[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 234 (Tuesday, December 6, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76193-76199]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-31310]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2011-0275]
Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses
Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations and Containing
Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: License amendment request; opportunity to comment and request a
hearing, order.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DATES: Comments must be filed by January 5, 2012. A request for a
hearing must be filed by February 6, 2012. Any potential party as
defined in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 2.4 who
believes access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information
(SUNSI) is necessary to respond to this notice must request document
access by December 16, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Please include Docket ID NRC-2011-0275 in the subject line
of your comments. For additional instructions on submitting comments
and instructions on accessing documents related to this action, see
``Submitting Comments and Accessing Information'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document. You may submit comments by any
one of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for documents filed under Docket ID NRC-
2011-0275. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher,
telephone: (301) 492-3668; email: [email protected].
Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules,
Announcements, and Directives Branch (RADB), Office of Administration,
Mail Stop: TWB-05-B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555-0001.
Fax comments to: RADB at (301) 492-3446.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Submitting Comments and Accessing Information
Comments submitted in writing or in electronic form will be posted
on the NRC Web site and on the Federal rulemaking Web site, http://www.regulations.gov. Because your comments will not be edited to remove
any identifying or contact information, the NRC cautions you against
including any information in your submission that you do not want to be
publicly disclosed.
The NRC requests that any party soliciting or aggregating comments
received from other persons for submission to the NRC inform those
persons that the NRC will not edit their comments to remove any
identifying or contact information, and therefore, they should not
include any information in their comments that they do not want
publicly disclosed.
You can access publicly available documents related to this
document using the following methods:
NRC's Public Document Room (PDR): The public may examine
and have copied, for a fee, publicly available documents at the NRC's
PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland 20852.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC
are available online in the NRC Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this page, the public can gain entry into ADAMS,
which provides text and image files of the NRC's public documents. If
you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing
the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC's PDR reference staff
at 1-(800) 397-4209, (301) 415-4737, or by email to
[email protected].
Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Public comments and
supporting materials related to this notice can be found at http://www.regulations.gov by searching on Docket ID NRC-2011-0275.
Background
Pursuant to Section 189a.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the
Commission or NRC staff) is publishing this notice. The Act requires
the Commission 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 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.
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination,
and Opportunity for a Hearing
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following
amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under
the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation
of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1)
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated; (2) create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or
(3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The basis
for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown
below.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be
[[Page 76194]]
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 should circumstances change during the 30-day
comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result,
for example in derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the
Commission take action prior to the expiration of either the comment
period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a
notice of issuance. Should the Commission make a final No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will take place after
issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will
occur very infrequently.
Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any
person(s) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a
request for a hearing and a petition to intervene with respect to
issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license.
Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be
filed in accordance with the Commission's ``Rules of Practice for
Domestic Licensing Proceedings'' in 10 CFR Part 2. Interested person(s)
should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at
the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21,
11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. The NRC
regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the
NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If
a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed
within 60 days, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the
Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety
and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition;
and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an
appropriate order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene
shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in
the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of
the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons
why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the
following general requirements: (1) The name, address, and telephone
number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the
requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the
proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's
property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the
possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the
proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must
also set forth the specific contentions which the requestor/petitioner
seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.
Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue
of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the
requestor/petitioner shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for
the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert
opinion which support the contention and on which the requestor/
petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing.
The requestor/petitioner must also provide references to those specific
sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the
requestor/petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert
opinion. The petition must include sufficient information to show that
a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law
or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of
the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if
proven, would entitle the requestor/petitioner to relief. A requestor/
petitioner who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at
least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding,
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene,
and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing.
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 decide when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that
the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration,
the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately
effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held
would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final
determination is that the amendment request involves a significant
hazards consideration, any hearing held would take place before the
issuance of any amendment.
All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a
request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or
other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a
request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by
interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c),
must be filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139,
August 28, 2007). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit
and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some
cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not
submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in
accordance with the procedures described below.
To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10
days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the
Office of the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by
telephone at (301) 415-1677, to request (1) a digital identification
(ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or
representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal
server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise
the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a request or
petition for hearing (even in instances in which the participant, or
its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID
certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish
an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the
Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is
available on NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html. System requirements for accessing
the E-Submittal server are detailed in NRC's ``Guidance for Electronic
Submission,'' which is available on the agency's public Web site at
http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants may
attempt to use other software not listed on the Web site, but should
note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted software,
and the NRC
[[Page 76195]]
Meta System Help Desk will not be able to offer assistance in using
unlisted software.
If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC
in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the
document using the NRC's online, Web-based submission form. In order to
serve documents through the Electronic Information Exchange System,
users will be required to install a Web browser plug-in from the NRC
Web site. Further information on the Web-based submission form,
including the installation of the Web browser plug-in, is available on
the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.
Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a
docket has been created, the participant can then submit a request for
hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in
Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance
available on the NRC public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the
documents are submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be
timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system
no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of
a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends
the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The
E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access
to the document to the NRC Office of the General Counsel and any others
who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to
participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the
documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and
other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for
and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition
to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document
via the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically using the agency's adjudicatory E-
Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Meta System
Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC Web site
at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email at
[email protected], or by a toll-free call at 1-(866) 672-7640. The
NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.,
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.
Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not
submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention:
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth
Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff.
Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for
serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered
complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or
by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing
the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer,
having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a
participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer
subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from
use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at
http://ehd1.nrc.gov/EHD/, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the
Commission, or the presiding officer. Participants are requested not to
include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers,
home addresses, or home phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC
regulation or other law requires submission of such information. 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.
Petitions for leave to intervene must be filed no later than 60
days from the date of publication of this notice. Non-timely filings
will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer
that the petition or request should be granted or the contentions
should be admitted, based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10
CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii).
For further details with respect to this amendment action, see the
application for amendment which is available for public inspection at
the NRC's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. Publicly
available documents created or received at the NRC are accessible
electronically through ADAMS in the NRC Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there
are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the
PDR Reference staff at 1-(800) 397-4209, (301) 415-4737, or by email to
[email protected].
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50-456 and STN 50-457,
Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2, Will County, Illinois; Docket Nos.
STN 50-454 and STN 50-455, Byron Station, Units 1 and 2, Ogle County,
Illinois
Date of amendment request: June 23, 2011.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The proposed
amendment would revise the maximum power level specified in each unit's
operating license and the Technical Specification (TS) definition of
rated thermal power. The proposed amendment would revise TS Section
2.1.1 to modify the departure from nucleate boiling (DNB) ratio and use
of DNB correlations. The proposed amendment would revise TS 3.4.1 to
modify the reactor coolant system total flow rate for measurement
uncertainty recapture uprated power conditions. The proposed amendment
would revise TS 5.6.5 to add analytical methods used to determine the
core operating limits. In addition, the amendment request includes a
revised steam generator tube rupture and margin to overfill analysis.
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 nuclear steam supply system and balance-of-plant systems,
components and analyses that could be affected by the proposed
change to the rated thermal power (RTP) level were evaluated using
revised design parameters. The evaluations determined that these
structures, systems and components are capable of performing their
design function at the proposed uprated RTP of 3645 MWt. A portion
of the current safety
[[Page 76196]]
analyses remain bounding, as they were performed at 102% of the
current power level which exceeds the requested MUR [measurement
uncertainty recapture] power level. Other analyses were previously
performed at the current RTP level and have either been evaluated as
acceptable or re-performed at the increased power level. The results
demonstrate that acceptance criteria of the applicable analyses
continue to be met at the uprated power conditions. As such, all
applicable accident analyses continue to comply with the relevant
acceptance criteria. Power level is an input assumption to equipment
design and accident analyses; however, it is not a transient or
accident initiator, and therefore does not increase the probability
of an accident. Plant safety barriers are not challenged by the
proposed changes.
The source terms used to assess radiological consequences for
each transient or accident have been reviewed. he radiological
consequences are either bounded by the current analysis or have been
evaluated to remain within regulatory limits at the uprated
condition. Specifically, the SGTR [steam generator tube rupture] and
MTO [margin to overfill] analysis has been revised with updated
assumptions to gain additional margin to overfill during a SGTR
event. Appropriate modifications will be added to the plant in
support of the SGTR analysis single failure assumptions. Although
the revised analysis results in more than a minimal increase in the
accident dose, as defined in [Nuclear Energy Institute] NEI 96-01,
``Guidelines for 10 CFR 50.59 Implementation,'' Revision 1, dated
November 2000, the dose results remain within the limits specified
in the Standard Review Plan (SRP), Section 15.6.3, ``Radiological
Consequences of Steam Generator Tube Failure (PWR).''
The primary loop components (e.g., reactor vessel, reactor
internals, control rod drive housings, piping and supports, and
reactor coolant pumps) remain within their applicable structural
limits and will continue to perform their intended design functions.
Thus, there is no significant increase in the probability of a
structural failure of these components.
In addition, the proposed use of the [Leading Edge Flow Meter]
LEFM, the NRC-approved W-3 alternative correlations, (i.e., the ABB-
NV and WLOP correlations) and the increase in required RCS [reactor
coolant systems] flow, serve to facilitate operations at the uprated
power level and have no impact on the probability or consequences of
any accident previously evaluated.
Therefore, the proposed changes described above 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.
No new accident scenarios, failure mechanisms, or limiting
single failures are introduced as a result of any proposed changes.
LEFM system failures will not adversely affect any safety-related
system or any structures, systems or components required for
transient mitigation. Structures, systems and components previously
required for transient mitigation continue to be capable of
fulfilling their intended design functions. The proposed changes
have no significant adverse affect on any safety-related structure
systems or components and do not significantly change the
performance or integrity of any safety-related system.
The proposed changes do not adversely affect any current system
interfaces or create any new interfaces that could result in an
accident or malfunction of a different kind than previously
evaluated. Operating at RTP of 3645 MWt does not create any new
accident initiators or precursors. Credible malfunctions are bounded
by the current accident analyses of record or recent evaluations
demonstrating that applicable criteria are still met with the
proposed changes.
The proposed changes to replace the W-3 [departure from nucleate
boiling] DNB correlation with the NRC approved ABB-NV and WLOP
correlations, the revision to the required RCS flow rate, and the
assumptions used in the revised SGTR and MTO analysis would not
prompt a new or different kind of accident.
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.
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 regulatory and analysis 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.
The margins of safety associated with the power uprate are those
pertaining to core thermal power. These include fuel cladding,
reactor coolant system pressure boundary, and containment barriers.
Core analyses demonstrate that operation at the proposed uprated
power level will continue to meet the nuclear design basis
acceptance criteria. Impacts to components associated with the
reactor coolant system pressure boundary structural integrity, and
factors such as pressure-temperature limits, vessel fluence, and
pressurized thermal shock were found to be acceptable under MUR
operating conditions. The proposed changes will have minimal effect
on operating parameters and the noted components remain capable of
performing their intended safety functions following implementation
of the MUR power uprate.
The revised SGTR and MTO analysis show acceptable results. The
resultant SGTR dose remains within the limits specified in the
Standard Review Plan (SRP), Section 15.6.3, ``Radiological
Consequences of Steam Generator Tube Failure (PWR).'' The analysis
also shows an improvement (i.e., a larger margin) in the MTO
results. The results of all other associated safety analyses remain
acceptable.
The proposed changes to use the NRC-approved W-3 alternative
correlations, (i.e., the ABB-NV and WLOP correlations) and the
increase in the required minimum RCS flow value verify that
appropriate nuclear and thermal hydraulic margins to safety are
maintained.
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
requested amendments involve no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Mr. Bradley J. Fewell, Associate General
Counsel, Exelon Nuclear, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555.
NRC Branch Chief: Jacob I. Zimmerman.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-352, Limerick Generating
Station, Unit 1, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania
Date of amendment request: October 12, 2011.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The proposed
changes revise the Technical Specification (TS) relating to the Safety
Limit Minimum Critical Power Ratios (SLMCPRs). The changes result from
a cycle-specific analysis performed to support the operation of
Limerick Generating Station, Unit 1, in the upcoming Cycle 15.
Specifically, the proposed TS changes will revise the SLMCPRs contained
in TS 2.1, ``Safety Limits,'' for two recirculation loop operation and
single recirculation loop operation to reflect the changes in the
cycle-specific analysis. The new SLMCPRs are calculated using the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)-approved methodology described in
NEDE 24011-P-A, ``General Electric Standard Application for Reactor
Fuel,'' Revision 18.
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
[[Page 76197]]
consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The derivation of the cycle specific Safety Limit Minimum
Critical Power Ratios (SLMCPRs) for incorporation into the Technical
Specifications (TS), and their use to determine cycle specific
thermal limits, has been performed using the methodology discussed
in NEDE-24011-P-A, ``General Electric Standard Application for
Reactor Fuel,'' Revision 18.
The basis of the SLMCPR calculation is to ensure that during
normal operation and during abnormal operational transients, at
least 99.9% of all fuel rods in the core do not experience
transition boiling if the limit is not violated. The new SLMCPRs
preserve the existing margin to transition boiling.
The MCPR [minimum critical power ratio] safety limit is
reevaluated for each reload using NRC-approved methodologies. The
analyses for Limerick Generating Station (LGS), Unit 1, Cycle 15
have concluded that a two loop MCPR safety limit of >=1.09, based on
the application of Global Nuclear Fuel's NRC-approved MCPR safety
limit methodology, will ensure that this acceptance criterion is
met. For single-loop operation, a MCPR safety limit of >=1.12 also
ensures that this acceptance criterion is met. The MCPR operating
limits are presented and controlled in accordance with the LGS, Unit
1 Core Operating Limits Report (COLR).
The requested TS changes do not involve any plant modifications
or operational changes that could affect system reliability or
performance or that could affect the probability of operator error.
The requested changes do not affect any postulated accident
precursors, do not affect any accident mitigating systems, and do
not introduce any new accident initiation mechanisms. Therefore, the
proposed TS changes do 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 SLMCPR is a TS numerical value, calculated to ensure that
during normal operation and during abnormal operational transients,
at least 99.9% of all fuel rods in the core do not experience
transition boiling if the limit is not violated. The new SLMCPRs are
calculated using NRC-approved methodology discussed in NEDE-24011-P-
A, ``General Electric Standard Application for Reactor Fuel,''
Revision 18. The proposed changes do not involve any new modes of
operation or any plant modifications. The proposed revised MCPR
safety limits have been shown to be acceptable for Cycle 15
operation. The core operating limits will continue to be developed
using NRC-approved methods. The proposed MCPR safety limits or
methods for establishing the core operating limits do not result in
the creation of any new precursors to an accident. Therefore, the
proposed TS changes do not create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
There is no significant reduction in the margin of safety
previously approved by the NRC as a result of the proposed change to
the SLMCPRs. The new SLMCPRs are calculated using methodology
discussed in NEDE-24011-P-A, ``General Electric Standard Application
for Reactor Fuel,'' Revision 18. The SLMCPRs ensure that during
normal operation and during abnormal operational transients, at
least 99.9% of all fuel rods in the core do not experience
transition boiling if the limit is not violated, thereby preserving
the fuel cladding integrity. Therefore, the proposed TS changes do
not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety
previously approved by the NRC.
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: J. Bradley Fewell, Esquire, Associate
General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road,
Warrenville, IL 60555.
NRC Branch Chief: Harold K. Chernoff.
Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information for Contention Preparation
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50-456, STN 50-457, STN
50-454, and STN 50-455, Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2, Will County,
Illinois and Byron Station, Units 1 and 2, Ogle County, Illinois;
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-352, Limerick Generating
Station, Unit 1, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania
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 such access. A ``potential party'' is any person who intends to
participate as a party by demonstrating standing and filing an
admissible contention under 10 CFR 2.309. Requests for access to SUNSI
submitted later than 10 days after publication 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 requestor shall submit a letter requesting permission to
access SUNSI to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff, and provide a copy to the Associate General
Counsel for Hearings, Enforcement and Administration, Office of the
General Counsel, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The expedited delivery or
courier mail address for both offices is: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The email
address for the Office of the Secretary and the Office of the General
Counsel are [email protected] and [email protected],
respectively.\1\ The request must include the following information:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ While a request for hearing or petition to intervene in this
proceeding must comply with the filing requirements of the NRC's
``E-Filing Rule,'' the initial request to access SUNSI under these
procedures should be submitted as described in this paragraph.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) A description of the licensing action with a citation to this
Federal Register notice;
(2) The name and address of the potential party and a description
of the potential party's particularized interest that could be harmed
by the action identified in C.(1); and
(3) The identity of the individual or entity requesting access to
SUNSI and the requestor'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
[[Page 76198]]
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
the requestor is granted access to that information. However, if more
than 25 days remain between the date the petitioner is granted 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
either after a determination on standing and need for access, or after
a determination on trustworthiness and reliability, the NRC staff shall
immediately notify the requestor in writing, briefly stating the reason
or reasons for the denial.
(2) The requestor 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.
H. Review of Grants of Access. A party other than the requestor may
challenge an NRC staff determination granting access to SUNSI whose
release would harm that party's interest independent of the proceeding.
Such a challenge must be filed with the Chief Administrative Judge
within 5 days of the notification by the NRC staff of its grant of
access.
If challenges to the NRC staff determinations are filed, these
procedures give way to the normal process for litigating disputes
concerning access to information. The availability of interlocutory
review by the Commission of orders ruling on such NRC staff
determinations (whether granting or denying access) is governed by 10
CFR 2.311.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Requestors should note that the filing requirements of the
NRC's E-Filing Rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007) 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.
Attachment 1 to this Order summarizes the general target schedule for
processing and resolving requests under these procedures.
It is so ordered.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day of November 2011.
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; (ii) all contentions whose
formulation does not require access to SUNSI
(+25 Answers to petition for intervention; +7
requestor/petitioner reply).
20.................... Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff
informs the requestor 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 requestor/
petitioner to file a motion seeking a ruling to
reverse the NRC staff's denial of access; NRC
staff files copy of access determination with
the presiding officer (or Chief Administrative
Judge or other designated officer, as
appropriate). If NRC staff finds ``need'' for
SUNSI, the deadline for any party to the
proceeding whose interest independent of the
proceeding would be harmed by the release of
the information to file a motion seeking a
ruling to reverse the NRC staff's grant of
access.
30.................... Deadline for NRC staff reply to motions to
reverse NRC staff determination(s).
40.................... (Receipt +30) If NRC staff finds standing and
need for SUNSI, deadline for NRC staff to
complete information processing and file motion
for Protective Order and draft Non-Disclosure
Affidavit. Deadline for applicant/licensee to
file Non-Disclosure Agreement for SUNSI.
A..................... If access granted: Issuance of presiding officer
or other designated officer decision on motion
for protective order for access to sensitive
information (including schedule for providing
access and submission of contentions) or
decision reversing a final adverse
determination by the NRC staff.
A + 3................. Deadline for filing executed Non-Disclosure
Affidavits. Access provided to SUNSI consistent
with decision issuing the protective order.
A + 28................ Deadline for submission of contentions whose
development depends upon access to SUNSI.
However, if more than 25 days remain between
the petitioner's receipt of (or access to) the
information and the deadline for filing all
other contentions (as established in the notice
of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the
petitioner may file its SUNSI contentions by
that later deadline.
A + 53................ (Contention receipt +25) Answers to contentions
whose development depends upon access to SUNSI.
A + 60................ (Answer receipt +7) Petitioner/Intervenor reply
to answers.
>A + 60............... Decision on contention admission.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 76199]]
[FR Doc. 2011-31310 Filed 12-5-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P