Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations and Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information, 9553-9559 [2018-03235]

Agencies

• NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 6, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9553-9559]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03235]



[[Page 9553]]

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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2018-0027]


Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and 
Combined Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards 
Considerations and Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards 
Information and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive 
Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: License amendment request; notice of opportunity to comment, 
request a hearing, and petition for leave to intervene; order imposing 
procedures.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) received and is 
considering approval of two amendment requests. The amendment requests 
are for North Anna Power Station, Units 1 and 2, and Vogtle Electric 
Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4. For each amendment request, the NRC 
proposes to determine that they involve no significant hazards 
consideration. Because each amendment request contains sensitive 
unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI), an order imposes 
procedures to obtain access to SUNSI for contention preparation.

DATES: Comments must be filed by April 5, 2018. A request for a hearing 
must be filed by May 7, 2018. Any potential party as defined in Sec.  
2.4 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), who 
believes access to SUNSI is necessary to respond to this notice must 
request document access by March 16, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0027. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-
9127; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact 
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 
this document.
     Mail comments to: May Ma, Office of Administration, Mail 
Stop: TWFN-3-D1, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001.
    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting 
comments, see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Janet Burkhardt, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1384; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments

A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0027, facility name, unit 
number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject when 
contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this 
action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this 
action by any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0027.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the 
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and 
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, 
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected]. The 
ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available 
in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this 
document.
     NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public 
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2018-0027, facility name, unit 
number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject in your 
comment submission.
    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact 
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your 
comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at https://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into 
ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove 
identifying or contact information.
    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons 
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to 
include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be 
publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should 
state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to 
remove such information before making the comment submissions available 
to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

II. Background

    Pursuant to Section 189a.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 
amended (the Act), the NRC is publishing this notice. The Act requires 
the Commission to publish notice of any amendments issued, or proposed 
to be issued and grants the Commission the authority to issue and make 
immediately effective any amendment to an operating license or combined 
license, as applicable, upon a determination by the Commission that 
such amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, 
notwithstanding the pendency before the Commission of a request for a 
hearing from any person.
    This notice includes notices of amendments containing SUNSI.

III. Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility 
Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses, Proposed No Significant 
Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing

    The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following 
amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under 
the Commission's regulations in 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation 
of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) 
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated, or (2) create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, 
or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The basis 
for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown 
below.
    The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed 
determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of 
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final 
determination.
    Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the 
expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The 
Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-

[[Page 9554]]

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 if 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. If the Commission 
takes action prior to the expiration of either the comment period or 
the notice period, it will publish a notice of issuance in the Federal 
Register. If the Commission makes 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.

A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To Intervene

    Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any 
persons (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may 
file a request for a hearing and petition for leave to intervene 
(petition) with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in 
accordance with the Commission's ``Agency Rules of Practice and 
Procedure'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a 
current copy of 10 CFR 2.309. The NRC's regulations are accessible 
electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's website at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. Alternatively, a copy of 
the regulations is available at the NRC's Public Document Room, located 
at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 
floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, the 
Commission or a presiding officer will rule on the petition and, if 
appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be issued.
    As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the petition should specifically 
explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with 
particular reference to the following general requirements for 
standing: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the 
petitioner; (2) the nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to 
be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the 
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 petitioner's interest.
    In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), the petition must also set 
forth the specific contentions which the petitioner seeks to have 
litigated in the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific 
statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In 
addition, the petitioner must provide a brief explanation of the bases 
for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or 
expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner 
intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The 
petitioner must also provide references to the specific sources and 
documents on which the petitioner intends to rely to support its 
position on the issue. The petition must include sufficient information 
to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant or licensee on 
a material issue of law or fact. Contentions must be limited to matters 
within the scope of the proceeding. The contention must be one which, 
if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who 
fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 CFR 2.309(f) 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. 
Parties have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the 
hearing with respect to resolution of that party's admitted 
contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence, consistent 
with the NRC's regulations, policies, and procedures.
    Petitions must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of 
publication of this notice. Petitions and motions for leave to file new 
or amended contentions that are filed after the deadline will not be 
entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the 
filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 
CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii). The petition must be filed in 
accordance with the filing instructions in the ``Electronic Submissions 
(E-Filing)'' section of this document.
    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 establish 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 would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final 
determination is that the amendment request involves a significant 
hazards consideration, then any hearing held would take place before 
the issuance of the amendment unless the Commission finds an imminent 
danger to the health or safety of the public, in which case it will 
issue an appropriate order or rule under 10 CFR part 2.
    A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian 
Tribe, or agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to 
participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition should 
state the nature and extent of the petitioner's interest in the 
proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission no later 
than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. The petition 
must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the 
``Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)'' section of this document, and 
should meet the requirements for petitions set forth in this section, 
except that under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local governmental body, 
or Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof does not need 
to address the standing requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(d) if the facility 
is located within its boundaries. Alternatively, a State, local 
governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof 
may participate as a non-party under 10 CFR 2.315(c).
    If a hearing is granted, any person who is not a party to the 
proceeding and is not affiliated with or represented by a party may, at 
the discretion of the presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited 
appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person 
making a limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of 
his or her position on the issues but may not otherwise participate in 
the proceeding. A limited appearance may be made at any session of the 
hearing or at any prehearing conference, subject to the limits and 
conditions as may be imposed by the presiding officer. Details 
regarding the opportunity to make a limited appearance will be provided 
by the presiding officer if such sessions are scheduled.

B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)

    All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a 
request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition), 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 that request to 
participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance

[[Page 9555]]

with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended 
at 77 FR 46562; August 3, 2012). 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. 
Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions may be found in the 
Guidance for Electronic Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC website 
at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants may not 
submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in 
accordance with the procedures described below.
    To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 
days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the 
Office of the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by 
telephone at 301-415-1677, to (1) request a digital identification (ID) 
certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or 
representative) to digitally sign submissions and access the E-Filing 
system for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise 
the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a petition or 
other adjudicatory document (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 the NRC's public website at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. Once a participant has obtained a 
digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant 
can then submit adjudicatory documents. Submissions must be in Portable 
Document Format (PDF). Additional guidance on PDF submissions is 
available on the NRC's public website at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A filing is considered complete at the 
time the document is 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's Office of the General Counsel and any 
others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to 
participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the 
document on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and 
other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for 
and receive a digital ID certificate before adjudicatory documents are 
filed so that they can obtain access to the documents via the E-Filing 
system.
    A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-
Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's Electronic 
Filing Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC's 
public website at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by 
email to [email protected], or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-
7640. The NRC Electronic Filing Help Desk is available between 9 a.m. 
and 6 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 
stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and 
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, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and 
Adjudications Staff. Participants filing adjudicatory documents 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 the 
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at 
https://adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the 
Commission or the presiding officer. If you do not have an NRC-issued 
digital ID certificate as described above, click cancel when the link 
requests certificates and you will be automatically directed to the 
NRC's electronic hearing dockets where you will be able to access any 
publicly available documents in a particular hearing docket. 
Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, 
such as social security numbers, home addresses, or personal phone 
numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law 
requires submission of such information. For example, in some 
instances, individuals provide home addresses in order to demonstrate 
proximity to a facility or site. 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.

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026, 
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia

    Date of amendment request: December 15, 2017. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17349A924.
    Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains 
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The 
requested amendment proposes consistency changes to combined license 
Appendix C (and to plant-specific Tier 1 information) and associated 
Tier 2* and Tier 2 information to clarify the thickness of the Nuclear 
Island (NI) Basemat, to revise wall thicknesses and descriptions in the 
Auxiliary Building, and to clarify floor thicknesses in the Annex 
Building. Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 52.63(b)(1), an 
exemption from elements of the design as certified in the 10 CFR part 
52, Appendix D, design certification rule is also requested for the 
plant-specific Design Control Document Tier 1 material departures.
    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration 
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has 
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards 
consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed changes do not affect the operation or reliability 
of any system,

[[Page 9556]]

structure or component (SSC) required to maintain a normal power 
operating condition or to mitigate anticipated transients without 
safety-related systems. The change to the NI Basemat and Auxiliary 
Building dimensions is a consistency change, and involves no design 
changes or technical reanalysis. The change to the Annex Building 
concrete thickness acceptance criteria is a clarification and does 
not involve a change to the design of the Annex Building or 
reanalysis of the Annex Building. The change to the Annex Building 
kitchen and restroom floor thickness involves only structural 
changes, and does not affect the performance of any SSC relied upon 
to maintain normal power operation, or to effect safe shutdown using 
nonsafety-related equipment. The change to the Annex Building 
kitchen and restroom floor thickness does not adversely affect 
occupational radiation dose to personnel in these areas because 
calculations show the dose rates in the Annex Building during normal 
operations and in post-accident conditions are maintained within 
regulatory limits. Therefore, the requested amendment does 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 proposed changes do not affect the operation of any safety-
related SSC relied upon to mitigate design basis accidents. The 
proposed changes to the NI Basemat and the Auxiliary Building 
resolve inconsistencies to reflect NI existing structural design, 
which has been analyzed and shown to comply with seismic and 
structural criteria. The change to the Annex Building concrete 
thickness acceptance criteria is a clarification, and does not 
involve a change to the design of the Annex Building or reanalysis 
of the Annex Building. The seismic Category II section of the Annex 
Building has been shown to maintain its structural integrity 
following a design basis earthquake. The proposed changes to the 
Annex Building kitchen and restroom floor thickness do not affect 
the structural integrity or seismic response of the Annex Building. 
The design of these structures continues to meet the requirements of 
10 CFR 50 Appendix A General Design Criterion 2, Design Bases for 
Protection Against Natural Phenomena. Therefore, the proposed 
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.
    The proposed changes do not affect existing safety margins. The 
proposed changes to the NI Basemat and the Auxiliary Building 
resolve inconsistencies to reflect NI existing structural design. 
The change to the Annex Building concrete thickness acceptance 
criteria is a clarification, and does not involve a change to the 
design of the Annex Building or reanalysis of the Annex Building. 
The proposed changes to the Annex Building kitchen and restroom 
floor thickness do not involve a reduction to the structural 
integrity of the seismic Category II portion of the building, as 
adequate reinforcement is provided in the floor of the kitchen and 
restroom areas of the [Control Support Area (CSA)] to support the 
design function of the Annex Building. No margin to the specified 
acceptable fuel design limits is affected by the proposed changes.

    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: M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 
1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, Alabama 35203-2015.
    NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon-Herrity.

Virginia Electric and Power Company, Docket Nos. 50-338 and 50-339, 
North Anna Power Station (NAPS), Units 1 and 2, Louisa County, Virginia

    Date of amendment request: May 2, 2017. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17129A446.
    Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains 
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The 
amendments would revise Technical Specification (TS) 3.7.18, ``Spent 
Fuel Pool Storage,'' and TS 4.3.1, ``Criticality,'' to allow the 
storage of fuel assemblies with a maximum enrichment of up to 5.0 
weight percent uranium 235 (U-235) in the NAPS spent fuel pool (SFP) 
storage racks and the new fuel storage racks (NFSR). The amendments 
would further revise the allowable fuel assembly parameters and storage 
patterns for fuel in the SFP.
    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 proposed change does not involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed change will not affect the plant equipment or 
structure, including the SFP, NFSR, or fuel handling equipment, 
including how equipment is operated and maintained. There are no 
changes to the equipment for fuel handling or how fuel assemblies 
are handled, including how fuel assemblies are inserted into and 
removed from SFP and NFSR storage locations. There will be no 
changes to administrative means to verify correct fuel assembly 
storage in the SFP, which will now also be used to verify required 
[Rod Cluster Control Assembly (RCCA)] storage in selected Region 2 
assemblies, or the required response to a fuel assembly misloading 
or drop event. There are no changes to how RCCAs will be handled, 
including how RCCAs are inserted into or removed from a fuel 
assembly or other location such as a[n] SFP storage location. Also, 
since the proposed change does not modify plant equipment or its 
operation and maintenance, including equipment used to maintain SFP 
soluble boron levels, the proposed change will not impact a boron 
dilution event or plant response to it.
    The criticality safety evaluation concluded that the NFSR 
limiting accident is the optimum moderation condition with each 
storage location loaded with a maximum reactivity fuel assembly. The 
NFSR will maintain keff <0.98 for this postulated 
scenario including all uncertainties and biases. The NFSR also 
maintains keff <=0.95 for the fully flooded scenario 
including all uncertainties and biases. Thus, the consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated regarding the NFSR is not 
significantly increased. There is no change to the plant equipment 
or its operation and maintenance due to the proposed change. Thus, 
the probability of a flooding accident that could impact the NFSR is 
not significantly increased.
    Regarding the SFP, there will now be two storage Regions. The 
process of choosing fuel assembly storage locations will not change, 
except that the storage arrangement (checkerboard) and burnup 
requirements will be revised and assemblies containing an RCCA can 
be stored in Region 2 without consideration of the burnup curves. 
The physical handling, insertion, removal, and storage of fuel 
assemblies in SFP racks will not change. The NAPS program for 
choosing fuel assembly storage locations, for fuel handling, and for 
assuring that the fuel assemblies are placed into correct locations 
will remain in place. Thus, the probability of a fuel assembly 
misloading or a fuel assembly drop in the SFP will not significantly 
increase due to the proposed change.
    A number of postulated accidents for the SFP were reviewed for 
the proposed change which included postulated fuel assembly 
misloading and drop scenarios. The criticality safety evaluation for 
the SFP concluded that the limiting accident, which bounds all other 
scenarios, is a multiple misload of a maximum reactivity fuel 
assembly into each SFP storage location. The criticality safety 
evaluation concluded that a[n] SFP soluble boron concentration of 
2600 [parts per million (ppm)] will maintain keff <=0.95 
including all uncertainties and biases for this postulated scenario. 
The current TS, which is not being changed, requires a minimum 
concentration of 2600 ppm soluble boron at all times that fuel is in 
the SFP. Since there is no change to the plant equipment that 
maintains boron concentration or how the boron

[[Page 9557]]

concentration is maintained, the probability of an accident 
involving an incorrect amount of SFP soluble boron is not 
significantly increased. Also, since keff would remain 
<=0.95, there is no significant increase in the consequences of a 
postulated accident.
    There are no changes to plant equipment, including its operation 
and maintenance, as a result of the proposed change, including 
equipment associated with maintaining SFP soluble boron 
concentration or possible flow paths that could contribute to a 
boron dilution event. Thus, no new avenues for a boron dilution 
event will be created. There will be no change regarding how the 
plant maintains boron concentration or responds to a boron dilution 
event. The criticality safety evaluation for the postulated boron 
dilution event shows that, like the existing analysis, the SFP 
maintains keff <=0.95 at 900 ppm soluble boron. Thus, 
there is no significant increase in the probability or consequences 
of a boron dilution accident.
    In each of the above scenarios the proposed change does not 
significantly increase the probability of an accident previously 
evaluated. In each postulated accident keff continues to 
be less than or equal to the licensing limit of 0.95, or less than 
0.98 for the NFSR optimum moderation scenario.
    The NAPS SFP is currently licensed to store a fuel assembly in 
each of the 1737 spent fuel rack storage locations. Thus, the SFP 
seismic/structural loading requirements for the proposed change are 
bounded by the existing TS which have been shown to protect the fuel 
during normal and accident conditions, including during a postulated 
seismic event. Thus, there is no increase in the consequences of a 
seismic event.
    The proposed license amendment makes no changes to any safety 
analysis limits, including core power level, operating temperature 
or pressure, or peaking factors. There are no changes being made to 
any fuel burnup limits. Thus, it is concluded that:
     There is no increase in the radiological consequences 
in response to postulated accidents,
     there is no change to the maximum allowable SFP heat 
load,
     there is no impact on fuel rod integrity during normal 
or accident conditions, and
     there is no impact on the ability of RCCAs to fully 
insert during normal or accident conditions.
    Thus, it is concluded that the probability or consequences of a 
previously evaluated accident do not significantly increase.
    2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
    There is no change to any plant equipment, including how 
equipment is operated and maintained. Equipment used to handle fuel 
assemblies (or any heavy load) over the NFSR or the SFP, or how the 
fuel assemblies are stored, inserted into and removed from fuel 
storage locations is not changed. There is no change to how RCCAs 
will be inserted into or removed from a fuel assembly or other 
location, or otherwise how RCCAs are handled. Any fuel assemblies 
containing a[n] RCCA may now be stored in Region 2 without being in 
the ``Acceptable'' region of the burnup curves. However, if such an 
assembly was stored in Region 2 without the RCCA, it would be 
treated as any other fuel misload event in which an assembly is 
stored in Region 2 without meeting the requirements of the burnup 
curves. Thus, there are no new accidents created over and above the 
existing postulated accidents of a fuel misload or a fuel assembly 
drop in the SFP, or a flooding event in the NFSR area.
    Also, since there is no change to the plant equipment or how 
equipment is operated and maintained, the probability of a new type 
of accident that could impact the SFP or NFSR is not significantly 
increased.
    Since the proposed change will not change fuel/RCCA handling 
equipment or how fuel assemblies and RCCAs are handled and stored, 
nor will it change any other plant equipment, there is no mechanism 
for creating a new or different kind of accident not previously 
evaluated. Thus, the proposed change does 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.
    The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in 
a margin of safety.
    The licensing requirement for the SFP is that keff 
remain <=0.95 under normal and all postulated accident conditions 
with credit for soluble boron. The criticality safety evaluation 
concluded that this requirement is met for the bounding postulated 
accident of a multiple misload of a maximum reactivity fuel assembly 
into each SFP storage location, and for the postulated boron 
dilution event.
    In addition the criticality safety evaluation concluded the 
following regarding normal conditions with 0 ppm soluble boron in 
the SFP:
     The SFP will maintain keff <1.0.
     For a fuel handling event that brings two fresh 5.0 
weight percent U-235 fuel assemblies, not stored in a spent fuel 
rack or dry shielded container, [near] each other, keff 
is maintained <0.95 with 0 ppm of soluble boron in the SFP water for 
a distance >12 inches. With credit for soluble boron keff 
is maintained <0.95 for any distance less than 12 inches apart.
    The criticality safety evaluation also allows the following 
storage configurations. In each case the storage configuration 
either reduces or does not increase reactivity assuring that 
keff margin is maintained:
     Storing a[n] RCCA and/or cell blocker in a Region 1 
empty location.
     Storing non-fuel components in any spent fuel rack 
storage location where fuel assemblies are allowed.
     Storing non-fuel components in the guide tubes of any 
fuel assembly.
    The criticality safety evaluation evaluated Non-standard Fuel 
Assemblies stored in the NAPS SFP to determine whether they need to 
contain a[n] RCCA for Region 2 storage. This information is used to 
maintain keff margin when storing Non-standard Fuel 
Assemblies.
    The licensing requirements for the NFSR is that keff 
remain <=0.95 for the fully flooded scenario, and <0.98 for the 
optimum moderation scenario. The criticality safety evaluation 
concluded that these requirements are met assuming each storage 
location is loaded with a maximum reactivity fuel assembly.
    Thus, all the margins of safety are maintained, and the proposed 
change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of 
safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the 
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
    Attorney for licensee: Lillian M. Cuoco, Senior Counsel, Dominion 
Resources Services, Inc., 120 Tredegar Street, RS-2, Richmond, Virginia 
23219.
    NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. Markley.

Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information for Contention Preparation

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026, 
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia

Virginia Electric and Power Company, Docket Nos. 50-338 and 50-339, 
North Anna Power Station, Units 1 and 2, Louisa County, Virginia

    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 access to SUNSI. 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 of this notice 
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 requester 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

[[Page 9558]]

General Counsel for Hearings, Enforcement and Administration, Office of 
the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001. The expedited delivery or courier mail address for both 
offices is: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 11555 Rockville Pike, 
Rockville, Maryland 20852. The email address for the Office of the 
Secretary and the Office of the General Counsel are 
[email protected] and [email protected], respectively.\1\ The 
request must include the following information:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ While a request for hearing or petition to intervene in this 
proceeding must comply with the filing requirements of the NRC's 
``E-Filing Rule,'' the initial request to access SUNSI under these 
procedures should be submitted as described in this paragraph.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (1) A description of the licensing action with a citation to this 
Federal Register notice;
    (2) The name and address of the potential party and a description 
of the potential party's particularized interest that could be harmed 
by the action identified in C.(1); and
    (3) The identity of the individual or entity requesting access to 
SUNSI and the requester's basis for the need for the information in 
order to meaningfully participate in this adjudicatory proceeding. In 
particular, the request must explain why publicly available versions of 
the information requested would not be sufficient to provide the basis 
and specificity for a proffered contention.
    D. Based on an evaluation of the information submitted under 
paragraph C.(3) the NRC staff will determine within 10 days of receipt 
of the request whether:
    (1) There is a reasonable basis to believe the petitioner is likely 
to establish standing to participate in this NRC proceeding; and
    (2) The requestor has established a legitimate need for access to 
SUNSI.
    E. If the NRC staff determines that the requestor satisfies both 
D.(1) and D.(2) above, the NRC staff will notify the requestor in 
writing that access to SUNSI has been granted. The written notification 
will contain instructions on how the requestor may obtain copies of the 
requested documents, and any other conditions that may apply to access 
to those documents. These conditions may include, but are not limited 
to, the signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit, or 
Protective Order \2\ setting forth terms and conditions to prevent the 
unauthorized or inadvertent disclosure of SUNSI by each individual who 
will be granted access to SUNSI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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 
receipt of (or access to) that information. 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.
    G. Review of Denials of Access.
    (1) If the request for access to SUNSI is denied by the NRC staff 
after a determination on standing and requisite need, the NRC staff 
shall immediately notify the requestor in writing, briefly stating the 
reason or reasons for the denial.
    (2) The requester 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.
    (3) Further appeals of decisions under this paragraph must be made 
pursuant to 10 CFR 2.311.
    H. Review of Grants of Access. A party other than the requester 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 within 5 days of the notification by the 
NRC staff of its grant of access and must be filed 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.
    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\ Requesters should note that the filing requirements of the 
NRC's E-Filing Rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 
FR 46562; August 3, 2012) 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. The 
attachment to this Order summarizes the general target schedule for 
processing and resolving requests under these procedures.

    It is so ordered.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, on February 12, 2018.

    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.

[[Page 9559]]

 
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; and (ii) all contentions whose
                            formulation does not require access to SUNSI
                            (+25 Answers to petition for intervention;
                            +7 petitioner/requestor reply).
20.......................  U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
                            staff informs the requester 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
                            petitioner/requester 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 opportunity to request a hearing
                            and petition for leave to intervene), 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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2018-03235 Filed 3-5-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P