[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 146 (Tuesday, July 30, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36964-36972]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-15849]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2019-0150]
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 June 29, 2019, to July 15, 2019. The last
biweekly notice was published on July 16, 2019.
DATES: Comments must be filed by August 29, 2019. A request for a
hearing must be filed by September 30, 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 https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2019-0150. Address
questions about NRC docket IDs in Regulations.gov to Jennifer Borges;
telephone: 301-287-9127; email: [email protected]. For technical
questions, contact the individual 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: Paula Blechman, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-2242, email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2019-0150, 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 https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2019-0150.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://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-2019-0150, 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
https://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.
[[Page 36965]]
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 https://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
[[Page 36966]]
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 https://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 https://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 https://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 https://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
application(s), see the application for amendment which is available
for public inspection in ADAMS and at the NRC's PDR. For additional
direction on accessing
[[Page 36967]]
information related to this document, see the ``Obtaining Information
and Submitting Comments'' section of this document.
Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-313, Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit
1, Pope County, Arkansas
Date of amendment request: May 29, 2019. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19149A290.
Description of amendment request: The amendment would revise the
Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1, Technical Specifications (TSs) by
adopting Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-563,
``Revise Instrument Testing Definitions to Incorporate the Surveillance
Frequency Control Program.''
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 SFCP [Surveillance Frequency Control
Program]. All components in the channel continue to be tested. The
frequency at which a channel test is performed is not an initiator
of any accident previously evaluated; therefore, 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 SFCP. 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 SFCP. The SFCP assures sufficient safety
margins are maintained, and that the 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: Ms. Anna Vinson Jones, Senior Counsel,
Entergy Services, Inc., 101 Constitution Avenue NW, Suite 200 East,
Washington, DC 20001.
NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. Pascarelli.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50-456 and STN 50-457,
Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2, Will County, Illinois
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50-454 and STN 50-455,
Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Ogle County, Illinois
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-237 and 50-249, Dresden
Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Grundy County, Illinois
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374, LaSalle
County Station, Units 1 and 2, LaSalle County, Illinois
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-352 and No. 50-353,
Limerick Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, Montgomery County,
Pennsylvania
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-220 and 50-410, Nine
Mile Point Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Oswego County, New York
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, and PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50-
277 and 50-278, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3, York
and Lancaster Counties, Pennsylvania
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, Quad
Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, Rock Island County,
Illinois
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-244, R. E. Ginna Nuclear
Power Plant, Wayne County, New York
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-333, James A. FitzPatrick
Nuclear Power Plant, Oswego County, New York
Date of amendment request: June 14, 2019. Publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19165A252.
Description of amendment request: The amendments would remove the
Table of Contents (TOC) from the Technical Specifications (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 amendment is administrative and affects control of
a document, the TOC, listing the specifications
[[Page 36968]]
in the plant TS. Transferring control from the NRC to EGC [Exelon
Generation Company, LLC] does not affect the operation, physical
configuration, or function of plant equipment or systems. The
proposed amendment does not impact the initiators or assumptions of
analyzed events; nor does it impact the mitigation of accidents or
transient events.
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 previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change does not involve a physical alteration of
the plant (i.e., no new or different type of equipment will be
installed) or a change in the methods governing normal plant
operation. The proposed change does not alter any 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 is administrative. The TOC is not required
by regulation to be in the TS. Removal does not impact any safety
assumptions or have the potential to reduce a margin of safety. The
proposed change involves a transfer of control of the TOC from the
NRC to EGC. No change in the technical content of the TS is
involved.
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
requested amendments involve no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel,
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL
60555.
NRC Acting Branch Chief: Lisa M. Regner.
Florida Power and Light Company, Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251, Turkey
Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4, Miami-Dade County, Florida
Date of amendment request: June 13, 2019. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19170A094.
Description of amendment request: The amendments would revise the
Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4 Technical
Specifications (TSs) related to Reactor Trip System instrumentation and
would resolve non-conservative TSs.
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 modify the mode of applicability and
surveillance requirements for the Reactor Trip System (RTS) turbine
trip instrumentation such that operability is required in MODE 1
when above the permissive interlock, P-7, and satisfactory
surveillance testing is required prior to reaching MODE 1 above P-7
whenever the Unit has been in MODE 3. Aligning the operability
requirements with the plant conditions required for the protective
feature to function neither changes the manner in which operability
will be determined nor the manner in which the equipment will be
operated and maintained. No change to the RTS turbine trip
instrumentation is proposed and the equipment will remain capable of
performing as required upon implementation of the proposed
amendments. No changes are proposed to any safety analysis inputs or
assumptions. The proposed change additionally resolves two non-
conservative TS requirements consistent with NRC Administrative
Letter 98-10, and thereby cannot adversely affect the likelihood or
the outcome of any design basis accident.
Therefore, this proposed change does not represent 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 accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed amendments align the RTS turbine trip channel
requirements with the plant conditions required for the protective
feature to function (i.e., P-7). The proposed change establishes RTS
turbine trip channel operability in MODE 1 when above P-7 and
requires surveillance testing prior to MODE 1 above P-7 whenever the
Unit has been in MODE 3. The inputs and assumptions to safety
analyses remain unchanged as a result of the proposed change since
no physical change to plant equipment is proposed and the
requirement to demonstrate operability prior to the plant conditions
necessitating the protective feature remains unchanged. As such, the
proposed change cannot introduce new equipment failure modes, cannot
change the types or amount of effluent that may be released off-
site, and cannot increase individual or cumulative occupational
exposures that would result from any accident. The proposed change
additionally resolves two non-conservative requirements consistent
with NRC Administrative Letter 98-10, and thereby cannot create a
new or different kind of accident.
Therefore, the proposed amendments 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 align the RTS turbine trip channel
requirements with the plant conditions required for the protective
feature to function (i.e., P-7) by establishing RTS turbine trip
channel operability in MODE 1 when above P-7 and requiring
surveillance testing prior to MODE 1 above P-7 whenever the Unit has
been in MODE 3. The proposed amendments additionally resolve two
non-conservative TS requirements consistent with NRC Administrative
Letter 98-10. The proposed changes do not affect any plant operating
margins or the reliability of equipment credited in safety analyses
and no changes are proposed to any safety analysis assumptions,
safety limits, or limiting safety system settings.
Therefore, the proposed amendments 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: Debbie Hendell, Managing Attorney--Nuclear,
Florida Power & Light Company, 700 Universe Blvd., MS LAW/JB, Juno
Beach, FL 33408-0420.
NRC Branch Chief: Undine Shoop.
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: June 18, 2019. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19169A350.
Description of amendment request: The amendment proposes changes to
the Combined License Appendix A Technical Specifications (TS) 3.7.11,
Spent Fuel Pool Boron Concentration, Applicability and Required Actions
to eliminate an allowance to exit the Applicability of Limiting
Condition of Operation 3.7.11, Spent Fuel Pool Boron Concentration,
once a spent fuel pool storage verification had been performed. The
requested amendment also proposes to eliminate TS 3.7.11 Required
Action A.2.2, which provides an option to perform a spent fuel pool
storage verification in lieu of restoring spent fuel pool boron
concentration to within limits.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards
[[Page 36969]]
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 changes do not involve changes to current plant
design or safety analysis assumptions. These changes provide
Technical Specifications (TS) consistency with the approved plant
design and criticality analysis assumptions and the requirements of
10 CFR 50.68(b)(4). The radioactive material source terms and
release paths used in the safety analyses are unchanged, thus the
radiological releases in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report
(UFSAR) accident analyses are not affected.
The changes do not affect the operation of any systems or
equipment that initiate an analyzed accident or alter any
structures, systems, and components (SSCs) accident initiator or
initiating sequence of events. The proposed changes do not result in
any increase in the probability of an analyzed accident occurring.
Meeting the 10 CFR 50.68 requirements is consistent with 10 CFR
50 Appendix A, General Design Criterion (GDC) 62, and thereby
establishes that criticality in the fuel storage and handling system
is prevented by physical systems or processes, and geometrically
safe configurations.
Therefore, the requested amendment does not involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes do not affect the safety limits as
described in the plant-specific Technical Specifications. In
addition, the limiting safety system settings and limiting control
settings continue to be met with the proposed changes to the plant-
specific Technical Specifications. These changes provide Technical
Specifications (TS) consistency with the approved plant design and
criticality analysis assumptions and the requirements of 10 CFR
50.68(b)(4). The proposed changes do not affect the operation of any
systems or equipment that may initiate a new or different kind of
accident or alter any SSC such that a new accident initiator or
initiating sequence of events is created.
The proposed changes do not affect plant protection
instrumentation systems, and do not affect the design function,
support, design, or operation of mechanical and fluid systems. The
proposed changes do not result in a new failure mechanism or
introduce any new accident precursors. No design function described
in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) is affected by
the proposed changes.
Therefore, the proposed amendment 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 changes do not involve changes to current plant
design or safety analysis assumptions. These changes provide
Technical Specifications (TS) consistency with the approved plant
design and criticality analysis assumptions and the requirements of
10 CFR 50.68(b)(4). No safety analysis or design basis acceptance
limit/criterion is involved.
The criticality analysis, which meets the applicable
requirements of 10 CFR 50.68, Paragraph b, considers the inherent
neutron absorbing effect of the materials of construction, including
fixed neutron absorbing ``poison'' material. Soluble boron in the
spent fuel pool and assembly burnup is used as reactivity credits.
Meeting the 10 CFR 50.68 requirements is consistent with 10 CFR
50 Appendix A GDC 62, and thereby establishes that criticality in
the fuel storage and handling system is prevented by physical
systems or processes, and geometrically safe configurations. No
safety analysis or design basis acceptance limit/criterion is
challenged or exceeded by the proposed changes, and no margin of
safety is reduced.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant
reduction in a margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP,
1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35203-2015.
NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer L. Dixon-Herrity.
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket Nos. 50-390 and 50-391, Watts Bar
Nuclear Plant (WBN), Units 1 and 2, Rhea County, Tennessee
Date of amendment request: November 29, 2018. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18334A363.
Description of amendment request: The amendments would modify the
WBN Facility Operating Licenses to allow for the implementation of the
provisions of 10 CFR 50.69, ``Risk-informed categorization and
treatment of structures, systems and components for nuclear power
reactors.'' The provisions of 10 CFR 50.69 allow adjustment of the
scope of equipment subject to special treatment controls (e.g., quality
assurance, testing, inspection, condition monitoring, assessment, and
evaluation). For equipment determined to be of low safety significance,
alternative treatment requirements can be implemented in accordance
with this regulation. For equipment determined to be of high safety
significance, requirements will not be changed or will be enhanced.
This allows improved focus on equipment that has safety significance
resulting in improved plant safety.
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 any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change will permit the use of a risk-informed
categorization process to modify the scope of structures, systems,
and components (SSCs) subject to Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
special treatment requirements and to implement alternative
treatments per the regulations. The process used to evaluate SSCs
for changes to NRC special treatment requirements and the use of
alternative requirements ensures the ability of the SSCs to perform
their design function. The potential change to special treatment
requirements does not change the design and operation of the SSCs.
As a result, the proposed change does not significantly affect any
initiators to accidents previously evaluated or the ability to
mitigate any accidents previously evaluated. The consequences of the
accidents previously evaluated are not affected because the
mitigation functions performed by the SSCs assumed in the safety
analysis are not being modified. The SSCs required to safely shut
down the reactor and maintain it in a safe shutdown condition
following an accident will continue to perform their design
functions.
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 previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change will permit the use of a risk-informed
categorization process to modify the scope of SSCs subject to NRC
special treatment requirements and to implement alternative
treatments per the regulations. The proposed change does not change
the functional requirements, configuration, or method of operation
of any SSC. Under the proposed change, no additional plant equipment
will be installed.
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
the margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed change will permit the use of a risk-informed
categorization process to
[[Page 36970]]
modify the scope of SSCs subject to NRC special treatment
requirements and to implement alternative treatments per the
regulations. The proposed change does not affect any safety limits
or operating parameters used to establish the safety margin. The
safety margins included in analyses of accidents are not affected by
the proposed change. The regulation requires that there be no
significant effect on plant risk due to any change to the special
treatment requirements for SSCs and that the SSCs continue to be
capable of performing their design basis functions, as well as to
perform any beyond design basis functions consistent with the
categorization process and results.
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: General Counsel, Tennessee Valley Authority,
400 West Summit Hill Drive, 6A West Tower, Knoxville, TN 37902.
NRC Branch Chief: Undine Shoop.
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 Carolinas, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414, Catawba
Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 (Catawba), York County, South Carolina
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370, McGuire
Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 (McGuire), Mecklenburg County, North
Carolina
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287,
Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 (Oconee), Oconee County,
South Carolina
Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324, Brunswick
Steam Electric Plant (Brunswick), Units 1 and 2, Brunswick County,
North Carolina
Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket No. 50-400, Shearon Harris Nuclear
Power Plant, Unit 1 (Harris), Wake County, North Carolina
Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket No. 50-261, H. B. Robinson Steam
Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 (Robinson), Darlington County, South
Carolina
Date of amendment request: June 20, 2018.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the
Emergency Action Levels (EALs) for Catawba, McGuire, Oconee, Brunswick,
Harris, and Robinson consistent with Emergency Preparedness Frequently
Asked Questions (EPFAQs) 2015-013 (EAL HG1.1) and 2016-002 (EALs CA6.1
and SA9.1 (SA8.1 for Brunswick)). The amendments also revised the EALs
for Harris and Robinson consistent with EPFAQ 2015-014 (EAL HS6.1).
Date of issuance: July 1, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 180 days of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: 303 and 299, for Catawba; 315 and 294, for McGuire;
412, 414, and 413, for Oconee; 291 and 319, for Brunswick; 172, for
Harris; and 264, for Robinson. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS
under Accession No. ML19058A632; documents related to these amendments
are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-35, NPF-52, NPF-9, NPF-
17, DPR-38, DPR-47, DPR-55, DPR-71, DPR-62, NPF-63, and DPR-23:
Amendments revised the Facility Emergency Plans.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 14, 2018 (83 FR
40346).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated July 1, 2019.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370, McGuire
Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 (McGuire), Mecklenburg County, North
Carolina
Date of amendment requests: May 2, 2017, as supplemented by letters
dated July 20 and November 21, 2017; July 10 and December 3, 2018; and
March 7 and April 8, 2019.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments modified McGuire's
Technical Specifications (TSs) to extend the Completion Time of TS
3.8.1, ``AC [Alternating Current] Sources--Operating,'' Required Action
B.6 (existing Required Action B.4, numbered as B.6) for an inoperable
emergency diesel generator from 72 hours to 14 days. To support this
amendment, the licensee added a supplemental power source (i.e., two
supplemental diesel generators per station) with the capability to
power any emergency bus. The supplemental diesel generators have the
capacity to bring the affected unit to cold shutdown. Additionally, the
amendments modified TS 3.8.1 to add new two limiting conditions for
operation (LCOs), TS LCO 3.8.1.c and TS LCO 3.8.1.d, to ensure that at
least one train of shared components has an operable emergency power
supply. Corresponding Conditions, Required Actions and Completion Times
of TS 3.8.1 are revised to account for the new supplemental AC power
source.
Date of issuance: June 28, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 120 days of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: 314 (Unit 1) and 293 (Unit 2). A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19126A030; documents related
to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with
the amendments.
[[Page 36971]]
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-9 and NPF-17:
Amendments revised the Renewed Licenses and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: February 27, 2017 (83
FR 8512). The supplemental letters dated July 20 and November 21, 2017;
July 10 and December 3, 2018; and March 7 and April 8, 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 amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated June 28, 2019.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-382, Waterford Steam Electric
Station, Unit 3 (Waterford 3), St. Charles Parish, Louisiana
Date of amendment request: March 26, 2018, as supplemented by
letters dated May 17, 2018, and February 15, 2019.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised Waterford 3
Technical Specification (TS) 3/4.7.4, ``Ultimate Heat Sink.''
Specifically, the amendment corrected the wet cooling tower basin level
discrepancy, revised requirements for cooling fan operation described
in TS 3.7.4 ACTION Statements, revised Surveillance Requirement 4.7.4,
and revised Table 3.7-3, ``Ultimate Heat Sink Minimum Fan Requirements
Per Train.''
Date of issuance: June 28, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 60 days from the date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 254. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML19164A001; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-38: The amendment
revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical
Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 31, 2018 (83 FR
36976). The supplemental letter dated February 15, 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 June 28, 2019.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Exelon FitzPatrick, LLC and Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No.
50-333, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, Oswego County, New
York
Date of amendment request: October 2, 2018.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised James A.
FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Technical Specification 3.1.2,
``Reactivity Anomalies,'' to change the method used to perform the
reactivity anomaly surveillance. Specifically, the amendment allows
performance of the surveillance based on the difference between the
monitored (i.e., actual) core reactivity and the predicted core
reactivity. The surveillance was previously performed based on the
difference between the monitored control rod density and the predicted
control rod density.
Date of issuance: July 11, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance, and shall be
implemented within 90 days.
Amendment No.: 325. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML19157A203; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-59: The amendment
revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical
Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 20, 2018 (83
FR 58610).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated July 11, 2019.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Florida Power and Light Company, et al., Docket Nos. 50-335 and 50-389,
St. Lucie Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, St. Lucie County, Florida
Date of amendment request: December 5, 2014; as supplemented by
letters dated July 8 and July 22, 2016; February 25, 2017; and February
1, March 15, June 7, September 18, November 9, and November 30, 2018.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the
Technical Specification (TS) requirements related to Completion Times
for Required Actions to provide the option to calculate longer, risk-
informed Completion Times. The amendments also added a new program, the
Risk Informed Completion Time Program, to TS Section 6.0,
``Administrative Controls.''
Date of issuance: July 2, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 180 days of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: 247 and 199. A publicly-available version is in
ADAMS under Accession No. ML19113A099; documents related to these
amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the
amendments.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-67 and NPF-16: The
amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and
Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 14, 2018 (83 FR
40349). The supplements dated September 18, November 9, and November
30, 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 July 2, 2019.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Indiana Michigan Power Company, Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316, Donald
C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Berrien County, Michigan
Date of amendment request: February 26, 2019.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the
Technical Specifications (TSs) to adopt Technical Specifications Task
Force (TSTF) Traveler-563, ``Revise Instrument Testing Definitions to
Incorporate the Surveillance Frequency Control Program.'' TSTF-563
revises the TS definitions of Channel Calibration, Channel Operational
Test, and Trip Actuating Device Operational Test.
Date of issuance: July 11, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 60 days of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: 345 (Unit 1) and 327 (Unit 2). A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19134A355; documents related
to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with
the amendments.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-58 and DPR-74: The
amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and
Technical Specifications.
[[Page 36972]]
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: April 9, 2019 (84 FR
14151).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated July 11, 2019.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Oyster Creek Environmental Protection, LLC and Holtec Decommissioning
International, LLC, Docket No. 50-219, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating
Station, Ocean County, New Jersey
Date of amendment request: August 31, 2018.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised Renewed
Facility Operating License No. DPR-16 to reflect the direct transfer of
the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Renewed Facility Operating
License No. DPR-16, and the general license for the Oyster Creek
Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation from Exelon Generation
Company, LLC to Oyster Creek Environmental Protection, LLC as the
licensed owner and to Holtec Decommissioning International, LLC as the
licensed decommissioning operator.
Date of issuance: July 1, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance, and shall be
implemented within 30 days of issuance.
Amendment No.: 297. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML19164A155; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the letter dated June 20,
2019 (ADAMS Accession No. ML19095A454).
Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-16: The amendment
revised the Renewed Facility Operating License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 19, 2018 (83 FR
53119).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in the Safety Evaluation dated June 20, 2019.
SHINE Medical Technologies, LLC, Docket No. 50-608, SHINE Medical
Isotope Production Facility, Rock County, Wisconsin
Date of amendment request: December 11, 2018, as supplemented by
letter dated March 8, 2019.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment modified Construction
Permit No. CPMIF-001 to reflect SHINE Medical Technologies, LLC
converting from a corporation into a single-member limited liability
company, owned and controlled by Illuminated Holdings, Inc.
Date of issuance: July 1, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 1. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
ADAMS Accession No. ML19162A024; documents related to this amendment
are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the letter dated May
20, 2019 (ADAMS Accession No. ML19102A321).
Construction Permit No. CPMIF-001: Amendment revised the
Construction Permit.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: February 20, 2019 (84
FR 5116). The supplemental letter dated March 8, 2019, provided
additional information that clarified the application and did not
expand the scope of the application as originally noticed.
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated May 20, 2019.
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: June 29, 2018, as supplemented by letter
dated June 12, 2019.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the
Allowable Values specified in Technical Specification (TS) Table
3.3.5.1-1 for automatic transfer of the High Pressure Coolant Injection
pump suction alignment from the condensate storage tank to the
suppression pool for Units 1 and 2. The amendments also increased the
Allowable Value specified in TS Table 3.3.5.3-1 for automatic transfer
of the Reactor Core Isolation Cooling pump suction alignment from the
condensate storage tank to the suppression pool for Unit 1.
Date of issuance: July 8, 2019.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 90 days of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: 297 and 242. A publicly-available version is in
ADAMS under Accession No. ML19177A166; 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:
Amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and
Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 4, 2018 (83 FR
62622). The supplemental letter dated June 12, 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 July 8, 2019.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd day of July 2019.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Craig G. Erlanger,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2019-15849 Filed 7-29-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P