unit, and does not
result in overloading the DG due to the reduced loading on the non-
accident DG. The CCS and ERCW are not initiators of any analyzed
accident. All equipment supported by CCS and ERCW has been evaluated
to demonstrate that their performance and operation remains as
described in the FSAR with no increase in probability of failure or
malfunction.
The SSCs credited to mitigate the consequences of postulated
design basis accidents remain capable of performing their design
basis function. The change in CCS and ERCW system alignments has
been evaluated to ensure the RHR System remains capable of removing
normal operating and post-accident heat. Additionally, all the CCS
and ERCW supported equipment, credited in the accident analysis to
mitigate an accident, has
[[Page 42556]]
been shown to continue to perform their design function as described
in the FSAR.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
The proposed TS changes add explanatory text to the programmatic
description of the Safety Function Determination Program (SFDP) in
TS 5.7.2.18 to clarify the requirements that consideration does not
have to be made for a loss of power in determining loss of function.
The Bases for LCO 3.0.6 is revised to provide clarification of the
``appropriate LCO for loss of function,'' and that consideration
does not have to be made for a loss of power in determining loss of
function. The changes are editorial and administrative in nature,
and therefore do not increase the probability of any accident
previously evaluated. No physical or operational changes are made to
the plant. The proposed changes do not change how the plant would
mitigate an accident previously evaluated.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
The proposed change does not introduce any new modes of plant
operation, change the design function of any SSC, or change the mode
of operation of any SSC. There are no new equipment failure modes or
malfunctions created as the affected SSCs continue to operate in the
same manner as previously evaluated and have been evaluated to
perform their safety functions when in the alternate alignments as
assumed in the accident analysis. Additionally, accident initiators
remain as described in the FSAR and no new accident initiators are
postulated as a result of the alternate CCS and ERCW alignments.
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
The proposed changes [to TS 5.7.2.18] are editorial and
administrative in nature and do not result in a change in the manner
in which the plant operates. The loss of function of any specific
component will continue to be addressed in its specific TS LCO, and
plant configuration will be governed by the required actions of
those LCOs. The proposed changes are clarifications that do not
degrade the availability or capability of safety related equipment,
and therefore do not create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. There are
no design changes associated with the proposed changes, and the
changes do not involve a physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no
new or different type of equipment will be installed). The changes
do not alter assumptions made in the safety analysis, and are
consistent with the safety analysis assumptions and current plant
operating practice. Due to the administrative nature of the changes,
they cannot be an accident initiator.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of
a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change continues to ensure that the cooling
capability of RHR during normal operation and during the mitigation
of a design basis event remains within the evaluated equipment
limits and capabilities assumed in the accident analysis. The
proposed change does not result in any changes to plant equipment
functions, including setpoints and actuations. The proposed change
does not alter existing limiting conditions for operation, limiting
safety system settings, or safety limits specified in the Technical
Specifications. The proposed change to add a new TS for ERCW and CCS
assures the ability of these systems to support post-accident
residual heat removal.
Therefore, since there is no adverse impact of this change on
the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant safety analysis, there is no significant
reduction in the margin of safety of the plant.
The proposed changes to TS 5.7.2.18 are clarifications and are
editorial and administrative in nature. No changes are made to the
LCOs for plant equipment, the time required for the TS Required
Actions to be completed, or the out of service time for the
components involved. The proposed changes do not affect the safety
analysis acceptance criteria for any analyzed event, nor is there a
change to any safety analysis limit. The proposed changes do not
alter the manner in which safety limits, limiting safety system
settings or limiting conditions for operation are determined, nor is
there any adverse effect on those plant systems necessary to assure
the accomplishment of protection functions. The proposed changes
will not result in plant operation in a configuration outside the
design basis.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant
reduction in a margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
license amendment request involves a No Significant Hazards
Consideration.
The NRC is seeking public comments on this proposed determination
that the license amendment request involves no significant hazards
consideration. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the
expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The
Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-
day notice period if the Commission concludes the amendment involves no
significant hazards consideration. In addition, the Commission may
issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-day comment
period should circumstances change during the 30-day comment period
such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, in
derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the Commission take action
prior to the expiration of either the comment period or the notice
period, it will publish in the Federal Register a notice of issuance.
Should the Commission make a final No Significant Hazards Consideration
Determination, any hearing will take place after issuance. The
Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very
infrequently.
III. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To
Intervene
Within 60 days after the date of publication of this Federal
Register notice, any person whose interest may be affected by this
proceeding and who desires to participate as a party in the proceeding
must file a written request for hearing or a petition for leave to
intervene specifying the contentions which the person seeks to have
litigated in the hearing with respect to the license amendment request.
Requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene shall be
filed in accordance with the NRC's ``Agency Rules of Practice and
Procedure'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested person(s) should consult a
current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the NRC's PDR. The
NRC's regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on
the NRC's Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a request for hearing or petition for
leave to intervene must set forth with particularity the interest of
the petitioner in the proceeding and how that interest may be affected
by the results of the proceeding. The hearing request or petition must
specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted,
with particular reference to the following general requirements: (1)
The name, address, and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner;
(2) the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to
be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the
requestor's/petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the
proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which
may be
[[Page 42557]]
entered in the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The
hearing request or petition must also include the specific contentions
that the requestor/petitioner seeks to have litigated at the
proceeding.
For each contention, the requestor/petitioner must provide a
specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or
controverted, as well as a brief explanation of the basis for the
contention. Additionally, the requestor/petitioner must demonstrate
that the issue raised by each contention is within the scope of the
proceeding and is material to the findings that the NRC must make to
support the granting of a license amendment in response to the
application. The hearing request or petition must also include a
concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion that support
the contention and on which the requestor/petitioner intends to rely at
the hearing, together with references to those specific sources and
documents. The hearing request or petition must provide sufficient
information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on
a material issue of law or fact, including references to specific
portions of the application for amendment that the petitioner disputes
and the supporting reasons for each dispute. If the requestor/
petitioner believes that the application for amendment fails to contain
information on a relevant matter as required by law, the requestor/
petitioner must identify each failure and the supporting reasons for
the requestor's/petitioner's belief. Each contention must be one which,
if proven, would entitle the requestor/petitioner to relief. A
requestor/petitioner who does not satisfy these requirements for at
least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding,
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene,
and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing with respect to resolution of that person's admitted
contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence and to
submit a cross-examination plan for cross-examination of witnesses,
consistent with NRC regulations, policies, and procedures. The Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board will set the time and place for any
prehearing conferences and evidentiary hearings, and the appropriate
notices will be provided.
Hearing requests or petitions for leave to intervene must be filed
no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice.
Requests for hearing, petitions for leave to intervene, and motions for
leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the 60-
day deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the
presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying
the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(iii).
If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If
the final determination is that the amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the
amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance
of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment
request involves a significant hazards consideration, then any hearing
held would take place before the issuance of any amendment unless the
Commission finds an imminent danger to the health or safety of the
public, in which case it will issue an appropriate order or rule under
10 CFR part 2.
IV. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)
All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a
request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or
other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a
request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by
interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c),
must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139;
August 28, 2007). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit
and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some
cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not
submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in
accordance with the procedures described below.
To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least
ten 10 days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should
contact the Office of the Secretary by email at hearing.docket@nrc.gov,
or by telephone at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital
identification (ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its
counsel or representative) to digitally sign documents and access the
E-Submittal server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and
(2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a
request or petition for hearing (even in instances in which the
participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-
issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the
Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this
proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic
docket.
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is
available on the NRC's public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. System requirements for accessing
the E-Submittal server are detailed in the NRC's ``Guidance for
Electronic Submission,'' which is available on the agency's public Web
site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants
may attempt to use other software not listed on the Web site, but
should note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted
software, and the NRC Meta System Help Desk will not be able to offer
assistance in using unlisted software.
If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC
in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the
document using the NRC's online, Web-based submission form. In order to
serve documents through the Electronic Information Exchange System,
users will be required to install a Web browser plug-in from the NRC's
Web site. Further information on the Web-based submission form,
including the installation of the Web browser plug-in, is available on
the NRC's public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.
Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a
docket has been created, the participant can then submit a request for
hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in
Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance
available on the NRC's public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the
documents are submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be
timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system
no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of
a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends
the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The
E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access
to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any
others who
[[Page 42558]]
have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate
in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the documents on
those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other
participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and
receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition to
intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document via
the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-
Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Meta System
Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC's public
Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email to
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The
NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.,
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.
Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not
submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention:
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth
Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland
20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants
filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the
document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by
first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier,
express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the
document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having
granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a
participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer
subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from
use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at
https://ehd1.nrc.gov/ehd/, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the
Commission, or the presiding officer. Participants are requested not to
include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers,
home addresses, or home phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC
regulation or other law requires submission of such information.
However, in some instances, a request to intervene will require
including information on local residence in order to demonstrate a
proximity assertion of interest in the proceeding. With respect to
copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose
of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use
application, participants are requested not to include copyrighted
materials in their submission.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for license amendment dated June 17, 2015.
Attorney for licensee: General Counsel, Tennessee Valley Authority,
400 West Summit Hill Drive, ET 11A, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902.
NRC Branch Chief: Jessie F. Quichocho.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of July 2015.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jeanne Dion,
Project Manager, Watts Bar Special Projects Branch, Division of
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2015-17645 Filed 7-16-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P