[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 98 (Tuesday, May 21, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23074-23083]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10315]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2019-0121]
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 April 23, 2019, to May 6, 2019. The last
biweekly notice was published on May 7, 2019.
DATES: Comments must be filed by June 20, 2019. A request for a hearing
must be filed by July 22, 2019.
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-2019-0121. Address
questions about NRC dockets IDs in Regulations.gov to Jennifer Borges;
telephone: 301-287-9127; 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 NRC-2019-0121, 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-2019-0121.
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-2019-0121, 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 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
[[Page 23075]]
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 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
[[Page 23076]]
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 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.
Entergy Operations, Inc.; System Energy Resources, Inc.; Cooperative
Energy, A Mississippi Electric Cooperative; and Entergy Mississippi,
LLC, Docket No. 50-416, Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Claiborne
County, Mississippi
Entergy Louisiana, LLC, and Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-
458, River Bend Station, Unit 1, West Feliciana Parish, Louisiana
Date of amendment request: March 7, 2019. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19070A227.
Description of amendment request: The amendments would revise the
Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1, and the River Bend Station, Unit 1,
Technical Specifications (TSs) Safety Limit 2.1.1.2 and TS 5.6.5,
``Core Operation Limits Report (COLR).'' The proposed changes are
consistent with the NRC-approved Technical Specifications Task Force
(TSTF) Traveler TSTF-564, Revision 2, ``Safety Limit MCPR [Minimum
Critical Power Ratio],'' using the consolidated line item
[[Page 23077]]
improvement process (ADAMS Package Accession No. ML18299A048).
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. Do the proposed amendments involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed amendments revise the TS SLMCPR [safety limit
minimum critical power ratio] and the list of core operating limits
to be included in the COLR. The SLMCPR is not an initiator of any
accident previously evaluated. The revised safety limit values
continue to ensure, for all accidents previously evaluated, that the
fuel cladding will be protected from failure due to transition
boiling. The proposed change does not affect plant operation or any
procedural or administrative controls on plant operation that affect
functions of preventing or mitigating any accidents previously
evaluated.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Do the proposed amendments create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed amendments revise the TS SLMCPR and the list of
core operating limits to be included in the COLR. The proposed
change will not affect the design function or operation of any
structures, systems, or components (SSCs). No new equipment will be
installed. As a result, the proposed change will not create any
credible new failure mechanisms, malfunctions, or accident
initiators not considered in the design and licensing bases.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of
a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
3. Do the proposed amendments involve a significant reduction in
a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed amendments revise the TS SLMCPR and the list of
core operating limits to be included in the COLR. This will result
in a change to a safety limit, but will not result in a significant
reduction in the margin of safety provided by the safety limit. As
discussed in TSTF-564, changing the SLMCPR methodology to one based
on a 95% probability with 95% confidence level that no fuel rods
experience transition boiling during an anticipated transient
instead of the current limit based on ensuring that 99.9% of the
fuel rods are not susceptible to boiling transition, does not have a
significant effect on plant response to any analyzed accident. The
SLMCPR and the TS Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) on MCPR
continue to provide the same level of assurance as the current
limits and do not reduce margin of safety.
Therefore, 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
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, Washington,
DC 20001.
NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. Pascarelli.
Florida Power & Light Company, et al., Docket Nos. 50-335 and 50-389,
St. Lucie Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, St. Lucie County, Florida
Date of amendment request: December 20, 2018. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18354A901.
Description of amendment request: The amendments would revise the
Technical Specifications (TSs) by allowing the performance of selected
emergency diesel generator (EDG) surveillance requirements during power
operation, and by relocating to licensee control two EDG surveillance
requirements that are not necessary to demonstrate operability.
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 modifies the allowable MODEs for selected
EDG testing and relocates two EDG testing requirements to licensee
control. EDG testing verifies the accident mitigation capabilities
assumed in accident analyses. In some cases, the proposed changes
could result in detectable electrical perturbations resulting from
testing at-power. However, the perturbations do not exceed expected
parameters or equipment capabilities, and do not trigger protective
safety systems, and thereby cannot increase the likelihood of any
accident. In some cases, the proposed changes could delay the
ability of the EDG under test to respond to a loss of offsite power.
However, the delay is insignificant, the testing would not affect
redundant trains or equipment capabilities, and the plant would
remain within its licensing basis in response to any postulated
event. In addition, administrative controls ensure that the testing
would not occur under conditions that could potentially challenge
safe operation such as severe weather, etc. The testing selected for
relocation to licensee control verify passive capabilities or
capabilities verified during pre-operational testing that will not
change without physical changes to the station. The proposed changes
align the St. Lucie TS with the regulatory guidance of NUREG-1432,
Revision 4, and industry precedent, and thereby cannot adversely
affect safety.
Therefore, the proposed license amendments would 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 modifies the allowable MODEs for EDG testing
and relocates two EDG testing requirements to licensee control. In
some cases, the proposed change increases the length of time an EDG
would be paralleled to the grid during power operation. During such
testing, the EDG under test would be declared inoperable for a
period well within the current licensing basis. Likewise, station
response to any postulated event during such testing would be within
its licensing basis. Hence, the proposed change would not introduce
new accident initiators or new failure mechanisms and would not
alter the expected outcome of any postulated event. The testing
selected for relocation to licensee control verify passive equipment
capabilities or capabilities verified during pre-operational testing
that will not change without physical changes to the station.
Therefore, the proposed license amendments would 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 modifies the allowable MODEs for EDG testing
and relocates two EDG testing requirements to licensee control. The
proposed change does not affect any fission product barrier or
modify any set points for which protective actions associated with
accident detection or mitigation are initiated. The proposed change
neither affects the design of plant equipment nor the manner in
which the plant is operated. The proposed changes cannot adversely
impact any safety limits or limiting safety settings.
Therefore, the proposed license amendment would not involve a
significant reduction in the margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Debbie Hendell, Managing Attorney--Nuclear,
Florida Power & Light Company, 700 Universe
[[Page 23078]]
Blvd., MS LAW/JB, Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420.
NRC Branch Chief: Undine Shoop.
PSEG Nuclear LLC, and Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-
272 and 50-311, Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2,
Salem County, New Jersey
Date of amendment request: April 8, 2019. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19098B529.
Description of amendment request: The amendment would adopt
Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-563, ``Revise
Instrument Testing Definitions to Incorporate the Surveillance
Frequency Control Program.'' TSTF-563 revises the Technical
Specification (TS) definitions of Channel Calibration and Channel
Functional Test.
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 revises the TS definitions of Channel
Calibration and Channel Functional Test to allow the frequency for
testing the components or devices in each step to be determined in
accordance with the TS Surveillance Frequency Control Program. The
proposed change also explicitly permits the Channel Functional Test
to be performed by any series of sequential, overlapping, or total
channel steps. All components in the channel continue to be
calibrated and tested. The frequency at which a channel is tested or
calibrated is not an initiator of any accident previously evaluated,
so the probability of an accident is not affected by the proposed
change. The channels surveilled in accordance with the affected
definitions continue to be required to be operable and the
acceptance criteria of the surveillances are unchanged. As a result,
any mitigating functions assumed in the accident analysis will
continue to be performed.
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 revises the TS definitions of Channel
Calibration and Channel Functional Test to allow the frequency for
testing the components or devices in each step to be determined in
accordance with the TS Surveillance Frequency Control Program. The
proposed change also explicitly permits the Channel Functional Test
to be performed by any series of sequential, overlapping, or total
channel steps. All components in the channel continue to be
calibrated and tested. The design function or operation of the
components involved are not affected and there is no physical
alteration of the plant (i.e., no new or different type of equipment
will be installed). No credible new failure mechanisms,
malfunctions, or accident initiators not considered in the design
and licensing bases are introduced. The changes do not alter
assumptions made in the safety analysis. The proposed changes are
consistent with the safety analysis assumptions.
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 revises the TS definitions of Channel
Calibration and Channel Functional Test to allow the frequency for
testing the components or devices in each step to be determined in
accordance with the TS Surveillance Frequency Control Program. The
proposed change also explicitly permits the Channel Functional Test
to be performed by any series of sequential, overlapping, or total
channel steps. All components in the channel continue to be
calibrated and tested. The Surveillance Frequency Control Program
assures sufficient safety margins are maintained, and that that
design, operation, surveillance methods, and acceptance criteria
specified in applicable codes and standards (or alternatives
approved for use by the NRC) will continue to be met as described in
the plants' licensing basis. The proposed change does not adversely
affect existing plant safety margins, or the reliability of the
equipment assumed to operate in the safety analysis. As such, there
are no changes being made to safety analysis assumptions, safety
limits, or limiting safety system settings that would adversely
affect plant safety as a result of the proposed change. Margins of
safety are unaffected by method of determining surveillance test
intervals under an NRC-approved licensee-controlled program.
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: Steven Fleischer, PSEG Services Corporation,
80 Park Plaza, T-5, Newark, NJ 07102.
NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna.
PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket No. 50-354, Hope Creek Generating Station,
Salem County, New Jersey
Date of amendment request: April 22, 2019. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19112A214.
Description of amendment request: The amendment would adopt
Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-564, Revision
2, ``Safety Limit MCPR [Minimum Critical Power Ratio],'' which would
revise the Hope Creek Generating Station technical specification (TS)
safety limit on minimum critical power ratio (SLMCPR) to reduce the
need for cyclespecific changes to the value while still meeting the
regulatory requirement for a safety limit.
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 amendment revises the TS SLMCPR and the list of
individual specifications that address core operating limits to be
included in the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR). The SLMCPR is
not an initiator of any accident previously evaluated. The revised
safety limit values continue to ensure for all accidents previously
evaluated that the fuel cladding will be protected from failure due
to transition boiling. The proposed change does not affect plant
operation or any procedural or administrative controls on plant
operation that affect the functions of preventing or mitigating any
accidents previously evaluated.
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 amendment revises the TS SLMCPR and the list of
individual specifications that address core operating limits to be
included in the COLR. The proposed change will not affect the design
function or operation of any structures, systems or components
(SSCs). No new equipment will be installed. As a result, the
proposed change will not create any credible new failure mechanisms,
malfunctions, or accident initiators not considered 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.
[[Page 23079]]
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed amendment revises the TS SLMCPR and the list of
specifications that address core operating limits to be included in
the COLR. This will result in a change to a safety limit, but will
not result in a significant reduction in the margin of safety
provided by the safety limit. As discussed in the application,
changing the SLMCPR methodology to one based on a 95% probability
with 95% confidence that no fuel rods experience transition boiling
during an anticipated transient instead of the current limit based
on ensuring that 99.9% of the fuel rods are not susceptible to
boiling transition does not have a significant effect on plant
response to any analyzed accident. The SLMCPR and the TS Limiting
Condition for Operation (LCO) on MCPR continue to provide the same
level of assurance as the current limits and do not reduce a margin
of safety.
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: Steven Fleischer, PSEG Services Corporation,
80 Park Plaza, T-5, Newark, NJ 07102.
NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna.
Virginia Electric and Power Company, Docket Nos. 50-338 and 50-339,
North Anna Power Station, Units Nos. 1 and 2, Louisa County, Virginia
and Docket Nos. 50-280 and 50-281, Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and
2, Surry County, Virginia, and Dominion Energy Nuclear Connecticut,
Inc., Docket Nos. 50-245, 50-336 and 50-423, Millstone Power Station,
Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3, New London County, Connecticut
Date of amendment request: January 4, 2019. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Package Accession No. ML19011A237.
Description of amendment request: The amendments would authorize
changes to the Millstone Power Station (MPS), North Anna Power Station
(NAPS), and Surry Power Station (SPS) emergency plans to incorporate
new Emergency Action Level (EAL) schemes prepared using the guidelines
of Nuclear Energy Institute 99-01, Revision 6, ``Methodology for the
Development of Emergency Action Levels for Non-Passive Reactors,''
November 2012.
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. Do the proposed amendments involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes affect the MPS, NAPS and SPS EALs by
incorporating new EAL schemes, as well as associated revised
engineering analysis, but do not alter any of the requirements of
the Operating Licenses or the Technical Specifications. The proposed
changes do not modify any plant equipment and do not impact any
failure modes that could lead to an accident. Additionally, the
proposed changes have no effect on the consequences of any analyzed
accident since the changes do not affect any equipment related to
accident mitigation. Based on this discussion, the proposed changes
do not increase the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Do the proposed amendments create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes affect the MPS, NAPS and SPS EALs by
incorporating new EAL schemes, as well as associated revised
engineering analysis, but do not alter any of the requirements of
the Operating Licenses or the Technical Specifications. The changes
do not modify any plant equipment and there are no impacts on the
capability of existing equipment to perform its intended design
functions. No system setpoints are being modified and no new failure
modes are introduced by the proposed changes. The proposed changes
do not introduce any new accident initiators or malfunctions that
would cause a new or different kind of accident. Therefore, the
proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
3. Do the proposed amendments involve a significant reduction in
a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed changes affect the MPS, NAPS and SPS EALs by
incorporating new EAL schemes, as well as associated revised
engineering analysis, but do not alter any of the requirements of
the Operating Licenses or the Technical Specifications. The proposed
changes do not affect any of the assumptions used in the accident
analyses, nor do the proposed changes affect any operability
requirements for equipment important to plant safety. Therefore, the
proposed changes will not result in a significant reduction in the
margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Mr. W. S. Blair, Senior Counsel, Dominion
Energy Services, Inc., 120 Tredegar Street, RS-2, Richmond, VA 23219.
NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. Markley.
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, Docket No. 50-482, Wolf Creek
Generating Station, Unit 1, Coffey County, Kansas
Date of amendment request: March 18, 2019. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19086A111.
Description of amendment request: The amendment would revise
Technical Specification (TS) 3.3.5, ``Loss of Power (LOP) Diesel
Generator (DG) Start Instrumentation.'' Specifically, the amendment
would revise the degraded voltage and loss of voltage relays Allowable
Values, nominal Trip Setpoints, and time delays specified in TS
Surveillance Requirement 3.3.5.3, based on analysis using the guidance
in Regulatory Issue Summary 2011-12, Revision 1, ``Adequacy of Station
Electric Distribution System Voltages'' (ADAMS Accession No.
ML113050583).
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented below:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change to the LOV [loss of voltage] and DV
[degraded voltage] Functions allows the protection scheme to
function as originally designed. This change will involve alteration
of the nominal Trip Setpoints in the field and will also be
reflected in revisions to the surveillance procedures. The proposed
change does not affect the probability or consequences of any
accident.
Analysis was conducted and demonstrates that the proposed
changes will allow the normally operating safety-related motors to
not be damaged in the event of sustained degraded bus voltage during
the time delay period prior to initiation of the first level LOV
trip function. Therefore, these safety-related loads will be
available to perform their design basis function should a loss-of-
coolant accident (LOCA) occur concurrent with a loss-of-offsite
power (LOOP) following the DV condition.
The proposed changes do not adversely affect accident initiators
or precursors, and do not alter the design assumptions, conditions,
or configuration or the plant or the manner in which the plant is
operated or maintained. The proposed changes ensure that the 4.16kV
[kilovolt] distribution system remains connected to the offsite
power system when adequate offsite voltage is
[[Page 23080]]
available and motor starting transients are considered. During an
actual LOV condition, the LOV time delay will continue to isolate
the 4.16kV distribution system from offsite power before the diesel
generator (DG) is ready to assume the emergency loads, which is the
limiting time basis for mitigating system responses to the 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 involves the DV and LOV relays AV [allowable
value], nominal Trip Setpoints, and time delays to satisfy existing
design requirements. The proposed change does not introduce any
changes or mechanisms that create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident. The proposed change does not install any
new or different type of equipment, and installed equipment is not
being operated in a new or different manner. No new effects on
existing equipment are created nor are any new malfunctions
introduced.
Therefore, the proposed change will 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 changes to the DV and LOV relay AVs, nominal Trip
Setpoints, and time delays continue to provide margin for the
protection of equipment from sustained DV conditions. During an
actual LOV condition, the LOV time delays will continue to isolate
the 4.16kV distribution system from offsite power before the DG is
ready to assume the emergency loads.
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: Jay Silberg, Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw
Pittman LLP, 1200 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20036.
NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. Pascarelli.
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.
Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket No. 50-261, H. B. Robinson Steam
Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 (Robinson), Darlington County, South
Carolina
Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket No. 50-400, Shearon Harris Nuclear
Power Plant, Unit 1 (Harris), Wake and Chatham Counties, North Carolina
Date of amendment request: October 19, 2017, as supplemented by
letters dated June 5, October 15, and November 6, 2018.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the
Technical Specifications (TSs) to support the allowance of Duke Energy
Progress, LLC to self-perform core reload design and safety analyses.
These revisions included (1) adding the NRC-approved COPERNIC Topical
Report (TR) to the list of TRs for Harris and Robinson and revised the
peak fuel centerline temperature equation in Robinson TS 2.1.1.2 and
Harris TS 2.1.1.b to be the equation used by COPERNIC; (2) relocating
several TS parameters to the Core Operating Limits Reports for Harris
and Robinson, (3) revising the Robinson TS Moderator Temperature
Coefficient maximum upper limit, (4) revising the Harris TS definition
of Shutdown Margin consistent with Technical Specifications Task Force
(TSTF) Traveler TSTF-248, Revision 0 (ADAMS Accession No. ML040611010),
``Revise Shutdown Margin Definition for Stuck Rod Exception,'' and (5)
revising the Robinson and Harris Power Distribution Limits limiting
condition of operation actions and surveillance requirements, as well
as the Robinson Reactor Protection System Instrumentation Table 3.3.1-1
to allow operation of a reactor core designed using the DPC-NE-2011-P
[proprietary], ``Nuclear Design Methodology Report for Core Operating
Limits of Westinghouse Reactors,'' methodology. (A redacted version,
designated as DPC-NE-2011, is publicly-available under ADAMS Accession
No. ML16125A420.)
Date of issuance: April 29, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
prior to startup following the next refueling outage at each plant.
Amendment Nos.: 263 (Robinson) and 171 (Harris). A publicly-
available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18288A139;
documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety
Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-23 and NPF-63: The
amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: January 2, 2018 (83 FR
166). The supplemental letter dated November 6, 2018, provided
additional information that expanded the scope of the application as
originally noticed and changed the NRC staff's original proposed no
significant hazards consideration determination as published in the
Federal Register. Accordingly, the NRC published a second proposed no
significant hazards consideration determination in the Federal Register
on December 4, 2018 (83 FR 62613). This notice superseded the original
notice in its entirety.
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated April 29, 2019.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
[[Page 23081]]
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: April 4, 2018, as supplemented by
letters dated May 29, 2018; September 27, 2018; and December 11, 2018.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2, Technical Specifications
to relocate the pressure-temperature limit curves to a licensee-
controlled Pressure and Temperature Limits Report (PTLR). The amendment
request was submitted in accordance with guidance provided in NRC
Generic Letter 96-03, ``Relocation of the Pressure Temperature Limit
Curves and Low Temperature Overpressure Protections System Limits,''
dated January 31, 1996, and Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF)
Traveler TSTF-419, Revision 0, ``Revise PTLR Definition and References
in ISTS 5.6.6, RCS PTLR,'' dated March 21, 2002.
Date of issuance: April 22, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 120 days of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: 289 (Unit 1) and 317 (Unit 2). A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19035A006; documents related
to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with
the amendments.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-71 and DPR-62: The
amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and
Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 17, 2018 (83 FR
33266). The supplemental letters dated September 27, 2018, and December
11, 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 April 22, 2019.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Entergy Louisiana, LLC, and Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-
458, River Bend Station, Unit 1 (River Bend), West Feliciana Parish,
Louisiana
Date of amendment request: February 28, 2018, as supplemented by
letters dated July 10, July 24, December 17, and December 20, 2018.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment modified the River
Bend Technical Specifications (TSs) to allow relocation of specific
surveillance frequencies to a licensee-controlled program with the
implementation of Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Traveler
TSTF-425, Revision 3, ``Relocate Surveillance Frequencies to Licensee
Control--RITSTF [Risk Informed TSTF] Initiative 5b.'' The amendment
added a new program, the Surveillance Frequency Control Program, to TS
Chapter 5.0, ``Administrative Controls,'' and required future
surveillance frequency changes to be made in accordance with an NRC-
approved methodology.
Date of issuance: April 29, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
90 days from the date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 196. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML19066A008; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Facility Operating License No. NPF-47: The amendment revised the
Renewed Facility Operating License and TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: May 22, 2018 (83 FR
23733). The supplemental letters dated July 10, July 24, December 17,
and December 20, 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 April 29, 2019.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-368, Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit
2, Pope County, Arkansas
Date of amendment request: February 6, 2018, as supplemented by
letters dated March 26, September 7, and November 16, 2018.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the Arkansas
Nuclear One, Unit 2, Technical Specifications and operating license by
relocating certain surveillance frequencies to a licensee-controlled
program, consistent with the NRC-approved Technical Specifications Task
Force (TSTF) Improved Standard Technical Specifications Traveler TSTF-
425, Revision 3, ``Relocate Surveillance Frequencies to Licensee
Control--RITSTF [Risk-Informed TSTF] Initiative 5b.''
Date of issuance: April 23, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 90 days from the date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 315. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML19063B948; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-6: The amendment revised
the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 5, 2018 (83 FR
26102). The supplemental letters dated September 7, 2018, and November
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 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 April 23, 2019.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Florida Power & Light Company, et al., Docket No. 50-389, St. Lucie
Plant, Unit No. 2, St. Lucie County, Florida
Date of amendment request: June 29, 2018, as supplemented by
letters dated August 17, 2018; November 15, 2018; and February 22,
2019.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the Technical
Specifications (TSs) by reducing the total number of control element
assemblies specified in the TSs from 91 to 87.
Date of issuance: April 23, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
prior to startup from the spring 2020 refueling outage.
Amendment No.: 198. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML19058A492; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-16: The amendment
revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 9, 2018 (83 FR
50696). The supplemental letters dated November 15, 2018, and February
22, 2019, provided additional information that clarified the
application, did not
[[Page 23082]]
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 April 23, 2019.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
NextEra Energy, Point Beach, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-266 and 50-301, Point
Beach Nuclear Plant (Point Beach), Units 1 and 2, Town of Two Creeks,
Manitowoc County, Wisconsin
Date of amendment request: March 30, 2018, as supplemented by
letter dated November 16, 2018.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the Point
Beach Technical Specification 5.5.15, ``Containment Leakage Rate
Testing Program,'' to allow extension of the 10-year frequency of the
Type A Integrated Leak Rate Test to 15 years on a permanent basis and
to allow the extension of the Containment Isolation Valves leakage test
interval (i.e., Type C tests) from its current 60 months frequency to
75 months.
Date of issuance: April 25, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 90 days of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: 265 (Unit 1) and 268 (Unit 2). A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19064A904; documents related
to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with
the amendments.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-24 and DPR-27: The
amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and
Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 19, 2018 (83 FR
28461).
The supplemental letter dated November 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 NRC staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination as published in the Federal Register.
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated April 25, 2019.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket No. 50-354, Hope Creek Generating Station,
Salem County, New Jersey
Date of amendment request: March 28, 2018, as supplemented by
letters dated September 26, 2018, and February 28, 2019.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the Hope
Creek Generating Station Technical Specification \3/4\.8.1, ``A.C.
Sources--Operating,'' specifically, Action b, concerning one inoperable
emergency diesel generator. The change removes the Salem Nuclear
Generating Station, Unit 3, gas turbine generator and replaces it with
portable diesel generators.
Date of issuance: April 30, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 1 year of the date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 216. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML19073A073; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-57: The amendment
revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical
Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 5, 2018 (83 FR
26106). The supplemental letters dated September 26, 2018, and February
28, 2019, 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 April 30, 2019.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, South Carolina Public Service
Authority, Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit
No. 1, Fairfield County, South Carolina
Date of amendment request: September 27, 2018, as supplemented by
letter dated March 11, 2019.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment corrected a non-
conservative Technical Specification by revising the inter-cell
resistance value listed in Surveillance Requirements 4.8.2.1.b.2 and
4.8.2.1.c.3.
Date of issuance: April 30, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 60 days of issuance.
Amendment No.: 215. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML19080A103; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-12: The amendment
revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical
Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 20, 2018 (83
FR 58607). The supplemental letter dated March 11, 2019, 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 April 30, 2019.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Georgia Power Company,
Oglethorpe Power Corporation, Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia,
City of Dalton, Georgia, Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366, Edwin I. Hatch
Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Appling County, Georgia
Date of amendment request: August 6, 2018. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18218A297.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments revise the Unit No.
1 and Unit No. 2 Technical Specifications (TS) requirements of TS
3.6.2.5, ``Residual Heat Removal (RHR) Drywell Spray,'' to allow the
affected unit to remain in Hot Shutdown (Mode 3) instead of proceeding
to Cold Shutdown (Mode 4) when the Required Actions of Condition C
cannot be met for the drywell spray system.
Date of issuance: April 30, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 90 days from the date of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: 296 (Unit No. 1) and 241 (Unit No. 2). A publicly-
available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19091A291;
documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety
Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-57 and NPF-5: The
amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 4, 2018 (83 FR
62618).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated April 30, 2019.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
[[Page 23083]]
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-
364, Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant (Farley), Units 1 and 2, Houston
County, Alabama, Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket Nos.
50-321 and 50-366, Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant (Hatch), Unit Nos. 1
and 2, City of Dalton, Georgia
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket Nos. 50-424 and 50-
425, Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (Vogtle), Units 1 and 2, Burke
County, Georgia
Date of amendment request: August 9, 2018, as supplemented by
letter dated January 31, 2019.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised Technical
Specification (TS) 5.2.2.g to eliminate a dedicated shift technical
advisor (STA) position at Farley, Units 1 and 2, and Hatch, Units 1 and
2, by allowing the STA functions to be combined with one or more of the
required senior licensed operator positions. The Vogtle, Units 1 and 2,
TS change aligns the facilities with equivalent wording. This change
also incorporated wording related to the modes of operation during
which the individual meeting the requirements in TS 5.2.2.g is required
and provided guidance that the same individual may provide advisory
technical support for both units.
Date of issuance: April 26, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 90 days of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: Farley--222 (Unit 1) and 219 (Unit 2); Hatch--295
(Unit 1) and 240 (Unit 2); and Vogtle--199 (Unit 1) and 182 (Unit 2). A
publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19064A774;
documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety
Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.
Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-2, NPF-5, NPF-8, NPF-68, NPF-
81, and DPR-57: The amendments revised the Facility Operating Licenses
and TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 23, 2018 (83 FR
53515). The supplemental letter dated January 31, 2019, 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 April 26, 2019.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day of May 2019.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Craig G. Erlanger,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2019-10315 Filed 5-20-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P