Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 38 / Friday, February 27, 2009 / Notices 9009 

under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4) and (6) of the 

Government in the Sunshine Act would be 

improperly disclosed. 

Dated: February 24, 2009. 

Susanne Bolton, 

Committee Management Officer. 

[FR Doc. E9–4187 Filed 2–26–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7555–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket Nos. 50–369 and 50–370; NRC– 

2009–0081] 

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC; Notice of 

Consideration of Issuance of 

Amendment to Facility Operating 

License, Proposed No Significant 

Hazards Consideration Determination, 

and Opportunity for a Hearing 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (the Commission) is 

considering issuance of an amendment 

to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF– 

9 and NPF–17 issued to Duke Energy 

Carolinas, LLC (the licensee), for 

operation of the McGuire Nuclear 

Station, Units 1 and 2, located in 

Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. 

The proposed amendments revise the 

McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, 

licensing basis by adopting the 

alternative source term (AST) 

radiological analysis methodology as 

allowed by Title 10 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations, Part 50, Section 

50.67, ‘‘Accident Source Term, for the 

Loss of Coolant Accident.’’ This 

amendment request represents full 

scope implementation of the AST as 

described in NRC Regulatory Guide 

1.183, ‘‘Alternative Radiological Source 

Terms for Evaluating Design Basis 

Accidents at Nuclear Power Reactors, 

Revision 0.’’ 

Before issuance of the proposed 

license amendment, the Commission 

will have made findings required by the 

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended 

(the Act), and the Commission’s 

regulations. 

The Commission has made a 

proposed determination that the 

amendment request involves no 

significant hazards consideration. Under 

the Commission’s regulations in Title 10 

of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 

CFR), Section 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. 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? 

No. AST is an updated methodology used 

to evaluate the dose consequences of the Loss 

of Coolant Accident (LOCA). This type of 

change is analytical, thus, does not increase 

the probability of an accident previously 

evaluated. It has been demonstrated that the 

dose consequences of the re-analyzed 

accident remain within the dose limits of 10 

CFR 50.67 and Regulatory Guide 1.183. 

This proposed change assumes an increase 

in the amount of unfiltered air in-leakage into 

the control room. The current Technical 

Information Document (TID) based McGuire 

dose consequence analysis for the LOCA 

assumed control room unfiltered in-leakage 

of 10 scfm. Tracer gas testing performed at 

McGuire revealed that unfiltered in-leakage 

into the control room exceeded this amount 

by as much as 167 scfm as discussed in 

McGuire’s response to NRC GL 2003–01 

dated February 19, 2004. Use of the AST 

methodology can accommodate a larger 

control room pressurization unfiltered inleakage rate without exceeding any 

regulatory dose limits. 

A comparison of the AST analysis results 

and the TID values (UFSAR Table 15–12) 

shows that the EAB and LPZ (off-site) doses 

decrease while the control room dose 

increases. The new AST based analysis not 

only implements changes which affect both 

off-site and control room doses, such as the 

change in source term methodology, it also 

includes changes to the LOCA model which 

only impact the control room dose, and are 

responsible for the increased result. These 

new attributes include a control room inleakage model that reflects the control room 

tracer gas testing results and a recomputed 

control room shine component of the post 

LOCA control room dose. The dose 

consequences of the revised analysis, 

however, are below the 10 CFR 50.67 

acceptance criteria for both off-site and 

control room doses and are not considered a 

significant increase. 

AST radiological methodology does not 

adversely affect accident initiators or 

precursors. Nor will it alter or prevent the 

ability of structures, systems, and 

components from performing their intended 

function to mitigate the consequences of an 

accident. 

Therefore, this LAR will not involve a 

significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated. 

2. Does the LAR create the possibility of a 

new or different kind of accident from any 

accident previously evaluated? 

No. AST is an updated methodology that 

was used to re-evaluate the dose 

consequences of the McGuire UFSAR 

previously analyzed accidents. This new 

analysis does not cause any change in the 

post accident operation of any plant system, 

structure, or component. 

This LAR does not involve an addition or 

modification to any plant system, structure, 

or component. This change does not affect 

the post accident operation of any plant 

system, structure, or component as directed 

in plant procedures. New or modified 

equipment or personnel failure modes that 

might initiate a new or different type 

accident are not created as a result of the 

proposed change. 

Therefore, no new or different accident is 

created by changing to the AST methodology 

prescribed in Regulatory Guide 1.183. 

3. Does this LAR involve a significant 

reduction in a margin of safety? 

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 accident 

conditions. These barriers include the fuel 

cladding, the reactor coolant system, and the 

containment system. The proposed reanalysis of the LOCA dose consequences 

using AST will have no affect on the 

performance of these barriers. This LAR does 

not involve an addition or modification to 

any plant system, structure, or component. 

This change will not affect the post accident 

operation of any plant system, structure, or 

component as directed in plant procedures. 

Therefore, the proposed LAR will 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. 

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 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 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES2
9010 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 38 / Friday, February 27, 2009 / Notices 

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. 

Written comments may be submitted 

by mail to the Chief, Rulemaking, 

Directives and Editing Branch, TWB– 

05–B01M, Division of Administrative 

Services, Office of Administration, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555–0001, and 

should cite the publication date and 

page number of this Federal Register 

notice. Documents may be examined, 

and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC’s 

Public Document Room (PDR), located 

at One White Flint North, Public File 

Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 

floor), Rockville, Maryland. 

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, Public 

File Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike 

(first floor), Rockville, Maryland. 

Publicly available records will be 

accessible from the Agencywide 

Documents Access and Management 

System’s (ADAMS) Public Electronic 

Reading Room on the Internet at the 

NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/ 

reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a 

request for a hearing or petition for 

leave to intervene is filed by the above 

date, 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 identify the specific 

contentions which the petitioner/ 

requestor seeks to have litigated at the 

proceeding. 

Each contention must consist of a 

specific statement of the issue of law or 

fact to be raised or controverted. In 

addition, the petitioner/requestor shall 

provide a brief explanation of the bases 

for the contention and a concise 

statement of the alleged facts or expert 

opinion which support the contention 

and on which the petitioner intends to 

rely in proving the contention at the 

hearing. The petitioner/requestor must 

also provide references to those specific 

sources and documents of which the 

petitioner is aware and on which the 

petitioner intends to rely to establish 

those facts or expert opinion. 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 petitioner to relief. A 

petitioner/requestor 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, 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, 

which the NRC promulgated on August 

28, 2007 (72 FR 49139). 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 

a waiver in accordance with the 

procedures described below. 

To comply with the procedural 

requirements of E-Filing, at least ten 

(10) days prior to the filing deadline, the 

petitioner/requestor must contact the 

Office of the Secretary by e-mail at 

hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by calling 

(301) 415–1677, to request (1) a digital 

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/or (2) creation of an 

electronic docket for the proceeding 

(even in instances in which the 

petitioner/requestor (or its counsel or 

representative) already holds an NRCissued digital ID certificate). Each 

petitioner/requestor will need to 

download the Workplace Forms 

ViewerTM to access the Electronic 

Information Exchange (EIE), a 

component of the E-Filing system. The 

Workplace Forms ViewerTM is free and 

is available at http://www.nrc.gov/sitehelp/e-submittals/install-viewer.html. 

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/applycertificates.html. 

Once a petitioner/requestor has 

obtained a digital ID certificate, had a 

docket created, and downloaded the EIE 

viewer, it 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/esubmittals.html. A filing is considered 

complete at the time the filer submits its 

documents through EIE. To be timely, 

an electronic filing must be submitted to 

the EIE system no later than 11:59 p.m. 

Eastern Time on the due date. Upon 

receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES2
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 38 / Friday, February 27, 2009 / Notices 9011 

system time-stamps the document and 

sends the submitter an e-mail notice 

confirming receipt of the document. The 

EIE system also distributes an e-mail 

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 may 

seek assistance through the ‘‘Contact 

Us’’ link located on the NRC Web site 

at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html or by calling the NRC 

electronic filing Help Desk, which is 

available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., 

Eastern Time, Monday through Friday. 

The electronic filing Help Desk can be 

contacted by telephone at 1–866–672– 

7640 or by e-mail at 

MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov. 

Participants who believe that they 

have a good cause for not submitting 

documents electronically must file a 

motion, 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 firstclass mail as of the time of deposit in 

the mail, or by courier, express mail, or 

expedited delivery service upon 

depositing the document with the 

provider of the service. 

Non-timely requests and/or petitions 

and contentions will not be entertained 

absent a determination by the 

Commission or the presiding officer of 

the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 

that the petition and/or request should 

be granted and/or the contentions 

should be admitted, based on a 

balancing of the factors specified in 10 

CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)–(viii). 

Documents submitted in adjudicatory 

proceedings will appear in NRC’s 

electronic hearing docket which is 

available to the public at http:// 

ehd.nrc.gov/ehd_proceeding/home.asp, 

unless excluded pursuant to an order of 

the Commission, an Atomic Safety and 

Licensing Board, or a 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. 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 submissions. 

For further details with respect to this 

license amendment application, see the 

application for amendment and 

supplements dated March 20, 2008, May 

28, 2008, October 6, 2008, December 17, 

2008 and February 12, 2009, which are 

available for public inspection at the 

Commission’s PDR, located at One 

White Flint North, File Public Area O1 

F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), 

Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available 

records will be accessible electronically 

from the Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System’s 

(ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading 

Room on the Internet at the NRC Web 

site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ 

adams.html. Persons who do not have 

access to ADAMS or who encounter 

problems in accessing the documents 

located in ADAMS, should contact the 

NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone 

at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or 

by e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day 

of February 2009. 

For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

John Stang, 

Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing 

Branch II–1, Division of Operating Reactor 

Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. 

[FR Doc. E9–4228 Filed 2–26–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

Proposed Collection; Comment 

Request 

Upon written request, copies available 

from: Securities and Exchange 

Commission, Office of Investor 

Education and Advocacy, 

Washington, DC 20549–0213. 

Extension: Form F–9, OMB Control No. 

3235–0377, SEC File No. 270–333. 

Notice is hereby given that, pursuant 

to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities 

and Exchange Commission 

(‘‘Commission’’) is soliciting comments 

on the collection of information 

summarized below. The Commission 

plans to submit this existing collection 

of information to the Office of 

Management Budget for extension and 

approval. 

Form F–9 (17 CFR 239.39) is a 

registration statement under the 

Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a et 

seq.) that is used to register investment 

grade debt or investment grade preferred 

securities that are offered for cash or in 

connection with an exchange, offer and 

are either non-convertible or not 

convertible for a period of at least one 

year from the date of issuance and 

thereafter are only convertible into a 

security of another class of the issuer. 

The purpose of the information 

collection is to permit verification of 

compliance with securities law 

requirements and to assure the public 

availability and dissemination of such 

information. The principal function of 

the Commission’s forms and rules under 

the securities laws’ disclosure 

provisions is to make information 

available to the investors. We estimate 

that Form F–9 takes approximately 25 

hours per response and it is filed by 18 

respondents. We further estimate that 

25% of the 25 hours per response (6.25 

hours) is prepared by the issuer for an 

annual reporting burden of 113 hours 

(6.25 hours per response × 18 

responses). 

Written comments are invited on: (a) 

Whether this proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate 

of the burden imposed by the collection 

of information; (c) ways to enhance the 

quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information collected; and (d) ways to 

minimize the burden of the collection of 

information on respondents, including 

through the use of automated collection 

techniques or other forms of information 

technology. Consideration will be given 

to comments and suggestions submitted 

in writing within 60 days of this 

publication. 

Please direct your written comments 

to Charles Boucher, Director/CIO, 

Securities and Exchange Commission, 

C/O Shirley Martinson, 6432 General 

Green Way, Alexandria, Virginia 22312; 

or send an e-mail to: 

PRA_Mailbox@sec.gov. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES2