Source: https://regulations.justia.com/regulations/fedreg/2013/03/12/2013-05022.html
Timestamp: 2019-12-11 19:38:54
Document Index: 631247569

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 2', 'art 50', 'art 50', 'art 50', 'art 50', 'art 50', 'art 50', 'art 50', 'art 2', 'art 50', 'art 50', 'art 50', 'art\n50', 'art 50', 'art 50']

Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations and Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information, 15747-15753 [2013-05022] :: Nuclear Regulatory Commission :: Agencies And Commissions :: Regulation Tracker :: Justia
Justia Regulation Tracker Agencies And Commissions Nuclear Regulatory Commission Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations and Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information, 15747-15753 [2013-05022]
Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations and Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information, 15747-15753 [2013-05022]
Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 48 / Tuesday, March 12, 2013 / Notices Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of March 2013. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Kevin A. Coyne, Chief, Probabilistic Risk Assessment Branch, Division of Risk Analysis, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. [FR Doc. 2013–05618 Filed 3–11–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 55–23694–SP; ASLBP No. 13– 925–01–SP–BD01] Charlissa C. Smith (Denial of Senior Reactor Operator License) Notice of Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Reconstitution Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.313(c) and 2.321(b), the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Board) in the abovecaptioned Charlissa C. Smith case is hereby reconstituted because Administrative Judge Alan S. Rosenthal, who has been serving as Board Chairman, is unavailable for continued service on this case. Administrative Judge Ronald M. Spritzer, who currently is serving on the Board, is appointed to serve as the Board Chairman, and Administrative Judge William J. Froehlich is appointed to serve as the third member of the Board in place of Judge Rosenthal. All correspondence, documents, and other materials shall continue to be filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule. See 10 CFR 2.302 et seq. Issued at Rockville, Maryland this 5th day of March 2013. E. Roy Hawkens, Chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel. [FR Doc. 2013–05614 Filed 3–11–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES [NRC–2013–0039] Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations and Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information Nuclear Regulatory Commission. AGENCY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:21 Mar 11, 2013 Jkt 229001 License amendment request; opportunity to comment, request a hearing, and petition for leave to intervene, order. ACTION: Comments must be filed by April 11, 2013. A request for a hearing must be filed by May 13, 2013. Any potential party as defined in section 2.4 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), who believes access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI) is necessary to respond to this notice must request document access by March 22, 2013. ADDRESSES: You may access information and comment submissions related to this document, which the NRC possesses and are publically available, by searching on http:// www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC–2013–0039. You may submit comments by any of the following methods: • Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2013–0039. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301–492–3668; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. • 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. For additional direction on accessing information and submitting comments, see ‘‘Accessing Information and Submitting Comments’’ in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DATES: I. Accessing Information and Submitting Comments A. Accessing Information Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2013– 0039 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may access information related to this document, which the NRC possesses and is publicly available, by the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2013–0039. • NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may access publicly available documents online in the NRC Library at http://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 15747 then select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced in this notice (if that document is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that a document is referenced. • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. B. Submitting Comments Please include Docket ID NRC–2013– 0039 in the subject line of your comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make your comment submission available to the public in this docket. The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http:// www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information. If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS. II. Background Pursuant to section 189a.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is publishing this 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 or combined license, as applicable, upon a determination by the Commission that such amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, notwithstanding the pendency before the Commission of a request for a hearing from any person. E:\FR\FM\12MRN1.SGM 12MRN1 15748 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 48 / Tuesday, March 12, 2013 / Notices mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES This notice includes notices of amendments containing SUNSI. Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission’s regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The basis for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown below. The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination. Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60day 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 or VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:21 Mar 11, 2013 Jkt 229001 combined license. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission’s ‘‘Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure’’ in 10 CFR Part 2. Interested person(s) should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the NRC’s PDR, located at One White Flint North, Room O1–F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. The NRC regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC’s Web site at http:// www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/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 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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, then any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment. All documents filed in the 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’s E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007). The EFiling process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the Internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in accordance with the procedures described below. To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone E:\FR\FM\12MRN1.SGM 12MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 48 / Tuesday, March 12, 2013 / Notices 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 NRCissued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic docket. Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the NRC’s public Web site at http:// www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/ apply-certificates.html. System requirements for accessing the ESubmittal server are detailed in the NRC’s ‘‘Guidance for Electronic Submission,’’ which is available on the agency’s public Web site at http:// www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.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 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’s Web site. Further information on the Webbased 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/esubmittals.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 the NRC’s guidance available on the NRC’s public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/sitehelp/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. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:21 Mar 11, 2013 Jkt 229001 Upon receipt of a transmission, the EFiling system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access to the document to the NRC’s Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing 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’s Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html, by email at MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a tollfree 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. PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 15749 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. However, a request to intervene will require including information on local residence in order to demonstrate a proximity assertion of interest in the proceeding. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested 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. Requests for hearing, petitions for leave to intervene, and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the 60-day deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the following three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1): (i) The information upon which the filing is based was not previously available; (ii) the information upon which the filing is based is materially different from information previously available; and (iii) the filing has been submitted in a timely fashion based on the availability of the subsequent information. Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC, Docket No. 50–410, Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit 2, Oswego County, New York Date of amendment request: November 21, 2012. A publicly available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML123380336. Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The amendment would revise NMP2 Technical Specification (TS) Section 3.4.11, ‘‘RCS Pressure and Temperature (P/T) Limits,’’ by replacing the existing reactor vessel heatup and cooldown rate limits and the pressure and temperature (P–T) limit curves with references to the Pressure and Temperature Limits Report (PTLR). In addition, a new definition for the PTLR would be added to TS Section 1.1, ‘‘Definitions,’’ and a new section E:\FR\FM\12MRN1.SGM 12MRN1 15750 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 48 / Tuesday, March 12, 2013 / Notices mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES addressing administrative requirements for the PTLR would be added to TS Section 5.0, ‘‘Administrative Controls.’’ Relocation of the P–T limit curves to the PTLR is consistent with the guidance provided in NRC approved General Electric Hitachi Nuclear Engineering (GEH) Licensing Topical Report, NEDC–33178P–A, Revision 1, ‘‘General Electric Methodology for Development of Reactor Pressure Vessel Pressure-Temperature Curves.’’ This topical report uses the guidelines provided in NRC Generic Letter (GL) 96–03, ‘‘Relocation of the Pressure Temperature Limit Curves and Low Temperature Overpressure Protection System Limits.’’ The proposed TS changes are consistent with the guidance provided in GL 96–03 as supplemented by Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) traveler TSTF–419–A, ‘‘Revise PTLR Definition and References in ISTS [Improved Standard Technical Specifications] 5.6.6, RCS PTLR.’’ Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below: 1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The proposed amendment modifies the TS by replacing references to existing reactor vessel heatup and cooldown rate limits and P–T limit curves with references to the PTLR. The proposed amendment also adopts the NRC-approved methodology of NEDC– 33178P–A for the preparation of NMP2 P–T limit curves. In 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G, requirements are established to protect the integrity of the reactor coolant pressure boundary (RCPB) in nuclear power plants. Implementing the NRC-approved methodology for calculating P–T limit curves and relocating those curves to the PTLR provide an equivalent level of assurance that RCPB integrity will be maintained, as specified in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G. The proposed amendment does not adversely affect accident initiators or precursors, and does not alter the design assumptions, conditions, or configuration of the plant or the manner in which the plant is operated and maintained. The ability of structures, systems, and components to perform their intended safety functions is not altered or prevented by the proposed changes, and the assumptions used in determining the radiological consequences of previously evaluated accidents are not affected. Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:21 Mar 11, 2013 Jkt 229001 2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The change in methodology for calculating P–T limits and the relocation of those limits to the PTLR do not alter or involve any design basis accident initiators. RCPB integrity will continue to be maintained in accordance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G, and the accident performance of plant structures, systems and components will not be affected. These changes do not involve any physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no new or different type of equipment will be installed), and installed equipment is not being operated in a new or different manner. Thus, no new failure modes are introduced. Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. 3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response: No. The proposed amendment does not affect the function of the RCPB or its response during plant transients. By calculating the P– T limits using NRC-approved methodology, adequate margins of safety relating to RCPB integrity are maintained. The proposed changes do not alter the manner in which safety limits, limiting safety system settings, or limiting conditions for operation are determined, there are no changes to setpoints at which protective actions are initiated, and the operability requirements for equipment assumed to operate for accident mitigation are not affected. Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee’s analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Attorney for licensee: Carey W. Fleming, Senior Counsel, Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, 100 Constellation Way, Suite 200C, Baltimore, MD 21202. NRC Branch Chief: George Wilson. Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket Nos. 50–348 and 50–364, Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Houston County, Alabama Date of amendment request: September 25, 2012, as supplemented by letter dated December 20, 2012 (NL– 12–1893). A publicly available version of the September 25, 2012, letter is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML12279A235. Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The proposed PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 amendment requests the review and approval for adoption of a new fire protection licensing basis which complies with the requirements in 10 CFR 50.48(a) and 50.48(c), and the guidance in Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.205, Revision 1, Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Fire Protection for Existing Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants. 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 transition to NFPA 805 involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? Response: No. Operation of Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, in accordance with the proposed amendment does not increase the probability or consequences of accidents previously evaluated. Engineering analyses, which may include engineering evaluations, probabilistic safety assessments, and fire modeling calculations, have been performed to demonstrate that the performance-based requirements of NFPA 805 have been satisfied. The Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) documents the analyses of design basis accidents at Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. The proposed amendment does not affect accident initiators, nor does it alter design assumptions, conditions, or configurations of the facility that would increase the probability of accidents previously evaluated. Further, the changes to be made for fire hazard protection and mitigation do not adversely affect the ability of structures, systems, or components (SSCs) to perform their design functions for accident mitigation, nor do they affect the postulated initiators or assumed failure modes for accidents described and evaluated in the UFSAR. Structures, systems, or components required to safely shutdown the reactor and to maintain it in a safe shutdown condition will remain capable of performing their design functions. The purpose of the proposed amendment is to permit Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, to adopt a new fire protection licensing basis which complies with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.48(a) and (c) and the guidance in Regulatory Guide 1.205. The NRC considers that NFPA 805 provides an acceptable methodology and performance criteria for licensees to identify fire protection requirements that are an acceptable alternative to the 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R required fire protection features (69 FR 33536; June 16, 2004). Engineering analyses, which may include engineering evaluations, probabilistic safety assessments, and fire modeling calculations, have been performed to demonstrate that the performance-based requirements of NFPA 805 have been met. E:\FR\FM\12MRN1.SGM 12MRN1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 48 / Tuesday, March 12, 2013 / Notices NFPA taken as a whole, provides an acceptable alternative for satisfying General Design Criterion 3 (GDC 3) of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50, meets the underlying intent of the NRC’s existing fire protection regulations and guidance, and provides for defense-in-depth. The goals, performance objectives, and performance criteria specified in Chapter 1 of the standard ensure that, if there are any increases in core damage frequency or risk, the increase will be small and consistent with the intent of the Commission’s Safety Goal Policy. Based on this, the implementation of the proposed amendment does not increase the probability of any accident previously evaluated. Equipment required to mitigate an accident remains capable of performing the assumed function(s). The proposed amendment will not affect the source term, containment isolation, or radiological release assumptions used in evaluating the radiological consequences of any accident previously evaluated. The applicable radiological dose criteria will continue to be met. Therefore, the consequences of any accident previously evaluated are not increased with the implementation of the proposed amendment. 2. Does the transition to NFPA 805 create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any kind of accident previously evaluated? Response: No. Operation of Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, in accordance with the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. The proposed change does not alter the requirements or functions for systems required during accident conditions. Implementation of the new fire protection licensing basis which complies with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.48(a) and (c) and the guidance Regulatory Guide 1.205 will not result in new or different accidents. The proposed amendment does not introduce new or different accident initiators, nor does it alter design assumptions, conditions, or configurations of the facility. The proposed amendment does not adversely affect the ability of SSCs to perform their design function. Structures, systems, or components required to safely shutdown the reactor and maintain it in a safe shutdown condition remain capable of performing their design functions. The purpose of the proposed amendment is to permit Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, to adopt a new fire protection licensing basis which complies with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.48(a) and (c) and the guidance in Regulatory Guide 1.205. The NRC considers that NFPA 805 provides an acceptable methodology and appropriate performance criteria for licensees to identify fire protection systems and features that are an acceptable alternative to the 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R required fire protection features (69 FR 33536; June 16, 2004). The requirements of NFPA 805 address only fire protection and the impacts of fire on the plant that have previously been evaluated. Based on this, implementation of the proposed amendment would not create VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:21 Mar 11, 2013 Jkt 229001 the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any kind of accident previously evaluated. No new accident scenarios, transient precursors, failure mechanisms, or limiting single failures will be introduced as a result of this amendment. There will be no adverse effect or challenges imposed on any safety-related system as a result of this amendment. Therefore, the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any kind of accident previously evaluated is not created with the implementation of the proposed amendment. 3. Does the transition to NFPA 805 involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety? Response: No. Operation of Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, in accordance with the proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety. The proposed amendment does not alter the manner in which safety limits, limiting safety system settings or limiting conditions for operation are determined. The safety analysis acceptance criteria are not affected by this change. The proposed amendment does not adversely affect existing plant safety margins or the reliability of equipment assumed to mitigate accidents in the UFSAR. The proposed amendment does not adversely affect the ability of SSCs to perform their design function. Structures, systems, or components required to safely shut down the reactor and to maintain it in a safe shutdown condition remain capable of performing their design functions. The purpose of the proposed amendment is to permit Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, to adopt a new fire protection licensing basis which complies with the requirements in 10 CFR 50.48(a) and (c) and the guidance in Regulatory Guide 1.205. The NRC considers that NFPA 805 provides an acceptable methodology and performance criteria for licensees to identify fire protection systems and features that are an acceptable alternative to the 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R required fire protection features (69 FR 33536; June 16, 2004). Engineering analyses, which may include engineering evaluations, probabilistic safety assessments, and fire modeling calculations, have been performed to demonstrate that the performance based requirements of NFPA 805 do not result in a significant reduction in the margin of safety. The proposed changes are evaluated to ensure that risk and safety margins are kept within acceptable limits. Therefore, the transition to NFPA 805 does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee’s analysis and, based on this review; it appears that the three standards of 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Attorney for licensee: M. Stanford Blanton, Esq., Balch and Bingham, Post PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 15751 Office Box 306, 1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, Alabama 35201. NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. Pascarelli. Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified NonSafeguards Information for Contention Preparation Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC, Docket No. 50–410, Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit 2, Oswego County, New York Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket Nos. 50–348 and 50–364, Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Houston County, Alabama 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 Hearing.Docket@nrc.gov and OGCmailcenter@nrc.gov, respectively.1 The request must include the following information: 1 While a request for hearing or petition to intervene in this proceeding must comply with the filing requirements of the NRC’s ‘‘E-Filing Rule,’’ the initial request to access SUNSI under these procedures should be submitted as described in this paragraph. E:\FR\FM\12MRN1.SGM 12MRN1 15752 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 48 / Tuesday, March 12, 2013 / Notices (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 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. 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 after a determination on standing and need for access, the NRC staff shall immediately notify the requestor in writing, briefly stating the reason or reasons for the denial. (2) The 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 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 26th day of February 2013. 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. Deadline for submitting requests for access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI) with information: Supporting the standing of a potential party identified by name and address; describing the need for the information in order for the potential party to participate meaningfully in an adjudicatory proceeding. Deadline for submitting petition for intervention containing: (i) Demonstration of standing; (ii) all contentions whose formulation does not require access to SUNSI (+25 Answers to petition for intervention; +7 requestor/petitioner reply). 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). 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. Deadline for NRC staff reply to motions to reverse NRC staff determination(s). 10 ............. 60 ............. 20 ............. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 25 ............. 30 ............. 2 Any motion for Protective Order or draft NonDisclosure Affidavit or Agreement for SUNSI must be filed with the presiding officer or the Chief Administrative Judge if the presiding officer has not VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:21 Mar 11, 2013 Jkt 229001 yet been designated, within 30 days of the deadline for the receipt of the written access request. 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 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 staff determinations (because they must be served on a presiding officer or the Commission, as applicable), but not to the initial SUNSI request submitted to the NRC staff under these procedures. E:\FR\FM\12MRN1.SGM 12MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 48 / Tuesday, March 12, 2013 / Notices 15753 Day Event/activity 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. If access granted: Issuance of presiding officer or other designated officer decision on motion for protective order for access to sensitive information (including schedule for providing access and submission of contentions) or decision reversing a final adverse determination by the NRC staff. Deadline for filing executed Non-Disclosure Affidavits. Access provided to SUNSI consistent with decision issuing the protective order. Deadline for submission of contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI. However, if more than 25 days remain between the petitioner’s receipt of (or access to) the information and the deadline for filing all other contentions (as established in the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the petitioner may file its SUNSI contentions by that later deadline. (Contention receipt +25) Answers to contentions whose development depends upon access to SUNSI. (Answer receipt +7) Petitioner/Intervenor reply to answers. Decision on contention admission. A .............. A + 3 ........ A + 28 ...... A + 53 ...... A + 60 ...... >A + 60 .... [FR Doc. 2013–05022 Filed 3–11–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC–2013–0048] Maintenance, Testing, and Replacement of Vented Lead-Acid Storage Batteries for Nuclear Power Plants Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Draft regulatory guide; request for comment. AGENCY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing for public comment Draft Regulatory Guide, DG– 1269 ‘‘Maintenance, Testing, and Replacement of Vented Lead-Acid Storage Batteries for Nuclear Power Plants.’’ The draft guide describes methods that the NRC staff consider acceptable for use in complying with the agency’s regulations with regard to the maintenance, testing, and replacement of vented lead-acid storage batteries in nuclear power plants. DATES: Submit comments by May 13, 2013. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date. Although a time limit is given, comments and suggestions in connection with items for inclusion in guides currently being developed or improvements in all published guides are encouraged at any time. ADDRESSES: You may access information and comment submissions related to this document, which the NRC possesses and is publicly available, by searching on http://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC–2013–0048. You may submit comments by any of the following methods: mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:21 Mar 11, 2013 Jkt 229001 • Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2013–0048. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301–492–3668; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. • 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. For additional direction on accessing information and submitting comments, see ‘‘Accessing Information and Submitting Comments’’ in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Liliana Ramadan, telephone: 301–251– 7642, email: liliana.ramadan@nrc.gov, or Edward O’Donnell, telephone: 301– 251–7455, or by email: edward.odonnell@nrc.gov. Both of the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Accessing Information and Submitting Comments A. Accessing Information Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2013– 0048 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may access information related to this document, which the NRC possesses and is publicly available, by the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2013–0048. • NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may access publicly available documents online in the NRC Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading- PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The draft regulatory guide is available electronically under ADAMS Accession No. ML110870131. The regulatory analysis may be found in ADAMS under Accession No. ML110870160. Regulatory guides are not copyrighted, and NRC approval is not required to reproduce them. • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. B. Submitting Comments Please include Docket ID NRC–2013– 0048 in the subject line of your comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make your comment submission available to the public in this docket. The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http:// www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information. If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or E:\FR\FM\12MRN1.SGM 12MRN1
[Pages 15747-15753]
[FR Doc No: 2013-05022]
[NRC-2013-0039]
DATES: Comments must be filed by April 11, 2013. A request for a
hearing must be filed by May 13, 2013. Any potential party as defined
in section 2.4 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR),
document access by March 22, 2013.
0039. You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-0039. Address
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2013-0039 when contacting the NRC
Please include Docket ID NRC-2013-0039 in the subject line of your
Date of amendment request: November 21, 2012. A publicly available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML123380336.
amendment would revise NMP2 Technical Specification (TS) Section
3.4.11, ``RCS Pressure and Temperature (P/T) Limits,'' by replacing the
existing reactor vessel heatup and cooldown rate limits and the
pressure and temperature (P-T) limit curves with references to the
Pressure and Temperature Limits Report (PTLR). In addition, a new
definition for the PTLR would be added to TS Section 1.1,
``Definitions,'' and a new section
addressing administrative requirements for the PTLR would be added to
TS Section 5.0, ``Administrative Controls.''
Relocation of the P-T limit curves to the PTLR is consistent with
the guidance provided in NRC approved General Electric Hitachi Nuclear
Engineering (GEH) Licensing Topical Report, NEDC-33178P-A, Revision 1,
``General Electric Methodology for Development of Reactor Pressure
Vessel Pressure-Temperature Curves.'' This topical report uses the
guidelines provided in NRC Generic Letter (GL) 96-03, ``Relocation of
the Pressure Temperature Limit Curves and Low Temperature Overpressure
Protection System Limits.'' The proposed TS changes are consistent with
the guidance provided in GL 96-03 as supplemented by Technical
Specification Task Force (TSTF) traveler TSTF-419-A, ``Revise PTLR
Definition and References in ISTS [Improved Standard Technical
Specifications] 5.6.6, RCS PTLR.''
The proposed amendment modifies the TS by replacing references
to existing reactor vessel heatup and cooldown rate limits and P-T
also adopts the NRC-approved methodology of NEDC-33178P-A for the
preparation of NMP2 P-T limit curves. In 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G,
coolant pressure boundary (RCPB) in nuclear power plants.
Implementing the NRC-approved methodology for calculating P-T limit
curves and relocating those curves to the PTLR provide an equivalent
level of assurance that RCPB integrity will be maintained, as
specified in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G.
initiators or precursors, and does not alter the design assumptions,
The change in methodology for calculating P-T limits and the
relocation of those limits to the PTLR do not alter or involve any
design basis accident initiators. RCPB integrity will continue to be
maintained in accordance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G, and the
accident performance of plant structures, systems and components
will not be affected. These changes do not involve any physical
will be installed), and installed equipment is not being operated in
a new or different manner. Thus, no new failure modes are
The proposed amendment does not affect the function of the RCPB
or its response during plant transients. By calculating the P-T
limits using NRC-approved methodology, adequate margins of safety
relating to RCPB integrity are maintained. The proposed changes do
settings, or limiting conditions for operation are determined, there
are no changes to setpoints at which protective actions are
initiated, and the operability requirements for equipment assumed to
operate for accident mitigation are not affected.
letter dated December 20, 2012 (NL-12-1893). A publicly available
version of the September 25, 2012, letter is in ADAMS under Accession
No. ML12279A235.
amendment requests the review and approval for adoption of a new fire
CFR 50.48(a) and 50.48(c), and the guidance in Regulatory Guide (RG)
1.205, Revision 1, Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Fire Protection for
Existing Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants.
Operation of Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, in accordance
with the proposed amendment does not increase the probability or
Report (UFSAR) documents the analyses of design basis accidents at
Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. The proposed amendment does not
affect accident initiators, nor does it alter design assumptions,
conditions, or configurations of the facility that would increase
the probability of accidents previously evaluated. Further, the
(SSCs) to perform their design functions for accident mitigation,
nor do they affect the postulated initiators or assumed failure
modes for accidents described and evaluated in the UFSAR.
Structures, systems, or components required to safely shutdown the
The purpose of the proposed amendment is to permit Farley
Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, to adopt a new fire protection
licensing basis which complies with the requirements of 10 CFR
50.48(a) and (c) and the guidance in Regulatory Guide 1.205. The NRC
requirements that are an acceptable alternative to the 10 CFR Part
50, Appendix R required fire protection features (69 FR 33536; June
[[Page 15751]]
NFPA taken as a whole, provides an acceptable alternative for
satisfying General Design Criterion 3 (GDC 3) of Appendix A to 10
CFR Part 50, meets the underlying intent of the NRC's existing fire
protection regulations and guidance, and provides for defense-in-
depth. The goals, performance objectives, and performance criteria
specified in Chapter 1 of the standard ensure that, if there are any
increases in core damage frequency or risk, the increase will be
small and consistent with the intent of the Commission's Safety Goal
Policy. Based on this, the implementation of the proposed amendment
does not increase the probability of any accident previously
consequences of any accident previously evaluated. The applicable
are not increased with the implementation of the proposed amendment.
with the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new
evaluated. The proposed change does not alter the requirements or
functions for systems required during accident conditions.
guidance Regulatory Guide 1.205 will not result in new or different
conditions, or configurations of the facility. The proposed
their design function. Structures, systems, or components required
to safely shutdown the reactor and maintain it in a safe shutdown
appropriate performance criteria for licensees to identify fire
to the 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R required fire protection features
(69 FR 33536; June 16, 2004).
evaluated. Based on this, implementation of the proposed amendment
would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any kind of accident previously evaluated. No new
any safety-related system as a result of this amendment.
created with the implementation of the proposed amendment.
with the proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction
in the margin of safety. The proposed amendment does not alter the
manner in which safety limits, limiting safety system settings or
limiting conditions for operation are determined. The safety
proposed amendment does not adversely affect existing plant safety
margins or the reliability of equipment assumed to mitigate
accidents in the UFSAR. The proposed amendment does not adversely
affect the ability of SSCs to perform their design function.
Structures, systems, or components required to safely shut down the
reactor and to maintain it in a safe shutdown condition remain
performance based requirements of NFPA 805 do not result in a
The proposed changes are evaluated to ensure that risk and
safety margins are kept within acceptable limits.
this review; it appears that the three standards of 50.92(c) are