83_FR_19387 83 FR 19302 - Exelon Generation Company, LLC

83 FR 19302 - Exelon Generation Company, LLC

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 85 (May 2, 2018)

Page Range19302-19304
FR Document2018-09210

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has issued a director's decision in response to a petition dated February 8, 2017, filed by Mr. Barry Quigley (the petitioner), requesting that the NRC take action with regard to Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon or the licensee). The petitioner's requests and the director's decision are included in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

Federal Register, Volume 83 Issue 85 (Wednesday, May 2, 2018) 
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 85 (Wednesday, May 2, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19302-19304]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2018-09210]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. STN 50-454, STN 50-455, STN 50-456, and STN 50-457; NRC-
2018-0081]


Exelon Generation Company, LLC

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Director's decision under 10 CFR 2.206; issuance.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has issued a 
director's decision in response to a petition dated February 8, 2017, 
filed by Mr. Barry Quigley (the petitioner), requesting that the NRC 
take action with regard to Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon or 
the licensee). The petitioner's requests and the director's decision 
are included in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

DATES: The director's decision was issued on April 24, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0081 when contacting the 
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You 
may obtain publicly[dash]available information related to this document 
using any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0081. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-
9127; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact 
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 
this document.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the 
ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and 
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, 
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected]. 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. In addition, for the convenience of the reader, the ADAMS 
accession numbers are provided in a table in the ``Availability of 
Documents'' section of 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel Wiebe, Office of Nuclear Reactor 
Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555-
0001, telephone: 301-415-6606; e-mail: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of the director's decision is 
attached.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of April, 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Joel S. Wiebe,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch III, Division of 
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
Attachment--Director's Decision DD-18-01

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION

In the Matter of Exelon Generation Company, LLC

Braidwood Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2

Docket Nos. STN 50[dash]456, 50[dash]457

License Nos. NPF[dash]72, NPF[dash]77

Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2

Docket Nos. STN 50[dash]454, 50[dash]455

License Nos. NPF[dash]37, NPF[dash]66

DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 CFR 2.206

I. Introduction

    By e[dash]mail to Mr. Victor M. McCree, Executive Director for 
Operations, dated February 8, 2017 (Agencywide Documents Access and 
Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML17061A127), Mr. Barry 
Quigley filed a petition under Title 10, ``Energy,'' of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 2.206, ``Requests for Action under this 
Subpart.'' Attachments to the petition are located at ADAMS 
Accession Nos. ML17061A126, ML17061A125, and ML17061A124. The 
petitioner requested that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
(NRC or the Commission) take the following actions against Exelon 
Generation Company, LLC (Exelon), the licensee for Byron Station, 
Unit Nos. 1 and 2, and Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2:
    1. Issue a violation under 10 CFR Part 50, ``Domestic Licensing 
of Production and Utilization Facilities,'' Appendix B, ``Quality 
Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing 
Plants,'' Criterion III, ``Design Control,'' for deficiencies in the 
analysis of record (AOR) for the main steam isolation valve (MSIV) 
room pressurization following a high-energy line break (HELB).
    2. Issue a violation under 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion 
XVI, ``Corrective Action,'' for failure to update the AOR in a 
timely manner.
    3. Require Exelon to show that the consequences of the secondary 
missiles resulting from MSIV room pressurization do not have adverse 
consequences.
    4. Issue a Demand for Information under 10 CFR 2.204, ``Demand 
for Information,'' to compare and contrast the behavior of Exelon 
management as described in the petition with the NRC's policy 
statement on the attributes of a safety-conscious work environment 
(SCWE).
    5. Use Exelon's response to Item 4 above as a basis on which to 
determine whether to issue a ``chilling effects'' letter.
    As the basis for the request, the petitioner stated the 
following:
    1. (a)--Break enthalpies used in the MSIV room pressurization 
AOR are actually the thermodynamic internal energy of the steam, not 
the enthalpy. Because, in the range of interest, the internal energy 
is about 13 percent less than the enthalpy, the energy flow to the 
areas of concern is nonconservative.
    (b)--Steam flow from secondary piping is neglected.
    2. Corrective actions to resolve an issue in the AOR are long 
overdue (8 years) and improperly tracked.
    3. A proposed revision to the AOR shows that the MSIV room roof 
slabs will be ejected by the high pressures in the MSIV rooms 
becoming potential missiles.
    4. Management dismissed information in the updated final safety 
evaluation report (UFSAR) that supported the concerns about the AOR 
as ``excessive detail'' and directed personnel to remove the 
information. Management dismissed UFSAR internal inconsistency 
related to the ``Break Exclusion Zone'' without discussion or review 
and stated that the information supporting the concern could be 
deleted as an UFSAR cleanup item. Recently, there was an operability 
concern for which engineering management maintained a position of 
operability in the face of conflicting information. The information 
that engineering management relied on to support operability was 
demonstrably irrelevant.
    The petitioner met with the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 
(NRR) Petition Review Board (PRB) on April 13, 2017, to clarify the 
basis for the petition. The NRC is treating the transcript of this 
meeting (ADAMS Accession No. ML17111A774) as a supplement to the 
petition. In its acknowledgement letter dated July 17, 2017 (ADAMS 
Accession No. ML17125A245), the NRC informed the petitioner that 
Items 1, 2, 4, and 5 were accepted for review under 10

[[Page 19303]]

CFR 2.206 and that the agency had referred the issues in the 
petition to NRR for appropriate action. This letter states that Item 
3 does not request enforcement action and, therefore, does not meet 
the criteria for acceptance for review under 10 CFR 2.206. However, 
the NRC informed the petitioner that the item is likely to be 
resolved when reviewing activities to address the AOR under Item 1.
    By letter dated July 26, 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17166A362), 
the NRC requested that Exelon provide a voluntary response to the 
petition. By letter dated September 1, 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML17255A824), Exelon provided its voluntary response.

II. Discussion

    1. Issue a violation under 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion 
III, for deficiencies in the AOR for the MSIV room pressurization 
following an HELB.
    The petitioner's basis and the licensee's September 1, 2017, 
voluntary response letter both identify errors in calculation 3C8-
0282-001, Revision 3. The licensee stated in its voluntary response 
letter that calculation 3C8-0282-001 is the design-basis analysis 
for the structural design of the MSIV house and the main steam 
tunnel. The regulation under 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion 
III, ``Design Control,'' requires, in part, that the licensee 
provide for verifying or checking the adequacy of design, such as by 
the performance of design reviews, by the use of alternate or 
simplified calculational methods, or by the performance of a 
suitable testing program. The NRC Region III staff conducted 
inspections at the Byron and Braidwood Stations between October 30 
and November 16, 2017. The inspectors identified that as of October 
22, 1996, and continuing through the date of the NRC inspections, 
the licensee failed to verify that Design Analysis 3C8-0282-001, 
Revision 3, which was the AOR addressing a postulated HELB in the 
safety-related main steam safety valve (MSSV) rooms [the petitioner 
and the licensee used the label MSIV house or room], would not cause 
a structural failure since it failed to apply worst-case 
environmental loading. The NRC Inspection Reports 05000454/455-2017-
010 for Byron Station and 05000456/457-2017-008 for Braidwood 
Station, dated December 15, 2017 (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML17349A917 
and ML17349A894, respectively), each identify a non-cited violation 
(NCV) of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion III, ``Design 
Control.''
    2. Issue a violation under 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion 
XVI, for failure to update the AOR in a timely manner.
    The petitioner's basis states that although the errors regarding 
the wrong break enthalpies in calculation 3C8-0282-001, Revision 3, 
were documented on June 30, 2008, in Issue Report 792213, ``MSLB 
Calc[ulation] Energy Release Error,'' the analysis still contains 
the nonconservative break enthalpies 8 years later. Exelon's 
voluntary response letter agrees that Issue Report 792213 for Byron 
Station and the related Issue Report 792215 for Braidwood Station 
were documented on June 30, 2008. Exelon's voluntary response letter 
shows that it issued a contract with a vendor to revise calculation 
3C8-0282-001, Revision 3, in February 2013; 5 years after 
identification of the error. In November 2013, the vendor provided a 
draft copy of a revision to calculation 3C8-0282-001 to Exelon for 
review. Currently, Exelon still has the analysis and proposed plant 
modifications under review to correct the analysis.
    The regulation under 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, 
``Corrective Action,'' requires, in part, that measures shall be 
established to assure that conditions adverse to quality, such as 
non-conformances, are promptly identified and corrected. The NRC 
Region III staff conducted inspections at the Byron and Braidwood 
Stations between October 30 and November 16, 2017. The inspectors 
identified that as of the dates of NRC inspections at Byron and 
Braidwood Stations, the licensee failed to promptly correct errors 
in Design Analysis 3C8[dash]0282[dash]001, Revision 3, for a main 
steam line break in the safety-related MSSV rooms [the petitioner 
and the licensee used the label MSIV house or room] and steam 
tunnels that were identified on June 30, 2008. The NRC Inspection 
Reports 05000454/455-2017-010 for Byron Station and 05000456/457-
2017-008 for Braidwood Station, dated December 15, 2017, each 
identify a NCV of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, 
``Corrective Action.''
    3. Require Exelon to show that the consequences of the secondary 
missiles resulting from MSIV room pressurization do not have adverse 
consequences.
    The July 17, 2017, acknowledgement letter informed the 
petitioner that this item did not meet the criteria for review under 
10 CFR 2.206 because it does not request enforcement action, as 
specified in Management Directive 8.11, ``Review Process for 10 CFR 
2.206 Petitions'' (MD 8.11). However, the licensee and NRC have 
taken action that addresses the issue raised by the petitioner. In 
September 2017, the licensee initiated operability evaluations 
(Operability Evaluation 17-002, Revision 0, for Braidwood Station 
and Operability Evaluation 17-001, Revision 0, for Byron Station) to 
address the consequences of secondary missiles from the MSIV room 
pressurization and has determined that no equipment safety functions 
are affected by potential missiles. During inspections conducted at 
Byron Station (Inspection Reports 05000454/455-2017-003 (ADAMS 
Accession No. ML17306A639) and 05000454/455-2017-010) and Braidwood 
Station (Inspection Reports 05000456/457-2017-003 (ADAMS Accession 
No. ML17306A664) and 05000456/457-2017-008), the NRC reviewed the 
licensee's revisions to the applicable operability evaluations and 
did not identify any concerns, but did identify NCVs of 10 CFR part 
50, Appendix B, Criterion III, ``Design Control,'' for the failure 
to identify design deficiencies involving secondary missiles from 
the MSSV room pressurization and NCVs of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix B, 
Criterion XVI, ``Corrective Action,'' for the failure to correct the 
design deficiencies.
    4. Issue a ``Demand for Information'' under 10 CFR 2.204, to 
compare and contrast the behavior of Exelon management as described 
in the petition with the NRC's policy statement on the attributes of 
an SCWE.
    As described in the NRC Enforcement Manual (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML102630150), a demand for information (DFI) is a formal request 
made to a licensee or applicant to obtain information for the NRC 
staff to determine whether an Order should be issued to modify, 
suspend, or revoke the license, or whether to take other enforcement 
action. The PRB determined that issuance of a DFI in this 
circumstance was not necessary to evaluate the SCWE concerns 
expressed in the petition. Consistent with MD 8.11, the NRC's letter 
dated July 26, 2017, requested that Exelon provide a voluntary 
response to the concerns raised in the petition. Exelon's September 
1, 2017, response, in part, provided the results of its evaluation 
of the SCWE at Byron Station. Exelon's evaluation included 
interviews with Braidwood Station personnel that were involved with 
the activities that the petitioner described in the petition. The 
evaluation concluded that the actions taken and behaviors 
demonstrated by Exelon management in response to the issues and 
activities cited in the petition dated February 8, 2017, demonstrate 
a healthy SCWE.
    The NRC conducted an inspection at Byron Station that ended on 
August 25, 2017 (Inspection Report 05000454/455-2017-007 (ADAMS 
Accession No. ML17276B174) that, in part, assessed the licensee's 
SCWE at Byron Station. Information obtained from interviews and 
focus groups (including with engineering personnel) indicated that 
an environment was established where licensee personnel felt free to 
raise nuclear safety issues without fear of retaliation. Licensee 
personnel were generally aware of and familiar with the corrective 
action program (CAP) and other processes, including the Employee 
Concerns Program (ECP) and the NRC's allegation process, through 
which concerns could be raised. In addition, a review of the types 
of issues in the ECP indicated that the licensee's staff members 
were appropriately using the CAP and ECP to identify issues. The 
inspection did not identify any examples where there was retaliation 
for raising nuclear safety issues. Documents regarding surveys and 
monitoring of the safety culture and SCWE generally supported the 
conclusions from the interviews. The inspection did not identify any 
chilling effect or impediment to the establishment of an SCWE at 
Byron Station.
    5. Use Exelon's response to Item 4 above as a basis on which to 
determine whether to issue a ``chilling effects'' letter.
    A chilling effect letter is a regulatory tool identified in the 
NRC Allegations Manual (ADAMS Accession No. ML17003A227) that the 
NRC uses to ensure that licensees are taking appropriate actions to 
foster a workplace environment that encourages employees to raise 
safety concerns and to feel free to do so without fear of 
retaliation, referred to as an SCWE. A chilling effect letter may be 
appropriate when there are indications of a chilled work 
environment, but no discrimination concern has been substantiated. 
Neither Exelon's voluntary response nor NRC's inspection at Byron 
Station, as discussed in Item 4, identified

[[Page 19304]]

evidence of a chilled environment at the Byron Station.

III. Conclusion

    The NRC staff conducted inspections at the Byron Station and 
Braidwood Station that assessed the licensee's compliance with the 
regulations under 10 CFR part 50, Appendix B, Criterion III, 
``Design Control,'' and Criterion XVI, ``Corrective Action,'' 
related to the adequacy of the AOR for the structural design of the 
MSIV house and the main steam tunnel, and took enforcement action as 
outlined in the inspection reports identified above. The NRC staff 
requested that the licensee evaluate the SCWE concerns expressed in 
the petition, and conducted an inspection that assessed the 
licensee's SCWE at Byron Station. Based on the licensee's voluntary 
response and the results of the inspection, the NRC staff did not 
identify challenges to the licensee's SCWE or evidence of a chilled 
environment at the Byron Station and, therefore, determined that 
issuance of a chilling effect letter was not warranted. Because 
these actions address the underlying concerns raised in requests 1, 
2, 4, and 5 of the petition, the petition is granted in part.
    As provided in 10 CFR 2.206(c), a copy of this director's 
decision will be filed with the Secretary of the Commission for 
review. As provided by this regulation, the decision will constitute 
the final action of the Commission 25 days after the date of the 
decision unless the Commission, on its own motion, institutes a 
review of the decision within that time.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of April, 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Brian E. Holian,

Acting Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 2018-09210 Filed 5-1-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

19302 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 2, 2018 / Notices Science Board website for additional 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by Unit Nos. 1 and 2, and Braidwood Station, information. Meeting information and email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The Units 1 and 2: schedule updates (time, place, subject ADAMS accession number for each 1. Issue a violation under 10 CFR Part 50, ‘‘Domestic Licensing of Production and matter, and status of meeting) may be document referenced (if it is available in Utilization Facilities,’’ Appendix B, ‘‘Quality found at http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/ ADAMS) is provided the first time that Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants meetings/notices.jsp#sunshine. it is mentioned in this document. In and Fuel Reprocessing Plants,’’ Criterion III, addition, for the convenience of the ‘‘Design Control,’’ for deficiencies in the Chris Blair, reader, the ADAMS accession numbers analysis of record (AOR) for the main steam Executive Assistant, National Science Board isolation valve (MSIV) room pressurization are provided in a table in the Office. following a high-energy line break (HELB). ‘‘Availability of Documents’’ section of [FR Doc. 2018–09346 Filed 4–30–18; 11:15 am] 2. Issue a violation under 10 CFR Part 50, this document. BILLING CODE 7555–01–P • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and Appendix B, Criterion XVI, ‘‘Corrective Action,’’ for failure to update the AOR in a purchase copies of public documents at timely manner. the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One 3. Require Exelon to show that the NUCLEAR REGULATORY White Flint North, 11555 Rockville consequences of the secondary missiles COMMISSION Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. resulting from MSIV room pressurization do [Docket Nos. STN 50–454, STN 50–455, STN FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel not have adverse consequences. 50–456, and STN 50–457; NRC–2018–0081] Wiebe, Office of Nuclear Reactor 4. Issue a Demand for Information under 10 Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory CFR 2.204, ‘‘Demand for Information,’’ to Exelon Generation Company, LLC compare and contrast the behavior of Exelon Commission, Washington DC 20555– management as described in the petition with AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 0001, telephone: 301–415–6606; e-mail: the NRC’s policy statement on the attributes Commission. Joel.Wiebe@nrc.gov. of a safety-conscious work environment ACTION: Director’s decision under 10 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of (SCWE). CFR 2.206; issuance. the director’s decision is attached. 5. Use Exelon’s response to Item 4 above as a basis on which to determine whether to Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory issue a ‘‘chilling effects’’ letter. of April, 2018. Commission (NRC) has issued a As the basis for the request, the petitioner For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. stated the following: director’s decision in response to a Joel S. Wiebe, 1. (a)—Break enthalpies used in the MSIV petition dated February 8, 2017, filed by Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing room pressurization AOR are actually the Mr. Barry Quigley (the petitioner), Branch III, Division of Operating Reactor thermodynamic internal energy of the steam, requesting that the NRC take action with Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor not the enthalpy. Because, in the range of regard to Exelon Generation Company, Regulation. interest, the internal energy is about 13 LLC (Exelon or the licensee). The Attachment—Director’s Decision DD-18-01 percent less than the enthalpy, the energy petitioner’s requests and the director’s flow to the areas of concern is UNITED STATES OF AMERICA nonconservative. decision are included in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION (b)—Steam flow from secondary piping is neglected. this document. OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR 2. Corrective actions to resolve an issue in DATES: The director’s decision was REGULATION the AOR are long overdue (8 years) and issued on April 24, 2018. improperly tracked. In the Matter of Exelon Generation Company, 3. A proposed revision to the AOR shows ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID LLC that the MSIV room roof slabs will be ejected NRC–2018–0081 when contacting the NRC about the availability of by the high pressures in the MSIV rooms Braidwood Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 becoming potential missiles. information regarding this document. Docket Nos. STN 50-456, 50-457 4. Management dismissed information in You may obtain publicly-available the updated final safety evaluation report information related to this document License Nos. NPF-72, NPF-77 (UFSAR) that supported the concerns about using any of the following methods: the AOR as ‘‘excessive detail’’ and directed • Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Go to Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 personnel to remove the information. http://www.regulations.gov and search Docket Nos. STN 50-454, 50-455 Management dismissed UFSAR internal for Docket ID NRC–2018–0081. Address inconsistency related to the ‘‘Break Exclusion questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer License Nos. NPF-37, NPF-66 Zone’’ without discussion or review and Borges; telephone: 301–287–9127; DIRECTOR’S DECISION UNDER 10 CFR stated that the information supporting the email: Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov. For 2.206 concern could be deleted as an UFSAR technical questions, contact the cleanup item. Recently, there was an I. Introduction operability concern for which engineering individual listed in the FOR FURTHER management maintained a position of By e-mail to Mr. Victor M. McCree, INFORMATION CONTACT section of this operability in the face of conflicting Executive Director for Operations, dated document. February 8, 2017 (Agencywide Documents information. The information that • NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) engineering management relied on to support Access and Management System Accession No. ML17061A127), Mr. Barry operability was demonstrably irrelevant. (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- Quigley filed a petition under Title 10, The petitioner met with the Office of available documents online in the ‘‘Energy,’’ of the Code of Federal Regulations Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) Petition ADAMS Public Documents collection at (10 CFR) 2.206, ‘‘Requests for Action under Review Board (PRB) on April 13, 2017, to daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ this Subpart.’’ Attachments to the petition are clarify the basis for the petition. The NRC is located at ADAMS Accession Nos. treating the transcript of this meeting adams.html. To begin the search, select ML17061A126, ML17061A125, and (ADAMS Accession No. ML17111A774) as a ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then ML17061A124. The petitioner requested that supplement to the petition. In its select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission acknowledgement letter dated July 17, 2017 Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, (NRC or the Commission) take the following (ADAMS Accession No. ML17125A245), the please contact the NRC’s Public actions against Exelon Generation Company, NRC informed the petitioner that Items 1, 2, Document Room (PDR) reference staff at LLC (Exelon), the licensee for Byron Station, 4, and 5 were accepted for review under 10 VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:14 May 01, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02MYN1.SGM 02MYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 2, 2018 / Notices 19303 CFR 2.206 and that the agency had referred it issued a contract with a vendor to revise in the petition with the NRC’s policy the issues in the petition to NRR for calculation 3C8-0282-001, Revision 3, in statement on the attributes of an SCWE. appropriate action. This letter states that Item February 2013; 5 years after identification of As described in the NRC Enforcement 3 does not request enforcement action and, the error. In November 2013, the vendor Manual (ADAMS Accession No. therefore, does not meet the criteria for provided a draft copy of a revision to ML102630150), a demand for information acceptance for review under 10 CFR 2.206. calculation 3C8-0282-001 to Exelon for (DFI) is a formal request made to a licensee However, the NRC informed the petitioner review. Currently, Exelon still has the or applicant to obtain information for the that the item is likely to be resolved when analysis and proposed plant modifications NRC staff to determine whether an Order reviewing activities to address the AOR under review to correct the analysis. should be issued to modify, suspend, or under Item 1. The regulation under 10 CFR 50, Appendix revoke the license, or whether to take other By letter dated July 26, 2017 (ADAMS B, Criterion XVI, ‘‘Corrective Action,’’ enforcement action. The PRB determined that Accession No. ML17166A362), the NRC requires, in part, that measures shall be issuance of a DFI in this circumstance was requested that Exelon provide a voluntary established to assure that conditions adverse not necessary to evaluate the SCWE concerns response to the petition. By letter dated to quality, such as non-conformances, are expressed in the petition. Consistent with September 1, 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. promptly identified and corrected. The NRC MD 8.11, the NRC’s letter dated July 26, ML17255A824), Exelon provided its Region III staff conducted inspections at the 2017, requested that Exelon provide a voluntary response. Byron and Braidwood Stations between voluntary response to the concerns raised in October 30 and November 16, 2017. The the petition. Exelon’s September 1, 2017, II. Discussion inspectors identified that as of the dates of response, in part, provided the results of its 1. Issue a violation under 10 CFR Part 50, NRC inspections at Byron and Braidwood evaluation of the SCWE at Byron Station. Appendix B, Criterion III, for deficiencies in Stations, the licensee failed to promptly Exelon’s evaluation included interviews with the AOR for the MSIV room pressurization correct errors in Design Analysis Braidwood Station personnel that were following an HELB. 3C8-0282-001, Revision 3, for a main steam involved with the activities that the The petitioner’s basis and the licensee’s line break in the safety-related MSSV rooms petitioner described in the petition. The September 1, 2017, voluntary response letter [the petitioner and the licensee used the label evaluation concluded that the actions taken both identify errors in calculation 3C8-0282- MSIV house or room] and steam tunnels that and behaviors demonstrated by Exelon 001, Revision 3. The licensee stated in its were identified on June 30, 2008. The NRC management in response to the issues and voluntary response letter that calculation Inspection Reports 05000454/455-2017-010 activities cited in the petition dated February 3C8-0282-001 is the design-basis analysis for for Byron Station and 05000456/457-2017- 8, 2017, demonstrate a healthy SCWE. the structural design of the MSIV house and 008 for Braidwood Station, dated December The NRC conducted an inspection at Byron the main steam tunnel. The regulation under 15, 2017, each identify a NCV of 10 CFR Part Station that ended on August 25, 2017 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion III, 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, ‘‘Corrective (Inspection Report 05000454/455-2017-007 ‘‘Design Control,’’ requires, in part, that the Action.’’ (ADAMS Accession No. ML17276B174) that, licensee provide for verifying or checking the 3. Require Exelon to show that the in part, assessed the licensee’s SCWE at adequacy of design, such as by the consequences of the secondary missiles Byron Station. Information obtained from performance of design reviews, by the use of resulting from MSIV room pressurization do interviews and focus groups (including with alternate or simplified calculational methods, not have adverse consequences. engineering personnel) indicated that an or by the performance of a suitable testing The July 17, 2017, acknowledgement letter environment was established where licensee program. The NRC Region III staff conducted informed the petitioner that this item did not personnel felt free to raise nuclear safety inspections at the Byron and Braidwood meet the criteria for review under 10 CFR issues without fear of retaliation. Licensee Stations between October 30 and November 2.206 because it does not request personnel were generally aware of and 16, 2017. The inspectors identified that as of enforcement action, as specified in familiar with the corrective action program October 22, 1996, and continuing through the Management Directive 8.11, ‘‘Review Process (CAP) and other processes, including the date of the NRC inspections, the licensee for 10 CFR 2.206 Petitions’’ (MD 8.11). Employee Concerns Program (ECP) and the failed to verify that Design Analysis 3C8- However, the licensee and NRC have taken NRC’s allegation process, through which 0282-001, Revision 3, which was the AOR action that addresses the issue raised by the concerns could be raised. In addition, a addressing a postulated HELB in the safety- petitioner. In September 2017, the licensee review of the types of issues in the ECP related main steam safety valve (MSSV) initiated operability evaluations (Operability indicated that the licensee’s staff members rooms [the petitioner and the licensee used Evaluation 17-002, Revision 0, for Braidwood were appropriately using the CAP and ECP the label MSIV house or room], would not Station and Operability Evaluation 17-001, to identify issues. The inspection did not cause a structural failure since it failed to Revision 0, for Byron Station) to address the identify any examples where there was apply worst-case environmental loading. The consequences of secondary missiles from the retaliation for raising nuclear safety issues. NRC Inspection Reports 05000454/455-2017- MSIV room pressurization and has Documents regarding surveys and monitoring 010 for Byron Station and 05000456/457- determined that no equipment safety of the safety culture and SCWE generally 2017-008 for Braidwood Station, dated functions are affected by potential missiles. supported the conclusions from the December 15, 2017 (ADAMS Accession Nos. During inspections conducted at Byron interviews. The inspection did not identify ML17349A917 and ML17349A894, Station (Inspection Reports 05000454/455- any chilling effect or impediment to the respectively), each identify a non-cited 2017-003 (ADAMS Accession No. establishment of an SCWE at Byron Station. violation (NCV) of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix ML17306A639) and 05000454/455-2017-010) 5. Use Exelon’s response to Item 4 above B, Criterion III, ‘‘Design Control.’’ and Braidwood Station (Inspection Reports as a basis on which to determine whether to 2. Issue a violation under 10 CFR Part 50, 05000456/457-2017-003 (ADAMS Accession issue a ‘‘chilling effects’’ letter. Appendix B, Criterion XVI, for failure to No. ML17306A664) and 05000456/457-2017- A chilling effect letter is a regulatory tool update the AOR in a timely manner. 008), the NRC reviewed the licensee’s identified in the NRC Allegations Manual The petitioner’s basis states that although revisions to the applicable operability (ADAMS Accession No. ML17003A227) that the errors regarding the wrong break evaluations and did not identify any the NRC uses to ensure that licensees are enthalpies in calculation 3C8-0282-001, concerns, but did identify NCVs of 10 CFR taking appropriate actions to foster a Revision 3, were documented on June 30, part 50, Appendix B, Criterion III, ‘‘Design workplace environment that encourages 2008, in Issue Report 792213, ‘‘MSLB Control,’’ for the failure to identify design employees to raise safety concerns and to feel daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES Calc[ulation] Energy Release Error,’’ the deficiencies involving secondary missiles free to do so without fear of retaliation, analysis still contains the nonconservative from the MSSV room pressurization and referred to as an SCWE. A chilling effect break enthalpies 8 years later. Exelon’s NCVs of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix B, letter may be appropriate when there are voluntary response letter agrees that Issue Criterion XVI, ‘‘Corrective Action,’’ for the indications of a chilled work environment, Report 792213 for Byron Station and the failure to correct the design deficiencies. but no discrimination concern has been related Issue Report 792215 for Braidwood 4. Issue a ‘‘Demand for Information’’ under substantiated. Neither Exelon’s voluntary Station were documented on June 30, 2008. 10 CFR 2.204, to compare and contrast the response nor NRC’s inspection at Byron Exelon’s voluntary response letter shows that behavior of Exelon management as described Station, as discussed in Item 4, identified VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:14 May 01, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02MYN1.SGM 02MYN1

19304 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 85 / Wednesday, May 2, 2018 / Notices evidence of a chilled environment at the Point). The renewed licenses would ML18072A224), and April 10, 2018 Byron Station. authorize the applicant to operate (ADAMS Package Accession No. III. Conclusion Turkey Point for an additional 20 years ML18102A521 and Accession No. The NRC staff conducted inspections at the beyond the period specified in each of ML18113A132), the NRC received an Byron Station and Braidwood Station that the current renewed licenses. The application from FPL, filed pursuant to assessed the licensee’s compliance with the current renewed operating licenses for Section 103 of the Atomic Energy Act of regulations under 10 CFR part 50, Appendix Turkey Point expire as follows: Unit No. 1954, as amended (the Act), and part 54 B, Criterion III, ‘‘Design Control,’’ and 3 on July 19, 2032, and Unit No. 4 on of title 10 of the Code of Federal Criterion XVI, ‘‘Corrective Action,’’ related to April 10, 2033. Regulations (10 CFR), to renew the the adequacy of the AOR for the structural DATES: A request for a hearing or operating licenses for Turkey Point at design of the MSIV house and the main 2,644 megawatt thermal each. The petition for leave to intervene must be steam tunnel, and took enforcement action as Turkey Point units are pressurized- outlined in the inspection reports identified filed July 2, 2018. ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID water reactors designed by above. The NRC staff requested that the licensee evaluate the SCWE concerns NRC–2018–0074 when contacting the Westinghouse Electric Company and are expressed in the petition, and conducted an NRC about the availability of located in Homestead, Miami-Dade inspection that assessed the licensee’s SCWE information regarding this document. County, Florida. A notice of receipt of at Byron Station. Based on the licensee’s You may obtain publicly-available the subsequent license renewal voluntary response and the results of the information related to this document application (SLRA) was published in inspection, the NRC staff did not identify using any of the following methods: the Federal Register (FR) on April 18, challenges to the licensee’s SCWE or 2018 (83 FR 17196). evidence of a chilled environment at the • Federal Rulemaking website: Go to The NRC staff has determined that Byron Station and, therefore, determined that http://www.regulations.gov and search FPL has submitted sufficient issuance of a chilling effect letter was not for Docket ID NRC–2018–0074. Address information in accordance with 10 CFR warranted. Because these actions address the questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer 54.19, 54.21, 54.22, 54.23, 51.45, and underlying concerns raised in requests 1, 2, Borges; telephone: 301–287–9127; 4, and 5 of the petition, the petition is 51.53(c), to enable the staff to undertake email: Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov. For granted in part. a review of the application, and that the technical questions, contact the As provided in 10 CFR 2.206(c), a copy of application is, therefore, acceptable for individual listed in the FOR FURTHER this director’s decision will be filed with the docketing. The current Docket Nos. 50– INFORMATION CONTACT section of this Secretary of the Commission for review. As 250 and 50–251 for Renewed Facility provided by this regulation, the decision will document. Operating License Nos. DPR–31 and constitute the final action of the Commission • NRC’s Agencywide Documents DPR–41, respectively, will be retained. 25 days after the date of the decision unless Access and Management System The determination to accept the SLRA the Commission, on its own motion, (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- for docketing does not constitute a institutes a review of the decision within that available documents online in the determination that a subsequent time. ADAMS Public Documents collection at renewed license should be issued, and Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ does not preclude the NRC staff from of April, 2018. adams.html. To begin the search, select requesting additional information as the For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then review proceeds. Brian E. Holian, select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Before issuance of the requested Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, subsequent renewed licenses, the NRC Acting Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. please contact the NRC’s Public will have made the findings required by Document Room (PDR) reference staff at the Act, and the Commission’s rules and [FR Doc. 2018–09210 Filed 5–1–18; 8:45 am] 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by regulations. In accordance with 10 CFR BILLING CODE 7590–01–P email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The 54.29, the NRC may issue a subsequent ADAMS accession number for each renewed license on the basis of its document referenced (if it is available in review if it finds that actions have been NUCLEAR REGULATORY ADAMS) is provided the first time that identified and have been or will be COMMISSION it is mentioned in this document. taken with respect to: (1) Managing the [Docket Nos. 50–250 and 50–251; NRC– • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and effects of aging during the period of 2018–0074] purchase copies of public documents at extended operation on the functionality the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One of structures and components that have Florida Power & Light Company; White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Turkey Point Nuclear Generating, Unit been identified as requiring aging Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. management review; and (2) time- Nos. 3 and 4 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lois limited aging analyses that have been AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory M. James, Office of Nuclear Reactor identified as requiring review, such that Commission. Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory there is reasonable assurance that the ACTION: License renewal application; Commission, Washington, DC 20555– activities authorized by the renewed opportunity to request a hearing and to 0001; telephone: 301–415–3306, email: licenses will continue to be conducted petition for leave to intervene. Lois.James@nrc.gov. in accordance with the current licensing SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: basis and that any changes made to the SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory plant’s current licensing basis will Commission (NRC) is considering an I. Introduction comply with the Act and the daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES application for the subsequent license By letters dated January 30, 2018 Commission’s regulations. renewal of Renewed Facility Operating (ADAMS Package Accession No. Additionally, in accordance with 10 License Nos. DPR–31 and DPR–41, ML18037A812); February 9, 2018 CFR 51.95(c), the NRC will prepare an which authorize Florida Power & Light (ADAMS Accession No. ML18044A653); environmental impact statement as a Company (FPL or the applicant) to February 16, 2018 (ADAMS Package supplement to the Commission’s operate Turkey Point Nuclear Accession No. ML18053A123); March 1, NUREG–1437, ‘‘Generic Environmental Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4 (Turkey 2018 (ADAMS Package Accession No. Impact Statement for License Renewal VerDate Sep<11>2014 22:14 May 01, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\02MYN1.SGM 02MYN1


Document Created: 2018-05-02 00:50:03
Document Modified: 2018-05-02 00:50:03
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionNotices
ActionDirector's decision under 10 CFR 2.206; issuance.
DatesThe director's decision was issued on April 24, 2018.
ContactJoel Wiebe, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555- 0001, telephone: 301-415-6606; e-mail: [email protected]
FR Citation83 FR 19302 
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR