80 FR 55383 - Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 1; Application and Amendment to Facility Operating License Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 178 (September 15, 2015)
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 178 (September 15, 2015)
| Page Range | 55383-55387 | |
| FR Document | 2015-23085 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 178 (Tuesday, September 15, 2015)] [Notices] [Pages 55383-55387] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-23085] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50-390; NRC-2015-0170] Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 1; Application and Amendment to Facility Operating License Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: License amendment request; opportunity to comment, request a hearing and petition for leave to intervene. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NFP-90, issued to the Tennessee Valley Authority (the licensee), for operation of the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant (WBN), Unit No. 1. The proposed amendment would modify the technical specifications (TSs) to define support systems needed in the first 48 hours after a unit shutdown when steam generators are not available for heat removal. The proposed amendment would also make changes consistent with Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-273-A, Revision 2, to provide clarifications related to the requirements of the Safety Function Determination Program (SFDP). The proposed license amendment was submitted by letter dated June 17, 2015, and was supplemented by letters dated July 14, August 28, and September 3, 2015. The NRC staff previously made a proposed determination that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. By letter dated September 3, 2015, the licensee provided additional information that expanded the scope of the amendment request as originally noticed. The September 3, 2015, supplement proposed new modifications to TS 3.3.2 and TS 3.4.6. This notice supersedes the previous notice in its entirety to update the description of the amendment request and the no significant hazards determination. DATES: Submit comments by October 15, 2015. A request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene must be filed by November 16, 2015. 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 Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0170. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415- 3463; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: OWFN-12-H08, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeanne A. Dion, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1349; email: [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2015-0170 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 Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0170. NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected]. The application for amendment, dated June 17, 2015, and supplemented by letters dated July 14, August 28, and September 3, 2015, are available in ADAMS under ADAMS Accession Nos. ML15170A474, ML15197A357, ML15243A044, and ML15246A638. [[Page 55384]] 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-2015-0170 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. Introduction The NRC is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NFP-90, issued to the Tennessee Valley Authority, for operation of the WBN, Unit No. 1, located in Spring City, Tennessee. The proposed amendment, initially submitted by letter dated June 17, 2015, would modify the TSs to define support systems needed in the first 48 hours after a unit shutdown when steam generators are not available for heat removal. The proposed change is required to support dual unit operation of WBN (a licensing decision for WBN, Unit No. 2, is currently expected to be made in the fall of 2015). The proposed amendment would also make changes consistent with TSTF-273-A, Revision 2, to provide clarifications related to the requirements of the SFDP. The proposed license amendment was supplemented by letters dated July 14, August 28, and September 3, 2015. The supplement dated September 3, 2015, proposed changes to TSs 3.3.2 and 3.4.6), beyond those that had been included in the June 17, 2015, letter. The NRC staff previously made a proposed determination that the amendment request dated June 17, 2015, involves no significant hazards consideration (80 FR 42554; July 17, 2015). This notice supersedes the previous notice in its entirety to update the description of the amendment request and the no significant hazards consideration. Before issuance of the proposed license amendment, the Commission will have made findings required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations. The NRC has made a proposed determination that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Under the NRC'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. 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 likelihood of a malfunction of any systems, structures or components (SSCs) supported by containment cooling system (CCS) and essential raw cooling water (ERCW) is not significantly increased by adding new technical specification (TS) for ERCW and CCS that require alternate CCS and ERCW system alignments during the first 48 hours after shut down of a unit when the steam generators are not available for heat removal. CCS and ERCW provide the means for transferring residual and decay heat to the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) System for process and operating heat from safety related components during a transient or accident, as well as during normal operation. Although the proposed change includes a design change to allow two ERCW pumps to be powered from one diesel generator (DG), the additional ERCW pump is only aligned to the DG on a non-accident unit during a design basis event on the other unit, and does not result in overloading the DG due to the reduced loading on the non- accident DG. The CCS and ERCW are not initiators of any analyzed accident. All equipment supported by CCS and ERCW has been evaluated to demonstrate that their performance and operation remains as described in the FSAR [Final Safety Analysis Report] with no increase in probability of failure or malfunction. The SSCs credited to mitigate the consequences of postulated design basis accidents remain capable of performing their design basis function. The change in CCS and ERCW system alignments has been evaluated to ensure the RHR System remains capable of removing normal operating and post-accident heat. Additionally, all the CCS and ERCW supported equipment, credited in the accident analysis to mitigate an accident, has been shown to continue to perform their design function as described in the FSAR. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. The proposed TS changes add explanatory text to the programmatic description of the Safety Function Determination Program (SFDP) in TS 5.7.2.18 to clarify the requirements that consideration does not have to be made for a loss of power in determining loss of function. The Bases for LCO [Limiting Condition for Operation] 3.0.6 is revised to provide clarification of the ``appropriate LCO for loss of function,'' and that consideration does not have to be made for a loss of power in determining loss of function. The changes are editorial and administrative in nature, and therefore do not increase the probability of any accident previously evaluated. No physical or operational changes are made to the plant. The proposed changes do not change how the plant would mitigate an accident previously evaluated. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. The proposed change to require the Reactor Coolant System (RCS) loops to be operable for the initial seven hours after shutdown and for the automatic switching of the auxiliary feedwater (AFW) pumps suction from the condensate storage tank (CST) to the and essential raw cooling water (ERCW) System to be operable in Mode 4 when relying on steam generators for heat removal does not increase the probability or consequences of an accident that has been previously evaluated at WBN. The RCS loops are currently required to be operable to remove decay heat until plant conditions allow the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) System to be placed in service. Specifying that the RCS loops are required to be operable for the initial seven hours after shutdown is consistent with the heat load assumptions at the specified time after shutdown described in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). The suction piping to the AFW pumps from either the CST or ERCW is not an initiator of any analyzed accident. The equipment supported by AFW and ERCW as described in the UFSAR has not been changed. The systems, structures or components (SSCs) credited to mitigate the consequences of postulated design basis accidents remain capable of performing their design basis function. The change requiring the RCS loops to be operable for the initial seven hours after shutdown does not affect heat removal capability. It ensures the RHR System is not solely relied on for decay heat removal before the decay heat load is within the capability of the RHR System. The change requiring the pressure switches in the AFW pump suction piping to remain in service in Mode 4 when steam generators are relied on to remove heat from the RCS does not affect heat removal capability. It retains the same automatic [[Page 55385]] action required by the instruments in Modes 1, 2, and 3, consistent with the TS Applicability requirements for the AFW System. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. The proposed change does not introduce any new modes of plant operation, change the design function of any SSC, or change the mode of operation of any SSC. There are no new equipment failure modes or malfunctions created as the affected SSCs continue to operate in the same manner as previously evaluated and have been evaluated to perform their safety functions when in the alternate alignments as assumed in the accident analysis. Additionally, accident initiators remain as described in the FSAR and no new accident initiators are postulated as a result of the alternate CCS and ERCW alignments. Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. The proposed changes [to TS 5.7.2.18] are editorial and administrative in nature and do not result in a change in the manner in which the plant operates. The loss of function of any specific component will continue to be addressed in its specific TS LCO, and plant configuration will be governed by the required actions of those LCOs. The proposed changes are clarifications that do not degrade the availability or capability of safety related equipment, and therefore do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. There are no design changes associated with the proposed changes, and the changes do not involve a physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no new or different type of equipment will be installed). The changes do not alter assumptions made in the safety analysis, and are consistent with the safety analysis assumptions and current plant operating practice. Due to the administrative nature of the changes, they cannot be an accident initiator. Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. The proposed change does not introduce any new modes of plant operation, change the design function of any SSC, or change the mode of operation of any SSC. There are no new equipment failure modes or malfunctions created as the affected SSCs continue to operate in the same manner as previously evaluated. Additionally, accident initiators remain as described in the UFSAR and no new accident initiators are postulated as a result of requiring the RCS loops to be operable for a specified duration after plant shutdown or by extending the Mode of Applicability of the AFW pump suction swap over from the CST to ERCW. 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 change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response: No. The proposed change continues to ensure that the cooling capability of RHR during normal operation and during the mitigation of a design basis event remains within the evaluated equipment limits and capabilities assumed in the accident analysis. The proposed change does not result in any changes to plant equipment functions, including setpoints and actuations. The proposed change does not alter existing limiting conditions for operation, limiting safety system settings, or safety limits specified in the Technical Specifications. The proposed change to add a new TS for ERCW and CCS assures the ability of these systems to support post-accident residual heat removal. Therefore, since there is no adverse impact of this change on the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant safety analysis, there is no significant reduction in the margin of safety of the plant. The proposed changes to TS 5.7.2.18 are clarifications and are editorial and administrative in nature. No changes are made to the LCOs for plant equipment, the time required for the TS Required Actions to be completed, or the out of service time for the components involved. The proposed changes do not affect the safety analysis acceptance criteria for any analyzed event, nor is there a change to any safety analysis limit. The proposed changes do not alter the manner in which safety limits, limiting safety system settings or limiting conditions for operation are determined, nor is there any adverse effect on those plant systems necessary to assure the accomplishment of protection functions. The proposed changes will not result in plant operation in a configuration outside the design basis. Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The proposed change does not result in any changes to plant equipment functions, including setpoints and actuations. The proposed change does not alter limiting safety system settings or safety limits specified in the TS for these instruments. The proposed change ensures the decay heat load of the plant is within the capability of the RHR System prior to allowing sole use of the RHR loops for decay heat removal. In addition, the proposed change ensures the same automatic action to align ERCW as a supply source to AFW that occurs in Modes 1, 2, and 3 will remain available in Mode 4 when relying on the steam generators for decay heat removal. Thus, the proposed change does not reduce the margin of safety. Therefore, since there is no adverse impact of this change on the safety analysis, there is no significant reduction in the margin of safety of the plant. 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. The NRC is seeking public comments on this proposed determination that the license amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination. Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60- day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30- day comment period should circumstances change during the 30-day comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example, in derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the Commission take action prior to the expiration of either the comment period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a notice of issuance. Should the Commission make a final No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will take place after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently. III. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To Intervene Within 60 days after the date of publication of this Federal Register notice, any person whose interest may be affected by this proceeding and who desires to participate as a party in the proceeding must file a written request for hearing or a petition for leave to intervene specifying the contentions which the person seeks to have litigated in the hearing with respect to the license amendment request. Requests for hearing and petitions for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the NRC's ``Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested person(s) should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the NRC's PDR. The NRC's regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. [[Page 55386]] As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene must set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The hearing request or petition must specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted, with particular reference to the following general requirements: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The hearing request or petition must also include the specific contentions that the requestor/petitioner seeks to have litigated at the proceeding. For each contention, the requestor/ petitioner must provide a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted, as well as a brief explanation of the basis for the contention. Additionally, the requestor/petitioner must demonstrate that the issue raised by each contention is within the scope of the proceeding and is material to the findings that the NRC must make to support the granting of a license amendment in response to the application. The hearing request or petition must also include a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion that support the contention and on which the requestor/petitioner intends to rely at the hearing, together with references to those specific sources and documents. The hearing request or petition must provide sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact, including references to specific portions of the application for amendment that the petitioner disputes and the supporting reasons for each dispute. If the requestor/ petitioner believes that the application for amendment fails to contain information on a relevant matter as required by law, the requestor/ petitioner must identify each failure and the supporting reasons for the requestor's/petitioner's belief. Each contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the requestor/petitioner to relief. A requestor/petitioner who does not satisfy these requirements for at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party. Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing with respect to resolution of that person's admitted contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence and to submit a cross-examination plan for cross-examination of witnesses, consistent with NRC regulations, policies, and procedures. The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will set the time and place for any prehearing conferences and evidentiary hearings, and the appropriate notices will be provided. Hearing requests or petitions for leave to intervene must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. Requests for hearing, petitions for leave to intervene, and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the 60- day deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(iii). If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, then any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment 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. IV. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing) All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139, August 28, 2007). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in accordance with the procedures described below. To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least ten (10) days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by telephone at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital identification (ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a request or petition for hearing (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC- issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic docket. Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. System requirements for accessing the E-Submittal server are detailed in the NRC's ``Guidance for Electronic Submission,'' which is available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants may attempt to use other software not listed on the Web site, but should note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted software, and the NRC Meta System Help Desk will not be able to offer assistance in using unlisted software. If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the document using the NRC's online, Web-based submission form. In order to serve documents through the Electronic Information Exchange System, users will be required to install a Web browser plug-in from the NRC's Web site. Further information on the Web-based submission form, including the installation of the Web browser plug-in, is available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. [[Page 55387]] Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant can then submit a request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the documents are submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access to the document to the NRC'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 documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document via the E-Filing system. A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E- Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Meta System Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email to [email protected], or by a toll-free call to 1-866-672-7640. The NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays. Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) first class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from use of E-Filing no longer exists. Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at http://ehd1.nrc.gov/ehd/, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission, or the presiding officer. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, or home phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law requires submission of such information. However, in some instances, a request to intervene will require including information on local residence in order to demonstrate a proximity assertion of interest in the proceeding. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission. Petitions for leave to intervene must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. Requests for hearing, petitions for leave to intervene, and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the 60-day deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(iii). For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment, dated June 17, 2015, and supplemented by letters dated July 14, August 28, and September 3, 2015, in ADAMS under ADAMS Accession Nos. ML15170A474, ML15197A357, ML15243A044, and ML15246A638. Attorney for licensee: General Counsel, Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, 6A West Tower, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902. NRC Branch Chief: Jessie F. Quichocho. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of September 2015. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Jeanne A. Dion, Project Manager, Watts Bar Special Projects Branch, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 2015-23085 Filed 9-14-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Notices 55383
3. As explained in Section 5.0 of the For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
NRC staff’s Safety Evaluation (ADAMS Lawrence Burkhart, by any of the following methods (unless
Accession No. ML15216A264), this Chief, Licensing Branch 4, Division of New this document describes a different
exemption meets the eligibility criteria Reactor Licensing, Office of New Reactors. method for submitting comments on a
for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 [FR Doc. 2015–23086 Filed 9–14–15; 8:45 am] specific subject):
CFR 51.22(c)(9). Therefore, pursuant to BILLING CODE 7590–01–P • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental http://www.regulations.gov and search
impact statement or environmental for Docket ID NRC–2015–0170. Address
assessment needs to be prepared in NUCLEAR REGULATORY questions about NRC dockets to Carol
connection with the issuance of the COMMISSION Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463;
exemption. email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For
4. This exemption is effective as of the technical questions, contact the
[Docket Nos. 50–390; NRC–2015–0170]
date of its issuance. individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
III. License Amendment Request Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 1; INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
Application and Amendment to Facility document.
The request for the amendment and
Operating License Involving Proposed • Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey,
exemption was submitted by the letter
No Significant Hazards Consideration Office of Administration, Mail Stop:
dated September 25, 2014. The licensee
Determination OWFN–12–H08, U.S. Nuclear
supplemented this request by the letter
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
dated March 13, 2015. The proposed AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory DC 20555–0001.
amendment is described in Section I, Commission.
above. For additional direction on obtaining
ACTION: License amendment request; information and submitting comments,
The Commission has determined for
opportunity to comment, request a see ‘‘Obtaining Information and
these amendments that the application
hearing and petition for leave to Submitting Comments’’ in the
complies with the standards and
intervene. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
requirements of the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the this document.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission’s rules and regulations. Commission (NRC) is considering FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The Commission has made appropriate issuance of an amendment to Facility Jeanne A. Dion, Office of Nuclear
findings as required by the Act and the Operating License No. NFP–90, issued Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear
Commission’s rules and regulations in to the Tennessee Valley Authority (the Regulatory Commission, Washington,
10 CFR chapter I, which are set forth in licensee), for operation of the Watts Bar DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415–
the license amendment. Nuclear Plant (WBN), Unit No. 1. The 1349; email: Jeanne.Dion@nrc.gov.
A notice of consideration of issuance proposed amendment would modify the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
of amendment to facility operating technical specifications (TSs) to define
license or combined license, as I. Obtaining Information and
support systems needed in the first 48 Submitting Comments
applicable, proposed no significant hours after a unit shutdown when steam
hazards consideration determination, generators are not available for heat A. Obtaining Information
and opportunity for a hearing in removal. The proposed amendment
connection with these actions, was Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2015–
would also make changes consistent 0170 when contacting the NRC about
published in the Federal Register on with Technical Specification Task Force
April 14, 2015 (80 FR 20020). No the availability of information for this
(TSTF) Traveler TSTF–273–A, Revision action. You may obtain publicly-
comments were received during the 30- 2, to provide clarifications related to the
day comment period. available information related to this
requirements of the Safety Function action by any of the following methods:
The NRC staff has found that the
Determination Program (SFDP). The • Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to
amendment involves no significant
proposed license amendment was http://www.regulations.gov and search
hazards consideration. The Commission
submitted by letter dated June 17, 2015, for Docket ID NRC–2015–0170.
has determined that these amendments
and was supplemented by letters dated
satisfy the criteria for categorical • NRC’s Agencywide Documents
July 14, August 28, and September 3,
exclusion in accordance with 10 CFR Access and Management System
2015. The NRC staff previously made a
51.22(c)(9). Therefore, pursuant to 10 (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-
proposed determination that the
CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact available documents online in the
amendment involves no significant
statement or environmental assessment ADAMS Public Documents collection at
hazards consideration. By letter dated
need be prepared for these amendments. http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
September 3, 2015, the licensee
adams.html. To begin the search, select
IV. Conclusion provided additional information that
‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then
Using the reasons set forth in the expanded the scope of the amendment
select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS
combined safety evaluation, the staff request as originally noticed. The
Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS,
granted the exemption and issued the September 3, 2015, supplement
please contact the NRC’s Public
amendment that the licensee requested proposed new modifications to TS 3.3.2
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
on September 25, 2014, and and TS 3.4.6. This notice supersedes the
1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by
supplemented by the letter dated March previous notice in its entirety to update
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
13, 2015. The exemption and the description of the amendment
application for amendment, dated June
amendment were issued on August 24, request and the no significant hazards
17, 2015, and supplemented by letters
2015, as part of a combined package to determination.
dated July 14, August 28, and
the licensee (ADAMS Accession No. DATES: Submit comments by October 15, September 3, 2015, are available in
ML15216A071). 2015. A request for a hearing or petition ADAMS under ADAMS Accession Nos.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day for leave to intervene must be filed by ML15170A474, ML15197A357,
of September 2015. November 16, 2015. ML15243A044, and ML15246A638.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:04 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\15SEN1.SGM 15SEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_55561/page/1.svg)
![55384 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Notices
• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and entirety to update the description of the heat. Additionally, all the CCS and ERCW
purchase copies of public documents at amendment request and the no supported equipment, credited in the
the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One significant hazards consideration. accident analysis to mitigate an accident, has
Before issuance of the proposed been shown to continue to perform their
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
design function as described in the FSAR.
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. license amendment, the Commission Therefore, the proposed change does not
will have made findings required by the involve a significant increase in the
B. Submitting Comments
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended probability or consequences of an accident
Please include Docket ID NRC–2015– (the Act), and the Commission’s previously evaluated.
0170 in your comment submission. regulations. The proposed TS changes add explanatory
The NRC cautions you not to include The NRC has made a proposed text to the programmatic description of the
identifying or contact information that determination that the amendment Safety Function Determination Program
you do not want to be publicly request involves no significant hazards (SFDP) in TS 5.7.2.18 to clarify the
disclosed in your comment submission. consideration. Under the NRC’s requirements that consideration does not
The NRC will post all comment have to be made for a loss of power in
regulations in § 50.92 of Title 10 of the determining loss of function. The Bases for
submissions at http:// Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), LCO [Limiting Condition for Operation] 3.0.6
www.regulations.gov as well as enter the this means that operation of the facility is revised to provide clarification of the
comment submissions into ADAMS. in accordance with the proposed ‘‘appropriate LCO for loss of function,’’ and
The NRC does not routinely edit amendment would not (1) involve a that consideration does not have to be made
comment submissions to remove significant increase in the probability or for a loss of power in determining loss of
identifying or contact information. consequences of an accident previously function. The changes are editorial and
If you are requesting or aggregating evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of administrative in nature, and therefore do not
comments from other persons for increase the probability of any accident
a new or different kind of accident from previously evaluated. No physical or
submission to the NRC, then you should any accident previously evaluated; or
inform those persons not to include operational changes are made to the plant.
(3) involve a significant reduction in a The proposed changes do not change how the
identifying or contact information that margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR plant would mitigate an accident previously
they do not want to be publicly 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its evaluated.
disclosed in their comment submission. analysis of the issue of no significant Therefore, the proposed change does not
Your request should state that the NRC hazards consideration, which is involve a significant increase in the
does not routinely edit comment presented below: probability or consequences of an accident
submissions to remove such information previously evaluated.
before making the comment 1. Does the proposed change involve a The proposed change to require the Reactor
significant increase in the probability or Coolant System (RCS) loops to be operable
submissions available to the public or consequences of an accident previously
entering the comment into ADAMS. for the initial seven hours after shutdown
evaluated? and for the automatic switching of the
II. Introduction Response: No. auxiliary feedwater (AFW) pumps suction
The likelihood of a malfunction of any from the condensate storage tank (CST) to the
The NRC is considering issuance of an systems, structures or components (SSCs) and essential raw cooling water (ERCW)
amendment to Facility Operating supported by containment cooling system
System to be operable in Mode 4 when
License No. NFP–90, issued to the (CCS) and essential raw cooling water
relying on steam generators for heat removal
Tennessee Valley Authority, for (ERCW) is not significantly increased by
does not increase the probability or
operation of the WBN, Unit No. 1, adding new technical specification (TS) for
consequences of an accident that has been
ERCW and CCS that require alternate CCS
located in Spring City, Tennessee. and ERCW system alignments during the first previously evaluated at WBN. The RCS loops
The proposed amendment, initially 48 hours after shut down of a unit when the are currently required to be operable to
submitted by letter dated June 17, 2015, steam generators are not available for heat remove decay heat until plant conditions
would modify the TSs to define support removal. CCS and ERCW provide the means allow the Residual Heat Removal (RHR)
systems needed in the first 48 hours for transferring residual and decay heat to the System to be placed in service. Specifying
Residual Heat Removal (RHR) System for that the RCS loops are required to be
after a unit shutdown when steam
process and operating heat from safety operable for the initial seven hours after
generators are not available for heat shutdown is consistent with the heat load
removal. The proposed change is related components during a transient or
accident, as well as during normal operation. assumptions at the specified time after
required to support dual unit operation Although the proposed change includes a shutdown described in the Updated Final
of WBN (a licensing decision for WBN, design change to allow two ERCW pumps to Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). The suction
Unit No. 2, is currently expected to be be powered from one diesel generator (DG), piping to the AFW pumps from either the
made in the fall of 2015). The proposed the additional ERCW pump is only aligned CST or ERCW is not an initiator of any
amendment would also make changes to the DG on a non-accident unit during a analyzed accident. The equipment supported
consistent with TSTF–273–A, Revision design basis event on the other unit, and does by AFW and ERCW as described in the
not result in overloading the DG due to the UFSAR has not been changed.
2, to provide clarifications related to the
reduced loading on the non-accident DG. The The systems, structures or components
requirements of the SFDP. The proposed (SSCs) credited to mitigate the consequences
CCS and ERCW are not initiators of any
license amendment was supplemented analyzed accident. All equipment supported of postulated design basis accidents remain
by letters dated July 14, August 28, and by CCS and ERCW has been evaluated to capable of performing their design basis
September 3, 2015. The supplement demonstrate that their performance and function. The change requiring the RCS loops
dated September 3, 2015, proposed operation remains as described in the FSAR to be operable for the initial seven hours after
changes to TSs 3.3.2 and 3.4.6), beyond [Final Safety Analysis Report] with no shutdown does not affect heat removal
capability. It ensures the RHR System is not
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
those that had been included in the June increase in probability of failure or
17, 2015, letter. The NRC staff malfunction. solely relied on for decay heat removal before
The SSCs credited to mitigate the the decay heat load is within the capability
previously made a proposed
consequences of postulated design basis of the RHR System. The change requiring the
determination that the amendment accidents remain capable of performing their pressure switches in the AFW pump suction
request dated June 17, 2015, involves no design basis function. The change in CCS and piping to remain in service in Mode 4 when
significant hazards consideration (80 FR ERCW system alignments has been evaluated steam generators are relied on to remove heat
42554; July 17, 2015). This notice to ensure the RHR System remains capable of from the RCS does not affect heat removal
supersedes the previous notice in its removing normal operating and post-accident capability. It retains the same automatic
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:04 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\15SEN1.SGM 15SEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_55561/page/2.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Notices 55385
action required by the instruments in Modes as a result of requiring the RCS loops to be The NRC staff has reviewed the
1, 2, and 3, consistent with the TS operable for a specified duration after plant licensee’s analysis and, based on this
Applicability requirements for the AFW shutdown or by extending the Mode of review, it appears that the three
System. Applicability of the AFW pump suction swap
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
Therefore, the proposed change does not over from the CST to ERCW.
involve a significant increase in the Therefore, the proposed change does not satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
probability or consequences of an accident create the possibility of a new or different proposes to determine that the
previously evaluated. kind of accident from any previously amendment request involves no
2. Does the proposed change create the evaluated. significant hazards consideration.
possibility of a new or different kind of 3. Does the proposed change involve a The NRC is seeking public comments
accident from any accident previously significant reduction in a margin of safety? on this proposed determination that the
evaluated? Response: No. license amendment request involves no
Response: No. The proposed change continues to ensure significant hazards consideration. Any
The proposed change does not create the that the cooling capability of RHR during comments received within 30 days after
possibility of a new or different kind of normal operation and during the mitigation
accident from any accident previously of a design basis event remains within the
the date of publication of this notice
evaluated. The proposed change does not evaluated equipment limits and capabilities will be considered in making any final
introduce any new modes of plant operation, assumed in the accident analysis. The determination.
change the design function of any SSC, or proposed change does not result in any Normally, the Commission will not
change the mode of operation of any SSC. changes to plant equipment functions, issue the amendment until the
There are no new equipment failure modes including setpoints and actuations. The expiration of 60 days after the date of
or malfunctions created as the affected SSCs proposed change does not alter existing publication of this notice. The
continue to operate in the same manner as limiting conditions for operation, limiting Commission may issue the license
previously evaluated and have been safety system settings, or safety limits amendment before expiration of the 60-
evaluated to perform their safety functions specified in the Technical Specifications. day period provided that its final
when in the alternate alignments as assumed The proposed change to add a new TS for
determination is that the amendment
in the accident analysis. Additionally, ERCW and CCS assures the ability of these
accident initiators remain as described in the systems to support post-accident residual involves no significant hazards
FSAR and no new accident initiators are heat removal. consideration. In addition, the
postulated as a result of the alternate CCS Therefore, since there is no adverse impact Commission may issue the amendment
and ERCW alignments. of this change on the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant prior to the expiration of the 30-day
Therefore, the proposed change does not safety analysis, there is no significant comment period should circumstances
create the possibility of a new or different reduction in the margin of safety of the plant. change during the 30-day comment
kind of accident from any accident The proposed changes to TS 5.7.2.18 are period such that failure to act in a
previously evaluated. clarifications and are editorial and timely way would result, for example,
The proposed changes [to TS 5.7.2.18] are administrative in nature. No changes are in derating or shutdown of the facility.
editorial and administrative in nature and do made to the LCOs for plant equipment, the
Should the Commission take action
not result in a change in the manner in which time required for the TS Required Actions to
the plant operates. The loss of function of be completed, or the out of service time for prior to the expiration of either the
any specific component will continue to be the components involved. The proposed comment period or the notice period, it
addressed in its specific TS LCO, and plant changes do not affect the safety analysis will publish in the Federal Register a
configuration will be governed by the acceptance criteria for any analyzed event, notice of issuance. Should the
required actions of those LCOs. The proposed nor is there a change to any safety analysis Commission make a final No Significant
changes are clarifications that do not degrade limit. The proposed changes do not alter the Hazards Consideration Determination,
the availability or capability of safety related manner in which safety limits, limiting safety any hearing will take place after
equipment, and therefore do not create the system settings or limiting conditions for issuance. The Commission expects that
possibility of a new or different kind of operation are determined, nor is there any the need to take this action will occur
accident from any accident previously adverse effect on those plant systems
very infrequently.
evaluated. There are no design changes necessary to assure the accomplishment of
associated with the proposed changes, and protection functions. The proposed changes III. Opportunity To Request a Hearing
the changes do not involve a physical will not result in plant operation in a and Petition for Leave To Intervene
alteration of the plant (i.e., no new or configuration outside the design basis.
different type of equipment will be installed). Therefore, the proposed changes do not Within 60 days after the date of
The changes do not alter assumptions made involve a significant reduction in a margin of publication of this Federal Register
in the safety analysis, and are consistent with safety. notice, any person whose interest may
the safety analysis assumptions and current The proposed change does not result in be affected by this proceeding and who
plant operating practice. Due to the any changes to plant equipment functions, desires to participate as a party in the
administrative nature of the changes, they including setpoints and actuations. The proceeding must file a written request
cannot be an accident initiator. proposed change does not alter limiting for hearing or a petition for leave to
Therefore, the proposed changes do not safety system settings or safety limits
intervene specifying the contentions
create the possibility of a new or different specified in the TS for these instruments. The
kind of accident from any accident proposed change ensures the decay heat load which the person seeks to have litigated
previously evaluated. of the plant is within the capability of the in the hearing with respect to the
The proposed change does not create the RHR System prior to allowing sole use of the license amendment request. Requests
possibility of a new or different kind of RHR loops for decay heat removal. In for hearing and petitions for leave to
accident from any accident previously addition, the proposed change ensures the intervene shall be filed in accordance
evaluated. The proposed change does not same automatic action to align ERCW as a with the NRC’s ‘‘Agency Rules of
introduce any new modes of plant operation, supply source to AFW that occurs in Modes
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Practice and Procedure’’ in 10 CFR part
change the design function of any SSC, or 1, 2, and 3 will remain available in Mode 4 2. Interested person(s) should consult a
change the mode of operation of any SSC. when relying on the steam generators for
current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is
There are no new equipment failure modes decay heat removal. Thus, the proposed
or malfunctions created as the affected SSCs change does not reduce the margin of safety. available at the NRC’s PDR. The NRC’s
continue to operate in the same manner as Therefore, since there is no adverse impact regulations are accessible electronically
previously evaluated. Additionally, accident of this change on the safety analysis, there is from the NRC Library on the NRC’s Web
initiators remain as described in the UFSAR no significant reduction in the margin of site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
and no new accident initiators are postulated safety of the plant. doc-collections/cfr/.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:04 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\15SEN1.SGM 15SEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_55561/page/3.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 178 / Tuesday, September 15, 2015 / Notices 55387
Once a participant has obtained a Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day
digital ID certificate and a docket has Participants filing a document in this of September 2015.
been created, the participant can then manner are responsible for serving the For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
submit a request for hearing or petition document on all other participants. Jeanne A. Dion,
for leave to intervene. Submissions Filing is considered complete by first- Project Manager, Watts Bar Special Projects
should be in Portable Document Format class mail as of the time of deposit in Branch, Division of Operating Reactor
(PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance the mail, or by courier, express mail, or Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
available on the NRC’s public Web site expedited delivery service upon Regulation.
at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e- depositing the document with the [FR Doc. 2015–23085 Filed 9–14–15; 8:45 am]
submittals.html. A filing is considered provider of the service. A presiding BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
complete at the time the documents are officer, having granted an exemption
submitted through the NRC’s E-Filing request from using E-Filing, may require
system. To be timely, an electronic a participant or party to use E-Filing if NUCLEAR REGULATORY
filing must be submitted to the E-Filing the presiding officer subsequently COMMISSION
system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern determines that the reason for granting [NRC–2015–0219]
Time on the due date. Upon receipt of the exemption from use of E-Filing no
a transmission, the E-Filing system longer exists. Biweekly Notice; Applications and
time-stamps the document and sends Documents submitted in adjudicatory Amendments to Facility Operating
the submitter an email notice proceedings will appear in NRC’s Licenses and Combined Licenses
confirming receipt of the document. The electronic hearing docket which is Involving No Significant Hazards
E-Filing system also distributes an email available to the public at http:// Considerations
notice that provides access to the ehd1.nrc.gov/ehd/, unless excluded
document to the NRC’s Office of the AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory
pursuant to an order of the Commission, Commission.
General Counsel and any others who or the presiding officer. Participants are
have advised the Office of the Secretary ACTION: Biweekly notice.
requested not to include personal
that they wish to participate in the privacy information, such as social SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 189a. (2)
proceeding, so that the filer need not security numbers, home addresses, or of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
serve the documents on those home phone numbers in their filings, amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear
participants separately. Therefore, unless an NRC regulation or other law Regulatory Commission (NRC) is
applicants and other participants (or requires submission of such publishing this regular biweekly notice.
their counsel or representative) must information. However, in some The Act requires the Commission to
apply for and receive a digital ID instances, a request to intervene will publish notice of any amendments
certificate before a hearing request/ require including information on local issued, or proposed to be issued, and
petition to intervene is filed so that they residence in order to demonstrate a grants the Commission the authority to
can obtain access to the document via proximity assertion of interest in the issue and make immediately effective
the E-Filing system. proceeding. With respect to copyrighted any amendment to an operating license
A person filing electronically using or combined license, as applicable,
works, except for limited excerpts that
the NRC’s adjudicatory E-Filing system upon a determination by the
serve the purpose of the adjudicatory
may seek assistance by contacting the Commission that such amendment
filings and would constitute a Fair Use
NRC Meta System Help Desk through involves no significant hazards
application, participants are requested
the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link located on the consideration, notwithstanding the
not to include copyrighted materials in
NRC’s public Web site at http:// pendency before the Commission of a
their submission.
www.nrc.gov/site-help/e- request for a hearing from any person.
submittals.html, by email to Petitions for leave to intervene must
be filed no later than 60 days from the This biweekly notice includes all
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll- notices of amendments issued, or
free call to 1–866–672–7640. The NRC date of publication of this notice.
Requests for hearing, petitions for leave proposed to be issued from August 18
Meta System Help Desk is available to August 31, 2015. The last biweekly
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern to intervene, and motions for leave to
file new or amended contentions that notice was published on September 1,
Time, Monday through Friday, 2015.
excluding government holidays. are filed after the 60-day deadline will
Participants who believe that they not be entertained absent a DATES: Comments must be filed by
have a good cause for not submitting determination by the presiding officer October 15, 2015. A request for a
documents electronically must file an that the filing demonstrates good cause hearing must be filed by November 16,
exemption request, in accordance with by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2015.
10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper 2.309(c)(1)(i)–(iii). ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
filing requesting authorization to For further details with respect to this by any of the following methods (unless
continue to submit documents in paper action, see the application for this document describes a different
format. Such filings must be submitted amendment, dated June 17, 2015, and method for submitting comments on a
by: (1) first class mail addressed to the supplemented by letters dated July 14, specific subject):
Office of the Secretary of the August 28, and September 3, 2015, in • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory ADAMS under ADAMS Accession Nos. http://www.regulations.gov and search
ML15170A474, ML15197A357,
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Commission, Washington, DC 20555– for Docket ID NRC–2015–0219. Address
0001, Attention: Rulemaking and ML15243A044, and ML15246A638. questions about NRC dockets to Carol
Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, Attorney for licensee: General Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463;
express mail, or expedited delivery Counsel, Tennessee Valley Authority, email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For
service to the Office of the Secretary, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, 6A West technical questions, contact the
Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, Tower, Knoxville, Tennessee 37902. individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, NRC Branch Chief: Jessie F. INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
Maryland, 20852, Attention: Quichocho. document.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:04 Sep 14, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\15SEN1.SGM 15SEN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_55561/page/5.svg)
Document Created: 2015-12-15 10:09:12
Document Modified: 2015-12-15 10:09:12
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | License amendment request; opportunity to comment, request a hearing and petition for leave to intervene. | |
| Dates | Submit comments by October 15, 2015. A request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene must be filed by November 16, 2015. | |
| Contact | Jeanne A. Dion, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1349; email: [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 55383 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR