[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 38 (Tuesday, February 26, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6176-6183]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-02934]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2019-0058]


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 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 January 29, 2019, to February 11, 2019. The 
last biweekly notice was published on February 12, 2019.

DATES: Comments must be filed by March 28, 2019. A request for a 
hearing must be filed by April 29, 2019. Comments received after this 
date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission 
is able to ensure consideration only for comments received before this 
date.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID INSERT: NRC-2019-0058. 
Address questions about Docket IDs in Regulations.gov to Krupskaya 
Castellon; telephone: 301-287-9221; email: [email protected]. 
For technical questions, contact the individual(s) listed in the FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.
     Mail comments to: Office of Administration, Mail Stop: 
TWFN-7-A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001, ATTN: Program Management, Announcements and Editing Staff.
    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: Lynn Ronewicz, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1927, email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments

A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID INSERT: NRC-2019-0058, 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 INSERT: NRC-2019-0058.
     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 ``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-2019-0058, 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. Background

    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

[[Page 6177]]

the pendency before the Commission of a request for a hearing from any 
person.

III. 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 which 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 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

[[Page 6178]]

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 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

[[Page 6179]]

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.

Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324, Brunswick 
Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2, Brunswick County, North Carolina

    Date of amendment request: December 14, 2018. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18353A951.
    Description of amendment request: The amendments would modify 
requirements for repetitive verification of the status of locked, 
sealed, or secured components to allow the verification to be done by 
use of administrative means consistent with Technical Specifications 
Task Force (TSTF) Traveler 269, Revision 2, ``Allow Administrative 
Means of Position Verification for Locked or Sealed Valves.''
    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration 
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has 
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards 
consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change modifies Technical Specification (TS) 
3.6.1.3, ``Primary Containment Isolation Valves (PCIVs)'' and TS 
3.6.4.2, ``Secondary Containment Isolation Dampers (SCIDs).'' These 
specifications require penetration flow paths with inoperable 
isolation devices be isolated and periodically verified to be 
isolated. Consistent with TSTF-269-A, Revision 2, notes are proposed 
to be added to TS 3.6.1.3, Required Actions A.2 and C.2, and TS 
3.6.4.2, Required Action A.2, to allow isolation devices that are 
locked, sealed, or otherwise secured to be verified using 
administrative means.
    The proposed change does not affect any plant equipment, test 
methods, or plant operation, and is not an initiator of any analyzed 
accident sequence. The inoperable containment penetrations will 
continue to be isolated, and hence perform their isolation function. 
Operation in accordance with the proposed TSs will ensure that all 
analyzed accidents will continue to be mitigated as previously 
analyzed. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change does not involve a physical alteration to 
the plant (i.e., no new or different type of equipment will be 
installed) or a change to the methods governing normal plant 
operation. Furthermore, the change does not alter the assumptions 
made in the safety analysis. Therefore, the proposed change does not 
create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from 
any accident previously evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change will not affect operation of plant equipment 
or the function of any equipment assumed in the accident analysis. 
Affected containment penetrations will continue to be isolated as 
required by the existing TSs. Therefore, the proposed change does 
not involve a significant reduction in safety margin.

    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: Kathryn B. Nolan, Deputy General Counsel, 
Duke Energy Corporation, 550 South Tryon Street, Mail Code DEC45A, 
Charlotte, NC 28202.

Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-313, Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 
1 (ANO-1), Pope County, Arkansas

    Date of amendment request: December 19, 2018. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18353B044.
    Description of amendment request: The amendment would revise the 
ANO-1 Technical Specifications (TSs) to adopt Technical Specifications 
Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-567, Revision 1, ``Add Containment Sump 
TS to Address GSI [Generic Safety Issue]-191 Issues.''
    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 adds a new specification to the TS for the 
reactor building sump. An existing SR [surveillance requirement] on 
the reactor building sump is moved to the new specification and a 
duplicative requirement to perform the SR in TS 3.5.3 is removed. 
The new specification retains the existing requirements on the 
reactor building sump and the actions to be taken when the reactor 
building sump is inoperable with the exception of adding new actions 
to be taken when the reactor building sump is inoperable due to 
reactor building accident generated and transported debris exceeding 
the analyzed limits. The new action provides time to evaluate and 
correct the condition instead of requiring an immediate plant 
shutdown.
    The reactor building sump is not an initiator of any accident 
previously evaluated. The reactor building sump is a passive 
component and the proposed change does not increase the likelihood 
of the malfunction. As a result, the probability of an accident is 
unaffected by the proposed change.
    The reactor building sump is used to mitigate accidents 
previously evaluated by providing a borated water source for the 
Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) and Reactor Building Spray 
(RBS) System. The design of the reactor building sump and the 
capability of the reactor building sump assumed in the accident 
analysis is not changed. The proposed action requires implementation 
of mitigating actions while the reactor building sump is inoperable 
and more frequent monitoring of reactor coolant leakage to detect 
any increased potential for an accident that would require the 
reactor building sump. The consequences of an accident during the 
proposed action are no different than the current consequences of an 
accident if the reactor building sump is inoperable.
    The proposed change clarifies the SFDP [Safety Function 
Determination Program] when a supported system is made inoperable by 
the inoperability of a single TS support system. The SFDP directs 
the appropriate use of TS actions and the proposed change does not 
alter the current intent of the TS. The actions taken when a system 
is inoperable are not an assumption in the initiation or mitigation 
of any previously evaluated accident.
    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 adds a new specification to the TS for the 
reactor building sump. An existing SR on the reactor building sump 
is moved to the new specification and a duplicative requirement to 
perform the SR in TS 3.5.3 is removed. The new specification retains 
the existing requirements on the reactor building sump and the 
actions to be taken when the reactor building sump is inoperable 
with the exception of adding new actions to be taken when the 
reactor building sump is inoperable due to reactor building accident 
generated and transported debris exceeding the analyzed limits. The 
new action provides time to evaluate and correct the condition 
instead of requiring an immediate plant shutdown.
    The proposed change does not alter the design or design function 
of the reactor

[[Page 6180]]

building sump or the plant. No new systems are installed or removed 
as part of the proposed change. The reactor building sump is a 
passive component and cannot initiate a malfunction or accident. No 
new credible accident is created that is not encompassed by the 
existing accident analyses that assume the function of the reactor 
building sump.
    The proposed change clarifies the SFDP when a supported system 
is made inoperable by the inoperability of a single TS support 
system. The SFDP directs the appropriate use of TS actions and the 
proposed change does not alter the current intent of the TS. The 
proposed change to the Safety Function Determination Program will 
not result in any change to the design or design function of the 
reactor building sump or a method of operation of the plant.
    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 proposed change adds a new specification to the TS for the 
reactor building sump. An existing SR on the reactor building sump 
is moved to the new specification and a duplicative requirement to 
perform the SR in TS 3.5.3 is removed. The new specification retains 
the existing requirements on the reactor building sump and the 
actions to be taken when the reactor building sump is inoperable 
with the exception of adding new actions to be taken when the 
reactor building sump is inoperable due to reactor building accident 
generated and transported debris exceeding the analyzed limits. The 
new action provides time to evaluate and correct the condition 
instead of requiring an immediate plant shutdown.
    The proposed change does not affect the controlling values of 
parameters used to avoid exceeding regulatory or licensing limits. 
No Safety Limits are affected by the proposed change. The proposed 
change does not affect any assumptions in the accident analyses that 
demonstrate compliance with regulatory and licensing requirements.
    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: Anna Vinson Jones, Senior Counsel, Entergy 
Services, Inc., 101 Constitution Avenue NW, Suite 200 East, L-ENT-WDC, 
Washington, DC 20001.
    NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. Pascarelli.

Susquehanna Nuclear, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388, Susquehanna 
Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania

    Date of amendment request: January 9, 2019. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19009A431.
    Description of amendment request: The amendments would temporarily 
change Technical Specification (TS) TS 3.7.1, ``Residual Heat Removal 
Service Water (RHRSW) System and the Ultimate Heat Sink (UHS),'' and TS 
3.7.2, ``Emergency Service Water (ESW) System,'' to allow one division 
of the ESW and RHRSW systems to be inoperable for a total of 14 days to 
address piping degradation. The amendments would also remove the Table 
of Contents (TOC) from the TSs and place it under licensee 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 change involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change is to permit a temporary extension to 
existing TS Completion Times to allow for ESW system piping 
replacement. The division of the ESW and RHRSW systems that are not 
being worked on will remain fully OPERABLE during the 14 day 
Completion Time. Although it would not be able to be restored to a 
fully OPERABLE status, the impacted division of ESW and RHRSW will 
be capable of being restored to perform its safety function within 
the limiting 72 hour Completion Time. The ESW and RHRSW systems and 
their supported equipment function as accident mitigators. Removing 
one division from service for a limited period of time does not 
affect any accident initiator and, therefore, cannot change the 
probability of an accident. The proposed changes and the ESW repair 
evolution have been evaluated to assess their impact on the systems 
affected and ensure design basis safety functions are preserved. 
There is a slight increase in risk associated with having the ESW 
and RHRSW systems and their supported systems out of service for 
longer than currently allowed by the SSES [Susquehanna] TS. However, 
Susquehanna will maintain the non-impacted division of ESW and RHRSW 
fully OPERABLE throughout the repair evolution and will protect 
required equipment in accordance with its protected equipment 
program. The non-impacted division is capable of serving 100 percent 
of the heat loads for both the online and outage units during an 
accident. As such, there is no impact on consequence mitigation for 
any transient or accident.
    Additionally, Susquehanna proposes an administrative change to 
remove the TOC from the TS and place it under licensee control. This 
has no impact on the design or operation of the plant and cannot 
impact the probability of an accident in any way.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.

    2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change is to permit a temporary extension to 
existing TS Completion Times to allow for ESW system piping 
replacement. The change does not involve a physical alteration of 
the plant (i.e., no different equipment will be installed) or a 
change in the methods governing normal plant operations. The 
proposed change does not alter assumptions made in the safety 
analysis. During the replacement evolution, one division of the ESW 
and RHRSW systems will not be capable of performing their safety 
function. However, the other division of ESW and RHRSW are capable 
of providing the necessary cooling in the event of an accident. 
Furthermore, the ability to perform the safety function for the 
impacted division can always be recovered within the existing TS 
Completion Times and the systems will be fully restored to OPERABLE 
status following the pipe replacement. The proposed change does not 
introduce new failure mechanisms, malfunctions, or accident 
initiators not considered in the design and licensing basis.
    Additionally, Susquehanna proposes an administrative change to 
remove the TOC from the TS and place it under licensee control. This 
has no impact on the design or operation of the plant and cannot 
create 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 change involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change is to permit a temporary extension to 
existing TS Completion Times to allow for ESW system piping 
replacement. The proposed change does not alter the manner in which 
safety limits, limiting safety settings, or limiting conditions for 
operation are determined. The safety analysis assumptions and 
acceptance criteria are not affected by this change. The change will 
ultimately result in an increase in a margin of safety due to 
installation of the new piping.
    Additionally, Susquehanna proposes an administrative change to 
remove the TOC from the TS and place it under licensee control. This 
has no impact on the design or operation of the plant and cannot 
impact any safety margins.
    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

[[Page 6181]]

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: Damon D. Obie, Associate General Counsel, 
Talen Energy Supply, LLC, 835 Hamilton St., Suite 150, Allentown, PA 
18101.
    NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna.

IV. 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.

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: September 5, 2018.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the Donald 
C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Technical Specification 
5.5.15, ``Battery Monitoring and Maintenance Program,'' to align with 
the latest Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 
Standard (Std.) for maintenance and testing of the safety-related 
batteries. Specifically, the amendments replaced all the references of 
the IEEE Std. 450-1995, ``IEEE Recommended Practice for Maintenance, 
Testing, and Replacement of Vented Lead-Acid Batteries for Stationary 
Applications,'' with the updated IEEE Std. 450-2010, as endorsed, with 
certain regulatory positions, in Regulatory Guide 1.129, Revision 3, 
``Seismic Design Classification.''
    Date of issuance: February 5, 2019.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 90 days of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: 343 (Unit No. 1) and 325 (Unit No. 2). A publicly-
available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18346A358; 
documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety 
Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.
    Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-58 and DPR-74: The amendments 
revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and Technical 
Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 6, 2018 (83 FR 
55574).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated February 5, 2019.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026, 
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia

    Date of amendment request: July 20, 2018, as supplemented by letter 
dated December 3, 2018.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments consisted of 
changes to Combined License Appendix A, Technical Specifications (TSs), 
and revised operability requirements for the Engineered Safety Feature 
Actuation System Spent Fuel Pool Level--Low 2 and In-Containment 
Refueling Water Storage Tank Wide Range Level--Low instrumentation 
functions for Refueling Cavity and Spent Fuel Pool Cooling System (SFS) 
Isolation. Additional changes added TS operability requirements for the 
SFS containment isolation valves in MODES 5 and 6.
    Date of issuance: January 15, 2019.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 30 days of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: 150 (Unit 3) and 149 (Unit 4). A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Package Accession No. ML18351A189; documents 
related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation 
enclosed with the amendments.
    Facility Combined License Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92: The amendments 
revised the facility Combined Licenses.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: September 11, 2018 (83 
FR 45986). The supplement dated December 3, 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 amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated January 15, 2019.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026, 
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia

    Date of amendment request: August 10, 2018.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments consisted of 
changes to Combined License Appendix A, Technical Specifications (TSs), 
and revised TS Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.1.8, ``Physics 
Tests Exception--Mode 2,'' to include Function 4 as one of the LCO 
3.3.1, ``Reactor Trip System (RTS) Instrumentation,'' functions where 
the number of required channels may be reduced to three during the 
performance of physics tests. Additionally, LCO 3.8.3, ``Inverters--
Operating,'' was revised to make an editorial nomenclature change from 
``constant voltage source transformer'' to ``voltage regulating 
transformer.''
    Date of issuance: January 30, 2019.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 30 days of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: 153 (Unit 3) and 152 (Unit 4). A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Package Accession No. ML18354B207; documents 
related to these amendments

[[Page 6182]]

are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.
    Facility Combined Licenses Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92: The amendments 
revised the facility Combined Licenses.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: September 25, 2018 (83 
FR 48467).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated January 30, 2019.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket Nos. 50-390 and 50-391, Watts Bar 
Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 (Watts Bar), Rhea County, Tennessee

    Date of amendment request: January 5, 2018.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised Technical 
Specification (TS) 3.6.3, ``Containment Isolation Valves,'' and 
Surveillance Requirement 3.6.3.5 to change the frequency in accordance 
with the Watts Bar Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program, which is 
described in TS 5.7.2.19. The changes allow leak rate testing of the 
containment purge system containment isolation valves to be performed 
at least once every 30 months, as prescribed in Regulatory Guide 1.163, 
``Performance-Based Containment Leak-Test Program.''
    Date of issuance: January 28, 2019.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 30 days of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: 123 (Unit 1) and 24 (Unit 2). A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18327A005; documents related 
to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with 
the amendments.
    Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-90 and NPF-96: The amendments 
revised the Facility Operating Licenses and TSs.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: March 13, 2018 (83 FR 
10924).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated January 28, 2019.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

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

    During the period since publication of the last biweekly notice, 
the Commission has issued the following amendments. The Commission has 
determined for each of these amendments that the application for the 
amendment complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic 
Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules 
and regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings as 
required by the Act and the Commission's rules and regulations in 10 
CFR chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendment.
    Because of exigent or emergency circumstances associated with the 
date the amendment was needed, there was not time for the Commission to 
publish, for public comment before issuance, its usual notice of 
consideration of issuance of amendment, proposed no significant hazards 
consideration determination, and opportunity for a hearing.
    For exigent circumstances, the Commission has either issued a 
Federal Register notice providing opportunity for public comment or has 
used local media to provide notice to the public in the area 
surrounding a licensee's facility of the licensee's application and of 
the Commission's proposed determination of no significant hazards 
consideration. The Commission has provided a reasonable opportunity for 
the public to comment, using its best efforts to make available to the 
public means of communication for the public to respond quickly, and in 
the case of telephone comments, the comments have been recorded or 
transcribed as appropriate and the licensee has been informed of the 
public comments.
    In circumstances where failure to act in a timely way would have 
resulted, for example, in derating or shutdown of a nuclear power plant 
or in prevention of either resumption of operation or of increase in 
power output up to the plant's licensed power level, the Commission may 
not have had an opportunity to provide for public comment on its no 
significant hazards consideration determination. In such case, the 
license amendment has been issued without opportunity for comment. If 
there has been some time for public comment but less than 30 days, the 
Commission may provide an opportunity for public comment. If comments 
have been requested, it is so stated. In either event, the State has 
been consulted by telephone whenever possible.
    Under its regulations, the Commission may issue and make an 
amendment immediately effective, notwithstanding the pendency before it 
of a request for a hearing from any person, in advance of the holding 
and completion of any required hearing, where it has determined that no 
significant hazards consideration is involved.
    The Commission has applied the standards of 10 CFR 50.92 and has 
made a final determination that the amendment involves no significant 
hazards consideration. The basis for this determination is contained in 
the documents related to this action. Accordingly, the amendments have 
been issued and made effective as indicated.
    Unless otherwise indicated, the Commission has determined that 
these amendments satisfy the criteria for categorical exclusion in 
accordance with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), 
no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be 
prepared for these amendments. If the Commission has prepared an 
environmental assessment under the special circumstances provision in 
10 CFR 51.12(b) and has made a determination based on that assessment, 
it is so indicated.
    For further details with respect to the action see (1) The 
application for amendment, (2) the amendment to Facility Operating 
License or Combined License, as applicable, 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.

Northern States Power Company--Minnesota, Docket No. 50-306, Prairie 
Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit 2, Goodhue County, Minnesota

    Date of amendment request: January 29, 2019.
    Description of amendment: The amendment revised Technical 
Specification 3.8.1, Condition E, to allow a one-time extension to the 
completion time for two diesel generators out of service.
    Date of issuance: January 29, 2019.
    Effective date: January 29, 2019.
    Amendment No: 213. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under 
Accession No. ML19029A094;

[[Page 6183]]

documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation 
enclosed with the amendment.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-60: The amendment 
revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical 
Specifications.
    Public comments requested as to proposed no significant hazards 
consideration: No.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment, finding of 
emergency circumstances, State consultation, and final no significant 
hazards consideration determination are contained in a Safety 
Evaluation dated January 29, 2019.
    Attorney for licensee: Peter M. Glass, Assistant General Counsel, 
Xcel Energy Services, Inc., 414 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, MN 55401.
    NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day of February, 2019.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Craig G. Erlanger,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2019-02934 Filed 2-25-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7590-01-P