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, 7937-7943 [2019-02418]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 43 / Tuesday, March 5, 2019 / Notices
expedition within an expedition, would
involve equipment including whale
tags, a carbon-fiber pole, an
echosounder, a small tow net, a CTD
instrument, and a hydrophone. The
intent would be to deploy and retrieve
all equipment during the course of the
research.
The Environmental Officer has
reviewed the modification request and
has determined that the amendment is
not a material change to the permit, and
it will have a less than a minor or
transitory impact. The permit holder is
hereby authorized to conduct waste
management activities associated with
whale-tagging research on the MS
ISLAND SKY in March 2019.
Dates of Permitted Activities: March
5–12, 2019.
The permit modification was issued
on February 25, 2019.
Erika N. Davis,
Program Specialist, Office of Polar Programs.
[FR Doc. 2019–03870 Filed 3–4–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555–01–P
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Notice of Permits Issued Under the
Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978
Erika N. Davis,
Program Specialist, Office of Polar Programs.
[FR Doc. 2019–03871 Filed 3–4–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Meeting of the Advisory Committee on
Reactor Safeguards (ACRS)
Subcommittee on Planning and
Procedures
The ACRS Subcommittee on Planning
and Procedures will hold a meeting on
March 7, 2019, at the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Two White
Flint North, Conference Room T3D50,
11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD
20852.
The meeting will be open to public
attendance.
The agenda for the subject meeting
shall be as follows:
AGENCY:
Thursday, March 7, 2019—11:30 a.m.
Until 12:30 p.m.
The National Science
Foundation (NSF) is required to publish
notice of permits issued under the
Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978.
This is the required notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nature McGinn, ACA Permit Officer,
Office of Polar Programs, National
Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower
Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314; 703–
292–8030; email: ACApermits@nsf.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
October 24, 2018, the National Science
Foundation published a notice in the
Federal Register of permit applications
received. The permits were issued on
December 3 and 21, 2018, respectively,
to:
1. Mark Salvatore—Permit No. 2019–
010
2. Zicheng Yu—Permit No. 2019–009
On November 27, 2018, the National
Science Foundation published a notice
in the Federal Register of a permit
application received. The permit was
issued on January 28, 2019 to:
1. Robin West, Seabourn Cruise Line,
Ltd.—Permit No. 2019–015
On December 31, 2018, the National
Science Foundation published a notice
in the Federal Register of permit
applications received. The permits were
The Subcommittee will discuss
proposed ACRS activities and related
matters. The Subcommittee will gather
information, analyze relevant issues and
facts, and formulate proposed positions
and actions, as appropriate, for
deliberation by the Full Committee.
Members of the public desiring to
provide oral statements and/or written
comments should notify the Designated
Federal Official (DFO), Quynh Nguyen
(Telephone 301–415–5844 or Email:
Quynh.Nguyen@nrc.gov) five days prior
to the meeting, if possible, so that
arrangements can be made. Thirty-five
hard copies of each presentation or
handout should be provided to the DFO
thirty minutes before the meeting. In
addition, one electronic copy of each
presentation should be emailed to the
DFO one day before the meeting. If an
electronic copy cannot be provided
within this timeframe, presenters
should provide the DFO with a CD
containing each presentation at least
thirty minutes before the meeting.
Electronic recordings will be permitted
only during those portions of the
meeting that are open to the public. The
public bridgeline number for the
meeting is 866–822–3032, passcode
8272423. Detailed procedures for the
conduct of and participation in ACRS
meetings were published in the Federal
National Science Foundation.
ACTION: Notice of permits issued.
SUMMARY:
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with NOTICES
issued on February 6 and 15, 2019,
respectively, to:
1. Michelle Shero—Permit No. 2019–
014
2. Kim Bernard—Permit No. 2019–013
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Mar 04, 2019
Jkt 247001
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7937
Register on December 7, 2018 (83 FR
26506).
Information regarding changes to the
agenda, whether the meeting has been
canceled or rescheduled, and the time
allotted to present oral statements can
be obtained by contacting the identified
DFO. Moreover, in view of the
possibility that the schedule for ACRS
meetings may be adjusted by the
Chairman as necessary to facilitate the
conduct of the meeting, persons
planning to attend should check with
the DFO if such rescheduling would
result in a major inconvenience.
If attending this meeting, please enter
through the One White Flint North
building, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland. After registering
with Security, please contact Paula
Dorm (Telephone 301–415–7799) to be
escorted to the meeting room.
Dated: February 27, 2019.
Mark Banks,
Chief, Technical Support Branch, Advisory
Committee on Reactor Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2019–03897 Filed 3–4–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2019–0044]
Applications and Amendments to
Facility Operating Licenses and
Combined Licenses Involving
Proposed No Significant Hazards
Considerations and Containing
Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information and Order Imposing
Procedures for Access to Sensitive
Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: License amendment request;
notice of opportunity to comment,
request a hearing, and petition for leave
to intervene; order imposing
procedures.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) received and is
considering approval of two amendment
requests. The amendment requests are
for Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit
Nos. 1 and 2 and Diablo Canyon Nuclear
Power Plant, Units 1 and 2. For each
amendment request, the NRC proposes
to determine that they involve no
significant hazards consideration.
Because each amendment request
contains sensitive unclassified nonsafeguards information (SUNSI) an
order imposes procedures to obtain
access to SUNSI for contention
preparation.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\05MRN1.SGM
05MRN1
7938
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 43 / Tuesday, March 5, 2019 / Notices
Comments must be filed by April
4, 2019. A request for a hearing must be
filed by May 6, 2019. Any potential
party as defined in § 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 15,
2019.
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–2019–0044. Address
questions about Docket IDs in https://
www.regulations.gov to Krupskaya
Castellon; telephone: 301–287–9221;
email: Krupskaya.Castellon@nrc.gov.
For technical questions, contact the
individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document.
• Mail comments to: Office of
Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN–7–
A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, ATTN: Program Management,
Announcements and Editing Staff.
• 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:
Paula Blechman, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington DC
20555–0001; telephone: 301–415–2242;
email: Paula.Blechman@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with NOTICES
I. Obtaining Information and
Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2019–
0044, 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 publiclyavailable 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–2019–0044.
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. To begin the search, select
‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For
problems with ADAMS, please contact
the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR)
reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–
415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Mar 04, 2019
Jkt 247001
nrc.gov. 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–2019–
0044 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 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 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
E:\FR\FM\05MRN1.SGM
05MRN1
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 43 / Tuesday, March 5, 2019 / Notices
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/doccollections/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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Mar 04, 2019
Jkt 247001
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 Federallyrecognized 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
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7939
its boundaries. Alternatively, a State,
local governmental body, Federallyrecognized 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
with the NRC’s E-Filing rule (72 FR
49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at
77 FR 46562; August 3, 2012). 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. 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
hearing.docket@nrc.gov, 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
E:\FR\FM\05MRN1.SGM
05MRN1
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with NOTICES
7940
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 43 / Tuesday, March 5, 2019 / Notices
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 EFiling system time-stamps the document
and sends the submitter an email notice
confirming receipt of the document. The
E-Filing system also distributes an email
notice that provides access to the
document to the NRC’s Office of the
General Counsel and any others who
have advised the Office of the Secretary
that they wish to participate in the
proceeding, so that the filer need not
serve the 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/esubmittals.html, by email to
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a tollfree 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Mar 04, 2019
Jkt 247001
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Indiana Michigan Power Company,
Docket Nos. 50–315 and 50–316, Donald
C. Cook Nuclear Plant (CNP), Unit Nos.
1 and 2, Berrien County, Michigan
Date of amendment request:
November 20, 2018. A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML18334A267.
Description of amendment request:
This amendment request contains
SUNSI. The proposed amendment
would apply leak before break (LBB)
methodology to piping for the
Accumulator, Residual Heat Removal,
and Safety Injection systems at CNP
Unit No. 2 by a modification to CNP
Unit No. 2 Technical Specification (TS)
3.4.13, ‘‘RCS [Reactor Coolant System]
Operational LEAKAGE,’’ to change the
limits for unidentified leakage from less
than or equal to 1 gallon per minute
(gpm) to less than or equal to 0.8 gpm.
In addition, frequency of air grab
samples in CNP Unit No. 2 TS 3.4.15,
‘‘RCS Leakage Detection
Instrumentation,’’ would be modified
for application of the LBB methodology.
The proposed amendment would also
change CNP Unit Nos. 1 and 2, TS
3.4.15, ‘‘RCS Leakage Detection
Instrumentation,’’ to delete the
containment humidity monitor from the
limiting condition of operation.
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.
Overall protection system performance will
remain within the bounds of the previously
performed accident analyses. The design of
the protection systems will be unaffected.
The reactor protection system and engineered
safety feature actuation system will continue
to function in a manner consistent with the
plant design basis. All design, material and
construction standards that were applicable
prior to the request are maintained.
For CNP, Unit 2, the bounding accident for
pipe breaks is a Large Break Loss of Coolant
Accident (LBLOCA). Since the application of
the LBB analysis verifies the integrity of the
piping attached to the reactor coolant system,
the probability of a previously evaluated
accident is not increased. The consequences
of a LBLOCA have been previously evaluated
and found to be acceptable. The application
of the LBB analysis will cause no change in
the dose analysis associated with a LBLOCA,
and therefore, does not affect the
consequences of an accident.
The proposed amendment will not alter
any assumptions or change any mitigation
actions in the radiological consequence
E:\FR\FM\05MRN1.SGM
05MRN1
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 43 / Tuesday, March 5, 2019 / Notices
evaluations in the Updated Final Safety
Analysis Report (UFSAR).
The proposed change to TS 3.4.15 removes
the requirement for containment humidity
monitor instrumentation. The occurrence of
RCS [reactor coolant system] leakage will
continue to be monitored by the remaining
required instrumentation, the atmosphere
radioactive particulate and gaseous monitors
and containment sump monitors. The
monitoring of RCS leakage is not a precursor
to any accident previously evaluated. The
monitoring of RCS leakage is not used to
mitigate the consequences of any accident
previously evaluated.
Therefore, the proposed 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 previously evaluated?
Response: No.
No new accident scenarios, failure
mechanisms, or single failures are introduced
as a result of the proposed change. All
systems, structures, and components
previously required for the mitigation of an
event remain capable of fulfilling their
intended design function. The proposed
change has no adverse effects on any safetyrelated systems or components and does not
challenge the performance or integrity of any
safety-related systems. Further, there are no
changes in the method by which any safetyrelated plant system performs its safety
function.
The proposed change to TS 3.4.15 allows
for the removal of the containment humidity
monitor as a RCS leakage detection
instrument, which does involve a physical
alteration of the plant, but no new or
different type of equipment will be installed
as a replacement. This change does not
involve a change in the methods governing
normal plant operation. The proposed change
maintains sufficient continuity and diversity
of leak detection capability that the
probability of piping evaluated and approved
for LBB progressing to pipe rupture remains
extremely low.
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 amendment involve
a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
Margin of safety is related to the ability of
the fission product barriers to perform their
design functions during and following
accident conditions. These barriers include
the fuel cladding, the reactor coolant system,
and the containment. The proposed
amendment request does not involve change
to any of these barriers.
The proposed change does not involve a
significant reduction in a margin of safety
because adoption of LBB methodology does
not reduce the margin of safety that exists in
the present CNP TS or UFSAR. The
operability requirements of the TS are
consistent with the initial condition
assumptions of the safety analyses.
This proposed amendment uses LBB
technology combined with leakage
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Mar 04, 2019
Jkt 247001
monitoring to show that it is acceptable to
exclude the dynamic effects associated with
postulated pipe ruptures from the licensing
basis for the systems evaluated that are
attached to the RCS. The CNP analysis
demonstrates that the LBB margins discussed
in NUREG–1601, Volume 3 are satisfied.
The proposed change to TS 3.4.15 removes
the containment humidity monitor
instrument from the operability requirements
for the RCS leakage detection
instrumentation. Although one less
instrument is available as a method of RCS
leakage detection, there are a sufficient
number and types of other RCS leakage
detection instruments that would detect
leakage at a lower threshold. Additionally,
alternate instrumentation for containment
pressure and temperature is available for
backup indication of RCS leakage. Therefore,
RCS leakage will continue to be detected
with a similar level of sensitivity before a
gross failure would occur in the RCS pressure
boundary.
Therefore, it is concluded that 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
amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Robert B.
Haemer, Senior Nuclear Counsel, One
Cook Place, Bridgman, MI 49106.
NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company,
Docket Nos. 50–275 and 50–323, Diablo
Canyon Nuclear Power Plant (DCPP),
Units 1 and 2, San Luis Obispo County,
California
Date of amendment request:
December 26, 2018. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession
No. ML19003A196.
Description of amendment request:
This amendment request contains
SUNSI. The proposed amendment
would revise DCPP Units 1 and 2
Technical Specification (TS) 5.6.5b,
‘‘Core Operating Limits Report (COLR),’’
to replace the existing NRC-approved
loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA)
methodologies with the NRC-approved
LOCA methodology contained in
WCAP–16996–P–A, Revision 1,
‘‘Realistic LOCA Evaluation
Methodology Applied to the Full
Spectrum of Break Sizes (FULL
SPECTRUM LOCA Methodology)’’
(ADAMS Package Accession No.
ML17277A130).
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
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7941
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 revises TS 5.6.5b to
replace the current NRC-approved LOCA
methodologies listed in TS 5.6.5b with
another NRC-approved methodology
contained in WCAP–16996–P–A, Rev. 1,
‘‘Realistic LOCA Evaluation Methodology
Applied to the Full Spectrum of Break Sizes
(FULL SPECTRUM LOCA Methodology).’’
The proposed changes to the TS 5.6.5b core
operating limits methodologies, consists of
replacing the current five LOCA
methodologies with a newer, single NRCapproved methodology (the FSLOCA EM
[Full Spectrum LOCA Evaluation Model]).
The NRC review of the FSLOCA EM
concluded that the analytical methods are
acceptable as a replacement for the current
LOCA analytical methods listed in TS 5.6.5b.
The proposed change does not affect the
design or function of any plant structures,
systems, and components (SSCs). Thus, the
proposed change does not affect plant
operation, design features, or the capability
of any SSC to perform its safety function. In
addition, the proposed change does not affect
any previously evaluated accidents in the
UFSAR, or any SSCs, operating procedures,
and administrative controls that have the
function of preventing or mitigating any
accident previously evaluated in the UFSAR.
Thus, the proposed use of the FSLOCA EM
will continue to assure that the plant
operates in the same safe manner as before
and will not involve an increase in the
probability of an accident.
The analyses results determined by use of
the proposed new methodology will not
increase the reactor power level or the core
fission product inventory, and will not
change any transport assumptions or the
shutdown margin requirements of the DCPP
TS. As such, DCPP will continue to operate
within the power distribution limits and
shutdown margins required by the TS and
within the assumptions of the safety analyses
described in the UFSAR. As such, the
proposed changes do not involve a
significant increase in the consequences of an
accident.
Therefore, the proposed change does 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 accident
from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change revises TS 5.6.5b to
replace the current NRC-approved LOCA
methodologies listed in TS 5.6.5b with a
single, newer NRC-approved methodology
contained in WCAP–16996–P–A, Rev. 1,
‘‘Realistic LOCA Evaluation Methodology
Applied to the Full Spectrum of Break Sizes
(FULL SPECTRUM LOCA Methodology).’’
The NRC review of the FSLOCA EM
concluded that the analytical methods are
acceptable as a replacement for the current
LOCA analytical methods listed in TS 5.6.5b.
E:\FR\FM\05MRN1.SGM
05MRN1
7942
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 43 / Tuesday, March 5, 2019 / Notices
The proposed change provides revised
analytical methods and does not change any
system functions or maintenance activities.
The change does not involve physical
alteration of the plant; that is, no new or
different type of equipment will be installed.
The change does not impact the ability of any
SSC to perform its safety function consistent
with the assu[m]ptions of the safety analyses
and continues to assure the plant is operated
within safe limits. As such, the proposed
change does not create new failure modes or
mechanisms that are not identifiable during
testing, and no new accident precursors are
generated.
Therefore, the proposed change does not
create the possibility of a new or different
accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a
significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The margin of safety is established through
equipment design, operating parameters, and
the setpoints at which automatic actions are
initiated. The proposed change does not
physically alter safety-related systems, nor
does it affect the way in which safety-related
systems perform their functions. The
setpoints at which protective actions are
initiated are not altered by the proposed
changes. Therefore, sufficient equipment
remains available to actuate upon demand for
the purpose of mitigating an analyzed event.
The NRC has reviewed and approved the
new methodology for the intended use in lieu
of the current methodologies; thus, the
margin of safety is not reduced due to this
change.
Therefore, 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: Jennifer Post,
Esq., Pacific Gas and Electric Company,
77 Beale Street, Mail Code B30A, San
Francisco, CA 94105.
NRC Branch Chief: Robert J.
Pascarelli.
Order Imposing Procedures for Access
to Sensitive Unclassified NonSafeguards Information for Contention
Preparation
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with NOTICES
Indiana Michigan Power Company,
Docket Nos. 50–315 and 50–316, Donald
C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and
2, Berrien County, Michigan
Pacific Gas and Electric Company,
Docket Nos. 50–275 and 50–323, Diablo
Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1
and 2, San Luis Obispo County,
California
A. This Order contains instructions
regarding how potential parties to this
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Mar 04, 2019
Jkt 247001
proceeding may request access to
documents containing 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 Deputy
General Counsel for Hearings 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 Hearing.Docket@
nrc.gov and
RidsOgcMailCenter.Resource@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 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.
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.
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.
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
yet been designated, within 30 days of the deadline
for the receipt of the written access request.
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\05MRN1.SGM
05MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 43 / Tuesday, March 5, 2019 / Notices
(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
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, this 11th day
of February, 2019.
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 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; and (ii) all contentions whose formulation does not require access to SUNSI (+25 Answers to petition for intervention; +7 petitioner/requestor reply).
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).
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.
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 opportunity to request a hearing and petition for leave to intervene), 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 .................
A + 28 ...............
A + 53 ...............
A + 60 ...............
>A + 60 .............
[FR Doc. 2019–02418 Filed 3–4–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
amozie on DSK9F9SC42PROD with NOTICES
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
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
7943
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
REVISED 661st Meeting of the
Advisory Committee on Reactor
Safeguards (ACRS)
Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2039, 2232b), the
Advisory Committee on Reactor
Safeguards (ACRS) will hold meetings
on March 7–8, 2019, Two White Flint
North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Conference
Room T3D50, Rockville, MD 20852.
In accordance with the purposes of
Sections 29 and 182b of the Atomic
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Mar 04, 2019
Jkt 247001
46562; August 3, 2012) apply to appeals of NRC
staff determinations (because they must be served
on a presiding officer or the Commission, as
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
applicable), but not to the initial SUNSI request
submitted to the NRC staff under these procedures.
E:\FR\FM\05MRN1.SGM
05MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 5, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7937-7943]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-02418]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2019-0044]
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 Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 and Diablo
Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2. 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.
[[Page 7938]]
DATES: Comments must be filed by April 4, 2019. A request for a hearing
must be filed by May 6, 2019. 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 15, 2019.
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-2019-0044. Address
questions about Docket IDs in https://www.regulations.gov to Krupskaya
Castellon; telephone: 301-287-9221; email: Krupskaya.Castellon@nrc.gov.
For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.
Mail comments to: Office of Administration, Mail Stop:
TWFN-7-A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001, ATTN: Program Management, Announcements and Editing Staff.
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: Paula Blechman, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2242; email: Paula.Blechman@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2019-0044, 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-2019-0044.
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 ``Begin Web-based ADAMS
Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or
by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number for each
document referenced (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-2019-0044 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-
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
[[Page 7939]]
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 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 hearing.docket@nrc.gov, 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
[[Page 7940]]
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 MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, 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.
Indiana Michigan Power Company, Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316, Donald
C. Cook Nuclear Plant (CNP), Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Berrien County,
Michigan
Date of amendment request: November 20, 2018. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18334A267.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
SUNSI. The proposed amendment would apply leak before break (LBB)
methodology to piping for the Accumulator, Residual Heat Removal, and
Safety Injection systems at CNP Unit No. 2 by a modification to CNP
Unit No. 2 Technical Specification (TS) 3.4.13, ``RCS [Reactor Coolant
System] Operational LEAKAGE,'' to change the limits for unidentified
leakage from less than or equal to 1 gallon per minute (gpm) to less
than or equal to 0.8 gpm. In addition, frequency of air grab samples in
CNP Unit No. 2 TS 3.4.15, ``RCS Leakage Detection Instrumentation,''
would be modified for application of the LBB methodology. The proposed
amendment would also change CNP Unit Nos. 1 and 2, TS 3.4.15, ``RCS
Leakage Detection Instrumentation,'' to delete the containment humidity
monitor from the limiting condition of operation.
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.
Overall protection system performance will remain within the
bounds of the previously performed accident analyses. The design of
the protection systems will be unaffected. The reactor protection
system and engineered safety feature actuation system will continue
to function in a manner consistent with the plant design basis. All
design, material and construction standards that were applicable
prior to the request are maintained.
For CNP, Unit 2, the bounding accident for pipe breaks is a
Large Break Loss of Coolant Accident (LBLOCA). Since the application
of the LBB analysis verifies the integrity of the piping attached to
the reactor coolant system, the probability of a previously
evaluated accident is not increased. The consequences of a LBLOCA
have been previously evaluated and found to be acceptable. The
application of the LBB analysis will cause no change in the dose
analysis associated with a LBLOCA, and therefore, does not affect
the consequences of an accident.
The proposed amendment will not alter any assumptions or change
any mitigation actions in the radiological consequence
[[Page 7941]]
evaluations in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR).
The proposed change to TS 3.4.15 removes the requirement for
containment humidity monitor instrumentation. The occurrence of RCS
[reactor coolant system] leakage will continue to be monitored by
the remaining required instrumentation, the atmosphere radioactive
particulate and gaseous monitors and containment sump monitors. The
monitoring of RCS leakage is not a precursor to any accident
previously evaluated. The monitoring of RCS leakage is not used to
mitigate the consequences of any accident previously evaluated.
Therefore, the proposed 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 previously evaluated?
Response: No.
No new accident scenarios, failure mechanisms, or single
failures are introduced as a result of the proposed change. All
systems, structures, and components previously required for the
mitigation of an event remain capable of fulfilling their intended
design function. The proposed change has no adverse effects on any
safety-related systems or components and does not challenge the
performance or integrity of any safety-related systems. Further,
there are no changes in the method by which any safety-related plant
system performs its safety function.
The proposed change to TS 3.4.15 allows for the removal of the
containment humidity monitor as a RCS leakage detection instrument,
which does involve a physical alteration of the plant, but no new or
different type of equipment will be installed as a replacement. This
change does not involve a change in the methods governing normal
plant operation. The proposed change maintains sufficient continuity
and diversity of leak detection capability that the probability of
piping evaluated and approved for LBB progressing to pipe rupture
remains extremely low.
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 amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
Margin of safety is related to the ability of the fission
product barriers to perform their design functions during and
following accident conditions. These barriers include the fuel
cladding, the reactor coolant system, and the containment. The
proposed amendment request does not involve change to any of these
barriers.
The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in
a margin of safety because adoption of LBB methodology does not
reduce the margin of safety that exists in the present CNP TS or
UFSAR. The operability requirements of the TS are consistent with
the initial condition assumptions of the safety analyses.
This proposed amendment uses LBB technology combined with
leakage monitoring to show that it is acceptable to exclude the
dynamic effects associated with postulated pipe ruptures from the
licensing basis for the systems evaluated that are attached to the
RCS. The CNP analysis demonstrates that the LBB margins discussed in
NUREG-1601, Volume 3 are satisfied.
The proposed change to TS 3.4.15 removes the containment
humidity monitor instrument from the operability requirements for
the RCS leakage detection instrumentation. Although one less
instrument is available as a method of RCS leakage detection, there
are a sufficient number and types of other RCS leakage detection
instruments that would detect leakage at a lower threshold.
Additionally, alternate instrumentation for containment pressure and
temperature is available for backup indication of RCS leakage.
Therefore, RCS leakage will continue to be detected with a similar
level of sensitivity before a gross failure would occur in the RCS
pressure boundary.
Therefore, it is concluded that 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
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Robert B. Haemer, Senior Nuclear Counsel,
One Cook Place, Bridgman, MI 49106.
NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323, Diablo
Canyon Nuclear Power Plant (DCPP), Units 1 and 2, San Luis Obispo
County, California
Date of amendment request: December 26, 2018. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19003A196.
Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains
SUNSI. The proposed amendment would revise DCPP Units 1 and 2 Technical
Specification (TS) 5.6.5b, ``Core Operating Limits Report (COLR),'' to
replace the existing NRC-approved loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA)
methodologies with the NRC-approved LOCA methodology contained in WCAP-
16996-P-A, Revision 1, ``Realistic LOCA Evaluation Methodology Applied
to the Full Spectrum of Break Sizes (FULL SPECTRUM LOCA Methodology)''
(ADAMS Package Accession No. ML17277A130).
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 revises TS 5.6.5b to replace the current
NRC-approved LOCA methodologies listed in TS 5.6.5b with another
NRC-approved methodology contained in WCAP-16996-P-A, Rev. 1,
``Realistic LOCA Evaluation Methodology Applied to the Full Spectrum
of Break Sizes (FULL SPECTRUM LOCA Methodology).''
The proposed changes to the TS 5.6.5b core operating limits
methodologies, consists of replacing the current five LOCA
methodologies with a newer, single NRC-approved methodology (the
FSLOCA EM [Full Spectrum LOCA Evaluation Model]). The NRC review of
the FSLOCA EM concluded that the analytical methods are acceptable
as a replacement for the current LOCA analytical methods listed in
TS 5.6.5b.
The proposed change does not affect the design or function of
any plant structures, systems, and components (SSCs). Thus, the
proposed change does not affect plant operation, design features, or
the capability of any SSC to perform its safety function. In
addition, the proposed change does not affect any previously
evaluated accidents in the UFSAR, or any SSCs, operating procedures,
and administrative controls that have the function of preventing or
mitigating any accident previously evaluated in the UFSAR. Thus, the
proposed use of the FSLOCA EM will continue to assure that the plant
operates in the same safe manner as before and will not involve an
increase in the probability of an accident.
The analyses results determined by use of the proposed new
methodology will not increase the reactor power level or the core
fission product inventory, and will not change any transport
assumptions or the shutdown margin requirements of the DCPP TS. As
such, DCPP will continue to operate within the power distribution
limits and shutdown margins required by the TS and within the
assumptions of the safety analyses described in the UFSAR. As such,
the proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in the
consequences of an accident.
Therefore, the proposed change does 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 accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change revises TS 5.6.5b to replace the current
NRC-approved LOCA methodologies listed in TS 5.6.5b with a single,
newer NRC-approved methodology contained in WCAP-16996-P-A, Rev. 1,
``Realistic LOCA Evaluation Methodology Applied to the Full Spectrum
of Break Sizes (FULL SPECTRUM LOCA Methodology).'' The NRC review of
the FSLOCA EM concluded that the analytical methods are acceptable
as a replacement for the current LOCA analytical methods listed in
TS 5.6.5b.
[[Page 7942]]
The proposed change provides revised analytical methods and does
not change any system functions or maintenance activities. The
change does not involve physical alteration of the plant; that is,
no new or different type of equipment will be installed. The change
does not impact the ability of any SSC to perform its safety
function consistent with the assu[m]ptions of the safety analyses
and continues to assure the plant is operated within safe limits. As
such, the proposed change does not create new failure modes or
mechanisms that are not identifiable during testing, and no new
accident precursors are generated.
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility
of a new or different accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
Response: No.
The margin of safety is established through equipment design,
operating parameters, and the setpoints at which automatic actions
are initiated. The proposed change does not physically alter safety-
related systems, nor does it affect the way in which safety-related
systems perform their functions. The setpoints at which protective
actions are initiated are not altered by the proposed changes.
Therefore, sufficient equipment remains available to actuate upon
demand for the purpose of mitigating an analyzed event. The NRC has
reviewed and approved the new methodology for the intended use in
lieu of the current methodologies; thus, the margin of safety is not
reduced due to this change.
Therefore, 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: Jennifer Post, Esq., Pacific Gas and
Electric Company, 77 Beale Street, Mail Code B30A, San Francisco, CA
94105.
NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. Pascarelli.
Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information for Contention Preparation
Indiana Michigan Power Company, Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316, Donald
C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Berrien County, Michigan
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323, Diablo
Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, San Luis Obispo County,
California
A. This Order contains instructions regarding how potential parties
to this proceeding may request access to documents containing 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 Deputy General Counsel
for Hearings 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 Hearing.Docket@nrc.gov and
RidsOgcMailCenter.Resource@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 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.
[[Page 7943]]
(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, this 11th day of February, 2019.
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 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....................... 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. 2019-02418 Filed 3-4-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
