Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations and Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information, 76193-76199 [2011-31310]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Notices August 9, 2011, and September 6, 2011, documents would each address different proposed changes to the Enforcement Policy. However, the staff acknowledges that there may be some overlap between the subject matter of the three documents. Therefore, interested parties who provided comments on the August 9, 2011, and September 6, 2011, documents may desire to revise their previous comments if they believe those comments are affected by the proposed revisions covered by this document. Any interested party desiring to revise their previous comments should do so within the comment period stated in the DATES section of this document. III. Procedural Requirements Paperwork Reduction Act Statement This policy statement contains new or amended information collection requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing requirements were approved by the Office of Management and Budget, approval number 3150– 0136. Public Protection Notification The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a request for information or an information collection requirement unless the requesting document displays a currently valid OMB control number. Dated at Rockville, MD, this 29th day of November 2011. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Roy P. Zimmerman, Director, Office of Enforcement. [FR Doc. 2011–31315 Filed 12–5–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 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 Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: License amendment request; opportunity to comment and request a hearing, order. jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES AGENCY: 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 DATES: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:04 Dec 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 (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: 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. 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 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 76193 (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 pdr.resource@nrc.gov. • 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 E:\FR\FM\06DEN1.SGM 06DEN1 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 76194 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Notices 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. 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 VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:04 Dec 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 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 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 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 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 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 ESubmittal 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 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 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 E:\FR\FM\06DEN1.SGM 06DEN1 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Notices 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/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 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 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/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. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:04 Dec 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 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 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. 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. Nontimely 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 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 76195 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 pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 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 E:\FR\FM\06DEN1.SGM 06DEN1 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 76196 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Notices 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 reperformed 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 NRCapproved 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 VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:04 Dec 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 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 safetyrelated 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, PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 ‘‘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 NRCapproved 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 E:\FR\FM\06DEN1.SGM 06DEN1 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Notices 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 NRCapproved 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. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:04 Dec 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 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 NonSafeguards 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 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 76197 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) 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 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\06DEN1.SGM 06DEN1 76198 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Notices 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 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 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. 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). (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. 10 ............. 60 ............. 20 ............. 25 ............. 30 ............. 40 ............. A .............. A + 3 ........ jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES A + 28 ...... A + 53 ...... A + 60 ...... >A + 60 .... 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 17:04 Dec 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 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 00079 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\06DEN1.SGM 06DEN1 76199 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 234 / Tuesday, December 6, 2011 / Notices [FR Doc. 2011–31310 Filed 12–5–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC–2011–0006] Sunshine Federal Register Notice AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETINGS: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Weeks of December 5, 12, 19, 26, 2011, January 2, 9, 2012. PLACE: Commissioners’ Conference Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. STATUS: Public and Closed. DATE: Week of December 5, 2011 There are no meetings scheduled for the week of December 5, 2011. Week of December 12, 2011—Tentative Tuesday, December 13, 2011 9 a.m. Briefing on NFPA 805 Fire Protection (Public Meeting) (Contact: Alex Klein, (301) 415– 2822) This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address—http://www.nrc.gov. Week of December 19, 2011—Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the week of December 19, 2011. Week of December 26, 2011—Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the week of December 26, 2011. Week of January 2, 2012—Tentative There are no meetings scheduled for the week of January 2, 2012. Week of January 9, 2012—Tentative Wednesday, January 11, 2012 1 p.m. Briefing on Proposed Rule To Revise the Environmental Review for Renewal of Nuclear Power Plant Operating Licenses (Part 51) (Public Meeting) (Contact: Jeremy Susco, (301) 415–2927). This meeting will be webcast live at the Web address—http://www.nrc.gov. * * * * * The schedule for Commission meetings is subject to change on short notice. To verify the status of meetings, call (recording)—(301) 415–1292. Contact person for more information: Rochelle Bavol, (301) 415–1651. * * * * * The NRC Commission Meeting Schedule can be found on the Internet at: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/ public-meetings/schedule.html. * * * * * The NRC provides reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities where appropriate. If you need a reasonable accommodation to participate in these public meetings, or need this meeting notice or the transcript or other information from the public meetings in another format (e.g. braille, large print), please notify Bill Dosch, Chief, Work Life and Benefits Branch, at (301) 415–6200, TDD: (301) 415–2100, or by email at william. dosch@nrc.gov. Determinations on requests for reasonable accommodation will be made on a case-by-case basis. * * * * * This notice is distributed electronically to subscribers. If you no longer wish to receive it, or would like to be added to the distribution, please contact the Office of the Secretary, Washington, DC 20555 (301) 415–1969), or send an email to darlene.wright@nrc. gov. Dated: December 1, 2011. Rochelle C. Bavol, Policy Coordinator, Office of the Secretary. [FR Doc. 2011–31363 Filed 12–2–11; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT Excepted Service U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM). AGENCY: ACTION: Notice. This gives notice of OPM decisions granting authority to make appointments under Schedules A, B, and C in the excepted service as required by 5 CFR 213.103. SUMMARY: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roland Edwards, Senior Executive Resource Services, Executive Resources and Employee Development, Employee Services, (202) 606–2246. Appearing in the listing below are the individual authorities established under Schedules A, B, and C between September 1, 2011, and September 30, 2011. These notices are published monthly in the Federal Register at http://www.gpoaccess.gov/ fr/. A consolidated listing of all authorities as of September 30 is also published each year. The following Schedules are not codified in the Code of Federal Regulations. These are agency-specific exceptions. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Schedule A No Schedule A authorities to report during September 2011. Schedule B No Schedule B authorities to report during September 2011. Schedule C The following Schedule C appointments were approved during September 2011. Authorization No. Agency name Organization name Position title Department of Agriculture ............. Office of the Under Secretary for Food Safety. Assistant Secretary and Director General for United States and Foreign Commercial Service. Economics and Statistics Administration. Office of the General Counsel ...... Office of the Chief of Staff ............ Office of the Under Secretary ...... Office of the Under Secretary ...... Special Assistant .......................... DA110121 9/21/2011 Executive Assistant ...................... DC110120 9/2/2011 Special Assistant .......................... DC110124 9/22/2011 Senior Advisor .............................. Advance Specialist ....................... Special Assistant .......................... Confidential Assistant and Scheduler. Deputy Director, Office of Business Liaison. Deputy General Counsel for Strategic Initiatives. DC110128 DC110119 DC110121 DC110136 9/26/2011 9/2/2011 9/8/2011 9/30/2011 DC110132 9/29/2011 DC110125 9/23/2011 jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Department of Commerce ............. Office of Business Liaison ............ Office of the General Counsel ...... VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:04 Dec 05, 2011 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\06DEN1.SGM 06DEN1 Effective date

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 234 (Tuesday, December 6, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76193-76199]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing 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: 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.

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 
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
     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 hearing.docket@nrc.gov, 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 
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, 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 
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.

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 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (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