[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 211 (Tuesday, November 3, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56882-56893]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-26168]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2009-0474]


Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility 
Operating Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations

I. Background

    Pursuant to section 189a.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 
amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the 
Commission or NRC) is publishing this regular biweekly notice. The Act 
requires the Commission 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 
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 biweekly notice includes all notices of amendments issued, or 
proposed to be issued from October 8, 2009 to October 21, 2009. The 
last

[[Page 56883]]

biweekly notice was published on October 20, 2009 (74 FR 53774).

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating 
Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, 
and Opportunity for a Hearing

    The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following 
amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under 
the Commission's regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR), Section 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 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 O1F21, 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/
requestor 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/requestor 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/requestor 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,

[[Page 56884]]

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 
[email protected], 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 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 NRC-issued 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/site-help/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/apply-certificates.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/e-submittals.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/site-help/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 
[email protected].
    Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not 
submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in 
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing 
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper 
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail 
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: 
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or 
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth 
Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. 
Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for 
serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered 
complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or 
by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing 
the document with the provider of the service.
    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 which is available for 
public inspection 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 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 at 1-800-
397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to [email protected].
Energy Northwest, Docket No. 50-397, Columbia Generating Station, 
Benton County, Washington
    Date of amendment request: August 17, 2009.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would (1) 
relocate the specific value for the fuel oil and lube oil storage 
volumes from Technical Specification (TS) 3.8.3, ``Diesel Fuel Oil, 
Lube Oil, and Starting Air,'' to the TS Bases; (2) relocate the 
specific value for day tank fuel oil volume from TS 3.8.1, ``AC 
[alternating current] Sources--Operating,'' to the TS Bases; and (3) 
relocate the specific standard for particulate concentration testing of 
diesel fuel oil from TS 5.5.9, ``Diesel Fuel Oil Testing Program,'' to 
the TS Bases.
    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff issued a notice 
of opportunity to comment in the Federal Register on February 22, 2006 
(71 FR 9179), on changes proposed by Technical Specification Task Force 
(TSTF) traveler TSTF-374,'' Diesel Fuel Oil Testing Program,'' for 
possible amendments to revise the plant-specific TSs to relocate the 
standards for diesel fuel oil testing to licensee-controlled documents 
and add alternate criteria to the ``clear and bright'' acceptance test 
for new fuel oil, including a model safety evaluation and model no

[[Page 56885]]

significant hazards consideration (NSHC) determination. The NRC staff 
subsequently issued a notice of availability of the TSTF-374 models for 
referencing in license amendment applications in the Federal Register 
on April 21, 2006 (71 FR 20735).
    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 NSHC 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 to the Diesel Fuel Oil, Lube Oil, and 
Starting Air Specification relocates the volume of diesel fuel oil 
and lube oil required to support 7 day operation of the onsite 
diesel generators [(DGs)], and the volume equivalent to a 6 day 
supply, to licensee control. A similar approach is also proposed for 
the AC Sources--Operating Specification which relocates the specific 
volume of fuel oil required to be maintained in the day tank to the 
TS Bases. The specific volumes of fuel oil equivalent to a 7 and 6 
day supply, and the one hour day tank supply, are calculated using 
the NRC approved methodology described in [NRC Regulatory Guide 
(RG)] 1.137 [Revision 1, ``Fuel Oil Systems for Standby Diesel 
Generators''] and [American National Standards Institute (ANSI)] 
N195 1976, [``Fuel Oil Systems for Standby Diesel-Generators].'' The 
specific volume of lube oil equivalent to a 7 and 6 day supply is 
based on the DG manufacturer's consumption values for the run time 
of the DG. The requirement(s) to maintain a 7 day supply of diesel 
fuel oil in subsystem storage, a 7 day supply of lube oil on-site, 
and a minimum of one hour of fuel oil in the day tank, continue to 
be met with this proposed change and thus remain consistent with the 
assumptions in the accident analyses. The actions required to be 
taken when the volume of fuel or lube oil is less than what is 
specified are not affected by this proposed change. Hence, neither 
the probability nor the consequences of any accident previously 
evaluated will be affected.
    Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    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 changes to the Diesel Fuel Oil, Lube Oil, and 
Starting Air, and the AC Sources--Operating specifications do not 
involve physical alterations of the plant (i.e., no new or different 
type of equipment will be installed) or changes in the methods of 
governing normal plant operation. The changes do not alter 
assumptions made in the safety analysis but ensure that the diesel 
generator operates as assumed in the accident analysis. The proposed 
changes are consistent with the safety analysis assumptions. 
Therefore, the proposed changes do 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 changes to the Diesel Fuel Oil, Lube Oil, and 
Starting Air, and AC Sources--Operating specifications relocates the 
volume of diesel fuel oil and lube oil to licensee control. As the 
bases for the existing limits on diesel fuel oil and lube oil are 
not changed and the methods used to determine these limits have been 
previously approved, no change is made to the accident analysis 
assumptions and no margin of safety is reduced as part of this 
change. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a 
significant reduction in a margin of safety.

    In its application dated August 17, 2009, the licensee also 
affirmed the applicability of the NSHC approved by the NRC in TSTF-374, 
as part of the consolidated line item process, 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 changes relocate the specific ASTM [American 
Society for Testing and Materials] standard references from the 
Administrative Controls Section of TS to a licensee-controlled 
document. Requirements to perform testing in accordance with 
applicable ASTM standards are retained in the TS as are requirements 
to perform surveillances of both new and stored diesel fuel oil. 
Future changes to the licensee-controlled document will be evaluated 
pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59, ``Changes, tests and 
experiments,'' to ensure that such changes do not result in more 
than a minimal increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated. In addition, the ``clear and bright'' 
test used to establish the acceptability of new fuel oil for use 
prior to addition to storage tanks has been expanded to recognize 
more rigorous testing of water and sediment content. Relocating the 
specific ASTM standard references from the TS to a licensee-
controlled document and allowing a water and sediment content test 
to be performed to establish the acceptability of new fuel oil will 
not affect nor degrade the ability of the emergency diesel 
generators (DGs) to perform their specified safety function. Fuel 
oil quality will continue to meet ASTM requirements.
    The proposed changes do not adversely affect accident initiators 
or precursors nor alter the design assumptions, conditions, and 
configuration of the facility or the manner in which the plant is 
operated and maintained. The proposed changes do not adversely 
affect the ability of structures, systems, and components (SSCs) to 
perform their intended safety function to mitigate the consequences 
of an initiating event within the assumed acceptance limits. The 
proposed changes do not affect the source term, containment 
isolation, or radiological release assumptions used in evaluating 
the radiological consequences of any accident previously evaluated. 
Further, the proposed changes do not increase the types and amounts 
of radioactive effluent that may be released offsite, nor 
significantly increase individual or cumulative occupational/public 
radiation exposures.
    Therefore, the changes do not involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of any accident previously 
evaluated.
    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 changes relocate the specific ASTM standard 
references from the Administrative Controls Section of TS to a 
licensee-controlled document. In addition, the ``clear and bright'' 
test used to establish the acceptability of new fuel oil for use 
prior to addition to storage tanks has been expanded to allow a 
water and sediment content test to be performed to establish the 
acceptability of new fuel oil. The changes do not involve a physical 
alteration of the plant (i.e., no new or different type of equipment 
will be installed) or a change in the methods governing normal plant 
operation. The requirements retained in the TS continue to require 
testing of the diesel fuel oil to ensure the proper functioning of 
the DGs.
    Therefore, the changes do 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 changes relocate the specific ASTM standard 
references from the Administrative Controls Section of TS to a 
licensee-controlled document. Instituting the proposed changes will 
continue to ensure the use of applicable ASTM standards to evaluate 
the quality of both new and stored fuel oil designated for use in 
the emergency DGs. Changes to the licensee-controlled document are 
performed in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.59. This 
approach provides an effective level of regulatory control and 
ensures that diesel fuel oil testing is conducted such that there is 
no significant reduction in a margin of safety.
    The ``clear and bright'' test used to establish the 
acceptability of new fuel oil for use prior to addition to storage 
tanks has been expanded to allow a water and sediment content test 
to be performed to establish the acceptability of new fuel oil. The 
margin of safety provided by the DGs is unaffected by the proposed 
changes since there continue to be TS requirements to ensure fuel 
oil is of the appropriate quality for emergency DG use. The proposed 
changes provide the flexibility needed to improve fuel oil sampling 
and analysis methodologies while maintaining sufficient controls to 
preserve the current margins of safety.
    [Therefore, the changes do not involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety.]


[[Page 56886]]


    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: William A. Horin, Esq., Winston & Strawn, 
1700 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20006-3817.
    NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. Markley.
Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC and Entergy Nuclear Operations, 
Inc., Docket No. 50-271, Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Vernon, 
Vermont
    Date of amendment request: September 16, 2009.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would 
revise Technical Specification Section 3.7.D.2 to allow reactor 
operation to continue, in the event any containment isolation valve 
becomes inoperable, provided the affected penetration flow path is 
isolated by the use of at least one closed and de-activated automatic 
valve, closed manual valve, or blind flange.
    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 change does not impact the probability of any design basis 
accident in that no accident initiators are impacted. The change 
does not impact accident mitigation. The proposed change provides 
equivalent requirements for conditions where there is an inoperable 
containment isolation valve so that accident mitigation systems 
function consistent with the licensing and design basis. The change 
ensures that the function of primary containment is maintained 
should there be an inoperable containment isolation valve by 
isolation of the penetration flow path using passive devices. 
Although the isolation means are not in all cases leak tested, 
leakage is not expected to be significant since the devices used for 
isolation are passive components that are in the isolated position. 
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    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 provides allowance for crediting passive 
isolation devices on lines that have been determined to have an 
inoperable containment isolation valve. The use of a passive 
component (i.e., another containment isolation valve in the affected 
line) to compensate for an inoperable isolation valve is already 
part of the licensing basis. The change expands the types of passive 
devices which may be used. Operation of existing installed equipment 
is unchanged. The methods governing plant operation and testing 
remain consistent with current safety analysis assumptions. 
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 a 
margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change does not change any existing design 
requirements and does not adversely affect existing plant safety 
margins or the reliability of the equipment assumed to operate in 
the safety analysis. The proposed change affects the types of 
passive devices that can be used as the containment boundary when a 
containment isolation valve is inoperable. The design of such 
devices would meet containment design requirements so that safety 
margins are maintained. Leakage through passive devices would be 
minimal and be within regulatory limits. Therefore, 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: Mr. William C. Dennis, Assistant General 
Counsel, Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., 400 Hamilton Avenue, White 
Plains, NY 10601.
    NRC Branch Chief: Nancy Salgado.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-237 and 50-249, Dresden 
Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Grundy County, Illinois, Docket 
Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 
2, Rock Island County, Illinois
    Date of application for amendment request: August 28, 2009.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment revises 
Technical Specification 3.4.5, ``RCS [Reactor Coolant System] Leakage 
Detection Instrumentation,'' to support implementation of an alternate 
method of verifying that leakage in the drywell is within limits.
    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 physical changes to any 
plant structure, system, or component. As a result, no new failure 
modes of the RCS leakage detection systems are being introduced. 
Additionally, the change being proposed will have no impact on the 
RCS leakage detection system that would impact initiating event 
frequency.
    The consequences of a previously analyzed accident are dependent 
on the initial conditions assumed for the analysis, the behavior of 
the fuel during the analyzed accident, the availability and 
successful functioning of the equipment assumed to operate in 
response to the analyzed event, and the setpoints at which these 
actions are initiated. The RCS leakage detection systems do not 
perform an accident mitigating function. Emergency Core Cooling 
System, Reactor Protection System, and primary and secondary 
containment isolation actuations are not affected by the proposed 
change. The proposed change has no impact on any setpoints or 
functions related to these actuations. There are no changes in the 
types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents 
released offsite.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    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 allows use of the drywell equipment drain 
system as an alternate method to verify that RCS leakage in the 
drywell is within TS limits. The drywell equipment drain system will 
continue to be used for leakage collection and quantification. There 
is no alteration to the parameters within which the plant is 
normally operated or in the setpoints that initiate protective or 
mitigative actions. As a result, no new failure modes are being 
introduced.
    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 a 
margin of safety?
    Response: No
    The current TSs require a periodic measurement of RCS leakage. 
The proposed change maintains the existing level of safety by 
allowing use of the DWEDS [drywell equipment drain sump] monitoring 
system to verify that RCS leakage in the drywell is within TS 
limits. No changes are being made to any of the RCS leakage limits 
specified in TS 3.4.4. The impact of the change is that the amount 
of unidentified and identified RCS leakage within the drywell will 
be quantified and evaluated as a single unidentified leakage value. 
This alternate method is more conservative than the current method.

[[Page 56887]]

    Therefore, 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: Mr. Bradley J. Fewell, Associate General 
Counsel, Exelon Nuclear, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555.
    NRC Branch Chief: Stephen J. Campbell.
R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC, Docket No. 50-244, R.E. Ginna 
Nuclear Power Plant, Wayne County, New York
    Date of amendment request: September 18, 2009.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would 
revise Technical Specification (TS) 5.5.7, ``Inservice Testing 
Program,'' to align it with the requirements of Title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 50.55a(f)(4) for pumps and valves 
which are classified as American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) 
Code Class 1, Class 2, and Class 3. Specifically, the TSs will be 
modified to incorporate TS Task Force (TSTF) 479-A, Revision 0, 
``Changes to Reflect Revision of 10 CFR 50.55a,'' and TSTF 497-A, 
Revision 0, ``Limit Inservice Testing Program SR [Surveillance 
Requirement] 3.0.2 Application to Frequencies of 2 Years or Less.''
    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. Operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed 
amendment would not involve a significant increase in the 
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed change will replace, within TS 5.5.7, references to 
Section XI of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code with references 
to the ASME Code for Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power 
Plants (OM Code). In addition the proposed change adds words to TS 
5.5.7.b which applies the extension allowance of Surveillance 
Requirement 3.0.2 to other normal and accelerated inservice testing 
frequencies of two years or less that were not included in the 
frequencies of the table listed in TS 5.5.7.a.
    The proposed change is administrative, does not affect any 
accident initiators, does not affect the ability to successfully 
respond to previously evaluated accidents and does not affect 
radiological assumptions used in the evaluations. Thus, operation of 
the facility in accordance with the proposed change will not involve 
an increase in the probability or the consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    2. Operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed 
amendment would not create the possibility of a new or different 
kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
    The proposed change will replace, within TS 5.5.7 references to 
Section XI of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code with references 
to the ASME OM Code. In addition the proposed change also adds words 
to TS 5.5.7.b which applies the extension allowance of Surveillance 
Requirement 3.0.2 to other normal and accelerated inservice testing 
frequencies of two years or less that were not included in the 
frequencies of the table listed in TS 5.5.7.a.
    The proposed change does not involve a modification to the 
physical configuration of the plant (i.e., no new equipment will be 
installed) or involve a change in the methods governing normal plant 
operation. The proposed change will not impose any new or different 
requirements or introduce a new accident initiator, accident 
precursor, or malfunction mechanism. Additionally, there is no 
change in the types or increase in the amounts of any effluent that 
may be released offsite and there is no increase in individual or 
cumulative occupational exposure.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility 
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    3. Operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed 
amendment would not involve a significant reduction in a margin of 
safety.
    The proposed change will replace, within TS 5.5.7 references to 
Section XI of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code with references 
to the ASME OM Code. In addition the proposed change also adds words 
to TS 5.5.7.b which applies the extension allowance of Surveillance 
Requirement 3.0.2 to other normal and accelerated inservice testing 
frequencies of two years or less that were not included in the 
frequencies of the table listed in TS 5.5.7.a.
    The proposed change does not involve a modification to the 
physical configuration of the operating units or change the methods 
governing normal plant operation. The proposed change incorporates 
revisions to the ASME Code that results in a net improvement in the 
measures for testing pumps and valves. The safety functions of the 
applicable pumps and valves will be maintained.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
reduction in the 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: Carey Fleming, Sr. Counsel--Nuclear 
Generation, Constellation Group, LLC, 750 East Pratt Street, 17 Floor, 
Baltimore, MD 21202.
    NRC Branch Chief: Nancy L. Salgado.

Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses

    During the period since publication of the last biweekly notice, 
the Commission has issued the following amendments. The Commission has 
determined for each of these amendments that the application complies 
with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, 
as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The 
Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the 
Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set 
forth in the license amendment.
    Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility 
Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration 
Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing in connection with these 
actions was published in the Federal Register as indicated.
    Unless otherwise indicated, the Commission has determined that 
these amendments satisfy the criteria for categorical exclusion in 
accordance with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), 
no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be 
prepared for these amendments. If the Commission has prepared an 
environmental assessment under the special circumstances provision in 
10 CFR 51.22(b) and has made a determination based on that assessment, 
it is so indicated.
    For further details with respect to the action see (1) the 
applications for amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3) the Commission's 
related letter, Safety Evaluation and/or Environmental Assessment as 
indicated. All of these items are available for public inspection at 
the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint 
North, Public File Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), 
Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from 
the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public 
Electronic Reading Room on the internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. If you do not have access to ADAMS 
or if there are

[[Page 56888]]

problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the PDR 
Reference staff at 1 (800) 397-4209, (301) 415-4737 or by email to 
[email protected].
Arizona Public Service Company, et al., Docket Nos. STN 50-528, STN 50-
529, and STN 50-530, Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 
1, 2, and 3, Maricopa County, Arizona
    Date of application for amendment: October 1, 2008, as supplemented 
by letters dated July 31 and September 17, 2009.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendments modified Technical 
Specification (TS) 5.5.16, ``Containment Leakage Rate Testing 
Program,'' by adding exceptions to the provisions of U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC) Regulatory Guide 1.163, ``Performance-Based 
Containment Leak-Test Program,'' that would allow the next containment 
integrated leak rate test for each unit to be performed at a 15-year 
interval instead of the current 10-year interval for Units 1, 2, and 3.
    Date of issuance: October 20, 2009.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 90 days from the date of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: Unit 1--176; Unit 2--176; Unit 3--176.
    Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-41, NPF-51, and NPF-74: The 
amendment revised the Operating Licenses and Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 18, 2008 (73 
FR 68452). The supplemental letters dated July 31 and September 17, 
2009, provided additional information that clarified the application, 
did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and 
did not change the NRC staff's original proposed no significant hazards 
consideration determination.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated October 20, 2009.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Arizona Public Service Company, et al., Docket Nos. STN 50-528, STN 50-
529, and STN 50-530, Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 
1, 2, and 3, Maricopa County, Arizona
    Date of application for amendment: November 13, 2008.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendments modified Technical 
Specification (TS) 3.5.5, ``Refueling Water Tank (RWT),'' for Palo 
Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS), Units 1 and 3, to increase 
the minimum required RWT level indications and the corresponding 
borated water volumes in TS Figure 3.5.5-1, ``Minimum Required RWT 
Volume,'' by 3 percent. The amendments also incorporate editorial 
changes to TS Figure 3.5.5-1 for PVNGS, Units 1, 2, and 3, to provide 
consistent formatting of the RWT volumetric values provided in the 
figure.
    Date of issuance: October 21, 2009.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 60 days from the date of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: Unit 1--177; Unit 2--177; Unit 3--177.
    Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-41, NPF-51, and NPF-74: The 
amendment revised the Operating Licenses and Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 30, 2008 (73 
FR 79930).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated October 21, 2009.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Carolina Power and Light Company, et al., Docket No. 50-400, Shearon 
Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Wake and Chatham Counties, North 
Carolina
    Date of application for amendment: April 30, 2008, as supplemented 
by letters dated December 3, 2008, and June 30, 2009.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revises Technical 
Specification Section 3.7.5a to restore the ultimate heat sink main 
reservoir minimum level to the value allowed by the initial operating 
license as a result of improvements made to the emergency service water 
system. The change will allow continued plant operation to a main 
reservoir minimum level of 206 feet mean sea level (MSL) in Modes 1-4, 
versus the current minimum allowed level of 215 feet MSL.
    Date of issuance: October 14, 2009.
    Effective date: Effective as of the date of issuance and shall be 
implemented within 120 days.
    Amendment No.: 132.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-63: The amendment 
revises the technical specifications and facility operating license.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 12, 2008 (73 FR 
46929).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a safety evaluation dated October 14, 2009.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-313, Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 
No. 1, Pope County, Arkansas
    Date of amendment request: October 22, 2007, as supplemented by 
letters dated April 3, August 14, and September 18, 2008, and August 
31, 2009.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the 
requirements of Technical Specification (TS) 3.4.12, ``RCS [reactor 
coolant system] Specific Activity,'' and TS 3.7.4, ``Secondary Specific 
Activity,'' as related to the use of an alternative source term (AST) 
associated with accident offsite and control room dose consequences. 
Implementation of the AST supports adoption of the control room 
envelope habitability controls in accordance with Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission (NRC)-approved TS Task Force (TSTF) Standard Technical 
Specification change traveler TSTF-448, Revision 3, ``Control Room 
Habitability.''
    Date of issuance: October 21, 2009.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 180 days.
    Amendment No.: 238.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-51: Amendment revised 
the Technical Specifications and license.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 18, 2007 (72 
FR 71708). The supplemental letters dated April 3, August 14, and 
September 18, 2008, and August 31, 2009, provided additional 
information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of 
the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staff's 
original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as 
published in the Federal Register.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated October 21, 2009.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50-456 and STN 50-457, 
Braidwood Station (Braidwood), Units 1 and 2, Will County, Illinois, 
Docket Nos. STN 50-454 and STN 50-455, Byron Station (Byron), Unit Nos. 
1 and 2, Ogle County, Illinois
    Date of application for amendment: June 24, 2009, as supplemented 
by letters dated. August 14, August 31, and September 15, 2009.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendments revise Technical 
Specification (TS) 5.5.9, ``Steam Generator (SG) Program,'' to exclude

[[Page 56889]]

portions of the tube below the top of the SG tubesheet from periodic SG 
tube inspections and plugging or repair. In addition, the amendments 
revise the wording of reporting requirements in TS 5.6.9, ``Steam 
Generator (SG) Tube Inspection Report.'' For TS 5.5.9, the amendments 
incorporate a one-cycle alternate repair criteria in the provisions for 
SG tube repair for Braidwood, Unit 2, during refueling outage (RFO) 14 
(fall 2009) and the subsequent operating cycle, and for Byron, Unit No. 
2, during RFO 15 (spring 2010) and the subsequent operating cycle. 
These changes only affect Braidwood, Unit 2, and Byron, Unit No. 2; 
however, this action is docketed for both Braidwood and Byron units 
because the Braidwood TS are common to both Braidwood units, and the 
Byron TS are common to both Byron units.
    Date of issuance: October 16, 2009.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 30 days for Braidwood and, for Byron, prior to conducting the SG 
inspections required by TS 5.5.9 for the Byron, Unit No. 2, spring 2010 
refueling outage (B2R15).
    Amendment Nos.: Braidwood Unit 1-161; Braidwood Unit 2-161; Byron 
Unit No. 1-166; and Byron Unit No. 2-166.
    Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-72, NPF-77, NPF-37, and NPF-66: 
The amendments revise the TSs and Licenses.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 31, 2009 (74 FR 
38234). The supplemental letters provided additional information that 
clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application 
as originally noticed, and did not change the NRC staff's original 
proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated October 16, 2009.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-237 and 50-249, Dresden 
Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Grundy County, Illinois
    Date of application for amendment: October 9, 2007, as supplemented 
by letter dated January 30, 2009.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendments modify the technical 
specifications to risk-informed requirements regarding selected 
Required Action End States as provided in Technical Specification Task 
Force (TSTF) change traveler TSTF-423, Revision 0, ``Technical 
Specifications End States, NEDC-32988-A, Revision 2.''
    Date of issuance: October 20, 2009.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 120 days.
    Amendment Nos.: 233/226.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-19 and DPR-25: The 
amendments revised the Technical Specifications and License.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 4, 2007 (72 FR 
68215). The January 30, 2009, supplement, contained clarifying 
information and did not change the NRC staff's initial proposed finding 
of no significant hazards consideration determination.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated October 20, 2009.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Indiana Michigan Power Company (IandM), Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316, 
Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Berrien County, Michigan
    Date of application for amendment: September 25, 2008.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment modifies Technical 
Specification Figures 4.3-1 and 4.3-2, which show allowable locations 
for nuclear fuel in the spent fuel pool storage racks. The figures 
currently show two different allowable storage patterns for four of the 
storage rack modules. The amendment modifies these two figures such 
that fuel may be located in any of these four individual modules in 
accordance with either figure to allow continued placement of new and 
intermediate burn-up fuel in the spent fuel pool as the storage racks 
approach capacity.
    Date of issuance: October 8, 2009.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 45 days from the date of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: Unit 1-311; Unit 2-293.
    Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-58 and DPR-74: Amendment 
revised the Renewed Operating License and Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 16, 2008 (73 
FR 76411).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated October 8, 2009.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Luminant Generation Company LLC, Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446, 
Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Somervell 
County, Texas
    Date of amendment request: June 8, 2009, as supplemented by letters 
dated August 20 and 27, and September 2 (two letters), 14, 17, and 28, 
2009.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised 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 tubes within 
the tubesheet from periodic SG inspections (establish alternate repair 
criteria). The amendments also revised TS 5.6.9, ``Unit 1 Model D76 and 
Unit 2 Model D5 Steam Generator Tube Inspection Report,'' to remove 
reference to previous interim alternate repair criteria and provide 
specific reporting requirements for Comanche Peak Steam Electric 
Station (CPSES), Unit 2 during refueling outage 11 and the subsequent 
operating cycle for CPSES, Unit 2.
    Date of issuance: October 9, 2009.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 30 days from the date of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: Unit 1-149; Unit 2-149.
    Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-87 and NPF-89: The amendments 
revised the Facility Operating Licenses and Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 23, 2009 (74 FR 
36533). The supplements dated August 20 and 27, and September 2 (two 
letters), 14, 17, and 28, 2009, provided additional information that 
clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application 
as originally noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed 
no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the 
Federal Register.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated October 9, 2009.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC, Docket No. 50-443, Seabrook Station, Unit 
No. 1, Rockingham County, New Hampshire
    Date of amendment request: May 28, 2009, as supplemented on 
September 16, 18, and 25, 2009.
    Description of amendment request: This amendment changes the 
inspection scope and repair requirements of Technical Specification 
(TS) Section 6.7.6.k, ``Steam Generator (SG) Program'' and the 
reporting

[[Page 56890]]

requirements of TS Section 6.8.1.7, ``Steam Generator Tube Inspection 
Report.'' The changes establish temporary alternate repair criteria for 
portions of the SG tubes within the tubesheet.
    Date of issuance: October 13, 2009.
    Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 30 days.
    Amendment No.: 123.
    Facility Operating License No. NPF-86: The amendment revised the TS 
and the License.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 21, 2009 (74 FR 
35891). The supplemental letters dated September 16, 18 and 25, 2009, 
provided additional information that clarified the application, did not 
expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not 
change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards 
consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated October 13, 2009.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Omaha Public Power District, Docket No. 50-285, Fort Calhoun Station, 
Unit No. 1, Washington County, Nebraska
    Date of amendment request: January 30, 2009, as supplemented by 
letters dated June 30 and August 28, 2009.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment modifies the Fort 
Calhoun Station (FCS), Unit No. 1, Renewed Operating License No. DPR-
40, by adding operability and surveillance testing requirements to the 
FCS Technical Specifications (TS) for the steam generator (SG) blowdown 
isolation on a reactor trip. Specifically, the changes revise TS 
Limiting Conditions for Operation (LCO) 2.15, Instrumentation and 
Control Systems, Table 2-4, Instrument Operating Conditions for 
Isolation Functions, to include operability requirements for SG 
blowdown isolation on a reactor trip and to add applicable footnotes. 
In addition, TS 3.1, Instrumentation and Control, Table 3-2, Minimum 
Frequencies for Checks, Calibrations and Testing of Engineered Safety 
Features, Instrumentation and Controls, is revised to include the 
surveillance test requirements for SG blowdown isolation on a reactor 
trip. The amendment changes TS LCO 2.15(1), to delete the words ``key 
operated'' associated with the bypass switches.
    Date of issuance: October 9, 2009.
    Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented 
prior to startup from the 2009 refueling outage, which is scheduled to 
commence on November 1, 2009.
    Amendment No.: 263.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-40: The amendment 
revised the Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: April 7, 2009 (74 FR 
15774). The supplemental letters dated June 30 and August 28, 2009, 
provided additional information that clarified the application, did not 
expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not 
change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards 
consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a safety evaluation dated October 9, 2009.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Southern California Edison Company, et al., Docket Nos. 50-361 and 50-
362, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3, San Diego 
County, California
    Date of application for amendments: June 10. 2009.
    Brief description of amendments: The changes consist of deletion of 
Technical Specification 5.2.2.e for San Onofre Nuclear Generating 
Station, Units 2 and 3, which has been superseded by the new 
requirements regarding working hours for nuclear plant staff in Title 
10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 26, subpart I. The 
changes are consistent with Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) 
change traveler, TSTF-511, Revision 0, ``Eliminate Working Hour 
Restrictions from TS 5.2.2 to Support Compliance with 10 CFR part 26.''
    Date of issuance: October 20, 2009.
    Effective date: Upon issuance; to be implemented within 60 days of 
issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: Unit 2--221; Unit 3--214.
    Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-10 and NPF-15: The amendments 
revised the Facility Operating Licenses and Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 11, 2009 (74 FR 
40239).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated October 20, 2009.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket No. 50-328, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, 
Unit 2, Hamilton County, Tennessee
    Date of application for amendment: May 21, 2009, as supplemented on 
August 14 and September 29, 2009 (TSC 09-02).
    Brief description of amendment: The proposed amendment revised 
Technical Specification (TS) Section 6.8.4.k, ``Steam Generator (SG) 
Program,'' for Unit 2 to allow the implementation of SG tubing 
alternate repair criteria for axial indications in the Westinghouse 
Electric Company explosive tube expansion region below the top of the 
tubesheet and specify the W* distance for the SG cold-legs.
    Date of issuance: October 19, 2009.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 60 days of issuance.
    Amendment No.: 318.
    Facility Operating License No. DPR-79: Amendment revised the 
technical specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 4, 2009 (74 FR 
34048). The supplements dated August 14 and September 29, 2009, 
provided additional information that clarified the application, did not 
expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not 
change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards 
consideration determination.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a safety evaluation dated October 19, 2009.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, Docket No. 50-482, Wolf Creek 
Generating Station, Coffey County, Kansas
    Date of amendment request: June 2, 2009, as supplemented by letters 
dated August 25, September 3 (two letters), and September 15, 2009.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised Technical 
Specification (TS) 5.5.9, ``Steam Generator (SG) Program,'' to exclude 
portions of the tubes within the tubesheet from periodic SG inspections 
(establish alternate repair criteria). The amendments also revised TS 
5.6.10, ``Steam Generator Tube Inspection Report,'' to remove reference 
to previous interim alternate repair criteria and provide specific 
reporting requirements for Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS) during 
refueling outage 17 and the subsequent operating cycle for WCGS.
    Date of issuance: October 19, 2009.

[[Page 56891]]

    Effective date: As of the date of its issuance and shall be 
implemented prior to MODE 4 entry during startup from Refueling Outage 
17.
    Amendment No.: 186.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-42. The amendment 
revised the Operating License and Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 21, 2009 (74 FR 
35892). The supplements dated August 25, September 3 (two letters), and 
September 15, 2009, provided additional information that clarified the 
application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally 
noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no 
significant hazards consideration determination as published in the 
Federal Register.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated October 19, 2009.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and 
Final Determination of No Significant Hazards Consideration and 
Opportunity for a Hearing (Exigent Public Announcement or Emergency 
Circumstances)

    During the period since publication of the last biweekly notice, 
the Commission has issued the following amendments. The Commission has 
determined for each of these amendments that the application for the 
amendment complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic 
Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules 
and regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings as 
required by the Act and the Commission's rules and regulations in 10 
CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendment.
    Because of exigent or emergency circumstances associated with the 
date the amendment was needed, there was not time for the Commission to 
publish, for public comment before issuance, its usual Notice of 
Consideration of Issuance of Amendment, Proposed No Significant Hazards 
Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing.
    For exigent circumstances, the Commission has either issued a 
Federal Register notice providing opportunity for public comment or has 
used local media to provide notice to the public in the area 
surrounding a licensee's facility of the licensee's application and of 
the Commission's proposed determination of no significant hazards 
consideration. The Commission has provided a reasonable opportunity for 
the public to comment, using its best efforts to make available to the 
public means of communication for the public to respond quickly, and in 
the case of telephone comments, the comments have been recorded or 
transcribed as appropriate and the licensee has been informed of the 
public comments.
    In circumstances where failure to act in a timely way would have 
resulted, for example, in derating or shutdown of a nuclear power plant 
or in prevention of either resumption of operation or of increase in 
power output up to the plant's licensed power level, the Commission may 
not have had an opportunity to provide for public comment on its no 
significant hazards consideration determination. In such case, the 
license amendment has been issued without opportunity for comment. If 
there has been some time for public comment but less than 30 days, the 
Commission may provide an opportunity for public comment. If comments 
have been requested, it is so stated. In either event, the State has 
been consulted by telephone whenever possible.
    Under its regulations, the Commission may issue and make an 
amendment immediately effective, notwithstanding the pendency before it 
of a request for a hearing from any person, in advance of the holding 
and completion of any required hearing, where it has determined that no 
significant hazards consideration is involved.
    The Commission has applied the standards of 10 CFR 50.92 and has 
made a final determination that the amendment involves no significant 
hazards consideration. The basis for this determination is contained in 
the documents related to this action. Accordingly, the amendments have 
been issued and made effective as indicated.
    Unless otherwise indicated, the Commission has determined that 
these amendments satisfy the criteria for categorical exclusion in 
accordance with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), 
no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be 
prepared for these amendments. If the Commission has prepared an 
environmental assessment under the special circumstances provision in 
10 CFR 51.12(b) and has made a determination based on that assessment, 
it is so indicated.
    For further details with respect to the action see (1) the 
application for amendment, (2) the amendment to Facility Operating 
License, and (3) the Commission's related letter, Safety Evaluation 
and/or Environmental Assessment, as indicated. All of these items are 
available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document 
Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 01F21, 
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. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems 
in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the PDR Reference 
staff at 1 (800) 397-4209, (301) 415-4737 or by e-mail to 
[email protected].
    The Commission is also offering an opportunity for a hearing with 
respect to the issuance of the amendment. 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 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), 
Rockville, Maryland, and electronically on the Internet at the NRC Web 
site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If there are 
problems in accessing the document, contact the PDR Reference staff at 
1 (800) 397-4209, (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to [email protected]. 
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

[[Page 56892]]

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 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.\1\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ To the extent that the applications contain attachments and 
supporting documents that are not publicly available because they 
are asserted to contain safeguards or proprietary information, 
petitioners desiring access to this information should contact the 
applicant or applicant's counsel and discuss the need for a 
protective order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Each contention shall be given a separate numeric or alpha 
designation within one of the following groups:
    1. Technical--primarily concerns/issues relating to technical and/
or health and safety matters discussed or referenced in the 
applications.
    2. Environmental--primarily concerns/issues relating to matters 
discussed or referenced in the environmental analysis for the 
applications.
    3. Miscellaneous--does not fall into one of the categories outlined 
above.
    As specified in 10 CFR 2.309, if two or more petitioners/requestors 
seek to co-sponsor a contention, the petitioners/requestors shall 
jointly designate a representative who shall have the authority to act 
for the petitioners/requestors with respect to that contention. If a 
petitioner/requestor seeks to adopt the contention of another 
sponsoring petitioner/requestor, the petitioner/requestor who seeks to 
adopt the contention must either agree that the sponsoring petitioner/
requestor shall act as the representative with respect to that 
contention, or jointly designate with the sponsoring petitioner/
requestor a representative who shall have the authority to act for the 
petitioners/requestors with respect to that contention.
    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. Since the Commission has made a final determination that the 
amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, if a hearing 
is requested, it will not stay the effectiveness of the amendment. Any 
hearing held would take place while the amendment is in effect.
    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 on 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 a waiver in accordance with the procedures described below.
    To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 
five (5) days prior to the filing deadline, the petitioner/requestor 
must contact the Office of the Secretary by e-mail at 
[email protected], 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 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 NRC-issued 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/site-help/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/apply-certificates.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/e-submittals.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/site-help/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 
[email protected].
    Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not 
submitting documents electronically must file a motion, in accordance 
with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing requesting 
authorization to continue to

[[Page 56893]]

submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by: 
(1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the 
Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, 
express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the 
Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and 
Adjudications Staff. Participants filing a document in this manner are 
responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing 
is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in 
the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service 
upon depositing the document with the provider of the service.
    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 petition 
and/or request 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 submission.
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket No. 50-364, Joseph M. 
Farley Nuclear Plant, Unit 2, (FNP) Houston County, Alabama
    Date of amendment request: October 8, 2009.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed one-time change to 
the Technical Specification revises Limiting Condition for Operation 
3.7.8, ``Service Water System (SWS),'' Action A, Completion Time from 
72 hours to a one-time 7-day Completion Time to allow replacement of 
two of the FNP Unit 2 SWS Train A seismic support ring assemblies.
    Date of Issuance: October 9, 2009.
    Amendment No.: 177.
    Facility Operating License No. (NPF-8): Amendment revises the 
technical specifications.
    Public comments requested as to proposed no significant hazards 
consideration (NSHC):
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment, finding of 
emergency circumstances, state consultation, and final NSHC 
determination are contained in a safety evaluation dated October 9, 
2009.
    Attorney for licensee: M. Stanford Blanton, Esq., Balch and 
Bingham, Post Office Box 306, 1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, 
Alabama 35201.
    NRC Branch Chief: John Stang (Acting).

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd day of October 2009.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Joseph G. Giitter,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E9-26168 Filed 11-2-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P