83 FR 33263 - Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 137 (July 17, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 137 (July 17, 2018)
| Page Range | 33263-33276 | |
| FR Document | 2018-14779 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 137 (Tuesday, July 17, 2018)] [Notices] [Pages 33263-33276] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-14779] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC-2018-0140] Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Biweekly notice. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 189a.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is publishing this regular biweekly notice. The Act requires the Commission to publish notice of any amendments issued, or proposed to be issued, and grants the Commission the authority to issue and make immediately effective any amendment to an operating license or combined license, as applicable, upon a determination by the Commission that such amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, notwithstanding the pendency before the Commission of a request for a hearing from any person. This biweekly notice includes all notices of amendments issued, or proposed to be issued, from June 18, 2018, to June 29, 2018. The last biweekly notice was published on July 3, 2018. DATES: Comments must be filed by August 16, 2018. A request for a hearing must be filed by September 17, 2018. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0140. Address questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287- 9127; email: Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. Mail comments to: May Ma, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN-7-A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Janet C. Burkhardt, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1384, email: Janet.Burkhardt@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0140, facility name, unit number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of the following methods: Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0140. 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 pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 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. [[Page 33264]] B. Submitting Comments Please include Docket ID NRC-2018-0140, facility name, unit number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject in your comment submission. The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information. If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS. II. Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses and Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under the Commission's regulations in section 50.92 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), this means that operation of the facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated, or (2) create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The basis for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown below. The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice will be considered in making any final determination. Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60- day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30- day comment period if circumstances change during the 30-day comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for example in derating or shutdown of the facility. If the Commission takes action prior to the expiration of either the comment period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a notice of issuance. If the Commission makes a final no significant hazards consideration determination, any hearing will take place after issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently. A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To Intervene Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any persons (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a request for a hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition) with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's ``Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309. The NRC's regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. Alternatively, a copy of the regulations is available at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, the Commission or a presiding officer will rule on the petition and, if appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be issued. As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements for standing: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the petitioner; (2) the nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), the petition must also set forth the specific contentions which the petitioner seeks to have litigated in the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner must provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to the specific sources and documents on which the petitioner intends to rely to support its position on the issue. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant or licensee on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions must be limited to matters within the scope of the proceeding. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 CFR 2.309(f) with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party. Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene. Parties have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing with respect to resolution of that party's admitted contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence, consistent with the NRC's regulations, policies, and procedures. Petitions must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. Petitions and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii). The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the ``Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)'' section of this document. If a hearing is requested, and the Commission has not made a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to establish when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the [[Page 33265]] amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, then any hearing held would take place before the issuance of the amendment unless the Commission finds an imminent danger to the health or safety of the public, in which case it will issue an appropriate order or rule under 10 CFR part 2. A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition should state the nature and extent of the petitioner's interest in the proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the ``Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)'' section of this document, and should meet the requirements for petitions set forth in this section, except that under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local governmental body, or Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof does not need to address the standing requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(d) if the facility is located within its boundaries. Alternatively, a State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof may participate as a non-party under 10 CFR 2.315(c). If a hearing is granted, any person who is not a party to the proceeding and is not affiliated with or represented by a party may, at the discretion of the presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of his or her position on the issues but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding. A limited appearance may be made at any session of the hearing or at any prehearing conference, subject to the limits and conditions as may be imposed by the presiding officer. Details regarding the opportunity to make a limited appearance will be provided by the presiding officer if such sessions are scheduled. B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing) All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition), any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by interested governmental entities that request to participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 FR 46562; August 3, 2012). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions may be found in the Guidance for Electronic Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in accordance with the procedures described below. To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone at 301-415-1677, to (1) request a digital identification (ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign submissions and access the E-Filing system for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a petition or other adjudicatory document (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC- issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic docket. Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the NRC's public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant can then submit adjudicatory documents. Submissions must be in Portable Document Format (PDF). Additional guidance on PDF submissions is available on the NRC's public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the document is submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the document on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before adjudicatory documents are filed so that they can obtain access to the documents via the E-Filing system. A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E- Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's Electronic Filing Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC's public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email to MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, 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 [[Page 33266]] have an NRC-issued digital ID certificate as described above, click cancel when the link requests certificates and you will be automatically directed to the NRC's electronic hearing dockets where you will be able to access any publicly available documents in a particular hearing docket. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, or personal phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law requires submission of such information. For example, in some instances, individuals provide home addresses in order to demonstrate proximity to a facility or site. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission. For further details with respect to these license amendment applications, see the application for amendment which is available for public inspection in ADAMS and at the NRC's PDR. For additional direction on accessing information related to this document, see the ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' section of this document. Dominion Energy Nuclear Connecticut, Inc. (DENC), Docket No. 50-423, Millstone Power Station, Unit No. 3 (MPS3), New London County, Connecticut Date of amendment request: April 4, 2018. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18100A055. Description of amendment request: The amendment would revise the MPS3 Technical Specifications (TSs). Specifically, with one Control Building Inlet Ventilation Radiation monitor channel inoperable for greater than 7 days, or if both radiation monitor channels are inoperable, DENC proposes to revise and reformat Action 18 in TS Table 3.3-3, Functional Unit 7.e, ``Control Building Inlet Ventilation Radiation,'' to allow control room operators to manually place one train of the Control Room Emergency Ventilation System (CREVS) in the emergency mode of operation to provide additional time to restore one channel of Control Building Inlet Ventilation Radiation monitoring to OPERABLE status. 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. Operation of MPS3 in accordance with the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. The proposed change removes an overly restrictive requirement and adds a conservative requirement for actions to be taken when there is a loss of operability of the CREVS actuation instrumentation. This does not increase the probability of an accident previously evaluated since the CREVS actuation itself is not an accident initiator. The proposed change is consistent with standard TSs for Westinghouse plants (NUREG-1431) and provides assurance that the CREVS is in the conservative mode of operation for a response to an accident. Analysis demonstrates that with one train of the CREVS in the emergency mode of operation, control room operators are adequately protected from the radiological consequences of design basis accident events. Therefore, the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated is not significantly increased. Based on the above, 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. Operation of MPS3 in accordance with 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 involve a physical alteration of the plant or change in the methods governing normal plant operation. The proposed change replaces the overly restrictive shutdown requirement with a conservative action to be taken upon loss of CREVS actuation instrumentation operability, thereby avoiding the risk associated with an immediate controlled shutdown. Therefore, the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated is not created. With one train of CREVS in the emergency mode of operation, DENC has confirmed that MPS3 is in compliance with the current radiological analyses of record for design basis accidents with dose consequences to the control room. Therefore, the proposed change does not affect the design basis analyses and does not alter the assumptions made in the MPS3 accident analysis. Based on the above, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident previously evaluated. 3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety? Response: No. Operation of MPS3 in accordance with the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety. The proposed change revises and reformats the Control Building lnlet Ventilation Radiation TS to place the CREVS in the conservative mode of operation for a response to an accident. The proposed change provides additional time to restore an inoperable radiation monitor channel instead of requiring an immediate controlled plant shutdown and suspension of movement of recently irradiated fuel assemblies, if applicable. A plant shutdown is a transient that may be avoided by providing a limited time to make repairs. In addition, the control room operators are adequately protected from the radiological consequences of design basis accident events with one train of the CREVS in the emergency mode of operation. The potential to avoid a plant transient in conjunction with protecting control room operators offsets any risk associated with the proposed change. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. Based on the above, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Attorney for licensee: Lillian M. Cuoco, Senior Counsel, Dominion Energy, Inc., 120 Tredegar Street, RS-2, Richmond, VA 23219. NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna. Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324, Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2 (Brunswick or BSEP), Brunswick County, North Carolina Date of amendment request: April 4, 2018, as supplemented by letter dated May 29, 2018. Publicly-available versions are in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML18094B058 and ML18149A487, respectively. Description of amendment request: The amendments would modify the BSEP Technical Specifications (TSs) to relocate the pressure- temperature limit curves to a licensee-controlled Pressure and Temperature Limits Report (PTLR). The amendment request was submitted in accordance with guidance provided in NRC Generic Letter 96-03, ``Relocation of the Pressure Temperature Limit Curves and Low Temperature Overpressure Protections System Limits,'' dated January 31, 1996. Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the [[Page 33267]] 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 license amendment adopts the NRC approved methodology described in Boiling Water Reactor Owner's Group (BWROG) Licensing Topical Report (LTR) (BWROG-TP-11-022-A, SIR-05-044, Revision 1-A), ``Pressure Temperature Limits Report Methodology for Boiling Water Reactors.'' The BSEP PTLR was developed based on the methodology and template provided in the BWROG LTR. 10 CFR 50, Appendix G, establishes requirements to protect the integrity of the reactor coolant pressure boundary (RCPB) in nuclear power plants. Implementing this NRC approved methodology does not reduce the ability to protect the reactor coolant pressure boundary as specified in Appendix G, nor will this change increase the probability of malfunction of plant equipment, or the failure of plant structures, systems, or components. Incorporation of the new methodology for calculating pressure and temperature limit curves, and the relocation of the pressure and temperature limit curves from the TS to the PTLR provides an equivalent level of assurance that the reactor coolant pressure boundary is capable of performing its intended safety functions. The proposed changes do not adversely affect accident initiators or precursors, and do not alter the design assumptions, conditions, or configuration of the plant or the manner in which the plant is operated and maintained. The ability of structures, systems, and components to perform their intended safety functions is not altered or prevented by the proposed changes, and the assumptions used in determining the radiological consequences of previously evaluated accidents are not affected. Therefore, the proposed amendment 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. Creation of the possibility of a new or different kind of accident requires creating one or more new accident precursors. New accident precursors may be created by modifications of plant configuration, including changes in allowable modes of operation. The change in methodology for calculating pressure and temperature limits and the relocation of those limits to the PTLR do not alter or involve any design basis accident initiators. Reactor coolant pressure boundary integrity will continue to be maintained in accordance with 10 CFR part 50, Appendix G, and the assumed accident performance of plant structures, systems and components will not be affected. The proposed changes do not involve a physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no new or different type of equipment will be installed), and the installed equipment is not being operated in a new or different manner. 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 change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response: No. The proposed changes do not affect the function of the reactor coolant pressure boundary or its response during plant transients. Calculating the Brunswick pressure temperature limits using the NRC approved structural integrity methodology ensures adequate margins of safety relating to reactor coolant pressure boundary integrity are maintained. The proposed changes do not alter the manner in which the Limiting Conditions for Operation pressure and temperature limits for the reactor coolant pressure boundary are determined. There are no changes to the setpoints at which protective actions are initiated, and the operability requirements for equipment assumed to operate for accident mitigation are not affected. Therefore, the proposed amendment does not result in a significant reduction in the margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Attorney for licensee: Kathryn B. Nolan, Deputy General Counsel, 550 South Tryon Street, M/C DEC45A, Charlotte, NC 28202. NRC Acting Branch Chief: Booma Venkataraman. Exelon FitzPatrick, LLC and Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-333, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (FitzPatrick), Oswego County, New York Date of amendment request: January 31, 2018. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18037A782. Description of amendment request: The amendment would revise FitzPatrick's emergency plan by changing the emergency action level (EAL) schemes. The proposed changes are based on the Nuclear Energy Institute's (NEI's) guidance in NEI 99-01, Revision 6, ``Development of Emergency Action Levels for Non-Passive Reactors,'' which was endorsed by the NRC in a letter dated March 28, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No. ML12346A463). 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 changes to FitzPatrick's EAL schemes to adopt the NRC-endorsed guidance in NEI 99-01, Revision 6 do not reduce the capability to meet the emergency planning requirements established in 10 CFR 50.47 and 10 CFR part 50, Appendix E. The proposed changes do not reduce the functionality, performance, or capability of FitzPatrick's ERO [emergency response organization] to respond in mitigating the consequences of any design basis accident. The probability of a reactor accident requiring implementation of Emergency Plan EALs has no relevance in determining whether the proposed changes to the EALs reduce the effectiveness of the Emergency Plans. As discussed in Section D, ``Planning Basis,'' of NUREG-0654, Revision 1, ``Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plants and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants:'' ``. . . The overall objective of emergency response plans is to provide dose savings (and in some cases immediate life saving) for a spectrum of accidents that could produce offsite doses in excess of Protective Action Guides (PAGs). No single specific accident sequence should be isolated as the one for which to plan because each accident could have different consequences, both in nature and degree. Further, the range of possible selection for a planning basis is very large, starting with a zero point of requiring no planning at all because significant offsite radiological accident consequences are unlikely to occur, to planning for the worst possible accident, regardless of its extremely low likelihood. . . .'' Therefore, Exelon did not consider the risk insights regarding any specific accident initiation or progression in evaluating the proposed changes. The proposed changes do not involve any physical changes to plant equipment or systems, nor do they alter the assumptions of any accident analyses. The proposed changes do not adversely affect accident initiators or precursors nor do they alter the design assumptions, conditions, and configuration or the manner in which the plants are operated and maintained. The proposed changes do not adversely affect the ability of Structures, Systems, or Components (SSCs) to perform their intended safety functions in mitigating the consequences of an initiating event within the assumed acceptance limits. Therefore, the proposed changes do 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 [[Page 33268]] accident from any accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The proposed changes to FitzPatrick's EAL schemes to adopt the NRC-endorsed guidance in NEI 99-01, Revision 6 do not involve any physical changes to plant systems or equipment. The proposed changes do not involve the addition of any new plant equipment. The proposed changes will not alter the design configuration, or method of operation of plant equipment beyond its normal functional capabilities. All FitzPatrick ERO functions will continue to be performed as required. The proposed changes do not create any new credible failure mechanisms, malfunctions, or accident initiators. Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from those that have been previously evaluated. 3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response: No. The proposed changes to FitzPatrick's EAL schemes to adopt the NRC-endorsed guidance in NEI 99-01, Revision 6 do not alter or exceed a design basis or safety limit. There is no change 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 changes. There are no changes to setpoints or environmental conditions of any SSC or the manner in which any SSC is operated. Margins of safety are unaffected by the proposed changes to adopt the NEI 99-01, Revision 6 EAL scheme guidance. The applicable requirements of 10 CFR 50.47 and 10 CFR part 50, Appendix E will continue to be met. Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve any 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: Donald P. Ferraro, Assistant General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 200 Exelon Way, Suite 305, Kennett Square, PA 19348. NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna. Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-289 and 50-320, Three Mile Island Nuclear Station (TMI), Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania Date of amendment request: March 19, 2018. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18078A578. Description of amendment request: The amendment would revise the TMI Site Emergency Plan (SEP) on-shift and emergency response organization (ERO) staffing to support the planned permanent cessation of operations and permanent defueling of TMI, Unit 1. Specifically, the proposed changes would eliminate the on-shift positions not needed for the safe storage of spent fuel in the spent fuel pool during the initial decommissioning period and eliminate the ERO positions not necessary to effectively respond to credible accidents for a permanently shutdown and defueled power reactor facility. The proposed changes will also relocate full augmentation position requirements from the SEP to the Emergency Preparedness Implementing Procedures. 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 changes to the TMI Emergency Plan do not impact the function of plant Structures, Systems, or Components (SSCs). The proposed changes do not involve the modification of any plant equipment or affect plant operation. The proposed changes do not affect accident initiators or precursors, nor do the proposed changes alter design assumptions. The proposed changes do not prevent the ability of the on-shift staff and ERO to perform their intended functions to mitigate the consequences of any accident or event that will be credible in the permanently defueled condition. The proposed changes only remove positions that will no longer be needed or credited in the Emergency Plan in the permanently defueled condition. Therefore, the proposed changes do 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 reduce the number of on-shift and ERO positions commensurate with the hazards associated with a permanently shutdown and defueled facility. The proposed changes do not involve installation of new equipment or modification of existing equipment, so that no new equipment failure modes are introduced. Also, the proposed changes do not result in a change to the way that the equipment or facility is operated so that no new accident initiators are created. Therefore, the proposed changes do 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. Margin of safety is associated with confidence in the ability of the fission product barriers (i.e., fuel cladding, reactor coolant system pressure boundary, and containment structure) to limit the level of radiation dose to the public. The proposed changes do not adversely affect existing plant safety margins or the reliability of the equipment assumed to operate in the safety analyses. 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 changes. The proposed changes are associated with the Emergency Plan and staffing and do not impact operation of the plant or its response to transients or accidents. The proposed changes do not affect the Technical Specifications. The proposed changes do not involve a change in the method of plant operation, and no accident analyses will be affected by the proposed changes. Safety analysis acceptance criteria are not affected by the proposed changes and margins of safety are maintained. The revised Emergency Plan will continue to provide the necessary response staff with the proposed changes. Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555. NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna. Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-352 and 50-353, Limerick Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania Exelon Generation Company, LLC, and PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50- 171, 50-277, and 50-278, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3, York and Lancaster Counties, Pennsylvania Date of amendment request: May 10, 2018. Publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Package Accession No. ML18149A290. Description of amendment request: The amendments would revise the emergency response organization (ERO) positions identified in the emergency plan for each site. 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 33269]] consideration for each site, 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 to the [site] Emergency Plan do not increase the probability or consequences of an accident. The proposed changes do not impact the function of plant Structures, Systems, or Components (SSCs). The proposed changes do not affect accident initiators or accident precursors, nor do the changes alter design assumptions. The proposed changes do not alter or prevent the ability of the onsite ERO to perform their intended functions to mitigate the consequences of an accident or event. The proposed changes remove ERO positions no longer credited or considered necessary in support of Emergency Plan implementation. Therefore, the proposed changes to the [site] Emergency Plan do 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 have no impact on the design, function, or operation of any plant SSCs. The proposed changes do not affect plant equipment or accident analyses. The proposed changes do not involve a physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no new or different type of equipment will be installed), a change in the method of plant operation, or new operator actions. The proposed changes do not introduce failure modes that could result in a new accident, and the proposed changes do not alter assumptions made in the safety analysis. The proposed changes remove ERO positions no longer credited or considered necessary in support of Emergency Plan implementation. Therefore, the proposed changes to the [site] Emergency Plan do 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. Margin of safety is associated with confidence in the ability of the fission product barriers (i.e., fuel cladding, reactor coolant system pressure boundary, and containment structure) to limit the level of radiation dose to the public. The proposed changes do not adversely affect existing plant safety margins or the reliability of the equipment assumed to operate in the safety analyses. 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 changes. Margins of safety are unaffected by the proposed changes to the ERO staffing. The proposed changes are associated with the [site] Emergency Plan staffing and do not impact operation of the plant or its response to transients or accidents. The proposed changes do not affect the Technical Specifications. The proposed changes do not involve a change in the method of plant operation, and no accident analyses will be affected by the proposed changes. Safety analysis acceptance criteria are not affected by these proposed changes. The proposed changes to the Emergency Plan will continue to provide the necessary onsite ERO response staff. Therefore, the proposed changes to the [site] Emergency Plan do not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis for each site and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the requested amendments involve no significant hazards consideration. Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555. NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona. Indiana Michigan Power Company, Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316, Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Berrien County, Michigan Date of amendment request: May 4, 2018. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18129A219. Description of amendment request: The proposed change would modify technical specification (TS) requirements regarding Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) and Surveillance Requirement (SR) usage, in accordance with NRC-approved Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-529, Revision 4, ``Clarify Use and Application Rules.'' 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 changes to Section 1.3 and LCO 3.0.4 have no effect on the requirement for systems to be Operable and have no effect on the application of TS actions. The proposed change to SR 3.0.3 states that the allowance may only be used when there is a reasonable expectation the surveillance will be met when performed. Since the proposed change does not significantly affect system Operability, the proposed change will have no effect on the initiating events for accidents previously evaluated and will have no significant effect on the ability of the systems to mitigate accidents previously evaluated. Therefore, it is concluded that this 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 to the TS usage rules does not affect the design or function of any plant systems. The proposed change does not change the Operability requirements for plant systems or the actions taken when plant systems are not operable. Therefore, it is concluded that this 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 clarifies the application of Section 1.3 and LCO 3.0.4 and does not result in changes in plant operation. SR 3.0.3 is revised to allow application of SR 3.0.3 when an SR has not been previously performed if there is reasonable expectation that the SR will be met when performed. This expands the use of SR 3.0.3 while ensuring the affected system is capable of performing its safety function. As a result, plant safety is either improved or unaffected. Therefore, it is concluded that this 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: Robert B. Haemer, Senior Nuclear Counsel, One Cook Place, Bridgman, MI 49106. NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona. Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52- 026, Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Unit Nos. 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia Date of amendment request: May 18, 2018. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18138A396. Description of amendment request: The amendment request proposes to change Technical Specifications Limiting Condition for Operation 3.3.8, Engineered Safety Feature Actuation System (ESFAS) Instrumentation, related to Safeguard Actuation Functions. Various ESFAS Functions require applicability and corresponding actions changes to more accurately reflect their operation and related safety analysis assumptions. This submittal requests approval of the license amendment necessary to implement these changes. [[Page 33270]] 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 changes do not involve changes to current plant design or safety analysis assumptions. These changes provide Technical Specifications consistency with the approved plant design and safety analysis assumptions. 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. 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 involve changes to current plant design or safety analysis assumptions. These changes provide Technical Specifications consistency with the approved plant design and safety analysis assumptions. 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 requested amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind 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 consistency with the approved plant design and safety analysis assumptions. No safety analysis or design basis acceptance limit/criterion is involved. Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Attorney for licensee: M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35203-2015. NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon-Herrity. Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), Docket Nos. 50-259, 50-260, and 50- 296, Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN), Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3, Limestone County, Alabama Date of amendment request: May 3, 2018. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18124A053. Description of amendment request: The amendments would revise the BFN Units 1, 2, and 3 renewed facility operating licenses (RFOLs) to provide a correction to previously submitted information in relation to their approved fire protection program under 10 CFR 50.48(c), ``National Fire Protection Association Standard NFPA 805.'' Specifically, TVA requested to modify the BFN licenses to reflect changes to Item 3.3.4 in Table B-1, ``Transition of Fundamental Fire Protection Program & Design Elements,'' of Attachment A in its NFPA 805 license amendment request dated March 27, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No. ML13092A393). Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below. 1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The proposed amendment adds the reference to this letter to the BFN RFOL License Condition paragraphs 2.C.(13), 2.C.(14), and 2.C.(7) for BFN Units 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The change encompassed by the proposed amendment is to correct the entry in Attachment A Table B-1 of the BFN Transition Report. The proposed change does not adversely affect accident initiators or precursors nor alter the design assumptions, conditions, and configuration of the facility or the manner in which the plant is operated and maintained. The proposed change does not affect the ability of structures, systems and components (SSCs) to perform their intended safety function to mitigate the consequences of an initiating event within the assumed acceptance limits. Therefore, these proposed changes do not involve a significant increase in the probability of consequences of an accident previously identified. 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 amendment adds the reference to this letter to the BFN RFOL License Condition paragraphs 2.C.(13), 2.C.(14), and 2.C.(7) for BFN Units 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The change encompassed by the proposed amendment is to correct the entry in Attachment A Table B-1 of the BFN Transition Report. There is no risk impact to Core Damage Frequency (CDF) or Large Early Release Frequency (LERF) because this is an administrative change. Plant secondary combustibles, including insulating materials, are considered in the fire modeling input to the Fire PRA [Probabilistic Risk Assessment]. The proposed change does not result in any new or different kinds of accident from that previously evaluated because it does not change any precursors or equipment that is previously credited for accident mitigation. Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. 3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response: No. The proposed amendment adds the reference to this letter to the BFN RFOL License Condition paragraphs 2.C.(13), 2.C.(14), and 2.C.(7) for BFN Units 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The change encompassed by the proposed amendment are to correct the entry in Attachment A Table B-1 of the BFN Transition Report. This proposed change corrects erroneous information to previously approved information in the BFN Transition Report. This proposed change will have an insignificant impact on the accident analysis as it is a clarifying or administrative change. Plant secondary combustibles, including insulating materials, are considered in the fire modeling input to the Fire PRA. The proposed change will not result in any new or different kinds of accident from that previously evaluated because it does not change any precursors or equipment that is previously credited for accident mitigation. Therefore, based on the above discussion, these proposed changes do not involve a reduction in the margin of safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Attorney for licensee: General Counsel, Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, 6A West Tower, Knoxville, TN 37902. NRC Acting Branch Chief: Booma Venkataraman. [[Page 33271]] III. Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses During the period since publication of the last biweekly notice, the Commission has issued the following amendments. The Commission has determined for each of these amendments that the application complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendment. A notice of consideration of issuance of amendment to facility operating license or combined license, as applicable, proposed no significant hazards consideration determination, and opportunity for a hearing in connection with these actions, was published in the Federal Register as indicated. Unless otherwise indicated, the Commission has determined that these amendments satisfy the criteria for categorical exclusion in accordance with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared for these amendments. If the Commission has prepared an environmental assessment under the special circumstances provision in 10 CFR 51.22(b) and has made a determination based on that assessment, it is so indicated. For further details with respect to the action see (1) the applications for amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3) the Commission's related letter, Safety Evaluation and/or Environmental Assessment as indicated. All of these items can be accessed as described in the ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' section of this document. Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket No. 50-400, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. 1, Wake and Chatham Counties, North Carolina Date of amendment request: June 5, 2017, as supplemented by letters dated October 30, 2017, November 27, 2017, and January 28, 2018. Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the Technical Specifications (TSs) to restrict the steady-state voltage and frequency limits for emergency diesel generator (EDG) operation to ensure that accident mitigation equipment can perform as designed. In addition, the amendment revised a TS to increase the voltage limit for the EDG full load rejection test to provide additional operating margin to test acceptance criteria. Date of issuance: June 20, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days. Amendment No.: 165. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18130A270; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment. Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-63: The amendment revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and TSs. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: September 26, 2017 (82 FR 44851). The supplemental letters dated October 30, 2017, November 27, 2017, and January 28, 2018, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the NRC staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register. The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated June 20, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-271, Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Vernon, Vermont Date of amendment request: July 13, 2017. Brief description of amendment: The amendment approved the removal of the existing cyber security license condition from the facility operating license. Date of issuance: June 27, 2018. Effective date: As of the date the licensee notifies the NRC in writing that all spent nuclear fuel assemblies have been transferred out of the spent fuel pool and have been placed in dry storage within the independent spent fuel storage installation, and shall be implemented within 60 days of the effective date. Amendment No.: 268. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18145A208; documents related to this amendment are referenced in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment. Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-28: This amendment revised the License. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: September 26, 2017 (82 FR 44852). The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated June 27, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-313, Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 (ANO-1), Pope County, Arkansas Date of amendment request: July 17, 2017. Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the Technical Specifications (TSs) for ANO-1 and established a new Completion Time in ANO-1 TS 3.7.5, ``Emergency Feedwater (EFW) System,'' where one steam supply to the turbine-driven EFW pump is inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor-driven EFW train. The amendment is consistent with NRC-approved Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF- 412, Revision 3, ``Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW [Auxiliary Feedwater]/EFW Pump Inoperable,'' with certain plant-specific deviations. Date of issuance: June 19, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 90 days from the date of issuance. Amendment No.: 260. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18115A282; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment. Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-51: Amendment revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 10, 2017 (82 FR 47036). The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated June 19, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-368, Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit No. 2 (ANO-2), Pope County, Arkansas Date of amendment request: July 17, 2017. Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the Technical Specifications (TSs) for ANO-2 and established Actions and Allowable Outage Times in ANO-2 TS 3.7.1.2, ``Emergency Feedwater System,'' for several combinations of inoperable Emergency Feedwater (EFW) trains consistent with NUREG-1432, ``Standard Technical Specifications-- Combustion Engineering Plants,'' Revision 4. The amendment includes [[Page 33272]] changes incorporated by Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF)-340, ``Allow 7 Day Completion Time for a Turbine-Driven AFW [Auxiliary Feedwater] Pump Inoperable,'' Revision 3 and TSTF-412, ``Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable,'' Revision 3. Date of issuance: June 19, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 90 days from the date of issuance. Amendment No.: 310. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18134A253; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment. Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-6: Amendment revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and TSs. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 10, 2017 (82 FR 47036). The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated June 19, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-317 and 50-318, Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Calvert County, Maryland, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-220 and 50- 410, Nine Mile, Point, Nuclear Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Oswego County, New York, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-244, R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, Wayne County, New York Date of amendment request: May 31, 2017. Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the emergency plans for each facility by changing the emergency action level schemes. The changes are based on the Nuclear Energy Institute's (NEI's) guidance in NEI 99-01, Revision 6, ``Development of Emergency Action Levels for Non-Passive Reactors,'' which was endorsed by the NRC by letter dated March 28, 2013 (ADAMS Package Accession No. ML13091A209). Date of issuance: June 26, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented on or before June 28, 2019. Amendment Nos.: Calvert Cliffs--324/302; Nine Mile Point--230/171; and, Ginna--128. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18137A614; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments. Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-53, DPR-69, DPR-63, NPF-69, and DPR-18: Amendments revised the emergency plans. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 1, 2017 (82 FR 35838). The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated June 26, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-237 and 50-249, Dresden Nuclear Power Station (DNPS), Unit Nos. 2 and 3, Grundy County, Illinois Date of amendment request: May 3, 2017, as supplemented by letter dated February 14, 2018. Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the DNPS Technical Specification (TS) 5.5.12, ``Primary Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program,'' to allow for the permanent extension of the Type A integrated leak rate testing and the Type C leak rate testing frequencies. Date of issuance: June 29, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 30 days of issuance. Amendment Nos.: 257 (Unit 2) and 250 (Unit 3). A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18137A271; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments. Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-19 and DPR-25: Amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and TS. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 1, 2017 (82 FR 35838). The supplemental letter dated February 14, 2018, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register. The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated June 29, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-244, R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant (Ginna), Wayne County, New York Date of amendment request: June 30, 2017, as supplemented by letters dated October 25, 2017, and June 5, 2018. Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the license to delete the modification to install overcurrent protection on its emergency diesel generators which was required as part of Ginna's implementation of its risk-informed, performance-based fire protection program in accordance with 10 CFR 50.48(c). Date of issuance: June 25, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days of issuance. Amendment No.: 127. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18114A025; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment. Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-18: Amendment revised the Renewed Facility Operating License. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 3, 2017 (82 FR 46097). The supplemental letters dated October 25, 2017, and June 5, 2018, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the NRC staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register. The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated June 25, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50-456 and STN 50-457, Braidwood Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Will County, Illinois and Docket Nos. STN 50-454 and STN 50-455, Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Ogle County, Illinois Date of amendment request: June 30, 2017, as supplemented by letters dated October 25, 2017, and May 29, 2018. Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised Technical Specification (TS) 3.1.4, ``Rod Group Alignment Limits,'' TS 3.1.5, ``Shutdown Bank Insertion Limits,'' TS 3.1.6, ``Control Bank Insertion Limits,'' and TS 3.1.7, ``Rod Position Indication.'' Date of issuance: June 27, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days from the date of issuance. Amendment Nos: 196 (Braidwood, Unit 1) and 196 (Braidwood, Unit 2); 202 (Bryon, Unit 1) and 202 (Bryon, Unit 2). A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18065A529; documents related to these amendments are listed in the [[Page 33273]] related Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments. Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-72, NPF-77, NPF-37, and NPF-66: The amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and TSs. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 29, 2017 (82 FR 41069). The supplemental letters dated October 25, 2017, and May 29, 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 June 27, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company, Docket No. 50-440, Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. 1, Lake County, Ohio Date of amendment request: September 11, 2017. Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the requirements in Technical Specification (TS) 3.3.6.1, ``Primary Containment and Drywell Isolation Instrumentation,'' by adding an ACTIONS note to Limiting Condition of Operation 3.3.6.1 to allow intermittent opening, under administrative control, of containment and drywell penetration flow paths that are isolated. Date of issuance: June 25, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days of issuance. Amendment No.: 181. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18157A084; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment. Facility Operating License No. NPF-58: Amendment revised the Facility Operating License and TS. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 7, 2017 (82 FR 51652). The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated June 25, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, South Carolina Public Service Authority, Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1, Fairfield County, South Carolina Date of amendment request: October 6, 2017, as supplemented by letter dated April 19, 2018. Brief description of amendment: This amendment increased the Integrated Leak Rate Test Peak Calculated Containment Internal Pressure, Pa, listed in Technical Specification (TS) 6.8.4.g, ``Containment Leakage Rate Testing Program,'' from 45.1 pounds per square inch gauge (psig) to 46.0 psig. It also removed the reference to Regulatory Guide 1.163, ``Performance-Based Containment Leak Test Program,'' and American National Standards Institute/American Nuclear Society (ANSI/ANS)-56.8-2002, ``Containment System Leakage Testing Requirements,'' and replaced the reference of Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 94-01, Revision 3-A, ``Industry Guideline for Implementing Performance-Based Option of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix J,'' with NEI 94- 01, Revision 2-A. Date of issuance: June 28, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days of issuance. Amendment No.: 210. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18141A668, documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment. Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-12: Amendment revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and the TS. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 21, 2017 (82 FR 55409). The supplemental letter dated April 19, 2018, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register. The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated June 28, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364, Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Houston County, Alabama Date of amendment request: December 21, 2017. Brief description of amendments: The amendments modified Technical Specification (TS) 3.7.5, ``Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW) System,'' to establish a new Completion Time for the Condition where one steam supply to the turbine driven AFW pump is inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW train. In addition, the amendments added specific Conditions and Action requirements: (1) For when two motor driven AFW trains are inoperable at the same time and; (2) for when the turbine driven AFW train is inoperable either (a) due solely to one inoperable steam supply, or (b) due to reasons other than one inoperable steam supply. The proposed changes are consistent with NRC- approved Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler, TSTF-412, Revision 3, ``Provide Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW [Emergency Feedwater] Pump Inoperable'' dated January 10, 2007. Date of issuance: June 27, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 90 days of issuance. Amendment Nos.: 219 (Unit 1) and 216 (Unit 2). A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18151A174. Documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments. Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-2 and NPF-8: The amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and TS. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: February 13, 2018 (83 FR 6234). The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated June 27, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Susquehanna Nuclear, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388, Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania Date of amendment request: December 14, 2017. Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised Technical Specification (TS) 3.6.4.1, ``Secondary Containment,'' Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.6.4.1.1. The SR was revised to address conditions during which the secondary containment pressure may not meet the SR pressure requirements. The changes are based on Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-551, Revision 3, ``Revise Secondary Containment Surveillance Requirements.'' Date of issuance: June 26, 2018. [[Page 33274]] Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days. Amendment Nos.: 270 (Unit 1) and 252 (Unit 2). A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18150A281. Documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments. Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-14 and NPF-22: The amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and TS. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: February 27, 2018 (83 FR 8520). The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated June 26, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket Nos. 50-390 and 50-391, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Rhea County, Tennessee Date of amendment request: November 23, 2016, as supplemented by letters dated September 29, November 16, and December 27, 2017, and May 11, 2018. Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the Technical Specification (TS) requirements on control and shutdown rods, and rod and bank position indication in the Units 1 and 2, TS 3.1.5, ``Rod Group Alignment Limits,'' TS 3.1.6, ``Shutdown Bank Insertion Limits,'' TS 3.1.7, ``Control Bank Insertion Limits,'' and TS 3.1.8, ``Rod Position Indication.'' Date of issuance: June 26, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days of issuance. Amendment Nos.: 120 (Unit 1) and 20 (Unit 2). A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18079A029; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments. Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-90 and NPF-96: Amendments revised the Facility Operating Licenses and TSs. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: March 14, 2017 (82 FR 13672). The supplemental letters dated September 29, November 16, and December 27, 2017, expanded the scope of the amendment request as originally noticed in the Federal Register. A second notice was published in the Federal Register on February 21, 2018 (83 FR 7500), which superseded the original notice in its entirety. The supplemental letter dated May 11, 2018, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as re-noticed, and did not change the NRC staff's 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 26, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. IV. Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses and Final Determination of No Significant Hazards Consideration and Opportunity for a Hearing (Exigent Public Announcement or Emergency Circumstances) During the period since publication of the last biweekly notice, the Commission has issued the following amendment. The Commission has determined for this amendment that the application for the amendment complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendment. Because of exigent or emergency circumstances associated with the date the amendment was needed, there was not time for the Commission to publish, for public comment before issuance, its usual notice of consideration of issuance of amendment, proposed no significant hazards consideration determination, and opportunity for a hearing. For exigent circumstances, the Commission has either issued a Federal Register notice providing opportunity for public comment or has used local media to provide notice to the public in the area surrounding a licensee's facility of the licensee's application and of the Commission's proposed determination of no significant hazards consideration. The Commission has provided a reasonable opportunity for the public to comment, using its best efforts to make available to the public means of communication for the public to respond quickly, and in the case of telephone comments, the comments have been recorded or transcribed as appropriate and the licensee has been informed of the public comments. In circumstances where failure to act in a timely way would have resulted, for example, in derating or shutdown of a nuclear power plant or in prevention of either resumption of operation or of increase in power output up to the plant's licensed power level, the Commission may not have had an opportunity to provide for public comment on its no significant hazards consideration determination. In such case, the license amendment has been issued without opportunity for comment. If there has been some time for public comment but less than 30 days, the Commission may provide an opportunity for public comment. If comments have been requested, it is so stated. In either event, the State has been consulted by telephone whenever possible. Under its regulations, the Commission may issue and make an amendment immediately effective, notwithstanding the pendency before it of a request for a hearing from any person, in advance of the holding and completion of any required hearing, where it has determined that no significant hazards consideration is involved. The Commission has applied the standards of 10 CFR 50.92 and has made a final determination that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. The basis for this determination is contained in the documents related to this action. Accordingly, the amendment has been issued and made effective as indicated. Unless otherwise indicated, the Commission has determined that this amendment satisfies 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 this amendment. If the Commission has prepared an environmental assessment under the special circumstances provision in 10 CFR 51.12(b) and has made a determination based on that assessment, it is so indicated. For further details with respect to the action see (1) the application for amendment, (2) the amendment to Facility Operating License or Combined License, as applicable, and (3) the Commission's related letter, Safety Evaluation and/or Environmental Assessment, as indicated. All of these items can be accessed as described in the ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' section of this document. A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To Intervene The Commission is also offering an opportunity for a hearing with respect to the issuance of the amendment. Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any persons (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this [[Page 33275]] action may file a request for a hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition) with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's ``Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309. The NRC's regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. Alternatively, a copy of the regulations is available at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, the Commission or a presiding officer will rule on the petition and, if appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be issued. As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements for standing: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the petitioner; (2) the nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the petitioner's interest. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), the petition must also set forth the specific contentions which the petitioner seeks to have litigated in the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner must provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to the specific sources and documents on which the petitioner intends to rely to support its position on the issue. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant or licensee on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions must be limited to matters within the scope of the proceeding. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 CFR 2.309(f) with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party. Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene. Parties have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing with respect to resolution of that party's admitted contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence, consistent with the NRC's regulations, policies, and procedures. Petitions must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. Petitions and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the deadline will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii). The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the ``Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)'' section of this document. If a hearing is requested, and the Commission has not made a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to establish when the hearing is held. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the request for a hearing. Any hearing would take place after issuance of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment request involves a significant hazards consideration, then any hearing held would take place before the issuance of the amendment unless the Commission finds an imminent danger to the health or safety of the public, in which case it will issue an appropriate order or rule under 10 CFR part 2. A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition should state the nature and extent of the petitioner's interest in the proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the ``Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)'' section of this document, and should meet the requirements for petitions set forth in this section, except that under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local governmental body, or Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof does not need to address the standing requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(d) if the facility is located within its boundaries. Alternatively, a State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof may participate as a non-party under 10 CFR 2.315(c). If a hearing is granted, any person who is not a party to the proceeding and is not affiliated with or represented by a party may, at the discretion of the presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of his or her position on the issues but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding. A limited appearance may be made at any session of the hearing or at any prehearing conference, subject to the limits and conditions as may be imposed by the presiding officer. Details regarding the opportunity to make a limited appearance will be provided by the presiding officer if such sessions are scheduled. B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing) All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition), any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by interested governmental entities that request to participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 FR 46562; August 3, 2012). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions may be found in the Guidance for Electronic Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in accordance with the procedures described below. To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at hearing.docket@nrc.gov, 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 [[Page 33276]] submissions and access the E-Filing system for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a petition or other adjudicatory document (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic docket. Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the NRC's public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant can then submit adjudicatory documents. Submissions must be in Portable Document Format (PDF). Additional guidance on PDF submissions is available on the NRC's public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the document is submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the document on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before adjudicatory documents are filed so that they can obtain access to the documents via the E-Filing system. A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E- Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's Electronic Filing Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC's public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email to MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, 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. Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3 (Peach Bottom), York County, Pennsylvania Date of amendment request: June 21, 2018. Description of amendments: The amendments revised the Peach Bottom Technical Specifications (TSs) for a one-time suspension of the emergency diesel generator (EDG) No. 4 (E-4) surveillance requirements. Specifically, the amendments revised TS Surveillance Requirements 3.8.1.2, 3.8.1.3, 3.8.1.6, and 3.8.3.4 to suspend performing required monthly surveillance testing on the E-4 EDG until the E-3 EDG is returned to operable status, not to exceed 2205 hours Eastern Time on June 27, 2018. Date of issuance: June 23, 2018. Effective date: June 23, 2018. Amendment Nos.: 318 (Unit 1) and 321 (Unit 2). A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18173A042. Documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments. Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-44 and DPR-56: The amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and TSs. Public comments requested as to proposed no significant hazards consideration: No. The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments, finding of emergency circumstances, State consultation, and final no significant hazards consideration determination are contained in a Safety Evaluation dated June 23, 2018. Attorney for licensee: J. Bradley Fewell, Vice President and Deputy General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 200 Exelon Way, Kennett Square, PA 19348. NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day of July 2018. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Gregory F. Suber, Deputy Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 2018-14779 Filed 7-16-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 17, 2018 / Notices 33263
Article VII B. Such surety or other financial • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to
The Commission and the State agree that requirements must be sufficient to ensure http://www.regulations.gov and search
it is desirable to provide reciprocal compliance with those standards established for Docket ID NRC–2018–0140. Address
recognition of licenses for the materials listed by the Commission pertaining to bonds,
questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer
in Article I licensed by the other party or by sureties, and financial arrangements to
ensure adequate reclamation and long-term Borges; telephone: 301–287–9127;
any other Agreement State. email: Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov. For
Accordingly, the Commission and the State management of such byproduct material and
agree to develop appropriate rules, its disposal site. technical questions, contact the
regulations, and procedures by which individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
Article X
reciprocity will be accorded. INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
This Agreement shall become effective on document.
Article VIII [date], and shall remain in effect unless and
until such time as it is terminated pursuant
• Mail comments to: May Ma, Office
A. The Commission, upon its own
initiative after reasonable notice and to Article VIII. of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN–7–
opportunity for hearing to the State or upon Done at [location] this [date] day of A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
request of the Governor of the State, may [month], 2018. Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
terminate or suspend all or part of this For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 0001.
agreement and reassert the licensing and Kristine L. Svinicki, Chairman. For additional direction on obtaining
regulatory authority vested in it under the information and submitting comments,
Done at [location] this [date] day of
Act if the Commission finds that (1) such
termination or suspension is required to
[month], 2018. see ‘‘Obtaining Information and
For the State of Wyoming. Submitting Comments’’ in the
protect public health and safety, or (2) the
State has not complied with one or more of Matthew H. Mead, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
the requirements of Section 274 of the Act. Governor. this document.
1. This Agreement will terminate without [FR Doc. 2018–14176 Filed 7–16–18; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
further NRC action if the State does not BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
amend Wyoming Statute Section 35–11– Janet C. Burkhardt, Office of Nuclear
2004(c) to be compatible with Section Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear
83b.(1)(A) of the Act by the end of the 2019 Regulatory Commission, Washington,
Wyoming legislative session. Upon passage NUCLEAR REGULATORY DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415–
of a revised Wyoming Statute Section 35–11– COMMISSION 1384, email: Janet.Burkhardt@nrc.gov.
2004(c) that the NRC finds compatible with [NRC–2018–0140]
Section 83b.(1)(A) of the Act, this paragraph SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
expires and is no longer part of the
Biweekly Notice; Applications and I. Obtaining Information and
Agreement.
B. The Commission may also, pursuant to Amendments to Facility Operating Submitting Comments
Section 274j. of the Act, temporarily suspend Licenses and Combined Licenses
Involving No Significant Hazards A. Obtaining Information
all or part of this agreement if, in the
judgment of the Commission, an emergency Considerations Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2018–
situation exists requiring immediate action to 0140, facility name, unit number(s),
protect public health and safety and the State AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory
Commission. plant docket number, application date,
has failed to take necessary steps. The
Commission shall periodically review actions and subject when contacting the NRC
ACTION: Biweekly notice.
taken by the State under this Agreement to about the availability of information for
ensure compliance with Section 274 of the SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 189a.(2) this action. You may obtain publicly-
Act, which requires a State program to be of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as available information related to this
adequate to protect public health and safety amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear action by any of the following methods:
with respect to the materials covered by this • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to
Agreement and to be compatible with the
Regulatory Commission (NRC) is
Commission’s program. publishing this regular biweekly notice. http://www.regulations.gov and search
The Act requires the Commission to for Docket ID NRC–2018–0140.
Article IX publish notice of any amendments • NRC’s Agencywide Documents
In the licensing and regulation of issued, or proposed to be issued, and Access and Management System
byproduct material as defined in Section grants the Commission the authority to (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-
11e.(2) of the Act, or of any activity that issue and make immediately effective available documents online in the
results in production of such material, the
State shall comply with the provisions of
any amendment to an operating license ADAMS Public Documents collection at
Section 274o. of the Act, if in such licensing or combined license, as applicable, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
and regulation, the State requires financial upon a determination by the adams.html. To begin the search, select
surety arrangements for reclamation or long- Commission that such amendment ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then
term surveillance and maintenance of such involves no significant hazards select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS
material. consideration, notwithstanding the Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS,
A. The total amount of funds the State pendency before the Commission of a please contact the NRC’s Public
collects for such purposes shall be request for a hearing from any person. Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
transferred to the United States if custody of This biweekly notice includes all
such material and its disposal site is 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by
transferred to the United States upon notices of amendments issued, or email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
termination of the State license for such proposed to be issued, from June 18, ADAMS accession number for each
material or any activity that results in the 2018, to June 29, 2018. The last document referenced (if it is available in
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
production of such material. Such funds biweekly notice was published on July ADAMS) is provided the first time that
include, but are not limited to, sums 3, 2018. it is mentioned in this document.
collected for long-term surveillance or
maintenance. Such funds do not, however,
DATES: Comments must be filed by • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and
August 16, 2018. A request for a hearing purchase copies of public documents at
include monies held as surety where no
default has occurred and the reclamation or must be filed by September 17, 2018. the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One
other bonded activity has been performed; ADDRESSES: You may submit comments White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
and, by any of the following methods: Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:07 Jul 16, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_33400/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 17, 2018 / Notices 33267
licensee has provided its analysis of the will not be affected. The proposed changes Basis for proposed no significant
issue of no significant hazards do not involve a physical alteration of the hazards consideration determination:
consideration, which is presented plant (i.e., no new or different type of As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the
equipment will be installed), and the
below: licensee has provided its analysis of the
installed equipment is not being operated in
1. Does the proposed change involve a a new or different manner. issue of no significant hazards
significant increase in the probability or Therefore, the proposed amendment does consideration, which is presented
consequences of an accident previously not create the possibility of a new or different below:
evaluated? kind of accident from any accident 1. Does the proposed amendment involve
Response: No. previously evaluated. a significant increase in the probability or
The proposed license amendment adopts 3. Does the proposed change involve a consequences of an accident previously
the NRC approved methodology described in significant reduction in a margin of safety? evaluated?
Boiling Water Reactor Owner’s Group Response: No. Response: No.
(BWROG) Licensing Topical Report (LTR) The proposed changes do not affect the The proposed changes to FitzPatrick’s EAL
(BWROG–TP–11–022–A, SIR–05–044, function of the reactor coolant pressure schemes to adopt the NRC-endorsed
Revision 1–A), ‘‘Pressure Temperature Limits boundary or its response during plant guidance in NEI 99–01, Revision 6 do not
Report Methodology for Boiling Water transients. Calculating the Brunswick reduce the capability to meet the emergency
Reactors.’’ The BSEP PTLR was developed pressure temperature limits using the NRC planning requirements established in 10 CFR
based on the methodology and template approved structural integrity methodology 50.47 and 10 CFR part 50, Appendix E. The
provided in the BWROG LTR. ensures adequate margins of safety relating to proposed changes do not reduce the
10 CFR 50, Appendix G, establishes reactor coolant pressure boundary integrity functionality, performance, or capability of
requirements to protect the integrity of the are maintained. The proposed changes do not FitzPatrick’s ERO [emergency response
reactor coolant pressure boundary (RCPB) in alter the manner in which the Limiting organization] to respond in mitigating the
nuclear power plants. Conditions for Operation pressure and consequences of any design basis accident.
Implementing this NRC approved temperature limits for the reactor coolant The probability of a reactor accident
methodology does not reduce the ability to pressure boundary are determined. There are requiring implementation of Emergency Plan
protect the reactor coolant pressure boundary no changes to the setpoints at which EALs has no relevance in determining
as specified in Appendix G, nor will this protective actions are initiated, and the whether the proposed changes to the EALs
change increase the probability of operability requirements for equipment reduce the effectiveness of the Emergency
malfunction of plant equipment, or the assumed to operate for accident mitigation Plans. As discussed in Section D, ‘‘Planning
failure of plant structures, systems, or are not affected. Basis,’’ of NUREG–0654, Revision 1, ‘‘Criteria
components. Incorporation of the new Therefore, the proposed amendment does for Preparation and Evaluation of
methodology for calculating pressure and not result in a significant reduction in the Radiological Emergency Response Plants and
temperature limit curves, and the relocation margin of safety. Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power
of the pressure and temperature limit curves Plants:’’
from the TS to the PTLR provides an The NRC staff has reviewed the ‘‘. . . The overall objective of emergency
equivalent level of assurance that the reactor licensee’s analysis and, based on this response plans is to provide dose savings
coolant pressure boundary is capable of review, it appears that the three (and in some cases immediate life saving) for
performing its intended safety functions. standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are a spectrum of accidents that could produce
The proposed changes do not adversely satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff offsite doses in excess of Protective Action
affect accident initiators or precursors, and proposes to determine that the Guides (PAGs). No single specific accident
do not alter the design assumptions, sequence should be isolated as the one for
conditions, or configuration of the plant or
amendment request involves no
which to plan because each accident could
the manner in which the plant is operated significant hazards consideration. have different consequences, both in nature
and maintained. The ability of structures, Attorney for licensee: Kathryn B. and degree. Further, the range of possible
systems, and components to perform their Nolan, Deputy General Counsel, 550 selection for a planning basis is very large,
intended safety functions is not altered or South Tryon Street, M/C DEC45A, starting with a zero point of requiring no
prevented by the proposed changes, and the Charlotte, NC 28202. planning at all because significant offsite
assumptions used in determining the NRC Acting Branch Chief: Booma radiological accident consequences are
radiological consequences of previously Venkataraman. unlikely to occur, to planning for the worst
evaluated accidents are not affected. possible accident, regardless of its extremely
Therefore, the proposed amendment does Exelon FitzPatrick, LLC and Exelon low likelihood. . . .’’
not involve a significant increase in the Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. Therefore, Exelon did not consider the risk
probability or consequences of an accident 50–333, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear insights regarding any specific accident
previously evaluated. Power Plant (FitzPatrick), Oswego initiation or progression in evaluating the
2. Does the proposed change create the proposed changes.
possibility of a new or different kind of
County, New York The proposed changes do not involve any
accident from any accident previously Date of amendment request: January physical changes to plant equipment or
evaluated? 31, 2018. A publicly-available version is systems, nor do they alter the assumptions of
Response: No. in ADAMS under Accession No. any accident analyses. The proposed changes
Creation of the possibility of a new or do not adversely affect accident initiators or
ML18037A782. precursors nor do they alter the design
different kind of accident requires creating
one or more new accident precursors. New Description of amendment request: assumptions, conditions, and configuration
accident precursors may be created by The amendment would revise or the manner in which the plants are
modifications of plant configuration, FitzPatrick’s emergency plan by operated and maintained. The proposed
including changes in allowable modes of changing the emergency action level changes do not adversely affect the ability of
operation. (EAL) schemes. The proposed changes Structures, Systems, or Components (SSCs)
The change in methodology for calculating are based on the Nuclear Energy to perform their intended safety functions in
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
pressure and temperature limits and the Institute’s (NEI’s) guidance in NEI 99– mitigating the consequences of an initiating
relocation of those limits to the PTLR do not event within the assumed acceptance limits.
01, Revision 6, ‘‘Development of
alter or involve any design basis accident Therefore, the proposed changes do not
initiators. Reactor coolant pressure boundary Emergency Action Levels for Non- involve a significant increase in the
integrity will continue to be maintained in Passive Reactors,’’ which was endorsed probability or consequences of an accident
accordance with 10 CFR part 50, Appendix by the NRC in a letter dated March 28, previously evaluated.
G, and the assumed accident performance of 2013 (ADAMS Accession No. 2. Does the proposed amendment create
plant structures, systems and components ML12346A463). the possibility of a new or different kind of
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:07 Jul 16, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_33400/page/5.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 17, 2018 / Notices 33269
consideration for each site, which is to transients or accidents. The proposed Therefore, it is concluded that this change
presented below: changes do not affect the Technical does not involve a significant increase in the
Specifications. The proposed changes do not probability or consequences of an accident
1. Does the proposed amendment involve involve a change in the method of plant previously evaluated.
a significant increase in the probability or operation, and no accident analyses will be 2. Does the proposed change create the
consequences of an accident previously affected by the proposed changes. Safety possibility of a new or different kind of
evaluated? analysis acceptance criteria are not affected accident from any accident previously
Response: No. by these proposed changes. The proposed evaluated?
The proposed changes to the [site] changes to the Emergency Plan will continue Response: No.
Emergency Plan do not increase the to provide the necessary onsite ERO response The proposed change to the TS usage rules
probability or consequences of an accident. staff. does not affect the design or function of any
The proposed changes do not impact the Therefore, the proposed changes to the plant systems. The proposed change does not
function of plant Structures, Systems, or [site] Emergency Plan do not involve a change the Operability requirements for plant
Components (SSCs). The proposed changes significant reduction in a margin of safety. systems or the actions taken when plant
do not affect accident initiators or accident systems are not operable.
precursors, nor do the changes alter design The NRC staff has reviewed the
licensee’s analysis for each site and, Therefore, it is concluded that this change
assumptions. The proposed changes do not does not create the possibility of a new or
alter or prevent the ability of the onsite ERO based on this review, it appears that the
different kind of accident from any accident
to perform their intended functions to three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are previously evaluated.
mitigate the consequences of an accident or satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff 3. Does the proposed change involve a
event. The proposed changes remove ERO proposes to determine that the significant reduction in a margin of safety?
positions no longer credited or considered requested amendments involve no Response: No.
necessary in support of Emergency Plan
implementation.
significant hazards consideration. The proposed change clarifies the
Therefore, the proposed changes to the Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, application of Section 1.3 and LCO 3.0.4 and
Associate General Counsel, Exelon does not result in changes in plant operation.
[site] Emergency Plan do not involve a
significant increase in the probability or Generation Company, LLC, 4300 SR 3.0.3 is revised to allow application of SR
consequences of an accident previously Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555. 3.0.3 when an SR has not been previously
evaluated. NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona. performed if there is reasonable expectation
2. Does the proposed amendment create that the SR will be met when performed. This
the possibility of a new or different kind of Indiana Michigan Power Company, expands the use of SR 3.0.3 while ensuring
accident from any accident previously Docket Nos. 50–315 and 50–316, Donald the affected system is capable of performing
evaluated? C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and its safety function. As a result, plant safety
Response: No. 2, Berrien County, Michigan is either improved or unaffected.
The proposed changes have no impact on Therefore, it is concluded that this change
Date of amendment request: May 4, does not involve a significant reduction in a
the design, function, or operation of any
plant SSCs. The proposed changes do not 2018. A publicly-available version is in margin of safety.
affect plant equipment or accident analyses. ADAMS under Accession No. The NRC staff has reviewed the
The proposed changes do not involve a ML18129A219. licensee’s analysis and, based on this
physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no new Description of amendment request:
review, it appears that the three
or different type of equipment will be The proposed change would modify
installed), a change in the method of plant
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
technical specification (TS)
operation, or new operator actions. The satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
requirements regarding Limiting
proposed changes do not introduce failure proposes to determine that the
Condition for Operation (LCO) and
modes that could result in a new accident, amendment request involves no
Surveillance Requirement (SR) usage, in
and the proposed changes do not alter significant hazards consideration.
assumptions made in the safety analysis. The accordance with NRC-approved Attorney for licensee: Robert B.
proposed changes remove ERO positions no Technical Specifications Task Force Haemer, Senior Nuclear Counsel, One
longer credited or considered necessary in (TSTF) Traveler TSTF–529, Revision 4, Cook Place, Bridgman, MI 49106.
support of Emergency Plan implementation. ‘‘Clarify Use and Application Rules.’’ NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona.
Therefore, the proposed changes to the Basis for proposed no significant
[site] Emergency Plan do not create the hazards consideration determination: Southern Nuclear Operating Company,
possibility of a new or different kind of As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the Inc., Docket Nos. 52–025 and 52–026,
accident from any accident previously licensee has provided its analysis of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Unit
evaluated. Nos. 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia
3. Does the proposed amendment involve
issue of no significant hazards
a significant reduction in a margin of safety? consideration, which is presented Date of amendment request: May 18,
Response: No. below: 2018. A publicly-available version is in
Margin of safety is associated with 1. Does the proposed amendment involve ADAMS under Accession No.
confidence in the ability of the fission a significant increase in the probability or ML18138A396.
product barriers (i.e., fuel cladding, reactor consequences of an accident previously Description of amendment request:
coolant system pressure boundary, and evaluated? The amendment request proposes to
containment structure) to limit the level of Response: No.
radiation dose to the public.
change Technical Specifications
The proposed changes to Section 1.3 and
The proposed changes do not adversely LCO 3.0.4 have no effect on the requirement
Limiting Condition for Operation 3.3.8,
affect existing plant safety margins or the for systems to be Operable and have no effect Engineered Safety Feature Actuation
reliability of the equipment assumed to on the application of TS actions. The System (ESFAS) Instrumentation,
operate in the safety analyses. There are no proposed change to SR 3.0.3 states that the related to Safeguard Actuation
changes being made to safety analysis allowance may only be used when there is Functions. Various ESFAS Functions
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
assumptions, safety limits, or limiting safety a reasonable expectation the surveillance will require applicability and corresponding
system settings that would adversely affect be met when performed. Since the proposed actions changes to more accurately
plant safety as a result of the proposed change does not significantly affect system
changes. Margins of safety are unaffected by
reflect their operation and related safety
Operability, the proposed change will have
the proposed changes to the ERO staffing. no effect on the initiating events for accidents analysis assumptions. This submittal
The proposed changes are associated with previously evaluated and will have no requests approval of the license
the [site] Emergency Plan staffing and do not significant effect on the ability of the systems amendment necessary to implement
impact operation of the plant or its response to mitigate accidents previously evaluated. these changes.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:07 Jul 16, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_33400/page/7.svg)
![33270 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 17, 2018 / Notices
Basis for proposed no significant Attorney for licensee: M. Stanford accident from any accident previously
hazards consideration determination: Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 1710 evaluated?
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL Response: No.
licensee has provided its analysis of the 35203–2015. The proposed amendment adds the
issue of no significant hazards NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon- reference to this letter to the BFN RFOL
consideration, which is presented Herrity. License Condition paragraphs 2.C.(13),
below: 2.C.(14), and 2.C.(7) for BFN Units 1, 2, and
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), 3, respectively. The change encompassed by
1. Does the proposed amendment involve Docket Nos. 50–259, 50–260, and 50– the proposed amendment is to correct the
a significant increase in the probability or 296, Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN), entry in Attachment A Table B–1 of the BFN
consequences of an accident previously
Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3, Limestone County, Transition Report.
evaluated?
Response: No. Alabama There is no risk impact to Core Damage
The proposed changes do not involve Date of amendment request: May 3, Frequency (CDF) or Large Early Release
changes to current plant design or safety 2018. A publicly-available version is in Frequency (LERF) because this is an
analysis assumptions. These changes provide administrative change. Plant secondary
ADAMS under Accession No.
Technical Specifications consistency with combustibles, including insulating materials,
the approved plant design and safety analysis
ML18124A053.
are considered in the fire modeling input to
assumptions. The changes do not affect the Description of amendment request:
the Fire PRA [Probabilistic Risk Assessment].
operation of any systems or equipment that The amendments would revise the BFN
The proposed change does not result in
initiate an analyzed accident or alter any Units 1, 2, and 3 renewed facility any new or different kinds of accident from
structures, systems, and components (SSCs) operating licenses (RFOLs) to provide a that previously evaluated because it does not
accident initiator or initiating sequence of correction to previously submitted change any precursors or equipment that is
events. The proposed changes do not result information in relation to their
in any increase in the probability of an previously credited for accident mitigation.
approved fire protection program under Therefore, the proposed change does not
analyzed accident occurring. Therefore, the
10 CFR 50.48(c), ‘‘National Fire create the possibility of a new or different
requested amendment does not involve a
significant increase in the probability or Protection Association Standard NFPA kind of accident from any accident
consequences of an accident previously 805.’’ Specifically, TVA requested to previously evaluated.
evaluated. modify the BFN licenses to reflect 3. Does the proposed amendment involve
2. Does the proposed amendment create changes to Item 3.3.4 in Table B–1, a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
the possibility of a new or different kind of ‘‘Transition of Fundamental Fire Response: No.
accident from any accident previously Protection Program & Design Elements,’’ The proposed amendment adds the
evaluated? of Attachment A in its NFPA 805 reference to this letter to the BFN RFOL
Response: No. License Condition paragraphs 2.C.(13),
license amendment request dated March
The proposed changes do not involve 2.C.(14), and 2.C.(7) for BFN Units 1, 2, and
changes to current plant design or safety 27, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML13092A393). 3, respectively. The change encompassed by
analysis assumptions. These changes provide
Technical Specifications consistency with Basis for proposed no significant the proposed amendment are to correct the
the approved plant design and safety analysis hazards consideration determination: entry in Attachment A Table B–1 of the BFN
assumptions. The proposed changes do not As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the Transition Report.
affect plant protection instrumentation licensee has provided its analysis of the This proposed change corrects erroneous
systems, and do not affect the design issue of no significant hazards information to previously approved
function, support, design, or operation of consideration, which is presented information in the BFN Transition Report.
mechanical and fluid systems. The proposed This proposed change will have an
changes do not result in a new failure below.
insignificant impact on the accident analysis
mechanism or introduce any new accident 1. Does the proposed amendment involve as it is a clarifying or administrative change.
precursors. No design function described in a significant increase in the probability or Plant secondary combustibles, including
the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report consequences of an accident previously insulating materials, are considered in the
(UFSAR) is affected by the proposed changes. evaluated? fire modeling input to the Fire PRA.
Therefore, the requested amendment does Response: No.
not create the possibility of a new or different The proposed change will not result in any
The proposed amendment adds the
kind accident from any accident previously new or different kinds of accident from that
reference to this letter to the BFN RFOL
evaluated. License Condition paragraphs 2.C.(13), previously evaluated because it does not
3. Does the proposed amendment involve 2.C.(14), and 2.C.(7) for BFN Units 1, 2, and change any precursors or equipment that is
a significant reduction in a margin of safety? 3, respectively. The change encompassed by previously credited for accident mitigation.
Response: No. the proposed amendment is to correct the Therefore, based on the above discussion,
The proposed changes do not involve entry in Attachment A Table B–1 of the BFN these proposed changes do not involve a
changes to current plant design or safety Transition Report. reduction in the margin of safety.
analysis assumptions. These changes provide The proposed change does not adversely
Technical Specifications consistency with affect accident initiators or precursors nor The NRC staff has reviewed the
the approved plant design and safety analysis alter the design assumptions, conditions, and licensee’s analysis and, based on this
assumptions. No safety analysis or design configuration of the facility or the manner in review, it appears that the three
basis acceptance limit/criterion is involved. which the plant is operated and maintained. standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not The proposed change does not affect the
involve a significant reduction in a margin of
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
ability of structures, systems and components proposes to determine that the
safety. (SSCs) to perform their intended safety
function to mitigate the consequences of an
amendment request involves no
The NRC staff has reviewed the significant hazards consideration.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
licensee’s analysis and, based on this initiating event within the assumed
review, it appears that the three acceptance limits. Attorney for licensee: General
Therefore, these proposed changes do not Counsel, Tennessee Valley Authority,
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are involve a significant increase in the
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff 400 West Summit Hill Drive, 6A West
probability of consequences of an accident Tower, Knoxville, TN 37902.
proposes to determine that the previously identified.
amendment request involves no 2. Does the proposed amendment create NRC Acting Branch Chief: Booma
significant hazards consideration. the possibility of a new or different kind of Venkataraman.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:07 Jul 16, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_33400/page/8.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 17, 2018 / Notices 33271
III. Notice of Issuance of Amendments revised a TS to increase the voltage limit The Commission’s related evaluation
to Facility Operating Licenses and for the EDG full load rejection test to of the amendment is contained in a
Combined Licenses provide additional operating margin to Safety Evaluation dated June 27, 2018.
During the period since publication of test acceptance criteria. No significant hazards consideration
the last biweekly notice, the Date of issuance: June 20, 2018. comments received: No.
Commission has issued the following Effective date: As of the date of Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50–
amendments. The Commission has issuance and shall be implemented 313, Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1
determined for each of these within 60 days. (ANO–1), Pope County, Arkansas
amendments that the application Amendment No.: 165. A publicly-
available version is in ADAMS under Date of amendment request: July 17,
complies with the standards and 2017.
requirements of the Atomic Energy Act Accession No. ML18130A270;
documents related to this amendment Brief description of amendment: The
of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the amendment revised the Technical
Commission’s rules and regulations. are listed in the Safety Evaluation
enclosed with the amendment. Specifications (TSs) for ANO–1 and
The Commission has made appropriate established a new Completion Time in
findings as required by the Act and the Renewed Facility Operating License
No. NPF–63: The amendment revised ANO–1 TS 3.7.5, ‘‘Emergency
Commission’s rules and regulations in Feedwater (EFW) System,’’ where one
10 CFR chapter I, which are set forth in the Renewed Facility Operating License
and TSs. steam supply to the turbine-driven EFW
the license amendment. pump is inoperable concurrent with an
A notice of consideration of issuance Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: September 26, 2017 (82 FR inoperable motor-driven EFW train. The
of amendment to facility operating amendment is consistent with NRC-
license or combined license, as 44851). The supplemental letters dated
October 30, 2017, November 27, 2017, approved Technical Specifications Task
applicable, proposed no significant Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF–412,
hazards consideration determination, and January 28, 2018, provided
additional information that clarified the Revision 3, ‘‘Provide Actions for One
and opportunity for a hearing in Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW
connection with these actions, was application, did not expand the scope of
the application as originally noticed, [Auxiliary Feedwater]/EFW Pump
published in the Federal Register as Inoperable,’’ with certain plant-specific
indicated. and did not change the NRC staff’s
original proposed no significant hazards deviations.
Unless otherwise indicated, the Date of issuance: June 19, 2018.
Commission has determined that these consideration determination as
Effective date: As of the date of
amendments satisfy the criteria for published in the Federal Register.
issuance and shall be implemented
categorical exclusion in accordance The Commission’s related evaluation
within 90 days from the date of
with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant of the amendment is contained in a
issuance.
to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental Safety Evaluation dated June 20, 2018.
Amendment No.: 260. A publicly-
impact statement or environmental No significant hazards consideration available version is in ADAMS under
assessment need be prepared for these comments received: No. Accession No. ML18115A282;
amendments. If the Commission has Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., documents related to this amendment
prepared an environmental assessment Docket No. 50–271, Vermont Yankee are listed in the Safety Evaluation
under the special circumstances Nuclear Power Station, Vernon, enclosed with the amendment.
provision in 10 CFR 51.22(b) and has Vermont Renewed Facility Operating License
made a determination based on that No. DPR–51: Amendment revised the
assessment, it is so indicated. Date of amendment request: July 13,
Renewed Facility Operating License and
For further details with respect to the 2017.
Technical Specifications.
action see (1) the applications for Brief description of amendment: The Date of initial notice in Federal
amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3) amendment approved the removal of the Register: October 10, 2017 (82 FR
the Commission’s related letter, Safety existing cyber security license condition 47036).
Evaluation and/or Environmental from the facility operating license. The Commission’s related evaluation
Assessment as indicated. All of these Date of issuance: June 27, 2018. of the amendment is contained in a
items can be accessed as described in Effective date: As of the date the Safety Evaluation dated June 19, 2018.
the ‘‘Obtaining Information and licensee notifies the NRC in writing that No significant hazards consideration
Submitting Comments’’ section of this all spent nuclear fuel assemblies have comments received: No.
document. been transferred out of the spent fuel
pool and have been placed in dry Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50–
Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket No. storage within the independent spent 368, Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit No. 2
50–400, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power fuel storage installation, and shall be (ANO–2), Pope County, Arkansas
Plant, Unit No. 1, Wake and Chatham implemented within 60 days of the Date of amendment request: July 17,
Counties, North Carolina effective date. 2017.
Date of amendment request: June 5, Amendment No.: 268. A publicly- Brief description of amendment: The
2017, as supplemented by letters dated available version is in ADAMS under amendment revised the Technical
October 30, 2017, November 27, 2017, Accession No. ML18145A208; Specifications (TSs) for ANO–2 and
and January 28, 2018. documents related to this amendment established Actions and Allowable
Brief description of amendment: The are referenced in the Safety Evaluation Outage Times in ANO–2 TS 3.7.1.2,
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
amendment revised the Technical enclosed with the amendment. ‘‘Emergency Feedwater System,’’ for
Specifications (TSs) to restrict the Renewed Facility Operating License several combinations of inoperable
steady-state voltage and frequency No. DPR–28: This amendment revised Emergency Feedwater (EFW) trains
limits for emergency diesel generator the License. consistent with NUREG–1432,
(EDG) operation to ensure that accident Date of initial notice in Federal ‘‘Standard Technical Specifications—
mitigation equipment can perform as Register: September 26, 2017 (82 FR Combustion Engineering Plants,’’
designed. In addition, the amendment 44852). Revision 4. The amendment includes
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:07 Jul 16, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_33400/page/9.svg)
![33272 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 17, 2018 / Notices
changes incorporated by Technical Safety Evaluation enclosed with the Brief description of amendment: The
Specifications Task Force (TSTF)-340, amendments. amendment revised the license to delete
‘‘Allow 7 Day Completion Time for a Facility Operating License Nos. DPR– the modification to install overcurrent
Turbine-Driven AFW [Auxiliary 53, DPR–69, DPR–63, NPF–69, and protection on its emergency diesel
Feedwater] Pump Inoperable,’’ Revision DPR–18: Amendments revised the generators which was required as part of
3 and TSTF–412, ‘‘Provide Actions for emergency plans. Ginna’s implementation of its risk-
One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven Date of initial notice in Federal informed, performance-based fire
AFW/EFW Pump Inoperable,’’ Revision Register: August 1, 2017 (82 FR 35838). protection program in accordance with
3. The Commission’s related evaluation 10 CFR 50.48(c).
Date of issuance: June 19, 2018. of the amendments is contained in a Date of issuance: June 25, 2018.
Effective date: As of the date of Safety Evaluation dated June 26, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of
issuance and shall be implemented No significant hazards consideration issuance and shall be implemented
within 90 days from the date of comments received: No. within 60 days of issuance.
issuance. Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Amendment No.: 127. A publicly-
Amendment No.: 310. A publicly- Docket Nos. 50–237 and 50–249, available version is in ADAMS under
available version is in ADAMS under Dresden Nuclear Power Station (DNPS), Accession No. ML18114A025;
Accession No. ML18134A253; Unit Nos. 2 and 3, Grundy County, documents related to this amendment
documents related to this amendment Illinois are listed in the Safety Evaluation
are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
enclosed with the amendment. Date of amendment request: May 3,
Renewed Facility Operating License
2017, as supplemented by letter dated
Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR–18: Amendment revised the
February 14, 2018.
No. NPF–6: Amendment revised the Renewed Facility Operating License.
Brief description of amendments: The
Renewed Facility Operating License and Date of initial notice in Federal
amendments revised the DNPS
TSs. Register: October 3, 2017 (82 FR
Technical Specification (TS) 5.5.12,
Date of initial notice in Federal 46097). The supplemental letters dated
‘‘Primary Containment Leakage Rate
Register: October 10, 2017 (82 FR October 25, 2017, and June 5, 2018,
Testing Program,’’ to allow for the
47036). provided additional information that
permanent extension of the Type A
The Commission’s related evaluation clarified the application, did not expand
integrated leak rate testing and the Type
of the amendment is contained in a the scope of the application as originally
C leak rate testing frequencies.
Safety Evaluation dated June 19, 2018. Date of issuance: June 29, 2018. noticed, and did not change the NRC
No significant hazards consideration Effective date: As of the date of staff’s original proposed no significant
comments received: No. issuance and shall be implemented hazards consideration determination as
within 30 days of issuance. published in the Federal Register.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC,
Amendment Nos.: 257 (Unit 2) and The Commission’s related evaluation
Docket Nos. 50–317 and 50–318, Calvert
250 (Unit 3). A publicly-available of the amendment is contained in a
Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1
version is in ADAMS under Accession Safety Evaluation dated June 25, 2018.
and 2, Calvert County, Maryland,
No. ML18137A271; documents related No significant hazards consideration
Exelon Generation Company, LLC,
to these amendments are listed in the comments received: No.
Docket Nos. 50–220 and 50–410, Nine
Mile, Point, Nuclear Station, Unit Nos. Safety Evaluation enclosed with the Exelon Generation Company, LLC,
1 and 2, Oswego County, New York, amendments. Docket Nos. STN 50–456 and STN 50–
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Renewed Facility Operating License 457, Braidwood Station, Unit Nos. 1 and
Docket No. 50–244, R.E. Ginna Nuclear Nos. DPR–19 and DPR–25: Amendments 2, Will County, Illinois and Docket Nos.
Power Plant, Wayne County, New York revised the Renewed Facility Operating STN 50–454 and STN 50–455, Byron
Licenses and TS. Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Ogle County,
Date of amendment request: May 31, Date of initial notice in Federal
2017. Illinois
Register: August 1, 2017 (82 FR 35838).
Brief description of amendments: The The supplemental letter dated February Date of amendment request: June 30,
amendments revised the emergency 14, 2018, provided additional 2017, as supplemented by letters dated
plans for each facility by changing the information that clarified the October 25, 2017, and May 29, 2018.
emergency action level schemes. The application, did not expand the scope of Brief description of amendments: The
changes are based on the Nuclear the application as originally noticed, amendments revised Technical
Energy Institute’s (NEI’s) guidance in and did not change the staff’s original Specification (TS) 3.1.4, ‘‘Rod Group
NEI 99–01, Revision 6, ‘‘Development of proposed no significant hazards Alignment Limits,’’ TS 3.1.5,
Emergency Action Levels for Non- consideration determination as ‘‘Shutdown Bank Insertion Limits,’’ TS
Passive Reactors,’’ which was endorsed published in the Federal Register. 3.1.6, ‘‘Control Bank Insertion Limits,’’
by the NRC by letter dated March 28, The Commission’s related evaluation and TS 3.1.7, ‘‘Rod Position Indication.’’
2013 (ADAMS Package Accession No. of the amendments is contained in a Date of issuance: June 27, 2018.
ML13091A209). Safety Evaluation dated June 29, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of
Date of issuance: June 26, 2018. No significant hazards consideration issuance and shall be implemented
Effective date: As of the date of comments received: No. within 60 days from the date of
issuance and shall be implemented on issuance.
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
or before June 28, 2019. Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Amendment Nos: 196 (Braidwood,
Amendment Nos.: Calvert Cliffs—324/ Docket No. 50–244, R. E. Ginna Nuclear Unit 1) and 196 (Braidwood, Unit 2);
302; Nine Mile Point—230/171; and, Power Plant (Ginna), Wayne County, 202 (Bryon, Unit 1) and 202 (Bryon,
Ginna—128. A publicly-available New York Unit 2). A publicly-available version is
version is in ADAMS under Accession Date of amendment request: June 30, in ADAMS under Accession No.
No. ML18137A614; documents related 2017, as supplemented by letters dated ML18065A529; documents related to
to these amendments are listed in the October 25, 2017, and June 5, 2018. these amendments are listed in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:07 Jul 16, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_33400/page/10.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 17, 2018 / Notices 33273
related Safety Evaluation enclosed with South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, Specification (TS) 3.7.5, ‘‘Auxiliary
the amendments. South Carolina Public Service Feedwater (AFW) System,’’ to establish
Renewed Facility Operating License Authority, Docket No. 50–395, Virgil C. a new Completion Time for the
Nos. NPF–72, NPF–77, NPF–37, and Summer Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1, Condition where one steam supply to
NPF–66: The amendments revised the Fairfield County, South Carolina the turbine driven AFW pump is
Date of amendment request: October inoperable concurrent with an
Renewed Facility Operating Licenses
6, 2017, as supplemented by letter dated inoperable motor driven AFW train. In
and TSs.
April 19, 2018. addition, the amendments added
Date of initial notice in Federal specific Conditions and Action
Brief description of amendment: This
Register: August 29, 2017 (82 FR requirements: (1) For when two motor
amendment increased the Integrated
41069). The supplemental letters dated driven AFW trains are inoperable at the
Leak Rate Test Peak Calculated
October 25, 2017, and May 29, 2018, Containment Internal Pressure, Pa, same time and; (2) for when the turbine
provided additional information that listed in Technical Specification (TS) driven AFW train is inoperable either
clarified the application, did not expand 6.8.4.g, ‘‘Containment Leakage Rate (a) due solely to one inoperable steam
the scope of the application as originally Testing Program,’’ from 45.1 pounds per supply, or (b) due to reasons other than
noticed, and did not change the NRC square inch gauge (psig) to 46.0 psig. It one inoperable steam supply. The
staff’s original proposed no significant also removed the reference to proposed changes are consistent with
hazards consideration determination as Regulatory Guide 1.163, ‘‘Performance- NRC-approved Technical Specification
published in the Federal Register. Based Containment Leak Test Program,’’ Task Force (TSTF) Traveler, TSTF–412,
and American National Standards Revision 3, ‘‘Provide Actions for One
The Commission’s related evaluation Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/
of the amendments is contained in a Institute/American Nuclear Society
(ANSI/ANS)-56.8–2002, ‘‘Containment EFW [Emergency Feedwater] Pump
Safety Evaluation dated June 27, 2018. Inoperable’’ dated January 10, 2007.
System Leakage Testing Requirements,’’
No significant hazards consideration and replaced the reference of Nuclear Date of issuance: June 27, 2018.
comments received: No. Energy Institute (NEI) 94–01, Revision Effective date: As of the date of
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating 3–A, ‘‘Industry Guideline for issuance and shall be implemented
Company, Docket No. 50–440, Perry Implementing Performance-Based within 90 days of issuance.
Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. 1, Lake Option of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix J,’’ Amendment Nos.: 219 (Unit 1) and
County, Ohio with NEI 94–01, Revision 2–A. 216 (Unit 2). A publicly-available
Date of issuance: June 28, 2018. version is in ADAMS under Accession
Date of amendment request: Effective date: As of the date of No. ML18151A174. Documents related
September 11, 2017. issuance and shall be implemented to these amendments are listed in the
Brief description of amendment: The within 60 days of issuance. Safety Evaluation enclosed with the
Amendment No.: 210. A publicly- amendments.
amendment revised the requirements in
available version is in ADAMS under Renewed Facility Operating License
Technical Specification (TS) 3.3.6.1,
Accession No. ML18141A668, Nos. NPF–2 and NPF–8: The
‘‘Primary Containment and Drywell
documents related to this amendment amendments revised the Renewed
Isolation Instrumentation,’’ by adding are listed in the Safety Evaluation Facility Operating Licenses and TS.
an ACTIONS note to Limiting Condition enclosed with the amendment.
of Operation 3.3.6.1 to allow Date of initial notice in Federal
Renewed Facility Operating License Register: February 13, 2018 (83 FR
intermittent opening, under No. NPF–12: Amendment revised the 6234).
administrative control, of containment Renewed Facility Operating License and
and drywell penetration flow paths that The Commission’s related evaluation
the TS. of the amendments is contained in a
are isolated. Date of initial notice in Federal Safety Evaluation dated June 27, 2018.
Date of issuance: June 25, 2018. Register: November 21, 2017 (82 FR
55409). The supplemental letter dated No significant hazards consideration
Effective date: As of the date of comments received: No.
April 19, 2018, provided additional
issuance and shall be implemented
information that clarified the Susquehanna Nuclear, LLC, Docket Nos.
within 60 days of issuance. application, did not expand the scope of 50–387 and 50–388, Susquehanna
Amendment No.: 181. A publicly- the application as originally noticed, Steam Electric Station, Unit Nos. 1 and
available version is in ADAMS under and did not change the staff’s original 2, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania
Accession No. ML18157A084; proposed no significant hazards
documents related to this amendment consideration determination as Date of amendment request:
are listed in the Safety Evaluation published in the Federal Register. December 14, 2017.
enclosed with the amendment. The Commission’s related evaluation Brief description of amendments: The
of the amendment is contained in a amendments revised Technical
Facility Operating License No. NPF– Specification (TS) 3.6.4.1, ‘‘Secondary
Safety Evaluation dated June 28, 2018.
58: Amendment revised the Facility Containment,’’ Surveillance
No significant hazards consideration
Operating License and TS. Requirement (SR) 3.6.4.1.1. The SR was
comments received: No.
Date of initial notice in Federal revised to address conditions during
Register: November 7, 2017 (82 FR Southern Nuclear Operating Company, which the secondary containment
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
51652). Docket Nos. 50–348 and 50–364, Joseph pressure may not meet the SR pressure
M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 requirements. The changes are based on
The Commission’s related evaluation and 2, Houston County, Alabama Technical Specification Task Force
of the amendment is contained in a
Date of amendment request: (TSTF) Traveler TSTF–551, Revision 3,
Safety Evaluation dated June 25, 2018. ‘‘Revise Secondary Containment
December 21, 2017.
No significant hazards consideration Brief description of amendments: The Surveillance Requirements.’’
comments received: No. amendments modified Technical Date of issuance: June 26, 2018.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:07 Jul 16, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_33400/page/11.svg)
![33276 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 137 / Tuesday, July 17, 2018 / Notices
submissions and access the E-Filing Participants who believe that they Exelon Generation Company, LLC,
system for any proceeding in which it have a good cause for not submitting Docket Nos. 50–277 and 50–278, Peach
is participating; and (2) advise the documents electronically must file an Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit Nos.
Secretary that the participant will be exemption request, in accordance with 2 and 3 (Peach Bottom), York County,
submitting a petition or other 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper Pennsylvania
adjudicatory document (even in filing stating why there is good cause for Date of amendment request: June 21,
instances in which the participant, or its not filing electronically and requesting 2018.
counsel or representative, already holds authorization to continue to submit Description of amendments: The
an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). documents in paper format. Such filings amendments revised the Peach Bottom
Based upon this information, the must be submitted by: (1) First class Technical Specifications (TSs) for a one-
Secretary will establish an electronic mail addressed to the Office of the time suspension of the emergency diesel
docket for the hearing in this proceeding Secretary of the Commission, U.S. generator (EDG) No. 4 (E–4) surveillance
if the Secretary has not already Nuclear Regulatory Commission, requirements. Specifically, the
established an electronic docket. Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention: amendments revised TS Surveillance
Information about applying for a Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or Requirements 3.8.1.2, 3.8.1.3, 3.8.1.6,
digital ID certificate is available on the (2) courier, express mail, or expedited and 3.8.3.4 to suspend performing
NRC’s public website at http:// delivery service to the Office of the required monthly surveillance testing
www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/ Secretary, 11555 Rockville Pike, on the E–4 EDG until the E–3 EDG is
getting-started.html. Once a participant Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: returned to operable status, not to
has obtained a digital ID certificate and Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. exceed 2205 hours Eastern Time on June
a docket has been created, the Participants filing adjudicatory 27, 2018.
participant can then submit documents in this manner are Date of issuance: June 23, 2018.
adjudicatory documents. Submissions responsible for serving the document on Effective date: June 23, 2018.
must be in Portable Document Format all other participants. Filing is Amendment Nos.: 318 (Unit 1) and
(PDF). Additional guidance on PDF considered complete by first-class mail 321 (Unit 2). A publicly-available
submissions is available on the NRC’s as of the time of deposit in the mail, or version is in ADAMS under Accession
public website at http://www.nrc.gov/ by courier, express mail, or expedited No. ML18173A042. Documents related
site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A delivery service upon depositing the to these amendments are listed in the
filing is considered complete at the time document with the provider of the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the
the document is submitted through the service. A presiding officer, having amendments.
NRC’s E-Filing system. To be timely, an granted an exemption request from Renewed Facility Operating License
electronic filing must be submitted to using E-Filing, may require a participant Nos. DPR–44 and DPR–56: The
the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 or party to use E-Filing if the presiding amendments revised the Renewed
p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. officer subsequently determines that the Facility Operating Licenses and TSs.
Upon receipt of a transmission, the E- reason for granting the exemption from Public comments requested as to
Filing system time-stamps the document use of E-Filing no longer exists. proposed no significant hazards
and sends the submitter an email notice Documents submitted in adjudicatory consideration: No.
confirming receipt of the document. The proceedings will appear in the NRC’s The Commission’s related evaluation
E-Filing system also distributes an email electronic hearing docket which is of the amendments, finding of
notice that provides access to the available to the public at https:// emergency circumstances, State
document to the NRC’s Office of the adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded consultation, and final no significant
General Counsel and any others who pursuant to an order of the Commission hazards consideration determination are
have advised the Office of the Secretary or the presiding officer. If you do not contained in a Safety Evaluation dated
that they wish to participate in the have an NRC-issued digital ID certificate June 23, 2018.
proceeding, so that the filer need not as described above, click cancel when Attorney for licensee: J. Bradley
serve the document on those the link requests certificates and you Fewell, Vice President and Deputy
participants separately. Therefore, will be automatically directed to the General Counsel, Exelon Generation
applicants and other participants (or NRC’s electronic hearing dockets where Company, LLC, 200 Exelon Way,
their counsel or representative) must you will be able to access any publicly Kennett Square, PA 19348.
apply for and receive a digital ID available documents in a particular NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna.
certificate before adjudicatory hearing docket. Participants are Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day
documents are filed so that they can requested not to include personal of July 2018.
obtain access to the documents via the privacy information, such as social For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
E-Filing system. security numbers, home addresses, or Gregory F. Suber,
A person filing electronically using personal phone numbers in their filings, Deputy Director, Division of Operating
the NRC’s adjudicatory E-Filing system unless an NRC regulation or other law Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
may seek assistance by contacting the requires submission of such Regulation.
NRC’s Electronic Filing Help Desk information. For example, in some [FR Doc. 2018–14779 Filed 7–16–18; 8:45 am]
through the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link located instances, individuals provide home BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
on the NRC’s public website at http:// addresses in order to demonstrate
www.nrc.gov/site-help/e- proximity to a facility or site. With
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
submittals.html, by email to respect to copyrighted works, except for SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll- limited excerpts that serve the purpose COMMISSION
free call at 1–866–672–7640. The NRC of the adjudicatory filings and would
Electronic Filing Help Desk is available constitute a Fair Use application, Sunshine Act Meetings
between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., Eastern participants are requested not to include
Time, Monday through Friday, copyrighted materials in their TIME AND DATE: 2:00 p.m. on Thursday,
excluding government holidays. submission. July 19, 2018.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:07 Jul 16, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\17JYN1.SGM 17JYN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_33400/page/14.svg)
Document Created: 2018-07-17 01:38:35
Document Modified: 2018-07-17 01:38:35
| 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 | Biweekly notice. | |
| Dates | Comments must be filed by August 16, 2018. A request for a hearing must be filed by September 17, 2018. | |
| Contact | Janet C. Burkhardt, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1384, email: [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 33263 |
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR