88 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2019 / Notices 

other information, call (866) 208–3676 

(toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. 

Dated: December 31, 2018. 

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2019–00024 Filed 1–7–19; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[NRC–2018–0277] 

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 Palo Verde Nuclear 

Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3; 

Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2; and 

Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 

and 4. For each amendment request, the 

NRC proposes to determine that they 

involve no significant hazards 

consideration. Because each amendment 

request contains sensitive unclassified 

non-safeguards information (SUNSI), an 

order imposes procedures to obtain 

access to SUNSI for contention 

preparation. 

DATES: Comments must be filed by 

February 7, 2019. A request for a 

hearing must be filed by March 11, 

2019. Any potential party as defined in 

§ 2.4 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (10 CFR), who believes 

access to SUNSI is necessary to respond 

to this notice must request document 

access by January 18, 2019. 

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–2018–0277. Address 

questions about Docket IDs in 

Regulations.gov to Krupskaya Castellon; 

telephone: 301–287–9221; email: 

Krupskaya.Castellon@nrc.gov. For 

technical questions, contact the 

individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

document. 

• Mail comments to: 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: 

Shirley Rohrer, Office of Nuclear 

Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– 

5411, email: Shirley.Rohrer@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Obtaining Information and 

Submitting Comments 

A. Obtaining Information 

Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2018– 

0277, facility name, unit number(s), 

plant docket number, application date, 

and subject when contacting the NRC 

about the availability of information for 

this action. You may obtain publiclyavailable information related to this 

action by any of the following methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and search 

for Docket ID NRC–2018–0277. 

• NRC’s Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System 

(ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable 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 pdr.resource@

nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number 

for each document referenced (if it is 

available in ADAMS) is provided the 

first time that it is mentioned in this 

document. 

• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and 

purchase copies of public documents at 

the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One 

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 

Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. 

B. Submitting Comments 

Please include Docket ID NRC–2018– 

0277, 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 


khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2019 / Notices 89 

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/doccollections/cfr/. Alternatively, a copy of 

the regulations is available at the NRC’s 

Public Document Room, located at One 

White Flint North, Room O1–F21, 11555 

Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 

Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, 

the Commission or a presiding officer 

will rule on the petition and, if 

appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be 

issued. 

As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the 

petition should specifically explain the 

reasons why intervention should be 

permitted with particular reference to 

the following general requirements for 

standing: (1) The name, address, and 

telephone number of the petitioner; (2) 

the nature of the petitioner’s right under 

the Act to be made a party to the 

proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of 

the petitioner’s property, financial, or 

other interest in the proceeding; and (4) 

the possible effect of any decision or 

order which may be entered in the 

proceeding on the petitioner’s interest. 

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), 

the petition must also set forth the 

specific contentions which the 

petitioner seeks to have litigated in the 

proceeding. Each contention must 

consist of a specific statement of the 

issue of law or fact to be raised or 

controverted. In addition, the petitioner 

must provide a brief explanation of the 

bases for the contention and a concise 

statement of the alleged facts or expert 

opinion which support the contention 

and on which the petitioner intends to 

rely in proving the contention at the 

hearing. The petitioner must also 

provide references to the specific 

sources and documents on which the 

petitioner intends to rely to support its 

position on the issue. The petition must 

include sufficient information to show 

that a genuine dispute exists with the 

applicant or licensee on a material issue 

of law or fact. Contentions must be 

limited to matters within the scope of 

the proceeding. The contention must be 

one which, if proven, would entitle the 

petitioner to relief. A petitioner who 

fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 

CFR 2.309(f) with respect to at least one 

contention will not be permitted to 

participate as a party. 

Those permitted to intervene become 

parties to the proceeding, subject to any 

limitations in the order granting leave to 

intervene. Parties have the opportunity 

to participate fully in the conduct of the 

hearing with respect to resolution of 

that party’s admitted contentions, 

including the opportunity to present 

evidence, consistent with the NRC’s 

regulations, policies, and procedures. 

Petitions must be filed no later than 

60 days from the date of publication of 

this notice. Petitions and motions for 

leave to file new or amended 

contentions that are filed after the 

deadline will not be entertained absent 

a determination by the presiding officer 

that the filing demonstrates good cause 

by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 

2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii). The petition 

must be filed in accordance with the 

filing instructions in the ‘‘Electronic 

Submissions (E-Filing)’’ section of this 

document. 

If a hearing is requested, and the 

Commission has not made a final 

determination on the issue of no 

significant hazards consideration, the 

Commission will make a final 

determination on the issue of no 

significant hazards consideration. The 

final determination will serve to 

establish when the hearing is held. If the 

final determination is that the 

amendment request involves no 

significant hazards consideration, the 

Commission may issue the amendment 

and make it immediately effective, 

notwithstanding the request for a 

hearing. Any hearing would take place 

after issuance of the amendment. If the 

final determination is that the 

amendment request involves a 

significant hazards consideration, then 

any hearing held would take place 

before the issuance of the amendment 

unless the Commission finds an 

imminent danger to the health or safety 

of the public, in which case it will issue 

an appropriate order or rule under 10 

CFR part 2. 

A State, local governmental body, 

Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or 

agency thereof, may submit a petition to 

the Commission to participate as a party 

under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition 

should state the nature and extent of the 

petitioner’s interest in the proceeding. 

The petition should be submitted to the 

Commission no later than 60 days from 

the date of publication of this notice. 

The petition must be filed in accordance 

with the filing instructions in the 

‘‘Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)’’ 

section of this document, and should 

meet the requirements for petitions set 

forth in this section, except that under 

10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local 

governmental body, or Federallyrecognized Indian Tribe, or agency 

thereof does not need to address the 

standing requirements in 10 CFR 

2.309(d) if the facility is located within 

its boundaries. Alternatively, a State, 

local governmental body, Federallyrecognized Indian Tribe, or agency 

thereof may participate as a non-party 

under 10 CFR 2.315(c). 

If a hearing is granted, any person 

who is not a party to the proceeding and 

is not affiliated with or represented by 

a party may, at the discretion of the 

presiding officer, be permitted to make 

a limited appearance pursuant to the 

provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person 

making a limited appearance may make 

an oral or written statement of his or her 

position on the issues but may not 

otherwise participate in the proceeding. 

A limited appearance may be made at 

any session of the hearing or at any 

prehearing conference, subject to the 

limits and conditions as may be 

imposed by the presiding officer. Details 

regarding the opportunity to make a 

limited appearance will be provided by 

the presiding officer if such sessions are 

scheduled. 


khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
90 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2019 / Notices 

B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing) 

All documents filed in NRC 

adjudicatory proceedings, including a 

request for hearing and petition for 

leave to intervene (petition), any motion 

or other document filed in the 

proceeding prior to the submission of a 

request for hearing or petition to 

intervene, and documents filed by 

interested governmental entities that 

request to participate under 10 CFR 

2.315(c), must be filed in accordance 

with the NRC’s E-Filing rule (72 FR 

49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 

77 FR 46562; August 3, 2012). The EFiling process requires participants to 

submit and serve all adjudicatory 

documents over the internet, or in some 

cases to mail copies on electronic 

storage media. Detailed guidance on 

making electronic submissions may be 

found in the Guidance for Electronic 

Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC 

website at 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 

hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone 

at 301–415–1677, to (1) request a digital 

identification (ID) certificate, which 

allows the participant (or its counsel or 

representative) to digitally sign 

submissions and access the E-Filing 

system for any proceeding in which it 

is participating; and (2) advise the 

Secretary that the participant will be 

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 EFiling system time-stamps the document 

and sends the submitter an email notice 

confirming receipt of the document. The 

E-Filing system also distributes an email 

notice that provides access to the 

document to the NRC’s Office of the 

General Counsel and any others who 

have advised the Office of the Secretary 

that they wish to participate in the 

proceeding, so that the filer need not 

serve the document on those 

participants separately. Therefore, 

applicants and other participants (or 

their counsel or representative) must 

apply for and receive a digital ID 

certificate before adjudicatory 

documents are filed so that they can 

obtain access to the documents via the 

E-Filing system. 

A person filing electronically using 

the NRC’s adjudicatory E-Filing system 

may seek assistance by contacting the 

NRC’s Electronic Filing Help Desk 

through the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link located 

on the NRC’s public website at http://

www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html, by email to 

MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a tollfree call at 1–866–672–7640. The NRC 

Electronic Filing Help Desk is available 

between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., Eastern 

Time, Monday through Friday, 

excluding government holidays. 

Participants who believe that they 

have a good cause for not submitting 

documents electronically must file an 

exemption request, in accordance with 

10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper 

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. 

Arizona Public Service Company (APS), 

et al., Docket Nos. STN 50–528, STN 

50–529, and STN 50–530, Palo Verde 

Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS), 

Units 1, 2, and 3, Maricopa County, 

Arizona 

Date of amendment request: July 6, 

2018, as supplemented by letter dated 

October 18, 2018. Publicly-available 

versions are in ADAMS under 

Accession Nos. ML18187A417 and 

ML18296A466, respectively. 

Description of amendment request: 

This amendment request contains 

sensitive unclassified non-safeguards 

information (SUNSI). The amendment 

would revise the Technical 

Specifications for PVNGS, Units 1, 2, 

and 3, to support the implementation of 

Framatome Advanced Combustion 

Engineering 16x16 (CE–16) High 

Thermal Performance (HTPTM) fuel 

design with M5® as a fuel rod cladding 

material and gadolinia as a burnable 

absorber. In addition to this amendment 

request, APS is requesting an exemption 

from certain requirements of 10 CFR 

50.46, ‘‘Acceptance criteria for 

emergency core cooling systems 


khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2019 / Notices 91 

[(ECCS)] for light-water nuclear power 

reactors,’’ and 10 CFR part 50, 

Appendix K, ‘‘ECCS Evaluation 

Models,’’ to allow the use of Framatome 

M5® alloy as a fuel rod cladding 

material. This amendment will adapt 

the approved PVNGS reload analysis 

methodology to address both 

Westinghouse and Framatome fuel, 

including the implementation of 

Framatome methodologies, parameters 

and correlations. The ability to use 

either Westinghouse or Framatome fuel 

will ensure security of the PVNGS fuel 

supply by providing for multiple fuel 

vendors with reliable fuel designs and 

geographically diverse manufacturing 

facilities. 

Basis for proposed no significant 

hazards consideration determination: 

As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the 

licensee has provided its analysis of the 

issue of no significant hazards 

consideration, which is presented 

below: 

1. Does the proposed amendment involve 

a significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed changes establish a 

COPERNIC fuel rod design computer code 

peak fuel centerline temperature safety limit 

for Framatome HTPTM fuel, allows for the use 

of M5® fuel rod cladding material by 

simplifying the TS 4.2.1 list of fuel rod 

cladding materials to the phrase ‘‘zirconiumalloy clad,’’ and updates the TS 5.6.5.b list 

of documents describing the core operating 

limits report (COLR) analytical methods to 

implement Framatome fuel, BHTP critical 

heat flux (CHF) correlation [BHTP 

designation], gadolinia burnable absorber, 

and VIPRE–01 (Versatile lnternals and 

Component Program for Reactors) code 

methodology. 

The requested Technical Specification (TS) 

changes do not involve any plant 

modifications that could affect system 

reliability, component performance, or the 

possibility of operator error. There is a new 

time requirement for an existing operator 

action, but it has been demonstrated to be 

able to be performed successfully well within 

the time requirement. The requested TS 

changes do not affect any postulated accident 

precursors, do not affect any accident 

mitigation systems, and do not introduce any 

new accident initiation methods. The 

response of the Framatome fuel to postulated 

accidents has been analyzed using the 

proposed safety limit, fuel design 

characteristics, and associated 

methodologies. These evaluation results 

show that the fuel response to postulated 

accidents is within applicable acceptance 

criteria. 

Therefore, the proposed changes do not 

involve a significant increase in the 

probability or consequences of an accident 

previously evaluated. 

2. Does the proposed amendment create 

the possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed changes establish a 

COPERNIC peak fuel centerline temperature 

safety limit for Framatome HTPTM fuel, 

allows for the use of M5® fuel rod cladding 

material by simplifying the TS 4.2.1 list of 

fuel rod cladding materials to the phrase 

‘‘zirconium-alloy clad,’’ and updates the TS 

5.6.5.b list of documents describing the 

COLR analytical methods to implement 

Framatome fuel, BHTP CHF Correlation, 

gadolinia burnable absorber, and VIPRE–01 

code methodology. 

Physical changes associated with 

Framatome HTPTM fuel (e.g., M5® cladding, 

fuel assembly spacer grids, gadolinia as a 

burnable absorber, MONOBLOCTM

construction, FUELGUARDTM lower tie plate) 

do not introduce any new accident initiators 

and do not adversely affect the performance 

of any structure, system, or component 

previously credited for accident mitigation. 

Use of Framatome fuel with M5® cladding in 

Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station 

reactor cores is compatible with the plant 

design and does not introduce any new safety 

functions for plant structures, systems, or 

components. The fuel design performs within 

the fuel design limits. 

Therefore, the proposed changes do not 

create the possibility of a new or different 

kind of accident than any previously 

evaluated. 

3. Does the proposed amendment involve 

a significant reduction in a margin of safety? 

Response: No. 

The proposed changes establish a 

COPERNIC peak fuel centerline temperature 

safety limit for Framatome HTPTM fuel, 

allows for the use of M5® fuel rod cladding 

material by simplifying the TS 4.2.1 list of 

fuel rod cladding materials to the phrase 

‘‘zirconium-alloy clad,’’ and updates the TS 

5.6.5.b list of documents describing the 

COLR analytical methods to implement 

Framatome fuel, BHTP CHF Correlation, 

gadolinia burnable absorber, and VIPRE–01 

code methodology. 

The existing TS safety limits for fuel 

supplied by Westinghouse are not being 

changed. The proposed COPERNIC peak fuel 

centerline temperature safety limit provides 

assurance that Framatome HTPTM fuel fission 

product barriers will perform within 

applicable acceptance criteria for normal 

operation, anticipated operational 

occurrences, and postulated accidents. The 

methodology implementing the BHTP CHF 

correlation for Framatome HTPTM fuel 

ensures that the applicable margin of safety 

is maintained (i.e., there is at least 95% 

probability at a 95% confidence level that the 

hot fuel rod in the core will not experience 

departure from nucleate boiling). 

Therefore, the proposed changes do not 

involve a significant reduction in a margin of 

safety. 

The NRC staff has reviewed the 

licensee’s analysis and, based on that 

review, it appears that the three 

standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 

satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff 

proposes to determine that the request 

for amendments involves no significant 

hazards consideration. 

Attorney for licensee: Michael G. 

Green, Senior Regulatory Counsel, 

Pinnacle West Capital Corporation, P.O. 

Box 52034, Mail Station 8695, Phoenix, 

Arizona 85072–2034. 

NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. 

Pascarelli. 

Exelon Generation Company (EGC), 

LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50–456 and STN 

50–457, Braidwood Station (Braidwood), 

Units 1 and 2, Will County, Illinois 

Date of amendment request: July 19, 

2018, as supplemented by letter dated 

October 19, 2018. Publicly-available 

versions are in ADAMS under 

Accession Nos. ML18204A169 and 

ML18296A288, respectively. 

Description of amendment request: 

This amendment request contains 

sensitive unclassified non-safeguards 

information (SUNSI). The amendments 

would add new License Conditions to 

Appendix C, ‘‘Additional Conditions,’’ 

of the Braidwood Operating Licenses for 

Unit 1 and Unit 2, respectively, that 

authorize the use of up to eight Joint 

Stock Company ‘‘TVEL’’ (Fuel Company 

of Rosatom) TVS–K lead test assemblies 

(LTAs) in non-limiting reactor core 

locations for operation and evaluation. 

Basis for proposed no significant 

hazards consideration determination: 

As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the 

licensee has provided its analysis of the 

issue of no significant hazards 

consideration, which is presented 

below: 

1. Does the proposed amendment involve 

a significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change involves only a small 

number of LTAs, which will be designed to 

be compatible from a neutronic, thermalhydraulic, and mechanical standpoint with 

all plant Systems, Structures, and 

Components (SSCs). The fuel pellets and fuel 

rods themselves will have no impact on 

accident initiators or precursors. There will 

not be a significant impact on the operation 

of any plant SSC or on the progression of any 

operational transient or design basis 

accident. There will be no impact on any 

procedure or administrative control designed 

to prevent or mitigate any accident. 

The TVS–K LTAs will be placed in 

nonlimiting core locations. The Braidwood 

Station Unit 1 or Unit 2, [Refueling] Cycle 22, 

23 and 24 reload designs will meet all 

applicable design criteria. Evaluations of the 

TVS–K LTAs will be performed as part of the 

cycle specific reload safety analysis to 

confirm that the acceptance criteria of the 

existing safety analyses will continue to be 

met. A source term specific to the TVS–K 

LTAs will be used to evaluate changes to the 

current source term to ensure that the 


khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
92 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2019 / Notices 

predicted radiological consequences 

continue to meet the applicable acceptance 

criteria. Operation of the TVS–K LTAs will 

not significantly increase the predicted 

radiological consequences of accidents 

currently postulated in the Updated Final 

Safety Analysis Report. 

Based on the above discussion, the 

proposed changes do not involve a 

significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated. 

2. Does the proposed amendment create 

the possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any previously evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change involves the use of 

a small number of TVS–K LTAs which are 

similar to the co-resident fuel, as noted in 

Question 1. The proposed change does not 

change the design function or operation of 

any SSC, and does not introduce any new 

failure mechanism, malfunction, or accident 

initiator not considered in the current design 

and licensing bases. 

The Braidwood Station reactor cores will 

be designed to meet all applicable design and 

licensing basis criteria. Demonstrated 

adherence to these standards and criteria 

precludes new challenges to components and 

systems that could introduce a new type of 

accident. The reload core designs for the 

[refueling] cycles in which the TVS–K LTAs 

will operate (i.e., [Refueling] Cycles 22, 23 

and 24) will demonstrate that the use of the 

TVS–K LTAs in nonlimiting core locations is 

acceptable. The relevant design and 

performance criteria will continue to be met 

and no new single failure mechanisms will 

be created. The use of TVS–K LTAs does not 

involve any alteration to plant equipment or 

procedures that would introduce any new or 

unique operational modes or accident 

precursors. 

Therefore, the proposed change will not 

create the possibility of a new or different 

kind of accident than those previously 

evaluated. 

3. Does the proposed amendment involve 

a significant reduction in a margin of safety? 

Response: No. 

Operation of Braidwood Station Unit 1 or 

Unit 2 with up to eight TVEL TVS–K LTAs, 

placed in nonlimiting core locations, does 

not change the performance requirements on 

any system or component such that any 

design criteria will be exceeded. The current 

limits on core operation defined in the 

Braidwood Station Technical Specifications 

are applicable to the subject LTAs during 

[Refueling] Cycles 22, 23 and 24. The 

Westinghouse analytical codes and methods 

used for currently licensed fuel design and 

reload analysis will be used to confirm that 

the TVS–K LTAs will not have a significant 

adverse impact on the resident Westinghouse 

fuel. 

With respect to non-fuel SSCs, the safety 

limit, limiting safety system setting, limiting 

condition of operation, instrument setpoint, 

and other design criteria will continue to be 

met. 

Based on this evaluation, the proposed 

change does not involve a significant 

reduction in a margin of safety. 

Based on the above, EGC concludes that 

the proposed amendment does not involve a 

significant hazards consideration under the 

standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92, and 

accordingly, a finding of ‘‘no significant 

hazards consideration’’ is justified. 

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 

Nuclear, 4300 Winfield Road, 

Warrenville, Illinois 60555. 

NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona. 

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, 

Inc., Docket Nos. 52–025 and 52–026, 

Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP), 

Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia 

Date of amendment request: 

September 28, 2018. A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under 

Accession No. ML18271A116. 

Description of amendment request: 

This amendment request contains 

sensitive unclassified non-safeguards 

information (SUNSI). The amendment 

request proposes changes to the VEGP 

Units 3 and 4 Combined License (COL) 

Physical Security Plan (PSP) and to a 

plant-specific emergency planning 

inspections, tests, analyses, and 

acceptance criteria (ITAAC) in 

Appendix C of the VEGP Unit 4 COL. 

Specifically, the amendment request 

proposes changes to Appendix E of the 

VEGP Units 3 and 4 COL PSP to 

describe the Transitional Security 

Measures (TSMs) that would be 

implemented in the event that Unit 3 is 

ready to load fuel and begin operation 

with a contiguous Protected Area 

boundary and vehicle barrier system 

and a secure boundary is needed 

between Units 3 and 4. 

Basis for proposed no significant 

hazards consideration determination: 

As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the 

licensee has provided its analysis of the 

issue of no significant hazards 

consideration, which is presented 

below: 

1. Does the proposed amendment involve 

a significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed changes to implement TSMs 

on the western boundary of Unit 3 do not 

involve any new accident. The changes do 

not affect the operation of any systems or 

equipment that initiate an analyzed accident 

or alter any structures, systems, or 

components (SSCs) accident initiator or 

initiating sequence of events. The changes do 

not impact the design, construction, or 

operation of any mechanical and fluid 

systems. There is no change to plant systems 

or the response of systems to postulated 

accident conditions. There is no change to 

the predicted radioactive releases due to 

postulated accident conditions. 

Consequently, the plant response to 

previously evaluated accidents or external 

events is not adversely affected, nor do the 

proposed changes create any new accident 

precursors. 

The VEGP Unit 4 COL Appendix C 

Emergency Planning ITAAC provide 

assurance that the facility has been 

constructed and will be operated in 

conformity with the license, the provisions of 

the Act, and the Commission’s rules and 

regulations. The proposed change to the 

VEGP Unit 4 COL Appendix C Emergency 

Planning ITAAC Table E.3.9–5 item No. 852 

does not affect the design of a system, 

structure, or component (SSC) used to meet 

the design bases of the nuclear plant. Nor 

does the change affect the construction or 

operation of the nuclear plant itself, so there 

is no change to the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated. Changing the VEGP Unit 4 COL 

Appendix C Emergency Planning ITAAC 

Table E.3.9–5 item No. 852 does not affect 

prevention and mitigation of abnormal events 

(e.g., accidents, anticipated operational 

occurrences, earthquakes, floods, or turbine 

missiles) or their safety or design analyses. 

No safety-related SSC or function is 

adversely affected. The change does not 

involve or interface with any SSC accident 

initiator or initiating sequence of events, so 

the probabilities of the accidents evaluated in 

the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report 

(UFSAR) are not affected. 

Because the change does not involve any 

safety-related SSC or function used to 

mitigate an accident, the consequences of the 

accidents evaluated in the UFSAR are not 

affected. Therefore, the proposed amendment 

does not involve a significant increase in the 

probability or consequences of an accident 

previously evaluated. 

2. Does the proposed amendment create 

the possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed changes do not affect the 

operation of any systems or equipment that 

may initiate a new or different kind of 

accident, or alter any SSC such that a new 

accident initiator or initiating sequence of 

events is created. Therefore, the proposed 

amendment does not create the possibility of 

a new or different kind of accident from any 

accident previously evaluated. 

3. Does the proposed amendment involve 

a significant reduction in a margin of safety? 

Response: No. 

The proposed changes to implement TSMs 

on the western boundary of Unit 3 do not 

alter any safety-related equipment, applicable 

design codes, code compliance, design 

function, or safety analysis. Consequently, no 

safety analysis or design basis acceptance 

limit/criterion is challenged or exceeded by 

the proposed changes, thus the margin of 

safety is not reduced. The added barriers are 

designed, constructed, and controlled in 

accordance with applicable regulations. 


khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2019 / Notices 93 

1While 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. 

2Any motion for Protective Order or draft NonDisclosure Affidavit or Agreement for SUNSI must 

be filed with the presiding officer or the Chief 

Administrative Judge if the presiding officer has not 

yet been designated, within 30 days of the deadline 

for the receipt of the written access request. 

The revision to VEGP Unit 4 COL 

Appendix C Emergency Planning ITAAC 

Table E.3.9–5 item No. 852 does not 

adversely affect safety-related equipment or 

fission product barriers. No safety analysis or 

design basis acceptance limit or criterion is 

challenged or exceeded by the proposed 

change. 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: Kathryn M. 

Sutton, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLC, 

1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 

Washington, DC 20004–2514. 

NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer L. DixonHerrity. 

Order Imposing Procedures for Access 

to Sensitive Unclassified NonSafeguards Information for Contention 

Preparation 

Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, 

Units 1, 2, and 3, Maricopa County, 

Arizona 

Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2, Will 

County, Illinois 

Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 

and 4, Burke County, Georgia 

Order Imposing Procedures for Access 

to Sensitive Unclassified NonSafeguards Information for Contention 

Preparation 

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 Hearing.Docket@

nrc.gov and 

RidsOgcMailCenter.Resource@nrc.gov, 

respectively.1 The request must include 

the following information: 

(1) A description of the licensing 

action with a citation to this Federal 

Register notice; 

(2) The name and address of the 

potential party and a description of the 

potential party’s particularized interest 

that could be harmed by the action 

identified in C.(1); and 

(3) The identity of the individual or 

entity requesting access to SUNSI and 

the requester’s basis for the need for the 

information in order to meaningfully 

participate in this adjudicatory 

proceeding. In particular, the request 

must explain why publicly available 

versions of the information requested 

would not be sufficient to provide the 

basis and specificity for a proffered 

contention. 

D. Based on an evaluation of the 

information submitted under paragraph 

C.(3) the NRC staff will determine 

within 10 days of receipt of the request 

whether: 

(1) There is a reasonable basis to 

believe the petitioner is likely to 

establish standing to participate in this 

NRC proceeding; and 

(2) The requestor has established a 

legitimate need for access to SUNSI. 

E. If the NRC staff determines that the 

requestor satisfies both D.(1) and D.(2) 

above, the NRC staff will notify the 

requestor in writing that access to 

SUNSI has been granted. The written 

notification will contain instructions on 

how the requestor may obtain copies of 

the requested documents, and any other 

conditions that may apply to access to 

those documents. These conditions may 

include, but are not limited to, the 

signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement 

or Affidavit, or Protective Order 2 setting 

forth terms and conditions to prevent 

the unauthorized or inadvertent 

disclosure of SUNSI by each individual 

who will be granted access to SUNSI. 

F. Filing of Contentions. Any 

contentions in these proceedings that 

are based upon the information received 

as a result of the request made for 

SUNSI must be filed by the requestor no 

later than 25 days after receipt of (or 

access to) that information. However, if 

more than 25 days remain between the 

petitioner’s receipt of (or access to) the 

information and the deadline for filing 

all other contentions (as established in 

the notice of hearing or opportunity for 

hearing), the petitioner may file its 

SUNSI contentions by that later 

deadline. 

G. Review of Denials of Access. 

(1) If the request for access to SUNSI 

is denied by the NRC staff after a 

determination on standing and requisite 

need, the NRC staff shall immediately 

notify the requestor in writing, briefly 

stating the reason or reasons for the 

denial. 

(2) The requester may challenge the 

NRC staff’s adverse determination by 

filing a challenge within 5 days of 

receipt of that determination with: (a) 

The presiding officer designated in this 

proceeding; (b) if no presiding officer 

has been appointed, the Chief 

Administrative Judge, or if he or she is 

unavailable, another administrative 

judge, or an Administrative Law Judge 

with jurisdiction pursuant to 10 CFR 

2.318(a); or (c) if another officer has 

been designated to rule on information 

access issues, with that officer. 

(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 


khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES
94 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 5 / Tuesday, January 8, 2019 / Notices 

3Requesters 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. 

procedures give way to the normal 

process for litigating disputes 

concerning access to information. The 

availability of interlocutory review by 

the Commission of orders ruling on 

such NRC staff determinations (whether 

granting or denying access) is governed 

by 10 CFR 2.311.3

I. The Commission expects that the 

NRC staff and presiding officers (and 

any other reviewing officers) will 

consider and resolve requests for access 

to SUNSI, and motions for protective 

orders, in a timely fashion in order to 

minimize any unnecessary delays in 

identifying those petitioners who have 

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 13th day 

of December 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. 

[FR Doc. 2018–27393 Filed 1–7–19; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 

[Disaster Declaration #15845 and #15846; 

VIRGINIA Disaster Number VA–00079] 

Presidential Declaration of a Major 

Disaster for Public Assistance Only for 

the Commonwealth of Virginia 

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business 

Administration. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the 

Presidential declaration of a major 

disaster for Public Assistance Only for 

the Commonwealth of VIRGINIA 

(FEMA–4411–DR), dated 12/18/2018. 

Incident: Tropical Storm Michael. 

Incident Period: 10/09/2018 through 

10/16/2018. 

DATES: Issued on 12/18/2018. 

Physical Loan Application Deadline 

Date: 02/19/2019. 

Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan 

Application Deadline Date: 09/18/2019. 

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan 

applications to: U.S. Small Business 

Administration, Processing and 

Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 

Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. 

Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, 

U.S. Small Business Administration, 

409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, 

Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205–6734. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is 

hereby given that as a result of the 

President’s major disaster declaration on 

12/18/2018, Private Non-Profit 

organizations that provide essential 

services of a governmental nature may 

file disaster loan applications at the 

address listed above or other locally 

announced locations. 

The following areas have been 

determined to be adversely affected by 

the disaster: 

Primary Counties: Amelia, Appomattox, 

Brunswick, Campbell, Charlotte, 

Chesterfield, Cumberland, Danville 


khammond on DSK30JT082PROD with NOTICES