Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations and Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information, 87958-87964 [2016-28521]
Download as PDF
87958
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2016 / Notices
Bureau of Justice Statistics, in the Office
of Justice Programs.
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Primary: State, Local, or Tribal
Government. Other: Federal
Government and business (privately
operated correctional institutions, both
for-profit and not-for-profit). The data
will be used to develop estimates for the
incidence and prevalence of sexual
assault within correctional facilities, as
well as characteristics of substantiated
incidents, as required under the Prison
Rape Elimination Act of 2003 (Pub. L.
108–79).
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: An estimate of the total
number of respondents is 1,538 adult
and juvenile systems and facilities.
(This estimate assumes a response rate
of 100%.) Federal and state systems for
adults and juveniles (102 respondents)
will take an estimated 60 minutes to
complete the summary form; local and
privately operated facilities (1,426
respondents) will take an estimated 30
minutes to complete the summary form;
and each incident form (we estimate
about 2,000 incident forms will be
completed, one for each incident that
was substantiated) will take about 30
minutes. The annual burden estimates
are based on data from the prior
administration of the SSV.
(6) An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The annual total burden
hours associated with this collection is
estimated to be 1,815.
If additional information is required
contact: Jerri Murray, Department
Clearance Officer, United States
Department of Justice, Justice
Management Division, Policy and
Planning Staff, Two Constitution
Square, 145 N Street NE., 3E.405B,
Washington, DC 20530.
Dated: December 1, 2016.
Jerri Murray,
Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S.
Department of Justice.
[FR Doc. 2016–29166 Filed 12–5–16; 8:45 am]
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 4410–18–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Dec 05, 2016
Jkt 241001
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
[NRC–2016–0240]
Applications and Amendments to
Facility Operating Licenses and
Combined Licenses Involving
Proposed No Significant Hazards
Considerations and Containing
Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information and Order Imposing
Procedures for Access to Sensitive
Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: License amendment request;
notice of opportunity to comment,
request a hearing, and petition for leave
to intervene; order imposing
procedures.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) received and is
considering approval of two amendment
requests. The amendment requests are
for Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1;
and Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station,
Units 2 and 3. For each amendment
request, the NRC proposes to determine
that they involve no significant hazards
consideration. Because each amendment
request contains sensitive unclassified
non-safeguards information (SUNSI) an
order imposes procedures to obtain
access to SUNSI for contention
preparation.
SUMMARY:
Comments must be filed by
January 5, 2017. A request for a hearing
must be filed by February 6, 2017. Any
potential party as defined in § 2.4 of title
10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(10 CFR), who believes access to SUNSI
is necessary to respond to this notice
must request document access by
December 16, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods.
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2016–0240. 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.
• 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
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4703
section of
this document.
Sfmt 4703
Janet Burkhardt, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415–
1384; email: Janet.Burkhardt@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Information and
Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID facility
name, unit number(s), plant docket
number, application date, and subject
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–2016–0240.
• 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/
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 it is available in
ADAMS) is provided the first time that
it is mentioned in this document.
• 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–2016–
0240, facility name, unit number(s),
plant docket number, application date,
and subject 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
E:\FR\FM\06DEN1.SGM
06DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2016 / Notices
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.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
II. Background
Pursuant to Section 189a.(2) of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
(the Act), the NRC is publishing this
notice. The Act requires the
Commission to publish notice of any
amendments issued, or proposed to be
issued and grants the Commission the
authority to issue and make
immediately effective any amendment
to an operating license or combined
license, as applicable, upon a
determination by the Commission that
such amendment involves no significant
hazards consideration, notwithstanding
the pendency before the Commission of
a request for a hearing from any person.
This notice includes notices of
amendments containing SUNSI.
III. Notice of Consideration of Issuance
of Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses and Combined Licenses,
Proposed No Significant Hazards
Consideration Determination, and
Opportunity for a Hearing
The Commission has made a
proposed determination that the
following amendment requests involve
no significant hazards consideration.
Under the Commission’s regulations in
10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation
of the facility in accordance with the
proposed amendment would not (1)
involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated, (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. The basis for this proposed
determination for each amendment
request is shown below.
The Commission is seeking public
comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received
within 30 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be
considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not
issue the amendment until the
expiration of 60 days after the date of
publication of this notice. The
Commission may issue the license
amendment before expiration of the 60day period provided that its final
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Dec 05, 2016
Jkt 241001
determination is that the amendment
involves no significant hazards
consideration. In addition, the
Commission may issue the amendment
prior to the expiration of the 30-day
comment period if 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.
If the Commission takes action prior to
the expiration of either the comment
period or the notice period, it will
publish a notice of issuance in the
Federal Register. If the Commission
makes 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.
A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing
and Petition for Leave To Intervene
Within 60 days after the date of
publication of this notice, any persons
(petitioner) whose interest may be
affected by this action may file a request
for a hearing and a petition to intervene
(petition) with respect to the action.
Petitions shall be filed in accordance
with the Commission’s ‘‘Agency Rules
of Practice and Procedure’’ in 10 CFR
part 2. Interested persons should
consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309,
which is available at the NRC’s PDR,
located at One White Flint North, Room
O1–F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. The
NRC’s regulations are accessible
electronically from the NRC Library on
the NRC’s Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/cfr/. If a petition is filed
within 60 days, the Commission or a
presiding officer designated by the
Commission or by the Chief
Administrative Judge of the Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will
rule on the petition; and the Secretary
or the Chief Administrative Judge of the
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
Panel will issue a notice of a hearing or
an appropriate order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a
petition shall set forth with particularity
the interest of the petitioner in the
proceeding, and how that interest may
be affected by the results of the
proceeding. The petition should
specifically explain the reasons why
intervention should be permitted with
particular reference to the following
general requirements: (1) The name,
address, and telephone number of the
petitioner; (2) the nature of the
petitioner’s right under the Act to be
made a party to the proceeding; (3) the
nature and extent of the petitioner’s
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
87959
property, financial, or other interest in
the proceeding; and (4) the possible
effect of any decision or order which
may be entered in the proceeding on the
petitioner’s interest. The petition must
also set forth the specific contentions
which the petitioner seeks to have
litigated at the proceeding.
Each contention must consist of a
specific statement of the issue of law or
fact to be raised or controverted. In
addition, the petitioner shall provide a
brief explanation of the bases for the
contention and a concise statement of
the alleged facts or expert opinion
which support the contention and on
which the petitioner intends to rely in
proving the contention at the hearing.
The petitioner must also provide
references to those specific sources and
documents of which the petitioner is
aware and on which the petitioner
intends to rely to establish those facts or
expert opinion to support its position on
the issue. The petition must include
sufficient information to show that a
genuine dispute exists with the
applicant on a material issue of law or
fact. Contentions shall be limited to
matters within the scope of the
proceeding. The contention must be one
which, if proven, would entitle the
petitioner to relief. A petitioner who
fails to satisfy these requirements with
respect to at least one contention will
not be permitted to participate as a
party.
Those permitted to intervene become
parties to the proceeding, subject to any
limitations in the order granting leave to
intervene, and have the opportunity to
participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing with respect to resolution of
that person’s admitted contentions
consistent with the NRC’s regulations,
policies, and procedures.
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) through (iii).
A State, local governmental body,
Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or
agency thereof, may submit a petition to
the Commission to participate as a party
under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1).
The petition should state the nature
and extent of the petitioner’s interest in
the proceeding. The petition should be
submitted to the Commission by
February 6, 2017. The petition must be
filed in accordance with the filing
E:\FR\FM\06DEN1.SGM
06DEN1
87960
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2016 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
instructions in the ‘‘Electronic
Submissions (E-Filing)’’ section of this
document, and should meet the
requirements for petitions set forth in
this section, except that under 10 CFR
2.309(h)(2) a State, local governmental
body, or Federally-recognized Indian
Tribe, or agency thereof does not need
to address the standing requirements in
10 CFR 2.309(d) if the facility is located
within its boundaries. A State, local
governmental body, Federallyrecognized Indian Tribe, or agency
thereof may also have the opportunity to
participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c).
If a hearing is granted, any person
who does not wish, or is not qualified,
to become a party to the proceeding
may, in the discretion of the presiding
officer, be permitted to make a limited
appearance pursuant to the provisions
of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a
limited appearance may make an oral or
written statement of position on the
issues, but may not otherwise
participate in the proceeding. A limited
appearance may be made at any session
of the hearing or at any prehearing
conference, subject to the limits and
conditions as may be imposed by the
presiding officer. Details regarding the
opportunity to make a limited
appearance will be provided by the
presiding officer if such sessions are
scheduled.
B. 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
(hereinafter ‘‘petition’’), 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, as amended at 77 FR
46562; August 3, 2012). 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 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Dec 05, 2016
Jkt 241001
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 petition (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 available on the
NRC’s public Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/
adjudicatory-sub.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
Electronic Filing Help Desk will not be
able to offer assistance in using unlisted
software.
Once a participant has obtained a
digital ID certificate and a docket has
been created, the participant can then
submit a petition. Submissions should
be in Portable Document Format (PDF).
Additional guidance on PDF
submissions is available on the NRC’s
public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/
site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.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 EFiling 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
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 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 Electronic Filing Help Desk
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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
Electronic Filing Help Desk is available
between 9 a.m. and 7 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 stating why there is good cause for
not filing electronically and 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, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention:
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff.
Participants filing a document in this
manner are responsible for serving the
document on all other participants.
Filing is considered complete by firstclass mail as of the time of deposit in
the mail, or by courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service upon
depositing the document with the
provider of the service. 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 petition 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
E:\FR\FM\06DEN1.SGM
06DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2016 / Notices
not to include copyrighted materials in
their submission.
The Commission will issue a notice or
order granting or denying a hearing
request or intervention petition,
designating the issues for any hearing
that will be held and designating the
Presiding Officer. A notice granting a
hearing will be published in the Federal
Register and served on the parties to the
hearing.
For further details with respect to
these license amendment applications,
see the application for amendment
which is available for public inspection
in ADAMS and at the NRC’s PDR. For
additional direction on accessing
information related to this document,
see the ‘‘Obtaining Information and
Submitting Comments’’ section of this
document.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
NextEra Energy, Point Beach, LLC,
Docket No. 50–266, Point Beach Nuclear
Plant, Unit 1, Town of Two Creeks,
Manitowoc County, Wisconsin
Date of amendment request: July 29,
2016. A publicly-available version is in
ADAMS under Accession No.
ML16237A066.
Description of amendment request:
This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguard
information (SUNSI). The amendment
would revise technical specification
(TS) 3.4.13, RCS [Reactor Coolant
System] Operational Leakage; TS 5.5.8,
Steam Generator (SG) Program; and TS
5.6.8, Steam Generator Tube Inspection
Report, to exclude a portion of the tubes
below the top of the SG tube sheet from
periodic inspections and plugging.
Basis for proposed no significant
hazards consideration determination:
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. The proposed changes do not involve a
significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated.
The proposed changes to TS 3.4.13, TS
5.5.8, and TS 5.6.8 have no effect on accident
probabilities or consequences. The
previously analyzed accidents are initiated
by the failure of plant structures, systems, or
components. The proposed change that alters
the steam generator (SG) inspection and
reporting criteria does not have a detrimental
impact on the integrity of any plant structure,
system, or component that initiates an
analyzed event. The proposed change will
not alter the operation of, or otherwise
increase the failure probability of any plant
equipment that initiates an analyzed
accident.
Of the applicable accidents previously
evaluated, the limiting transients with
consideration to the proposed change to the
SG tube inspection and repair criteria are:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Dec 05, 2016
Jkt 241001
The steam generator tube rupture (SGTR)
event, the steam line break (SLB), locked
rotor and control rod ejection postulated
accidents. Loss of Coolant Accident
conditions cause a compressive load to act on
a tube. This accident attempts to displace the
tube into the tubesheet rather than pull it out,
and, therefore, is not a factor in this
amendment request. Another faulted load
consideration is a safe shutdown earthquake;
however, seismic analysis has shown that
axial loading of the tubes is negligible during
this event (Section 5.0 of Reference 10).
Addressing the SGTR event, the required
structural integrity margins of the SG tubes
and the tube-to-tubesheet joint over the H*
distance will be maintained. Tube rupture in
tubes with cracks within the tubesheet is
precluded by the constraint provided by the
presence of the tubesheet and the tube-totubesheet joint. Tube burst cannot occur
within the thickness of the tubesheet. The
tube-to-tubesheet joint constraint results from
the hydraulic expansion process, thermal
expansion mismatch between the tube and
tubesheet, from the differential pressure
between the primary and secondary side, and
tubesheet rotation. Based on this design, the
structural margins against burst/tube pullout,
as discussed in Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.121,
‘‘Bases for Plugging Degraded PWR
[pressurized-water reactor] Steam Generator
Tubes,’’ and TS 5.5.8 are maintained for both
normal and postulated accident conditions.
The final H* distance to preclude tube
pullout from the tubesheet at 0.95 probability
at 95% confidence is 20.60 inches.
The proposed change has no impact on the
structural or leakage integrity of the portion
of the tube outside of the tubesheet. The
proposed change maintains structural and
leakage integrity of the SG tubes consistent
with the performance criteria in TS 5.5.8.
Therefore, the proposed change results in no
significant increase in the probability of the
occurrence of a SGTR accident.
At normal operating pressures, leakage
from tube degradation below the proposed
limited inspection depth is limited by the
tube-to-tubesheet crevice. Consequently,
negligible normal operating leakage is
expected from degradation below the
inspected depth within the tubesheet region.
The consequences of an SGTR event are not
affected by the primary-to-secondary leakage
flow during the event as primary-tosecondary leakage flow through a postulated
tube that has been pulled out of the tubesheet
is essentially equivalent to a severed tube.
Therefore, the proposed change does not
result in a significant increase in the
consequences of a SGTR.
Concerning a postulated SLB event,
NextEra will apply a leakage factor of 5.22 to
the normal operating leakage associated with
the tubesheet expansion region in the
condition monitoring (CM) and operational
assessment (OA). The leakage factor of 5.22
is a bounding value for all SGs, both hot and
cold legs. The accident-induced leak rate
limit for Point Beach Unit 1 is 500 gpd
[gallons per day] at accident conditions. As
a result, the TS operational leak rate limit is
reduced from 150 gpd to 72 gpd through any
one steam generator to help to ensure that
accident induced leakage in excess of SLB
accident analysis assumptions will not occur.
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
87961
For the CM assessment, the component of
leakage from the prior cycle from below the
H* distance will be multiplied by a factor of
5.22 and added to the total leakage from any
other source and compared to the allowable
accident induced leakage limit. For the OA,
the difference in the leakage between the
allowable leakage and the accident induced
leakage from sources other than the tubesheet
expansion region will be divided by 5.22 and
compared to the observed operational
leakage.
No leakage factor will be applied to the
locked rotor or control rod ejection transients
due to their short duration.
Based on the above, the proposed changes
do not involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. The proposed changes do not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any previously evaluated.
The proposed changes to TS 3.4.13, TS
5.5.8, and TS 5.6.8 that alter the SG
inspection and reporting criteria do not
introduce any new equipment, create new
failure modes for existing equipment, or
create any new limiting single failures. Plant
operation will not be altered, and all safety
functions will continue to perform as
previously assumed in accident analyses.
Tube bundle integrity is maintained for all
plant conditions upon implementation of the
permanent alternate repair criteria.
Therefore, based on the above, the
proposed change does not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any previously evaluated.
3. The proposed changes do not involve a
significant reduction in the margin of safety.
The proposed changes to TS 3.4.13, TS
5.5.8, and TS 5.6.8 define the safety
significant portion of the tube that must be
inspected and repaired. WCAP–18089–P
identifies the specific inspection depth from
the top of the tubesheet below which any
type of tube degradation is shown to have no
impact on the performance criteria in NEI
97–06 Rev. 3, ‘‘Steam Generator Program
Guidelines.’’
The proposed change that alters the SG
inspection and reporting criteria maintains
the required structural margins of the SG
tubes for both normal and accident
conditions. Nuclear Energy Institute 97–06,
‘‘Steam Generator Program Guidelines,’’ and
NRC Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.121, ‘‘Bases for
Plugging Degraded PWR Steam Generator
Tubes’’ are used as the bases in the
development of the limited tubesheet
inspection depth methodology for
determining that SG tube integrity
considerations are maintained within
acceptable limits. RG 1.121 describes a
method acceptable to the NRC for meeting
General Design Criteria (GDC) 14, ‘‘Reactor
Coolant Pressure Boundary,’’ GDC 15,
‘‘Reactor Coolant System Design,’’ GDC 31,
‘‘Fracture Prevention of Reactor Coolant
Pressure Boundary,’’ and GDC 32,
‘‘Inspection of Reactor Coolant Pressure
Boundary,’’ by reducing the probability and
consequences of a SGTR. RG 1.121 concludes
that by determining the limiting safe
conditions for tube wall degradation, the
probability and consequences of a SGTR are
E:\FR\FM\06DEN1.SGM
06DEN1
87962
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2016 / Notices
reduced. This RG uses safety factors on loads
for tube burst that are consistent with the
requirements of Section III of the American
Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
Code.
For axially oriented cracking located
within the tubesheet, tube burst is precluded
due to the presence of the tubesheet. For
circumferentially oriented cracking,
Westinghouse WCAP–18089–P defines a
length of degradation-free expanded tubing
that provides the necessary resistance to tube
pullout due to the pressure induced forces,
with applicable safety factors applied.
Application of the limited hot and cold leg
tubesheet inspection criteria will preclude
unacceptable primary-to-secondary leakage
during all plant conditions. Using the
methodology for determining leakage as
described in WCAP–18089–P, it is shown
that significant adequate margin exists
between conservatively estimated accident
induced leakage and the allowable accident
leakage (500 gpd at operating conditions) if
either SG is assumed to be leaking at the TS
leakage limit of 72 gpd at the beginning of
the design basis accident.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not
involve a significant reduction in any margin
of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the
licensee’s analysis and, based on this
review, it appears that the three
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: William Blair,
Managing Attorney—Nuclear, Florida
Power & Light Company, P. O. Box
14000, 700 Universe Boulevard, Juno
Beach, Florida 33408–0420.
NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
South Carolina Electric and Gas
Company Docket Nos. 52–027 and 52–
028, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station
(VCSNS) Units 2 and 3, Fairfield
County, South Carolina
Date of amendment request:
September 20, 2016. A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML16267A163.
Description of amendment request:
This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards
information (SUNSI). The amendment
request proposes changes to the
Updated Final Safety Analysis Report
(UFSAR) in the form of departures from
the incorporated plant-specific Design
Control Document Tier 2* information.
Specifically, the proposed change
clarifies in the UFSAR how the quality
and strength of a specific set of couplers
welded to stainless steel embedment
plates already installed and embedded
in concrete are demonstrated through
visual examination and static tension
testing, in lieu of the nondestructive
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Dec 05, 2016
Jkt 241001
examination requirements of American
Institute of Steel Construction (AISC)
N690, ‘‘Specification for Safety-Related
Steel Structures for Nuclear Facilities.’’
Basis for proposed no significant
hazards consideration determination:
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 amendment involve
a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change describes how
evaluation of coupler strength, and by
extension, weld strength and quality are used
to demonstrate the capacity of partial joint
penetration (PJP) welds joining weldable
couplers to stainless steel embedment plates
as being able to perform their design function
in lieu of satisfying the AISC N690–1994,
Section Q1.26.2.2, Section Q1.26.2.3, and
Section Q1.26.3 requirements for nondestructive examination (NDE) on 10 percent
weld populations, reexamination, and repair,
respectively. The proposed change does not
affect the operation of any systems or
equipment that initiate an analyzed accident
or alter any structures, systems, and
components (SSCs) accident initiator or
initiating sequence of events.
The change has no adverse effect on the
design function of the mechanical couplers
or the SSCs to which the mechanical
couplers are welded. The probabilities of the
accidents evaluated in the Updated Final
Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) are not
affected.
The change does not impact the support,
design, or operation of mechanical and fluid
systems. The change does not impact the
support, design, or operation of any safetyrelated structures. There is no change to
plant systems or the response of systems to
postulated accident conditions. There is no
change to the predicted radioactive releases
due to normal operation or postulated
accident conditions. The plant response to
previously evaluated accidents or external
events is not adversely affected, nor does the
proposed change create any new accident
precursors.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does
not involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed amendment create
the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change describes how
evaluation of coupler strength, and by
extension, weld strength and quality are used
to demonstrate the capacity of PJP welds
joining weldable couplers to stainless steel
embedment plates as being able to perform
their design function in lieu of satisfying the
AISC N690–1994, Section Q1.26.2.2, Section
Q1.26.2.3, and Section Q1.26.3 requirements
for non-destructive examination on 10
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
percent weld populations, reexamination,
and repair, respectively.
The proposed change does not affect the
operation of any systems or equipment that
may initiate a new or different kind of
accident, or alter any SSC such that a new
accident initiator or initiating sequence of
events is created.
The proposed change does not adversely
affect the design function of the mechanical
couplers, the structures in which the
couplers are used, or any other SSC design
functions or methods of operation in a
manner that results in a new failure mode,
malfunction, or sequence of events that affect
safety-related or nonsafety-related
equipment. This activity does not allow for
a new fission product release path, result in
a new fission product barrier failure mode, or
create a new sequence of events that result
in significant fuel cladding failures.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does
not create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve
a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change describes how
evaluation of coupler strength, and by
extension, weld strength and quality are used
to demonstrate the capacity of the PJP welds
joining weldable couplers to stainless steel
embedment plates as being able to perform
their design function in lieu of satisfying the
AISC N690–1994, Section Q1.26.2.2, Section
Q1.26.2.3, and Section Q1.26.3 requirements
for non-destructive examination on 10
percent weld populations, reexamination,
and repair, respectively. The proposed
change satisfies the same design functions as
stated in the UFSAR. This change does not
adversely affect compliance with any design
function, design analysis, safety analysis
input or result, or design/safety margin. No
safety analysis or design basis acceptance
limit/criterion is challenged or exceeded by
the proposed change.
Because no safety analysis or design basis
acceptance limit/criterion is challenged or
exceeded by this change, no significant
margin of safety is reduced.
Therefore, the proposed change does 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
amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Kathryn M.
Sutton, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLC,
1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20004–2514.
NRC Branch Chief: Michael T.
Markley.
E:\FR\FM\06DEN1.SGM
06DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2016 / Notices
Order Imposing Procedures for Access
to Sensitive Unclassified NonSafeguards Information for Contention
Preparation
A. This Order contains instructions
regarding how potential parties to this
proceeding may request access to
documents containing SUNSI.
B. Within 10 days after publication of
this notice of hearing and opportunity to
petition for leave to intervene, any
potential party who believes access to
SUNSI is necessary to respond to this
notice may request such access. A
‘‘potential party’’ is any person who
intends to participate as a party by
demonstrating standing and filing an
admissible contention under 10 CFR
2.309. Requests for access to SUNSI
submitted later than 10 days after
publication of this notice will not be
considered absent a showing of good
cause for the late filing, addressing why
the request could not have been filed
earlier.
C. The requester shall submit a letter
requesting permission to access SUNSI
to the Office of the Secretary, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention:
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff,
and provide a copy to the Associate
General Counsel for Hearings,
Enforcement and Administration, Office
of the General Counsel, Washington, DC
20555–0001. The expedited delivery or
courier mail address for both offices is:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland 20852. The email address for
the Office of the Secretary and the
Office of the General Counsel are
Hearing.Docket@nrc.gov and
OGCmailcenter@nrc.gov, respectively.1
The request must include the following
information:
(1) A description of the licensing
action with a citation to this Federal
Register notice;
(2) The name and address of the
potential party and a description of the
potential party’s particularized interest
that could be harmed by the action
identified in C.(1); and
(3) The identity of the individual or
entity requesting access to SUNSI and
the requester’s basis for the need for the
information in order to meaningfully
participate in this adjudicatory
proceeding. In particular, the request
must explain why publicly-available
versions of the information requested
would not be sufficient to provide the
basis and specificity for a proffered
contention.
D. Based on an evaluation of the
information submitted under paragraph
C.(3) the NRC staff will determine
within 10 days of receipt of the request
whether:
(1) There is a reasonable basis to
believe the petitioner is likely to
establish standing to participate in this
NRC proceeding; and
(2) The requestor has established a
legitimate need for access to SUNSI.
E. If the NRC staff determines that the
requestor satisfies both D.(1) and D.(2)
above, the NRC staff will notify the
requestor in writing that access to
SUNSI has been granted. The written
notification will contain instructions on
how the requestor may obtain copies of
the requested documents, and any other
conditions that may apply to access to
those documents. These conditions may
include, but are not limited to, the
signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement
or Affidavit, or Protective Order2 setting
forth terms and conditions to prevent
the unauthorized or inadvertent
disclosure of SUNSI by each individual
who will be granted access to SUNSI.
F. Review of Denials of Access.
(1) If the request for access to SUNSI
is denied by the NRC staff after a
determination on standing and need for
access, the NRC staff shall immediately
notify the requestor in writing, briefly
stating the reason or reasons for the
denial.
(2) The requester may challenge the
NRC staff’s adverse determination by
1 While a request for hearing or petition to
intervene in this proceeding must comply with the
filing requirements of the NRC’s ‘‘E-Filing Rule,’’
the initial request to access SUNSI under these
procedures should be submitted as described in this
paragraph.
2 Any motion for Protective Order or draft NonDisclosure Affidavit or Agreement for SUNSI must
be filed with the presiding officer or the Chief
Administrative Judge if the presiding officer has not
yet been designated, within 30 days of the deadline
for the receipt of the written access request.
NextEra Energy, Point Beach, LLC,
Docket No. 50–266, Point Beach Nuclear
Plant, Unit 1, Town of Two Creeks,
Manitowoc County, Wisconsin
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
South Carolina Electric and Gas
Company Docket Nos. 52–027 and 52–
028, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station
(VCSNS) Units 2 and 3, Fairfield
County, South Carolina
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Dec 05, 2016
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
87963
filing a challenge within 5 days of
receipt of that determination with: (a)
the presiding officer designated in this
proceeding; (b) if no presiding officer
has been appointed, the Chief
Administrative Judge, or if he or she is
unavailable, another administrative
judge, or an administrative law judge
with jurisdiction pursuant to 10 CFR
2.318(a); or (c) an officer if that officer
has been designated to rule on
information access issues.
G. Review of Grants of Access. A
party other than the requester may
challenge an NRC staff determination
granting access to SUNSI whose release
would harm that party’s interest
independent of the proceeding. Such a
challenge must be filed with the Chief
Administrative Judge within 5 days of
the notification by the NRC staff of its
grant of access.
If challenges to the NRC staff
determinations are filed, these
procedures give way to the normal
process for litigating disputes
concerning access to information. The
availability of interlocutory review by
the Commission of orders ruling on
such NRC staff determinations (whether
granting or denying access) is governed
by 10 CFR 2.311.3
H. The Commission expects that the
NRC staff and presiding officers (and
any other reviewing officers) will
consider and resolve requests for access
to SUNSI, and motions for protective
orders, in a timely fashion in order to
minimize any unnecessary delays in
identifying those petitioners who have
standing and who have proposed
contentions meeting the specificity and
basis requirements in 10 CFR part 2.
Attachment 1 to this Order summarizes
the general target schedule for
processing and resolving requests under
these procedures.
It is so ordered.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd
day of November, 2016.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
3 Requesters should note that the filing
requirements of the NRC’s E-Filing Rule (72 FR
49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 FR
46562; August 3, 2012) apply to appeals of NRC
staff determinations (because they must be served
on a presiding officer or the Commission, as
applicable), but not to the initial SUNSI request
submitted to the NRC staff under these procedures.
E:\FR\FM\06DEN1.SGM
06DEN1
87964
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2016 / Notices
ATTACHMENT 1—GENERAL TARGET SCHEDULE FOR PROCESSING AND RESOLVING REQUESTS FOR ACCESS TO SENSITIVE
UNCLASSIFIED NON-SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION IN THIS PROCEEDING
Day
Event/Activity
0 ...........
Publication of FEDERAL REGISTER notice of hearing and opportunity to petition for leave to intervene, including order with instructions
for access requests.
Deadline for submitting requests for access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI) with information: supporting the standing of a potential party identified by name and address; describing the need for the information in order for the potential party to participate meaningfully in an adjudicatory proceeding.
Deadline for submitting petition for intervention containing: (i) demonstration of standing; and (ii) all contentions whose formulation
does not require access to SUNSI (+25 Answers to petition for intervention; +7 petitioner/requestor reply).
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff informs the requester of the staff’s determination whether the request for access
provides a reasonable basis to believe standing can be established and shows need for SUNSI. (NRC staff also informs any party
to the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the release of the information.) If NRC staff
makes the finding of need for SUNSI and likelihood of standing, NRC staff begins document processing (preparation of redactions
or review of redacted documents).
If NRC staff finds no ‘‘need’’ or no likelihood of standing, the deadline for petitioner/requester to file a motion seeking a ruling to reverse the NRC staff’s denial of access; NRC staff files copy of access determination with the presiding officer (or Chief Administrative Judge or other designated officer, as appropriate). If NRC staff finds ‘‘need’’ for SUNSI, the deadline for any party to the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the release of the information to file a motion seeking a
ruling to reverse the NRC staff’s grant of access.
Deadline for NRC staff reply to motions to reverse NRC staff determination(s).
(Receipt +30) If NRC staff finds standing and need for SUNSI, deadline for NRC staff to complete information processing and file motion for Protective Order and draft Non-Disclosure Affidavit. Deadline for applicant/licensee to file Non-Disclosure Agreement for
SUNSI.
If access granted: issuance of presiding officer or other designated officer decision on motion for protective order for access to sensitive information (including schedule for providing access and submission of contentions) or decision reversing a final adverse determination by the NRC staff.
Deadline for filing executed Non-Disclosure Affidavits. Access provided to SUNSI consistent with decision issuing the protective order.
Deadline for submission of contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI. However, if more than 25 days remain
between the petitioner’s receipt of (or access to) the information and the deadline for filing all other contentions (as established in
the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the petitioner may file its SUNSI contentions by that later deadline.
(Contention receipt +25) Answers to contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI.
(Answer receipt +7) Petitioner/Intervenor reply to answers.
Decision on contention admission.
10 .........
60 .........
20 .........
25 .........
30 .........
40 .........
A ...........
A + 3 ....
A + 28 ..
A + 53 ..
A + 60 ..
>A + 60
[FR Doc. 2016–28521 Filed 12–5–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2016–0245]
Biweekly Notice; Applications and
Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses and Combined Licenses
Involving No Significant Hazards
Considerations
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Biweekly notice.
AGENCY:
Pursuant to Section 189a.(2)
of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) is
publishing this regular biweekly notice.
The Act requires the Commission to
publish notice of any amendments
issued, or proposed to be issued, and
grants the Commission the authority to
issue and make immediately effective
any amendment to an operating license
or combined license, as applicable,
upon a determination by the
Commission that such amendment
involves no significant hazards
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:39 Dec 05, 2016
Jkt 241001
consideration, notwithstanding the
pendency before the Commission of a
request for a hearing from any person.
This biweekly notice includes all
notices of amendments issued, or
proposed to be issued, from November
8 to November 21, 2016. The last
biweekly notice was published on
November 22, 2016.
DATES: Comments must be filed by
January 5, 2017. A request for a hearing
must be filed by February 6, 2017.
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–2016–0245. 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.
• Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey,
Office of Administration, Mail Stop:
OWFN–12–H08, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001.
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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:
Janet Burkhardt, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415–
1384, email: Janet.Burkhardt@nrc.gov.
I. Obtaining Information and
Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2016–
0245, facility name, unit number(s),
plant docket number, application date,
and subject 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–2016–0245.
• 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/
E:\FR\FM\06DEN1.SGM
06DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 234 (Tuesday, December 6, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 87958-87964]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-28521]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2016-0240]
Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and
Combined Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards
Considerations and Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive
Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: License amendment request; notice of opportunity to comment,
request a hearing, and petition for leave to intervene; order imposing
procedures.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) received and is
considering approval of two amendment requests. The amendment requests
are for Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Unit 1; and Virgil C. Summer Nuclear
Station, Units 2 and 3. For each amendment request, the NRC proposes to
determine that they involve no significant hazards consideration.
Because each amendment request contains sensitive unclassified non-
safeguards information (SUNSI) an order imposes procedures to obtain
access to SUNSI for contention preparation.
DATES: Comments must be filed by January 5, 2017. A request for a
hearing must be filed by February 6, 2017. Any potential party as
defined in Sec. 2.4 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10
CFR), who believes access to SUNSI is necessary to respond to this
notice must request document access by December 16, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods.
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0240. 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.
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: Janet Burkhardt, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1384; email: Janet.Burkhardt@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID facility name, unit number(s), plant
docket number, application date, and subject 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-2016-0240.
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 it is available
in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this
document.
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-2016-0240, facility name, unit
number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject 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
[[Page 87959]]
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. Background
Pursuant to Section 189a.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act), the NRC is publishing this notice. The Act requires
the Commission to publish notice of any amendments issued, or proposed
to be issued and grants the Commission the authority to issue and make
immediately effective any amendment to an operating license or combined
license, as applicable, upon a determination by the Commission that
such amendment involves no significant hazards consideration,
notwithstanding the pendency before the Commission of a request for a
hearing from any person.
This notice includes notices of amendments containing SUNSI.
III. Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility
Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses, Proposed No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following
amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under
the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation
of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1)
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated, (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. The basis
for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown
below.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the
expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The
Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-
day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment
involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the
Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-
day comment period if 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. If the Commission
takes action prior to the expiration of either the comment period or
the notice period, it will publish a notice of issuance in the Federal
Register. If the Commission makes 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.
A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To Intervene
Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any
persons (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may
file a request for a hearing and a petition to intervene (petition)
with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in accordance with
the Commission's ``Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure'' in 10 CFR
part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR
2.309, which is available at the NRC's PDR, located at One White Flint
North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland 20852. 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/. If a petition is filed within 60 days,
the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or
by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing
Board Panel, will rule on the petition; and the Secretary or the Chief
Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition shall set forth with
particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how
that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The
petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention
should be permitted with particular reference to the following general
requirements: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the
petitioner; (2) the nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to
be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the
petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding;
and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be
entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. The petition
must also set forth the specific contentions which the petitioner seeks
to have litigated at the proceeding.
Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue
of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the
petitioner shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for the
contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert
opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner
intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The
petitioner must also provide references to those specific sources and
documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the petitioner
intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion to support
its position on the issue. The petition must include sufficient
information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on
a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to
matters within the scope of the proceeding. The contention must be one
which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner
who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one
contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding,
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene,
and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing with respect to resolution of that person's admitted
contentions consistent with the NRC's regulations, policies, and
procedures.
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) through (iii).
A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian
Tribe, or agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to
participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1).
The petition should state the nature and extent of the petitioner's
interest in the proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the
Commission by February 6, 2017. The petition must be filed in
accordance with the filing
[[Page 87960]]
instructions in the ``Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)'' section of
this document, and should meet the requirements for petitions set forth
in this section, except that under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local
governmental body, or Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency
thereof does not need to address the standing requirements in 10 CFR
2.309(d) if the facility is located within its boundaries. A State,
local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency
thereof may also have the opportunity to participate under 10 CFR
2.315(c).
If a hearing is granted, any person who does not wish, or is not
qualified, to become a party to the proceeding may, in the discretion
of the presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited appearance
pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a
limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of position on
the issues, but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding. A
limited appearance may be made at any session of the hearing or at any
prehearing conference, subject to the limits and conditions as may be
imposed by the presiding officer. Details regarding the opportunity to
make a limited appearance will be provided by the presiding officer if
such sessions are scheduled.
B. 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 (hereinafter
``petition''), 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, as amended at 77
FR 46562; August 3, 2012). 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 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 petition (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 available on the NRC's public Web site at
https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/adjudicatory-sub.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 Electronic Filing Help Desk will not be
able to offer assistance in using unlisted software.
Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a
docket has been created, the participant can then submit a petition.
Submissions should be in Portable Document Format (PDF). Additional
guidance on PDF submissions is available on the NRC's public Web site
at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.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 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 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 Electronic
Filing 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 Electronic Filing Help Desk is available between 9 a.m.
and 7 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
stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and
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, 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 petition 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
[[Page 87961]]
not to include copyrighted materials in their submission.
The Commission will issue a notice or order granting or denying a
hearing request or intervention petition, designating the issues for
any hearing that will be held and designating the Presiding Officer. A
notice granting a hearing will be published in the Federal Register and
served on the parties to the hearing.
For further details with respect to these license amendment
applications, see the application for amendment which is available for
public inspection in ADAMS and at the NRC's PDR. For additional
direction on accessing information related to this document, see the
``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' section of this
document.
NextEra Energy, Point Beach, LLC, Docket No. 50-266, Point Beach
Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, Town of Two Creeks, Manitowoc County, Wisconsin
Date of amendment request: July 29, 2016. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML16237A066.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguard information (SUNSI). The amendment
would revise technical specification (TS) 3.4.13, RCS [Reactor Coolant
System] Operational Leakage; TS 5.5.8, Steam Generator (SG) Program;
and TS 5.6.8, Steam Generator Tube Inspection Report, to exclude a
portion of the tubes below the top of the SG tube sheet from periodic
inspections and plugging.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: 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. The proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The proposed changes to TS 3.4.13, TS 5.5.8, and TS 5.6.8 have
no effect on accident probabilities or consequences. The previously
analyzed accidents are initiated by the failure of plant structures,
systems, or components. The proposed change that alters the steam
generator (SG) inspection and reporting criteria does not have a
detrimental impact on the integrity of any plant structure, system,
or component that initiates an analyzed event. The proposed change
will not alter the operation of, or otherwise increase the failure
probability of any plant equipment that initiates an analyzed
accident.
Of the applicable accidents previously evaluated, the limiting
transients with consideration to the proposed change to the SG tube
inspection and repair criteria are: The steam generator tube rupture
(SGTR) event, the steam line break (SLB), locked rotor and control
rod ejection postulated accidents. Loss of Coolant Accident
conditions cause a compressive load to act on a tube. This accident
attempts to displace the tube into the tubesheet rather than pull it
out, and, therefore, is not a factor in this amendment request.
Another faulted load consideration is a safe shutdown earthquake;
however, seismic analysis has shown that axial loading of the tubes
is negligible during this event (Section 5.0 of Reference 10).
Addressing the SGTR event, the required structural integrity
margins of the SG tubes and the tube-to-tubesheet joint over the H*
distance will be maintained. Tube rupture in tubes with cracks
within the tubesheet is precluded by the constraint provided by the
presence of the tubesheet and the tube-to-tubesheet joint. Tube
burst cannot occur within the thickness of the tubesheet. The tube-
to-tubesheet joint constraint results from the hydraulic expansion
process, thermal expansion mismatch between the tube and tubesheet,
from the differential pressure between the primary and secondary
side, and tubesheet rotation. Based on this design, the structural
margins against burst/tube pullout, as discussed in Regulatory Guide
(RG) 1.121, ``Bases for Plugging Degraded PWR [pressurized-water
reactor] Steam Generator Tubes,'' and TS 5.5.8 are maintained for
both normal and postulated accident conditions. The final H*
distance to preclude tube pullout from the tubesheet at 0.95
probability at 95% confidence is 20.60 inches.
The proposed change has no impact on the structural or leakage
integrity of the portion of the tube outside of the tubesheet. The
proposed change maintains structural and leakage integrity of the SG
tubes consistent with the performance criteria in TS 5.5.8.
Therefore, the proposed change results in no significant increase in
the probability of the occurrence of a SGTR accident.
At normal operating pressures, leakage from tube degradation
below the proposed limited inspection depth is limited by the tube-
to-tubesheet crevice. Consequently, negligible normal operating
leakage is expected from degradation below the inspected depth
within the tubesheet region. The consequences of an SGTR event are
not affected by the primary-to-secondary leakage flow during the
event as primary-to-secondary leakage flow through a postulated tube
that has been pulled out of the tubesheet is essentially equivalent
to a severed tube. Therefore, the proposed change does not result in
a significant increase in the consequences of a SGTR.
Concerning a postulated SLB event, NextEra will apply a leakage
factor of 5.22 to the normal operating leakage associated with the
tubesheet expansion region in the condition monitoring (CM) and
operational assessment (OA). The leakage factor of 5.22 is a
bounding value for all SGs, both hot and cold legs. The accident-
induced leak rate limit for Point Beach Unit 1 is 500 gpd [gallons
per day] at accident conditions. As a result, the TS operational
leak rate limit is reduced from 150 gpd to 72 gpd through any one
steam generator to help to ensure that accident induced leakage in
excess of SLB accident analysis assumptions will not occur.
For the CM assessment, the component of leakage from the prior
cycle from below the H* distance will be multiplied by a factor of
5.22 and added to the total leakage from any other source and
compared to the allowable accident induced leakage limit. For the
OA, the difference in the leakage between the allowable leakage and
the accident induced leakage from sources other than the tubesheet
expansion region will be divided by 5.22 and compared to the
observed operational leakage.
No leakage factor will be applied to the locked rotor or control
rod ejection transients due to their short duration.
Based on the above, the proposed changes do not involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated.
2. The proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
The proposed changes to TS 3.4.13, TS 5.5.8, and TS 5.6.8 that
alter the SG inspection and reporting criteria do not introduce any
new equipment, create new failure modes for existing equipment, or
create any new limiting single failures. Plant operation will not be
altered, and all safety functions will continue to perform as
previously assumed in accident analyses. Tube bundle integrity is
maintained for all plant conditions upon implementation of the
permanent alternate repair criteria.
Therefore, based on the above, the proposed change does not
create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from
any previously evaluated.
3. The proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction
in the margin of safety.
The proposed changes to TS 3.4.13, TS 5.5.8, and TS 5.6.8 define
the safety significant portion of the tube that must be inspected
and repaired. WCAP-18089-P identifies the specific inspection depth
from the top of the tubesheet below which any type of tube
degradation is shown to have no impact on the performance criteria
in NEI 97-06 Rev. 3, ``Steam Generator Program Guidelines.''
The proposed change that alters the SG inspection and reporting
criteria maintains the required structural margins of the SG tubes
for both normal and accident conditions. Nuclear Energy Institute
97-06, ``Steam Generator Program Guidelines,'' and NRC Regulatory
Guide (RG) 1.121, ``Bases for Plugging Degraded PWR Steam Generator
Tubes'' are used as the bases in the development of the limited
tubesheet inspection depth methodology for determining that SG tube
integrity considerations are maintained within acceptable limits. RG
1.121 describes a method acceptable to the NRC for meeting General
Design Criteria (GDC) 14, ``Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary,'' GDC
15, ``Reactor Coolant System Design,'' GDC 31, ``Fracture Prevention
of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary,'' and GDC 32, ``Inspection of
Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary,'' by reducing the probability and
consequences of a SGTR. RG 1.121 concludes that by determining the
limiting safe conditions for tube wall degradation, the probability
and consequences of a SGTR are
[[Page 87962]]
reduced. This RG uses safety factors on loads for tube burst that
are consistent with the requirements of Section III of the American
Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code.
For axially oriented cracking located within the tubesheet, tube
burst is precluded due to the presence of the tubesheet. For
circumferentially oriented cracking, Westinghouse WCAP-18089-P
defines a length of degradation-free expanded tubing that provides
the necessary resistance to tube pullout due to the pressure induced
forces, with applicable safety factors applied. Application of the
limited hot and cold leg tubesheet inspection criteria will preclude
unacceptable primary-to-secondary leakage during all plant
conditions. Using the methodology for determining leakage as
described in WCAP-18089-P, it is shown that significant adequate
margin exists between conservatively estimated accident induced
leakage and the allowable accident leakage (500 gpd at operating
conditions) if either SG is assumed to be leaking at the TS leakage
limit of 72 gpd at the beginning of the design basis accident.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant
reduction in any margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: William Blair, Managing Attorney--Nuclear,
Florida Power & Light Company, P. O. Box 14000, 700 Universe Boulevard,
Juno Beach, Florida 33408-0420.
NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona.
South Carolina Electric and Gas Company Docket Nos. 52-027 and 52-028,
Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station (VCSNS) Units 2 and 3, Fairfield
County, South Carolina
Date of amendment request: September 20, 2016. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML16267A163.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The
amendment request proposes changes to the Updated Final Safety Analysis
Report (UFSAR) in the form of departures from the incorporated plant-
specific Design Control Document Tier 2* information. Specifically, the
proposed change clarifies in the UFSAR how the quality and strength of
a specific set of couplers welded to stainless steel embedment plates
already installed and embedded in concrete are demonstrated through
visual examination and static tension testing, in lieu of the
nondestructive examination requirements of American Institute of Steel
Construction (AISC) N690, ``Specification for Safety-Related Steel
Structures for Nuclear Facilities.''
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: 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 amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change describes how evaluation of coupler
strength, and by extension, weld strength and quality are used to
demonstrate the capacity of partial joint penetration (PJP) welds
joining weldable couplers to stainless steel embedment plates as
being able to perform their design function in lieu of satisfying
the AISC N690-1994, Section Q1.26.2.2, Section Q1.26.2.3, and
Section Q1.26.3 requirements for non-destructive examination (NDE)
on 10 percent weld populations, reexamination, and repair,
respectively. The proposed change does not affect the operation of
any systems or equipment that initiate an analyzed accident or alter
any structures, systems, and components (SSCs) accident initiator or
initiating sequence of events.
The change has no adverse effect on the design function of the
mechanical couplers or the SSCs to which the mechanical couplers are
welded. The probabilities of the accidents evaluated in the Updated
Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) are not affected.
The change does not impact the support, design, or operation of
mechanical and fluid systems. The change does not impact the
support, design, or operation of any safety-related structures.
There is no change to plant systems or the response of systems to
postulated accident conditions. There is no change to the predicted
radioactive releases due to normal operation or postulated accident
conditions. The plant response to previously evaluated accidents or
external events is not adversely affected, nor does the proposed
change create any new accident precursors.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change describes how evaluation of coupler
strength, and by extension, weld strength and quality are used to
demonstrate the capacity of PJP welds joining weldable couplers to
stainless steel embedment plates as being able to perform their
design function in lieu of satisfying the AISC N690-1994, Section
Q1.26.2.2, Section Q1.26.2.3, and Section Q1.26.3 requirements for
non-destructive examination on 10 percent weld populations,
reexamination, and repair, respectively.
The proposed change does not affect the operation of any systems
or equipment that may initiate a new or different kind of accident,
or alter any SSC such that a new accident initiator or initiating
sequence of events is created.
The proposed change does not adversely affect the design
function of the mechanical couplers, the structures in which the
couplers are used, or any other SSC design functions or methods of
operation in a manner that results in a new failure mode,
malfunction, or sequence of events that affect safety-related or
nonsafety-related equipment. This activity does not allow for a new
fission product release path, result in a new fission product
barrier failure mode, or create a new sequence of events that result
in significant fuel cladding failures.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change describes how evaluation of coupler
strength, and by extension, weld strength and quality are used to
demonstrate the capacity of the PJP welds joining weldable couplers
to stainless steel embedment plates as being able to perform their
design function in lieu of satisfying the AISC N690-1994, Section
Q1.26.2.2, Section Q1.26.2.3, and Section Q1.26.3 requirements for
non-destructive examination on 10 percent weld populations,
reexamination, and repair, respectively. The proposed change
satisfies the same design functions as stated in the UFSAR. This
change does not adversely affect compliance with any design
function, design analysis, safety analysis input or result, or
design/safety margin. No safety analysis or design basis acceptance
limit/criterion is challenged or exceeded by the proposed change.
Because no safety analysis or design basis acceptance limit/
criterion is challenged or exceeded by this change, no significant
margin of safety is reduced.
Therefore, the proposed change does 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
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Kathryn M. Sutton, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius
LLC, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004-2514.
NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. Markley.
[[Page 87963]]
Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information for Contention Preparation
NextEra Energy, Point Beach, LLC, Docket No. 50-266, Point Beach
Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, Town of Two Creeks, Manitowoc County, Wisconsin
South Carolina Electric and Gas Company Docket Nos. 52-027 and 52-028,
Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station (VCSNS) Units 2 and 3, Fairfield
County, South Carolina
A. This Order contains instructions regarding how potential parties
to this proceeding may request access to documents containing SUNSI.
B. Within 10 days after publication of this notice of hearing and
opportunity to petition for leave to intervene, any potential party who
believes access to SUNSI is necessary to respond to this notice may
request such access. A ``potential party'' is any person who intends to
participate as a party by demonstrating standing and filing an
admissible contention under 10 CFR 2.309. Requests for access to SUNSI
submitted later than 10 days after publication of this notice will not
be considered absent a showing of good cause for the late filing,
addressing why the request could not have been filed earlier.
C. The requester shall submit a letter requesting permission to
access SUNSI to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff, and provide a copy to the Associate General
Counsel for Hearings, Enforcement and Administration, Office of the
General Counsel, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The expedited delivery or
courier mail address for both offices is: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The email
address for the Office of the Secretary and the Office of the General
Counsel are Hearing.Docket@nrc.gov and OGCmailcenter@nrc.gov,
respectively.\1\ The request must include the following information:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ While a request for hearing or petition to intervene in this
proceeding must comply with the filing requirements of the NRC's
``E-Filing Rule,'' the initial request to access SUNSI under these
procedures should be submitted as described in this paragraph.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) A description of the licensing action with a citation to this
Federal Register notice;
(2) The name and address of the potential party and a description
of the potential party's particularized interest that could be harmed
by the action identified in C.(1); and
(3) The identity of the individual or entity requesting access to
SUNSI and the requester's basis for the need for the information in
order to meaningfully participate in this adjudicatory proceeding. In
particular, the request must explain why publicly-available versions of
the information requested would not be sufficient to provide the basis
and specificity for a proffered contention.
D. Based on an evaluation of the information submitted under
paragraph C.(3) the NRC staff will determine within 10 days of receipt
of the request whether:
(1) There is a reasonable basis to believe the petitioner is likely
to establish standing to participate in this NRC proceeding; and
(2) The requestor has established a legitimate need for access to
SUNSI.
E. If the NRC staff determines that the requestor satisfies both
D.(1) and D.(2) above, the NRC staff will notify the requestor in
writing that access to SUNSI has been granted. The written notification
will contain instructions on how the requestor may obtain copies of the
requested documents, and any other conditions that may apply to access
to those documents. These conditions may include, but are not limited
to, the signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit, or
Protective Order\2\ setting forth terms and conditions to prevent the
unauthorized or inadvertent disclosure of SUNSI by each individual who
will be granted access to SUNSI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Any motion for Protective Order or draft Non-Disclosure
Affidavit or Agreement for SUNSI must be filed with the presiding
officer or the Chief Administrative Judge if the presiding officer
has not yet been designated, within 30 days of the deadline for the
receipt of the written access request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Review of Denials of Access.
(1) If the request for access to SUNSI is denied by the NRC staff
after a determination on standing and need for access, the NRC staff
shall immediately notify the requestor in writing, briefly stating the
reason or reasons for the denial.
(2) The requester may challenge the NRC staff's adverse
determination by filing a challenge within 5 days of receipt of that
determination with: (a) the presiding officer designated in this
proceeding; (b) if no presiding officer has been appointed, the Chief
Administrative Judge, or if he or she is unavailable, another
administrative judge, or an administrative law judge with jurisdiction
pursuant to 10 CFR 2.318(a); or (c) an officer if that officer has been
designated to rule on information access issues.
G. Review of Grants of Access. A party other than the requester may
challenge an NRC staff determination granting access to SUNSI whose
release would harm that party's interest independent of the proceeding.
Such a challenge must be filed with the Chief Administrative Judge
within 5 days of the notification by the NRC staff of its grant of
access.
If challenges to the NRC staff determinations are filed, these
procedures give way to the normal process for litigating disputes
concerning access to information. The availability of interlocutory
review by the Commission of orders ruling on such NRC staff
determinations (whether granting or denying access) is governed by 10
CFR 2.311.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Requesters should note that the filing requirements of the
NRC's E-Filing Rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77
FR 46562; August 3, 2012) apply to appeals of NRC staff
determinations (because they must be served on a presiding officer
or the Commission, as applicable), but not to the initial SUNSI
request submitted to the NRC staff under these procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H. The Commission expects that the NRC staff and presiding officers
(and any other reviewing officers) will consider and resolve requests
for access to SUNSI, and motions for protective orders, in a timely
fashion in order to minimize any unnecessary delays in identifying
those petitioners who have standing and who have proposed contentions
meeting the specificity and basis requirements in 10 CFR part 2.
Attachment 1 to this Order summarizes the general target schedule for
processing and resolving requests under these procedures.
It is so ordered.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd day of November, 2016.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[[Page 87964]]
Attachment 1--General Target Schedule for Processing and Resolving
Requests for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information
in This Proceeding
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day Event/Activity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0................... Publication of Federal Register notice of hearing
and opportunity to petition for leave to
intervene, including order with instructions for
access requests.
10.................. Deadline for submitting requests for access to
Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information
(SUNSI) with information: supporting the standing
of a potential party identified by name and
address; describing the need for the information
in order for the potential party to participate
meaningfully in an adjudicatory proceeding.
60.................. Deadline for submitting petition for intervention
containing: (i) demonstration of standing; and
(ii) all contentions whose formulation does not
require access to SUNSI (+25 Answers to petition
for intervention; +7 petitioner/requestor reply).
20.................. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff
informs the requester of the staff's
determination whether the request for access
provides a reasonable basis to believe standing
can be established and shows need for SUNSI. (NRC
staff also informs any party to the proceeding
whose interest independent of the proceeding
would be harmed by the release of the
information.) If NRC staff makes the finding of
need for SUNSI and likelihood of standing, NRC
staff begins document processing (preparation of
redactions or review of redacted documents).
25.................. If NRC staff finds no ``need'' or no likelihood of
standing, the deadline for petitioner/requester
to file a motion seeking a ruling to reverse the
NRC staff's denial of access; NRC staff files
copy of access determination with the presiding
officer (or Chief Administrative Judge or other
designated officer, as appropriate). If NRC staff
finds ``need'' for SUNSI, the deadline for any
party to the proceeding whose interest
independent of the proceeding would be harmed by
the release of the information to file a motion
seeking a ruling to reverse the NRC staff's grant
of access.
30.................. Deadline for NRC staff reply to motions to reverse
NRC staff determination(s).
40.................. (Receipt +30) If NRC staff finds standing and need
for SUNSI, deadline for NRC staff to complete
information processing and file motion for
Protective Order and draft Non-Disclosure
Affidavit. Deadline for applicant/licensee to
file Non-Disclosure Agreement for SUNSI.
A................... If access granted: issuance of presiding officer
or other designated officer decision on motion
for protective order for access to sensitive
information (including schedule for providing
access and submission of contentions) or decision
reversing a final adverse determination by the
NRC staff.
A + 3............... Deadline for filing executed Non-Disclosure
Affidavits. Access provided to SUNSI consistent
with decision issuing the protective order.
A + 28.............. Deadline for submission of contentions whose
development depends upon access to SUNSI.
However, if more than 25 days remain between the
petitioner's receipt of (or access to) the
information and the deadline for filing all other
contentions (as established in the notice of
hearing or opportunity for hearing), the
petitioner may file its SUNSI contentions by that
later deadline.
A + 53.............. (Contention receipt +25) Answers to contentions
whose development depends upon access to SUNSI.
A + 60.............. (Answer receipt +7) Petitioner/Intervenor reply to
answers.
>A + 60............. Decision on contention admission.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2016-28521 Filed 12-5-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P