82 FR 20493 - 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 Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 83 (May 2, 2017)
Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 83 (May 2, 2017)
| Page Range | 20493-20500 | |
| FR Document | 2017-08896 |
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 83 (Tuesday, May 2, 2017)] [Notices] [Pages 20493-20500] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2017-08896] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2017-0100] 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 three amendment requests. The amendment requests are for Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, and H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant Unit No. 2; Exelon Generation Company, LLC and PSEG Nuclear LLC, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3; and South Carolina Electric & Gas Company and South Carolina Public Service Authority, 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 June 1, 2017. A request for a hearing must be filed by July 3, 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 May 12, 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 http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2017-0100. 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: TWFN-8-D36, 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: Lynn Ronewicz, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1927; email: Lynn.Ronewicz@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: [[Page 20494]] I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2017-0100, 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 http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2017-0100. NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by 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-2017-0100, 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 http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information. If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS. II. 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, or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. 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 petition for leave 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. The NRC's regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. Alternatively, a copy of the regulations is available at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, the Commission or a presiding officer will rule on the petition and, if appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be issued. As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements for standing: (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 that may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), the petition must also set forth the specific contentions which the petitioner seeks to have litigated in 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 must 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 [[Page 20495]] provide references to the specific sources and documents on which the petitioner intends to rely to support its position on the issue. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant or licensee on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions must 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 the requirements at 10 CFR 2.309(f) 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. Parties have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing with respect to resolution of that party's admitted contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence, consistent with the NRC's regulations, policies, and procedures. Petitions must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. Petitions and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the 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). The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the ``Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)'' section of this document. If a hearing is requested, and the Commission has not made a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to establish when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, then any hearing held would take place before the issuance of the amendment unless the Commission finds an imminent danger to the health or safety of the public, in which case it will issue an appropriate order or rule under 10 CFR part 2. 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 July 3, 2017. The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing 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. Alternatively, a State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof may participate as a non-party under 10 CFR 2.315(c). If a hearing is granted, any person who is not a party to the proceeding and is not affiliated with or represented by a party may, at 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 his or her 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 and petition, any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition, and documents filed by interested governmental entities that request to participate 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. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions may be found in the Guidance for Electronic Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. 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 (1) request a digital identification (ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign submissions and access the E-Filing system for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a petition or other adjudicatory document (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 http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant can then submit adjudicatory documents. Submissions must be in Portable Document Format (PDF). Additional guidance on PDF submissions is available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the document is 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 document on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before adjudicatory documents are filed so that they can obtain access to the documents via the E-Filing system. [[Page 20496]] A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E- Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's Electronic Filing Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC's public Web site at http://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 6 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 adjudicatory documents 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://adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission or the presiding officer. If you do not have an NRC-issued digital ID certificate as described above, click cancel when the link requests certificates and you will be automatically directed to the NRC's electronic hearing dockets where you will be able to access any publicly available documents in a particular hearing docket. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, or personal phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law requires submission of such information. For example, in some instances, individuals provide home addresses in order to demonstrate proximity to a facility or site. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission. Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket No. 50-400, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 (HNP), Wake and Chatham Counties, North Carolina Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket No. 50-261, H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant Unit No. 2 (RNP), Darlington County, South Carolina Date of amendment request: November 19, 2015, as supplemented by letters dated October 3, 2016, and November 10, 2016. Publicly- available versions are in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML15323A351, ML16278A080, and ML16315A286. Description of amendment request: The amendment request contains sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The NRC staff previously made a proposed determination that the license amendment request dated November 19, 2015, involves no significant hazards consideration (81 FR 19645; April 5, 2016). Subsequently, by letter dated October 3, 2016, the licensee provided additional information that expanded the scope of the amendment request as originally noticed. Accordingly, this notice supersedes the previous notice in its entirety. The amendment requests plant-specific review and approval of reactor core design methodology reports DPC-NE-3008-P, Revision 0, ``Thermal-Hydraulic Models for Transient Analysis,'' and DPC-NE-3009-P, Revision 0, ``FSAR/UFSAR [Final Safety Analysis Report/ Updated Final Safety Analysis Report] Chapter 15 Transient Analysis Methodology,'' for adoption into the HNP and RNP Technical Specifications. In the supplement dated October 3, 2016, the licensee added the request for the review and approval of DPC-NE-3009-P, Revision 0. 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 change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The proposed changes request review and approval of DPC-NE-3008- P, Revision 0, ``Thermal-Hydraulic Models for Transient Analysis,'' and DPC-NE-3009-P, Revision 0, ``FSAR/UFSAR Chapter 15 Transient Analysis Methodology'' to be applied to Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant (HNP) and H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant (RNP). The benchmark calculations performed confirm the accuracy of the codes and models. The proposed use of this methodology does not affect the performance of any equipment used to mitigate the consequences of an analyzed accident. There is no impact on the source term or pathways assumed in accidents previously assumed. No analysis assumptions are violated and there are no adverse effects on the factors that contribute to offsite or onsite dose as the result of an accident. Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The proposed changes request review and approval of DPC-NE-3008- P, Revision 0, ``Thermal-Hydraulic Models for Transient Analysis,'' and DPC-NE-3009-P, Revision 0, ``FSAR/UFSAR Chapter 15 Transient Analysis Methodology'' to be applied to Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant (HNP) and H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant (RNP). It does not change any system functions or maintenance activities. The change does not physically alter the plant, that is, no new or different type of equipment will be installed. The software is not installed in any plant equipment, and therefore the software is incapable of initiating an equipment malfunction that would result in a new or different type of accident from any previously evaluated. The proposed methodology and safety analysis assumptions ensure that the core will operate within safe limits. This change does not create new failure modes or mechanisms which are not identifiable during testing, and no new accident precursors are generated. Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. 3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response: No. Margin of safety is related to the confidence in the ability of the fission product barriers to perform their design functions during and following an accident. These barriers include the fuel cladding, the reactor coolant system, and the containment system. The proposed changes request review and approval of DPC-NE-3008-P, Revision 0, ``Thermal-Hydraulic Models for Transient Analysis,'' and DPC-NE-3009-P, Revision 0, ``FSAR/UFSAR Chapter 15 Transient Analysis Methodology'' to be applied to Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant (HNP) [[Page 20497]] and H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant (RNP). As a portion of the overall Duke Energy methodology for cycle reload safety analyses, DPC-NE-3008-P will be used in thermal-hydraulic transient analyses and DPC-NE-3009-P will support the performance of FSAR/UFSAR Chapter 15 transient analysis. As with the existing methodologies, the Duke Energy methodologies will continue to ensure (a) the acceptability of analytical limits under normal, transient, and accident conditions, and (b) that all applicable design and safety limits are satisfied such that the fission product barriers will continue to perform their design functions. Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Attorney for licensee: Kathryn B. Nolan, Deputy General Counsel, Duke Energy Corporation, 550 South Tyron Street, Mail Code DEC45A, Charlotte, NC 28202. NRC Branch Chief: Benjamin G. Beasley. Exelon Generation Company, LLC and PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, York and Lancaster Counties, Pennsylvania Date of amendment request: February 17, 2017. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17048A444. Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The amendment would revise the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and Technical Specifications to implement a measurement uncertainty recapture power uprate. Specifically, the amendment would authorize an increase in the maximum licensed thermal power level from 3,951 megawatts thermal (MWt) to 4,016 MWt, which is an increase of approximately 1.66 percent. 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 change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? Response: No, the proposed increase in power level does not significantly increase the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. The proposed changes do not affect system design or operation and thus do not create any new accident initiators or increase the probability of an accident previously evaluated. All accident mitigation systems will function as designed, and all performance requirements for these systems have been evaluated and were found acceptable. The Nuclear Steam Supply System (NSSS) components (e.g., reactor vessel, reactor internals, control rod drive housings, piping and supports, and recirculation pumps) remain within their applicable structural limits and will continue to perform their intended design functions during normal and accident conditions. Thus, there is no increase in the probability of a structural failure of these components. The balance of plant systems and components continue to meet their applicable structural limits and will continue to perform their intended design functions. Thus, there is no increase in the probability of a failure of these components. The safety relief valves and containment isolation valves meet design sizing requirements at the uprated power level. Because the integrity of the plant will not be affected by operation at the uprated condition, EGC [Exelon Generation Company] has concluded that all structures, systems, and components required to mitigate a transient remain capable of fulfilling their intended functions. All safety analyses have either been performed at 102% of Current Licensed Thermal Power (CLTP) and therefore bound the proposed uprate or have been subject to plant-specific analyses at a power level equal to or greater than the proposed uprate. The results demonstrate that acceptance criteria of the applicable analyses continue to be met at the uprated conditions. The analyses performed to assess the effects of mass and energy releases remain valid. The source terms used to assess radiological consequences have been reviewed and determined to bound operation at the uprated condition. Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? Response: No, the proposed increase in power level does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. No new accident scenarios, failure mechanisms, or limiting single failures are introduced as a result of the proposed changes. All systems, structures, and components previously required for the mitigation of a transient remain capable of fulfilling their intended design functions. The proposed changes have no adverse effects on any safety-related system or component and do not challenge the performance or integrity of any safety-related system. No new equipment or procedure changes are involved that could add new accident initiators. Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. 3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response: No, the proposed increase in power level does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. Operation at the uprated power condition does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. Analyses of the primary fission product barriers have concluded that relevant design criteria remain satisfied, both from the standpoint of the integrity of the primary fission product barrier, and from the standpoint of compliance with the required acceptance criteria. As appropriate, all evaluations have been performed using methods that have either been reviewed or approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or that are in compliance with regulatory review guidance and standards. Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Rd., Warrenville, IL 60555. NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna. South Carolina Electric & Gas Company and South Carolina Public Service Authority, Docket Nos. 52-027 and 52-028, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Units 2 and 3, Fairfield County, South Carolina Date of amendment request: October 27, 2016. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML16301A385. Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The amendment request proposes a change to Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) Tier 2* information to specify the supplemental requirement of American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) N690- 1994, ``American National Standard Specification for the Design, Fabrication, and Erection of Steel Safety-Related Structures for Nuclear Facilities'' (AISC N690-1994), Section Q1.26.2.2, ``Partial- Penetration Welds,'' for the demonstration of sufficient strength and quality of the carbon steel embedment plate coupler welds to be [[Page 20498]] credited as justification for the determination that the installed coupler welds are capable of performing their intended design function. The requested amendment proposes a change to Tier 2* information. This submittal requests approval of the license amendment necessary to implement these changes. 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 penetrate on (PJP) welds with fillet weld reinforcement joining weldable couplers to carbon steel embedment plates as being able to perform their intended design function in lieu of satisfying the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) N690-1994, Section Q1.26.2.2 requirement for non-destructive examination (NDE) on 10 percent weld populations. 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 or 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 requested 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 with fillet weld reinforcement joining weldable couplers to carbon steel embedment plates as being able to perform their design function in lieu of satisfying the AISC N690-1994, Section Q1.26.2.2 requirement for non-destructive examination on 10 percent weld populations. 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 requested 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 PJP welds with fillet weld reinforcement joining weldable couplers to carbon steel embedment plates as being able to perform their design function in lieu of satisfying the AISC N690-1994, Section Q1.26.2.2 requirement for non-destructive examination on 10 percent weld populations. The proposed change satisfies the same design functions in accordance with the same codes and standards as stated in the UFSAR. This change does not adversely affect compliance with any design code, 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 changes, and no margin of safety is reduced. Therefore, the requested amendment 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: Ms. Kathryn M. Sutton, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLC, 1111 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20004-2514. NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon-Herrity. Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non- Safeguards Information for Contention Preparation Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket No. 50-400, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 (HNP), Wake and Chatham Counties, North Carolina Exelon Generation Company, LLC and PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, York and Lancaster Counties, Pennsylvania South Carolina Electric & Gas Company and South Carolina Public Service Authority, Docket Nos. 52-027 and 52-028, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, 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 sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (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 access to SUNSI. 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, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 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\ [[Page 20499]] 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. Filing of Contentions. Any contentions in these proceedings that are based upon the information received as a result of the request made for SUNSI must be filed by the requestor no later than 25 days after receipt of (or access to) that information. However, if more than 25 days remain between the petitioner's receipt of (or access to) the information and the deadline for filing all other contentions (as established in the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the petitioner may file its SUNSI contentions by that later deadline. G. 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 requisite need, 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) if another officer has been designated to rule on information access issues, with that officer. (3) Further appeals of decisions under this paragraph must be made pursuant to 10 CFR 2.311. H. 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 within 5 days of the notification by the NRC staff of its grant of access and must be filed with: (a) The presiding officer designated in this proceeding; (b) if no presiding officer has been appointed, the Chief Administrative Judge, or if he or she is unavailable, another administrative judge, or an Administrative Law Judge with jurisdiction pursuant to 10 CFR 2.318(a); or (c) if another officer has been designated to rule on information access issues, with that officer. 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. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I. The Commission expects that the NRC staff and presiding officers (and any other reviewing officers) will consider and resolve requests for access to SUNSI, and motions for protective orders, in a timely fashion in order to minimize any unnecessary delays in identifying those petitioners who have standing and who have propounded contentions meeting the specificity and basis requirements in 10 CFR part 2. The attachment 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 27th day of April, 2017. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. Attachment 1--General Target Schedule for Processing and Resolving Requests for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information 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). [[Page 20500]] 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 opportunity to request a hearing and petition for leave to intervene), 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. 2017-08896 Filed 5-1-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 83 / Tuesday, May 2, 2017 / Notices 20493
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. the NRC take action with regard to the considering approval of three
James G. Danna, U.S. Army Installation Command amendment requests. The amendment
Chief, Plant Licensing Branch I, Division of (ADAMS Accession No. ML17110A308). requests are for Duke Energy Progress,
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of The petitioner requested that the NRC LLC, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power
Nuclear Reactor Regulation. reconsider its approval of License SUC– Plant, Unit 1, and H. B. Robinson Steam
[FR Doc. 2017–08842 Filed 5–1–17; 8:45 am] 1593 (ADAMS Accession No. Electric Plant Unit No. 2; Exelon
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
ML16343A161) for possession of Generation Company, LLC and PSEG
depleted uranium at various military Nuclear LLC, Peach Bottom Atomic
installations in the United States. Power Station, Units 2 and 3; and South
NUCLEAR REGULATORY As the basis for this request, the Carolina Electric & Gas Company and
COMMISSION petitioner identified concerns about lack South Carolina Public Service
of air sampling, inappropriateness of the Authority, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear
[Docket No. 40–9083; NRC–2017–0106]
location and number of sediment Station, Units 2 and 3. For each
U.S. Army Installation Command samples, and insufficient geologic amendment request, the NRC proposes
sampling procedures for sediment to determine that they involve no
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory collection for the licensed depleted significant hazards consideration.
Commission. uranium that is located in radiation Because each amendment request
ACTION: 10 CFR 2.206 request; receipt. controlled areas on the United States contains sensitive unclassified non-
Army’s Pohakuloa Training Area, one of safeguards information (SUNSI) an
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory the facilities licensed under License order imposes procedures to obtain
Commission (NRC) is giving notice that SUC–1593. access to SUNSI for contention
by petition dated March 16, 2017, Dr. The request is being treated pursuant
Michael Reimer (the petitioner) has preparation.
to section 2.206 of Title 10 of the Code
requested that the NRC take action with of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) of the DATES: Comments must be filed by June
regard to facilities licensed under source Commission’s regulations. The request 1, 2017. A request for a hearing must be
materials license SUC–1593. The has been referred to the Director of filed by July 3, 2017. Any potential
petitioner’s requests are included in the Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. party as defined in § 2.4 of title 10 of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of As provided by 10 CFR 2.206, Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR),
this document. appropriate action will be taken on this who believes access to SUNSI is
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID petition within a reasonable time. necessary to respond to this notice must
NRC–2017–0106 when contacting the Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 21st day request document access by May 12,
NRC about the availability of of April 2017. 2017.
information regarding this document. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
You may obtain publicly-available ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
Theodore Smith, by any of the following methods (unless
information related to this document
using any of the following methods: Acting Branch Chief, Materials this document describes a different
Decommissioning Branch, Division of
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to method for submitting comments on a
Decommissioning, Uranium Recovery, and
http://www.regulations.gov and search Waste Programs, Office of Nuclear Material
specific subject):
for Docket ID NRC–2017–0106. Address Safety and Safeguards. • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
questions about NRC dockets to Carol [FR Doc. 2017–08843 Filed 5–1–17; 8:45 am] http://www.regulations.gov and search
Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463; for Docket ID NRC–2017–0100. Address
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. questions about NRC dockets to Carol
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463;
Access and Management System NUCLEAR REGULATORY email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly COMMISSION technical questions, contact the
available documents online in the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
ADAMS Public Documents collection at [NRC–2017–0100]
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ document.
adams.html. To begin the search, select Applications and Amendments to
‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then Facility Operating Licenses and • Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey,
select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Combined Licenses Involving Office of Administration, Mail Stop:
Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, Proposed No Significant Hazards TWFN–8–D36, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
please contact the NRC’s Public Considerations and Containing Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards 0001.
1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by Information and Order Imposing For additional direction on obtaining
email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The Procedures for Access to Sensitive information and submitting comments,
ADAMS accession number for each Unclassified Non-Safeguards see ‘‘Obtaining Information and
document referenced in this document Information Submitting Comments’’ in the
(if that document is available in AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
ADAMS) is provided the first time that Commission. this document.
a document is referenced.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
ACTION: License amendment request; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and
notice of opportunity to comment, Lynn Ronewicz, Office of Nuclear
purchase copies of public documents at
request a hearing, and petition for leave Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear
the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One
to intervene; order imposing Regulatory Commission, Washington,
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
procedures. DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415–
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
1927; email: Lynn.Ronewicz@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On March SUMMARY:The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
16, 2017, the petitioner requested that Commission (NRC) received and is SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:36 May 01, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02MYN1.SGM 02MYN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_20576/page/1.svg)
![20496 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 83 / Tuesday, May 2, 2017 / Notices
A person filing electronically using unless an NRC regulation or other law consequences of an accident previously
the NRC’s adjudicatory E-Filing system requires submission of such evaluated?
may seek assistance by contacting the information. For example, in some Response: No.
The proposed changes request review and
NRC’s Electronic Filing Help Desk instances, individuals provide home
approval of DPC–NE–3008–P, Revision 0,
through the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link located addresses in order to demonstrate ‘‘Thermal-Hydraulic Models for Transient
on the NRC’s public Web site at http:// proximity to a facility or site. With Analysis,’’ and DPC–NE–3009–P, Revision 0,
www.nrc.gov/site-help/e- respect to copyrighted works, except for ‘‘FSAR/UFSAR Chapter 15 Transient
submittals.html, by email to limited excerpts that serve the purpose Analysis Methodology’’ to be applied to
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll- of the adjudicatory filings and would Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant (HNP)
free call at 1–866–672–7640. The NRC constitute a Fair Use application, and H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant
Electronic Filing Help Desk is available participants are requested not to include (RNP). The benchmark calculations
between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., Eastern performed confirm the accuracy of the codes
copyrighted materials in their
and models. The proposed use of this
Time, Monday through Friday, submission. methodology does not affect the performance
excluding government holidays. of any equipment used to mitigate the
Participants who believe that they Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket No.
50–400, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power consequences of an analyzed accident. There
have a good cause for not submitting is no impact on the source term or pathways
documents electronically must file an Plant, Unit 1 (HNP), Wake and Chatham assumed in accidents previously assumed.
exemption request, in accordance with Counties, North Carolina No analysis assumptions are violated and
10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket No. there are no adverse effects on the factors that
filing stating why there is good cause for 50–261, H. B. Robinson Steam Electric contribute to offsite or onsite dose as the
not filing electronically and requesting Plant Unit No. 2 (RNP), Darlington result of an accident.
authorization to continue to submit Therefore, the proposed changes do not
County, South Carolina involve a significant increase in the
documents in paper format. Such filings
Date of amendment request: probability or consequences of an accident
must be submitted by: (1) First class previously evaluated.
November 19, 2015, as supplemented by
mail addressed to the Office of the 2. Does the proposed change create the
letters dated October 3, 2016, and
Secretary of the Commission, U.S. possibility of a new or different kind of
November 10, 2016. Publicly-available
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, accident from any accident previously
versions are in ADAMS under
Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention: evaluated?
Accession Nos. ML15323A351,
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or Response: No.
ML16278A080, and ML16315A286. The proposed changes request review and
(2) courier, express mail, or expedited
Description of amendment request: approval of DPC–NE–3008–P, Revision 0,
delivery service to the Office of the
The amendment request contains ‘‘Thermal-Hydraulic Models for Transient
Secretary, 11555 Rockville Pike,
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards Analysis,’’ and DPC–NE–3009–P, Revision 0,
Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention:
information (SUNSI). The NRC staff ‘‘FSAR/UFSAR Chapter 15 Transient
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Analysis Methodology’’ to be applied to
previously made a proposed
Participants filing adjudicatory Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant (HNP)
determination that the license
documents in this manner are and H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant
amendment request dated November 19,
responsible for serving the document on (RNP). It does not change any system
2015, involves no significant hazards
all other participants. Filing is functions or maintenance activities. The
consideration (81 FR 19645; April 5,
considered complete by first-class mail change does not physically alter the plant,
as of the time of deposit in the mail, or 2016). Subsequently, by letter dated that is, no new or different type of equipment
by courier, express mail, or expedited October 3, 2016, the licensee provided will be installed. The software is not
delivery service upon depositing the additional information that expanded installed in any plant equipment, and
document with the provider of the the scope of the amendment request as therefore the software is incapable of
originally noticed. Accordingly, this initiating an equipment malfunction that
service. A presiding officer, having would result in a new or different type of
granted an exemption request from notice supersedes the previous notice in
its entirety. The amendment requests accident from any previously evaluated. The
using E-Filing, may require a participant proposed methodology and safety analysis
or party to use E-Filing if the presiding plant-specific review and approval of
assumptions ensure that the core will operate
officer subsequently determines that the reactor core design methodology reports within safe limits. This change does not
reason for granting the exemption from DPC–NE–3008–P, Revision 0, ‘‘Thermal- create new failure modes or mechanisms
use of E-Filing no longer exists. Hydraulic Models for Transient which are not identifiable during testing, and
Documents submitted in adjudicatory Analysis,’’ and DPC–NE–3009–P, no new accident precursors are generated.
proceedings will appear in the NRC’s Revision 0, ‘‘FSAR/UFSAR [Final Safety Therefore, the proposed changes do not
electronic hearing docket, which is Analysis Report/Updated Final Safety create the possibility of a new or different
Analysis Report] Chapter 15 Transient kind of accident from any accident
available to the public at https://
Analysis Methodology,’’ for adoption previously evaluated.
adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded 3. Does the proposed change involve a
pursuant to an order of the Commission into the HNP and RNP Technical
significant reduction in a margin of safety?
or the presiding officer. If you do not Specifications. In the supplement dated Response: No.
have an NRC-issued digital ID certificate October 3, 2016, the licensee added the Margin of safety is related to the
as described above, click cancel when request for the review and approval of confidence in the ability of the fission
the link requests certificates and you DPC–NE–3009–P, Revision 0. product barriers to perform their design
will be automatically directed to the Basis for proposed no significant functions during and following an accident.
hazards consideration determination: These barriers include the fuel cladding, the
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
NRC’s electronic hearing dockets where
you will be able to access any publicly As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the reactor coolant system, and the containment
licensee has provided its analysis of the system. The proposed changes request review
available documents in a particular
issue of no significant hazards and approval of DPC–NE–3008–P, Revision
hearing docket. Participants are 0, ‘‘Thermal-Hydraulic Models for Transient
requested not to include personal consideration, which is presented
Analysis,’’ and DPC–NE–3009–P, Revision 0,
privacy information, such as social below: ‘‘FSAR/UFSAR Chapter 15 Transient
security numbers, home addresses, or 1. Does the proposed change involve a Analysis Methodology’’ to be applied to
personal phone numbers in their filings, significant increase in the probability or Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant (HNP)
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:36 May 01, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02MYN1.SGM 02MYN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_20576/page/4.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 83 / Tuesday, May 2, 2017 / Notices 20497
and H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant Response: No, the proposed increase in system. No new equipment or procedure
(RNP). As a portion of the overall Duke power level does not significantly increase changes are involved that could add new
Energy methodology for cycle reload safety the probability or consequences of an accident initiators.
analyses, DPC–NE–3008–P will be used in accident previously evaluated. Therefore, the proposed changes do not
thermal-hydraulic transient analyses and The proposed changes do not affect system create the possibility of a new or different
DPC–NE–3009–P will support the design or operation and thus do not create kind of accident from any accident
performance of FSAR/UFSAR Chapter 15 any new accident initiators or increase the previously evaluated.
transient analysis. As with the existing probability of an accident previously 3. Does the proposed change involve a
methodologies, the Duke Energy evaluated. All accident mitigation systems significant reduction in a margin of safety?
methodologies will continue to ensure (a) the will function as designed, and all Response: No, the proposed increase in
acceptability of analytical limits under performance requirements for these systems power level does not involve a significant
normal, transient, and accident conditions, have been evaluated and were found reduction in a margin of safety.
and (b) that all applicable design and safety acceptable. Operation at the uprated power condition
limits are satisfied such that the fission The Nuclear Steam Supply System (NSSS) does not involve a significant reduction in a
product barriers will continue to perform components (e.g., reactor vessel, reactor margin of safety. Analyses of the primary
their design functions. internals, control rod drive housings, piping fission product barriers have concluded that
Therefore, the proposed changes do not and supports, and recirculation pumps) relevant design criteria remain satisfied, both
involve a significant reduction in a margin of remain within their applicable structural from the standpoint of the integrity of the
safety. limits and will continue to perform their primary fission product barrier, and from the
intended design functions during normal and standpoint of compliance with the required
The NRC staff has reviewed the accident conditions. Thus, there is no acceptance criteria. As appropriate, all
licensee’s analysis and, based on this increase in the probability of a structural evaluations have been performed using
review, it appears that the three failure of these components. methods that have either been reviewed or
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are The balance of plant systems and approved by the Nuclear Regulatory
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff components continue to meet their Commission, or that are in compliance with
proposes to determine that the applicable structural limits and will continue regulatory review guidance and standards.
amendment request involves no to perform their intended design functions. Therefore, the proposed changes do not
Thus, there is no increase in the probability involve a significant reduction in a margin of
significant hazards consideration. of a failure of these components. The safety
Attorney for licensee: Kathryn B. safety.
relief valves and containment isolation
Nolan, Deputy General Counsel, Duke valves meet design sizing requirements at the The NRC staff has reviewed the
Energy Corporation, 550 South Tyron uprated power level. Because the integrity of licensee’s analysis and, based on this
Street, Mail Code DEC45A, Charlotte, the plant will not be affected by operation at review, it appears that the three
NC 28202. the uprated condition, EGC [Exelon standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
NRC Branch Chief: Benjamin G. Generation Company] has concluded that all satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
Beasley. structures, systems, and components proposes to determine that the
required to mitigate a transient remain amendment request involves no
Exelon Generation Company, LLC and capable of fulfilling their intended functions.
PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50–277 All safety analyses have either been
significant hazards consideration.
performed at 102% of Current Licensed Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer,
and 50–278, Peach Bottom Atomic
Thermal Power (CLTP) and therefore bound Associate General Counsel, Exelon
Power Station, Units 2 and 3, York and
the proposed uprate or have been subject to Generation Company, LLC, 4300
Lancaster Counties, Pennsylvania
plant-specific analyses at a power level equal Winfield Rd., Warrenville, IL 60555.
Date of amendment request: February to or greater than the proposed uprate. The NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna.
17, 2017. A publicly-available version is results demonstrate that acceptance criteria
in ADAMS under Accession No. of the applicable analyses continue to be met South Carolina Electric & Gas Company
ML17048A444. at the uprated conditions. The analyses and South Carolina Public Service
Description of amendment request: performed to assess the effects of mass and Authority, Docket Nos. 52–027 and 52–
This amendment request contains energy releases remain valid. The source 028, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station,
terms used to assess radiological Units 2 and 3, Fairfield County, South
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards
consequences have been reviewed and Carolina
information (SUNSI). The amendment determined to bound operation at the uprated
would revise the Renewed Facility condition. Date of amendment request: October
Operating Licenses and Technical Therefore, the proposed changes do not 27, 2016. A publicly-available version is
Specifications to implement a involve a significant increase in the in ADAMS under Accession No.
measurement uncertainty recapture probability or consequences of an accident ML16301A385.
power uprate. Specifically, the previously evaluated. Description of amendment request:
amendment would authorize an 2. Does the proposed change create the This amendment request contains
increase in the maximum licensed possibility of a new or different kind of sensitive unclassified non-safeguards
accident from any accident previously
thermal power level from 3,951 information (SUNSI). The amendment
evaluated?
megawatts thermal (MWt) to 4,016 MWt, Response: No, the proposed increase in request proposes a change to Updated
which is an increase of approximately power level does not create the possibility of Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR)
1.66 percent. a new or different kind of accident from any Tier 2* information to specify the
Basis for proposed no significant accident previously evaluated. supplemental requirement of American
hazards consideration determination: No new accident scenarios, failure Institute of Steel Construction (AISC)
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the mechanisms, or limiting single failures are N690–1994, ‘‘American National
licensee has provided its analysis of the introduced as a result of the proposed Standard Specification for the Design,
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
issue of no significant hazards changes. All systems, structures, and Fabrication, and Erection of Steel
components previously required for the
consideration, which is presented Safety-Related Structures for Nuclear
mitigation of a transient remain capable of
below: fulfilling their intended design functions. Facilities’’ (AISC N690–1994), Section
1. Does the proposed change involve a The proposed changes have no adverse Q1.26.2.2, ‘‘Partial-Penetration Welds,’’
significant increase in the probability or effects on any safety-related system or for the demonstration of sufficient
consequences of an accident previously component and do not challenge the strength and quality of the carbon steel
evaluated? performance or integrity of any safety-related embedment plate coupler welds to be
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:36 May 01, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02MYN1.SGM 02MYN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_20576/page/5.svg)
![20500 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 83 / Tuesday, May 2, 2017 / Notices
ATTACHMENT 1—GENERAL TARGET SCHEDULE FOR PROCESSING AND RESOLVING REQUESTS FOR ACCESS TO SENSITIVE
UNCLASSIFIED NON-SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION IN THIS PROCEEDING—Continued
Day Event/activity
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 in-
forms any party to the proceeding whose interest independent of the proceeding would be harmed by the release of the in-
formation.) If NRC staff makes the finding of need for SUNSI and likelihood of standing, NRC staff begins document proc-
essing (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 protec-
tive 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 opportunity to request a hearing and petition for leave to intervene), 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. 2017–08896 Filed 5–1–17; 8:45 am] The granting of the exemption allows Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS,
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P the changes to Tier 1 information asked please contact the NRC’s Public
for in the amendment. Because the Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
acceptability of the exemption was 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by
NUCLEAR REGULATORY determined in part by the acceptability email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
COMMISSION of the amendment, the exemption and ADAMS accession number for each
amendment are being issued document referenced (if it is available in
[Docket Nos. 52–027 and 52–028; NRC– concurrently. ADAMS) is provided the first time that
2008–0441] DATES: The exemption and amendment it is mentioned in this document. The
were issued on March 1, 2017. request for the amendment and
Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, exemption was submitted by letter
Units 2 and 3; South Carolina Electric ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID
dated October 21, 2015 (ADAMS
& Gas Company; South Carolina NRC–2008–0441 when contacting the Accession No. ML16246A214), and
Public Service Authority Relocation of NRC about the availability of supplemented by letters dated March 31
Air Cooled Chiller Pump 3, VWS–MP– information regarding this document. and July 14, 2016 (ADAMS Accession
03 You may access information related to Nos. ML16091A380 and
this document, which the NRC ML16196A354).
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory possesses and is publicly available,
• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and
Commission. using any of the following methods:
purchase copies of public documents at
ACTION: Exemption and combined • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One
license amendment; issuance. http://www.regulations.gov and search
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
for Docket ID NRC–2008–0252. Address
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory questions about NRC dockets to Carol
Commission (NRC) is granting an Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463; FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
exemption to allow a departure from the email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For William C. Gleaves, Office of New
certification information of Tier 1 of the technical questions, contact the Reactors, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
generic AP1000 design control individual listed in the FOR FURTHER Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
document (DCD) and is issuing License INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 0001; telephone: 301–415–5848; email:
Amendment No. 62 to Combined document. Bill.Gleaves@nrc.gov.
Licenses (COL), NPF–93 and NPF–94. • NRC’s Agencywide Documents SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The COLs were issued to South Carolina Access and Management System
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
I. Introduction
Electric & Gas Company and the South (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-
Carolina Public Service Authority, (both available documents online in the The NRC is granting an exemption
collectively referred to as the licensee) ADAMS Public Documents collection at from Paragraph B of Section III, ‘‘Scope
for construction and operation of the http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ and Contents,’’ of appendix D, ‘‘Design
Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station adams.html. To begin the search, select Certification Rule for the AP1000,’’ to
(VCSNS) Units 2 and 3, located in ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then part 52 of title 10 of the Code of Federal
Fairfield County, South Carolina. select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Regulations (10 CFR), and issuing
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:36 May 01, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02MYN1.SGM 02MYN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_20576/page/8.svg)
Document Created: 2017-05-02 00:04:38
Document Modified: 2017-05-02 00:04:38
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | License amendment request; notice of opportunity to comment, request a hearing, and petition for leave to intervene; order imposing procedures. | |
| Dates | Comments must be filed by June 1, 2017. A request for a hearing must be filed by July 3, 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 May 12, 2017. | |
| Contact | Lynn Ronewicz, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1927; email: [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 82 FR 20493 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR