[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 79 (Tuesday, April 24, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17858-17867]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-08070]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2018-0073]
Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility
Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant
Hazards Considerations
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Biweekly notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 189a.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,
as amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is
publishing this regular biweekly notice. The Act requires the
Commission to publish notice of any amendments issued, or proposed to
be issued, and grants the Commission the authority to issue and make
immediately effective any amendment to an operating license or combined
license, as applicable, upon a determination by the Commission that
such amendment involves no significant hazards consideration,
notwithstanding the pendency before the Commission of a request for a
hearing from any person.
This biweekly notice includes all notices of amendments issued, or
proposed to be issued, from March 27 to April 9, 2018. The last
biweekly notice was published on April 10, 2018.
DATES: Comments must be filed by May 24, 2018. A request for a hearing
must be filed by June 25, 2018.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods
(unless this document describes a different method for submitting
comments on a specific subject):
Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0073. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-
9127; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
[[Page 17859]]
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.
Mail comments to: May Ma, Office of Administration, Mail
Stop: TWFN-7-A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001.
For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting
comments, see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly Clayton, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3475, email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0073, facility name, unit
number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject when
contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this
action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this
action by any of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0073.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS,
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected]. The
ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available
in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this
document
NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
B. Submitting Comments
Please include Docket ID NRC-2018-0073, facility name, unit
number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject in your
comment submission.
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your
comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into
ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove
identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to
include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be
publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should
state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to
remove such information before making the comment submissions available
to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.
II. Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility
Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses and Proposed No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination
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 if circumstances change during the 30-day comment
period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for
example in derating or shutdown of the facility. If the Commission
takes action prior to the expiration of either the comment period or
the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a notice of
issuance. If the Commission makes a final no significant hazards
consideration determination, any hearing will take place after
issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will
occur very infrequently.
A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To Intervene
Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any
persons (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may
file a request for a hearing and petition for leave to intervene
(petition) with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in
accordance with the Commission's ``Agency Rules of Practice and
Procedure'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a
current copy of 10 CFR 2.309. The NRC's regulations are accessible
electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. Alternatively, a copy of
the regulations is available at the NRC's Public Document Room, located
at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (First
Floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, the
Commission or a presiding officer will rule on the petition and, if
appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be issued.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the petition should specifically
explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with
particular reference to the following general requirements for
standing: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the
petitioner; (2) the nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to
be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the
petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding;
and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be
entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), the petition must also set
forth the specific contentions that the petitioner seeks to have
litigated in the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific
statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In
addition, the petitioner must provide a brief explanation of the bases
for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or
expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner
intends to rely in proving the contention at the
[[Page 17860]]
hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to the specific
sources and documents on which the petitioner intends to rely to
support its position on the issue. The petition must include sufficient
information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant or
licensee on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions must be
limited to matters within the scope of the proceeding. The contention
must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A
petitioner who fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 CFR 2.309(f)
with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to
participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding,
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene.
Parties have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing with respect to resolution of that party's admitted
contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence, consistent
with the NRC's regulations, policies, and procedures.
Petitions must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of
publication of this notice. Petitions and motions for leave to file new
or amended contentions that are filed after the deadline will not be
entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the
filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10
CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii). The petition must be filed in
accordance with the filing instructions in the ``Electronic Submissions
(E-Filing)'' section of this document.
If a hearing is requested, and the Commission has not made a final
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration, the
Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no
significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve
to establish when the hearing is held. If the final determination is
that the amendment request involves no significant hazards
consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it
immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any
hearing would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final
determination is that the amendment request involves a significant
hazards consideration, then any hearing held would take place before
the issuance of the amendment unless the Commission finds an imminent
danger to the health or safety of the public, in which case it will
issue an appropriate order or rule under 10 CFR part 2.
A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian
Tribe, or agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to
participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition should
state the nature and extent of the petitioner's interest in the
proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission no later
than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. The petition
must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the
``Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)'' section of this document, and
should meet the requirements for petitions set forth in this section,
except that under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local governmental body,
or Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof does not need
to address the standing requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(d) if the facility
is located within its boundaries. Alternatively, a State, local
governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof
may participate as a non-party under 10 CFR 2.315(c).
If a hearing is granted, any person who is not a party to the
proceeding and is not affiliated with or represented by a party may, at
the discretion of the presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited
appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person
making a limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of
his or her position on the issues but may not otherwise participate in
the proceeding. A limited appearance may be made at any session of the
hearing or at any prehearing conference, subject to the limits and
conditions as may be imposed by the presiding officer. Details
regarding the opportunity to make a limited appearance will be provided
by the presiding officer if such sessions are scheduled.
B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)
All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a
request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition), any
motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the
submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene, and
documents filed by interested governmental entities that request to
participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the
NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 FR
46562; August 3, 2012). The 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. Detailed
guidance on making electronic submissions may be found in the Guidance
for Electronic Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants may not submit
paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in
accordance with the procedures described below.
To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10
days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the
Office of the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by
telephone at 301-415-1677, to (1) request a digital identification (ID)
certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or
representative) to digitally sign submissions and access the E-Filing
system for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise
the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a petition or
other adjudicatory document (even in instances in which the
participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-
issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the
Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this
proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic
docket.
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is
available on the NRC's public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. Once a participant has obtained a
digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant
can then submit adjudicatory documents. Submissions must be in Portable
Document Format (PDF). Additional guidance on PDF submissions is
available on the NRC's public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A filing is considered complete at the
time the document is submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be
timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system
no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of
a transmission, the 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's Office of the General Counsel and any
others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to
participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the
document on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and
other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for
and receive a digital ID certificate before adjudicatory
[[Page 17861]]
documents are filed so that they can obtain access to the documents via
the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-
Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's Electronic
Filing Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC's
public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by
email to [email protected], or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-
7640. The NRC Electronic Filing Help Desk is available between 9 a.m.
and 6 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government
holidays.
Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not
submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing
stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention:
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff. Participants filing adjudicatory documents in this
manner are responsible for serving the document on all other
participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of
the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the
provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an
exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant or
party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer subsequently determines
that the reason for granting the exemption from use of E-Filing no
longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at
https://adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the
Commission or the presiding officer. If you do not have an NRC-issued
digital ID certificate as described above, click cancel when the link
requests certificates and you will be automatically directed to the
NRC's electronic hearing dockets where you will be able to access any
publicly available documents in a particular hearing docket.
Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information,
such as social security numbers, home addresses, or personal phone
numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law
requires submission of such information. For example, in some
instances, individuals provide home addresses in order to demonstrate
proximity to a facility or site. With respect to copyrighted works,
except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory
filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are
requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission.
For further details with respect to these license amendment
applications, see the application for amendment which is available for
public inspection in ADAMS and at the NRC's PDR. For additional
direction on accessing information related to this document, see the
``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' section of this
document.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, Quad
Cities Nuclear Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Rock Island County,
Illinois
Date of amendment request: February 26, 2018. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18057B125.
Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would add,
delete, modify and replace numerous technical specification (TS)
requirements related to operations that have the potential for draining
the reactor vessel (OPDRVs) with new requirements on reactor pressure
vessel water inventory control (RPV WIC) to protect TS Safety Limit
2.1.1.3. The proposed changes are based on Technical Specifications
Task Force (TSTF) traveler TSTF-542, ``Reactor Pressure Vessel Water
Inventory Control.''
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 replaces existing TS requirements related to
OPDRVs with new requirements on RPV WIC that will protect Safety
Limit 2.1.1.3. Draining of RPV water inventory in Mode 4 (i.e., cold
shutdown) and Mode 5 (i.e., refueling) is not an accident previously
evaluated and, therefore, replacing the existing TS controls to
prevent or mitigate such an event with a new set of controls has no
effect on any accident previously evaluated. RPV water inventory
control in Mode 4 or Mode 5 is not an initiator of any accident
previously evaluated. The existing OPDRV controls or the proposed
RPV WIC controls are not mitigating actions assumed in any accident
previously evaluated.
The proposed change reduces the probability of an unexpected
draining event (which is not a previously evaluated accident) by
imposing new requirements on the limiting time in which an
unexpected draining event could result in the reactor vessel water
level dropping to the top of the active fuel (TAF). These controls
require cognizance of the plant configuration and control of
configurations with unacceptably short drain times. These
requirements reduce the probability of an unexpected draining event.
The current TS requirements are only mitigating actions and impose
no requirements that reduce the probability of an unexpected
draining event.
The proposed change reduces the consequences of an unexpected
draining event (which is not a previously evaluated accident) by
requiring an Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) subsystem to be
operable at all times in Modes 4 and 5. The current TS requirements
do not require any water injection systems, ECCS or otherwise, to be
operable in certain conditions in Mode 5. The change in requirement
from two ECCS subsystems to one ECCS subsystem in Modes 4 and 5 does
not significantly affect the consequences of an unexpected draining
event because the proposed Actions ensure equipment is available
within the limiting drain time that is as capable of mitigating the
event as the current requirements. The proposed controls provide
escalating compensatory measures to be established as calculated
drain times decrease, such as verification of a second method of
water injection and additional confirmations that secondary
containment and/or filtration would be available if needed.
The proposed change reduces or eliminates some requirements that
were determined to be unnecessary to manage the consequences of an
unexpected draining event, such as automatic initiation of an ECCS
subsystem and control room ventilation. These changes do not affect
the consequences of any accident previously evaluated since a
draining event in Modes 4 and 5 is not a previously evaluated
accident and the requirements are not needed to adequately respond
to a draining event.
Therefore, the proposed change 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 previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change replaces existing TS requirements related to
OPDRVs with new requirements on RPV WIC that will protect Safety
Limit 2.1.1.3. The proposed change will not alter the design
function of the equipment involved. Under the proposed change, some
systems that are currently
[[Page 17862]]
required to be operable during OPDRVs would be required to be
available within the limiting drain time or to be in service
depending on the limiting drain time. Should those systems be unable
to be placed into service, the consequences are no different than if
those systems were unable to perform their function under the
current TS requirements.
The event of concern under the current requirements and the
proposed change is an unexpected draining event. The proposed change
does not create new failure mechanisms, malfunctions, or accident
initiators that would cause a draining event or a new or different
kind of accident not previously evaluated or included in the design
and licensing bases.
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility
of a new or different kind of accident from any previously
evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change replaces existing TS requirements related to
OPDRVs with new requirements on RPV WIC. The current requirements do
not have a stated safety basis and no margin of safety is
established in the licensing basis. The safety basis for the new
requirements is to protect Safety Limit 2.1.1.3. New requirements
are added to determine the limiting time in which the RPV water
inventory could drain to the top of the fuel in the reactor vessel
should an unexpected draining event occur. Plant configurations that
could result in lowering the RPV water level to the TAF within one
hour are now prohibited. New escalating compensatory measures based
on the limiting drain time replace the current controls. The
proposed TS establish a safety margin by providing defense-in-depth
to ensure that the Safety Limit is protected and to protect the
public health and safety. While some less restrictive requirements
are proposed for plant configurations with long calculated drain
times, the overall effect of the change is to improve plant safety
and to add safety margin.
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: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel,
Exelon Nuclear, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555.
NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50-456 and STN 50-457,
Braidwood Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Will County, Illinois
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50-454 and STN 50-455,
Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Ogle County, Illinois
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-317 and 50-318, Calvert
Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Calvert County, Maryland
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-461, Clinton Power
Station, Unit No. 1, DeWitt County, Illinois
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-237 and 50-249, Dresden
Nuclear Power Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3, Grundy County, Illinois
Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Exelon FitzPatrick, LLC, Docket No.
50-333, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, Oswego County, New
York
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374, LaSalle
County Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, LaSalle County, Illinois
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-352 and No. 50-353,
Limerick Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Montgomery County,
Pennsylvania
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-220 and 50-410, Nine
Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Oswego County, New York
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, and PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50-
277 and 50-278, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3,
York and Lancaster Counties, Pennsylvania
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, Quad
Cities Nuclear Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Rock Island County,
Illinois
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-244, R.E. Ginna Nuclear
Power Plant, Wayne County, New York
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-289, Three Mile Island
Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania
Date of amendment request: March 1, 2018. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18060A266.
Description of amendment request: The amendments would revise the
technical specifications for each facility to relocate the staff
qualification requirements to the Exelon Generation Company, LLC (EGC)
quality assurance topical report.
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. Will operation of the facility in accordance with the
proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability
or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes do not make any physical changes to the
plants, are administrative in nature, and do not alter accident
analysis assumptions, add any initiators or affect the function of
plant systems, or the manner in which systems are operated,
maintained, tested, or inspected. The proposed changes do not
require any plant modifications which affect the performance
capability of the structures, systems and components relied upon to
mitigate the consequences of postulated accidents. The unit/
facility/plant staff qualification requirements remain the same and
are being relocated from the Technical Specifications (TS) to the
EGC Quality Assurance Topical Report (QATR).
Based on the above discussion, EGC concludes that the proposed
changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2. Will the operation of the facility in accordance with the
proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind
of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes do not involve changes to unit/facility/
plant staff selection, qualification and training programs, are
administrative in nature, and do not impact physical plant systems.
The qualification standards are being relocated from the TS to the
EGC QATR. As a result, the ability of the plant to respond to and
mitigate accidents is unchanged by the proposed changes. The
proposed changes do not alter accident analysis assumptions, add any
initiators, or affect the function of plant systems or the manner in
which systems are operated, maintained, modified, tested, or
inspected.
Based on the above discussion, EGC concludes that the proposed
changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously evaluated.
3. Will operation of the facility in accordance with the
proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of
safety?
Response: No.
The proposed changes are administrative in nature. The proposed
changes do not affect plant design, hardware, system operation, or
procedures for accident mitigation systems. The proposed changes do
not impact any plant safety margins that are established in existing
limiting conditions for operation, limiting safety systems settings
and specified
[[Page 17863]]
safety limits. There are no changes in the established safety
margins of these systems. The proposed changes do not impact the
performance or proficiency requirements for licensed operators or
unit/facility/plant staff, since the qualification standards are not
changing and are only being relocated from the TS to the EGC QATR.
As a result, the ability of the plant to respond to and mitigate
accidents is unchanged by the proposed changes. Therefore, these
proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin
of safety.
Based on the above discussion, EGC concludes that the proposed
changes do 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
requested amendments involve no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel,
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL
60555.
NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona.
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company, Docket No. 50-440, Perry Nuclear
Power Plant, Unit No. 1, Lake County, Ohio
Date of amendment request: February 14, 2018. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18045A195.
Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would
revise Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement 3.3.1.1.2 to
verify that the calculated power is no more than 2 percent greater than
the average power range monitor (APRM) channel output when operating at
greater than or equal to 23.8 percent of rated thermal power. The
proposed change is based on Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF)
traveler TSTF-546, ``Revise APRM Channel Adjustment Surveillance
Requirement.''
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 APRM system and the RPS [reactor protection system] are not
initiators of any accidents previously evaluated. As a result, the
proposed change does not affect the probability of any accident
previously evaluated. The APRM system and the RPS functions act to
mitigate the consequences of accidents previously evaluated. The
reliability of APRM system and the RPS is not significantly affected
by removing the gain adjustment requirement on the APRM channels
when the APRMs are calibrated conservatively with respect to the
calculated heat balance. This is because the actual core thermal
power at which the reactor will automatically trip is lower, thereby
increasing the margin to the core thermal limits and the limiting
safety system settings assumed in the safety analyses. The
consequences of an accident during the adjustment of the APRM
instrumentation are no different from those during the existing
surveillance testing period or the existing time allowed to restore
the instruments to operable status. As a result, the ability of the
APRM system and the RPS to mitigate any accident previously
evaluated is not significantly affected.
Therefore, the proposed change 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 change does not alter the protection system design,
create new failure modes, or change any modes of operation. The
proposed change does not involve a physical alteration of the plant;
no new or different kind of equipment will be installed.
Consequently, there are no new initiators that could result in a new
or different kind of accident.
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 amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The margin of safety provided by the APRM system and the RPS is
to ensure that the reactor is shut down automatically when plant
parameters exceed the setpoints for the system. Any reduction in the
margin of safety resulting from the adjustment of the APRM channels
while continuing operation is considered to be offset by delaying a
plant shutdown (i.e., a transient) for a short time with the APRM
system, the primary indication of core power and an input to the
RPS, not calibrated. Additionally, the short time period required
for adjustment is consistent with the time allowed by Technical
Specifications to restore the core power distribution parameters to
within limits and is acceptable based on the low probability of a
transient or design basis accident occurring simultaneously with
inaccurate APRM channels.
The proposed change does not alter setpoints or limits
established or assumed by the accident analyses. The Technical
Specifications continue to require operability of the RPS functions,
which provide core protection for postulated reactivity insertion
events occurring during power operating conditions consistent with
the plant safety analyses.
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: David W. Jenkins, Attorney, FirstEnergy
Corporation, Mail Stop A-GO-15, 76 South Main Street, Akron, OH 44308.
NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona.
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026,
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Unit Nos. 3 and 4, Burke County,
Georgia
Date of amendment request: January 31, 2018. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18031B181.
Description of amendment request: The amendment request proposes to
depart from the approved combined license (COL) Appendix A, Technical
Specifications. The proposed changes revise COL Appendix A,
Surveillance Requirements (SR) 3.8.1.2 to identify that the required
minimum amperage output for the battery chargers is 150 amps.
Additionally, the proposed changes revise COL Appendix A, SR 3.8.7.6 to
align the test frequency with the expected life of the AP1000 Class 1E
batteries. This submittal requests approval of the license amendment
necessary to implement these changes.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: As required by 10 CFR50.91(a), the licensee has provided
its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration,
which is presented below with NRC staff's edits in square brackets:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The changes do not involve an interface with any [structure,
system, and component (SSC)] accident initiator or initiating
sequence of events, and thus, the probabilities of the accidents
evaluated in the plant-specific [Updated Final Safety Analysis
Report (UFSAR)] are not affected. The proposed changes do not
involve a change to any mitigation sequence or the predicted
radiological releases due to postulated accident conditions, thus,
the consequences of the accidents evaluated in the UFSAR are not
affected. Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated.
[[Page 17864]]
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 do not adversely affect any system or
design function or equipment qualification as the change does not
modify any SSCs that prevent safety functions from being performed.
The changes do not introduce a new failure mode, malfunction or
sequence of events that could adversely affect safety or safety-
related equipment. Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create
the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from accident
previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed changes would not affect any safety-related design
code, function, design analysis, safety analysis input or result, or
existing design/safety margin. No safety analysis or design basis
acceptance limit/criterion is challenged or exceed the requested
changes. 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: M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP,
1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35203-2015.
NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon-Herrity.
III. 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 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 can be accessed as described in the
``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' section of this
document.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket No. 50-400, Shearon Harris Nuclear
Power Plant, Unit 1, Wake and Chatham Counties, North Carolina
Date of amendment request: May 22, 2017, as supplemented by letters
dated October 30 and November 29, 2017.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the licensing
basis as described in Updated Final Safety Analysis Report to provide
gap release fractions for high-burnup fuel rods that exceed the 6.3
kilowatt per foot linear heat generation rate limit detailed in Table 3
of Regulatory Guide 1.183 (ADAMS Accession No. ML003716792).
Date of issuance: March 26, 2018.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 120 days of issuance.
Amendment No.: 163. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML18045A060; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-63: Amendment revised
the Renewed Facility Operating License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 29, 2017 (82 FR
41067). The supplemental letters dated October 30 and November 29,
2017, 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 March 26, 2018.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Energy Northwest, Docket No. 50-397, Columbia Generating Station (CGS),
Benton County, Washington
Date of application for amendment: March 27, 2017, as supplemented
by letter dated January 2, 2018.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised CGS Technical
Specification (TS) 5.5.12, ``Primary Containment Leakage Rate Testing
Program,'' in accordance with Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 94-01,
Revision 3-A, ``Industry Guideline for Implementing Performance-Based
Option of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix J,'' July 2012, and the conditions
and limitations specified in NEI 94-01, Revision 2-A, ``Industry
Guideline for Implementing Performance-Based Option of 10 CFR part 50,
Appendix J,'' dated October 2008, which serves as the guidance document
for implementation of performance-based Option B of 10 CFR part 50,
Appendix J.
Date of issuance: March 30, 2018.
Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 120 days from the date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 247. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML18052B185; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-21: The amendment
revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 6, 2017 (82 FR
26131). The supplemental letter dated January 2, 2018, 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 as published in the Federal Register.
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated March 30, 2018.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-271, Vermont Yankee
Nuclear Power Station, Vernon, Vermont
Date of amendment request: May 15, 2017, as supplemented by letter
dated November 16, 2017.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment is for a revision to
the site emergency plan and emergency action
[[Page 17865]]
level scheme to reflect an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Instillation
(ISFSI)-only configuration for the storage of spent nuclear fuel onsite
once all of the spent nuclear fuel is placed in the ISFSI in 2018.
Date of issuance: March 30, 2018.
Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date
the licensee notifies the NRC in writing that all spent nuclear fuel
assemblies have been transferred out of the spent fuel pool and have
been placed in dry storage within the ISFSI. The license amendment
shall be implemented within 60 days of the effective date.
Amendment No.: 267. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML18053A111; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Facility Operating License No. DPR-28: The amendment revised the
Facility Operating License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 18, 2017 (82 FR
32879). The supplemental letter dated November 16, 2017, 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 March 30, 2018.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-410, Nine Mile Point
Nuclear Station, Unit 2, Oswego County, New York
Date of amendment request: February 28, 2017, as supplemented by
letters dated November 3, December 27, 2017, January 12, and February
6, 2018.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revises the Nine Mile
Point Nuclear Station, Unit 2, Technical Specifications by replacing
the existing specifications related to ``operations with a potential
for draining the reactor vessel,'' with revised requirements for
reactor pressure vessel water inventory control to protect Safety Limit
2.1.1.3, which requires reactor vessel water level to be greater than
the top of active irradiated fuel. The revisions, with variations as
noted in the license amendment request, are based on the NRC-approved
Technical Specifications Task Force Traveler TSTF-542, Revision 2,
``Reactor Pressure Vessel Water Inventory Control'' (ADAMS Accession
No. ML16074A448).
Date of issuance: March 28, 2018.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
no later than the start of the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit 2,
spring 2018, refueling outage.
Amendment No.: 168. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML18073A364; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-69: Amendment revised
the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: April 25, 2017 (82 FR
19102). The supplements dated November 3, December 27, 2017, January
12, and February 6, 2018, 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 amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated March 28, 2018.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Florida Power & Light Company, Docket No. 50-250, Turkey Point Nuclear
Generating Unit No. 3, Miami-Dade County, Florida
Date of amendment request: December 18, 2017, as supplemented by
letter dated February 16, 2018.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the Technical
Specifications to allow a one-time extension of the allowable outage
time for the Unit 3 Containment Spray System from 72 hours to 14 days.
Date of issuance: April 3, 2018.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 90 days of issuance.
Amendment No.: 280. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML18075A348; documents related to the amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-31: Amendment revised
the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: January 30, 2018 (83 FR
4285). The supplemental letter dated February 16, 2018, 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 April 3, 2018.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Indiana Michigan Power Company, Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316, Donald
C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Berrien County, Michigan
Date of amendment request: May 23, 2017, as supplemented by letter
dated December 8, 2017.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments change the
emergency plan for the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2,
by revising the emergency action level scheme to one based on the
Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) document NEI 99-01, Revision 6,
``Development of Emergency Action Levels for Non-Passive Reactors.''
Date of issuance: April 5, 2018.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 180 days of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: 339 (Unit No. 1) and 321 (Unit No. 2). A publicly-
available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18057B067;
documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety
Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-58 and DPR-74:
Amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 5, 2017 (82 FR
31098). The supplemental letter dated December 8, 2017, 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 April 5, 2018.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Omaha Public Power District, Docket No. 50-285, Fort Calhoun Station,
Unit 1 (FCS), Washington County, Nebraska
Date of amendment request: June 16, 2017.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment would remove the FCS
Cyber Security Plan (CSP) from FCS License Condition 3.C.
Date of issuance: March 28, 2018.
Effective date: As of April 7, 2018, and shall be implemented by
July 6, 2018.
[[Page 17866]]
Amendment No.: 298. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML18047A661; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Renewed Facility License No. DPR-40: The amendment revised the
Renewed Facility License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 15, 2017 (82 FR
38718).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated March 28, 2018.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026,
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP), Unit Nos. 3 and 4, Burke
County, Georgia
Date of amendment request: September 29, 2017, and supplemented
January 31, 2018.
Description of amendment: The amendment authorizes changes to the
VEGP Unit Nos. 3 and 4 Combined License page 7, and Updated Final
Safety Analysis Report, including Tier 2* and associated Tier 2 to
depart from certain information related to human engineering
deficiencies contained in Westinghouse Electric Company's report APP-
OCS-GEH-320, titled, ``AP1000 Human Factors Engineering Integrated
Systems Validation Plan.''
Date of issuance: March 22, 2018.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 30 days of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: 116 (Unit 3) and 115 (Unit 4). The publicly-
available versions are in an ADAMS package under Accession No.
ML18044A071, which includes the Safety Evaluation that references
documents related to this amendment.
Facility Combined Licenses Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92: Amendment
revised the Facility Combined Licenses.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 21, 2017 (82
FR 55413). The supplement dated January 31, 2018, 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 amendment is contained
in the Safety Evaluation dated March 22, 2018.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026,
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP), Unit Nos. 3 and 4, Burke
County, Georgia
Date of amendment request: September 22, 2017.
Description of amendment: The amendments consist of changes to
Combined License Appendix A, Technical Specifications (TS).
Specifically, the changes add new TS 3.1.10, Rod Withdrawal Test
Exception--MODE 5, and modify TS Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO)
3.0.7, to allow rod movement and rod drop time testing under cold
conditions (MODE 5). Additionally, the LCO Applicability of TS 3.4.8,
Minimum Reactor Coolant System Flow, is revised to reflect its safety
analysis basis.
Date of issuance: March 28, 2018.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 30 days of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: 117 (Unit 3) and 116 (Unit 4). A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18060A411; documents related
to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the
amendment.
Facility Combined Licenses Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92: Amendment
revised the Facility Combined License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 24, 2017 (82 FR
49240).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in the Safety Evaluation dated March 28, 2018.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026,
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP), Unit Nos. 3 and 4, Burke
County, Georgia
Date of amendment request: July 28, 2017.
Description of amendment: The amendment authorizes changes to the
VEGP Units 3 and 4 Updated Final Safety Analysis Report to change
Technical Specification (TS) Section 1.1, ``Definition of Actuation
Logic Test,'' by adding a new TS Section 1.1, ``Definition of Actuation
Logic Output Test (ALOT),'' revising existing Surveillance Requirements
(SR) 3.3.15.1 and 3.3.16.1, and adding new SR 3.3.15.2 and SR 3.3.16.2
to implement the new ALOT.
Date of issuance: March 29, 2018.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 30 days of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: 119 (Unit 3) and 118 (Unit 4). A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18064A340, which contains
documents that are related to this amendment and are listed in the
Safety Evaluation enclosed with this amendment.
Facility Combined Licenses Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92: Amendment
revised the Facility Combined License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 21, 2017 (82
FR 55410).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in the Safety Evaluation dated March 29, 2018.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket No. 50-390, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant,
Unit 1, Rhea County, Tennessee
Date of amendment request: March 16, 2017, as supplemented by
letter dated August 31, 2017.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised Technical
Specification Table 3.3.1-1, ``Reactor Trip System Instrumentation,''
to reflect plant modifications to the reactor protection system
instrumentation associated with the turbine trip on low fluid oil
pressure.
Date of issuance: March 28, 2018.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
no later than startup from the Unit 1 refueling outage scheduled for
fall 2018.
Amendment No.: 119. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML18052B347; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Facility Operating License No. NPF-90: Amendment revised the
Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 6, 2017 (82 FR
26140). The supplemental letter dated August 31, 2017, 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 March 28, 2018.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day of April 2018.
[[Page 17867]]
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Tara Inverso,
Acting Deputy Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office
of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2018-08070 Filed 4-23-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P