38732 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 152 / Tuesday, August 7, 2018 / Notices 

appropriate, limit its review to assessing 

whether the application of the digital 

I&C modification falls within the 

envelope of the topical report approval. 

This ISG was developed based upon, 

and is designed to work in concert with, 

established guidance. As a result, this 

ISG references other guidance 

documents for review criteria. 

The NRC staff performs evaluations of 

proposed digital I&C equipment to 

ensure equipment will perform required 

functions. These evaluations use the 

guidance in the Standard Review Plan, 

Chapter 7, and other associated 

guidance. When a license amendment is 

required, licensees are obligated to 

provide a description of the licensing 

basis functions of digital I&C equipment 

and include a description of the 

equipment that implements the 

functions. Additionally, licensees 

identify those parts of the licensing 

basis being updated as a result of the 

proposed change. 

The NRC staff review processes 

include activities for evaluating 

documentation of plans and processes 

which are used to support system 

development activities and their 

outcomes. 

The Standard Review Plan, Appendix 

7.0–A, and Branch Technical Position 

7–14, guide the NRC staff in performing 

reviews of digital systems in support of 

safety evaluations. For reviews using the 

Alternate Process as defined in the ISG, 

the ISG provides additional guidance for 

performing early stage reviews of digital 

safety-related systems in support of 

safety evaluations. The NRC staff may 

review the system design and 

development process to support a 

determination that the design meets 

regulatory requirements and that in 

safety-related applications in nuclear 

power plants, the process is of sufficient 

high quality to produce systems and 

software suitable for use. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day 

of August 2018. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Eric J. Benner, 

Director, Division of Engineering, Office of 

Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 2018–16810 Filed 8–6–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[NRC–2018–0139] 

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 one amendment 

request. The amendment request is for 

Millstone Power Station, Unit No. 3. For 

each amendment request, the NRC 

proposes to determine that they involve 

no significant hazards consideration. 

Because each amendment request 

contains sensitive unclassified nonsafeguards information (SUNSI), an 

order imposes procedures to obtain 

access to SUNSI for contention 

preparation. 

DATES: Comments must be filed by 

September 6, 2018. A request for a 

hearing must be filed by October 9, 

2018. 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 August 17, 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–2018–0139. Address 

questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer 

Borges; telephone: 301–287–9127; 

email: Jennifer.Borges@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: 

Paula Blechman, Office of Nuclear 

Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 

20555–0001; telephone: 301–415–2242; 

email: Paula.Blechman@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Obtaining Information and 

Submitting Comments 

A. Obtaining Information 

Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2018– 

0139, 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–2018–0139. 

• 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 

‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then 

select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS 

Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, 

please contact the NRC’s Public 

Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 

1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by 

email to 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– 

0139, 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 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 152 / Tuesday, August 7, 2018 / Notices 38733 

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 notice of an 

amendment 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 request involves 

no significant hazards consideration. 

Under the Commission’s regulations in 

10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation 

of the facility in accordance with the 

proposed amendment would not (1) 

involve a significant increase in the 

probability or consequences of an 

accident previously evaluated, or (2) 

create the possibility of a new or 

different kind of accident from any 

accident previously evaluated, or (3) 

involve a significant reduction in a 

margin of safety. The basis for this 

proposed determination for each 

amendment request is shown below. 

The Commission is seeking public 

comments on this proposed 

determination. Any comments received 

within 30 days after the date of 

publication of this notice will be 

considered in making any final 

determination. 

Normally, the Commission will not 

issue the amendment until the 

expiration of 60 days after the date of 

publication of this notice. The 

Commission may issue the license 

amendment before expiration of the 60- 

day period provided that its final 

determination is that the amendment 

involves no significant hazards 

consideration. In addition, the 

Commission may issue the amendment 

prior to the expiration of the 30-day 

comment period if circumstances 

change during the 30-day comment 

period such that failure to act in a 

timely way would result, for example, 

in derating or shutdown of the facility. 

If the Commission takes action prior to 

the expiration of either the comment 

period or the notice period, it will 

publish a notice of issuance in the 

Federal Register. If the Commission 

makes a final no significant hazards 

consideration determination, any 

hearing will take place after issuance. 

The Commission expects that the need 

to take this action will occur very 

infrequently. 

A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing 

and Petition for Leave To Intervene 

Within 60 days after the date of 

publication of this notice, any persons 

(petitioner) whose interest may be 

affected by this action may file a request 

for a hearing and petition for leave to 

intervene (petition) with respect to the 

action. Petitions shall be filed in 

accordance with the Commission’s 

‘‘Agency Rules of Practice and 

Procedure’’ in 10 CFR part 2. Interested 

persons should consult a current copy 

of 10 CFR 2.309. The NRC’s regulations 

are accessible electronically from the 

NRC Library on the NRC’s website at 

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/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 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
38734 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 152 / Tuesday, August 7, 2018 / Notices 

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. 

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 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 152 / Tuesday, August 7, 2018 / Notices 38735 

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. 

Dominion Energy Nuclear Connecticut, 

Inc. (DENC), Docket No. 50–423, 

Millstone Power Station, Unit No. 3 

(MPS3), New London County, 

Connecticut 

Date of amendment request: May 3, 

2018. A publicly-available version is in 

ADAMS under Accession No. 

ML18128A049. 

Description of amendment request: 

This amendment request contains 

sensitive unclassified non-safeguards 

information (SUNSI). The amendment 

would revise the MPS3 Technical 

Specifications (TSs). DENC performed a 

criticality safety evaluation for fuel 

assembly storage in the MPS3 spent fuel 

pool (SFP) storage racks and new fuel 

storage racks to support the proposed 

TS changes using a new methodology. 

Specifically, the proposed amendment 

would revise the MPS3 TSs supporting 

changes to the operation and 

administration of the SFP to (1) modify 

storage requirements in TSs 1.40, 1.41, 

3/4.9.13 and 3/4.9.14, including updates 

to surveillance requirements for storing 

fuel assemblies and TS Figures detailing 

storage patterns and minimum fuel 

burnup versus fuel enrichment; (2) 

eliminate the requirement for cell 

blockers in Region 1 fuel storage racks; 

(3) modify SFP soluble boron 

requirements in 3/4.9.1.2; and (4) 

modify the description of SFP criticality 

control in TS 5.6.1.1. 

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 does not involve a 

significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated. 

The proposed change will not affect plant 

equipment or structure, including the SFP, 

NFSR [new fuel storage racks], or fuel 

handling equipment, including how the 

equipment is operated and maintained. There 

are no changes to the equipment for fuel 

handling or how fuel assemblies are handled, 

including how fuel assemblies are inserted 

into and removed from SFP and NFSR 

storage locations. There is no change to 

administrative means to verify correct fuel 

assembly storage in the SFP, or the required 

response to a fuel assembly misload or drop 

event. There are no changes to how RCCAs 

[rod cluster control assemblies] will be 

handled, including how RCCAs are inserted 

into or removed from a fuel assembly or other 

location such as a SFP storage location. Also, 

since the proposed change does not modify 

plant equipment or its operation and 

maintenance, including equipment used to 

maintain SFP soluble boron levels, the 

proposed change will not impact a boron 

dilution event or plant response to it. 

The criticality safety evaluation concluded 

that the NFSR limiting accident is the fully 

flooded condition with each storage location 

loaded with a maximum reactivity fuel 

assembly. The NFSR maintains [k-effective] 

keff ≤ 0.95 for this postulated scenario 

including uncertainties and biases. The 

NFSR also maintains keff ≤ 0.98 for the 

optimum moderation scenario including 

uncertainties and biases. Thus, the 

consequences of a previously evaluated 

NFSR related accident is not significantly 

increased. There is no change to the plant 

equipment or its operation and maintenance 

due to the proposed change. Thus, the 

probability of a flooding accident that could 

impact the NFSR is not significantly 

increased. 

Regarding the SFP, the Region 1 storage 

configuration will change. The Region 2 and 

3 burnup curves will be updated and reduced 

in number. The process of choosing fuel 

assembly storage locations will not change, 

except that the Region 1 storage configuration 

and Region 2 and 3 burnup requirements will 

be updated, and fuel assemblies containing 

RCCAs may be stored in Region 2 without 

consideration of the burnup curve. The 

physical handling, insertion, removal, and 

storage of fuel assemblies in SFP racks will 

not change. The MPS3 program for choosing 

fuel assembly storage locations, for fuel 

handling, and for assuring that the fuel 

assemblies are placed into correct locations 

will remain in place. Thus, the probability of 

a fuel assembly misloading or a fuel assembly 

drop in the SFP will not significantly 

increase due to the proposed change. 

Several postulated accidents for the SFP 

were reviewed for the proposed change 

which included postulated fuel assembly 

misload and drop scenarios. The criticality 

safety evaluation for the SFP concluded that 

the limiting accident, which bounds the 

other scenarios, is a multiple misload of fuel 

assemblies into each Region 2 fuel storage 

location. The criticality safety evaluation 

concluded that a SFP soluble boron 

concentration of 2600 ppm [part per million] 

will maintain keff ≤ 0.95, including 

uncertainties and biases, for this postulated 

scenario. The minimum TS soluble boron 

concentration will be increased from 800 

ppm to 2600 ppm. MPS3 has maintained SFP 

soluble boron concentration greater than 

2600 ppm for many years, so the proposed 

change will not affect the routine 

maintaining of the boron concentration. 

There are no changes to plant equipment, 

including its operation and maintenance, as 

a result of the proposed change, including 

equipment associated with maintaining SFP 

soluble boron concentration or possible flow 

paths that could contribute to a boron 

dilution event. Thus, no new avenues for a 

boron dilution event will be created. There 

is no change regarding how the plant 

maintains boron concentration or responds to 

a boron dilution event. The criticality safety 

evaluation for the postulated boron dilution 

event shows the SFP maintains keff ≤ 0.95 at 

600 ppm soluble boron. Thus, there is no 

significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of a boron dilution accident. 

The MPS3 SFP is currently licensed to 

store 1860 fuel assemblies which include a 

Region 2 rack that has not been placed in the 

SFP (TS 5.6.3). 

Thus, the SFP seismic/structural loading 

requirements for the proposed change are 

bounded by the existing TS. The criticality 

safety evaluation shows that keff will be 

maintained ≤ 0.95 during a postulated 

seismic event. Thus, there is no increase in 

the consequences of a seismic event. 

In each of the above scenarios the proposed 

change does not significantly increase the 

probability of an accident previously 

evaluated, and maintains required keff

margin. Therefore, it is concluded that the 

probability or consequences of a previously 

evaluated accident do not significantly 

increase. 

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 does not create the 

possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any accident previously 

evaluated. 

There is no change to any plant equipment, 

including how equipment is operated and 

maintained. There will be no changes to 

equipment used to handle fuel assemblies (or 

any heavy load) over the NFSR or the SFP. 

There is no change regarding how the fuel 

assemblies are stored, inserted into, and 

removed from fuel storage locations. There is 

no change to how RCCAs will be inserted 

into or removed from a fuel assembly or other 

location, or otherwise how RCCAs are 

handled. Thus, there are no new accidents 

created over and above the existing 

postulated accidents of a fuel misload or a 

fuel assembly drop in the SFP or a flooding 

event in the NFSR area. 

Also, since there is no change to the plant 

equipment or how equipment is operated and 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
38736 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 152 / Tuesday, August 7, 2018 / Notices 

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. 

maintained, the probability of a new type of 

accident that could impact the SFP or NFSR 

is not significantly increased. 

The criticality safety evaluation for the first 

time at MPS3 specifically analyzes a boron 

dilution event. However, the overall accident 

analyzed is the potential for a SFP criticality, 

and the boron dilution event is another 

potential initiator of the postulated SFP 

criticality accident. Also, the possibility of a 

SFP boron dilution event has always existed 

at MPS3 and the proposed change does not 

newly create or change the possibility of such 

an event occurring. 

The criticality safety evaluation for the first 

time at MPS3 specifically analyzes a multiple 

fuel misload event. As with the postulated 

boron dilution event, the possibility of a 

multiple fuel assembly misload has always 

existed at MPS3 and the proposed change 

does not newly create or change the 

possibility of such an event occurring. Also, 

this postulated event was analyzed for the 

MPS2 spent fuel pool criticality LAR [license 

amendment request] which the NRC 

approved in June 2016 [Reference 3 of the 

application dated May 3, 2018]. 

Since the proposed change will not change 

fuel/RCCA handling equipment or how fuel 

assemblies and RCCAs are handled and 

stored, nor will it change any other plant 

equipment, there is no mechanism for 

creating a new or different kind of accident 

not previously evaluated. 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 the margin of safety? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change does not involve a 

significant reduction in a margin of safety. 

The licensing requirement for the SFP is 

that keff remain ≤ 0.95 under normal and 

postulated accident conditions with credit 

for soluble boron. The criticality safety 

evaluation concluded that this requirement is 

met for the bounding postulated accident of 

a multiple misload of fuel assemblies into 

each Region 2 fuel storage location. The 

analyses apply to all of the fuel assemblies 

currently stored in the MPS3 SFP and to 

future anticipated fuel designs. 

In addition, the criticality safety evaluation 

concludes that the SFP will maintain keff < 

1.0 with 0 ppm soluble boron in the SFP 

under normal conditions with the maximum 

allowed reactivity fuel assembly stored in 

each fuel storage location. 

The criticality safety evaluation also allows 

the following storage configurations. In each 

case the storage configuration does not 

increase reactivity assuring that keff margin is 

maintained: 

• Storing non-fuel components in any 

spent fuel rack storage location where fuel 

assemblies are allowed 

• Storing non-fuel components in the 

guide tubes of any fuel assembly. 

The criticality safety evaluation evaluated 

non-standard fuel stored in the MPS3 to 

determine where they can be stored in the 

SFP. This information is used to maintain keff

margin when storing non standard fuel 

assemblies. 

The licensing requirement for the NFSR is 

that keff remain ≤ 0.95 for the fully flooded 

scenario, and ≤ 0.98 for the optimum 

moderation scenario. 

The criticality safety evaluation concludes 

that these requirements are met assuming 

each fuel storage location is loaded with a 

maximum reactivity fuel assembly (5.0 wt% 

U–235 enrichment with no burnable 

poisons). 

Therefore, all the margins of safety are 

maintained, and 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: Lillian M. 

Cuoco, Senior Counsel, Dominion 

Energy, Inc., 120 Tredegar Street, RS–2, 

Richmond, Virginia 23219. 

NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna. 

Order Imposing Procedures for Access 

to Sensitive Unclassified NonSafeguards Information for Contention 

Preparation 

Dominion Energy Nuclear Connecticut, 

Inc., Docket No. 50–423, Millstone 

Power Station, Unit No. 3, New London 

County, Connecticut 

A. This Order contains instructions 

regarding how potential parties to this 

proceeding may request access to 

documents containing Sensitive 

Unclassified Non-Safeguards 

Information (SUNSI). 

B. Within 10 days after publication of 

this notice of hearing and opportunity to 

petition for leave to intervene, any 

potential party who believes access to 

SUNSI is necessary to respond to this 

notice may request access to SUNSI. A 

‘‘potential party’’ is any person who 

intends to participate as a party by 

demonstrating standing and filing an 

admissible contention under 10 CFR 

2.309. Requests for access to SUNSI 

submitted later than 10 days after 

publication of this notice will not be 

considered absent a showing of good 

cause for the late filing, addressing why 

the request could not have been filed 

earlier. 

C. The requester shall submit a letter 

requesting permission to access SUNSI 

to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention: 

Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, 

and provide a copy to the Associate 

General Counsel for Hearings, 

Enforcement and Administration, Office 

of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555–0001. The expedited delivery 

or courier mail address for both offices 

is: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Maryland 20852. The email address for 

the Office of the Secretary and the 

Office of the General Counsel are 

Hearing.Docket@nrc.gov and 

OGCmailcenter@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 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 152 / Tuesday, August 7, 2018 / Notices 38737 

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. 

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 

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 6th of 

July 2018. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Russell E. Chazell, 

Acting, 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. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
38738 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 152 / Tuesday, August 7, 2018 / Notices 

1 12 U.S.C. 5465(e)(1). 

2 17 CFR 240.19b–4(n)(1)(i). 

Day Event/activity 

>A + 60 ............. Decision on contention admission. 

[FR Doc. 2018–14915 Filed 8–6–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 

[Docket Nos. CP2018–280; MC2018–202 and 

CP2018–281] 

New Postal Products 

AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a 

recent Postal Service filing for the 

Commission’s consideration concerning 

negotiated service agreements. This 

notice informs the public of the filing, 

invites public comment, and takes other 

administrative steps. 

DATES: Comments are due: August 9, 

2018. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

electronically via the Commission’s 

Filing Online system at http://

www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit 

comments electronically should contact 

the person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section by 

telephone for advice on filing 

alternatives. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 

202–789–6820. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Introduction 

II. Docketed Proceeding(s) 

I. Introduction 

The Commission gives notice that the 

Postal Service filed request(s) for the 

Commission to consider matters related 

to negotiated service agreement(s). The 

request(s) may propose the addition or 

removal of a negotiated service 

agreement from the market dominant or 

the competitive product list, or the 

modification of an existing product 

currently appearing on the market 

dominant or the competitive product 

list. 

Section II identifies the docket 

number(s) associated with each Postal 

Service request, the title of each Postal 

Service request, the request’s acceptance 

date, and the authority cited by the 

Postal Service for each request. For each 

request, the Commission appoints an 

officer of the Commission to represent 

the interests of the general public in the 

proceeding, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505 

(Public Representative). Section II also 

establishes comment deadline(s) 

pertaining to each request. 

The public portions of the Postal 

Service’s request(s) can be accessed via 

the Commission’s website (http://

www.prc.gov). Non-public portions of 

the Postal Service’s request(s), if any, 

can be accessed through compliance 

with the requirements of 39 CFR 

3007.40. 

The Commission invites comments on 

whether the Postal Service’s request(s) 

in the captioned docket(s) are consistent 

with the policies of title 39. For 

request(s) that the Postal Service states 

concern market dominant product(s), 

applicable statutory and regulatory 

requirements include 39 U.S.C. 3622, 39 

U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3010, and 39 

CFR part 3020, subpart B. For request(s) 

that the Postal Service states concern 

competitive product(s), applicable 

statutory and regulatory requirements 

include 39 U.S.C. 3632, 39 U.S.C. 3633, 

39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 

39 CFR part 3020, subpart B. Comment 

deadline(s) for each request appear in 

section II. 

II. Docketed Proceeding(s) 

1. Docket No(s).: CP2018–280; Filing 

Title: Notice of United States Postal 

Service of Filing a Functionally 

Equivalent Global Expedited Package 

Services 7 Negotiated Service 

Agreement and Application for NonPublic Treatment of Materials Filed 

Under Seal; Filing Acceptance Date: 

August 1, 2018; Filing Authority: 39 CFR 

3015.5; Public Representative: 

Christopher C. Mohr; Comments Due: 

August 9, 2018. 

2. Docket No(s).: MC2018–202 and 

CP2018–281; Filing Title: USPS Request 

to Add Priority Mail Contract 458 to 

Competitive Product List and Notice of 

Filing Materials Under Seal; Filing 

Acceptance Date: August 1, 2018; Filing 

Authority: 39 U.S.C. 3642, 39 CFR 

3020.30 et seq., and 39 CFR 3015.5; 

Public Representative: Christopher C. 

Mohr; Comments Due: August 9, 2018. 

This notice will be published in the 

Federal Register. 

Stacy L. Ruble, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2018–16873 Filed 8–6–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P 

POSTAL SERVICE 

Product Change—Priority Mail 

Negotiated Service Agreement 

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives 

notice of filing a request with the Postal 

Regulatory Commission to add a 

domestic shipping services contract to 

the list of Negotiated Service 

Agreements in the Mail Classification 

Schedule’s Competitive Products List. 

DATES: Date of required notice: August 

7, 2018. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Elizabeth Reed, 202–268–3179. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

United States Postal Service® hereby 

gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 

3642 and 3632(b)(3), on August 1, 2018, 

it filed with the Postal Regulatory 

Commission a USPS Request to Add 

Priority Mail Contract 458 to 

Competitive Product List. Documents 

are available at www.prc.gov, Docket 

Nos. MC2018–202, CP2018–281. 

Elizabeth Reed, 

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law. 

[FR Doc. 2018–16811 Filed 8–6–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–12–P 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE 

COMMISSION 

[Release No. 34–83761; File No. SR–OCC– 

2017–809] 

Self-Regulatory Organizations; The 

Options Clearing Corporation; Notice 

of Filing of Amendments No. 1 and 2 

To Advance Notice Concerning 

Enhanced and New Tools for Recovery 

Scenarios 

August 1, 2018. 

Pursuant to Section 806(e)(1) of Title 

VIII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street 

Reform and Consumer Protection Act, 

entitled Payment, Clearing and 

Settlement Supervision Act of 2010 

(‘‘Clearing Supervision Act’’) 1 and Rule 

19b–4(n)(1)(i) of the Securities Exchange 

Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’),2 The Options 

Clearing Corporation (‘‘OCC’’) filed with 

the Securities and Exchange 

Commission (‘‘Commission’’) an 

advance notice concerning updates to 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES