Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 219 / Monday, November 15, 2010 / Notices 69709 

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 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, 

Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 

11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking 

and Adjudications Staff. Participants 

filing a document 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 NRC’s 

electronic hearing docket which is 

available to the public at http://ehd.nrc.

gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp, unless 

excluded pursuant to an order of the 

Commission, or the presiding officer. 

Participants are requested not to include 

personal privacy information, such as 

social security numbers, home 

addresses, or home phone numbers in 

their filings, unless an NRC regulation 

or other law requires submission of such 

information. 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. 

Petitions for leave to intervene must 

be filed no later than 60 days from the 

date of publication of this notice. Nontimely filings will not be entertained 

absent a determination by the presiding 

officer that the petition or request 

should be granted or the contentions 

should be admitted, based on a 

balancing of the factors specified in 10 

CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)–(viii). 

The Commission hereby provides 

notice that this is a proceeding on an 

application for a license amendment 

falling within the scope of section 134 

of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 

(NWPA), 42 U.S.C. 10154. Under 

section 134 of the NWPA, the 

Commission, at the request of any party 

to the proceeding, must use hybrid 

hearing procedures with respect to ‘‘any 

matter which the Commission 

determines to be in controversy among 

the parties.’’ 

The hybrid procedures in section 134 

provide for oral argument on matters in 

controversy, preceded by discovery 

under the Commission’s rules and the 

designation, following argument of only 

those factual issues that involve a 

genuine and substantial dispute, 

together with any remaining questions 

of law, to be resolved in an adjudicatory 

hearing. Actual adjudicatory hearings 

are to be held on only those issues 

found to meet the criteria of section 134 

and set for hearing after oral argument. 

The Commission’s rules 

implementing section 134 of the NWPA 

are found in 10 CFR part 2, subpart K, 

‘‘Hybrid Hearing Procedures for 

Expansion of Spent Fuel Storage 

Capacity at Civilian Nuclear Power 

Reactors.’’ Under those rules, any party 

to the proceeding may invoke the hybrid 

hearing procedures by filing with the 

presiding officer a written request for 

oral argument under 10 CFR 2.1109. To 

be timely, the request must be filed 

together with a request for hearing/ 

petition to intervene, filed in 

accordance with 10 CFR 2.309. If it is 

determined a hearing will be held, the 

presiding officer must grant a timely 

request for oral argument. The presiding 

officer may grant an untimely request 

for oral argument only upon a showing 

of good cause by the requesting party for 

the failure to file on time and after 

providing the other parties an 

opportunity to respond to the untimely 

request. If the presiding officer grants a 

request for oral argument, any hearing 

held on the application must be 

conducted in accordance with the 

hybrid hearing procedures. In essence, 

those procedures limit the time 

available for discovery and require that 

an oral argument be held to determine 

whether any contentions must be 

resolved in an adjudicatory hearing. If 

no party to the proceeding timely 

requests oral argument, and if all 

untimely requests for oral argument are 

denied, then the usual procedures in 10 

CFR part 2, subpart L apply. 

For further details with respect to this 

license amendment application, see the 

application for amendment dated 

January 6, 2010, as supplemented by 

letters dated August 20 and October 14, 

2010, which are available for public 

inspection at the Commission’s PDR, 

located at One White Flint North, Room 

O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 

floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly 

available records will be accessible 

electronically from the ADAMS Public 

Electronic Reading Room on the Internet 

at the NRC Web site, http:// 

www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. 

Persons who do not have access to 

ADAMS or who encounter problems in 

accessing the documents located in 

ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR 

Reference staff by telephone at 1–800– 

397–4209, or 301–415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 

Attorney for licensee: Mr. Bradley J. 

Fewell, Associate General Counsel, 

Exelon Nuclear, 4300 Winfield Road, 

Warrenville, IL 60555. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day 

of November 2010. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Eva A. Brown, 

Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing 

Branch III–2, Division of Operating Reactor 

Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 2010–28635 Filed 11–12–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[NRC–2010–0184] 

Office of New Reactors; Notice of 

Availability of the Final Staff Guidance; 

Standard Review Plan, Section 13.6.6, 

Revision 0 on Cyber Security Plan 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC). 

ACTION: Notice of Availability. 

SUMMARY: The NRC is issuing its Final 

Revision 0 to NUREG–0800, ‘‘Standard 

Review Plan (SRP) for the Review of 

Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear 

Power Plants,’’ Section 13.6.6, Revision 

0 on ‘‘Cyber Security Plan’’ (Agencywide 

Documents Access and Management 

System (ADAMS) Accession No. 

ML102630477). The NRC staff issues 

revisions to SRP sections to facilitate 

timely implementation of the current 

staff guidance and to facilitate reviews 

to amendments to licenses for operating 

reactors or for activities associated with 

review of applications for early site 

permits and combined licenses for the 

Office of New Reactors. The NRC staff 

will also incorporate Revision 0 of SRP 

Section 13.6.6 into the next revisions of 

the Regulatory Guide 1.206, ‘‘Combined 

License Applications for Nuclear Power 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
69710 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 219 / Monday, November 15, 2010 / Notices 

Plants,’’ and related guidance 

documents. 

Disposition: On May 13, 2010, the 

NRC staff issued the proposed Revision 

0 on SRP Section 13.6.6 on ‘‘Cyber 

Security Plan,’’ ADAMS Accession No. 

ML093560837. There were comments 

received on the proposed guidance 

(ADAMS Accession No. ML101810249). 

These comments were incorporated as 

appropriate and the details of 

disposition of the stakeholder’s 

comments are available under ADAMS 

Accession No. ML102590155. 

ADDRESSES: The NRC maintains 

ADAMS, which provides text and image 

files of NRC’s public documents. These 

documents may be accessed through the 

NRC’s Public Electronic Reading Room 

on the Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/ 

reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who 

do not have access to ADAMS or who 

encounter problems in accessing the 

documents located in ADAMS should 

contact the NRC Public Document Room 

reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301– 

415–4737, or by e-mail at 

pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

William F. Burton, Chief, Rulemaking 

and Guidance Development Branch, 

Division of New Reactor Licensing, 

Office of New Reactors, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555–0001; telephone at 301–415– 

6332 or e-mail at 

william.burton@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The NRC 

posts its issued staff guidance on the 

NRC external Web page (http:// 

www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/isg/). 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day 

of November 2010. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

William F. Burton, 

Chief, Rulemaking and Guidance 

Development Branch, Division of New Reactor 

Licensing, Office of New Reactors. 

[FR Doc. 2010–28634 Filed 11–12–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 50–302; NRC–2010–0105] 

Florida Power Corporation, et al.; 

Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear 

Generating Plant Environmental 

Assessment and Finding of No 

Significant Impact 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is considering 

issuance of an exemption, pursuant to 

Title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (10 CFR) Section 73.5, 

‘‘Specific exemptions,’’ from the 

implementation date for certain new 

requirements of 10 CFR part 73, 

‘‘Physical protection of plants and 

materials,’’ for Facility Operating 

License No. DPR 72 issued to Florida 

Power Corporation (the licensee), for 

operation of the Crystal River Unit 3 

Nuclear Generating Plant (CR–3), 

located in Citrus County, Florida. In 

accordance with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC 

prepared an environmental assessment 

documenting its finding. The NRC 

concluded that the proposed actions 

will have no significant environmental 

impact. 

Environmental Assessment 

Identification of the Proposed Action 

The proposed action would exempt 

the licensee from the required 

implementation date of March 31, 2010, 

for four new requirements of 10 CFR 

part 73. Specifically, CR–3 would be 

granted a second exemption, further 

extending the date for full compliance 

with four new requirements contained 

in 10 CFR 73.55, from November 15 and 

December 15 (the dates specified in a 

prior exemption granted by NRC on 

March 25, 2010), until December 15, 

2011 and March 15, 2012, respectively. 

The licensee has proposed an alternate 

full compliance implementation date of 

March 15, 2012, which is approximately 

2 years beyond the compliance date 

required by 10 CFR part 73. The 

proposed action, an extension of the 

schedule for completion of certain 

actions required by the revised 10 CFR 

part 73, does not involve any physical 

changes to the reactor, fuel, plant 

structures, support structures, water, or 

land at the CR–3 site. 

The proposed action is in accordance 

with the licensee’s application dated 

September 8, 2010. 

The Need for the Proposed Action 

The proposed second scheduler 

exemption is needed to provide the 

licensee with additional time, beyond 

the previously approved by the NRC 

letter dated March 25, 2010, to 

implement four specific elements of the 

new requirements that involve 

significant physical upgrades to the CR– 

3 security system. The schedules used 

in the original scheduler exemption 

were based on the conceptual design 

information available to the licensee at 

the time of the submittal. At this time, 

the licensee has fully developed the 

design and has completed the discovery 

phase. Therefore, due to the unforeseen 

need for design changes necessary to 

achieve full compliance with the Final 

Rule, additional time is needed to 

complete the complex revised design 

and construction and associated 

analysis. 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed 

Action 

The NRC has completed its 

environmental assessment of the 

proposed exemption. The NRC staff has 

concluded that the proposed action to 

further extend the implementation 

deadline for two items would not 

significantly affect plant safety and 

would not have a significant adverse 

effect on the probability of an accident 

occurring. 

The proposed action would not result 

in an increased radiological hazard 

beyond those hazards previously 

analyzed in the environmental 

assessment and finding of no significant 

impact made by the Commission in 

promulgating its revisions to 10 CFR 

part 73 as discussed in a Federal 

Register notice dated March 27, 2009; 

74 FR 13926. There will be no change 

to radioactive effluents that affect 

radiation exposures to plant workers 

and members of the public. Therefore, 

no changes or different types of 

radiological impacts are expected as a 

result of the proposed exemption. 

The proposed action does not result 

in changes to land use or water use, or 

result in changes to the quality or 

quantity of nonradiological effluents. No 

changes to the National Pollution 

Discharge Elimination System permit 

are needed. No effects on the aquatic or 

terrestrial habitat in the vicinity of the 

plant, or to threatened, endangered, or 

protected species under the Endangered 

Species Act, or impacts to essential fish 

habitat covered by the MagnusonStevens Act are expected. There are no 

impacts to the air or ambient air quality. 

There are no impacts to historical and 

cultural resources. There would be no 

impact to socioeconomic resources. 

Therefore, no changes to or different 

types of nonradiological environmental 

impacts are expected as a result of the 

proposed exemption. 

Accordingly, the NRC concludes that 

there are no significant environmental 

impacts associated with the proposed 

action. In addition, in promulgating its 

revisions to 10 CFR part 73, the 

Commission prepared an environmental 

assessment and published a finding of 

no significant impact [Part 73, Power 

Reactor Security Requirements, March 

27, 2009; 74 FR 13926]. 

With its request to extend the 

implementation deadline, the licensee 

currently maintains a security system 

acceptable to the NRC and that will 

continue to provide acceptable physical 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES