Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 140 / Thursday, July 23, 2009 / Notices 36533 

ATTACHMENT I: COUNTIES IMPACTED

BY AUTOMOTIVE-RELATED RESTRUCTURING—Continued 

FIPS County name State 

31047 ... Dawson .................. NE 

31051 ... Dixon ...................... NE 

31141 ... Platte ...................... NE 

31159 ... Seward ................... NE 

34023 ... Middlesex ............... NJ 

34039 ... Union ...................... NJ 

36029 ... Erie ......................... NY 

36063 ... Niagara ................... NY 

36067 ... Onondaga ............... NY 

36089 ... St. Lawrence .......... NY 

39001 ... Adams .................... OH 

39003 ... Allen ....................... OH 

39011 ... Auglaize .................. OH 

39019 ... Carroll ..................... OH 

39021 ... Champaign ............. OH 

39025 ... Clermont ................. OH 

39027 ... Clinton .................... OH 

39033 ... Crawford ................. OH 

39035 ... Cuyahoga ............... OH 

39039 ... Defiance ................. OH 

39043 ... Erie ......................... OH 

39051 ... Fulton ..................... OH 

39061 ... Hamilton ................. OH 

39063 ... Hancock ................. OH 

39065 ... Hardin ..................... OH 

39069 ... Henry ...................... OH 

39071 ... Highland ................. OH 

39077 ... Huron ...................... OH 

39079 ... Jackson .................. OH 

39083 ... Knox ....................... OH 

39091 ... Logan ..................... OH 

39093 ... Lorain ..................... OH 

39095 ... Lucas ...................... OH 

39097 ... Madison .................. OH 

39113 ... Montgomery ........... OH 

39117 ... Morrow ................... OH 

39121 ... Noble ...................... OH 

39125 ... Paulding ................. OH 

39131 ... Pike ........................ OH 

39135 ... Preble ..................... OH 

39137 ... Putnam ................... OH 

39139 ... Richland ................. OH 

39141 ... Ross ....................... OH 

39143 ... Sandusky ................ OH 

39147 ... Seneca ................... OH 

39149 ... Shelby .................... OH 

39153 ... Summit ................... OH 

39155 ... Trumbull ................. OH 

39159 ... Union ...................... OH 

39161 ... Van Wert ................ OH 

39169 ... Wayne .................... OH 

39171 ... Williams .................. OH 

39173 ... Wood ...................... OH 

39175 ... Wyandot ................. OH 

40095 ... Marshall .................. OK 

40109 ... Oklahoma ............... OK 

42003 ... Allegheny ................ PA 

42117 ... Tioga ...................... PA 

45007 ... Anderson ................ SC 

45019 ... Charleston .............. SC 

45021 ... Cherokee ................ SC 

45035 ... Dorchester .............. SC 

45067 ... Marion .................... SC 

45083 ... Spartanburg ............ SC 

47001 ... Anderson ................ TN 

47003 ... Bedford ................... TN 

47007 ... Bledsoe .................. TN 

47009 ... Blount ..................... TN 

47015 ... Cannon ................... TN 

47031 ... Coffee ..................... TN 

ATTACHMENT I: COUNTIES IMPACTED

BY AUTOMOTIVE-RELATED RESTRUCTURING—Continued 

FIPS County name State 

47041 ... DeKalb .................... TN 

47045 ... Dyer ........................ TN 

47051 ... Franklin ................... TN 

47053 ... Gibson .................... TN 

47055 ... Giles ....................... TN 

47061 ... Grundy .................... TN 

47063 ... Hamblen ................. TN 

47065 ... Hamilton ................. TN 

47069 ... Hardeman ............... TN 

47073 ... Hawkins .................. TN 

47077 ... Henderson .............. TN 

47079 ... Henry ...................... TN 

47087 ... Jackson .................. TN 

47097 ... Lauderdale ............. TN 

47099 ... Lawrence ................ TN 

47105 ... Loudon ................... TN 

47113 ... Madison .................. TN 

47117 ... Marshall .................. TN 

47119 ... Maury ..................... TN 

47107 ... McMinn ................... TN 

47109 ... McNairy .................. TN 

47121 ... Meigs ...................... TN 

47123 ... Monroe ................... TN 

47131 ... Obion ...................... TN 

47133 ... Overton ................... TN 

47135 ... Perry ....................... TN 

47141 ... Putnam ................... TN 

47143 ... Rhea ....................... TN 

47147 ... Robertson ............... TN 

47149 ... Rutherford .............. TN 

47151 ... Scott ....................... TN 

47159 ... Smith ...................... TN 

47177 ... Warren .................... TN 

47185 ... White ...................... TN 

48029 ... Bexar ...................... TX 

48439 ... Tarrant .................... TX 

49003 ... Box Elder ................ UT 

51023 ... Botetourt ................. VA 

51710 ... Norfolk (city) ........... VA 

51155 ... Pulaski .................... VA 

51173 ... Smyth ..................... VA 

51177 ... Spotsylvania ........... VA 

55059 ... Kenosha ................. WI 

55075 ... Marinette ................ WI 

55105 ... Rock ....................... WI 

54079 ... Putnam ................... WV 

6. Supplementary Information Section 

B ‘‘Green Industries and Occupations’’: 

Is revised to provide further information 

on the industries on which applicants 

may focus by adding the language 

designated below as ‘‘new text’’ to the 

existing language in that section: 

a. New Text: ‘‘We will also evaluate 

applications for projects that include 

emerging green occupations from 

industries that have not been discussed 

in this section.’’ 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Janice Sheelor, Grants Management 

Specialist, Division of Federal 

Assistance, at (202) 693–3538. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 17th day of 

July 2009. 

Donna Kelly, 

Grant Officer, Employment & Training 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. E9–17458 Filed 7–22–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket Nos. 50–445 and 50–446 NRC– 

2009–0318] 

Luminant Generation Company LLC; 

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of 

Amendment to Facility Operating 

License, Proposed No Significant 

Hazards Consideration Determination, 

and Opportunity for a Hearing and 

Order Imposing Procedures for Access 

to Sensitive Unclassified NonSafeguards Information (SUNSI) for 

Contention Preparation 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC, the Commission) is 

considering issuance of an amendment 

to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF– 

87 and NPF–89 issued to Luminant 

Generation Company LLC for operation 

of the Comanche Peak Steam Electric 

Station (CPSES), Units 1 and 2, located 

in Somervell County, Texas. 

The proposed amendment would 

revise Technical Specification (TS) 

5.5.9.2, ‘‘Unit 1 Model D76 and Unit 2 

Model D5 Steam Generator (SG) 

Program,’’ to exclude portions of the 

CPSES, Unit 2 Model D5 SG below the 

top of the SG tubesheet from periodic 

SG tube inspections. In addition, the 

proposed amendment would revise TS 

5.6.9, ‘‘Unit 1 Model D76 and Unit 2 

Model D5 Steam Generator Tube 

Inspection Report,’’ to include reporting 

requirements specific to the permanent 

alternate repair criteria for CPSES, Unit 

2. The amendment request is supported 

by Westinghouse WCAP–17072–P, ‘‘H*: 

Alternate Repair Criteria for the Tube 

Sheet Expansion Region in Steam 

Generators with Hydraulically 

Expanded Tubes (Model D5),’’ May 

2009. The amendment application dated 

June 8, 2009, contains sensitive 

unclassified non-safeguards information 

(SUNSI). 

Before issuance of the proposed 

license amendment, the Commission 

will have made findings required by the 

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended 

(the Act), and the Commission’s 

regulations. 

The Commission has made a 

proposed determination that the 

amendment request involves no 

significant hazards consideration. Under 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
36534 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 140 / Thursday, July 23, 2009 / Notices 

the Commission’s regulations in Title 10 

of the Code of Federal Regulations (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. 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. Do the proposed changes involve a 

significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

Of the accidents previously evaluated, the 

limiting transients with consideration to the 

proposed change to the SG tube inspection 

and repair criteria are the steam generator 

tube rupture (SGTR) event, the steam line 

break (SLB), and the feed line break (FLB) 

postulated accidents. 

During the SGTR event, the required 

structural integrity margins of the SG tubes 

and the tube-to-tubesheet joint over the H* 

[the structural integrity of the primary-tosecondary pressure boundary is unaffected 

by degradation of any magnitude below a 

specific depth, designated as H*] distance 

will be maintained. Tube rupture in tubes 

with cracks within the tubesheet is precluded 

by the constraint provided by the presence of 

the tubesheet and the tube-to-tubesheet joint. 

Tube burst cannot occur within the thickness 

of the tubesheet. The tube-to-tubesheet joint 

constraint results from the hydraulic 

expansion process, thermal expansion 

mismatch between the tube and tubesheet, 

differential pressure between the primary 

and secondary side, and tubesheet rotation. 

Based on this design, the structural margins 

against burst, as discussed in Regulatory 

Guide (RG) 1.121, ‘‘Bases for Plugging 

Degraded PWR [Pressurized-Water Reactor] 

Steam Generator Tubes,’’ and TS 5.5.9.2 are 

maintained for both normal and postulated 

accident conditions. 

The proposed change has no impact on the 

structural or leakage integrity of the portion 

of the tube outside of the tubesheet. The 

proposed change maintains structural and 

leakage integrity of the SG tubes consistent 

with the performance criteria in TS 5.5.9.2. 

Therefore, the proposed change results in no 

significant increase in the probability of the 

occurrence of a SGTR accident. 

At normal operating pressures, leakage 

from tube degradation below the proposed 

limited inspection depth is limited by the 

tube-to-tubesheet crevice. Consequently, 

negligible normal operating leakage is 

expected from degradation below the 

inspected depth within the tubesheet region. 

The consequences of an SGTR event are not 

affected by the primary-to-secondary leakage 

flow during the event as primary-tosecondary leakage flow through a postulated 

tube that has been pulled out of the tubesheet 

is essentially equivalent to a severed tube. 

Therefore, the proposed change does not 

result in a significant increase in the 

consequences of a SGTR. 

The probability of a SLB is unaffected by 

the potential failure of a steam generator tube 

as the failure of tube is not an initiator for 

[an] SLB event. 

The leakage factor of 1.94 for Comanche 

Peak Unit 2 [CPSES, Unit 2], for a postulated 

SLB/FLB, has been calculated as shown in 

Table 9–7 of Reference 8.1 [Westinghouse 

WCAP–17072–P]. However, Luminant Power 

[Luminant Generation Company LLC] will 

apply a factor of 2.03 to the normal operating 

leakage associated with the tubesheet 

expansion region in the condition monitoring 

(CM) and operational assessment (OA). The 

leakage factor of 2.03 is a bounding value for 

all SGs, both hot and cold legs, in Table 9– 

7 of Reference 8.1. Through application of 

the limited tubesheet inspection scope, the 

existing operating leakage limit provides 

assurance that excessive leakage (i.e., greater 

than accident analysis assumptions) will not 

occur. The accident-induced leak rate limit 

for Comanche Peak Unit 2 is 1.0 gpm [gallons 

per minute]. The TS operational leak rate 

limit through any one steam generator is 150 

gpd [gallons per day] (0.1 gpm). 

Consequently, there is significant margin 

between accident leakage and allowable 

operational leakage. The SLB/FLB overall 

leakage factor is only 2.03 resulting in 

significant margin between the 

conservatively estimated accident induced 

leakage and the allowable accident leakage. 

No leakage factor was applied to the locked 

rotor or control rod ejection transients due to 

their short duration. 

For the CM assessment, the component of 

leakage from the prior cycle from below the 

H* distance will be multiplied by a factor of 

2.03 and added to the total leakage from any 

other source and compared to the allowable 

accident induced leakage limit. For the OA, 

the difference in the leakage between the 

allowable leakage and the accident induced 

leakage from sources other than the tubesheet 

expansion region will be divided by 2.03 and 

compared to the observed operational 

leakage. 

The previously analyzed accidents are 

initiated by the failure of plant structures, 

systems, or components. The proposed 

change that alters the steam generator (SG) 

inspection and reporting criteria does not 

have a detrimental impact on the integrity of 

any plant structure, system, or component 

that initiates an analyzed event. The 

proposed change will not alter the operation 

of, or otherwise increase the failure 

probability of any plant equipment that 

initiates an analyzed accident. 

Therefore, the proposed changes do not 

involve a significant increase in the 

probability or consequences of an accident 

previously evaluated. 

2. Do the proposed changes create the 

possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any previously evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change that alters the steam 

generator inspection and reporting criteria 

does not introduce any new equipment, 

create new failure modes for existing 

equipment, or create any new limiting single 

failures. Plant operation will not be altered, 

and all safety functions will continue to 

perform as previously assumed in accident 

analyses. Therefore, the proposed change 

does not create the possibility of a new or 

different kind of accident from any 

previously evaluated. 

3. Do the proposed changes involve a 

significant reduction in the margin of safety? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change defines the safety 

significant portion of the tube that must be 

inspected and repaired. WCAP–17072–P 

identifies the specific inspection depth below 

which any type tube degradation is shown to 

have no impact on the performance criteria 

in NEI [Nuclear Energy Institute] 97–06 Rev. 

2, ‘‘Steam Generator Program Guidelines.’’ 

The proposed change that alters the steam 

generator inspection and reporting criteria 

maintains the required structural margins of 

the SG tubes for both normal and accident 

conditions. Nuclear Energy Institute 97–06, 

‘‘Steam Generator Program Guidelines,’’ and 

NRC Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.121, ‘‘Bases for 

Plugging Degraded PWR Steam Generator 

Tubes,’’ are used as the bases in the 

development of the limited hot leg tubesheet 

inspection depth methodology for 

determining that SG tube integrity 

considerations are maintained within 

acceptable limits. RG 1.121 describes a 

method acceptable to the NRC for meeting 

General Design Criteria (GDC) 14, ‘‘Reactor 

Coolant Pressure Boundary,’’ GDC 15, 

‘‘Reactor Coolant System Design,’’ GDC 31, 

‘‘Fracture Prevention of Reactor Coolant 

Pressure Boundary,’’ and GDC 32, 

‘‘Inspection of Reactor Coolant Pressure 

Boundary,’’ by reducing the probability and 

consequences of [an] SGTR. RG 1.121 

concludes that by determining the limiting 

safe conditions for tube wall degradation, the 

probability and consequences of [an] SGTR 

are reduced. RG 1.121 uses safety factors on 

loads for tube burst that are consistent with 

the requirements of Section III of the 

American Society of Mechanical Engineers 

(ASME) Code. 

For axially oriented cracking located 

within the tubesheet, tube burst is precluded 

due to the presence of the tubesheet. For 

circumferentially oriented cracking, 

Westinghouse WCAP–17072–P defines a 

length of degradation-free expanded tubing 

that provides the necessary resistance to tube 

pullout due to the pressure induced forces, 

with applicable safety factors applied. 

Application of the limited hot and cold leg 

tubesheet inspection criteria will preclude 

unacceptable primary-to-secondary leakage 

during all plant conditions. Using the 

methodology for determining leakage as 

described in WCAP–17072–P, it is shown 

that significant margin exists between 

conservatively estimated accident induced 

leakage and the allowable accident leakage 

(1.0 gpm) if all four generators are assumed 

to be leaking at the Technical Specification 

3.4.13 leakage limit at the beginning of the 

design basis accident. 

Therefore, the proposed change does not 

involve a significant reduction in any margin 

of safety. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 140 / Thursday, July 23, 2009 / Notices 36535 

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. 

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 should 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. 

Should the Commission take action 

prior to the expiration of either the 

comment period or the notice period, it 

will publish in the Federal Register a 

notice of issuance. Should the 

Commission make 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. 

Written comments may be submitted 

by mail to the Chief, Rulemaking and 

Directives Branch (RDB), TWB–05– 

B01M, Division of Administrative 

Services, Office of Administration, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555–0001, and 

should cite the publication date and 

page number of this Federal Register 

notice. Written comments may also be 

faxed to the RDB at 301–492–3446. 

Documents may be examined, and/or 

copied for a fee, at the NRC’s Public 

Document Room (PDR), located at One 

White Flint North, Public File Area O1 

F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), 

Rockville, Maryland. 

Within 60 days after the date of 

publication of this notice, any person(s) 

whose interest may be affected by this 

action may file a request for a hearing 

and a petition to intervene with respect 

to issuance of the amendment to the 

subject facility operating license. 

Requests for a hearing and a petition for 

leave to intervene shall be filed in 

accordance with the Commission’s 

‘‘Rules of Practice for Domestic 

Licensing Proceedings’’ in 10 CFR Part 

2. Interested person(s) should consult a 

current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is 

available at the Commission’s PDR, 

located at One White Flint North, Public 

File Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike 

(first floor), Rockville, Maryland. 

Publicly available records will be 

accessible from the Agencywide 

Documents Access and Management 

System’s (ADAMS) Public Electronic 

Reading Room on the Internet at the 

NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/ 

reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If a 

request for a hearing or petition for 

leave to intervene is filed by the above 

date, the Commission or a presiding 

officer designated by the Commission or 

by the Chief Administrative Judge of the 

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 

Panel, will rule on the request and/or 

petition; and the Secretary or the Chief 

Administrative Judge of the Atomic 

Safety and Licensing Board will issue a 

notice of a hearing or an appropriate 

order. 

As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a 

petition for leave to intervene shall set 

forth with particularity the interest of 

the petitioner in the proceeding, and 

how that interest may be affected by the 

results of the proceeding. The petition 

should specifically explain the reasons 

why intervention should be permitted 

with particular reference to the 

following general requirements: (1) The 

name, address and telephone number of 

the requestor or petitioner; (2) the 

nature of the requestor’s/petitioner’s 

right under the Act to be made a party 

to the proceeding; (3) the nature and 

extent of the requestor’s/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 

requestor’s/petitioner’s interest. The 

petition must also identify the specific 

contentions which the petitioner/ 

requestor seeks to have litigated at 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/requestor shall 

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/requestor must 

also provide references to those specific 

sources and documents of which the 

petitioner is aware and on which the 

petitioner intends to rely to establish 

those facts or expert opinion. The 

petition must include sufficient 

information to show that a genuine 

dispute exists with the applicant on a 

material issue of law or fact. 

Contentions shall be limited to matters 

within the scope of the amendment 

under consideration. The contention 

must be one which, if proven, would 

entitle the petitioner to relief. A 

petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy 

these requirements 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, and have the opportunity to 

participate fully in the conduct of the 

hearing. 

If a hearing is requested, the 

Commission will make a final 

determination on the issue of no 

significant hazards consideration. The 

final determination will serve to decide 

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 

held would take place after issuance of 

the amendment. If the final 

determination is that the amendment 

request involves a significant hazards 

consideration, any hearing held would 

take place before the issuance of any 

amendment. 

All documents filed in NRC 

adjudicatory proceedings, including a 

request for hearing, a petition for leave 

to intervene, 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 participating 

under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in 

accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule, 

which the NRC promulgated in August 

28, 2007 (72 FR 49139). The E-Filing 

process requires participants to submit 

and serve all adjudicatory documents 

over the internet, or in some cases to 

mail copies on electronic storage media. 

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 ten 

(10) days prior to the filing deadline, the 

petitioner/requestor should contact the 

Office of the Secretary by e-mail at 

hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by calling 

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

certificate, which allows the participant 

(or its counsel or representative) to 

digitally sign documents and access the 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
36536 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 140 / Thursday, July 23, 2009 / Notices 

E-Submittal server for any proceeding in 

which it is participating; and/or (2) 

creation of an electronic docket for the 

proceeding (even in instances in which 

the petitioner/requestor (or its counsel 

or representative) already holds an NRCissued digital ID certificate). Each 

petitioner/requestor will need to 

download the Workplace Forms 

ViewerTM to access the Electronic 

Information Exchange (EIE), a 

component of the E-Filing system. The 

Workplace Forms ViewerTM is free and 

is available at http://www.nrc.gov/sitehelp/e-submittals/install-viewer.html. 

Information about applying for a digital 

ID certificate is available on NRC’s 

public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/ 

site-help/e-submittals/applycertificates.html. 

Once a petitioner/requestor has 

obtained a digital ID certificate, had a 

docket created, and downloaded the EIE 

viewer, it can then submit a request for 

hearing or petition for leave to 

intervene. Submissions should be in 

Portable Document Format (PDF) in 

accordance with NRC guidance 

available on the NRC public Web site at 

http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. A filing is considered 

complete at the time the filer submits its 

documents through EIE. To be timely, 

an electronic filing must be submitted to 

the EIE system no later than 11:59 p.m. 

Eastern Time on the due date. Upon 

receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing 

system time-stamps the document and 

sends the submitter an e-mail notice 

confirming receipt of the document. The 

EIE system also distributes an e-mail 

notice that provides access to the 

document to the NRC 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 documents on those 

participants separately. Therefore, 

applicants and other participants (or 

their counsel or representative) must 

apply for and receive a digital ID 

certificate before a hearing request/ 

petition to intervene is filed so that they 

can obtain access to the document via 

the E-Filing system. 

A person filing electronically using 

the agency’s adjudicatory e-filing system 

may seek assistance through the 

‘‘Contact Us’’ link located on the NRC 

Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/sitehelp/e-submittals.html or by calling the 

NRC Meta-System Help Desk, which is 

available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., 

Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, 

excluding government holidays. The 

Meta-System Help Desk can be 

contacted by telephone at 1–866–672– 

7640 or by e-mail at 

MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov. 

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 firstclass 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. 

Non-timely requests and/or petitions 

and contentions will not be entertained 

absent a determination by the 

Commission, the presiding officer, or 

the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 

that the request and/or petition should 

be granted and/or the contentions 

should be admitted, based on a 

balancing of the factors specified in 10 

CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)–(viii). 

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, an Atomic Safety and 

Licensing Board, or a 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 

submissions. 

For further details with respect to this 

license amendment application, see the 

application for amendment dated June 

8, 2009, which is available for public 

inspection at the Commission’s PDR, 

located at One White Flint North, File 

Public Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville 

Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. 

Publicly available records will be 

accessible from the Agencywide 

Documents Access and Management 

System’s (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, 301– 

415–4737, or by e-mail to 

pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 

Attorney for licensee: Timothy P. 

Matthews, Esq., Morgan, Lewis and 

Bockius, 1800 M Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20036. 

Order Imposing Procedures for Access 

to Sensitive Unclassified NonSafeguards Information (SUNSI) for 

Contention Preparation 

1. This order contains instructions 

regarding how potential parties to this 

proceeding may request access to 

documents containing sensitive 

unclassified information. 

2. Within ten (10) days after 

publication of this notice of opportunity 

for hearing any potential party as 

defined in 10 CFR 2.4 who believes 

access to SUNSI is necessary for a 

response to the notice may request 

access to such information. A ‘‘potential 

party’’ is any person who intends or 

may intend to participate as a party by 

demonstrating standing and the filing of 

an admissible contention under 10 CFR 

2.309. Requests submitted later than ten 

(10) days will not be considered absent 

a showing of good cause for the late 

filing, addressing why the request could 

not have been filed earlier. 

3. 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, Washington, DC 

20555–0001. The expedited delivery or 

courier mail address for both offices is 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 

20852. The e-mail address for the Office 

of the Secretary and the Office of the 

General Counsel are 

Hearing.Docket@nrc.gov and 

OGCMailCenter.Resource@nrc.gov, 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 140 / Thursday, July 23, 2009 / Notices 36537 

1See footnote 4. While a request for hearing or 

petition to intervene in this proceeding must 

comply with the filing requirements of the NRC’s 

‘‘E-Filing Rule,’’ the initial request to access SUNSI 

under these procedures should be submitted as 

described in this paragraph. 

2 If a presiding officer has not yet been 

designated, the Chief Administrative Judge will 

issue such orders, or will appoint a presiding officer 

to do so. 

3Parties/persons other than the requester and the 

NRC staff will be notified by the NRC staff of a 

favorable access determination (and may participate 

in the development of such a motion and protective 

order) if it concerns SUNSI and if the party/person’s 

interest independent of the proceeding would be 

harmed by the release of the information (e.g., as 

with proprietary information). 

4As of October 15, 2007, the NRC’s final ‘‘EFiling Rule’’ became effective. See Use of Electronic 

Submissions in Agency Hearings (August 28, 2007; 

72 FR 49139). Requesters should note that the filing 

requirements of that rule 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 requests 

submitted to the NRC staff under these procedures. 

respectively.1 The request must include 

the following information: 

a. A description of the licensing 

action with a citation to this Federal 

Register notice of opportunity for 

hearing; 

b. The name and address of the 

potential party and a description of the 

potential party’s particularized interest 

that could be harmed by the potential 

licensing action; 

c. The identity of the individual 

requesting access to SUNSI and the 

requester’s need for the information in 

order to meaningfully participate in this 

adjudicatory proceeding, particularly 

why publicly available versions of the 

application would not be sufficient to 

provide the basis and specificity for a 

proffered contention; 

4. Based on an evaluation of the 

information submitted under items 2 

and 3.a through 3.c, above, the NRC staff 

will determine within ten days of 

receipt of the written access 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) there is a 

legitimate need for access to SUNSI. 

5. A request for access to SUNSI will 

be granted if: 

a. The request has demonstrated that 

there is a reasonable basis to believe that 

a potential party is likely to establish 

standing to intervene or to otherwise 

participate as a party in this proceeding; 

b. The proposed recipient of the 

information has demonstrated a need for 

SUNSI; 

c. The proposed recipient of the 

information has executed a NonDisclosure Agreement or Affidavit and 

agrees to be bound by the terms of a 

Protective Order setting forth terms and 

conditions to prevent the unauthorized 

or inadvertent disclosure of SUNSI; and 

d. The presiding officer has issued a 

protective order concerning the 

information or documents requested.2

Any protective order issued shall 

provide that the petitioner must file 

SUNSI contentions 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. 

6. If the request for access to SUNSI 

is granted, the terms and conditions for 

access to such information will be set 

forth in a draft protective order and 

affidavit of non-disclosure appended to 

a joint motion by the NRC staff, any 

other affected parties to this 

proceeding,3 and the petitioner(s). If the 

diligent efforts by the relevant parties or 

petitioner(s) fail to result in an 

agreement on the terms and conditions 

for a draft protective order or nondisclosure affidavit, the relevant parties 

to the proceeding or the petitioner(s) 

should notify the presiding officer 

within five (5) days, describing the 

obstacles to the agreement. 

7. If the request for access to SUNSI 

is denied by the NRC staff, the NRC staff 

shall briefly state the reasons for the 

denial. The requester may challenge the 

NRC staff’s adverse determination with 

respect to access to SUNSI (including 

with respect to standing) by filing a 

challenge within five (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. 

In the same manner, 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 five (5) days of the 

notification by the NRC staff of its grant 

of such a request. 

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 2.311.4

8. 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. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day 

of July 2009. 

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 (SUNSI) in This 

Proceeding 

Day Event 

0 ........................................... Publication of [Federal Register notice/other notice of proposed action and opportunity for hearing], including 

order with instructions for access requests. 

10 ......................................... Deadline for submitting requests for access to SUNSI with information: supporting the standing of a potential 

party identified by name and address; and describing the need for the information in order for the potential 

party to participate meaningfully in an adjudicatory proceeding. 

[20,30 or 60] ......................... Deadline for submitting petition for intervention containing: (i) Demonstration of standing; (ii) all contentions 

whose formulation does not require access to SUNSI (+25 Answers to petition for intervention; +7 petitioner/requestor reply). 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
36538 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 140 / Thursday, July 23, 2009 / Notices 

1Notice of United States Postal Service Filing of 

Functionally Equivalent Global Expedited Package 

Services 1 Negotiated Service Agreement, July 16, 

2009 (Notice). 

2See Docket No. CP2008–4, Notice of United 

States Postal Service of Governors’ Decision 

Establishing Prices and Classifications for Global 

Expedited Package Services Contents, May 20, 

2008. The docket referenced in the caption should 

be the docket in which the Governors’ Decision is 

filed. In this instance, that was Docket No. CP2008– 

4. The contract being suspended was filed in Docket 

No. CP2008–5. 

3See Docket No. CP2008–5, Order Concerning 

Global Expedited Package Services Contracts, June 

27, 2008, at 7 (Order No. 86). 

Day Event 

20 ......................................... 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’’ for SUNSI or 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 hearing or opportunity for hearing), 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. 

B ........................................... Decision on contention admission. 

[FR Doc. E9–17568 Filed 7–22–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 

[Docket No. CP2009–50; Order No. 251] 

Global Expedited Package Services 

Contract 

AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a 

recently-filed Postal Service request to 

include an additional Priority Mail 

Contract 1 on the Competitive Product 

List. This notice addresses procedural 

steps associated with this filing. 

DATES: Comments are due July 27, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments 

electronically via the Commission’s 

Filing Online system at http:// 

www.prc.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, 

202–789–6820 and 

stephen.sharfman@prc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

II. Notice of Filing 

III. Ordering Paragraphs 

I. Introduction 

On July 16, 2009, the Postal Service 

filed a notice announcing that it has 

entered into an additional Global 

Expedited Package Services 1 (GEPS 1) 

contract.1 GEPS 1 provides volumebased incentives for mailers that send 

large volumes of Express Mail 

International (EMI) and/or Priority Mail 

International (PMI). The Postal Service 

believes the instant contract is 

functionally equivalent to previously 

submitted GEPS 1 contracts, and is 

supported by the Governors’ Decision 

filed in Docket No. CP2008–4.2 Notice at 

1. It further notes that in Order No. 86, 

which established GEPS 1 as a product, 

the Commission held that additional 

contracts may be included as part of the 

GEPS 1 product if they meet the 

requirements of 39 U.S.C. 3633, and if 

they are functionally equivalent to the 

initial GEPS 1 contract filed in Docket 

No. CP2008–5.3 Notice at 1. 

The instant contract. The Postal 

Service filed the instant contract 

pursuant to 39 CFR 3015.5. In addition, 

the Postal Service contends that the 

contract is in accordance with Order No. 

86. The Postal Service states that the 

instant contract replaces the contract for 

the customer in Docket No. CP2008–5 

which will end on August 1, 2009. Id. 

at 2. It submitted the contract and 

supporting material under seal, and 

attached a redacted copy of the contract 

and certified statement required by 39 

CFR 3015.5(c)(2) to the Notice as 

Attachments 1 and 2, respectively. Id. at 

1–2. The term of the instant contract is 

1 year from the date the Postal Service 

notifies the customer that all necessary 

regulatory approvals have been 

received. 

The Notice advances reasons why the 

instant GEPS 1 contract fits within the 

Mail Classification Schedule language 

for GEPS 1. The Postal Service contends 

that the instant contract is functionally 

equivalent to the GEPS 1 contracts filed 

previously. It states that in Governors’ 

Decision No. 08–7, a pricing formula 

and classification system were 

established to ensure that each contract 

meets the statutory and regulatory 

requirements of 39 U.S.C. 3633. The 

Postal Service contends that the instant 

contract demonstrates its functional 

equivalence with the previous GEPS 1 

contracts because of several factors: The 

customers are small or medium-sized 

businesses that mail directly to foreign 

destinations using EMI and/or PMI, the 

contract term of one year applies to all 

GEPS 1 contracts, the contracts have 

similar cost and market characteristics, 

and each requires payment through 

permit imprint. Id. at 4. It asserts that 

even though prices may be different 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES