[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 180 (Tuesday, September 17, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57180-57186]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-22469]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2013-0209]
Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility
Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant
Hazards Considerations
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 or
combined license, as applicable, upon a determination by the Commission
that such amendment involves no significant hazards consideration,
notwithstanding the pendency before the Commission of a request for a
hearing from any person.
This biweekly notice includes all notices of amendments issued, or
proposed to be issued from August 22, 2013, to September 4, 2013. The
last biweekly notice was published on September 3, 2013 (78 FR 54280).
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods
(unless
[[Page 57181]]
this document describes a different method for submitting comments on a
specific subject):
Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-0209. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-
3422; email: [email protected].
Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules,
Announcements, and Directives Branch (RADB), Office of Administration,
Mail Stop: 3WFN-06-A44MP, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001.
For additional direction on accessing information and submitting
comments, see ``Accessing Information and Submitting Comments'' in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Accessing Information and Submitting Comments
A. Accessing Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2013-0209 when contacting the NRC
about the availability of information regarding this document. You may
access information related to this document, which the NRC possesses
and is publicly available, by the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-0209.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may access publicly available documents online in the NRC
Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the
search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and then select ``Begin Web-
based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's
Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-
4737, or by email to [email protected]. Documents may be viewed in
ADAMS by performing a search on the document date and docket number.
NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
B. Submitting Comments
Please include Docket ID NRC-2013-0209 in the subject line of your
comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make
your comment submission available to the public in this docket.
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact
information in comment submissions that you do not want to be publicly
disclosed. The NRC posts all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as entering the comment submissions into
ADAMS, and the NRC does not edit comment submissions to remove
identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to
include identifying or contact information in their comment submissions
that they do not want to be publicly disclosed. Your request should
state that the NRC will not edit comment submissions to remove such
information before making the comment submissions available to the
public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses and Combined Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards
Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following
amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under
the Commission's regulations in Sec. 50.92 of Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (10 CFR), 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.
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 or
combined 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 NRC's PDR, located at One White Flint North,
Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland
20852. NRC regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC
Library on the NRC Web site at 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
[[Page 57182]]
petition must also identify the specific contentions which the
requestor/petitioner 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
requestor/petitioner 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 requestor/
petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing.
The requestor/petitioner must also provide references to those specific
sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the
requestor/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 requestor/petitioner to relief. A requestor/
petitioner 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, then 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 (72 FR 49139,
August 28, 2007). 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 10
days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the
Office of the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by
telephone at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital information (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 (2) advise
the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a request or
petition for hearing (even in instances in which the participant, or
its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID
certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish
an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the
Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is
available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html. System requirements for accessing
the E-Submittal server are detailed in the NRC's ``Guidance for
Electronic Submission,'' which is available on the agency's public Web
site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants
may attempt to use other software not listed on the Web site, but
should note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted
software, and the NRC Meta System Help Desk will not be able to offer
assistance in using unlisted software.
If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC
in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the
document using the NRC's online, Web-based submission form. In order to
serve documents through Electronic Information Exchange System, users
will be required to install a Web browser plug-in from the NRC Web
site. Further information on the Web-based submission form, including
the installation of the Web browser plug-in, is available on the NRC's
public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.
Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a
docket has been created, the participant 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
documents are submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be
timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system
no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of
a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends
the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The
E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access
to the document to the NRC 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 by contacting the NRC Meta System
Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC Web site
at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email at
[email protected], or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The
NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.,
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.
Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not
submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing
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,
[[Page 57183]]
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking
and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing a document in this manner
are responsible for serving the document on all other participants.
Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of
deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery
service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service.
A presiding officer, having granted an exemption request from using E-
Filing, may require a participant or party to use E-Filing if the
presiding officer subsequently determines that the reason for granting
the exemption from use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at
http://ehd1.nrc.gov/ehd/, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the
Commission, or the presiding officer. Participants are requested not to
include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers,
home addresses, or home phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC
regulation or other law requires submission of such information.
However, a request to intervene will require including information on
local residence in order to demonstrate a proximity assertion of
interest in the proceeding. With respect to copyrighted works, except
for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings
and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested
not to include copyrighted materials in their submission.
Petitions for leave to intervene must be filed no later than 60
days from the date of publication of this notice. Requests for hearing,
petitions for leave to intervene, and motions for leave to file new or
amended contentions that are filed after the 60-day deadline will not
be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the
filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the following three
factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1): (i) the information upon which the
filing is based was not previously available; (ii) the information upon
which the filing is based is materially different from information
previously available; and (iii) the filing has been submitted in a
timely fashion based on the availability of the subsequent information.
For further details with respect to this license amendment
application, see the application for amendment which is available for
public inspection at the NRC's PDR, located at One White Flint North,
Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland
20852. Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC are
accessible electronically through ADAMS in the NRC Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to
ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in
ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209,
301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected].
South Carolina Electric and Gas, Docket Nos. 52-027 and 52-028, Virgil
C. Summer Nuclear Station (VCSNS) Units 2 and 3, Fairfield County,
South Carolina
Date of amendment request: August 30, 2013.
Description of amendment request: The proposed change would amend
Combined License Nos. NPF-93 and NPF-94 for the Virgil C. Summer
Nuclear Station (VCSNS) Units 2 and 3 by departing from the Combined
License Appendix C information and the plant-specific Design Control
Document (DCD) Tier 2 material by revising the safety function and
classification of Liquid Radwaste System (WLS) drain hubs in the
Chemical and Volume Control System and Passive Core Cooling System
(PXS) compartments. In addition, the proposed changes would modify the
PXS compartment drain piping connection; WLS valve types, and depiction
of components in the WLS figures.
Because this proposed change requires a departure from Tier 1
information in the Westinghouse Advanced Passive 1000 DCD, the licensee
also requested an exemption from the requirements of the Generic DCD
Tier 1 in accordance with 52.63(b)(1).
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented below:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No
The design function of the WLS is containment isolation and the
prevention of backflow in the drain lines from the CVS compartment
and the PXS compartment to the containment sump which prevents cross
flooding of these compartments. The proposed changes to the WLS
drainage function; the CVS and PXS compartment drain hubs; and the
WLS valve types do not affect these design functions or any other
system design function. Revising the drain hub safety
classification, the PXS drains connection type, and the WLS valve
types do not involve any accident initiating event or component
failure. The changes to how components (valves, filters) are
depicted in the figure provide consistency with the figure legend
and do not alter any system functions. The system will utilize the
same codes and standards previously used for the system. Since there
are no impacts on accident initiating events or component failures,
the probability of an accident previously evaluated is not affected.
The radioactive material source terms and release paths used in the
safety analyses are unchanged, thus the radiological releases in the
Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) accident analyses are
not affected.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No
The proposed changes to the WLS system do not adversely affect
the design or quality of any structure, system or component.
Revising the WLS safety functions and re-classifying the drain hubs
as nonsafety-related does not create a new fault or sequence of
events that could result in a radioactive material release nor do
the changes to the WLS piping connections, valve types and the
depiction of components on the figure have any impact on any
accident previously evaluated.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No
The proposed changes to the WLS system drain hubs, piping
connection, valve type, and Tier 1 figure depiction would not affect
any radioactive material barrier. No safety analysis or design basis
acceptance limit/criterion is challenged or exceeded by the proposed
change, thus no margin of safety is reduced.
Therefore, the proposed amendment 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: Ms. Kathryn M. Sutton, Morgan, Lewis &
Bockius LLC, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004-2514.
NRC Branch Chief: Lawrence Burkhart.
[[Page 57184]]
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket Nos. 50-424 and 50-
425, Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2, Burke County,
Georgia
Date of amendment request: August 20, 2013.
Description of amendment request: The proposed amendments would
revise the Vogtle Electric Generating (VEGP) Emergency Plan by revising
the Emergency Action Level (EAL) thresholds for certain Initiating
Conditions. The proposed change will remove certain Main Steam Line
(MSL) radiation monitors from the reference initiating conditions to
address limitations of these monitors.
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 amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No
The proposed change to the emergency plan does not impact the
physical function of plant structures, systems, or components (SSCs)
or the manner in which SSCs perform their design function. The
proposed changes neither adversely affect accident initiators or
precursors, nor alter design assumptions.
The proposed changes do not alter or prevent the ability of
operable SSCs to perform their intended function to mitigate the
consequences of an initiating event within assumed acceptance
limits. No operating procedures or administrative controls that
function to prevent or mitigate accidents are affected by the
proposed change.
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 changes do not impact the accident analysis. The
changes do not involve a physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no
new or different type of equipment will be installed), a change in
the method of plant operation, or new operator actions. The proposed
change will not introduce failure modes that could result in a new
accident, and the change does not alter assumptions made in the
safety analysis. The proposed changes revise EALs, which establish
the thresholds for placing the plant in an emergency classification.
EALs are not initiators of any accidents.
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.
Margin of safety is associated with confidence in the ability of
the fission product barriers (i.e., fuel cladding, reactor coolant
system pressure boundary, and containment structure) to limit the
level of radiation dose to the public. The proposed changes are
associated with the EALs and do not impact operation of the plant or
its response to transients or accidents. The changes do not affect
the TSs or the operating license. The proposed changes do not
involve a change in the method of plant operation, and no accident
analyses will be affected by the proposed changes. Additionally, the
proposed changes will not relax any criteria used to establish
safety limits and will not relax any safety system settings. The
safety analysis acceptance criteria are not affected by these
changes. The proposed changes will not result in plant operation in
a configuration outside the design basis. The proposed change does
not adversely affect systems that respond to safely shutdown the
plant and to maintain the plant in a safe shutdown condition.
The revised EAL provides more appropriate and accurate criteria
for determining protective measures that should be considered within
and outside the site boundary to protect health and safety. The
emergency plan will continue to activate an emergency response
commensurate with the extent of degradation of plant safety.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant
reduction in a margin of safety.
Based on the above, SNC has determined that operation of the
facility in accordance with the proposed changes does not involve a
significant hazards consideration as defined in 10 CFR 50.92(c), in
that it does not: (1) involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated; or
(2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident
from any accident previously evaluated.
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: Leigh D. Perry, SVP & General Counsel,
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, 40 Inverness Center Parkway,
Birmingham, AL 35242.
NRC Branch Chief: Robert Pascarelli.
Previously Published Notices of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments
to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses, Proposed No
Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a
Hearing
The following notices were previously published as separate
individual notices. The notice content was the same as above. They were
published as individual notices either because time did not allow the
Commission to wait for this biweekly notice or because the action
involved exigent circumstances. They are repeated here because the
biweekly notice lists all amendments issued or proposed to be issued
involving no significant hazards consideration.
For details, see the individual notice in the Federal Register on
the day and page cited. This notice does not extend the notice period
of the original notice.
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket No. 50-259, Browns Ferry Nuclear
Plant, Unit 1, Limestone County, Alabama
Date of application for amendments: August 14, 2013.
Description of amendments request: The proposed amendment would
delete the Notes that cover the Reactor Coolant System (RCS) Pressure
and Temperature Limits curves on Technical Specification 3.4.9, ``RCS
Pressure and Temperature (P/T) Limits,'' Figures 3.4.9-1 and 3.4.9-2
that are applicable from 12 Effective Full Power Years (EFPY) to 16
EFPY and allows the usage of the figures up to 16 EFPY. The current
notes state, ``Do Not Use This Figure. This curve applies to operations
> 12 EFPY. For current operation, use previous curve, which is valid up
to 12 EFPY.''
Date of publication of individual notice in the Federal Register:
August 23, 2013 (78 FR 52571).
Expiration date of individual notice: September 6, 2013 (Public
comments) and October 22, 2013 (Hearing requests).
Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and
Combined 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.
A notice of consideration of issuance of amendment to facility
operating license or combined license, as applicable, proposed no
significant hazards consideration determination, and opportunity for a
hearing in connection with these actions, was
[[Page 57185]]
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, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland 20852. Publicly available documents created or received at the
NRC are accessible electronically through the Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System (ADAMS) in the NRC Library at 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's Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by
email to [email protected].
Carolina Power and Light Company, et al., Docket No. 50-261, H.B.
Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2, Darlington County, South
Carolina
Date of application for amendment: August 29, 2012, as supplemented
by letters dated March 6, 2013, April 9, 2013, and August 22, 2013.
Brief description of amendment: The license amendment combined two
changes that affected the same Technical Specification (TS) sections.
The first part implemented revisions consistent with TS Task Force--
510, Revision 2, ``Revision to Steam Generator (SG) Program Inspection
Frequencies and Tube Sample Selection.'' The second part revised TS
5.5.9 ``Steam Generator Program'' to exclude portions of the SG tube
below the top of the SG tubesheet form periodic inspections by
implementing the permanent alternate criteria ``H*''.
Date of issuance: August 29, 2013.
Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date
of its issuance and shall be implemented within 30 days.
Amendment No.: 235.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-23: Amendment changed
the license and TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 16, 2012, 2012
(77 FR 63348). The supplements dated March 6, 2013, April 9, 2013, and
August 22, 2013, 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 August 29, 2013.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287,
Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3, Oconee County, South
Carolina
Date of application of amendments: October 30, 2012, as
supplemented by letters dated July 16 and July 26, 2013.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the
Technical Specifications related to limits on outage times for the
Keowee Hydro Units, which are the onsite electrical power supply for
the Oconee Nuclear Station.
Date of Issuance: August 23, 2013.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 30 days from the date of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: 382, 384, and 383.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47, and DPR-55:
Amendments revised the licenses and the technical specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: February 19, 2013, 78
FR 11691. The supplements dated July 16 and July 26, 2013, 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 amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated August 23, 2013.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Florida Power and Light Company, et al., Docket Nos. 50-335 and 50-389,
St. Lucie Plant Unit Nos. 1 and 2, St. Lucie County, Florida
Date of application for amendment: December 27, 2012.
Brief description of amendment: The amendments revised the
Technical Specifications (TSs) to align with Combustion Engineering
Owners Group TS language describing required licensed Senior Reactor
Operator duties during fuel-handling activities.
Date of issuance: August 30, 2013.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 90 days.
Amendment Nos.: 216 and 166.
Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-77 and DPR-79: Amendments
revised the License and TS.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: March 19, 2013 (78 FR
16884).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated August 30, 2013.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Northern States Power Company--Minnesota (NSPM), Docket No. 50-263,
Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP), Wright County, Minnesota
Date of application for amendment: August 21, 2012, as supplemented
on November 7, 2012, and March 22, 2013.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revises the MNGP
Renewed Facility Operating Licensing and Technical Specifications to
(1) correct typographical errors; (2) remove obsolete information; (3)
remove outdated references to a letter that, in part, specified spent
fuel pool storage capability; (4) make editorial changes; and (5)
correct a pagination error from a previously-issued license amendment.
Date of issuance: August 28, 2013.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 90 days from the date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 175.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-22: Amendment revises
the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 26, 2012 (77
FR 76081). The supplements dated November 7, 2012, and March 22, 2013,
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 August 28, 2013.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
[[Page 57186]]
Northern States Power Company--Minnesota, Docket Nos. 50-282 and 50-
306, Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2, Goodhue
County, Minnesota
Date of application for amendments: August 19, 2011, supplemented
by letters dated May 16, 2012, September 4, 2012, February 8, 2013, and
July 17, 2013.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised TS 3.7.17,
``Spent Fuel Pool Storage,'' and TS 4.3.1, ``Fuel Storage Criticality''
to provide new spent fuel pool (SFP) loading restrictions that meet
subcriticality for all postulated conditions. The TS changes will
correct non-conservatisms in the SFP criticality analysis-of-record.
Date of issuance: August 29, 2013.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 120 days.
Amendment Nos.: Unit 1--209; Unit 2--196.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-42 and DPR-60:
Amendments revised the Facility Operating Licenses and Technical
Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: February 14, 2012 (77
FR 8291). The supplemental letters dated May 16, 2012, September 4,
2012, February 8, 2013, and July 17, 2013, 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 August 29, 2013.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket Nos. 50-259, 50-260, and 50-296,
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN), Units 1, 2, and 3, Limestone County,
Alabama
Date of application for amendments: August 28, 2012, as
supplemented by letter dated August 29, 2013.
Description of amendment request: The amendments deleted references
to the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code, Section
XI, and added references to the ASME Code for Operation and Maintenance
of Nuclear Power Plants to Section 5.5.6, ``Inservice Testing
Program,'' to the Technical Specifications. The amendment also allows a
25-percent extension of surveillance interval using the Surveillance
Requirement 3.0.2 provisions to other normal and accelerated
frequencies specified as two years or less in the Inservice Test
Program.
Date of issuance: August 30, 2013.
Effective date: Date of issuance, to be implemented within 60 days.
Amendment Nos.: Unit 1--283, Unit 2--310, and Unit 3--269.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-33, DPR-52, and DPR-68:
Amendments revised the licenses and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 27, 2012 (77
FR 70844). The supplement dated August 29, 2013, 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 August 30, 2013.
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: October 18, 2012, as supplemented by
letter dated March 20, 2013.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised paragraph
2.C(5)(a) of the renewed facility operating license and the fire
protection program as described in the Updated Safety Analysis Report
(USAR) to allow a deviation from the separation requirements of 10 CFR
Part 50, Appendix R, Section III.G.2, as documented in Appendix 9.5E of
the Wolf Creek Generating Station USAR, for the volume control tank
outlet valves.
Date of issuance: August 23, 2013.
Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 90 days of the date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 205.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-42. The amendment
revised the Operating License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 11, 2012 (77
FR 73692). The supplemental letter dated March 20, 2013, 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 August 23, 2013.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of September 2013.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michele G. Evans,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2013-22469 Filed 9-16-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P