83 FR 48463 - 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 186 (September 25, 2018)

Page Range		48463-48470
FR Document		2018-20333
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 August 28, 2018 to September 10, 2018. The last biweekly notice was published on September 11, 2018.
Federal Register, Volume 83 Issue 186 (Tuesday, September 25, 2018)
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 186 (Tuesday, September 25, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48463-48470]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2018-20333]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2018-0208]


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.

[[Page 48464]]

    This biweekly notice includes all notices of amendments issued, or 
proposed to be issued, from August 28, 2018 to September 10, 2018. The 
last biweekly notice was published on September 11, 2018.

DATES: Comments must be filed by October 25, 2018. A request for a 
hearing must be filed by November 26, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods 
(unless this document describes a different method for submitting 
comments on a specific subject):
     Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0208. Address 
questions about Docket IDs in Regulations.gov to Jennifer Borges; 
telephone: 301-287-9127; email: [email protected]. For technical 
questions, contact the individual(s) listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.
     Mail comments to: 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: Kay Goldstein, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1506, email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments

A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0208 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-2018-0208.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the 
ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS 
Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public 
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or 
by email to [email protected]. The ADAMS accession number for each 
document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first 
time that it is mentioned in this document.
     NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public 
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2018-0208, 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 Sec.  50.92 of title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (10 CFR), this means that operation of the facility 
in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated, or (2) create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or 
(3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The basis 
for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown 
below.
    The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed 
determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of 
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final 
determination.
    Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the 
expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The 
Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-
day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment 
involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the 
Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-
day comment period if circumstances change during the 30-day comment 
period such that failure to act in a timely way would result, for 
example in derating or shutdown of the facility. If the Commission 
takes action prior to the expiration of either the comment period or 
the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a notice of 
issuance. If the Commission makes a final no significant hazards 
consideration determination, any hearing will take place after 
issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will 
occur very infrequently.

A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To Intervene

    Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any 
persons (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may 
file a request for a hearing and petition for leave to intervene 
(petition) with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in 
accordance with the Commission's ``Agency Rules of Practice and 
Procedure'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a 
current copy of 10 CFR 2.309. The NRC's regulations are accessible 
electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. Alternatively, a copy of 
the regulations is available at the NRC's Public Document Room, located 
at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 
floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, the 
Commission or a presiding officer will rule on the petition and, if 
appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be issued.
    As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the petition should specifically 
explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with 
particular reference to the following general requirements for 
standing: (1) The name, address, and

[[Page 48465]]

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 [email protected], or by 
telephone at 301-415-1677, to (1) request a digital identification (ID) 
certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or 
representative) to digitally sign submissions and access the E-Filing 
system for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise 
the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a petition or 
other adjudicatory document (even in instances in which the 
participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-
issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the 
Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this 
proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic 
docket.
    Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is 
available on the NRC's public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. Once a participant has obtained a 
digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant 
can then submit adjudicatory documents. Submissions must be in Portable 
Document Format (PDF). Additional guidance on PDF submissions is 
available on the NRC's public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A filing is considered complete at the 
time

[[Page 48466]]

the document is submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be 
timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system 
no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of 
a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends 
the submitter an email notice confirming receipt of the document. The 
E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access 
to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any 
others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to 
participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the 
document on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and 
other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for 
and receive a digital ID certificate before adjudicatory documents are 
filed so that they can obtain access to the documents via the E-Filing 
system.
    A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-
Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's Electronic 
Filing Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC's 
public website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by 
email to [email protected], or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-
7640. The NRC Electronic Filing Help Desk is available between 9 a.m. 
and 6 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government 
holidays.
    Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not 
submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in 
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing 
stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and 
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper 
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail 
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: 
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or 
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and 
Adjudications Staff. Participants filing adjudicatory documents in this 
manner are responsible for serving the document on all other 
participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of 
the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or 
expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the 
provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an 
exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant or 
party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer subsequently determines 
that the reason for granting the exemption from use of E-Filing no 
longer exists.
    Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the 
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at 
https://adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the 
Commission or the presiding officer. If you do not have an NRC-issued 
digital ID certificate as described above, click cancel when the link 
requests certificates and you will be automatically directed to the 
NRC's electronic hearing dockets where you will be able to access any 
publicly available documents in a particular hearing docket. 
Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, 
such as social security numbers, home addresses, or personal phone 
numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law 
requires submission of such information. For example, in some 
instances, individuals provide home addresses in order to demonstrate 
proximity to a facility or site. With respect to copyrighted works, 
except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory 
filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are 
requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission.
    For further details with respect to these license amendment 
applications, see the application for amendment which is available for 
public inspection in ADAMS and at the NRC's PDR. For additional 
direction on accessing information related to this document, see the 
``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' section of this 
document.

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-
364, Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Houston County, 
Alabama

    Date of amendment request: July 27, 2018. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18208A619.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would 
modify Technical Specification requirements to permit use of Risk 
Informed Completion Times in accordance with NEI 06-09, Revision 0-A, 
``Risk-Informed Technical Specifications Initiative 4b, Risk-Managed 
Technical Specifications (RMTS) Guidelines.''
    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 [change] involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change permits the extension of completion times 
provided risk is assessed and managed within the Risk Informed 
Completion Time Program. The proposed change does not involve a 
significant increase in the probability of an accident previously 
evaluated because the changes involve no change to the plant or its 
mode of operation. The proposed change does not increase the 
consequences of an accident because the design-basis mitigation 
function of the affected systems is not changed and the consequences 
of an accident during the extended completion time are no different 
from those during the existing COMPLETION TIME.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed TS revision does not change the design, 
configuration, or method of plant operation. The proposed change 
does not involve a physical alteration of the plant in that no new 
or different kind of equipment will be installed.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility 
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change permits the extension of completion times 
provided risk is assessed and managed within the Risk Informed 
Completion Time Program. The proposed change implements a risk-
informed configuration management program to assure that adequate 
safety margins are maintained. Application of these new 
specifications and the configuration management program considers 
cumulative effects of multiple systems or components being out of 
service and does so more effectively than the current TS.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the 
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
    Attorney for licensee: Millicent Ronnlund, Vice President and 
General

[[Page 48467]]

Counsel, Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., P.O. Box 1295, 
Birmingham, AL 35201-1295.

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

    Date of amendment request: July 19, 2018. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18200A415.
    Description of amendment request: The amendment request proposes 
changes to combined license Appendix C (and plant-specific design 
control document Tier 1) to revise Inspections, Tests, Analysis, and 
Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC) related to flow testing of low pressure 
makeup from the cask loading pit to the reactor coolant system via the 
normal residual heat removal system (RNS) and RNs pump testing at 
reduced inventory.
    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 RNS ITAAC revise the acceptance 
criteria for flow testing of low pressure makeup from the CLP [cask 
loading pit] to the RCS [reactor coolant system] (via RNS) and 
clarify the acceptance criteria for RNS pump flow testing at reduced 
inventory. The proposed changes do not have any adverse effects on 
the design functions of the RNS. The probabilities of accidents 
evaluated in the UFSAR [Updated Safety Analysis Report] are not 
affected.
    The changes do not adversely impact the support, design, or 
operation of mechanical and fluid systems. The changes do not impact 
the support, design, or operation of any safety-related structures. 
There is no change to the plant systems or response of systems to 
postulated accident conditions. There is no change to the predicted 
radioactive releases due to normal operation or postulated accident 
conditions. The plant response to previously evaluated accidents or 
external events is not adversely affected, nor do the proposed 
changes create any new accident precursors.
    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 to the RNS ITAAC revise the acceptance 
criteria for flow testing of low pressure makeup from the CLP to the 
RCS (via RNS) and clarify the acceptance criteria for RNS pump flow 
testing at reduced inventory. The proposed changes do not have any 
adverse effects on the design function of the RNS, the structures 
and systems in which the RNS is used, or any other SSC [structure 
system or component] design functions or methods of operation that 
result in a new failure mode, malfunction, or sequence of events 
that affect safety-related or non-safety related equipment. This 
activity does not allow for a new fission product release path, 
result in a new fission product barrier failure mode, or create a 
new sequence of events that result in significant fuel cladding 
failures.
    Therefore, the requested amendment does not create the 
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident 
previously evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed changes to the RNS ITAAC revise the acceptance 
criteria for flow testing of low pressure makeup from the CLP to the 
RCS (via RNS) and clarify the acceptance criteria for RNS pump flow 
testing at reduced inventory.
    Because no safety analysis or design basis acceptance limit/
criterion is challenged or exceeded by these changes, no significant 
margin of safety is reduced. 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: M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 
1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35203-2015.
    NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon-Herrity.

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

    Date of amendment request: August 10, 2018. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18222A254.
    Description of amendment request: The requested amendment proposes 
changes to Combined License Appendix A, Technical Specifications, to 
change Technical Specifications Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 
3.1.8, ``Physics Tests Exception--Mode 2,'' related to Functions of LCO 
3.3.1, ``Reactor Trip System (RTS) Instrumentation,'' for which the 
required number of channels may be reduced from 4 channels to 3 
channels, to include Function 4. Additionally, for LCO 3.8.3, 
``Inverters--Operating,'' the request proposes to make an editorial 
nomenclature change from ``constant voltage source transformer'' to 
``voltage regulating transformer.''
    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 adversely impact the ability of any SSCs provided 
for, or credited in, mitigating any analyzed accident. 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 
adversely 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 of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed changes do not involve changes to current plant 
design or safety analysis assumptions. These changes provide 
Technical Specifications 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

[[Page 48468]]

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.

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

    Date of amendment request: August 3, 2018. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18215A382.
    Description of amendment request: The requested amendment requires 
changes to the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) in the form 
of departures from the incorporated plant-specific Design Control 
Document (DCD) Tier 2* and Tier 2 information and related changes to 
the VEGP Units 3 and 4 Combined License (COL) and COL Appendix C (and 
corresponding plant-specific DCD Tier 1) information. Specifically, the 
requested amendment includes changes to credit previously completed 
first plant only and first three plant only testing as described in the 
licensing basis documents, including COL Condition 2.D.(2)(a) and 
plant-specific Tier 1 Section 2.1.3. In particular, the proposed 
changes would revise the COL to delete conditions requiring the 
following tests: In-Containment Refueling Water Storage Tank (IRWST) 
Heatup Test, Reactor Vessel Internals Vibration Testing, and Core 
Makeup Tank (CMT) Heated Recirculation Tests. The documentation to 
establish a valid prototype reactor internals in accordance with 
Regulatory Guide 1.20 is also included.
    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration 
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has 
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards 
consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change does not affect the operation of any systems 
or equipment that initiates an analyzed accident or alter any 
structures, systems, or components (SSC) accident initiator or 
initiating sequence of events. The proposed changes remove first 
plant and first three plant only tests including the IRWST heatup 
test, reactor vessel internals vibration testing, and CMT 
recirculation tests based on the successful completion of the tests 
at the lead AP1000 units. The change does not adversely affect any 
methodology which would increase the probability or consequences of 
a previously evaluated accident.
    The change does not impact the support, design, or operation of 
mechanical or fluid systems. There is no change to plant systems or 
the response of systems to postulated accident conditions. There is 
no change to predicted radioactive releases due to normal operation 
or postulated accident conditions. The plant response to previously 
evaluated accidents or external events is not adversely affected, 
nor does the proposed change create any new accident precursors.
    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of a previously 
evaluated accident.
    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change does not affect the operation of any systems 
or equipment that may initiate a new or different kind of accident, 
or alter any SSC such that a new accident initiator or initiating 
sequence of events is created.
    The proposed change credits previously completed first plant and 
first three plant only tests including the IRWST heatup test, 
reactor vessel internals vibration testing, and CMT recirculation 
tests based on the successful completion of the tests at the lead 
AP1000 units. The proposed changes do not adversely affect any 
design function of any SSC design functions or methods of operation 
in a manner that results in a new failure mode, malfunction, or 
sequence of events that affect safety-related or non-safety-related 
equipment. This activity does not allow for a new fission product 
release path, result in a new fission product barrier failure mode, 
or create a new sequence of events that result in significant fuel 
cladding failures.
    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the 
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident 
previously evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change maintains existing safety margin and 
provides adequate protection through continued application of the 
existing requirement in the UFSAR. The proposed change satisfies the 
same design functions in accordance with the same codes and 
standards as stated in the UFSAR. This change does not adversely 
affect any design code, function, design analysis, safety analysis 
input or result, or design/safety margin. No safety analysis or 
design basis acceptance limit/criterion is challenged or exceeded by 
the proposed change.
    Since no safety analysis or design basis acceptance limit/
criterion is challenged or exceeded by this change, no significant 
margin of safety is reduced.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the 
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
    Attorney for licensee: Mr. M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham 
LLP, 1710 Sixth Avenue North Birmingham, AL 35203-2015.
    NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon-Herrity.

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.

[[Page 48469]]

Energy Northwest, Docket No. 50-397, Columbia Generating Station, 
Benton County, Washington

    Date of amendment request: December 12, 2017.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised Technical 
Specification (TS) 3.6.4.1, ``Secondary Containment.'' The changes are 
based on Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-551, 
Revision 3, ``Revise Secondary Containment Surveillance Requirements.''
    Date of issuance: September 6, 2018.
    Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 60 days from the date of issuance.
    Amendment No.: 250. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under 
Accession No. ML18221A107; documents related to this amendment are 
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-21: The amendment 
revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical 
Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: March 13, 2018 (83 FR 
10915).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated September 6, 2018.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-244, R. E. Ginna Nuclear 
Power Plant, Wayne County, New York

    Date of amendment request: October 31, 2017.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised Technical 
Specification (TS) Surveillance Requirement 3.8.4.3, ``DC [Direct 
Current] Sources--MODES 1, 2, 3, and 4,'' to allow for a modified 
performance discharge test.
    Date of issuance: August 31, 2018.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 60 days of issuance.
    Amendment No.: 130. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under 
Accession No. ML18214A176; 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 and TS.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: January 2, 2018 (83 FR 
168).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated August 31, 2018.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Nebraska Public Power District, Docket No. 50-298, Cooper Nuclear 
Station (CNS), Nemaha County, Nebraska

    Date of amendment request: May 10, 2018.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment modified CNS 
Technical Specification 2.1.1.2 by revising the values of the safety 
limit minimum critical power ratio for two recirculation loop operation 
and for single recirculation loop operation to reflect the results of a 
cycle-specific calculation.
    Date of issuance: September 6, 2018.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
prior to startup from Refuel Outage 30.
    Amendment No.: 261. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under 
Accession No. ML18218A483; documents related to this amendment are 
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-46: The amendment 
revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical 
Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 2, 2018 (83 FR 
30984).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated September 6, 2018.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Georgia Power Company, 
Oglethorpe Power Corporation, Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, 
City of Dalton, Georgia, Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366, Edwin I. Hatch 
Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Appling County, Georgia

    Date of amendment request: July 10, 2017. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML17191B163.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments revise the 
Technical Specifications (TSs) by: (1) Adding a Note to the 
Surveillance Requirements (SRs) of TS 3.7.7 to clarify that the SRs are 
not required to be met when the Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) 
does not require the Main Turbine Bypass System to be operable; (2) 
clarifying that LCO 3.2.3, ``LINEAR HEAT GENERATION RATE,'' also has 
limits for an inoperable Main Turbine Bypass System that are made 
applicable as specified in the Core Operating Limits Report; and (3) 
deleting an outdated footnote for LCO 3.2.3.
    Date of issuance: August 29, 2018.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 90 days from the date of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: Unit 1--292, Unit 2--237. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18222A296; documents related 
to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with 
the amendments.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-57 and NPF-5: 
Amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and 
Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 21, 2017 (82 
FR 55412).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated August 29, 2018.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

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

    Date of amendment request: January 31, 2018, as supplemented by 
letters dated April 25, and June 21, 2018.
    Description of amendment: The amendments make changes to the VEGP 
Units 3 and 4 Combined Operating License (COL) in the form of departure 
from the approved COL Appendix A, Technical Specifications. The 
amendments make changes to COL Appendix A, Surveillance Requirement 
3.8.7.6 to align the test frequency with the expected life of the 
AP1000 Class 1E batteries.
    Date of issuance: The amendments were issued on July 26, 2018.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 30 days of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: 135 (Unit 3) and 134 (Unit 4). A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18173A301; documents related 
to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the 
amendment.
    Facility Combined Licenses Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92: Amendment 
revised the Facility Combined License.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: April 24, 2018 (83 FR 
17858). The supplements dated April 25, 2018 and June 21, 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

[[Page 48470]]

original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in the Safety Evaluation dated July 26, 2018.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

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

    Date of amendment request: June 15, 2018 and supplemented on June 
25, 2018 and July 10, 2018.
    Description of amendment: The amendment revises commitments related 
to the construction fitness-for-duty (FFD) program described in the 
VEGP Units 3 and 4 Updated Final Safety Analysis Report. Specifically, 
the change involves the creation of a new type of FFD Authorization 
that allows construction workers temporary access to the construction 
site pending completion of all pre-access FFD requirements. The 
individuals will not be given assignments to work on safety or 
security-related structures, systems, and components prior to the 
completion of the FFD requirements.
    Date of issuance: August 29, 2018.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 30 days of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: 141 (Unit 3) and 140 (Unit 4). A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18214A659; documents related 
to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the 
amendment.
    Facility Combined Licenses No. NPF-91 and NPF-92: Amendment revised 
the Facility Combined Licenses.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 27, 2018 (83 FR 
30199). The supplements dated June 25, 2018, and July 10, 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 the Safety Evaluation dated August 29, 2018.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Docket Nos. 50-327 and 50-328, 
Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (SQN), Units 1 and 2, Hamilton County, Tennessee

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

    Date of amendment request: August 7, 2017.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised technical 
specifications (TSs) limiting conditions for operation and surveillance 
requirements related to the reactor trip system instrumentation for all 
four units.
    Date of issuance: August 30, 2018.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
in 30 days.
    Amendment Nos.: SQN, 343 (Unit 1) and 336 (Unit 2); and WBN, 122 
(Unit 1) and 21 (Unit 2). A publicly-available version is in ADAMS 
under Accession No. ML18197A307; documents related to these amendments 
are listed in the Safety Evaluation (SE) enclosed with the amendments.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-77, DPR-79 and Facility 
Operating License Nos, NPF-90 and NPF-96: Amendments revised the 
Facility Operating Licenses and TSs.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 21, 2017 (82 
FR 55416).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in SE dated August 30, 2018.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, on September 14, 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Kathryn M. Brock,
Acting Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of 
Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2018-20333 Filed 9-24-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 186 / Tuesday, September 25, 2018 / Notices 48463

responded on August 29, 2018, stating in four specific geographic regions of requirements in 10 CFR part 51, the
that the WY SHPO would not be the western United States. Smith Ranch NRC staff has determined that renewal
commenting, considering its Project properties are located in two of of source materials license SUA–1548
understanding that Section 106 these four regions. for the Smith Ranch Project would not
consultation was completed during the Where applicable, this EA significantly affect the quality of the
original licensing for the project incorporates by reference relevant human environment. In its license
(ADAMS Accession No. ML18242A349). portions from the GEIS, and uses site- renewal request, Cameco proposed
On August 9, 2018, the NRC staff specific information from Cameco’s increased ground water flowrates at
made sections of the draft EA license renewal application and certain of the project properties with
concerning historic and cultural responses to NRC staff requests for previously approved uranium recovery
resources available on the NRC public additional information, and from to commence at the Reynolds Ranch
web page for the Smith Ranch Project independent sources to fulfill the satellite and at the Gas Hills remote
for public comment at https:// requirements in 10 CFR 51.20(b)(8). satellite site. No other significant
www.nrc.gov/materials/uranium- License SUA–1548 authorizes Cameco changes in Cameco’s authorized
recovery/license-apps/smith-ranch/ to conduct ISR operations at four operations for the Smith Ranch Project
section106-smith-ranch.html. On the properties under the Smith Ranch were requested. Approval of the
same date, the NRC staff also made Project located in Wyoming: The proposed action would not result in an
these same sections of the draft EA contiguous Smith Ranch, Highland, and increased radiological risk to public
available to the Tribal Historic Reynolds Ranch properties in Converse health or the environment. The NRC
Preservation Officers (THPOs) from 27 County; the North Butte remote satellite staff has determined that pursuant to 10
Native American Tribes for their review site in Campbell County; the Ruth CFR 51.31, preparation of an EIS is not
and comment. remote satellite site in Johnson County; required for the proposed action and
No comments were received from and the Gas Hills remote satellite site in that, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, a FONSI
members of the public. In response to Fremont and Natrona Counties. is appropriate.
comments received from the THPO for In the EA, the NRC staff assessed the
the Northern Arapaho Tribe (ADAMS potential environmental impacts from Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day
Accession No. ML18247A228), the NRC the continued construction, operation, of September 2018.
staff hosted two conference calls, on aquifer restoration, and For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
August 28 and 30, 2018, to discuss the decommissioning of the sites under the Craig G. Erlanger,
staff’s approach concerning protection Smith Ranch Project. The NRC staff Director, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety,
of historic and cultural resources assessed the impacts of the proposed Safeguards, and Environmental Review,
(ADAMS Accession No. ML18243A262); action on land use; historical and Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
no THPOs attended these calls. The cultural resources; visual and scenic Safeguards.
NRC staff also held a conference call resources; climatology, meteorology and [FR Doc. 2018–20793 Filed 9–24–18; 8:45 am]
with the Northern Cheyenne THPO on air quality; geology, minerals, and soils; BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
August 31, 2018 (ADAMS Accession water resources; ecological resources;
No. ML18260A046). No written socioeconomics; noise; traffic and
comments were received from the transportation; public and occupational NUCLEAR REGULATORY
Northern Cheyenne THPO. However, health and safety; and waste COMMISSION
the NRC staff addressed the Northern management. [NRC–2018–0208]
Arapaho THPO’s comments provided on In addition to the action proposed by
August 31, 2018, conference call in the the licensee, the NRC staff addressed the Biweekly Notice; Applications and
final EA. No-Action Alternative that serves as a Amendments to Facility Operating
baseline for comparison of the potential Licenses and Combined Licenses
Additional Information
environmental impacts of the proposed Involving No Significant Hazards
The NRC staff conducted its action. Under the No-Action Considerations
environmental review in accordance Alternative, the NRC staff would deny
with 10 CFR part 51, which implements renewal of License SUA–1548. AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory
the requirements of the National After weighing the impacts of the Commission.
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as proposed license renewal and ACTION: Biweekly notice.
amended (NEPA) and following the comparing to the No-Action Alternative,
NRC staff guidance in NUREG–1748, the NRC staff, in accordance with 10 SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 189a.(2)
‘‘Environmental Review Guidance for CFR 51.91(d), sets forth its NEPA of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
Licensing Actions Associated with recommendation regarding the proposed amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear
NMSS Programs’’ (ADAMS Accession action (granting the NRC license Regulatory Commission (NRC) is
No. ML032450279). renewal request for the Smith Ranch publishing this regular biweekly notice.
In May 2009, the NRC staff issued Project). Unless safety issues mandate The Act requires the Commission to
NUREG–1910, ‘‘Generic Environmental otherwise, the NRC staff publish notice of any amendments
Impact Statement for In-Situ Leach recommendation related to the issued, or proposed to be issued, and
Uranium Milling Facilities’’ (herein environmental aspects of the proposed grants the Commission the authority to
referred to as the GEIS) (ADAMS action is that a renewed NRC license be issue and make immediately effective
Accession No. ML15093A368 and issued. The EA for the proposed any amendment to an operating license
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES

ML15093A486). In the GEIS, the NRC renewal of License SUA–1548 may be or combined license, as applicable,
staff assessed the potential accessed at ADAMS Accession No. upon a determination by the
environmental impacts from ML18257A071. Commission that such amendment
construction, operation, aquifer involves no significant hazards
restoration, and decommissioning of an III. Finding of No Significant Impact consideration, notwithstanding the
in-situ leach uranium milling facility Based on its review of the proposed pendency before the Commission of a
(also known as an ISR facility) located action, and in accordance with the request for a hearing from any person.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:40 Sep 24, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25SEN1.SGM 25SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 186 / Tuesday, September 25, 2018 / Notices 48465

telephone number of the petitioner; (2) determination on the issue of no B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)
the nature of the petitioner’s right under significant hazards consideration. The All documents filed in NRC
the Act to be made a party to the final determination will serve to adjudicatory proceedings, including a
proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of establish when the hearing is held. If the request for hearing and petition for
the petitioner’s property, financial, or final determination is that the leave to intervene (petition), any motion
other interest in the proceeding; and (4) amendment request involves no or other document filed in the
the possible effect of any decision or significant hazards consideration, the proceeding prior to the submission of a
order which may be entered in the Commission may issue the amendment request for hearing or petition to
proceeding on the petitioner’s interest. and make it immediately effective, intervene, and documents filed by
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), notwithstanding the request for a interested governmental entities that
the petition must also set forth the hearing. Any hearing would take place request to participate under 10 CFR
specific contentions which the after issuance of the amendment. If the 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance
petitioner seeks to have litigated in the final determination is that the with the NRC’s E-Filing rule (72 FR
proceeding. Each contention must amendment request involves a
49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at
consist of a specific statement of the significant hazards consideration, then
77 FR 46562; August 3, 2012). The E-
issue of law or fact to be raised or any hearing held would take place
controverted. In addition, the petitioner Filing process requires participants to
before the issuance of the amendment
must provide a brief explanation of the submit and serve all adjudicatory
unless the Commission finds an
bases for the contention and a concise documents over the internet, or in some
imminent danger to the health or safety
statement of the alleged facts or expert cases to mail copies on electronic
of the public, in which case it will issue
opinion which support the contention storage media. Detailed guidance on
an appropriate order or rule under 10
and on which the petitioner intends to making electronic submissions may be
CFR part 2.
rely in proving the contention at the A State, local governmental body, found in the Guidance for Electronic
hearing. The petitioner must also Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC
provide references to the specific agency thereof, may submit a petition to website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/
sources and documents on which the the Commission to participate as a party e-submittals.html. Participants may not
petitioner intends to rely to support its under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition submit paper copies of their filings
position on the issue. The petition must should state the nature and extent of the unless they seek an exemption in
include sufficient information to show petitioner’s interest in the proceeding. accordance with the procedures
that a genuine dispute exists with the The petition should be submitted to the described below.
applicant or licensee on a material issue Commission no later than 60 days from To comply with the procedural
of law or fact. Contentions must be the date of publication of this notice. requirements of E-Filing, at least 10
limited to matters within the scope of The petition must be filed in accordance days prior to the filing deadline, the
the proceeding. The contention must be with the filing instructions in the participant should contact the Office of
one which, if proven, would entitle the ‘‘Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)’’ the Secretary by email at
petitioner to relief. A petitioner who section of this document, and should hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone
fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 meet the requirements for petitions set at 301–415–1677, to (1) request a digital
CFR 2.309(f) with respect to at least one forth in this section, except that under identification (ID) certificate, which
contention will not be permitted to 10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local allows the participant (or its counsel or
participate as a party. governmental body, or Federally- representative) to digitally sign
Those permitted to intervene become recognized Indian Tribe, or agency submissions and access the E-Filing
parties to the proceeding, subject to any thereof does not need to address the system for any proceeding in which it
limitations in the order granting leave to standing requirements in 10 CFR is participating; and (2) advise the
intervene. Parties have the opportunity 2.309(d) if the facility is located within Secretary that the participant will be
to participate fully in the conduct of the its boundaries. Alternatively, a State, submitting a petition or other
hearing with respect to resolution of local governmental body, Federally- adjudicatory document (even in
that party’s admitted contentions, recognized Indian Tribe, or agency instances in which the participant, or its
including the opportunity to present thereof may participate as a non-party counsel or representative, already holds
evidence, consistent with the NRC’s under 10 CFR 2.315(c). an NRC-issued digital ID certificate).
regulations, policies, and procedures. If a hearing is granted, any person Based upon this information, the
Petitions must be filed no later than who is not a party to the proceeding and Secretary will establish an electronic
60 days from the date of publication of is not affiliated with or represented by docket for the hearing in this proceeding
this notice. Petitions and motions for a party may, at the discretion of the if the Secretary has not already
leave to file new or amended presiding officer, be permitted to make established an electronic docket.
contentions that are filed after the a limited appearance pursuant to the Information about applying for a
deadline will not be entertained absent provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person digital ID certificate is available on the
a determination by the presiding officer making a limited appearance may make NRC’s public website at http://
that the filing demonstrates good cause an oral or written statement of his or her www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/
by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR position on the issues but may not getting-started.html. Once a participant
2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii). The petition otherwise participate in the proceeding. has obtained a digital ID certificate and
must be filed in accordance with the A limited appearance may be made at a docket has been created, the
filing instructions in the ‘‘Electronic any session of the hearing or at any participant can then submit
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES

Submissions (E-Filing)’’ section of this prehearing conference, subject to the adjudicatory documents. Submissions
document. limits and conditions as may be must be in Portable Document Format
If a hearing is requested, and the imposed by the presiding officer. Details (PDF). Additional guidance on PDF
Commission has not made a final regarding the opportunity to make a submissions is available on the NRC’s
determination on the issue of no limited appearance will be provided by public website at http://www.nrc.gov/
significant hazards consideration, the the presiding officer if such sessions are site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A
Commission will make a final scheduled. filing is considered complete at the time

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:40 Sep 24, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25SEN1.SGM 25SEN1
48468 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 186 / Tuesday, September 25, 2018 / Notices

satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff completion of the tests at the lead AP1000 The NRC staff has reviewed the
proposes to determine that the units. The change does not adversely affect licensee’s analysis and, based on this
amendment request involves no any methodology which would increase the review, it appears that the three
significant hazards consideration. probability or consequences of a previously
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
Attorney for licensee: M. Stanford evaluated accident.
The change does not impact the support,
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 1710 design, or operation of mechanical or fluid proposes to determine that the
Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL systems. There is no change to plant systems amendment request involves no
35203–2015. or the response of systems to postulated significant hazards consideration.
NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon- accident conditions. There is no change to Attorney for licensee: Mr. M. Stanford
Herrity. predicted radioactive releases due to normal
Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 1710
operation or postulated accident conditions.
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Sixth Avenue North Birmingham, AL
The plant response to previously evaluated
Inc., Docket Nos.: 52–025 and 52–026, accidents or external events is not adversely 35203–2015.
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP) affected, nor does the proposed change create NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon-
Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia any new accident precursors. Herrity.
Date of amendment request: August 3, Therefore, the proposed amendment does
2018. A publicly-available version is in not involve a significant increase in the III. Notice of Issuance of Amendments
ADAMS under Accession No. probability or consequences of a previously to Facility Operating Licenses and
evaluated accident. Combined Licenses
ML18215A382. 2. Does the proposed amendment create
Description of amendment request: the possibility of a new or different kind of During the period since publication of
The requested amendment requires accident from any accident previously the last biweekly notice, the
changes to the Updated Final Safety evaluated? Commission has issued the following
Analysis Report (UFSAR) in the form of Response: No. amendments. The Commission has
departures from the incorporated plant- The proposed change does not affect the
determined for each of these
specific Design Control Document operation of any systems or equipment that
(DCD) Tier 2* and Tier 2 information may initiate a new or different kind of amendments that the application
and related changes to the VEGP Units accident, or alter any SSC such that a new complies with the standards and
3 and 4 Combined License (COL) and accident initiator or initiating sequence of requirements of the Atomic Energy Act
COL Appendix C (and corresponding events is created. of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the
plant-specific DCD Tier 1) information.
The proposed change credits previously Commission’s rules and regulations.
completed first plant and first three plant The Commission has made appropriate
Specifically, the requested amendment only tests including the IRWST heatup test,
includes changes to credit previously findings as required by the Act and the
reactor vessel internals vibration testing, and Commission’s rules and regulations in
completed first plant only and first three CMT recirculation tests based on the
plant only testing as described in the successful completion of the tests at the lead
10 CFR chapter I, which are set forth in
licensing basis documents, including AP1000 units. The proposed changes do not the license amendment.
COL Condition 2.D.(2)(a) and plant- adversely affect any design function of any A notice of consideration of issuance
specific Tier 1 Section 2.1.3. In SSC design functions or methods of of amendment to facility operating
particular, the proposed changes would operation in a manner that results in a new license or combined license, as
revise the COL to delete conditions failure mode, malfunction, or sequence of applicable, proposed no significant
events that affect safety-related or non-safety-
requiring the following tests: In- hazards consideration determination,
related equipment. This activity does not
Containment Refueling Water Storage allow for a new fission product release path, and opportunity for a hearing in
Tank (IRWST) Heatup Test, Reactor result in a new fission product barrier failure connection with these actions, was
Vessel Internals Vibration Testing, and mode, or create a new sequence of events that published in the Federal Register as
Core Makeup Tank (CMT) Heated result in significant fuel cladding failures. indicated.
Recirculation Tests. The documentation Therefore, the proposed amendment does Unless otherwise indicated, the
to establish a valid prototype reactor not create the possibility of a new or different
Commission has determined that these
internals in accordance with Regulatory kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
amendments satisfy the criteria for
Guide 1.20 is also included. categorical exclusion in accordance
Basis for proposed no significant 3. Does the proposed amendment involve
a significant reduction in a margin of safety? with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant
hazards consideration determination: to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental
Response: No.
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the The proposed change maintains existing impact statement or environmental
licensee has provided its analysis of the safety margin and provides adequate assessment need be prepared for these
issue of no significant hazards protection through continued application of amendments. If the Commission has
consideration, which is presented the existing requirement in the UFSAR. The prepared an environmental assessment
below: proposed change satisfies the same design under the special circumstances
1. Does the proposed amendment involve functions in accordance with the same codes
provision in 10 CFR 51.22(b) and has
a significant increase in the probability or and standards as stated in the UFSAR. This
change does not adversely affect any design
made a determination based on that
consequences of an accident previously assessment, it is so indicated.
evaluated? code, function, design analysis, safety
Response: No. analysis input or result, or design/safety For further details with respect to the
The proposed change does not affect the margin. No safety analysis or design basis action see (1) the applications for
operation of any systems or equipment that acceptance limit/criterion is challenged or amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3)
daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES

initiates an analyzed accident or alter any exceeded by the proposed change. the Commission’s related letter, Safety
structures, systems, or components (SSC) Since no safety analysis or design basis
Evaluation and/or Environmental
accident initiator or initiating sequence of acceptance limit/criterion is challenged or
events. The proposed changes remove first exceeded by this change, no significant Assessment as indicated. All of these
plant and first three plant only tests margin of safety is reduced. items can be accessed as described in
including the IRWST heatup test, reactor Therefore, the proposed change does not the ‘‘Obtaining Information and
vessel internals vibration testing, and CMT involve a significant reduction in a margin of Submitting Comments’’ section of this
recirculation tests based on the successful safety. document.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:40 Sep 24, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25SEN1.SGM 25SEN1
Document Created: 2018-09-25 00:22:21
Document Modified: 2018-09-25 00:22:21
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 October 25, 2018. A request for a hearing must be filed by November 26, 2018.
Contact		Kay Goldstein, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-1506, email: [email protected]
FR Citation		83 FR 48463