ML16230A613

NRR E-mail Capture - Fermi 2 - NRC Issuance of Amendment Associated with Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.5.1.4

ML16230A613
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	08/17/2016
From:	Sujata Goetz Plant Licensing Branch III
To:	Yale K State of MI
References
Download: ML16230A613 (16)

Text

NRR-PMDAPEm Resource From: Goetz, Sujata Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2016 3:26 PM To: yalek@michigan.gov Cc: Goetz, Sujata

Subject:

RE: Fermi 2 - NRC Issuance of Amendment associated with Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.5.1.4 Attachments: FRN notice.pdf Mr. Yale, The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is in the process of approving a license amendment request from DTE Electric Company, for Fermi 2.

The proposed amendment would allow for permanent extension of the Type A primary containment integrated leak rate test interval to15 years and extension of the Type C test interval up to 75 months. The amendment also proposes two administrative changes. The first changes revises Technical Specification (TS) 5.5.12 to remove a one-time extension of the Type A test frequency. The second change would revise the Fermi 2 Operating License, Section D, to remove a reference to an exemption regarding Appendix J testing of containment air lock.

The NRC staffs proposed no significant hazard consideration determination was published in the Federal Register on June 7, 2016 (81 FR 36613).

Please let me know if you have any comments on this action. I can be reached at 301-415-8004.

Thanks, Sue Sujata Goetz Project Manager NRC, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation NRC/NRR/DORL/LPL3-1, O8C10 Washington, DC 20555-0001 301.415.8004, 301.415.3313 (fax)

Mail Stop O8H4A 1

Hearing Identifier: NRR_PMDA Email Number: 2999 Mail Envelope Properties (Sujata.Goetz@nrc.gov20160817152600)

Subject:

RE: Fermi 2 - NRC Issuance of Amendment associated with Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.5.1.4 Sent Date: 8/17/2016 3:26:03 PM Received Date: 8/17/2016 3:26:00 PM From: Goetz, Sujata Created By: Sujata.Goetz@nrc.gov Recipients:

"Goetz, Sujata" <Sujata.Goetz@nrc.gov>

Tracking Status: None "yalek@michigan.gov" <yalek@michigan.gov>

Tracking Status: None Post Office:

Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 1154 8/17/2016 3:26:00 PM FRN notice.pdf 280593 Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date:

Recipients Received:

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Notices 36613 and SRP-LR. In this way, the NRC staff NUCLEAR REGULATORY Regulation, telephone: 301-415-1506, and stakeholders may use the guidance COMMISSION email: Kay.Goldstein@nrc.gov and Lynn in an LR-ISG document before it is Ronewicz, Office of Nuclear Reactor

[NRC-2016-0107]

incorporated into a formal license Regulation, telephone: 301-415-1927, renewal guidance document revision. Biweekly Notice, Applications and email: Lynn.Ronewicz@nrc.gov. Both are The NRC staff issues LR-ISGs in Amendments to Facility Operating staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory accordance with the LR-ISG Process, Licenses and Combined Licenses Commission, Washington DC 20555-Revision 2 (ADAMS Accession No. Involving No Significant Hazards 0001.

ML100920158), for which a notice of Considerations SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

availability was published in the Federal Register on June 22, 2010 (75 AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory I. Obtaining Information and FR 35510). Commission. Submitting Comments The NRC also plans to consider the ACTION: Biweekly notice.

A. Obtaining Information information in this LR-ISG and make

SUMMARY

Pursuant to Section 189a. (2) Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2016-corresponding changes when finalizing of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 0107 when contacting the NRC about the draft aging management guidance amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear the availability of information for this for the subsequent license renewal Regulatory Commission (NRC) is action. You may obtain publicly-period (i.e., up to 80 years of operation),

publishing this regular biweekly notice. available information related to this which is documented in draft NUREG- The Act requires the Commission to 2191, Generic Aging Lessons Learned action by any of the following methods:

for Subsequent License Renewal publish notice of any amendments

• Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to issued, or proposed to be issued, and http://www.regulations.gov and search (GALL-SLR) Report, and draft grants the Commission the authority to NUREG-2192, Standard Review Plan for Docket ID NRC-2016-0107.

issue and make immediately effective

• NRCs Agencywide Documents for Review of Subsequent License any amendment to an operating license Access and Management System Renewal Applications for Nuclear or combined license, as applicable, (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-Power Plants, if it is practicable to do upon a determination by the available documents online in the so in terms of the guidance development Commission that such amendment ADAMS Public Documents collection at schedule. involves no significant hazards http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/

III. Proposed Action consideration, notwithstanding the adams.html. To begin the search, select pendency before the Commission of a ADAMS Public Documents and then By this action, the NRC is requesting request for a hearing from any person.

public comments on draft LR-ISG- select Begin Web-based ADAMS This biweekly notice includes all Search. For problems with ADAMS, 2016-01. This LR-ISG proposes certain notices of amendments issued, or revisions to NRC guidance on please contact the NRCs Public proposed to be issued from May 10, Document Room (PDR) reference staff at implementation of the requirements in 2016, to May 23, 2016. The last 10 CFR part 54. The NRC staff will make 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by biweekly notice was published on May email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The a final determination regarding issuance 24, 2016 (81 FR 32800).

of the LR-ISG after it considers any ADAMS accession number for each DATES: Comments must be filed by July document referenced (if it is available in public comments received in response 7, 2016. A request for a hearing must be to this request. ADAMS) is provided the first time that filed by August 8, 2016. it is mentioned in the SUPPLEMENTARY IV. Backfitting ADDRESSES: You may submit comments INFORMATION section of this document.

Issuance of this LR-ISG in final form by any of the following methods (unless

• NRCs PDR: You may examine and this document describes a different purchase copies of public documents at would not constitute backfitting as method for submitting comments on a the NRCs PDR, Room O1-F21, One defined in 10 CFR 50.109 (the Backfit specific subject): White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Rule). As discussed in the Backfitting

• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to section of draft LR-ISG-2016-01, the Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

http://www.regulations.gov and search LR-ISG is directed to holders of for Docket ID NRC-2016-0107. Address B. Submitting Comments operating licenses who are currently in questions about NRC dockets to Carol Please include Docket ID NRC-2016-the license renewal process. The LR- Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; 0107, facility name, unit number(s),

ISG is not directed to holders of email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For application date, and subject in your operating licenses or combined licenses technical questions, contact the comment submission.

until they apply for license renewal. individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER The NRC cautions you not to include The LR-ISG also is not directed to INFORMATION CONTACT section of this identifying or contact information that licensees who already hold renewed document. you do not want to be publicly operating licenses. However, the NRC

• Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, disclosed in your comment submission.

could also use the LR-ISG in evaluating Office of Administration, Mail Stop: The NRC will post all comment voluntary, licensee-initiated changes to OWFN-12-H08, U.S. Nuclear submissions at http://

previously-approved AMPs. Regulatory Commission, Washington, www.regulations.gov as well as enter the Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day DC 20555-0001. comment submissions into ADAMS.

asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES of May, 2016. For additional direction on obtaining The NRC does not routinely edit For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. information and submitting comments, comment submissions to remove Dennis C. Morey, see Obtaining Information and identifying or contact information.

Acting Deputy Director, Division of License Submitting Comments in the If you are requesting or aggregating Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of comments from other persons for Regulation. this document. submission to the NRC, then you should

[FR Doc. 2016-13388 Filed 6-6-16; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kay inform those persons not to include BILLING CODE 7590-01-P Goldstein, Office of Nuclear Reactor identifying or contact information that VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:13 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM 07JNN1

36614 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Notices they do not want to be publicly A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing statement of the alleged facts or expert disclosed in their comment submission. and Petition for Leave To Intervene opinion which support the contention Your request should state that the NRC Within 60 days after the date of and on which the requestor/petitioner does not routinely edit comment publication of this notice, any person(s) intends to rely in proving the contention submissions to remove such information whose interest may be affected by this at the hearing. The requestor/petitioner before making the comment action may file a request for a hearing must also provide references to those submissions available to the public or and a petition to intervene with respect specific sources and documents of entering the comment into ADAMS. to issuance of the amendment to the which the petitioner is aware and on subject facility operating license or which the requestor/petitioner intends II. Notice of Consideration of Issuance to rely to establish those facts or expert of Amendments to Facility Operating combined license. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to opinion. The petition must include Licenses and Combined Licenses and sufficient information to show that a Proposed No Significant Hazards intervene shall be filed in accordance genuine dispute exists with the Consideration Determination with the Commissions Agency Rules applicant on a material issue of law or of Practice and Procedure in 10 CFR The Commission has made a fact. Contentions shall be limited to part 2. Interested person(s) should proposed determination that the matters within the scope of the consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, following amendment requests involve amendment under consideration. The which is available at the NRCs PDR, no significant hazards consideration. contention must be one which, if located at One White Flint North, Room Under the Commissions regulations in proven, would entitle the requestor/

O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first

§ 50.92 of title 10 of the Code of Federal petitioner to relief. A requestor/

floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. The Regulations (10 CFR), this means that petitioner who fails to satisfy these NRCs regulations are accessible operation of the facility in accordance requirements with respect to at least one electronically from the NRC Library on contention will not be permitted to with the proposed amendment would the NRCs Web site at http://

not (1) involve a significant increase in participate as a party.

www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc- Those permitted to intervene become the probability or consequences of an collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing accident previously evaluated, or (2) parties to the proceeding, subject to any or petition for leave to intervene is filed limitations in the order granting leave to create the possibility of a new or within 60 days, the Commission or a different kind of accident from any intervene, and have the opportunity to presiding officer designated by the participate fully in the conduct of the accident previously evaluated; or (3) Commission or by the Chief involve a significant reduction in a hearing with respect to resolution of Administrative Judge of the Atomic that persons admitted contentions, margin of safety. The basis for this Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will proposed determination for each including the opportunity to present rule on the request and/or petition; and evidence and to submit a cross-amendment request is shown below. the Secretary or the Chief examination plan for cross-examination The Commission is seeking public Administrative Judge of the Atomic of witnesses, consistent with NRC comments on this proposed Safety and Licensing Board will issue a regulations, policies and procedures.

determination. Any comments received notice of a hearing or an appropriate Petitions for leave to intervene must within 30 days after the date of order. be filed no later than 60 days from the publication of this notice will be As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a date of publication of this notice.

considered in making any final petition for leave to intervene shall set Requests for hearing, petitions for leave determination. forth with particularity the interest of to intervene, and motions for leave to Normally, the Commission will not the petitioner in the proceeding, and file new or amended contentions that issue the amendment until the how that interest may be affected by the are filed after the 60-day deadline will expiration of 60 days after the date of results of the proceeding. The petition not be entertained absent a publication of this notice. The should specifically explain the reasons determination by the presiding officer Commission may issue the license why intervention should be permitted that the filing demonstrates good cause amendment before expiration of the 60- with particular reference to the by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR day period provided that its final following general requirements: (1) The 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(iii). If a hearing is determination is that the amendment name, address, and telephone number of requested, and the Commission has not involves no significant hazards the requestor or petitioner; (2) the made a final determination on the issue consideration. In addition, the nature of the requestors/petitioners of no significant hazards consideration, Commission may issue the amendment right under the Act to be made a party the Commission will make a final prior to the expiration of the 30-day to the proceeding; (3) the nature and determination on the issue of no comment period if circumstances extent of the requestors/petitioners significant hazards consideration. The change during the 30-day comment property, financial, or other interest in final determination will serve to decide period such that failure to act in a the proceeding; and (4) the possible when the hearing is held. If the final timely way would result, for example in effect of any decision or order which determination is that the amendment derating or shutdown of the facility. If may be entered in the proceeding on the request involves no significant hazards the Commission takes action prior to the requestors/petitioners interest. The consideration, the Commission may expiration of either the comment period petition must also set forth the specific issue the amendment and make it or the notice period, it will publish in contentions which the requestor/ immediately effective, notwithstanding asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES the Federal Register a notice of petitioner seeks to have litigated at the the request for a hearing. Any hearing issuance. If the Commission makes a proceeding. held would take place after issuance of final no significant hazards Each contention must consist of a the amendment. If the final consideration determination, any specific statement of the issue of law or determination is that the amendment hearing will take place after issuance. fact to be raised or controverted. In request involves a significant hazards The Commission expects that the need addition, the requestor/petitioner shall consideration, then any hearing held to take this action will occur very provide a brief explanation of the bases would take place before the issuance of infrequently. for the contention and a concise any amendment unless the Commission VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:13 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM 07JNN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Notices 36615 finds an imminent danger to the health unless they seek an exemption in available on the NRCs public Web site or safety of the public, in which case it accordance with the procedures at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-will issue an appropriate order or rule described below. submittals.html. A filing is considered under 10 CFR part 2. To comply with the procedural complete at the time the documents are A State, local governmental body, requirements of E-Filing, at least ten 10 submitted through the NRCs E-Filing federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or days prior to the filing deadline, the system. To be timely, an electronic agency thereof, may submit a petition to participant should contact the Office of filing must be submitted to the E-Filing the Commission to participate as a party the Secretary by email at system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone Time on the due date. Upon receipt of should state the nature and extent of the at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital a transmission, the E-Filing system petitioners interest in the proceeding. identification (ID) certificate, which time-stamps the document and sends The petition should be submitted to the allows the participant (or its counsel or the submitter an email notice Commission by August 8, 2016. The representative) to digitally sign confirming receipt of the document. The petition must be filed in accordance documents and access the E-Submittal E-Filing system also distributes an email with the filing instructions in the server for any proceeding in which it is notice that provides access to the Electronic Submissions (E-Filing) participating; and (2) advise the document to the NRCs Office of the section of this document, and should Secretary that the participant will be General Counsel and any others who meet the requirements for petitions for submitting a request or petition for have advised the Office of the Secretary leave to intervene set forth in this hearing (even in instances in which the that they wish to participate in the section, except that under § 2.309(h)(2) participant, or its counsel or proceeding, so that the filer need not a State, local governmental body, or representative, already holds an NRC- serve the documents on those Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or issued digital ID certificate). Based upon participants separately. Therefore, agency thereof does not need to address this information, the Secretary will applicants and other participants (or the standing requirements in 10 CFR establish an electronic docket for the their counsel or representative) must 2.309(d) if the facility is located within hearing in this proceeding if the apply for and receive a digital ID its boundaries. A State, local Secretary has not already established an certificate before a hearing request/

governmental body, Federally- electronic docket. petition to intervene is filed so that they recognized Indian Tribe, or agency Information about applying for a can obtain access to the document via thereof may also have the opportunity to digital ID certificate is available on the the E-Filing system.

participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c). NRCs public Web site at http:// A person filing electronically using If a hearing is granted, any person www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/ the NRCs adjudicatory E-Filing system who does not wish, or is not qualified, getting-started.html. System may seek assistance by contacting the to become a party to the proceeding requirements for accessing the E- NRC Meta System Help Desk through may, in the discretion of the presiding Submittal server are detailed in the the Contact Us link located on the officer, be permitted to make a limited NRCs Guidance for Electronic NRCs public Web site at http://

appearance pursuant to the provisions Submission, which is available on the www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a agencys public Web site at http:// submittals.html, by email to limited appearance may make an oral or www.nrc.gov/site-help/e- MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll-written statement of position on the submittals.html. Participants may free call at 1-866-672-7640. The NRC issues, but may not otherwise attempt to use other software not listed Meta System Help Desk is available participate in the proceeding. A limited on the Web site, but should note that the between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern appearance may be made at any session NRCs E-Filing system does not support Time, Monday through Friday, of the hearing or at any prehearing unlisted software, and the NRC Meta excluding government holidays.

conference, subject to the limits and System Help Desk will not be able to Participants who believe that they conditions as may be imposed by the offer assistance in using unlisted have a good cause for not submitting presiding officer. Persons desiring to software. documents electronically must file an make a limited appearance are If a participant is electronically exemption request, in accordance with requested to inform the Secretary of the submitting a document to the NRC in 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper Commission by August 8, 2016. accordance with the E-Filing rule, the filing requesting authorization to participant must file the document continue to submit documents in paper Electronic Submissions (E-Filing) using the NRCs online, Web-based format. Such filings must be submitted All documents filed in NRC submission form. In order to serve by: (1) First class mail addressed to the adjudicatory proceedings, including a documents through the Electronic Office of the Secretary of the request for hearing, a petition for leave Information Exchange System, users Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory to intervene, any motion or other will be required to install a Web Commission, Washington, DC 20555-document filed in the proceeding prior browser plug-in from the NRCs Web 0001, Attention: Rulemaking and to the submission of a request for site. Further information on the Web- Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, hearing or petition to intervene, and based submission form, including the express mail, or expedited delivery documents filed by interested installation of the Web browser plug-in, service to the Office of the Secretary, governmental entities participating is available on the NRCs public Web Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e- 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES accordance with the NRCs E-Filing rule submittals.html. Maryland, 20852, Attention:

(72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007). The E- Once a participant has obtained a Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff.

Filing process requires participants to digital ID certificate and a docket has Participants filing a document in this submit and serve all adjudicatory been created, the participant can then manner are responsible for serving the documents over the Internet, or in some submit a request for hearing or petition document on all other participants.

cases to mail copies on electronic for leave to intervene. Submissions Filing is considered complete by first-storage media. Participants may not should be in Portable Document Format class mail as of the time of deposit in submit paper copies of their filings (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance the mail, or by courier, express mail, or VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:13 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM 07JNN1

36616 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Notices expedited delivery service upon Basis for proposed no significant The change in Type A test frequency to depositing the document with the hazards consideration determination: once per 15 years, measured as an increase provider of the service. A presiding As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the to the total integrated plant risk for those accident sequences influenced by Type A officer, having granted an exemption licensee has provided its analysis of the testing, is 1.14E-4 person-rem/yr (a request from using E-Filing, may require issue of no significant hazards 0.00184% increase). EPRI Report No.

a participant or party to use E-Filing if consideration, which is presented 1009325, Revision 2-A, states that a very the presiding officer subsequently below: small population dose is defined as an determines that the reason for granting increase of 1.0 person-rem per year or 1%

the exemption from use of E-Filing no 1. Does the proposed amendment involve a of the total population dose, whichever is significant increase in the probability or less restrictive for the risk impact assessment longer exists.

consequences of an accident previously of the extended ILRT intervals. Moreover, the Documents submitted in adjudicatory evaluated? risk impact when compared to other severe proceedings will appear in the NRCs electronic hearing docket which is Response: No. accident risks is negligible.

The proposed amendment to the TS The increase in the CCFP [conditional available to the public at http:// containment failure probability] from the involves the extension of Fermi 2 Type A ehd1.nrc.gov/ehd/, unless excluded containment test interval to 15 years and the three in 10 year [sic] interval to one in 15 pursuant to an order of the Commission, extension of the Type C test interval to 75 year interval is 0.73%. EPRI Report No.

or the presiding officer. Participants are months. The current Type A test interval of 1009325, Revision 2-A, states that increases requested not to include personal 10 years would be extended on a permanent in CCFP of less than or equal to 1.5 privacy information, such as social basis to no longer than 15 years from the last percentage points are very small. Therefore, security numbers, home addresses, or Type A test. The current Type C test interval this increase judged to be very small.

home phone numbers in their filings, of 60 months for selected components would The other two changes, to TS 5.5.12, item unless an NRC regulation or other law be extended on a performance basis to no a, and Operating License, Provision D, are longer than 75 months. Extensions of up to administrative in nature to remove old text requires submission of such that is no longer applicable.

nine months (total maximum interval of 84 information. However, in some months for Type C tests) are permissible only Therefore, the proposed change does not instances, a request to intervene will for non-routine emergent conditions. The involve a significant increase in the require including information on local proposed amendment does not involve either probability or consequences of an accident residence in order to demonstrate a a physical change to the plant or a change in previously evaluated.

proximity assertion of interest in the the manner in which the plant is operated or 2. Does the proposed change create the proceeding. With respect to copyrighted controlled. The primary containment is possibility of a new or different kind of works, except for limited excerpts that designed to provide an essentially leak tight accident from any accident previously serve the purpose of the adjudicatory barrier against the uncontrolled release of evaluated?

filings and would constitute a Fair Use radioactivity to the environment for Response: No.

postulated accidents. As such, the application, participants are requested The proposed amendment to the TS containment and the testing requirements not to include copyrighted materials in invoked to periodically demonstrate the involves the extension of the Fermi 2 Type their submission. A containment test interval to 15 years and integrity of the containment exist to ensure For further details with respect to the extension of the Type C test interval to the plants ability to mitigate the these license amendment applications, 75 months. The containment and the testing consequences of an accident, and do not see the application for amendment requirements to periodically demonstrate the involve any accident precursors or initiators.

integrity of the containment exist to ensure which is available for public inspection RG [Regulatory Guide] 1.174 [sic] [ADAMS the plants ability to mitigate the in ADAMS and at the NRCs PDR. For Accession No. ML023240437] provides consequences of an accident and do not additional direction on accessing guidance for determining the risk impact of involve any accident precursors or initiators.

information related to this document, plant-specific changes to the licensing basis. The proposed change does not involve a see the Obtaining Information and RG 1.174 defines very small changes in risk physical change to the plant (e.g., no new or as resulting in increases of CDF [core damage different type of equipment will be installed)

Submitting Comments section of this frequency] below 1.0E-06/yr and increases in document. or a change to the manner in which the plant LERF [large early release frequency] below is operated or controlled.

DTE Electric Company, Docket No. 50- 1.0E-07/yr. Since the ILRT [integrated leak The other two changes to TS 5.5.12, item 341, Fermi 2, Monroe County, Michigan rate test] does not impact CDF, the relevant a, and Operating License, Provision D, are criterion is LERF. The increase in LERF administrative in nature to remove old text Date of amendment request: March resulting from a change in the Type A ILRT that is no longer needed. Therefore, these 22, 2016. A publicly-available version is test interval from three in ten years to one in changes have no impact on the probability or in ADAMS under Accession No. fifteen years is very conservatively estimated consequences of an accident previously ML16082A309. as 1.27E-08/yr using the EPRI [Electric evaluated.

Description of amendment request: Power Research Institute] guidance as Therefore, the proposed change does not The proposed amendment would allow written. As such, the estimated change in create the possibility of a new or different LERF is determined to be very small using kind of accident from any previously for permanent extension of the Type A the acceptance guidelines of RG 1.174. evaluated.

primary containment integrated leak RG 1.174 also states that when the rate test interval to 15 years and calculated increase in LERF is in the range 3. Does the proposed change involve a extension of the Type C test interval up of 1.0E-06 per reactor year to 1.0E-07 per significant reduction in a margin of safety?

to 75 months. The amendment also reactor year, applications will be considered Response: No.

proposes two administrative changes to only if it can be reasonably shown that the The proposed amendment to TS 5.5.12 remove text that is no longer applicable. total LERF is less than 1.0E-05 per reactor involves the extension of the Fermi 2 Type asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES The first change revises technical year. An additional assessment of the impact A containment test interval to 15 years and specification (TS) 5.5.12 to remove a from external events was also made. In this the extension of the Type C test interval to case, the total LERF increase was 75 months for selected components. This one-time extension of the Type A test conservatively estimated (with an external amendment does not alter the manner in frequency. The second change would event multiplier of 15) as 1.90E-07 for Fermi which safety limits, limiting safety system set revise the Fermi 2 Operating License, 2 (the baseline total LERF for this case is points, or limiting conditions for operation Section D, to remove a reference to an 7.88E- 06/yr). This is well below the RG are determined. The specific requirements exemption regarding Appendix J testing 1.174 acceptance criteria for total LERF of and conditions of the TS Containment Leak of containment air locks. 1.0E-05. Rate Testing Program exist to ensure that the VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:13 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM 07JNN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Notices 36617 degree of containment structural integrity Basis for proposed no significant involve a significant reduction in the margin and leak-tightness that is considered in the hazards consideration determination: of safety.

plant safety analysis is maintained. The As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the overall containment leak rate limit specified The NRC staff has reviewed the by TS is maintained.

licensee has provided its analysis of the licensees analysis and, based on this The proposed surveillance interval issue of no significant hazards review, it appears that the three extension is bounded by the 15 year ILRT consideration, which is presented standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are interval and the 75 month Type C test below: satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff interval currently authorized within NEI 94- proposes to determine that the 01, Revision 3-A. Industry experience 1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability of amendment request involves no supports the conclusion that Type B and Type C testing detects a large percentage of occurrence or consequences of an accident significant hazards consideration.

containment leakage paths and the previously evaluated? Attorney for licensee: Lara S. Nichols, percentage of containment leakage paths that Response: No. Deputy General Counsel, Duke Energy are detected only by Type A testing is small. The proposed change will not increase the Corporation, 526 South Church Street The containment inspections preformed in probability of accident previously evaluated. EC07H, Charlotte, NC 28202.

accordance with ASME [American Society of The Ice Condenser performs an entirely Mechanical Engineers] Section XI, mitigative function. The proposed change Duke Energy Progress, Inc., Docket Nos.

Maintenance Rule, and TS serve to provide does not result in any physical change to the 50-325 and 50-324, Brunswick Steam a high degree of assurance that the plant which would affect any accident Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2, Brunswick containment would not degrade in a manner initiators. No structures, systems, or County, North Carolina that is detectable only by Type A testing. The components (SSCs) involved in the initiation combination of these factors ensures that the of postulated accidents will be operated in Date of amendment request: April 13, margin of safety in the plant safety analysis any different manner. The probability of 2016. A publicly-available version is in is maintained. The design, operation, testing occurrence of a previously evaluated ADAMS under Accession No.

methods, and acceptance criteria for Type A, accident will not be significantly increased. ML16111B203.

Type B, and Type C containment leakage The proposed change involves use of an Description of amendment request:

tests specified in applicable codes and alternate method of verifying that the lower The amendments would revise the standards would continue to be met with the inlet doors to the ice condenser are closed. Allowable Values (AVs) of Surveillance acceptance of this proposed change since This proposed change has no effect on the these are not affected by the changes to the Requirements (SRs) contained in ability of the ice condenser to perform its Type A and Type C test intervals. function. Technical Specification 3.3.8.2, RPS The other two changes to TS 5.5.12, item Therefore, the proposed change does not Electric Power Monitoring, by a, and Operating License, Provision D, are involve a significant increase in the amending the Reactor Protection System administrative in nature to remove old text probability or consequences of an accident electric power monitoring assembly AVs that is no longer needed. Therefore, these previously evaluated. for overvoltage and undervoltage changes have no impact on the probability or 2. Does the proposed change create the contained within SRs 3.3.8.2.2 and consequences of an accident previously 3.3.8.2.3.

possibility of a new or different kind of evaluated.

Therefore, the proposed change does not accident from any accident previously Basis for proposed no significant evaluated? hazards consideration determination:

involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. Response: No. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the The proposed change does not alter the licensee has provided its analysis of the The NRC staff has reviewed the design function or operation of any SSC that issue of no significant hazards licensees analysis and, based on this may be involved in the initiation of an consideration, which is presented review, it appears that the three accident. The Ice Condenser will not become below:

standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are the source of a new type of accident. No new satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff accident causal mechanisms will be created. 1. Does the proposed amendment involve a proposes to determine that the The proposed change does not create new significant increase in the probability or amendment request involves no failure mechanisms, malfunctions, or consequences of an accident previously accident initiators. evaluated?

significant hazards consideration. Therefore, the proposed change does not Attorney for licensee: Jon P. create the possibility of a new or different Response: No Christinidis, DTE Energy, Expert kind of accident from any accident The proposed change to the Allowable AttorneyRegulatory, 688 WCB, One previously evaluated. Values of Surveillance Requirements Energy Plaza, Detroit, MI 48226-1279. contained in Technical Specifications 3.3.8.2

3. Does the proposed change involve a does not impact the physical function of NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona. significant reduction in the margin of safety? plant structures, systems, or components Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket Response: No. (SSC) or the manner in which SCCs [sic]

Nos. 50-369 and 50-370, McGuire Margin of safety is related to the perform their design function. The proposed Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, confidence in the ability of the fission change does not authorize the addition of any Mecklenburg County, North Carolina product barriers to perform their intended new plant equipment or systems, nor does it functions. These barriers include the fuel alter the assumptions of any accident Date of amendment request: March cladding, the reactor coolant system pressure analyses. The Electrical Protection 24, 2016. A publicly available version is boundary, and the containment barriers. The Assemblies are not accident initiators. They in ADAMS under Accession No. proposed change involves use of a method to operate in response to off-normal voltage ML16089A228. verify the lower inlet doors to the ice conditions on Class 1E buses to protect the Description of amendment request: condenser are closed when an invalid alarm connected loads. The proposed change does asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES The amendments would modify is providing indication of an open door. This not adversely affect accident initiators or Technical Specification 3.6.13, Ice proposed change has no effect on the ability precursors, nor does it alter the design of the ice condenser to perform its function. assumptions, conditions, and configuration Condenser Doors, to revise Condition B Hence, the proposed change will not affect or the manner in which the plant is operated for an ice condenser lower inlet door containment barriers. Nor does the proposed and maintained.

invalid open alarm to preclude plant change have any effect on fuel cladding or Therefore, the proposed change does not shutdown caused by an invalid OPEN the reactor coolant pressure boundary. involve a significant increase in the alarm from the Inlet Door Position Therefore, existing safety margins will be probability or consequences of an accident Monitoring System. preserved, and the proposed change does not previously evaluated.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:13 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM 07JNN1

36618 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Notices

2. Does the proposed amendment create the be added to TS 1.0, Definitions, affect the reliability of the tested possibility of a new or different kind of section. The licensee has noted that components. As a result, the availability of accident from any accident previously while the request is consistent with TS the affected components, as well as their evaluated? Task Force (TSTF)-545, Revision 3, TS ability to mitigate the consequences of Response: No accidents previously evaluated, is not Inservice Testing Program Removal & affected.

The proposed change to the Allowable Clarify SR [Surveillance Requirement]

Values of Surveillance Requirements Therefore, the proposed change does not Usage Rule Application to Section 5.5 involve a significant increase in the contained in Technical Specifications 3.3.8.2 does not require any modification to the Testing, there are various deviations probability or consequences of an accident plant (i.e., other than the setpoint changes) or from the TSTF-545, Revision 3. ANO- previously evaluated.

change equipment operation or testing. The 2 TSs are of an older standard version 2. Does the proposed change create the proposed change will not introduce failure and have not been converted to the possibility of a new or different kind of modes that could result in a new accident, improved standard TSs (ISTSs) based on accident from any accident previously and the change does not alter assumptions NUREG 1432, Standard Technical evaluated?

made in the safety analysis. The proposed SpecificationsCombustion change will not alter the design Response: No.

Engineering Plants, Revision 4. As The proposed change does not alter the configuration, or method of operation of plant equipment beyond its normal such, Entergy stated there are several design or configuration of the plant. The functional capabilities. The proposed change administrative-type variations (TS proposed change does not involve a physical does not create any new credible failure numbering, wording, etc.) but these alteration of the plant; no new or different mechanisms, malfunctions, or accident variations do not result in any technical kind of equipment will be installed. The initiators. conflict with the intent of TSTF-545, proposed change does not alter the types of Therefore, the proposed change does not inservice testing performed. In most cases, Revision 3 or the associated model create the possibility of a new or different the frequency of inservice testing is safety evaluation. unchanged. However, the frequency of kind of accident from those that have been Basis for proposed no significant previously evaluated. testing would not result in a new or different hazards consideration determination: kind of accident from any previously

3. Does the proposed amendment involve a As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the evaluated since the testing methods are not significant reduction in a margin of safety? licensee has provided its analysis of the altered.

Response: No issue of no significant hazards Therefore, the proposed change does not The proposed change to the Allowable consideration, with NRC edits in create the possibility of a new or different Values of Surveillance Requirements [brackets], which is presented below: kind of accident from any previously contained in Technical Specifications 3.3.8.2 evaluated.

does not alter or exceed a design basis or 1. Does the proposed change involve a safety limit. There is no change being made 3. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or significant reduction in a margin of safety?

to safety analysis assumptions or the safety consequences of an accident previously limits that would adversely affect plant safety evaluated? Response: No.

as a result of the proposed change. Margins The proposed change eliminates some Response: No.

of safety are unaffected by the proposed requirements from the TS in lieu of The proposed change revises TS Chapter 6, change and the applicable requirements of 10 requirements in the ASME Code, as modified Administrative Controls, Section 6.5, CFR 50.36(c)(2)(ii) and 10 CFR 50, Appendix by use of Code Case OMN-20. Compliance Programs and Manuals, by eliminating the A will continue to be met. with the ASME Code is required by 10 CFR Inservice Testing Program specification.

Therefore, the proposed change does not 50.55a. The proposed change also allows Most requirements in the IST Program are involve any reduction in a margin of safety. inservice tests with frequencies greater than removed, as they are duplicative of The NRC staff has reviewed the requirements in the ASME [American Society 2 years to be extended by 6 months to of Mechanical Engineers] OM Code [ASME facilitate test scheduling and consideration of licensees analysis and, based on this plant operating conditions that may not be review, it appears that the three Code for Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants], as clarified by Code suitable for performance of the required standards of 50.92(c) are satisfied. testing. The testing frequency extension will Case OMN-20, Inservice Test Frequency.

Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to The remaining requirements in the Section not affect the ability of the components to determine that the amendment request 6.5 IST Program are eliminated because the respond to an accident as the components are involves no significant hazards NRC has determined their inclusion in the required to be operable during the testing consideration. TS is contrary to regulations. A new defined period extension. The proposed change will Attorney for licensee: Kathryn B. term, Inservice Testing Program, is added eliminate the existing TS Surveillance Nolan, Deputy General Counsel, 550 to the TS, which references the requirements Requirement (SR) 4.0.3 (referenced as SR South Tryon Street, M/C DEC45A, of 10 CFR 50.55a(f). 3.0.3 in the ISTS) allowance to defer Performance of inservice testing is not an performance of missed inservice tests up to Charlotte NC 28202. the duration of the specified testing NRC Branch Chief: Benjamin G. initiator to any accident previously evaluated. As a result, the probability of frequency, and instead will require an Beasley. assessment of the missed test on equipment occurrence of an accident is not significantly Entergy Operations, Inc. (Entergy), affected by the proposed change. Inservice operability. This assessment will consider Docket No. 50-368, Arkansas Nuclear test frequencies under Code Case OMN-20 the effect on a margin of safety (equipment are equivalent to the current testing period operability). Should the component be One, Unit No. 2 (ANO-2), Pope County, inoperable, the Technical Specifications allowed by the TS with the exception that Arkansas testing frequencies greater than 2 years may provide actions to ensure that the margin of Date of amendment request: March be extended by up to 6 months to facilitate safety is protected. The proposed change also 25, 2016. A publicly-available version is test scheduling and consideration of plant eliminates a statement that nothing in the asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES in ADAMS under Accession No. operating conditions that may not be suitable ASME Code should be construed to for performance of the required testing. The supersede the requirements of any TS. The ML16088A186.

testing frequency extension will not affect the NRC has determined that statement to be Description of amendment request:

ability of the components to mitigate any incorrect. However, elimination of the The amendment will revise the accident previously evaluated as the statement will have no effect on plant Technical Specifications (TSs) to components are required to be operable operation or safety.

eliminate TS 6.5.8, Inservice Testing during the testing period extension. Therefore, the proposed change does not Program. A new defined term, Performance of inservice tests utilizing the involve a significant reduction in a margin of Inservice Testing [IST] Program, will allowances in OMN-20 will not significantly safety.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:13 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM 07JNN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Notices 36619 The NRC staff has reviewed the affected by the proposed change. Inservice operability). Should the component be licensees analysis and, based on this test frequencies under Code Case OMN-20 inoperable, the Technical Specifications review, it appears that the three are equivalent to the current testing period provide actions to ensure that the margin of allowed by the TS with the exception that safety is protected. The proposed change also standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are testing frequencies greater than 2 years may eliminates a statement that nothing in the satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff be extended by up to 6 months to facilitate ASME Code should be construed to proposes to determine that the test scheduling and consideration of plant supersede the requirements of any TS. The amendment request involves no operating conditions that may not be suitable NRC has determined that statement to be significant hazards consideration. for performance of the required testing. The incorrect. However, elimination of the Attorney for licensee: Joseph A. testing frequency extension will not affect the statement will have no effect on plant Aluise, Associate General Counsel ability of the components to mitigate any operation or safety.

Nuclear, Entergy Services, Inc., 639 accident previously evaluated as the Therefore, the proposed change does not components are required to be operable Loyola Avenue, New Orleans, Louisiana involve a significant reduction in a margin of during the testing period extension.

70113. Performance of inservice tests utilizing the safety.

NRC Branch Chief: Meena K. Khanna. allowances in OMN-20 will not significantly The NRC staff has reviewed the Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50- affect the reliability of the tested components. As a result, the availability of licensees analysis and, based on this 313, Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit No. 1, the affected components, as well as their review, it appears that the three Pope County, Arkansas ability to mitigate the consequences of standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are Date of amendment request: March accidents previously evaluated, is not satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff 25, 2016. A publicly-available version is affected. proposes to determine that the Therefore, the proposed change does not amendment request involves no in ADAMS under Accession No.

involve a significant increase in the significant hazards consideration.

ML16088A181. probability or consequences of an accident Description of amendment request: previously evaluated. Attorney for licensee: Joseph A.

The amendment would revise the 2. Does the proposed change create the Aluise, Associate General Counsel Technical Specifications (TSs) to possibility of a new or different kind of Nuclear, Entergy Services, Inc., 639 eliminate TS Section 5.5.8, Inservice accident from any accident previously Loyola Avenue, New Orleans, Louisiana Testing [IST] Program. A new defined evaluated? 70113.

term, Inservice Testing Program, will Response: No. NRC Branch Chief: Meena K. Khanna.

be added to TS 1.1, Definitions. This The proposed change does not alter the amendment request is consistent with design or configuration of the plant. The Exelon Generation Company, LLC and TS Task Force (TSTF)-545, Revision 3, proposed change does not involve a physical PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50-277 TS Inservice Testing Program Removal alteration of the plant; no new or different and 50-278, Peach Bottom Atomic

& Clarify SR [Surveillance Requirement] kind of equipment will be installed. The Power Station, Units 2 and 3, York and Usage Rule Application to Section 5.5 proposed change does not alter the types of Lancaster Counties, Pennsylvania inservice testing performed. In most cases, Testing, under the consolidated line the frequency of inservice testing is item improvement process. Date of amendment request: March unchanged. However, the frequency of 24, 2016, as supplemented by letter Basis for proposed no significant testing would not result in a new or different hazards consideration determination: kind of accident from any previously dated May 11, 2016. A publicly-As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the evaluated since the testing methods are not available version is in ADAMS under licensee has provided its analysis of the altered. Accession Nos. ML16084A567 and issue of no significant hazards Therefore, the proposed change does not ML16132A440.

consideration, with NRC edits in create the possibility of a new or different Description of amendment request:

kind of accident from any previously

[brackets], which is presented below: The amendments would revise the evaluated.

frequency for cycling of the

1. Does the proposed change involve a 3. Does the proposed change involve a recirculation pump discharge valves as significant increase in the probability or significant reduction in a margin of safety?

consequences of an accident previously specified in Technical Specification Response: No. (TS) Surveillance Requirement (SR) evaluated? The proposed change eliminates some 3.5.1.5. Specifically, SR 3.5.1.5 requires Response: No. requirements from the TS in lieu of The proposed change revises TS Chapter 5, requirements in the ASME Code, as modified verification that each recirculation Administrative Controls, Section 5.5, by use of Code Case OMN-20. Compliance pump discharge valve cycles through Programs and Manuals, by eliminating the with the ASME Code is required by 10 CFR one complete cycle of full travel or is Inservice Testing Program specification. 50.55a. The proposed change also allows de-energized in the closed position.

Most requirements in the IST Program are inservice tests with frequencies greater than Currently, this SR needs to be removed, as they are duplicative of 2 years to be extended by 6 months to performed once each plant startup prior requirements in the ASME [American Society facilitate test scheduling and consideration of to exceeding 23 percent rated thermal of Mechanical Engineers] OM Code [ASME plant operating conditions that may not be power (RTP), if the SR had not been Code for Operation and Maintenance of suitable for performance of the required performed within the previous 31 days.

Nuclear Power Plants], as clarified by Code testing. The testing frequency extension will Case OMN-20, Inservice Test Frequency. not affect the ability of the components to The amendments would change the The remaining requirements in the Section respond to an accident as the components are frequency for the SR such that it is 5.5 IST Program are eliminated because the required to be operable during the testing performed in accordance with the asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES NRC has determined their inclusion in the period extension. The proposed change will Inservice Testing Program.

TS is contrary to regulations. A new defined eliminate the existing TS Surveillance Basis for proposed no significant term, Inservice Testing Program, is added Requirement (SR) 3.0.3 allowance to defer hazards consideration determination:

to the TS, which references the requirements performance of missed inservice tests up to of 10 CFR 50.55a(f). the duration of the specified testing As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the Performance of inservice testing is not an frequency, and instead will require an licensee has provided its analysis of the initiator to any accident previously assessment of the missed test on equipment issue of no significant hazards evaluated. As a result, the probability of operability. This assessment will consider consideration, which is presented occurrence of an accident is not significantly the effect on a margin of safety (equipment below:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:13 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM 07JNN1

36620 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Notices

1. Does the proposed change involve a frequency of testing other valves in the Technical Specifications currently allow significant increase in the probability or Emergency Core Cooling System. for operation at greater than 200 degrees F consequences of an accident previously Therefore, this change does not involve a while imposing MODE 4 requirements in evaluated? significant reduction in a margin of safety. addition to the secondary containment Response: No. The NRC staff has reviewed the requirements required to be met. No new The proposed change revises the frequency operational conditions beyond those licensees analysis and, based on this for cycling the recirculation pump discharge currently allowed by LCO 3.10.1 are review, it appears that the three introduced. The changes do not involve a valves from Once each startup prior to standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no new exceeding 23% RTP, as modified by a Note stating, Not required to be performed if satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff or different type of equipment will be performed within the previous 31 days to proposes to determine that the installed) or a change in the methods In accordance with the Inservice Testing amendment request involves no governing normal plant operation. In Program. Testing of the recirculation pump significant hazards consideration. addition, the changes do not impose any new discharge valves is not an initiator of any Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, or different requirements or eliminate any accident previously evaluated. As the Associate General Counsel, Exelon existing requirements. The changes do not recirculation pump discharge valves are still Generation Company, LLC, 4300 alter assumptions made in the safety required to be Operable, the ability to Winfield Rd., Warrenville, IL 60555. analysis. The proposed changes are mitigate any accident previously evaluated is NRC Branch Chief: Douglas A. consistent with the safety analysis not affected. The proposed change does not assumptions and current plant operating adversely affect the design assumptions, Broaddus. practice conditions, or configuration of the facility. Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Therefore, the proposed change does not The proposed change does not alter or Docket No. 50-461, Clinton Power create the possibility of a new or different prevent the ability of structures, systems, and kind of accident from any previously Station, Unit No.1, DeWitt County, components (SSCs) from performing their evaluated.

intended function. Illinois

3. Does the proposed change involve a Therefore, this change does not Date of amendment request: April 4, significant reduction in a margin of safety?

significantly increase the probability or 2016. A publicly-available version is in consequences of an accident previously Response: No.

ADAMS under Accession No. Technical Specifications currently allow evaluated. ML16095A285. for operation at greater than 200 degrees F

2. Does the proposed change create the Description of amendment request: while imposing MODE 4 requirements in possibility of a new or different kind of The proposed changes would revise addition to the secondary containment accident from any accident previously technical specification (TS) limiting requirements required to be met. Extending evaluated?

condition for operation (LCO) 3.10.1, the activities that can apply this allowance Response: No. and the associated Bases, to expand its will not adversely impact any margin of The proposed change revises the frequency scope to include provisions for safety. Allowing completion of inspections for cycling the recirculation pump discharge and testing and supporting completion of valves from Once each startup prior to temperature excursions greater than 200 scram time testing initiated in conjunction exceeding 23% RTP, as modified by a Note degrees Fahrenheit as a consequence of with an in-service leak or hydrostatic test stating, Not required to be performed if in-service leak and hydrostatic testing, prior to power operation results in enhanced performed within the previous 31 days to and as a consequence of scram time safe operations by eliminating unnecessary In accordance with the Inservice Testing testing initiated in conjunction with an maneuvers to control reactor temperature and Program. This revision will not impact the in-service leak or hydrostatic test, while pressure. Therefore, the proposed change accident analysis. The change will not alter considering operational conditions to be does not involve a significant reduction in a the methods of operation of the recirculation in Mode 4. margin of safety.

pump discharge valves. No new or different Basis for proposed no significant accidents result. The change does not involve The NRC staff has reviewed the a physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no new hazards consideration determination: licensees analysis and, based on this or different type of equipment will be As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the review, it appears that the three installed) or a significant change in the licensee has provided its analysis of the standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are methods governing normal plant operation. issue of no significant hazards satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff The change does not alter assumptions made consideration which is presented below: proposes to determine that the in the safety analysis.

1. Does the proposed amendment involve a amendment request involves no Therefore, the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident significant increase in the probability or significant hazards consideration.

previously evaluated is not created. consequences of an accident previously Attorney for licensee: Bradley J.

evaluated? Fewell, Associate General Counsel,

3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response: No. Exelon Nuclear, 4300 Winfield Road, Technical Specifications currently allow Warrenville, IL 60555.

Response: No. NRC Branch Chief: G. Ed Miller for operation at greater than 200 degrees F The proposed change revises the frequency while imposing MODE 4 requirements in for cycling the recirculation pump discharge (Acting) addition to the secondary containment valves from Once each startup prior to requirements required to be met. Extending Exelon Generation Company, LLC, exceeding 23% RTP, as modified by a Note the activities that can apply this allowance Docket Nos. 50-352 and 50-353, stating, Not required to be performed if will not adversely impact the probability or Limerick Generating Station (LGS),

performed within the previous 31 days to consequences of an accident previously In accordance with the Inservice Testing Units 1 and 2, Montgomery County, evaluated. Pennsylvania Program. The proposed change does not asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Therefore, the proposed change does not alter the manner in which safety limits, involve a significant increase in the Date of amendment request: April 4, limiting safety system settings or limiting probability or consequences of an accident 2016. A publicly-available version is in conditions for operation are determined. The previously evaluated. ADAMS under Accession No.

safety analysis acceptance criteria are not affected by this change. The proposed change 2. Does the proposed change create the ML16095A275.

will not result in plant operation in a possibility of a new or different kind of Description of amendment request:

configuration outside the design basis. The accident from any accident previously The amendments would revise the high frequency of testing the recirculation pump evaluated? pressure coolant injection (HPCI) and discharge valves will be consistent with the Response: No. reactor core isolation cooling (RCIC)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:13 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM 07JNN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Notices 36621 system actuation instrumentation The NRC staff has reviewed the configuration or operation of the facilities Technical Specification (TS) licensees analysis and, based on this and would create no new modes of operation.

requirements. review, it appears that the three We conclude that the proposed changes Basis for proposed no significant standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are would not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident.

hazards consideration determination: satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the proposes to determine that the 3. Use of the Modified Specification Would licensee has provided its analysis of the amendment request involves no Not Involve a Significant Reduction in a Margin of Safety issue of no significant hazards significant hazards consideration.

consideration, which is presented Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, The changes are administrative in nature below: Associate General Counsel, Exelon and would in no way affect plant or Generation Company, LLC, 4300 equipment operation or the accident analysis.

1. Do the proposed changes involve a We conclude that the proposed changes Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555.

significant increase in the probability or would not result in a significant reduction in NRC Acting Branch Chief: Andrew consequences of an accident previously a margin of safety.

Hon.

evaluated? The NRC staff has reviewed the Response: No. Florida Power & Light Company, et al., licensees analysis and, based on this The proposed changes involve the addition Docket Nos. 50-335 and 50-389, St. review, it appears that the three of clarifying footnotes to the HPCI and RCIC Lucie Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, St. Lucie standards of 50.92(c) are satisfied.

actuation instrumentation TS to reflect the County, Florida as-built plant design and operability Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to requirements of HPCI and RCIC Date of amendment request: April 29, determine that the amendment request instrumentation as described in the LGS 2016. A publicly-available version is in involves no significant hazards Updated Final Safety Analysis Report ADAMS under Accession No. consideration.

(UFSAR). ML16125A253. Attorney for licensee: William S.

HPCI and RCIC are not an initiator of any Description of amendment request: Blair, Managing AttorneyNuclear, accident previously evaluated. As a result, The amendments would revise Florida Power & Light Company, 700 the probability of any accident previously Appendix B (Environmental Protection Universe Boulevard, MS LAW/JB, Juno evaluated is not increased. In addition, the Plan (EPP)) of the Unit 1 and Unit 2 automatic start of HPCI on high drywell Beach, FL 33408-0420.

pressure, and the manual initiation of HPCI Operating Licenses to incorporate the NRC Branch Chief: Benjamin G.

and RCIC, are not credited to mitigate the revised Section 8.4, Terms and Beasley.

consequences of design basis accidents, Conditions of the currently applicable Biological Opinion issued by the Northern States Power Company transients or special events within the current LGS design and licensing basis. National Marine Fisheries Service Minnesota (NSPM), Docket No. 50-263, Therefore, the proposed changes do not (NMFS) on March 24, 2016. In addition, Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, involve a significant increase in the the amendments would clarify in the Wright County, Minnesota probability or consequences of an accident EPP that the licensee must adhere to the Date of amendment request: April 4, previously evaluated. currently applicable Biological Opinion. 2016. A publicly-available version is in

2. Do the proposed changes create the This clarification would preclude the ADAMS under Accession No.

possibility of a new or different kind of need for a new license amendment in ML16099A097.

accident from any accident previously the event that NMFS issues a new Description of amendment request:

evaluated?

Biological Opinion. The proposed amendment would revise Response: No. Basis for proposed no significant technical specification (TS) 3.8.4, DC The proposed changes do not alter the hazards consideration determination: SourcesOperating, Surveillance protection system design, create new failure modes, or change any modes of operation.

As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the Requirement (SR) 3.8.4.2 to increase the The proposed changes do not involve a licensee has provided its analysis of the required 125 Volt (V) Direct Current physical alteration of the plant, and no new issue of no significant hazards (DC) subsystems battery charger output or different kind of equipment will be consideration, which is presented current and to remove the second installed. Consequently, there are no new below: method specified to perform the initiators that could result in a new or surveillance. The first proposed change different kind of accident. 1. Operation of the Facility in Accordance is to increase the required 125 Volt VDC Therefore, the proposed changes do not With the Proposed Amendments Would Not Involve a Significant Increase in the battery charger output current specified create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident Probability or Consequences of an Accident as the first option under SR 3.8.4.2 to previously evaluated. Previously Evaluated resolve a non-conservative TS The changes are administrative in nature condition. The second proposed change

3. Do the proposed changes involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? and would in no way affect the initial is to remove from SR 3.8.4.2 an conditions, assumptions, or conclusions of alternative option for meeting the Response: No. the St. Lucie Unit 1 or Unit 2 accident surveillance requirement. This The proposed changes have no adverse analyses. In addition, the proposed changes effect on plant operation. The plant response alternative requires verifying each would not affect the operation or battery charger can recharge the battery to the design basis accidents does not change. performance of any equipment assumed in The proposed changes do not adversely affect to the fully charged state within the the accident analyses. Based on the above existing plant safety margins or the reliability information, we conclude that the proposed required time period, 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> for the of the equipment assumed to operate in the 250 VDC and 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> for the 125 VDC asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES changes would not significantly increase the safety analyses. probability or consequences of an accident subsystems, respectively, while There is no change being made to safety previously evaluated. supplying the largest combined analysis assumptions, safety limits or

2. Use of the Modified Specification Would continuous steady state loads, after a limiting safety system settings that would adversely affect plant safety as a result of the Not Create the Possibility of a New or battery discharge to the bounding design proposed changes. Different Kind of Accident From any basis event discharge state.

Therefore, the proposed changes do not Previously Evaluated Basis for proposed no significant involve a significant reduction in a margin of The changes are administrative in nature hazards consideration determination:

safety. and would in no way impact or alter the As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:13 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM 07JNN1

36622 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Notices licensee has provided its analysis of the 3. Does the proposed change involve a with the STS [Standard Technical issue of no significant hazards significant reduction in a margin of safety? SpecificationsWestinghouse Plants]. The consideration, which is presented Response: No. change has been determined not to adversely below: The margin of safety is established through affect the safe operation of the plant. The the equipment design, the operating affected TS requirements are not initiating

1. Does the proposed change involve a conditions for any accident previously parameters, and the setpoints at which significant increase in the probability or evaluated. In addition, changes that are automatic actions are initiated. The consequences of an accident previously consistent with the STS have been previously equipment margins will be maintained in evaluated? evaluated by plants adopting the STS and accordance with the plant-specific design Response: No. bases as a result of the proposed changes. found not to adversely affect the safe The proposed TS changes revise the battery The proposed changes do not adversely affect operation of Westinghouse NSSS [Nuclear charger surveillance requirements in SR operation of plant equipment. The proposed Steam Supply System] plants. Based on the 3.8.4.2. The DC electrical power system, TS changes do not result in a change to the conclusions of the plant specific evaluation including associated battery chargers, is not setpoints at which protective actions are associated with the change and the an initiator of any accident sequence initiated. Sufficient DC capacity to support evaluations performed in developing the analyzed in the Updated Safety Analysis operation of mitigation equipment continues STS, the proposed change does not result in Report (USAR). Rather, the DC electrical to be ensured. The equipment fed by the DC operating conditions that will significantly power system supports operation of electrical sources will continue to provide increase the probability of initiating an equipment used to mitigate accidents. adequate power to safety-related loads in analyzed event. The proposed change was Operation in accordance with the proposed accordance with safety analysis assumptions. also evaluated to assure that it does not alter TS continues to ensure that the DC electrical Therefore, the proposed changes do not the safety analysis assumptions relative to power system is capable of performing its involve a significant reduction in a margin of mitigation of an accident or transient event specified safety functions as described in the safety. and that the resulting TS requirements USAR. Therefore, the mitigating functions continue to ensure the necessary equipment supported by the DC electrical power system The NRC staff has reviewed the is operable consistent with the safety will continue to provide the protection licensees analysis and, based on this analyses or that the plant is placed in an assumed by the analysis. review, it appears that the three operating Mode where the system is no Accidents are initiated by the malfunction standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are longer required operable. As such the of plant equipment, or the catastrophic satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposed change also does not result in failure of plant structures, systems, or components (SSCs). Performance of battery proposes to determine that the operating conditions that will significantly amendment request involves no increase the consequences of an analyzed testing is not a precursor to any accident significant hazards consideration. event.

previously evaluated, nor does it change the manner in which the batteries and battery Attorney for licensee: Peter M. Glass, Therefore, the proposed change does not chargers are operated. The proposed testing Assistant General Counsel, Xcel Energy involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident requirements will not contribute to the Services, Inc., 414 Nicollet Mall, failure of the batteries nor any plant SSC. previously evaluated.

Minneapolis, MN 55401.

NSPM has determined that the proposed TS NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona. 2. Does the proposed change create the changes provide an equivalent level of possibility of a new or different kind of assurance that the batteries and battery South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, accident from any accident previously chargers are capable of performing their South Carolina Public Service evaluated?

intended safety functions. Thus, the Authority, Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Response: No.

proposed changes do not affect the Summer Nuclear Station, Unit 1, The proposed change includes the deletion probability of an accident previously Fairfield County, South Carolina of an expired allowed outage time extension evaluated. and the revision of the SRs that confirm the Therefore, the proposed change does not Date of amendment request: April 7, EFW pump performance to be more involve a significant increase in the 2016. A publicly-available version is in consistent with the corresponding STS SR.

probability or consequences of an accident ADAMS under Accession No. Consistent with the STS SR, the proposed previously evaluated. ML16104A027. change would remove the specific pump

2. Does the proposed change create the Description of amendment request: head and flow values from the current SRs possibility of a new or different kind of The amendment would revise the and require that the SR be performed in accident from any accident previously Emergency Feedwater System pump accordance with the Inservice Testing evaluated? performance testing requirements in Program. The removal of the specific pump Response: No. Technical Specification (TS) 3/4.7.1.2, head and flow values from the SR is The DC electrical power system, including Emergency Feedwater System, necessary to support the implementation of the associated battery chargers, is not an a plant modification that would change the Surveillance Requirements 4.7.1.2.a.1 current EFW pump head and flow values in initiator of any accident sequence analyzed and 4.7.1.2.a.2.

in the USAR. The proposed TS changes do the SR. The plant modification is being Basis for proposed no significant performed under the provisions of not involve operation of the DC electrical power system in a manner or configuration hazards consideration determination: 10CFR50.59. The proposed TS change does different from those previously evaluated. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the not involve a change in the methods Performance of battery testing is not a licensee has provided its analysis of the governing normal plant operation. The precursor to any accident previously issue of no significant hazards proposed change also does not change any evaluated. NSPM has determined that the consideration, which is presented below system functions nor does the proposed TS proposed TS changes provide an equivalent with NRC staff edits in square brackets: change affect any safety analysis or design level of assurance that the batteries and basis requirements. The proposed TS change battery chargers are capable of performing 1. Do the proposed changes [sic] involve a will continue to ensure the EFW System is asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES their intended safety functions. Therefore, significant increase in the probability or operable in a similar manner as before. As the mitigating functions supported by the DC consequences of an accident previously such, the proposed change does not create electrical power system will continue to evaluated? new failure modes or mechanisms that are provide the protection assumed in the safety Response: No. not identifiable during testing, and no new analyses. The proposed change deletes an allowed accident precursors are generated.

Therefore, the proposed change does not outage time that is no longer applicable and Therefore, the proposed changes do [sic]

create the possibility of a new or different revises the Surveillance Requirements (SRs) not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident that confirm the Emergency Feedwater (EFW) kind of accident from any previously previously evaluated. pump performance to be more consistent evaluated.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:13 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM 07JNN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Notices 36623

3. Does this [proposed] change involve a licensee has provided its analysis of the used to mitigate accidents. The proposed significant reduction in a margin of safety? issue of no significant hazards changes to restructure the TS and change Response: No. consideration, which is presented surveillances for batteries and chargers to The margin of safety is established through below: incorporate the updates included in TSTF-equipment design, operating parameters, and 500, Revision 2, will maintain the same level

1. Does the proposed change involve a of equipment performance required for the setpoints at which automatic actions are significant increase in the probability or mitigating accidents assumed in the FSAR.

initiated. The proposed change does not consequences of any accident previously Administrative and mechanical controls are physically alter safety-related systems, nor evaluated? in place to ensure the design and operation does it affect the way in which safety related systems perform their functions. The Response: No. of the DC systems continues to meet the plant setpoints at which protective actions are The proposed changes restructure the design basis described in the FSAR.

initiated are not altered by the proposed Technical Specifications (TS) for the direct Therefore, operation of the facility in change. Therefore, in a similar manner as current (DC) electrical power system and are accordance with this proposed change will before, sufficient equipment remains consistent with TSTF-500, Revision 2. The not create the possibility of a new or different available to actuate upon demand for the proposed changes modify TS Actions relating kind of accident from any accident purpose of mitigating an analyzed event. The to battery and battery charger inoperability. previously evaluated.

proposed change results in TS requirements The DC electrical power system, including 3. Does the proposed change involve a that are consistent with the plant safety associated battery chargers, is not an initiator significant reduction in the margin of safety?

analyses. As such, the change does not result of any accident sequence analyzed in the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). Rather, Response: No.

in operating conditions that significantly The margin of safety is established through reduce any margin of safety. the DC electrical power system supports equipment used to mitigate accidents. The equipment design, operating parameters, and Therefore, the proposed changes do [sic] the setpoints at which automatic actions are not involve a significant reduction in a proposed changes to restructure TS and change surveillances for batteries and initiated. The equipment margins will be margin of safety. maintained in accordance with the plant-chargers to incorporate the updates included The NRC staff has reviewed the in TSTF-500, Revision 2, will maintain the specific design bases as a result of the licensees analysis and, based on this same level of equipment performance proposed changes. The proposed changes review, it appears that the three required for mitigating accidents assumed in will not adversely affect operation of plant the FSAR. Operation in accordance with the equipment. These changes will not result in standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are a change to the setpoints at which protective satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposed TS would ensure that the DC electrical power system is capable of actions are initiated. Sufficient DC capacity proposes to determine that the to support operation of mitigation equipment amendment request involves no performing its specified safety function as described in the FSAR. Therefore, the is ensured. The changes associated with the significant hazards consideration. mitigating functions supported by the DC new Battery Monitoring and Maintenance Attorney for licensee: J. Hagood electrical power system will continue to Program will ensure that the station batteries Hamilton, Jr., South Carolina Electric & provide the protection assumed by the are maintained in a highly reliable manner.

Gas Company, Post Office Box 764, analysis. The equipment fed by the DC electrical Columbia, South Carolina 29218. The relocation of preventive maintenance sources will continue to provide adequate surveillances, and certain operating limits power to safety-related loads in accordance NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. with analysis assumptions.

Markley. and actions, to a licensee-controlled Battery Monitoring and Maintenance Program will TS changes made in accordance with Southern Nuclear Operating Company, not challenge the ability of the DC electrical TSTF-500, Revision 2, maintain the same Inc.; Georgia Power Company; power system to perform its design function. level of equipment performance stated in the Appropriate monitoring and maintenance FSAR and the current TSs. Therefore, the Oglethorpe Power Corporation; proposed changes do not involve a Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia; that are consistent with industry standards will continue to be performed. In addition, significant reduction of safety.

City of Dalton, Georgia, Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366, Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear the DC electrical power system is within the The NRC staff has reviewed the scope of 10 CFR 50.65, Requirements for licensees analysis and, based on this Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Appling monitoring the effectiveness of maintenance County, Georgia review, it appears that the three at nuclear power plants, which will ensure standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are Date of amendment request: August the control of maintenance activities associated with the DC electrical power satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff 11, 2015, as supplemented by letters proposes to determine that the dated March 16, 2014, and April 4, system.

The integrity of fission product barriers, amendment request involves no 2016. Publicly-available versions are in plant configuration, and operating significant hazards consideration.

ADAMS under Accession Nos. procedures as described in the FSAR will not Attorney for licensee: Jennifer M.

ML15226A276, ML16076A453, and be affected by the proposed changes. Buettner, Associate General Counsel, ML16095A373, respectively. Therefore, the consequences of previously Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Description of amendment request: analyzed accidents will not increase by Inc., 40 Iverness Center Parkway, The amendments would revise the implementing these changes. Birmingham, AL 35242.

technical specification (TS) Therefore, the proposed changes do not NRC Branch Chief: Michael T.

requirements related to direct current involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident Markley.

(DC) electrical systems in TS Limiting previously evaluated. Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.8.4, DC SourcesOperating; LCO 3.8.5, 2. Does the proposed change create the Inc., Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364, DC SourcesShutdown; and LCO possibility of a new or different kind of Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant (FNP),

asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES accident from any previously evaluated? Units 1 and 2, Houston County, 3.8.6, Battery Cell Parameters. A new battery monitoring and maintenance Response: No. Alabama program is being proposed for Section The proposed changes involve Date of amendment request: April 25, restructuring the TS for the DC electrical 5.5, Administrative Controls power system. The DC electrical power 2016. A publicly-available version is in Programs and Manuals. system, including associated battery chargers, ADAMS under Accession No.

Basis for proposed no significant is not an initiator to any accident sequence ML16120A294.

hazards consideration determination: analyzed in the FSAR. Rather, the DC Description of amendment request:

As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the electrical power system supports equipment The license proposed three changes to VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:13 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM 07JNN1

36624 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Notices modifications specified in the March 10, as they are clarifying or administrative in and opportunity for a hearing in 2015, NFPA [National Environmental nature. The proposed change relates to the connection with these actions, was Policy Act]-805 amendment, availability of fire PRA [probabilistic risk published in the Federal Register as analysis] credited component in given fire Attachment S, Table S-2, Plant scenarios. indicated.

Modifications Committed. The three Therefore, this proposed change does not Unless otherwise indicated, the proposed modifications are: (1) Delete create the possibility of a new or different Commission has determined that these Fire Area 1-041 information from Table kind of accident from any accident amendments satisfy the criteria for S-2, (2) add information on item 11, previously evaluated.

Pyro Panel modification, and, (3) change categorical exclusion in accordance

3. Does the proposed amendment involve a cable 2VCHAL07P to cable with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant significant reduction in a margin of safety?

2VCFARK2P. to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental Response: No. impact statement or environmental Basis for proposed no significant The proposed amendment updates hazards consideration determination: Attachments M, S, and W of the previously assessment need be prepared for these As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the approved NFPA-805 LAR submittal for FNP. amendments. If the Commission has licensee has provided its analysis of the The attachment revisions are based on the prepared an environmental assessment issue of no significant hazards three changes to Table S-2 proposed in this under the special circumstances consideration. The NRC staff has LAR. One of the changes is justified based on provision in 10 CFR 51.22(b) and has reviewed the licensees analysis against negligible risk impact to Core Damage made a determination based on that Frequency or Large Early Release Frequency the standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c). The assessment, it is so indicated.

associated with not performing the licensees analysis is presented below: committed modification. The other two For further details with respect to the

1. Does the proposed amendment involve a changes have no impact on accident analysis action see (1) the applications for significant increase in the probability or as they are clarifying or administrative in amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3) consequences of an accident previously nature.

evaluated?

the Commissions related letter, Safety The proposed change does not increase the probability or consequence of an accident Evaluation and/or Environmental Response: No.

The proposed amendment updates and does not reduce the margin of safety as Assessment as indicated. All of these Attachments M, S, and W of the previously verified by the risk analysis performed. items can be accessed as described in approved NFPA-805 LAR [license Therefore, this proposed change does not the Obtaining Information and amendment request] submittal for FNP. The involve a significant reduction in a margin of Submitting Comments section of this attachment revisions are based on the three safety. document.

changes to Table S-2 proposed in this LAR. The NRC staff has reviewed the One of the changes is justified based on licensees analysis and, based on this Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-negligible risk impact to Core Damage 382, Waterford Steam Electric Station, Frequency or Large Early Release Frequency review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are Unit 3, St. Charles Parish, Louisiana associated with not performing the committed modification. The other two satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff Date of amendment request: June 29, changes have no impact on accident analysis proposes to determine that the as they are clarifying or administrative in 2015.

amendment request involves no nature. significant hazards consideration. Brief description of amendment: The The proposed change does not adversely Attorney for licensee: Jennifer M. amendment approved a change to the affect accident initiators or precursors nor Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit alter the design assumptions, conditions, and Buettner, Associate General Counsel, Southern Nuclear Operating Company, 3, Cyber Security Plan Implementation configuration of the facility or the manner in which the plant is operated and maintained. 40 Iverness Center Parkway, Schedule Milestone 8 full The proposed changes do not adversely affect Birmingham, AL 35201. implementation date and a related the ability of structures, systems and NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. change to the existing operating license components (SSCs) to perform their intended Markley. physical protection license condition.

safety function to mitigate the consequences of an initiating event within the assumed III. Notice of Issuance of Amendments Date of issuance: May 10, 2016.

acceptance limits. The proposed change does to Facility Operating Licenses and Effective date: As of the date of not increase the probability or consequence Combined Licenses issuance and shall be implemented of an accident as verified by the risk analysis within 30 days of issuance.

During the period since publication of performed.

Therefore, this proposed change does not the last biweekly notice, the Amendment No.: 247. A publicly-involve a significant increase in the Commission has issued the following available version is in ADAMS under probability or consequences of an accident amendments. The Commission has Accession No. ML16077A270; previously identified. determined for each of these documents related to this amendment

2. Does the proposed amendment create the amendments that the application are listed in the Safety Evaluation possibility of a new or different kind of complies with the standards and enclosed with the amendment.

accident from any accident previously requirements of the Atomic Energy Act evaluated? of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Facility Operating License No. NPF-Response: No. Commissions rules and regulations. 38: The amendment revised the facility The proposed amendment updates The Commission has made appropriate operating license.

Attachments M, S, and W of the previously findings as required by the Act and the asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Date of initial notice in Federal approved NFPA-805 LAR submittal for FNP. Commissions rules and regulations in Register: September 1, 2015 (80 FR The attachment revisions are based on the 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in three changes to Table S-2 proposed in this 52805).

the license amendment.

LAR. One of the changes is justified based on A notice of consideration of issuance The Commissions related evaluation negligible risk impact to Core Damage of the amendment is contained in a Frequency or Large Early Release Frequency of amendment to facility operating license or combined license, as Safety Evaluation dated May 10, 2016.

associated with not performing the committed modification. The other two applicable, proposed no significant No significant hazards consideration changes have no impact on accident analysis hazards consideration determination, comments received: No.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:13 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM 07JNN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Notices 36625 Exelon Generation Company, LLC, RCS Flow Rate, Unit 1, and 3.4.1-2, 2015; and January 14 and March 4, Docket No. 50-461, Clinton Power Reduction in Percent RATED 2016.

Station, Unit No. 1, DeWitt County, THERMAL POWER for Reduced RCS Brief description of amendment: The Illinois Flow Rate, Unit 2, and add RCS amendment approved a change to the thermal design flow (TDF) values to the Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station Exelon Generation Company, LLC, requirements of TS 3.4.1. The change licensing basis to incorporate a Docket Nos. 50-237 and 50-249, also relocates the RCS minimum supplemental analysis for the steam Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 measured flow (MMF) values to the generator tube rupture accident.

and 3, Grundy County, Illinois DCPP, Units 1 and 2, core operating Date of issuance: May 16, 2016.

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, limits reports (COLR) with a reference to Effective date: As of the date of Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, Quad the MMF values in TS 3.4.1 and issuance and shall be implemented Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 Surveillance Requirements 3.4.1.3 and within120 days of issuance.

and 2, Rock Island County, Illinois 3.4.1.4. Figure 2.1.1-1, Reactor Core Amendment No.: 205. A publicly-Date of application for amendments: Safety Limit, has been revised to delete available version is in ADAMS under August 18, 2015, as supplemented by a footnote with references to Tables Accession No. ML15231A605; letter dated April 14, 2016. 3.4.1-1 and 3.4.1-2. The change is documents related to this amendment Brief description of amendments: The consistent with NUREG-1431, Volume are listed in the Safety Evaluation amendments revised the reactor steam 1, Revision 4.0, Standard Technical enclosed with the amendment.

dome pressure specified in the technical Specifications, Westinghouse Plants, Facility Operating License No. NPF-specification safety limits. April 2012; NRC-approved Technical 12: Amendment revised the Facility Date of issuance: May 11, 2016. Specification Task Force (TSTF) Change Operating License.

Effective date: As of the date of Traveler 339-A, Revision 2, Relocate Date of initial notice in Federal issuance and shall be implemented TS Parameters to COLR, dated June 13, Register: October 14, 2014 (79 FR within 60 days from the date of 2000; and NRC-approved WCAP- 61661). The supplemental letters dated issuance. 14483-A, Generic Methodology for October 31, 2014; February 12, May 12, Amendment Nos.: 209, 250, 243, 262, Expanded Core Operating Limits September 10, and November 5, 2015; and 257. A publicly-available versions Report, January 1999. and January 14 and March 4, 2016, is in ADAMS under Accession No. The change is necessary to correct a provided additional information that ML16111A104. Documents related to non-conservative TS 3.4.1 total RCS clarified the application, did not expand these amendments are listed in the flow rate value for DCPP, Unit 1. The the scope of the application as originally Safety Evaluation enclosed with the change also ensures that the TS stays noticed, and did not change the staffs amendments. conservative, if the cycle-specific original proposed no significant hazards Facility Operating License Nos. : minimum RCS flow is higher than the consideration determination as NPF-62, DPR-19, DPR-25, DPR-29, and minimum TDF. published in the Federal Register.

DPR-30. Amendments revised the The Commissions related evaluation Date of issuance: May 19, 2016.

Facility Operating Licenses and of the amendment is contained in a Effective date: As of its date of Technical Specifications. Safety Evaluation dated May 16, 2016.

issuance and shall be implemented No significant hazards consideration Date of initial notice in Federal within 120 days from the date of comments received: No.

Register: October 27, 2015 (80 FR issuance.

65812). The supplemental letter dated Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Amendment Nos.: Unit 1226; Unit April 14, 2016, provided additional Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364, Joseph 2228. A publicly-available version is information that clarified the M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, in ADAMS under Accession No.

application, did not expand the scope of Houston County, Alabama ML16117A252; documents related to the application as originally noticed, these amendments are listed in the Date of amendment request: August and did not change the staffs original Safety Evaluation enclosed with the 31, 2015, as supplemented by letters proposed no significant hazards amendments. dated January 28, 2016, and March 11, consideration determination as published in the Federal Register. Facility Operating License Nos. DPR- 2016.

The Commissions related evaluation 80 and DPR-82: The amendments Brief description of amendments: The of the amendment is contained in a revised the Facility Operating Licenses amendments revised Technical safety evaluation dated May 11, 2016. and TSs. Specification (TS) 3.4.14, RCS Pressure No significant hazards consideration Date of initial notice in Federal Isolation Valve (PIV) Leakage, to comments received: No. Register: November 10, 2015 (80 FR eliminate the requirements for the 69714). residual heat removal system suction Pacific Gas and Electric Company, The Commissions related evaluation valve auto closure interlock function.

Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323, Diablo of the amendments is contained in a Date of issuance: May 17, 2016.

Canyon Nuclear Power Plant (DCPP), Safety Evaluation dated May 19, 2016. Effective date: As of the date of Units 1 and 2, San Luis Obispo County, No significant hazards consideration issuance and shall be implemented as California comments received: No. follows: Unit 1prior to the first entry Date of application for amendments: into Mode 4, following the end-of-cycle South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, September 16, 2015. refueling outage 27 (scheduled for fall asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Brief description of amendments: The South Carolina Public Service 2016), and Unit 2prior to the first amendments revised Technical Authority, Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C.

entry into Mode 4, following the end-of-Specification (TS) 3.4.1, RCS [Reactor Summer Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1, cycle refueling outage 25 (scheduled for Coolant System] Pressure, Temperature, Fairfield County, South Carolina fall 2017).

and Flow Departure from Nucleate Date of amendment request: August Amendment Nos.: 201 (Unit 1) and Boiling (DNB) Limits, to delete current 27, 2014, as supplemented by letters 197 (Unit 2). A publicly-available Tables 3.4.1-1, Reduction in Percent dated October 31, 2014; February 12, version is in ADAMS under Accession RATED THERMAL POWER for Reduced May 12, September 10, and November 5, No. ML16083A265; documents related VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:13 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM 07JNN1

36626 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 109 / Tuesday, June 7, 2016 / Notices to these amendments are listed in the approving an indirect license transfer of comments electronically should contact Safety Evaluation enclosed with the the SSES license to Talen Energy the person identified in the FOR FURTHER amendments. Corporation (ADAMS Accession No. INFORMATION CONTACT section by Facility Operating License Nos. NPF- ML15058A073). telephone for advice on filing 2 and NPF-8: The amendments revised Date of issuance: May 20, 2016. alternatives.

the Renewed Facility Operating Effective date: As of the date of Licenses and TSs. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

issuance and shall be implemented Date of initial notice in Federal within 180 days of issuance. David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at Register: October 27, 2015 (80 FR Amendment Nos.: 266 (Unit 1) and 202-789-6820.

65815). The supplemental letters dated 247 (Unit 2). A publicly-available SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

January 28, 2016, and March 11, 2016, version is in ADAMS under Accession provided additional information that Table of Contents No. ML16005A234; documents related clarified the application, did not expand to these amendments are listed in the SE I. Introduction the scope of the application as originally enclosed with the amendments. II. Notice of Commission Action noticed, and did not change the staffs Renewed Facility Operating License III. Ordering Paragraphs original proposed no significant hazards Nos. NPF-14 and NPF-22: Amendments I. Introduction consideration determination as revised the Renewed Facility Operating published in the Federal Register. Licenses and TSs. On May 31, 2016, the Postal Service The Commissions related evaluation Date of initial notice in Federal filed notice that it has entered into a of the amendments is contained in a Register: March 3, 2015 (80 FR 11479). Global Expedited Package Services 6 Safety Evaluation dated May 17, 2016. The supplemental letters dated July 2, (GEPS 6) negotiated service agreement No significant hazards consideration 2015; September 21, 2015; November (Agreement).1 comments received: No. 11, 2015; and January 29, 2016, To support its Request, the Postal Susquehanna Nuclear, LLC, Docket Nos. provided additional information that Service filed a copy of the Agreement, 50-387 and 50-388, Susquehanna clarified the application, did not expand a copy of the Governors Decision Steam Electric Station (SSES), Units 1 the scope of the application as originally authorizing the product, a certification and 2, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania noticed, and did not change the staffs of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a),

original proposed no significant hazards and an application for non-public Date of amendment request: October consideration determination as treatment of certain materials. It also 27, 2014, as supplemented by letters published in the Federal Register. filed supporting financial workpapers.

dated July 2, 2015; September 21, 2015; The Commissions related evaluation November 11, 2015; and January 29, II. Notice of Commission Action of the amendments is contained in an 2016. SE dated May 20, 2016. The Commission establishes Docket Brief description of amendments: The No significant hazards consideration Nos. MC2016-149 and CP2016-188 for amendments modified the SSES comments received: No. consideration of matters raised by the technical specifications (TSs). Request.

Specifically, the amendments modified Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of May, 2016. The Commission invites comments on the TSs by relocating specific whether the Postal Services filing is surveillance frequencies to a licensee- For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Anne T. Boland, consistent with 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or controlled program, the Surveillance 3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR Frequency Control Program, with Director, Division of Operating Reactor part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due implementation of Nuclear Energy Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. no later than June 8, 2016. The public Institute (NEI) 04-10, Revision 1, Risk- portions of the filing can be accessed via Informed Technical Specifications [FR Doc. 2016-13255 Filed 6-6-16; 8:45 am]

the Commissions Web site (http://

Initiative 5b, Risk-Informed Method for BILLING CODE 7590-01-P www.prc.gov).

Control of Surveillance Frequencies.

The Commission appoints Curtis E.

The changes are consistent with NRC-Kidd to serve as Public Representative approved Technical Specification Task POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION in this docket.

Force Improved Standard Technical

[Docket Nos. MC2016-149 and CP2016-188; Specifications Change Traveler (TSTF)- Order No. 3335] III. Ordering Paragraphs 425, Revision 3, Relocate Surveillance It is ordered:

Frequencies to Licensee Control New Postal Product RITSTF Initiative 5b. The Federal 1. The Commission establishes Docket Register notice published on July 6, AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. Nos. MC2016-149 and CP2016-188 for 2009 (74 FR 31996), announced the ACTION: Notice. consideration of the matters raised by availability of this TSTF improvement the Postal Services Notice.

and included a model no significant

SUMMARY

The Commission is noticing a 2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Curtis E.

hazards consideration and safety recent Postal Service filing concerning Kidd is appointed to serve as an officer evaluation (SE). the addition of Global Expedited of the Commission to represent the This license amendment request was Package Services 6 Contracts to the interests of the general public in this submitted by PPL Susquehanna, LLC; competitive product list. This notice proceeding (Public Representative).

asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES however, on June 1, 2015, the NRC staff informs the public of the filing, invites 3. Comments are due no later than issued an amendment changing the public comment, and takes other June 8, 2016.

name on the SSES license from PPL administrative steps.

Susquehanna, LLC to Susquehanna DATES: Comments are due: June 8, 2016. 1 Request of the United States Postal Service to Nuclear, LLC (ADAMS Accession No. ADDRESSES: Submit comments Add Global Expedited Package Services 6 Contracts to the Competitive Product List, and Notice of ML15054A066). These amendments electronically via the Commissions Filing (Under Seal) of Contract and Application for were issued subsequent to an order Filing Online system at http:// Non-Public Treatment of Materials Filed Under issued on April 10, 2015, to SSES, www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit Seal, May 31, 2016 (Request).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:13 Jun 06, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM 07JNN1