[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 190 (Tuesday, October 3, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46094-46102]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-20084]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2017-0192]


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

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: License amendment request; 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 three amendment requests. The amendment 
requests are for Hope Creek Generating Station, R.E. Ginna Nuclear 
Power Plant, and Wolf Creek Generating Station. For each amendment 
request, the NRC proposes to determine that they involve no significant 
hazards consideration. Because the amendment requests contain sensitive 
unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI) and safeguards 
information (SGI), an order imposes procedures to obtain access to 
SUNSI and SGI for contention preparation.

DATES: Comments must be filed by November 2, 2017. A request for a 
hearing must be filed by December 4, 2017. 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 and/or SGI is necessary to respond 
to this notice must request document access by October 13, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2017-0192. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-
3463; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact 
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 
this document.
     Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Office of Administration, 
Mail Stop: TWFN-8-D36M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 
DC 20555-0001.
    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting 
comments, see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynn Ronewicz, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1927, email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments

A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2017-0192, 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 Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2017-0192.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the 
ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and 
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, 
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected]. The 
ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available 
in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this 
document.
     NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public 
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2017-0192, 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 http://www.regulations.gov, as well as enter the comment submissions into 
ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove 
identifying or contact information.

[[Page 46095]]

    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 and/or 
SGI.

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 Sec.  50.92 of 10 CFR, 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 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 Web site at http://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,

[[Page 46096]]

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 Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants may not submit 
paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in 
accordance with the procedures described below.
    To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 
days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the 
Office of the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by 
telephone at 301-415-1677, to (1) request a digital identification (ID) 
certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or 
representative) to digitally sign submissions and access the E-Filing 
system for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise 
the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a petition or 
other adjudicatory document (even in instances in which the 
participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-
issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the 
Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this 
proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic 
docket.
    Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is 
available on the NRC's public Web site at http://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 Web site at http://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 Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by 
email to [email protected], or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-
7640. The NRC Electronic Filing Help Desk is available between 9 a.m. 
and 6 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government 
holidays.
    Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not 
submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in 
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing 
stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and 
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper 
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail 
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: 
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or 
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and 
Adjudications Staff. Participants filing adjudicatory documents in this 
manner are responsible for serving the document on all other 
participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of 
the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or 
expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the 
provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an 
exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant or 
party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer subsequently determines 
that the reason for granting the exemption from use of E-Filing no 
longer exists.
    Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the 
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is

[[Page 46097]]

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.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-244, R.E. Ginna Nuclear 
Power Plant (Ginna), Wayne County, New York
    Date of amendment request: June 30, 2017. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17186A233.
    Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains 
safeguards information (SGI). The amendment would revise the 
modification to install overcurrent protection for the emergency diesel 
generators associated with the implementation of 10 CFR 50.48(c), 
National Fire Protection Association Standard 805 (NFPA 805), 
``Performance-Based Standard for Fire Protection for Light-Water 
Reactor Electric Generating Plants,'' 2001 Edition. The amendment would 
also update Attachment C, ``NEI 04-02 Table B-3 Fire Area Transition''; 
Attachment G, ``Recovery Actions Transition''; Attachment M, ``License 
Condition Changes''; Attachment S, ``Modifications and Implementation 
Items''; and Attachment W, ``Fire PRA [Probabilistic Risk Assessment] 
Insights,'' of the previously approved NFPA 805 amendment.
    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.
    Further consideration of committed modifications has resulted in 
the conclusion that the modification to install overcurrent 
protection, Engineering Service Request (ESR) 12-0141 (i.e., 
modification), is no longer required in the NFPA 805 project 
modification scope. The original purpose of the overcurrent 
protection modifications was to reduce fire risk by protecting the 
emergency diesel generations (EDGs) from fire-induced overcurrent 
events allowing local recovery of the EDGs. Several alternative 
means will be made available to provide the power for decay heat 
removal, RCS [reactor coolant system] inventory and reactivity 
control, as well as providing power to the vital battery chargers, 
long-term indication and control power, and breaker control.
    Operation of Ginna in accordance with the proposed amendment 
does not increase the probability or consequences of accidents 
previously evaluated. Engineering analyses, which may include 
engineering evaluations, probabilistic safety assessments, and fire 
modeling calculations, have been performed to demonstrate that the 
performance-based requirements of NFPA 805 have been satisfied with 
the elimination of fire-induced overcurrent protection. The proposed 
amendment does not affect accident initiators, nor does it alter 
design assumptions, conditions, or configurations of the facility 
that would increase the probability of accidents previously 
evaluated. Further, the changes to be made for fire hazard 
protection and mitigation do not adversely affect the ability of 
structures, systems, or components to perform their design functions 
for accident mitigation, nor do they affect the postulated 
initiators or assumed failure models for accidents described and 
evaluated in the UFSAR [Updated Final Safety Analysis Report]. 
Structures, systems, or components required to safely shutdown the 
reactor and to maintain it in a safe shutdown condition will remain 
capable of performing their design functions.
    The proposed amendment will not affect the source term, 
containment isolation, or radiological release assumptions used in 
evaluating the radiological consequences of any accident previously 
evaluated, and equipment required to mitigate an accident remains 
capable of performing the assumed function(s). The applicable 
radiological dose criteria will continue to be met.
    The combination of all the proposed modifications and data 
updates reduces the overall calculated delta risk relative to the 
previously submitted information even with the removal of the fire-
induced overcurrent modifications. The net Core Damage Frequency 
(CDF) delta risk including the internal events offset is 4E-6. The 
net Large Early Release Frequency (LERF) delta risk including the 
internal events offset is less than 1E-7.
    Based on the above discussion, it is concluded that the proposed 
amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability 
or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any kind of accident previously 
evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The original purpose of the overcurrent protection modifications 
was to reduce the fire risk by protecting the EDGs from fire-induced 
overcurrent events allowing local recovery of the EDGs. Several 
alternative means will be made available to provide the power for 
decay heat removal, RCS inventory and reactivity control, as well as 
providing power to the vital battery chargers, long-term indication 
and control power, and breaker control in lieu of ESR-12-0141. 
Operation of Ginna in accordance with the proposed amendment does 
not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident 
from any accident previously evaluated. The proposed change does not 
alter the requirements or functions for systems required during 
accident conditions. Implementation of this change will not result 
in new or different accidents.
    The proposed amendment does not introduce new or different 
accident initiators, nor does it alter design assumptions, 
conditions, or configurations of the facility in such a manner as to 
introduce new or different accident initiators. The proposed 
amendment does not adversely affect the ability of structures, 
systems, or components to perform their design function. Structures, 
systems, or components required to safely shutdown the reactor and 
maintain it in a safe shutdown condition remain capable of 
performing their design functions.
    The requirements of NFPA 805 address only fire protection and 
the impacts of fire on the plant that have previously been 
evaluated. Thus, implementation of the proposed amendment would not 
create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident beyond 
those already analyzed in the UFSAR. No new accident scenarios, 
transient precursors, failure mechanisms, or limiting single 
failures will be introduced, and there will be no adverse effect or 
challenges imposed on any safety-related system as a result of the 
proposed amendment.
    Based on the above discussion, it is concluded that the proposed 
amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind 
of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction 
in the margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The purpose of the proposed amendment is to permit Ginna to 
adopt a new fire protection licensing basis which complies with the 
requirements in 10 CFR 50.48(a) and (c) and the guidance in 
Regulatory Guide 1.205, Revision 1. The NRC considers that NFPA 805 
provides an acceptable methodology and performance criteria for 
licensees to identify fire protection systems and features that are 
an acceptable alternative to the 10 CFR 50, Appendix R required fire 
protection features (69 FR 33536; June 16,

[[Page 46098]]

2004). The proposed change eliminates the overcurrent protection 
modifications which were intended to reduce fire risk by protecting 
the EDGs from fire-induced overcurrent events allowing local 
recovery of the EDGs. Several alternative means will be made 
available to provide the power for decay heat removal, RCS inventory 
and reactivity control, and vital auxiliaries such as providing 
power to the vital battery chargers, long-term indication and 
control power, and breaker control functions in lieu of ESR-12-0141. 
These alternative means will ensure that this change does not result 
in a significant reduction in the margin of safety.
    The overall approach of NFPA 805 is consistent with the key 
principles for evaluating license basis changes, as described in 
Regulatory Guide 1.174, Revision 2, is consistent with the defense-
in-depth philosophy, and maintains sufficient safety margins. 
Engineering analysis, which may include engineering evaluations, 
probabilistic safety assessments, and fire modeling calculations, 
have been performed to demonstrate that the performance-based 
methods do not result in a significant reduction in the margin of 
safety.
    Operation of Ginna in accordance with the proposed amendment 
does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety. 
The proposed amendment does not alter the manner in which safety 
limits, limiting safety system settings, or limiting conditions for 
operation are determined. The safety analysis acceptance criteria 
are not affected by this change. The proposed amendment does not 
alter the manner in which safety limits, limiting safety system 
settings, or limiting conditions for operation are determined. The 
safety analysis acceptance criteria are not affected by this change. 
The proposed amendment does not adversely affect existing plant 
safety margins or the reliability of equipment assumed to mitigate 
accident sin the UFSAR. The proposed amendment does not adversely 
affect the ability of structures, systems, or components to perform 
their design function. Structures, systems, or components required 
to safely shut down the reactor and to maintain it in a safe 
shutdown condition remain capable of performing their design 
functions.
    Based on the above discussion, it is concluded that the proposed 
amendment does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of 
safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
this review, it appears that the three standards of 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: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, 
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, 
Illinois 60555.
    NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna.
PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket No. 50-354, Hope Creek Generating Station, 
Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey
    Date of amendment request: July 7, 2017. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Package Accession No. ML17188A259.
    Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains 
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The 
amendment would revise the Renewed Facility Operating License and 
Technical Specifications to implement a measurement uncertainty 
recapture power uprate. Specifically, the amendment would authorize an 
increase in the maximum licensed thermal power level from 3,840 
megawatts thermal (MWt) to 3,902 MWt, which is an increase of 
approximately 1.6 percent.
    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 will increase the Hope Creek Generating 
Station rated thermal power (RTP) from 3840 megawatts thermal (MWt) 
to 3902 MWt. The reviews and evaluations performed to support the 
proposed uprated power conditions included all structures, systems, 
and components that would be affected by the proposed changes. The 
reviews and evaluations determined that these structures, systems, 
and components are capable of performing their design function at 
the proposed uprated RTP of 3902 MWt. Accident mitigation systems 
will function as designed. The performance requirements for these 
systems have been evaluated and found acceptable. Thus, the proposed 
changes do not create any new accident initiators or increase the 
probability of an accident previously evaluated.
    The primary loop components (e.g., reactor vessel, reactor 
internals, control rod drive housings, piping and supports, and 
recirculation pumps) remain within their applicable structural 
limits and will continue to perform their intended design function 
at the uprated power level. Thus, there is no increase in the 
probability of a structural failure from these components. The 
safety relief valves and containment isolation valves meet design 
sizing requirements at the uprated power level. Because the plant 
integrity will not be affected by operation at the uprated 
condition, PSEG Nuclear LLC (PSEG) has concluded that all 
structures, systems, and components required to mitigate a transient 
remain capable of fulfilling their intended functions.
    The current safety analyses were evaluated for operation at 3902 
MWt. The results demonstrate that acceptance criteria for applicable 
analyses continue to be met at the uprated conditions. As such, 
applicable accident analyses continue to comply with the relevant 
event acceptance criteria. The analyses performed to assess the 
effects of mass and energy releases remain valid. Source terms used 
to assess radiological consequences have been determined to bound 
operation at the uprated power level.
    Power level is an input assumption to equipment design and 
accident analyses, but is not a transient or accident initiator. 
Accident initiators are not affected by the power uprate, and plant 
safety barrier challenges are not created by the proposed change.
    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 kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    No new accident scenarios, failure mechanisms, or single 
failures are introduced as a result of the proposed change. 
Structures, systems, and components previously required for 
transient mitigation remain capable of fulfilling their intended 
design functions. The proposed change has no adverse effect on any 
safety-related structures, systems, or components and does not 
challenge the performance or integrity of any safety-related system.
    The proposed change does not adversely affect any current system 
interfaces or create any new interfaces that could result in an 
accident or malfunction of a different kind than previously 
evaluated. Plant operation at 3902 MWt does not create any new 
accident initiators or precursors. Credible malfunctions are bounded 
by the current accident analyses of record or recent evaluations 
demonstrating that applicable criteria are still met with the 
proposed change.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility 
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    3. Do the proposed changes involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The margins of safety associated with the power uprate are those 
pertaining to core thermal power. Analyses of the primary fission 
product barriers have concluded that relevant design criteria remain 
satisfied, both from the standpoint of primary fission product 
barrier integrity and compliance with the required acceptance 
criteria. As appropriate, evaluations have been performed using 
methods that have either been reviewed and approved by the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, or are in compliance with regulatory review 
guidance and standards.
    Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant 
reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
this review, it appears that the three

[[Page 46099]]

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: Jeffrie J. Keenan, PSEG Nuclear LLC--N21, 
P.O. Box 236, Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038.
    NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna.
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, Docket No. 50-482, Wolf Creek 
Generating Station, (WCGS) Coffey County, Kansas
    Date of amendment request: June 28, 2017. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17186A082.
    Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains 
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The 
amendment would add new Technical Specification (TS) 3.7.20, ``Class 1E 
Electrical Equipment Air Conditioning (A/C) System,'' to the WCGS TSs. 
New TS 3.7.20 would include the limiting condition for operation (LCO) 
statement, Applicability during which the LCO must be met, ACTIONS 
(with Conditions, Required Actions, and Completion Times) to be applied 
when the LCO is not met, and Surveillance Requirements (SRs) with a 
specified Frequency to demonstrate that the LCO is met for the Class 1 
E Electrical Equipment A/C System trains at WCGS. Additionally, the 
Table of Contents would also be revised to reflect the incorporation of 
new TS 3.7.20.
    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration 
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has 
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards 
consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed addition of TS 3.7.20 creates a[n] LCO for the 
Class 1E Electrical Equipment A/C System that is required to support 
the TS Class 1E electrical equipment. The 30 day Completion Time to 
restore an inoperable Class 1E electrical equipment A/C train to 
OPERABLE status is consistent with the Control Room Air Conditioning 
System (CRACS) and is supported by a plant specific calculation. The 
Class 1E Electrical Equipment A/C Systems' actuation, operation, or 
failure is not an initiator to any accident previously evaluated. As 
a result, the probability of an accident previously evaluated is not 
significantly increased. Conversely, the proposed change provides a 
period of time to recover an unexpected loss of cooling capability 
with one OPERABLE Class 1E electrical equipment A/C train providing 
adequate area cooling for both trains of Class 1E electrical 
equipment during normal and accident conditions (with mitigating 
actions being required).
    Overall protection system performance will remain within the 
bounds of the previously performed accident analyses since no 
hardware changes are proposed to the protection systems. The same 
Reactor Trip System (RTS) and Engineered Safety Feature Actuation 
System (ESFAS) instrumentation will continue to be used. The 
protection systems will continue to function in a manner consistent 
with the plant design basis. The proposed change will not adversely 
affect accident initiators or precursors nor adversely alter the 
design assumptions and conditions of the facility or the manner in 
which the plant is operated and maintained with respect to such 
initiators or precursors.
    The proposed change will not alter or prevent the capability of 
structures, systems, and components (SSCs) to perform their intended 
functions for mitigating the consequences of an accident and meeting 
applicable acceptance limits.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated?
    Response: No.
    No new accident scenarios, transient precursors, failure 
mechanisms, or limiting single failures will be introduced as a 
result of this amendment. No new or different accidents result from 
addition of the proposed specification. The Class 1E electrical 
equipment A/C trains maintain the capability to perform their 
specified safety function. The proposed license amendment includes 
regulatory commitments to achieve the capability for one OPERABLE 
Class 1E electrical equipment A/C train to provide adequate cooling 
for both trains of electrical equipment during normal and accident 
conditions by design changes. [The planned modifications proposed by 
regulatory commitments will be implemented under the requirements of 
10 CFR 50.59.]
    The proposed amendment will not alter the design or performance 
of the 7300 Process Protection System, Nuclear Instrumentation 
System, Solid State Protection System, Balance of Plant Engineered 
Safety Features Actuation System, Main Steam and Feedwater Isolation 
System, or Load Shedder and Emergency Load Sequencers used in the 
plant protection systems.
    The proposed change adds requirements in the TSs that were 
previously located in plant procedures. One OPERABLE Class 1E 
electrical equipment A/C train is capable of providing adequate area 
cooling for both trains of Class 1E electrical equipment during 
normal and accident conditions (with mitigating actions being 
required). The change does not have a detrimental impact on the 
manner in which plant equipment operates or responds to an actuation 
signal.
    Therefore, the proposed change will not create the possibility 
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed specification allows for a period of time in which 
one Class 1E electrical equipment A/C train is capable of providing 
adequate area cooling for both trains of Class 1E electrical 
equipment during normal and accident conditions (with mitigating 
actions being required). The proposed change does not impact 
accident offsite dose, containment pressure or temperature, 
Emergency Core Cooling System settings or Reactor Protection System 
settings, or any other parameter that could affect a margin of 
safety. The margin of safety is enhanced by periodically verifying 
the area room temperatures are maintained within limit while one 
Class 1E electrical equipment A/C train is inoperable and allowing a 
reasonable period to perform preventive and corrective maintenance 
thus increasing system reliability.
    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: Jay Silberg, Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw 
Pittman LLP, 2300 N Street NW., Washington, DC 20037.
    NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. Pascarelli.

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

PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket No. 50-354, Hope Creek Generating Station, 
Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-244, R. E. Ginna Nuclear 
Power Plant, Wayne County, New York

Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, Docket No. 50-482, Wolf Creek 
Generating Station, Coffey County, Kansas

    A. This Order contains instructions regarding how potential parties 
to this proceeding may request access to documents containing sensitive 
unclassified information (including Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information (SUNSI) and Safeguards Information (SGI)). 
Requirements for access to SGI are primarily set forth in 10 CFR parts 
2 and 73. Nothing in this Order is intended to conflict with the SGI 
regulations.

[[Page 46100]]

    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 or SGI is necessary to respond to this notice 
may request access to SUNSI or SGI. 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 or SGI submitted later than 10 days after publication will not 
be considered absent a showing of good cause for the late filing, 
addressing why the request could not have been filed earlier.
    C. The requestor shall submit a letter requesting permission to 
access SUNSI, SGI, or both to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: 
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, and provide a copy to the 
Associate General Counsel for Hearings, Enforcement and Administration, 
Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001. The expedited delivery or courier mail 
address for both offices is: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The email address for the 
Office of the Secretary and the Office of the General Counsel are 
[email protected] and [email protected], respectively.\1\ The 
request must include the following information:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ While a request for hearing or petition to intervene in this 
proceeding must comply with the filing requirements of the NRC's 
``E-Filing Rule,'' the initial request to access SUNSI and/or SGI 
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);
    (3) If the request is for SUNSI, the identity of the individual or 
entity requesting access to SUNSI and the requestor's basis for the 
need for the information in order to meaningfully participate in this 
adjudicatory proceeding. In particular, the request must explain why 
publicly-available versions of the information requested would not be 
sufficient to provide the basis and specificity for a proffered 
contention; and
    (4) If the request is for SGI, the identity of each individual who 
would have access to SGI if the request is granted, including the 
identity of any expert, consultant, or assistant who will aid the 
requestor in evaluating the SGI. In addition, the request must contain 
the following information:
    (a) A statement that explains each individual's ``need to know'' 
the SGI, as required by 10 CFR 73.2 and 10 CFR 73.22(b)(1). Consistent 
with the definition of ``need to know'' as stated in 10 CFR 73.2, the 
statement must explain:
    (i) Specifically why the requestor believes that the information is 
necessary to enable the requestor to proffer and/or adjudicate a 
specific contention in this proceeding; \2\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Broad SGI requests under these procedures are unlikely to 
meet the standard for need to know; furthermore, NRC staff redaction 
of information from requested documents before their release may be 
appropriate to comport with this requirement. These procedures do 
not authorize unrestricted disclosure or less scrutiny of a 
requestor's need to know than ordinarily would be applied in 
connection with an already-admitted contention or non-adjudicatory 
access to SGI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (ii) The technical competence (demonstrable knowledge, skill, 
training or education) of the requestor to effectively utilize the 
requested SGI to provide the basis and specificity for a proffered 
contention. The technical competence of a potential party or its 
counsel may be shown by reliance on a qualified expert, consultant, or 
assistant who satisfies these criteria.
    (b) A completed Form SF-85, ``Questionnaire for Non-Sensitive 
Positions,'' for each individual who would have access to SGI. The 
completed Form SF-85 will be used by the Office of Administration to 
conduct the background check required for access to SGI, as required by 
10 CFR part 2, subpart C, and 10 CFR 73.22(b)(2), to determine the 
requestor's trustworthiness and reliability. For security reasons, Form 
SF-85 can only be submitted electronically through the electronic 
questionnaire for investigations processing (e-QIP) Web site, a secure 
Web site that is owned and operated by the Office of Personnel 
Management. To obtain online access to the form, the requestor should 
contact the NRC's Office of Administration at 301-415-3710.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The requestor will be asked to provide his or her full name, 
social security number, date and place of birth, telephone number, 
and email address. After providing this information, the requestor 
usually should be able to obtain access to the online form within 
one business day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) A completed Form FD-258 (fingerprint card), signed in original 
ink, and submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 73.57(d). Copies of Form 
FD-258 may be obtained by writing the Office of Administrative 
Services, Mail Services Center, Mail Stop P1-37, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, or by email to 
[email protected]. The fingerprint card will be used to satisfy 
the requirements of 10 CFR part 2, subpart C, 10 CFR 73.22(b)(1), and 
Section 149 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, which 
mandates that all persons with access to SGI must be fingerprinted for 
an FBI identification and criminal history records check.
    (d) A check or money order payable in the amount of $324.00 \4\ to 
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for each individual for whom the 
request for access has been submitted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ This fee is subject to change pursuant to the Office of 
Personnel Management's adjustable billing rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (e) If the requestor or any individual(s) who will have access to 
SGI believes they belong to one or more of the categories of 
individuals that are exempt from the criminal history records check and 
background check requirements in 10 CFR 73.59, the requestor should 
also provide a statement identifying which exemption the requestor is 
invoking and explaining the requestor's basis for believing that the 
exemption applies. While processing the request, the Office of 
Administration, Personnel Security Branch, will make a final 
determination whether the claimed exemption applies. Alternatively, the 
requestor may contact the Office of Administration for an evaluation of 
their exemption status prior to submitting their request. Persons who 
are exempt from the background check are not required to complete the 
SF-85 or Form FD-258; however, all other requirements for access to 
SGI, including the need to know, are still applicable.

    Note: Copies of documents and materials required by paragraphs 
C.(4)(b), (c), and (d) of this Order must be sent to the following 
address: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Personnel 
Security Branch, Mail Stop TWFN-03-B46M, 11555 Rockville Pike, 
Rockville, MD 20852.

    These documents and materials should not be included with the 
request letter to the Office of the Secretary, but the request letter 
should state that the forms and fees have been submitted as required.
    D. To avoid delays in processing requests for access to SGI, the 
requestor should review all submitted materials for completeness and 
accuracy (including legibility) before submitting them to the NRC. The 
NRC will return incomplete packages to the sender without processing.
    E. Based on an evaluation of the information submitted under 
paragraphs C.(3) or C.(4) above, as applicable, the

[[Page 46101]]

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 or need to know the SGI requested.
    F. For requests for access to SUNSI, if the NRC staff determines 
that the requestor satisfies both E.(1) and E.(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 setting forth 
terms and conditions to prevent the unauthorized or inadvertent 
disclosure of SUNSI by each individual who will be granted access to 
SUNSI.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    G. For requests for access to SGI, if the NRC staff determines that 
the requestor has satisfied both E.(1) and E.(2) above, the Office of 
Administration will then determine, based upon completion of the 
background check, whether the proposed recipient is trustworthy and 
reliable, as required for access to SGI by 10 CFR 73.22(b). If the 
Office of Administration determines that the individual or individuals 
are trustworthy and reliable, the NRC will promptly notify the 
requestor in writing. The notification will provide the names of 
approved individuals as well as the conditions under which the SGI will 
be provided. Those conditions may include, but are not limited to, the 
signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit, or Protective Order 
\6\ by each individual who will be granted access to SGI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Any motion for Protective Order or draft Non-Disclosure 
Agreement or Affidavit for SGI must be filed with the presiding 
officer or the Chief Administrative Judge if the presiding officer 
has not yet been designated, within 180 days of the deadline for the 
receipt of the written access request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    H. Release and Storage of SGI. Prior to providing SGI to the 
requestor, the NRC staff will conduct (as necessary) an inspection to 
confirm that the recipient's information protection system is 
sufficient to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 73.22. Alternatively, 
recipients may opt to view SGI at an approved SGI storage location 
rather than establish their own SGI protection program to meet SGI 
protection requirements.
    I. Filing of Contentions. Any contentions in these proceedings that 
are based upon the information received as a result of the request made 
for SUNSI or SGI 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 or SGI contentions by that later 
deadline.
    J. Review of Denials of Access.
    (1) If the request for access to SUNSI or SGI is denied by the NRC 
staff either after a determination on standing and requisite need, or 
after a determination on trustworthiness and reliability, the NRC staff 
shall immediately notify the requestor in writing, briefly stating the 
reason or reasons for the denial.
    (2) Before the Office of Administration makes a final adverse 
determination regarding the trustworthiness and reliability of the 
proposed recipient(s) for access to SGI, the Office of Administration, 
in accordance with 10 CFR 2.336(f)(1)(iii), must provide the proposed 
recipient(s) any records that were considered in the trustworthiness 
and reliability determination, including those required to be provided 
under 10 CFR 73.57(e)(1), so that the proposed recipient(s) have an 
opportunity to correct or explain the record.
    (3) The requestor may challenge the NRC staff's adverse 
determination with respect to access to SUNSI or with respect to 
standing or need to know for SGI 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.
    (4) The requestor may challenge the Office of Administration's 
final adverse determination with respect to trustworthiness and 
reliability for access to SGI by filing a request for review in 
accordance with 10 CFR 2.336(f)(1)(iv).
    (5) Further appeals of decisions under this paragraph must be made 
pursuant to 10 CFR 2.311.
    K. Review of Grants of Access. A party other than the requestor may 
challenge an NRC staff determination granting access to SUNSI whose 
release would harm that party's interest independent of the proceeding. 
Such a challenge must be filed 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.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Requestors 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/SGI 
request submitted to the NRC staff under these procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    L. The Commission expects that the NRC staff and presiding officers 
(and any other reviewing officers) will consider and resolve requests 
for access to SUNSI or SGI, 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 15th day of September 2017.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Rochelle C. Bavol,
Acting, Secretary of the Commission.

[[Page 46102]]



   Attachment 1--General Target Schedule for Processing and Resolving
Requests for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information
              and Safeguards Information in This Proceeding
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Day                            Event/activity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.............................  Publication of Federal Register notice
                                 of hearing and opportunity to petition
                                 for leave to intervene, including order
                                 with instructions for access requests.
10............................  Deadline for submitting requests for
                                 access to Sensitive Unclassified Non
                                 Safeguards Information (SUNSI) and/or
                                 Safeguards Information (SGI) 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; demonstrating that access
                                 should be granted (e.g., showing
                                 technical competence for access to
                                 SGI); and, for SGI, including
                                 application fee for fingerprint/
                                 background check.
60............................  Deadline for submitting petition for
                                 intervention containing: (i)
                                 Demonstration of standing; (ii) all
                                 contentions whose formulation does not
                                 require access to SUNSI and/or SGI (+25
                                 Answers to petition for intervention;
                                 +7 requestor/petitioner reply).
20............................  U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
                                 staff informs the requestor of the
                                 staff's determination whether the
                                 request for access provides a
                                 reasonable basis to believe standing
                                 can be established and shows (1) need
                                 for SUNSI or (2) need to know for SGI.
                                 (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 makes the
                                 finding of need to know for SGI and
                                 likelihood of standing, NRC staff
                                 begins background check (including
                                 fingerprinting for a criminal history
                                 records check), information processing
                                 (preparation of redactions or review of
                                 redacted documents), and readiness
                                 inspections.
25............................  If NRC staff finds no ``need,'' no
                                 ``need to know,'' or no likelihood of
                                 standing, the deadline for requestor/
                                 petitioner to file a motion seeking a
                                 ruling to reverse the NRC staff's
                                 denial of access; NRC staff files copy
                                 of access determination with the
                                 presiding officer (or Chief
                                 Administrative Judge or other
                                 designated officer, as appropriate). If
                                 NRC staff finds ``need'' for SUNSI, the
                                 deadline for any party to the
                                 proceeding whose interest independent
                                 of the proceeding would be harmed by
                                 the release of the information to file
                                 a motion seeking a ruling to reverse
                                 the NRC staff's grant of access.
30............................  Deadline for NRC staff reply to motions
                                 to reverse NRC staff determination(s).
40............................  (Receipt +30) If NRC staff finds
                                 standing and need for SUNSI, deadline
                                 for NRC staff to complete information
                                 processing and file motion for
                                 Protective Order and draft Non-
                                 Disclosure Affidavit. Deadline for
                                 applicant/licensee to file Non-
                                 Disclosure Agreement for SUNSI.
190...........................  (Receipt +180) If NRC staff finds
                                 standing, need to know for SGI, and
                                 trustworthiness and reliability,
                                 deadline for NRC staff to file motion
                                 for Protective Order and draft Non-
                                 disclosure Affidavit (or to make a
                                 determination that the proposed
                                 recipient of SGI is not trustworthy or
                                 reliable). Note: Before the Office of
                                 Administration makes a final adverse
                                 determination regarding access to SGI,
                                 the proposed recipient must be provided
                                 an opportunity to correct or explain
                                 information.
205...........................  Deadline for petitioner to seek reversal
                                 of a final adverse NRC staff
                                 trustworthiness or reliability
                                 determination under 10 CFR
                                 2.336(f)(1)(iv).
A.............................  If access granted: Issuance of a
                                 decision by a presiding officer or
                                 other designated officer 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 and/or SGI consistent with
                                 decision issuing the protective order.
A + 28........................  Deadline for submission of contentions
                                 whose development depends upon access
                                 to SUNSI and/or SGI. 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 or SGI
                                 contentions by that later deadline.
A + 53........................  (Contention receipt +25) Answers to
                                 contentions whose development depends
                                 upon access to SUNSI and/or SGI.
A + 60........................  (Answer receipt +7) Petitioner/
                                 Intervenor reply to answers.
>A + 60.......................  Decision on contention admission.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[FR Doc. 2017-20084 Filed 10-2-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P