40086 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 140 / Monday, July 26, 2021 / Notices 

obtains summary data annually from the 

official Government property records 

maintained by its contractors. The 

information is submitted via the NASA 

Form 1018, at the end of each fiscal 

year. Additional information submitted 

to approve the accuracy of the 

contractor property management system 

compliance is submitted via NASA 

Form 1019, at the beginning of awards 

with NASA property in the hands of 

contractors; and same information 

gathered by Federal agencies assisting 

NASA according to risk matrix. 

Information for property management 

system in accordance with FAR Part 45, 

NASA is the agency responsible for 

contract administration shall conduct an 

analysis of the contractor’s property 

management policies, procedures, 

practices, and systems. 

II. Methods of Collection 

Electronic. 

III. Data 

Title: NASA Property in the Custody 

of Contractors. 

OMB Number: 2700–0017. 

Type of review: Renewal of a 

previously approved information 

collection. 

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit and not-for-profit institutions. 

Estimated Annual Number of 

Activities: 1,200. 

Estimated Number of Respondents 

per Activity: 1. 

Annual Responses: 1,200. 

Estimated Time per Response: 1.5 

hours. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 1,800. 

Estimated Total Annual Cost: 

$36,000. 

IV. Request for Comments 

Comments are invited on: (1) Whether 

the proposed collection of information 

is necessary for the proper performance 

of the functions of NASA, including 

whether the information collected has 

practical utility; (2) the accuracy of 

NASA’s estimate of the burden 

(including hours and cost) of the 

proposed collection of information; (3) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (4) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on respondents, including automated 

collection techniques or the use of other 

forms of information technology. 

Comments submitted in response to 

this notice will be summarized and 

included in the request for OMB 

approval of this information collection. 

They will also become a matter of 

public record. 

Lori Parker, 

NASA PRA Clearance Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2021–15828 Filed 7–23–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7510–13–P 

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION 

ADMINISTRATION 

Sunshine Act Meetings 

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Thursday, 

July 22, 2021. 

PLACE: Due to the COVID–19 Pandemic, 

the meeting will be open to the public 

via live webcast only. Visit the agency’s 

homepage (www.ncua.gov) and access 

the provided webcast link. 

STATUS: This meeting will be open to the 

public. 

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

1. Request for Information and 

Comment, Digital Assets and Related 

Technologies. 

2. NCUA Rules and Regulations, 

Complex Credit Union Leverage Ratio. 

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Melane Conyers-Ausbrooks, Secretary of 

the Board, Telephone: 703–518–6304. 

Melane Conyers-Ausbrooks, 

Secretary of the Board. 

[FR Doc. 2021–15908 Filed 7–22–21; 11:15 am] 

BILLING CODE 7535–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 50–389; NRC–2021–0138] 

Florida Power and Light Company; St. 

Lucie Plant, Unit No. 2 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Exemption; issuance. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC, or the Commission) 

has issued an exemption in response to 

a March 17, 2021, request from Florida 

Power and Light (FPL or the licensee). 

The approval permits a one-time 

schedular exemption to allow submittal 

of a license renewal application for the 

St. Lucie, Unit No. 2 facility earlier than 

20 years before the expiration of the 

operating license, which expires on 

April 6, 2043. 

DATES: The exemption was issued on 

July 20, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID 

NRC–2021–0138 when contacting the 

NRC about the availability of 

information regarding this document. 

You may obtain publicly available 

information related to this document 

using any of the following methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to 

https://www.regulations.gov and search 

for Docket ID NRC–2021–0138. Address 

questions about Docket IDs in 

Regulations.gov to Stacy Schumann; 

telephone: 301–415–0624; email: 

Stacy.Schumann@nrc.gov. For technical 

questions, contact the individual listed 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this document. 

• NRC’s Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System 

(ADAMS): You may access publicly 

available documents online in the 

ADAMS public document collection at 

https://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 that 

document is available in ADAMS) is 

provided the first time that a document 

is referenced. 

• Attention: The PDR, where you may 

examine and order copies of public 

documents, is currently closed. You 

may submit your request to the PDR via 

email at pdr.resource@nrc.gov or call 1– 

800–397–4209 or 301–415–4737, 

between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. (ET), 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Mahoney, Office of Nuclear 

Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– 

3867; email: Michael.Mahoney@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of 

the exemption is attached. 

Dated: July 20, 2021. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Michael Mahoney, 

Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch 2– 

2, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 

Attachment—Exemption. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

Docket No. 50–389 

Florida Power & Light Company, St. 

Lucie Plant, Unit No. 2, Exemption 

I. Background 

Florida Power & Light Company (FPL, 

the licensee) is the holder of Renewed 

Facility Operating License No. NPF–16, 

which authorizes operation of the St. 

Lucie Plant, Unit 2 (St. Lucie 2), a 

pressurized water reactor. St. Lucie 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 140 / Monday, July 26, 2021 / Notices 40087 

Plant, Unit 1, is collocated with St. 

Lucie 2 in Jensen Beach, Florida; 

however, this exemption is applicable 

only to St. Lucie 2. The license 

provides, among other things, that the 

facility is subject to all rules, 

regulations, and orders of the U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, 

or the Commission) now or hereafter in 

effect. The current renewed facility 

operating license for St. Lucie 2 expires 

on April 6, 2043. 

II. Request/Action 

Part 54 of title 10 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 

‘‘Requirements for Renewal of Operating 

Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants,’’ 

contains the requirements for the 

renewal of operating licenses for nuclear 

power plants. Section 54.17(c) of 10 

CFR states that an application for a 

renewed license may not be submitted 

to the Commission earlier than 20 years 

before the expiration of the operating 

license currently in effect. 

The licensee has informed the NRC 

that it plans to submit the St. Lucie 

Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 subsequent 

license renewal application (SLRA) 

earlier than 20 years before expiration of 

the renewed facility operating license 

for St. Lucie 2. Based on the 

requirement in 10 CFR 54.17(c), a 

subsequent license renewal (SLR) 

application for St. Lucie 2 cannot be 

filed prior to April 6, 2023 without an 

exemption. As a result, by letter dated 

March 17, 2021 (Agencywide 

Documents Access and Management 

System (ADAMS) Accession No. 

ML21076A315), pursuant to 10 CFR 

54.15 and 10 CFR 50.12, FPL requested 

a one-time exemption from the 10 CFR 

54.17(c) schedular requirement. 

III. Discussion 

Under 10 CFR 54.15, exemptions from 

the requirements of part 54 are governed 

by regulations at 10 CFR 50.12. Pursuant 

to 10 CFR 50.12, the Commission may, 

upon application by any interested 

person or upon its own initiative, grant 

exemptions from the requirements of 

the regulations of this part, which are 

authorized by law, will not present an 

undue risk to the public health and 

safety, and are consistent with the 

common defense and security. However, 

an exemption will not be granted unless 

special circumstances are present as 

defined in 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2). In its 

application, FPL states that special 

circumstances, as described in 10 CFR 

50.12(a)(2)(ii) apply to its request, 

which states that special circumstances 

are present when ‘‘Application of the 

regulation in the particular 

circumstances would not serve the 

underlying purpose of the rule or is not 

necessary to achieve the underlying 

purpose of the rule.’’ 

A. The Exemption Is Authorized by Law 

The Commission’s basis for 

establishing the 20-year limit contained 

in 10 CFR 54.17(c) is discussed in the 

1991 Statements of Consideration for 10 

CFR part 54 (56 FR 64963). The limit 

was established to ensure that 

substantial operating experience was 

accumulated by a licensee before a 

renewal application is submitted such 

that any plant-specific concerns 

regarding aging would be disclosed. In 

amending the rule in 1995, the 

Commission indicated that it would 

consider plant-specific exemption 

requests by applicants who believe that 

sufficient information is available to 

justify applying for license renewal 

earlier than 20 years from expiration of 

the current license. The NRC staff has 

determined that granting the licensee’s 

proposed exemption will not result in a 

violation of the Atomic Energy Act of 

1954, as amended, or the Commission’s 

regulations. Therefore, the exemption is 

authorized by law. 

B. The Exemption Presents No Undue 

Risk to Public Health and Safety 

FPL is seeking an exemption from the 

requirements of 10 CFR 54.17(c) for 

schedular relief, which would only 

relieve FPL of the schedular 

requirement to wait until April 6, 2023 

to submit an SLRA for St. Lucie Unit 2. 

The action does not change the manner 

in which the plant operates and would 

maintain public health and safety, 

because no additional changes are made 

as a result of the action. FPL must still 

conduct all environmental reviews 

required by 10 CFR part 51 and all 

safety reviews and evaluations required 

by 10 CFR part 54 when preparing the 

SLRA for St. Lucie Units 1 and 2. 

Pending final action on the SLR 

application, the NRC will continue to 

conduct all regulatory activities 

associated with licensing, inspection, 

and oversight, and will take whatever 

action may be necessary to ensure 

adequate protection of the public health 

and safety. This exemption does not 

affect NRC’s authority, applicable to all 

licenses, to modify, suspend, or revoke 

a license for cause, such as the 

identification of a serious safety 

concern. Therefore, the NRC finds that 

the action does not cause undue risk to 

public health and safety. 

C. The Exemption is Consistent With the 

Common Defense and Security 

As discussed previously, the 

proposed exemption would only allow 

a schedular exemption. This exemption 

does not change any site security 

features, procedures, staffing, or other 

security-related matters. Therefore, the 

NRC finds that the action is consistent 

with common defense and security. 

D. Special Circumstances 

The regulation at 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2) 

lists special circumstances for which an 

exemption may be granted. Pursuant to 

the regulation, it is necessary for one of 

these special circumstances to be 

present in order for the NRC to consider 

granting an exemption request. As noted 

above, FPL stated that the special 

circumstance that applies to this 

exemption request is found in 10 CFR 

50.12(a)(2)(ii), which states, 

‘‘Application of the regulation in the 

particular circumstances would not 

serve the underlying purpose of the rule 

or is not necessary to achieve the 

underlying purpose of the rule.’’ 

In initially promulgating 10 CFR 

54.17(c) in 1991, the Commission stated 

that the purpose of the 20-year time 

limit was ‘‘to ensure that substantial 

operating experience is accumulated by 

a licensee before it submits a renewal 

application,’’ such that any plantspecific concerns regarding aging would 

be disclosed (56 FR 64963). At that time, 

the Commission found that 20 years of 

operating experience provided a 

sufficient basis for license renewal 

applications. However, in issuing the 

amended Part 54 in 1995, the 

Commission indicated it would 

consider an exemption to this 

requirement if sufficient information 

was available on a plant-specific basis to 

justify submission of an application to 

renew a license before completion of 20 

years of operation (60 FR 22488). FPL’s 

exemption request is consistent with the 

Commission’s intent to consider plantspecific requests and is permitted by 10 

CFR 54.15. 

The licensee stated that St. Lucie 2 is 

the sister unit to St. Lucie 1. The two 

units currently have a combined 

operating history of over 80 reactoryears, with Unit 1 having over 45 years 

and Unit 2 having over 37 years of 

operating experience. St. Lucie 1 

operating experience is directly 

applicable to St. Lucie 2 since the two 

units are similar in design, operation, 

maintenance, use of operating 

experience, and environment. 

According to the licensee, the 

materials of construction for St. Lucie 2 

structures, systems, and components are 

typically identical or similar to those 

used for the corresponding St. Lucie 1 

structures, systems, and components. 

The licensee specified that, because of 

the similarities between St. Lucie 1 and 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES
40088 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 140 / Monday, July 26, 2021 / Notices 

2, personnel of the various plant 

organizations (e.g., Maintenance and 

Engineering) are typically assigned work 

activities on both units. Licensed 

operators at St. Lucie receive training on 

both units. 

St. Lucie Unit 2 is physically located 

adjacent to Unit 1. As such, the external 

environments would be similar for both 

units. Internal environments for both 

units are also similar due to the 

similarity in plant design and operation. 

The licensee stated that an 

administrative procedure is used by its 

entire nuclear fleet for the review and 

dissemination of operating experience 

obtained from both external and internal 

sources. This procedure requires 

screening of information for potential 

St. Lucie applicability; the information 

is received from such sources as the 

NRC (e.g., NRC Information Notices), 

industry resources, vendor reports/ 

notices, and in-house operating 

experience. If an item is potentially 

applicable to St. Lucie, then the 

information item is addressed in the 

plant’s Corrective Action Program. 

Given the similarities between units, 

the NRC staff finds that the operating 

experience at Unit 1 is applicable to 

Unit 2 for purposes of the license 

renewal review. At the time of the 

exemption request, Unit 1 had achieved 

over 45 years of operating experience, 

which is applicable to Unit 2, and that 

Unit 2, itself, has over 37 years of 

operating experience. The NRC staff has 

determined that sufficient combined 

operating experience exists to satisfy the 

intent of 10 CFR 54.17(c), and the 

application of the regulation in this case 

is not necessary to achieve the 

underlying purpose of the rule. 

Therefore, the NRC staff finds that FPL’s 

request meets the special circumstance 

requirement in 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii). 

E. Environmental Considerations 

The NRC’s approval of an exemption 

to scheduling requirements belongs to a 

category of actions that the NRC, by rule 

or regulation, has declared to be a 

categorical exclusion to environmental 

analysis, after first finding that the 

category of actions does not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. Specifically, the 

exemption is categorically excluded 

from further analysis under 10 CFR 

51.22(c)(25)(vi)(G). 

Under 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25), the 

granting of exemption from the 

requirements of any regulation of 

chapter 10 is a categorical exclusion 

provided that (i) there is no significant 

hazards consideration; (ii) there is no 

significant change in the types or 

significant increase in the amounts of 

any effluents that may be released 

offsite; (iii) there is no significant 

increase in individual or cumulative 

public or occupational radiation 

exposure; (iv) there is no significant 

construction impact; (v) there is no 

significant increase in the potential for 

or consequences from radiological 

accidents; and (vi) the requirements 

from which an exemption if sought 

involve certain categories of 

requirements, including scheduling 

requirements. The basis for NRC’s 

determination is provided in the 

following evaluation of the 

requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25)(i)- 

(vi). 

Requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25)(i) 

To qualify for a categorical exclusion 

under 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25)(i), the 

exemption must involve a no significant 

hazards consideration. The criteria for 

making a no significant hazards 

consideration determination are found 

in 10 CFR 50.92(c). The NRC staff has 

determined that granting the exemption 

request involves no significant hazards 

consideration because allowing a onetime exemption from the 10 CFR 

54.17(c) schedular requirement does 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. Therefore, the 

requirements of 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25)(i) 

are met. 

Requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25)(ii) 

and (iii) 

The exemption constitutes a change to 

a schedular requirement which is 

administrative in nature, and does not 

involve any change in the types or 

significant increase in the amounts of 

any effluents that may be released 

offsite and does not contribute to any 

significant increase in individual or 

cumulative occupational or public 

radiation exposure. Therefore, the 

requirements of 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25)(ii) 

and (iii) are met. 

Requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25)(iv) 

The exempted regulation is not 

associated with construction, and the 

exemption does not propose any 

changes to the facility or the site, does 

not alter the site, and does not change 

the operation of the site. Therefore, the 

requirements of 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25)(iv) 

are met because there is no significant 

construction impact. 

Requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25)(v) 

The exemption constitutes a change to 

a schedular requirement which is 

administrative in nature and does not 

impact the probability or consequences 

of accidents. Thus, there is no 

significant increase in the potential for, 

or consequences from, a radiological 

accident. Therefore, the requirements of 

10 CFR 51.22(c)(25)(v) are met. 

Requirements in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25)(vi) 

To qualify for a categorical exclusion 

under 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25)(vi)(G), the 

exemption must involve scheduling 

requirements. The requested exemption 

involves an exemption from scheduling 

requirements because it would allow 

FPL to submit an SLRA for St. Lucie 

Unit 2 earlier than 20 years before the 

expiration of its current license. 

Therefore, the requirements of 10 CFR 

51.22(c)(25)(vi) are met. 

Based on the above, the NRC staff 

concludes that the proposed exemption 

meets the eligibility criteria for a 

categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 

51.22(c)(25). Therefore, pursuant to 10 

CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact 

statement or environmental assessment 

need be prepared in connection with the 

approval of this exemption request. 

IV. Conclusions 

The NRC has determined that, 

pursuant to 10 CFR 54.15 and 10 CFR 

50.12, the exemption is authorized by 

law, will not present an undue risk to 

the public health and safety, and is 

consistent with the common defense 

and security. Also, special 

circumstances, as defined in 10 CFR 

50.12(a)(2), are present. Therefore, the 

NRC hereby grants the licensee a onetime exemption for St Lucie 2, from the 

requirements of 10 CFR 54.17(c), to 

allow the submittal of a subsequent 

license renewal application earlier than 

20 years before the expiration of the St. 

Lucie 2 license that is currently in 

effect. 

This exemption is effective upon 

issuance. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day 

of July, 2021. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

/RA/ 

Bo M. Pham, Director, 

Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 2021–15823 Filed 7–23–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 


jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES