[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 25 (Tuesday, February 6, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5277-5284]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-01706]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2018-0011]


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 three amendment requests. The amendment 
requests are for Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit 2; R.E. Ginna 
Nuclear Power Plant; and Hope Creek Generating Station. For each 
amendment request, the NRC proposes to determine that they involve no 
significant hazards consideration. Because each amendment request 
contains sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI) an 
order imposes procedures to obtain access to SUNSI for contention 
preparation.

DATES: Comments must be filed by March 8, 2018. A request for a hearing 
must be filed by April 9, 2018. Any potential party as defined in Sec.  
2.4 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), who 
believes access to SUNSI is necessary to respond to this notice must 
request document access by February 16, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods 
(unless this document describes a different method for submitting 
comments on a specific subject):
     Federal Rulemaking website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0011. 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: May Ma, Office of Administration, Mail 
Stop: OWFN-2-A13, 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: Shirley Rohrer, Office of Nuclear 
Regulatory Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 
DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-5411, email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments

A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0011, facility name, unit 
number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject when 
contacting the NRC

[[Page 5278]]

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 http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0011.
     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-2018-0011, 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.
    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 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 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

[[Page 5279]]

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 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 website 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 website 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 website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-

[[Page 5280]]

submittals.html, by email to [email protected], or by a toll-free 
call at 1-866-672-7640. The NRC Electronic Filing Help Desk is 
available between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through 
Friday, excluding government holidays.
    Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not 
submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in 
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing 
stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and 
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper 
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail 
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: 
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or 
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and 
Adjudications Staff. Participants filing adjudicatory documents in this 
manner are responsible for serving the document on all other 
participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of 
the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or 
expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the 
provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an 
exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant or 
party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer subsequently determines 
that the reason for granting the exemption from use of E-Filing no 
longer exists.
    Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the 
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at 
https://adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the 
Commission or the presiding officer. If you do not have an NRC-issued 
digital ID certificate as described above, click cancel when the link 
requests certificates and you will be automatically directed to the 
NRC's electronic hearing dockets where you will be able to access any 
publicly available documents in a particular hearing docket. 
Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, 
such as social security numbers, home addresses, or personal phone 
numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law 
requires submission of such information. For example, in some 
instances, individuals provide home addresses in order to demonstrate 
proximity to a facility or site. With respect to copyrighted works, 
except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory 
filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are 
requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission.

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-410, Nine Mile Point 
Nuclear Station (NMP2), Unit 2, Oswego County, New York

    Date of amendment request: November 3, 2017. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17307A019.
    Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains 
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The 
amendment would revise the safety limit (SL) minimum critical power 
ratios (MCPRs) in Section 2.1.1, ``Reactor Core SLs,'' of the NMP2, 
Technical Specifications.
    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 derivation of the cycle specific Safety Limit Minimum 
Critical Power Ratios (SLMCPRs) for incorporation into the Technical 
Specifications (TS), and their use to determine cycle specific 
thermal limits, has been performed using the methodology discussed 
in NEDE-24011-P-A, ``General Electric Standard Application for 
Reactor Fuel,'' Revision 25.
    The basis of the SLMCPR calculation is to ensure that during 
normal operation and during abnormal operational transients, at 
least 99.9% of all fuel rods in the core do not experience 
transition boiling if the limit is not violated. The new SLMCPRs 
preserve the existing margin to transition boiling.
    The MCPR safety limit is reevaluated for each reload using NRC-
approved methodologies. The analyses for NMP2, Cycle 17, have 
concluded that a two-recirculation loop MCPR safety limit of >=1.17, 
based on the application of Global Nuclear Fuel's NRC-approved MCPR 
safety limit methodology, will ensure that this acceptance criterion 
is met. For single recirculation loop operation, a MCPR safety limit 
of >=1.17 also ensures that this acceptance criterion is met. The 
MCPR operating limits are presented and controlled in accordance 
with the NMP2 Core Operating Limits Report (COLR).
    The requested TS changes do not involve any plant modifications 
or operational changes that could affect system reliability or 
performance or that could affect the probability of operator error. 
The requested changes do not affect any postulated accident 
precursors, do not affect any accident mitigating systems, and do 
not introduce any new accident initiation mechanisms.
    Therefore, the proposed TS changes do not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The SLMCPR is a TS numerical value, calculated to ensure that 
during normal operation and during abnormal operational transients, 
at least 99.9% of all fuel rods in the core do not experience 
transition boiling if the limit is not violated. The new SLMCPRs are 
calculated using NRC-approved methodology discussed in NEDE-24011-P-
A, ``General Electric Standard Application for Reactor Fuel,'' 
Revision 25. The proposed changes do not involve any new modes of 
operation, any changes to setpoints, or any plant modifications. The 
proposed revised MCPR safety limits have been shown to be acceptable 
for Cycle 17 operation. The core operating limits will continue to 
be developed using NRC-approved methods. The proposed MCPR safety 
limits or methods for establishing the core operating limits do not 
result in the creation of any new precursors to an accident.
    Therefore, this change does not create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    There is no significant reduction in the margin of safety 
previously approved by the NRC as a result of the proposed change to 
the SLMCPRs. The new SLMCPRs are calculated using methodology 
discussed in NEDE-24011-P-A, ``General Electric Standard Application 
for Reactor Fuel,'' Revision 25. The SLMCPRs ensure that during 
normal operation and during abnormal operational transients, at 
least 99.9% of all fuel rods in the core do not experience 
transition boiling if the limit is not violated, thereby preserving 
the fuel cladding integrity.
    Therefore, the proposed TS changes do not involve a significant 
reduction in the margin of safety previously approved by the NRC.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the 
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
    Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, 
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 
60555.
    NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna.

[[Page 5281]]

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

    Date of amendment request: November 16, 2017. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17321A107.
    Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains 
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The 
amendment would revise the Ginna's Technical Specifications for 
selected Reactor Trip System (RTS) and Engineered Safety Feature 
Actuation System (ESFAS) instrumentation channels. The change would 
allow selected RTS (Table 3.3.1-1) and ESFAS instrumentation channels 
(Table 3.3.2-1) to be bypassed during surveillance testing. 
Additionally, the change would allow RTS and ESFAS input relays to be 
excluded from the Channel Operational Test. The change would allow 
testing of Nuclear Instrumentation System power range functions, which 
are part of the RTS, with a permanently installed bypass capability, 
while other RTS and ESFAS functions will be capable of being bypassed 
utilizing permanent connections in the racks to connect a portable test 
box.
    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 Reactor Trip System (RTS) and Engineered Safety Feature 
Actuation System (ESFAS) provide plant protection and are part of 
the accident mitigation response. The RTS and ESFAS functions do not 
themselves act as a precursor or an initiator for any transient or 
design basis accident; therefore, the proposed change does not 
significantly increase the probability of any accident previously 
evaluated.
    The structural and functional integrity of the RTS and ESFAS, or 
any other plant system, is unaffected. The proposed change does not 
alter or prevent the ability of structures, systems, and components 
to perform their intended function to mitigate the consequences of 
an initiating event within the assumed acceptance limits. 
Surveillance testing in the bypass condition will not cause any 
design or analysis acceptance criteria to be exceeded.
    Under the proposed change, the channel being tested may be 
bypassed. The number of available channels with one channel in 
bypass for testing will remain the same as the number of channels 
available when testing in trip. The number of channels to trip will 
be unchanged when testing in bypass while the number of channels to 
trip is reduced to one when testing in trip. Although there may be a 
slight increase in the possibility that the failure of a channel 
could prevent the actuation of a function (because testing in bypass 
could result in two-out-of-two logic while testing in trip would 
have resulted in one-out-of-two logic), testing in bypass will 
reduce the vulnerability to inadvertent actuation of a function 
while maintaining the required number of channels to trip. The 
impact of using bypass test capability upon nuclear safety has been 
previously evaluated by the NRC and determined to be acceptable in 
WCAP-10271-P-A and its supplements. Thus, testing in bypass when all 
channels are operable does not involve a significant increase in the 
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    Under the proposed change, the channel being tested may be 
bypassed when another channel is concurrently inoperable and in a 
tripped condition. As a result, one channel in bypass and another in 
trip leaves one-out-of-two operable channels to initiate the 
protective function (if the initial logic is two-out-of-four) or 
one-out-of-one operable channels to initiate the protective function 
(if the initial logic was two-out-of-three). Thus, testing in bypass 
with one channel inoperable does not involve a significant increase 
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously 
evaluated.
    Implementation of the bypass testing capability does not affect 
the integrity of the fission product barriers utilized for 
mitigation of radiological dose consequences as a result of an 
accident. Plant response as modeled in the safety analyses is 
unaffected. Hence, the releases used as input to the dose 
calculations are unchanged from those previously assumed.
    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.
    Surveillance testing in bypass does not affect accident 
initiation sequences or response scenarios as modeled in the safety 
analyses. No new operating configuration is being imposed by the 
surveillance testing in bypass that would create a new failure 
scenario. The RTS and ESFAS will continue to have the same setpoints 
after the proposed change is implemented. In addition, no new 
failure modes are being created for any plant equipment. The bypass 
test instrumentation has been designed to applicable regulatory and 
industry standards. Fault conditions, failure detection, reliability 
and equipment qualification have been considered. The modifications 
do not result in any new or different accident scenarios.
    The types of accidents defined in the UFSAR [Updated Final 
Safety Analysis Report] continue to represent the credible spectrum 
of events to be analyzed which determine safe plant operation.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility 
of a new or different kind of accident from any previously 
evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    No safety analyses were changed or modified as a result of the 
proposed TS change to reflect installed bypass test capability. The 
proposed change does not alter the manner in which safety limits, 
limiting safety system settings, or limiting conditions for 
operation are determined. Margins associated with the current safety 
analyses acceptance criteria are unaffected. The current safety 
analyses remain bounding since their conclusions are not affected by 
performing surveillance testing in bypass. The safety systems 
credited in the safety analyses will continue to be available to 
perform their mitigation functions.
    Implementation of testing in bypass results in an overall 
improvement in safety because the capability to test the channels in 
bypass will reduce the potential for an inadvertent reactor trip or 
safeguards actuation due to a failure or spurious transient in a 
redundant channel.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not result in 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: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, 
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 
60555.
    NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna.

PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket No. 50-354, Hope Creek Generating Station 
(HCGS), Salem County, New Jersey

    Date of amendment request: November 9, 2017. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17317B320.
    Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains 
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The 
amendment would revise the HCGS Technical Specifications (TSs). 
Specifically, the amendment would revise the safety limit minimum 
critical power ratio (SLMCPR) for two recirculation loop operation and 
single recirculation loop operation based on the HCGS Cycle 22 specific 
analysis.
    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration 
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has 
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards 
consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in 
the probability or

[[Page 5282]]

consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The required SLMCPRs for HCGS Cycle 22 are calculated using NRC-
approved methodology. The SLMCPR values, contained in TS Section 2.1 
(``Safety Limits''), ensure at least 99.9% of all fuel rods in the 
core do not experience transition boiling during normal operation 
and analyzed transients, preserving fuel cladding integrity. The 
proposed change to the SLMCPR values ensures this criterion 
continues to be met, and therefore does not increase the probability 
or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. In addition, no 
plant hardware or operational changes are required with this 
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 amendment create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The required SLMCPRs for HCGS Cycle 22 are calculated using NRC-
approved methodology. The SLMCPR values, contained in TS Section 
2.1, ensure at least 99.9% of all fuel rods in the core do not 
experience transition boiling during normal operation and analyzed 
transients. The proposed change to the SLMCPR values does not 
involve any plant hardware or operational changes and does not 
create any new precursors to an accident.
    Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of 
a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The required SLMCPRs for HCGS Cycle 22 are calculated using NRC-
approved methodology. The SLMCPR values, contained in TS Section 
2.1, ensure at least 99.9% of all fuel rods in the core do not 
experience transition boiling during normal operation and analyzed 
transients, preserving fuel cladding integrity. The revised SLMCPR 
values ensure this criterion continues to be met. In addition, the 
proposed change to the SLMCPR values does not adversely affect the 
design basis function or performance of a structure, system, or 
component as described in the HCGS UFSAR [Updated Final Safety 
Analysis Report].
    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant 
reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the 
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
    Attorney for licensee: Jeffrie J. Keenan, PSEG Nuclear LLC--N21, 
P.O. Box 236, Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038.
    NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna.

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

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-410, Nine Mile Point 
Nuclear Station, Unit 2, Oswego County, New York

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

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

    A. This Order contains instructions regarding how potential parties 
to this proceeding may request access to documents containing Sensitive 
Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information (SUNSI).
    B. Within 10 days after publication of this notice of hearing and 
opportunity to petition for leave to intervene, any potential party who 
believes access to SUNSI is necessary to respond to this notice may 
request access to SUNSI. A ``potential party'' is any person who 
intends to participate as a party by demonstrating standing and filing 
an admissible contention under 10 CFR 2.309. Requests for access to 
SUNSI submitted later than 10 days after publication of this notice 
will not be considered absent a showing of good cause for the late 
filing, addressing why the request could not have been filed earlier.
    C. The requester shall submit a letter requesting permission to 
access SUNSI to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemakings and 
Adjudications Staff, and provide a copy to the Associate General 
Counsel for Hearings, Enforcement and Administration, Office of the 
General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001. The expedited delivery or courier mail address for both 
offices is: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 11555 Rockville Pike, 
Rockville, Maryland 20852. The email address for the Office of the 
Secretary and the Office of the General Counsel are 
[email protected] and [email protected], respectively.\1\ The 
request must include the following information:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    \2\ Any motion for Protective Order or draft Non-Disclosure 
Affidavit or Agreement for SUNSI must be filed with the presiding 
officer or the Chief Administrative Judge if the presiding officer 
has not yet been designated, within 30 days of the deadline for the 
receipt of the written access request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    F. Filing of Contentions. Any contentions in these proceedings that 
are based upon the information received as a result of the request made 
for SUNSI must be filed by the requestor no later than 25 days after 
receipt of (or access to) that information. However, if more than 25 
days remain between the petitioner's receipt of (or access to) the 
information and the deadline for filing all other contentions (as 
established in the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the 
petitioner may file its SUNSI contentions by that later deadline.
    G. Review of Denials of Access.

[[Page 5283]]

    (1) If the request for access to SUNSI is denied by the NRC staff 
after a determination on standing and requisite need, the NRC staff 
shall immediately notify the requestor in writing, briefly stating the 
reason or reasons for the denial.
    (2) The requester may challenge the NRC staff's adverse 
determination by filing a challenge within 5 days of receipt of that 
determination with: (a) The presiding officer designated in this 
proceeding; (b) if no presiding officer has been appointed, the Chief 
Administrative Judge, or if he or she is unavailable, another 
administrative judge, or an Administrative Law Judge with jurisdiction 
pursuant to 10 CFR 2.318(a); or (c) if another officer has been 
designated to rule on information access issues, with that officer.
    (3) Further appeals of decisions under this paragraph must be made 
pursuant to 10 CFR 2.311.
    H. Review of Grants of Access. A party other than the requester may 
challenge an NRC staff determination granting access to SUNSI whose 
release would harm that party's interest independent of the proceeding. 
Such a challenge must be filed within 5 days of the notification by the 
NRC staff of its grant of access and must be filed with: (a) The 
presiding officer designated in this proceeding; (b) if no presiding 
officer has been appointed, the Chief Administrative Judge, or if he or 
she is unavailable, another administrative judge, or an Administrative 
Law Judge with jurisdiction pursuant to 10 CFR 2.318(a); or (c) if 
another officer has been designated to rule on information access 
issues, with that officer.
    If challenges to the NRC staff determinations are filed, these 
procedures give way to the normal process for litigating disputes 
concerning access to information. The availability of interlocutory 
review by the Commission of orders ruling on such NRC staff 
determinations (whether granting or denying access) is governed by 10 
CFR 2.311.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Requesters should note that the filing requirements of the 
NRC's E-Filing Rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 
FR 46562; August 3, 2012) apply to appeals of NRC staff 
determinations (because they must be served on a presiding officer 
or the Commission, as applicable), but not to the initial SUNSI 
request submitted to the NRC staff under these procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I. The Commission expects that the NRC staff and presiding officers 
(and any other reviewing officers) will consider and resolve requests 
for access to SUNSI, and motions for protective orders, in a timely 
fashion in order to minimize any unnecessary delays in identifying 
those petitioners who have standing and who have propounded contentions 
meeting the specificity and basis requirements in 10 CFR part 2. The 
attachment to this Order summarizes the general target schedule for 
processing and resolving requests under these procedures.
    It is so ordered.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th of January, 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.

   Attachment 1--General Target Schedule for Processing and Resolving
Requests for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information
                           in This Proceeding
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Day                             Event/activity
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0..................................  Publication of Federal Register
                                      notice of hearing and opportunity
                                      to petition for leave to
                                      intervene, including order with
                                      instructions for access requests.
10.................................  Deadline for submitting requests
                                      for access to Sensitive
                                      Unclassified Non-Safeguards
                                      Information (SUNSI) with
                                      information: Supporting the
                                      standing of a potential party
                                      identified by name and address;
                                      describing the need for the
                                      information in order for the
                                      potential party to participate
                                      meaningfully in an adjudicatory
                                      proceeding.
60.................................  Deadline for submitting petition
                                      for intervention containing: (i)
                                      Demonstration of standing; and
                                      (ii) all contentions whose
                                      formulation does not require
                                      access to SUNSI (+25 Answers to
                                      petition for intervention; +7
                                      petitioner/requestor reply).
20.................................  U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
                                      (NRC) staff informs the requester
                                      of the staff's determination
                                      whether the request for access
                                      provides a reasonable basis to
                                      believe standing can be
                                      established and shows need for
                                      SUNSI. (NRC staff also informs any
                                      party to the proceeding whose
                                      interest independent of the
                                      proceeding would be harmed by the
                                      release of the information.) If
                                      NRC staff makes the finding of
                                      need for SUNSI and likelihood of
                                      standing, NRC staff begins
                                      document processing (preparation
                                      of redactions or review of
                                      redacted documents).
25.................................  If NRC staff finds no ``need'' or
                                      no likelihood of standing, the
                                      deadline for petitioner/requester
                                      to file a motion seeking a ruling
                                      to reverse the NRC staff's denial
                                      of access; NRC staff files copy of
                                      access determination with the
                                      presiding officer (or Chief
                                      Administrative Judge or other
                                      designated officer, as
                                      appropriate). If NRC staff finds
                                      ``need'' for SUNSI, the deadline
                                      for any party to the proceeding
                                      whose interest independent of the
                                      proceeding would be harmed by the
                                      release of the information to file
                                      a motion seeking a ruling to
                                      reverse the NRC staff's grant of
                                      access.
30.................................  Deadline for NRC staff reply to
                                      motions to reverse NRC staff
                                      determination(s).
40.................................  (Receipt +30) If NRC staff finds
                                      standing and need for SUNSI,
                                      deadline for NRC staff to complete
                                      information processing and file
                                      motion for Protective Order and
                                      draft Non-Disclosure Affidavit.
                                      Deadline for applicant/licensee to
                                      file Non-Disclosure Agreement for
                                      SUNSI.
A..................................  If access granted: issuance of
                                      presiding officer or other
                                      designated officer decision on
                                      motion for protective order for
                                      access to sensitive information
                                      (including schedule for providing
                                      access and submission of
                                      contentions) or decision reversing
                                      a final adverse determination by
                                      the NRC staff.
A + 3..............................  Deadline for filing executed Non-
                                      Disclosure Affidavits. Access
                                      provided to SUNSI consistent with
                                      decision issuing the protective
                                      order.
A + 28.............................  Deadline for submission of
                                      contentions whose development
                                      depends upon access to SUNSI.
                                      However, if more than 25 days
                                      remain between the petitioner's
                                      receipt of (or access to) the
                                      information and the deadline for
                                      filing all other contentions (as
                                      established in the notice of
                                      opportunity to request a hearing
                                      and petition for leave to
                                      intervene), the petitioner may
                                      file its SUNSI contentions by that
                                      later deadline.
A + 53.............................  (Contention receipt +25) Answers to
                                      contentions whose development
                                      depends upon access to SUNSI.
A + 60.............................  (Answer receipt +7) Petitioner/
                                      Intervenor reply to answers.
>A + 60............................  Decision on contention admission.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 5284]]

[FR Doc. 2018-01706 Filed 2-5-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7590-01-P