[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 215 (Tuesday, November 6, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55561-55568]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-22576]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2018-0227]


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

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

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

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) received and is 
considering approval of two amendment requests. The amendment requests 
are for both Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3. For 
each amendment request, the NRC proposes to determine that they involve 
no significant hazards consideration. Because each amendment request

[[Page 55562]]

contains sensitive unclassified nonsafeguards information (SUNSI) an 
order imposes procedures to obtain access to SUNSI for contention 
preparation.

DATES: Comments must be filed by December 6, 2018. A request for a 
hearing must be filed by January 7, 2019. Any potential party as 
defined in Section 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 November 16, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0227. Address 
questions about Docket IDs in Regulations.gov to Jennifer Borges; 
telephone: 301-287-9127; email: [email protected]. For technical 
questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section of this document.
     Mail comments to: May Ma, Office of Administration, Mail 
Stop: TWFN-7-A60M, 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: Kay Goldstein, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1506, email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments

A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0227, facility name, unit 
number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject when 
contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this 
action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this 
action by any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0227.
     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 ``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-2018-0227, 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

[[Page 55563]]

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 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

[[Page 55564]]

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-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, 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 Nos. 50-277 and 50-278, Peach 
Bottom Atomic Power Station (PBAPS), Unit Nos. 2 and 3, York County, 
Pennsylvania

    Date of amendment request: May 30, 2018. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18150A387.
    Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains 
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The 
amendments would revise the Technical Specifications (TSs) to allow 
continued operation with two safety relief valves/safety valves (SRVs/
SVs) out-of-service (OOS) and to increase the reactor coolant system 
pressure safety limit. The proposed changes are based on taking credit 
for the additional SV that was installed on each unit per the Extended 
Power Uprate amendments for PBAPS Unit 2 and Unit 3, dated March 21, 
2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16034A372), and a re-evaluation of the 
transient pressure analysis at the current licensed thermal power 
authorized by the Measurement Uncertainty Recapture uprate amendments 
dated November 15, 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17286A013).
    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 would revise TS Section 3.4.3 to lower the 
required number of operable Safety Relief Valves (SRVs) and Safety 
Valves (SVs) from a total of 13 to 12, and raise the Reactor Coolant 
System (RCS) Safety Limit (SL) from 1,325 to 1,340 psig [pounds per 
square inch gauge]. Analysis confirms that raising the number of 
out-of-service SRVs/SVs from one to two does not have an adverse 
impact on (1) the overpressure protection for the reactor pressure 
vessel [RPV], (2) the ability of High Pressure Coolant Injection 
(HPCI), Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC), Standby Liquid 
Control (SLC) and Control Rod Drive (CRD) safety systems to perform 
their design basis requirements, and (3) the Emergency Core Cooling 
System (ECCS) Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) analysis. The analysis 
also confirms that for the peak vessel pressure in the overpressure 
event, there is still over 20 psi [pounds per square inch] margin to 
the American Society of Mechanical Engineer[s] (ASME) code 
overpressure limit. This margin also includes the penalty due to the 
TRACG statistical pressure adder required to be included in the 
analysis results, thereby

[[Page 55565]]

providing additional analytical margin. Raising the dome pressure 
safety limit by 15 psi from 1,325 to 1,340 psig [pounds per square 
inch gauge] still provides sufficient margin (approximately 5 psi) 
for the peak pressure vessel pressure and thus continues to support 
the ASME code overpressure limit requirements. Compliance with the 
ASME upset code requirements for vessel overpressure protection is 
still ensured with this change to the dome pressure safety limit 
(1,340 psig) to support operation with two SRVOOS.
    This analysis covers the plant response to the design basis 
accidents, Anticipated Operational Occurrence (AOO) events and 
Special Events. The proposed change does not require any new or 
unusual operator actions. The proposed change does not introduce any 
new failure modes that could result in a new or different accident. 
The SRVs and SVs are not being modified or operated differently and 
will continue to operate to meet the design basis requirements for 
RPV overpressure protection. The proposed change does not alter the 
manner in which the RPV overpressure protection system is operated 
and functions and thus, there is no significant impact on reactor 
operation. There is no change being made to safety limits or 
limiting safety system settings that would adversely affect plant 
safety as a result of the proposed change.
    For PBAPS, the limiting overpressure AOO event is the main steam 
isolation valve closure with scram on high flux (MSIVF). The PBAPS 
ATWS [Anticipated Transient Without Scram] Special Event analysis 
considered the limiting cases for RPV overpressure and is analyzed 
under two cases: (1) Main Steam Isolation Valve Closure (MSIVC) and 
(2) Pressure Regulator Failure Open (PRFO). These events were 
analyzed under the proposed conditions and it was confirmed that the 
existing analyses remain bounding for the condition of adding a 
second SRV/SV Out-of-Service.
    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.
    The proposed change would revise TS Section 3.4.3 to lower the 
required number of operable SRVs and SVs from a total of 13 to 12, 
and raise the RCS SL from 1,325 to 1,340 psig. The RPV overpressure 
protection capability of the 12 operable SRVs and SVs is adequate to 
ensure the ASME code allowable peak pressure limits are not 
exceeded. The SRVs and SVs are not being modified or operated 
differently and will continue to operate to meet the design basis 
requirements for RPV overpressure protection. The proposed change 
does not introduce any new failure modes that could result in a new 
or different accident. The proposed change does not alter the manner 
in which the RPV overpressure protection system is operated and 
functions and thus, there is no new failure mechanisms for the 
overpressure protection system. The plant response to the design 
basis accidents, AOO events and Special Events remains bounded by 
existing analyses. These events were analyzed under the proposed 
conditions and it was confirmed that the existing analyses remain 
bounding for the condition of adding a second SRV/SV Out-of-Service 
at the current licensed thermal power.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility 
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed involve a significant reduction in a margin 
of safety?
    Response: No.
    The margin of safety is established through the design of the 
plant structures, systems and components, the parameters within 
which the plant is operated, and the establishment of setpoints for 
the actuation of equipment relied upon to respond to an event. The 
proposed change does not change the setpoints at which the 
protective actions are initiated. The proposed change would revise 
TS Section 3.4.3 to lower the required number of operable SRVs and 
SVs and raise the RCS SL from 1,325 to 1,340 psig. The RPV 
overpressure protection capability of the 12 operable SRVs and SVs 
is adequate to ensure the ASME code allowable peak pressure limits 
are not exceeded. The plant response to the design basis accidents, 
AOO events and Special Events remains bounded by existing analyses. 
These events were analyzed under the proposed conditions and it was 
confirmed that for the peak vessel pressure in the overpressure 
event, there is still over 20 psi margin to the American Society of 
Mechanical Engineer (ASME) code overpressure limit. This margin also 
includes the penalty due to the TRACG statistical pressure adder 
required to be included in the analysis results, thereby providing 
additional analytical margin. Raising the dome pressure safety limit 
by 15 psi from 1,325 to 1,340 psig still provides sufficient margin 
for the peak pressure vessel pressure and thus continues to support 
the ASME code overpressure limit requirements. Compliance with the 
ASME upset code requirements for vessel overpressure protection is 
still ensured with this change to the dome pressure safety limit 
(1,340 psig) to support operation with two SRVOOS.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
reduction in a margin of safety.

    From the above analysis, the licensee concluded that the proposed 
amendment presents no significant hazards consideration under the 
standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c)(1)-(3), and accordingly, a 
finding of ``no significant hazards consideration'' is justified.
    The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's analysis of 10 CFR 
50.92(c)(1)-(3). Concerning the standard in 50.92(c)(3) (concerning 
whether a proposed amendment would involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety), the NRC staff elected to use its own analysis in 
place of the licensee's. The staff's analysis of 50.92(c)(3) is below. 
The margin of safety is established through (1) the establishment of 
setpoints for the actuation of equipment relied upon to respond to an 
event, (2) the design of the plant structures, systems, and components, 
and (3) the parameters within which the plant is operated. The proposed 
change does not change the setpoints at which the protective actions 
are initiated. The proposed design change to lower the required number 
of operable SRVs and SVs does not significantly reduce the margin of 
safety because the RPV overpressure protection capability of the 12 
operable SRVs and SVs is adequate to ensure the ASME code allowable 
peak pressure limits are not exceeded.
    The plant response to the design basis accidents, AAOs, and Special 
Events remains bounded by existing analyses.
    These events were analyzed under the proposed conditions and it was 
confirmed that for the peak vessel pressure in the overpressure event, 
there is still over 20 psi margin before reaching the ASME code 
overpressure limit. The proposed increase of the dome pressure safety 
limit from 1,325 to 1,340 psig still provides sufficient margin for the 
allowed peak vessel pressure and, therefore, continues to support the 
ASME code overpressure limit requirements.
    Compliance with the ASME code requirements for upset conditions of 
vessel overpressure protection is still ensured with this change to the 
dome pressure safety limit to support operation with two SRVs out of 
service.
    Therefore, because the proposed change does not affect the 
setpoints at which equipment relied upon to respond to an event, and 
the design changes and plant parameters do not exceed the ASME code 
allowable pressure limits, the change does not ``[i]nvolve a 
significant reduction in a margin of safety'' under 10 CFR 50.92(c)(3).
    Based on its review of the licensee's analysis, and on the NRC 
staff's additional analysis of 50.92(c)(3), it appears that the three 
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff 
proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no 
significant hazards consideration.
    Attorney for licensee: J. Bradley Fewell, Esquire, Vice President 
and Deputy General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 200 Exelon 
Way, Kennett Square, Pennsylvania 19348.
    NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna.

[[Page 55566]]

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278, Peach 
Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, York County, Pennsylvania

    Date of amendment request: August 27, 2018. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18239A355.
    Description of amendment request: This amendment request contains 
sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI). The 
amendments would revise the Technical Specifications to support the 
proposed compensatory measures for operation of the Leading Edge Flow 
Meter (LEFM) system at three separate intermediate power levels for an 
indefinite period when the mass flow input to the core thermal power 
calculation is from one, two, or three feedwater lines in check mode 
with none in fail mode, and a fourth intermediate power level when not 
more than one LEFM is in fail mode, and flow measurement is being 
provided by the associated feedwater flow nozzle. The proposed changes 
would allow operation at power levels commensurate with the 
uncertainties in the measurement of core thermal power (CTP) and reduce 
the magnitude of the required reactivity maneuver and plant power level 
change for degradation of the LEFM system.
    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, with NRC edits in square 
brackets:

    1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    [T]he proposed change does not significantly increase the 
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed change does not affect system design or operation 
and thus does not create any new accident initiators or increase the 
probability of an accident previously evaluated. Accident mitigation 
systems are not affected and will function as designed.
    The proposed change does not increase the licensed thermal power 
level and will not cause the thermal power level at which the ECCS 
have been analyzed in accordance with Appendix K to 10 CFR 50 to be 
exceeded. All safety analyses continue to be bounded by the safety 
analyses for the current licensed thermal power.
    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.
    [T]he proposed change does not create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    No new accident scenarios, failure mechanisms, or limiting 
single failures are introduced as a result of operation at power 
levels based on the uncertainties in the calculation of CTP for the 
stated LEFM system conditions. Calculation of the uncertainty 
associated with these plant conditions as well as existing plant 
instrumentation and procedures ensure that the licensed thermal 
power and the thermal power level at which the ECCS have been 
analyzed in accordance with Appendix K to 10 CFR 50 will not be 
exceeded. No new equipment or procedure changes are involved that 
could add new accident initiators.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility 
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    [T]he proposed change does not involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety.
    Operation at power levels based on the uncertainties in the 
calculation of CTP for the stated LEFM system conditions does not 
involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. Calculation 
of the uncertainties associated with the measurement of core thermal 
power for these plant conditions as well as existing plant 
instrumentation and procedures ensure that the licensed thermal 
power and the thermal power level at which the ECCS have been 
analyzed in accordance with Appendix K to 10 CFR 50 will not be 
exceeded.
    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: J. Bradley Fewell, Vice President and Deputy 
General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 200 Exelon Way, 
Kennett Square, PA 19348.
    NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna.

Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information for Contention Preparation. Peach Bottom Atomic 
Power Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3, York County, Pennsylvania

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

[[Page 55567]]

within 10 days of receipt of the request whether:
    (1) There is a reasonable basis to believe the petitioner is likely 
to establish standing to participate in this NRC proceeding; and
    (2) The requestor has established a legitimate need for access to 
SUNSI.
    E. If the NRC staff determines that the requestor satisfies both 
D.(1) and D.(2) above, the NRC staff will notify the requestor in 
writing that access to SUNSI has been granted. The written notification 
will contain instructions on how the requestor may obtain copies of the 
requested documents, and any other conditions that may apply to access 
to those documents. These conditions may include, but are not limited 
to, the signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit, or 
Protective Order \2\ setting forth terms and conditions to prevent the 
unauthorized or inadvertent disclosure of SUNSI by each individual who 
will be granted access to SUNSI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    F. Filing of Contentions. Any contentions in these proceedings that 
are based upon the information received as a result of the request made 
for SUNSI must be filed by the requestor no later than 25 days after 
receipt of (or access to) that information. However, if more than 25 
days remain between the petitioner's receipt of (or access to) the 
information and the deadline for filing all other contentions (as 
established in the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing), the 
petitioner may file its SUNSI contentions by that later deadline.
    G. Review of Denials of Access.
    (1) If the request for access to SUNSI is denied by the NRC staff 
after a determination on standing and requisite need, the NRC staff 
shall immediately notify the requestor in writing, briefly stating the 
reason or reasons for the denial.
    (2) The requester may challenge the NRC staff's adverse 
determination by filing a challenge within 5 days of receipt of that 
determination with: (a) The presiding officer designated in this 
proceeding; (b) if no presiding officer has been appointed, the Chief 
Administrative Judge, or if he or she is unavailable, another 
administrative judge, or an Administrative Law Judge with jurisdiction 
pursuant to 10 CFR 2.318(a); or (c) if another officer has been 
designated to rule on information access issues, with that officer.
    (3) Further appeals of decisions under this paragraph must be made 
pursuant to 10 CFR 2.311.
    H. Review of Grants of Access. A party other than the requester may 
challenge an NRC staff determination granting access to SUNSI whose 
release would harm that party's interest independent of the proceeding. 
Such a challenge must be filed within 5 days of the notification by the 
NRC staff of its grant of access and must be filed with: (a) The 
presiding officer designated in this proceeding; (b) if no presiding 
officer has been appointed, the Chief Administrative Judge, or if he or 
she is unavailable, another administrative judge, or an Administrative 
Law Judge with jurisdiction pursuant to 10 CFR 2.318(a); or (c) if 
another officer has been designated to rule on information access 
issues, with that officer.
    If challenges to the NRC staff determinations are filed, these 
procedures give way to the normal process for litigating disputes 
concerning access to information. The availability of interlocutory 
review by the Commission of orders ruling on such NRC staff 
determinations (whether granting or denying access) is governed by 10 
CFR 2.311.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of October 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.

[[Page 55568]]

 
A........................  If access granted: issuance of presiding
                            officer or other designated officer decision
                            on motion for protective order for access to
                            sensitive information (including schedule
                            for providing access and submission of
                            contentions) or decision reversing a final
                            adverse determination by the NRC staff.
A + 3....................  Deadline for filing executed Non-Disclosure
                            Affidavits. Access provided to SUNSI
                            consistent with decision issuing the
                            protective order.
A + 28...................  Deadline for submission of contentions whose
                            development depends upon access to SUNSI.
                            However, if more than 25 days remain between
                            the petitioner's receipt of (or access to)
                            the information and the deadline for filing
                            all other contentions (as established in the
                            notice of opportunity to request a hearing
                            and petition for leave to intervene), the
                            petitioner may file its SUNSI contentions by
                            that later deadline.
A + 53...................  (Contention receipt +25) Answers to
                            contentions whose development depends upon
                            access to SUNSI.
A + 60...................  (Answer receipt +7) Petitioner/Intervenor
                            reply to answers.
>A + 60..................  Decision on contention admission.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2018-22576 Filed 11-5-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7590-01-P