ML15223A318: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:15144 Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 52/Tuesday, March 18, 2014/Notices *evaluate the accuracy of the agencys estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
{{#Wiki_filter:NRC000191 Submitted: August 10, 2015 15144                         Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices
 
* evaluate the accuracy of the                      
methodology and assumptions used; *enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be
 
collected; and *minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who
 
are to respond, including through the
 
use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other
 
technological collection techniques or
 
other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions
 
of responses.
III. Current Actions:
The Department of Labor seeks the approval for the
 
extension of this currently approved
 
information collection in order to
 
ensure the accurate payment of benefits
 
to current and former Federal
 
employees with recurring work-related
 
injuries.
Type of Review:
Extension.
Agency: Office of Workers Compensation Programs.
Title: Notice of Recurrences OMB Number:
1240-0009.
 
Agency Number:
CA-2a.
Affected Public:
Individuals or households.
Total Respondents:
258.
Total Annual Responses:
258. Average Time per Response:
30 minutes. Estimated Total Burden Hours:
129. Frequency:
Annually.
Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):
$0. Total Burden Cost (operating/
maintenance):
$126. Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized and/or included in the request for Office of
 
Management and Budget approval of the
 
information collection request; they will
 
also become a matter of public record.
Dated: March 10, 2014.
Yoon Ferguson, Agency Clearance Officer, Office of Workers Compensation Programs, US Department of
 
Labor. [FR Doc. 2014-05981 Filed 3-17-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-CH-P NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Notice of Permit Applications Received Under the Antarctic Conservation Act
 
of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-541)
AGENCY: National Science Foundation.
ACTION: Notice of Permit Applications Received Under the Antarctic
 
Conservation Act of 1978, Public Law
 
95-541.


==SUMMARY==
==SUMMARY==
: The National Science Foundation (NSF) is required to publish a notice of permit applications received  
:   The National Science                       Antarctic Specially Protected Area No.
 
agencys estimate of the burden of the                  Foundation (NSF) is required to publish               152, Western Bransfield Strait (Area proposed collection of information,                    a notice of permit applications received             around Low Island).
to conduct activities regulated under the  
including the validity of the                          to conduct activities regulated under the Dates methodology and assumptions used;                      Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978.
 
* enhance the quality, utility and                    NSF has published regulations under                     June 21, 2014 to October 21, 2014.
Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978.  
clarity of the information to be                        the Antarctic Conservation Act at Title Nadene G. Kennedy, collected; and                                          45 Part 670 of the Code of Federal
 
* minimize the burden of the                                                                                Polar Coordination Specialist, Division of Regulations. This is the required notice Polar Programs.
NSF has published regulations under  
collection of information on those who                  of permit applications received.
 
are to respond, including through the                                                                        [FR Doc. 2014-05881 Filed 3-17-14; 8:45 am]
the Antarctic Conservation Act at Title  
DATES: Interested parties are invited to use of appropriate automated,                          submit written data, comments, or                     BILLING CODE 7555-01-P electronic, mechanical, or other                        views with respect to this permit technological collection techniques or                  application by April 17, 2014. This other forms of information technology,                  application may be inspected by                       NUCLEAR REGULATORY e.g., permitting electronic submissions                interested parties at the Permit Office,             COMMISSION of responses.                                          address below.                                       [NRC-2014-0045]
 
III. Current Actions: The Department                  ADDRESSES: Comments should be of Labor seeks the approval for the                    addressed to Permit Office, Room 755,                 Biweekly Notice; Applications and extension of this currently approved                    Division of Polar Programs, National                 Amendments to Facility Operating information collection in order to                      Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson                       Licenses and Combined Licenses ensure the accurate payment of benefits                Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230.                 Involving No Significant Hazards to current and former Federal                          FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:                     Considerations employees with recurring work-related                  Polly Penhale, ACA Permit Officer, at injuries.                                                                                                    Background the above address or ACApermits@
45 Part 670 of the Code of Federal  
Type of Review: Extension.                                                                                    Pursuant to Section 189a. (2) of the nsf.gov or (703) 292-7420.
 
Agency: Office of Workers                                                                                  Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended Compensation Programs.                                  SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Science Foundation, as                       (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Regulations. This is the required notice  
 
of permit applications received.
DATES: Interested parties are invited to submit written data, comments, or  
 
views with respect to this permit  
 
application by April 17, 2014. This  
 
application may be inspected by  
 
interested parties at the Permit Office, address below.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Permit Office, Room 755, Division of Polar Programs, National  
 
Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson  
 
Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230. FORFURTHERINFORMATIONCONTACT
: Polly Penhale, ACA Permit Officer, at  
 
the above address or ACApermits@
 
nsf.gov or (703) 292-7420. SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATION
: The National Science Foundation, as  
 
directed by the Antarctic Conservation
 
Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-541), as
 
amended by the Antarctic Science, Tourism and Conservation Act of 1996, has developed regulations for the
 
establishment of a permit system for
 
various activities in Antarctica and
 
designation of certain animals and
 
certain geographic areas a requiring
 
special protection. The regulations
 
establish such a permit system to
 
designate Antarctic Specially Protected
 
Areas. Application Details
: 1. Applicant:
Permit Application: 2014-030 Prof. Chi-Hing Christina Cheng Department of Animal Biology, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, IL Activity for Which Permit Is Requested ASPA, Import into USA: This permit would allow entry into ASPA 153
 
Eastern Dallmann Bay and ASPA 152
 
Western Bransfield Strait for the
 
purpose of collecting a small number of
 
icefish species via trawling and trapping
 
for a study on freezing avoidance and
 
evolutionary cold adaptation in
 
Antarctic fishes. Some whole, frozen
 
individuals as well as tissue samples
 
would be imported back into the U.S.A.
 
for physiological, biochemical, and
 
molecular studies. Port of Entry is Port


==Title:==
Notice of Recurrences OMB Number: 1240-0009.                                directed by the Antarctic Conservation                Commission (NRC) is publishing this Agency Number: CA-2a.                                Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-541), as                      regular biweekly notice. The Act Affected Public: Individuals or                      amended by the Antarctic Science,                    requires the Commission to publish households.                                            Tourism and Conservation Act of 1996,                notice of any amendments issued, or Total Respondents: 258.                              has developed regulations for the                    proposed to be issued and grants the Total Annual Responses: 258.                          establishment of a permit system for                  Commission the authority to issue and Average Time per Response: 30                        various activities in Antarctica and                  make immediately effective any minutes.                                                designation of certain animals and                    amendment to an operating license or Estimated Total Burden Hours: 129.                    certain geographic areas a requiring                  combined license, as applicable, upon a Frequency: Annually.                                  special protection. The regulations                  determination by the Commission that Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):                  establish such a permit system to                    such amendment involves no significant
                                                $0.                                                    designate Antarctic Specially Protected              hazards consideration, notwithstanding Total Burden Cost (operating/                        Areas.                                                the pendency before the Commission of maintenance): $126.                                                                                          a request for a hearing from any person.
Comments submitted in response to                    Application Details                                      This biweekly notice includes all this notice will be summarized and/or                  1. Applicant: Permit Application: 2014-              notices of amendments issued, or included in the request for Office of                        030                                              proposed to be issued from March 5 to Management and Budget approval of the                      Prof. Chi-Hing Christina Cheng                    March 18, 2014. The last biweekly information collection request; they will                  Department of Animal Biology,                      notice was published on March 4, 2014 also become a matter of public record.                      University of Illinois, Urbana-                  (79 FR 12241).
Dated: March 10, 2014.                                    Champaign, IL ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Yoon Ferguson,                                          Activity for Which Permit Is Requested                by any of the following methods (unless Agency Clearance Officer, Office of Workers              ASPA, Import into USA: This permit                  this document describes a different Compensation Programs, US Department of                                                                      method for submitting comments on a Labor.
would allow entry into ASPA 153 Eastern Dallmann Bay and ASPA 152                    specific subject):
[FR Doc. 2014-05981 Filed 3-17-14; 8:45 am]
Western Bransfield Strait for the
* Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to BILLING CODE 4510-CH-P purpose of collecting a small number of              http://www.regulations.gov and search icefish species via trawling and trapping            for Docket ID NRC-2014-0045. Address for a study on freezing avoidance and                questions about NRC dockets to Carol NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION                            evolutionary cold adaptation in                      Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-3422; Antarctic fishes. Some whole, frozen                  email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For Notice of Permit Applications Received                  individuals as well as tissue samples                technical questions, contact the emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES Under the Antarctic Conservation Act                    would be imported back into the U.S.A.                individual listed in the FOR FURTHER of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-541)                                for physiological, biochemical, and                  INFORMATION CONTACT section of this AGENCY: National Science Foundation.                    molecular studies. Port of Entry is Port              document.
Hueneme, CA.
Hueneme, CA.
Location Antarctic Specially Protected Area No. 153, Eastern Dallmann Bay; and Antarctic Specially Protected Area No.
* Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, ACTION: Notice of Permit Applications Chief, Rules, Announcements, and Received Under the Antarctic                            Location                                             Directives Branch (RADB), Office of Conservation Act of 1978, Public Law Antarctic Specially Protected Area                 Administration, Mail Stop: 3WFN                                                95-541.
152, Western Bransfield Strait (Area
No. 153, Eastern Dallmann Bay; and                   44M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory VerDate Mar<15>2010  18:34 Mar 17, 2014  Jkt 232001  PO 00000  Frm 00050  Fmt 4703  Sfmt 4703  E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM  18MRN1


around Low Island).
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices                                              15145 Commission, Washington, DC 20555-                      identifying or contact information that              the need to take this action will occur 0001.                                                  they do not want to be publicly                      very infrequently.
Dates June 21, 2014 to October 21, 2014.
For additional direction on accessing                disclosed in their comment submission.                   Within 60 days after the date of information and submitting comments,                   Your request should state that the NRC                publication of this notice, any person(s) see Accessing Information and                        does not routinely edit comment                      whose interest may be affected by this Submitting Comments in the                            submissions to remove such information                action may file a request for a hearing SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of                    before making the comment                            and a petition to intervene with respect this document.                                          submissions available to the public or                to issuance of the amendment to the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:                              entering the comment submissions into                subject facility operating license or ADAMS.                                                combined license. Requests for a I. Accessing Information and                                                                                  hearing and a petition for leave to Submitting Comments                                    Notice of Consideration of Issuance of                intervene shall be filed in accordance Amendments to Facility Operating                      with the Commissions Agency Rules A. Accessing Information                                Licenses and Combined Licenses,                      of Practice and Procedure in 10 CFR Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2014-                 Proposed No Significant Hazards                      Part 2. Interested person(s) should 0045 when contacting the NRC about                      Consideration Determination, and                      consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, the availability of information regarding              Opportunity for a Hearing                            which is available at the NRCs PDR, this document. You may access                              The Commission has made a                          located at One White Flint North, Room publicly-available information related to              proposed determination that the                      O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first this action by the following methods:                  following amendment requests involve                  floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. The
Nadene G. Kennedy, Polar Coordination Specialist, Division of Polar Programs.  
* Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to                no significant hazards consideration.                NRC regulations are accessible http://www.regulations.gov and search                  Under the Commissions regulations in                electronically from the NRC Library on for Docket ID NRC-2014-0045.                            &sect; 50.92 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal            the NRCs Web site at http://
[FR Doc. 2014-05881 Filed 3-17-14; 8:45 am]
* NRCs Agencywide Documents                        Regulations (10 CFR), this means that                www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-Access and Management System                            operation of the facility in accordance              collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing (ADAMS): You may access publicly                        with the proposed amendment would                    or petition for leave to intervene is filed available documents online in the NRC                  not (1) involve a significant increase in            by the above date, the Commission or a Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-                  the probability or consequences of an                presiding officer designated by the rm/adams.html. To begin the search,                    accident previously evaluated; or (2)                Commission or by the Chief select ADAMS Public Documents and                  create the possibility of a new or                    Administrative Judge of the Atomic then select Begin Web-based ADAMS                    different kind of accident from any                  Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will Search. For problems with ADAMS,                      accident previously evaluated; or (3)                rule on the request and/or petition; and please contact the NRCs Public                        involve a significant reduction in a                  the Secretary or the Chief Document Room (PDR) reference staff at                  margin of safety. The basis for this                  Administrative Judge of the Atomic 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by                    proposed determination for each                      Safety and Licensing Board will issue a email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The                      amendment request is shown below.                    notice of a hearing or an appropriate ADAMS accession number for each                            The Commission is seeking public                  order.
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
document referenced in this document                    comments on this proposed                                As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a (if that document is available in                      determination. Any comments received                  petition for leave to intervene shall set ADAMS) is provided the first time that                  within 30 days after the date of                      forth with particularity the interest of a document is referenced.                              publication of this notice will be                    the petitioner in the proceeding, and
[NRC-2014-0045]
* NRCs PDR: You may examine and                    considered in making any final                        how that interest may be affected by the purchase copies of public documents at                  determination.                                        results of the proceeding. The petition the NRCs PDR, Room O1-F21, One                            Normally, the Commission will not                  should specifically explain the reasons White Flint North, 11555 Rockville                      issue the amendment until the                        why intervention should be permitted Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.                        expiration of 60 days after the date of              with particular reference to the publication of this notice. The                      following general requirements: (1) the B. Submitting Comments                                  Commission may issue the license                      name, address, and telephone number of Please include Docket ID NRC-2014-                   amendment before expiration of the 60-                the requestor or petitioner; (2) the 0045 in the subject line of your                        day period provided that its final                    nature of the requestors/petitioners comment submission, in order to ensure                  determination is that the amendment                  right under the Act to be made a party that the NRC is able to make your                      involves no significant hazards                      to the proceeding; (3) the nature and comment submission available to the                    consideration. In addition, the                      extent of the requestors/petitioners public in this docket.                                  Commission may issue the amendment                    property, financial, or other interest in The NRC cautions you not to include                  prior to the expiration of the 30-day                the proceeding; and (4) the possible identifying or contact information that                comment period should circumstances                  effect of any decision or order which you do not want to be publicly                          change during the 30-day comment                      may be entered in the proceeding on the disclosed in your comment submission.                  period such that failure to act in a                  requestors/petitioners interest. The The NRC posts all comment                              timely way would result, for example in              petition must also identify the specific submissions at http://                                  derating or shutdown of the facility.                contentions which the requestor/
Biweekly Notice; Applications and  
www.regulations.gov as well as entering                Should the Commission take action                    petitioner seeks to have litigated at the emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES the comment submissions into ADAMS.                    prior to the expiration of either the                proceeding.
The NRC does not routinely edit                        comment period or the notice period, it                  Each contention must consist of a comment submissions to remove                          will publish in the Federal Register a                specific statement of the issue of law or identifying or contact information.                    notice of issuance. Should the                        fact to be raised or controverted. In If you are requesting or aggregating                  Commission make a final No Significant                addition, the requestor/petitioner shall comments from other persons for                        Hazards Consideration Determination,                  provide a brief explanation of the bases submission to the NRC, then you should                  any hearing will take place after                    for the contention and a concise inform those persons not to include                    issuance. The Commission expects that                statement of the alleged facts or expert VerDate Mar<15>2010  18:34 Mar 17, 2014  Jkt 232001  PO 00000  Frm 00051  Fmt 4703  Sfmt 4703  E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM  18MRN1


Amendments to Facility Operating
15146                        Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices opinion which support the contention                      To comply with the procedural                      considered complete at the time the and on which the requestor/petitioner                  requirements of E-Filing, at least 10                documents are submitted through the intends to rely in proving the contention              days prior to the filing deadline, the                NRCs E-Filing system. To be timely, an at the hearing. The requestor/petitioner                participant should contact the Office of              electronic filing must be submitted to must also provide references to those                  the Secretary by email at                            the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 specific sources and documents of                      hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone              p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.
which the petitioner is aware and on                    at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital            Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-which the requestor/petitioner intends                  identification (ID) certificate, which                Filing system time-stamps the document to rely to establish those facts or expert              allows the participant (or its counsel or            and sends the submitter an email notice opinion. The petition must include                      representative) to digitally sign                    confirming receipt of the document. The sufficient information to show that a                  documents and access the E-Submittal                  E-Filing system also distributes an email genuine dispute exists with the                        server for any proceeding in which it is              notice that provides access to the applicant on a material issue of law or                participating; and (2) advise the                    document to the NRCs Office of the fact. Contentions shall be limited to                  Secretary that the participant will be                General Counsel and any others who matters within the scope of the                        submitting a request or petition for                  have advised the Office of the Secretary amendment under consideration. The                      hearing (even in instances in which the              that they wish to participate in the contention must be one which, if                        participant, or its counsel or                        proceeding, so that the filer need not proven, would entitle the requestor/                    representative, already holds an NRC-                serve the documents on those petitioner to relief. A requestor/                      issued digital ID certificate). Based upon            participants separately. Therefore, petitioner who fails to satisfy these                  this information, the Secretary will                  applicants and other participants (or requirements with respect to at least one              establish an electronic docket for the                their counsel or representative) must contention will not be permitted to                    hearing in this proceeding if the                    apply for and receive a digital ID participate as a party.                                Secretary has not already established an              certificate before a hearing request/
Those permitted to intervene become                  electronic docket.                                    petition to intervene is filed so that they parties to the proceeding, subject to any                  Information about applying for a                  can obtain access to the document via limitations in the order granting leave to              digital ID certificate is available on the            the E-Filing system.
intervene, and have the opportunity to                  NRCs public Web site at http://                        A person filing electronically using participate fully in the conduct of the                www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/                  the agencys adjudicatory E-Filing hearing.                                                apply-certificates.html. System                      system may seek assistance by If a hearing is requested, the                      requirements for accessing the E-                    contacting the NRC Meta System Help Commission will make a final                            Submittal server are detailed in the                  Desk through the Contact Us link determination on the issue of no                        NRCs Guidance for Electronic                      located on the NRC Web site at http://
significant hazards consideration. The                  Submission, which is available on the              www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-final determination will serve to decide                agencys public Web site at http://                  submittals.html, by email to when the hearing is held. If the final                  www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-                              MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll-determination is that the amendment                    submittals.html. Participants may                    free call at 1-866-672-7640. The NRC request involves no significant hazards                attempt to use other software not listed              Meta System Help Desk is available consideration, the Commission may                      on the Web site, but should note that the            between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern issue the amendment and make it                        NRCs E-Filing system does not support                Time, Monday through Friday, immediately effective, notwithstanding                  unlisted software, and the NRC Meta                  excluding government holidays.
the request for a hearing. Any hearing                  System Help Desk will not be able to                    Participants who believe that they held would take place after issuance of                offer assistance in using unlisted                    have a good cause for not submitting the amendment. If the final                            software.                                            documents electronically must file an determination is that the amendment                        If a participant is electronically                exemption request, in accordance with request involves a significant hazards                  submitting a document to the NRC in                  10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper consideration, then any hearing held                    accordance with the E-Filing rule, the                filing requesting authorization to would take place before the issuance of                participant must file the document                    continue to submit documents in paper any amendment.                                          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, accordance with the NRCs E-Filing rule                submittals.html.                                      Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007). The E-                    Once a participant has obtained a                  and Adjudications Staff. Participants Filing process requires participants to                digital ID certificate and a docket has              filing a document in this manner are emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES submit and serve all adjudicatory                      been created, the participant can then                responsible for serving the document on documents over the internet, or in some                submit a request for hearing or petition              all other participants. Filing is cases to mail copies on electronic                      for leave to intervene. Submissions                  considered complete by first-class mail storage media. Participants may not                    should be in Portable Document Format                as of the time of deposit in the mail, or submit paper copies of their filings                    (PDF) in accordance with the NRC                      by courier, express mail, or expedited unless they seek an exemption in                        guidance available on the NRCs public                delivery service upon depositing the accordance with the procedures                          Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-                  document with the provider of the described below.                                        help/e-submittals.html. A filing is                  service. A presiding officer, having VerDate Mar<15>2010  18:34 Mar 17, 2014  Jkt 232001  PO 00000  Frm 00052  Fmt 4703  Sfmt 4703  E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM  18MRN1


Licenses and Combined Licenses
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices                                                  15147 granted an exemption request from                          Description of amendment request:                  tube, as the failure of a tube is not an initiator using E-Filing, may require a participant              The proposed amendment would revise                  for any of these events. In the supporting or party to use E-Filing if the presiding              Technical Specification (TS) 5.5.7,                  Westinghouse analyses, leakage is modeled as flow through a porous medium via the use officer subsequently determines that the                Steam Generator (SG) Program, to                  of the Darcy equation. The leakage model is reason for granting the exemption from                  exclude portions of the SG tube below                used to develop a relationship between use of E-Filing no longer exists.                      the top of the SG tubesheet from                      allowable leakage and leakage at accident Documents submitted in adjudicatory                  periodic inspections and plugging by                  conditions that is based on differential proceedings will appear in the NRCs                    implementing the H* alternate repair                  pressure across the tubesheet and the electronic hearing docket which is                      criteria. In addition, TS 5.6.7, Steam              viscosity of the fluid. A leak rate ratio was available to the public at http://ehd1.                Generator Tube Inspection Report,                  developed to relate the leakage at operating nrc.gov/ehd/;, unless excluded pursuant                would also be revised to include                      conditions to leakage at accident conditions.
The fluid viscosity is based on fluid to an order of the Commission, or the                  additional reporting requirements.
temperature and it has been shown that for presiding officer. Participants are                        Basis for proposed no significant                  the most limiting accident, the fluid requested not to include personal                      hazards consideration determination:                  temperature does not exceed the normal privacy information, such as social                    As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the                  operating temperature. Therefore, the security numbers, home addresses, or                    licensee has provided its analysis of the            viscosity ratio is assumed to be 1.0 and the home phone numbers in their filings,                    issue of no significant hazards                      leak rate ratio is a function of the ratio of the unless an NRC regulation or other law                  consideration, which is presented                    accident differential pressure and the normal requires submission of such                            below:                                                operating differential pressure.
The leakage factor of 1.75 for IP2 for a-information. However, a request to                        1. Does the proposed amendment involve            postulated MSLB, has been calculated as intervene will require including                        a significant increase in the probability or          shown in the supporting Westinghouse information on local residence in order                consequences of an accident previously                analysis. IP2 [Indian Point Unit 2] will apply to demonstrate a proximity assertion of                evaluated?                                            a factor of 1.75 to the normal operating interest in the proceeding. With respect                  Response: No.                                      leakage associated with the tubesheet The proposed change excludes the lower to copyrighted works, except for limited                portion of steam generator tubes from expansion region in the Condition excerpts that serve the purpose of the                                                                        Monitoring Assessment and Operational inspection by implementing the alternate adjudicatory filings and would                                                                                Assessment. Through application of the repair criteria H* and does not have a constitute a Fair Use application,                                                                            limited tubesheet inspection scope, the detrimental impact on the integrity of any administrative leakage limit of 75 gpd participants are requested not to include              plant structure, system, or component that
[gallons per day] provides assurance that copyrighted materials in their                          initiates an analyzed event. The proposed excessive leakage (i.e., greater than accident submission.                                            change has no significant effect upon analysis assumptions) will not occur. No Petitions for leave to intervene must                accident probabilities or consequences.
leakage factor will be applied to the Locked Of the applicable accidents previously be filed no later than 60 days from the                evaluated, the limiting transients with Rotor or Control Rod Ejection due to their date of publication of this notice.                                                                          short duration, since the calculated leak rate consideration to the proposed change to the Requests for hearing, petitions for leave              steam generator tube inspection and repair            ratio is less than 1.0. Therefore, the proposed to intervene, and motions for leave to                  criteria are the steam generator tube rupture        change does not result in a significant increase in the consequences of these file new or amended contentions that                    (SGTR), the main steam line break (MSLB),
Locked Rotor and Control Rod Ejection.                accidents.
are filed after the 60-day deadline will                                                                        For the Condition Monitoring Assessment, not be entertained absent a                                At normal operating pressures, leakage from Primary Water Stress Corrosion                  the component of leakage from the prior determination by the presiding officer                                                                        cycle from below the H* distance will be Cracking (PWSCC) below the proposed that the filing demonstrates good cause                limited inspection depth is limited by both          multiplied by a factor of 1.75 and added to by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR              the tube-to-tubesheet crevice and the limited        the total leakage from any other source and 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(iii).                                  crack opening permitted by the tubesheet              compared to the allowable MSLB leakage For further details with respect to this            constraint. Consequently, negligible normal          limit. For the Operational Assessment, the license amendment application, see the                  operating leakage is expected from cracks            difference in the leakage between the within the tubesheet region.                          allowable leakage and the accident induced application for amendment which is For the SGTR event, the required structural        leakage from sources other than the tubesheet available for public inspection at the                                                                        expansion region will be divided by 1.75 and NRCs PDR, located at One White Flint                  integrity margins of the steam generator tubes and the tube-to-tubesheet joint over the H*          compared to the observed operational North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville                    distance will be maintained. Tube rupture in          leakage. As noted above, an administrative Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland                tubes with cracks within the tubesheet is            limit of 75 gpd has been established at IP2 20852. Publicly available documents                    precluded by the constraint provided by the          to assure that the allowable accident induced created or received at the NRC are                      tube-to-tubesheet joint. This constraint              leakage is not exceeded.
accessible electronically through                      results from the hydraulic expansion process,            Based on the above, the performance ADAMS in the NRC Library at http://                    thermal expansion mismatch between the                criteria of NEI 97-06 and Regulatory Guide tube and tubesheet, and from the differential        (RG) 1.121 continue to be met and the www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
pressure between the primary and secondary            proposed change does not involve a Persons who do not have access to                                                                            significant increase in the probability or side. The structural margins against burst, as ADAMS or who encounter problems in                      discussed in Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.121,            consequences of an accident previously accessing the documents located in                      Bases for Plugging Degraded PWR Steam              evaluated.
ADAMS, should contact the NRCs PDR                    Generator Tubes, (Reference 11) and NEI                2. Does the proposed amendment create Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-                97-06, Steam Generator Program                      the possibility of a new or different kind of emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 415-4737, or by email to pdr.resource@                  Guidelines (Reference 3) are maintained for        accident from any accident previously nrc.gov.                                                both normal and postulated accident                  evaluated?
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.,                    conditions. Therefore, the proposed change              Response: No.
results in no significant increase in the                The proposed change excludes the lower Docket No. 50-247, Indian Point                                                                              portion of steam generator tubes from probability of the occurrence of a SGTR Nuclear Generating, Unit 2, Westchester                accident.                                            inspection by implementing the alternate County, New York                                          The probability of a Steam Line Break,            repair criteria (H*). The proposed change Date of amendment request: January                  Locked Rotor, and Control Rod Ejection are            does not introduce any new equipment, 16, 2014.                                              not affected by the potential failure of a SG        create new failure modes for existing VerDate Mar<15>2010  18:34 Mar 17, 2014  Jkt 232001  PO 00000  Frm 00053  Fmt 4703  Sfmt 4703  E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM  18MRN1


Involving No Significant Hazards
15148                        Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices equipment, or create any new limiting single              NRC Branch Chief: Benjamin G.                      are performed by plant staff during all plant failures resulting from tube degradation. The          Beasley.                                              conditions.
proposed change does not affect the design                Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.,                    Therefore, the proposed change does not of the SGs or their method of operation. In            Docket No. 50-255, Palisades Nuclear                  create the possibility of a new or different addition, the proposed change does not                                                                        kind of accident from any previously Plant, Van Buren County, Michigan                    evaluated.
impact any other plant system or component.
Date of amendment request: June 25,                  3. Does the proposed change involve a Plant operation will not be altered, and all safety functions will continue to perform as            2013, supplemented by letter dated                    significant reduction in a margin of safety?
previously assumed in accident analyses.                August 7, 2013.                                          Response: No.
Therefore, the proposed change does not                Description of amendment request:                    The proposed change does not affect plant create the possibility of a new or different            The proposed amendment would revise                  design or method of operation. Section kind of accident from any previously                    Palisades Nuclear Plant Site Emergency                50.47(b) and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E evaluated.                                              Plan (SEP) to increase the staff                      establish emergency planning standards and
: 3. Does the proposed amendment involve              augmentation response times for certain              requirements that require adequate staffing, a significant reduction in a margin of safety?          Emergency Response Organization                      satisfactory performance of key functional Response: No.                                                                                              areas and critical tasks, and timely positions from 30 to 60 minutes. Entergy The proposed change defines the safety                                                                    augmentation of the response capability.
significant portion of the SG tubing that must Nuclear Organization has reviewed the                Since the SEP was originally developed, be inspected and repaired. WCAP-17828-P                proposed changes against the standards                there have been improvements in the identifies the inspection depth below which            in &sect; 50.47(b) and the requirements in 10              technology used to support the SEP functions any type of degradation is shown to have no            CFR Part 50, Appendix E.                              and in the capabilities of onsite personnel. A impact on the steam generator tube integrity              Basis for proposed no significant                  functional analysis was performed on the performance criteria in NEI 97-06. The                  hazards consideration determination:                  effect of the proposed change on the proposed change does not affect tube design            As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the                  timeliness of performing major tasks for the or operating environment. The proposed                  licensee has provided its analysis of the            functional areas of SEP. The analysis change will continue to require monitoring of          issue of no significant hazards                      concluded that an increase in staff the physical condition of the SG tubes but                                                                    augmentation times would not significantly consideration, which is presented will limit inspection within the tubesheet to                                                                affect the ability to perform the required SEP the portion of the tube from the top of the below:                                                tasks. Thus, the proposed change has been tubesheet to a distance H* below the top of                1. Does the proposed change involve a              determined not to adversely affect the ability the tubesheet.                                          significant increase in the probability or            to meet the emergency planning standards as The proposed change maintains the                    consequences of an accident previously                described in 10 CFR 50.47(b) and required structural margins of the SG tubes            evaluated?                                            requirements in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E.
for both normal and accident conditions. For              Response: No.                                        Therefore, the proposed change does not axially oriented cracking located within the              The proposed extension of staff                    involve a significant reduction in a margin of tubesheet, tube burst is precluded due to the          augmentation times has no effect on normal            safety.
presence of the tubesheet. For                          plant operation or on any accident initiator.
The change affects the response to The NRC staff has reviewed the circumferentially oriented cracking, the supporting Westinghouse analyses define a              radiological emergencies under the Palisades          licensees analysis and, based on this length of degradation-free expanded tubing              Nuclear Plant SEP. The ability of the                review, it appears that the three that provides the necessary resistance to tube          emergency response organization to respond            standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are pullout due to the pressure induced forces,            adequately to radiological emergencies has            satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff with applicable safety factors applied.                been evaluated. Changes in the on-shift              proposes to determine that the Application of the limited hot and cold leg            organization, such as the addition of staff and      amendment request involves no tubesheet inspection criteria will preclude            reassignment of key on-shift emergency                significant hazards consideration.
unacceptable primary to secondary leakage              response functions, provide assurance of                Attorney for licensee: William Dennis, during all plant conditions. The MSLB leak              emergency response without competing or conflicting duties. An analysis was also              Assistant General Counsel, Entergy rate factor for IP2 is 1.75. Multiplying the IP2                                                              Nuclear Operations, Inc., 440 Hamilton administrative leak rate limit of 75 gpd/SG by          performed on the effect of the proposed this factor shows that the primary-to-                  change on the timeliness of performing major          Ave., White Plains, NY 10601.
secondary leak rate during a postulated SLB            tasks for the major functional areas of the              NRC Branch Chief: Robert D. Carlson.
is not exceeded.                                        SEP. The analysis concluded that extension              Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.,
Therefore, the proposed change does not              of staff augmentation times would not                Docket No. 50-255, Palisades Nuclear involve a significant reduction in any margin          significantly affect the ability to perform the      Plant, Van Buren County, Michigan of safety.                                              required tasks.                                          Date of amendment request:
Based on the above, Entergy concludes that              Therefore, the proposed change does not            December 11, 2013.
the proposed amendment to the Indian Point              involve a significant increase in the                    Description of amendment request:
2 Technical Specifications presents no                  probability or consequences of an accident            The proposed amendment would significant hazards consideration under the            previously evaluated.                                modify Palisades Nuclear Plant standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c), and                2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of technical specifications (TS) accordingly, a finding of no significant                                                                    requirements for unavailable barriers by hazards consideration is justified.                    accident from any accident previously evaluated?                                            adding limiting condition for operation The NRC staff has reviewed the                          Response: No.                                      (LCO) 3.0.9. The changes are consistent licensees analysis and, based on this                    The proposed change affects the required          with the NRCs approved industry/
review, it appears that the three                      response times for supplementing onsite              Technical Specification Task Force standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are                        personnel in response to a radiological              (TSTF) Standard Technical emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff                    emergency. It has been evaluated and                  Specification (STS) change TSTF-427, proposes to determine that the                          determined not to significantly affect the            Allowance for Non-Technical ability to perform that function. It has no amendment request involves no                                                                                Specification Barrier Degradation on effect on the plant design or on the normal significant hazards consideration.                      operation of the plant and does not affect            Supported System OPERABILITY, Attorney for licensee: Jeanne Cho,                  how the plant is physically operated under            Revision 2.
Assistant General Counsel, Entergy                      emergency conditions. The extension of staff            Basis for proposed no significant Nuclear Operations, Inc., 440 Hamilton                  augmentation times in the SEP does not                hazards consideration determination:
Avenue, White Plains, NY 10601.                        affect the plant operating procedures which          The licensee has affirmed the VerDate Mar<15>2010  18:34 Mar 17, 2014  Jkt 232001  PO 00000  Frm 00054  Fmt 4703  Sfmt 4703  E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM  18MRN1


Considerations Background Pursuant to Section 189a. (2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices                                              15149 applicability of the model proposed                    postulated initiating events which may                assuring the availability of the ultimate heat non-significant hazards consideration                  require a functional barrier are limited to          sink and core cooling. As such, the proposed published on October 2, 2006 (71 FR                    those with low frequencies of occurrence,            change does not increase the consequences of and the overall TS system safety function            an accident previously evaluated.
58444), as part of the Consolidated Line                would still be available for the majority of            In addition, implementing this strategy Item Improvement Process, Notice of                  anticipated challenges. The risk impact of the        eliminates the need for the exterior sluice Availability of the Model Safety                        proposed TS changes was assessed following            gates to be safety class and allows for Evaluation. The licensee has                          the three-tiered approach recommended in              continuous control of the intake cell level concluded that the findings presented in                RG 1.177. A bounding risk assessment was              during a design basis flood event. The that evaluation are applicable to PNP                  performed to justify the proposed TS                  proposed Updated Safety Analysis Report and is hereby referenced below:                        changes. This application of LCO 3.0.9 is            (USAR) changes for implementing predicated upon the licensees performance            modification EC 55394 allow for maintaining Criterion 1The Proposed Change Does Not                of a risk assessment and the management of            RW pump operation during a flooding event Involve a Significant Increase in the                  plant risk. The net change to the margin of          at FCS.
Probability or Consequences of an Accident              safety is insignificant as indicated by the              Therefore, the proposed change does not Previously Evaluated                                    anticipated low levels of associated risk            involve a significant increase in the The proposed change allows a delay time              (ICCDP and ICLERP) as shown in Table 1 of            probability or consequences of an accident for entering a supported system technical              Section 3.1.1 in the Safety Evaluation.              previously evaluated.
specification (TS) when the inoperability is              Therefore, this change does not involve a            2. Does the proposed amendment create due solely to an unavailable barrier if risk is        significant reduction in a margin of safety.          the possibility of a new or different kind of assessed and managed. The postulated                                                                          accident from any accident previously The NRC staff has reviewed the initiating events which may require a                                                                        evaluated?
licensees analysis and, based on this                  Response: No.
functional barrier are limited to those with low frequencies of occurrence, and the                  review, it appears that the three                        The proposed modification EC 55394 to overall TS system safety function would still          standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are                      provide control of the intake cell level by be available for the majority of anticipated            satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff                  operation of the manual valves and the challenges. Therefore, the probability of an            proposes to determine that the                        associated USAR changes do not alter the accident previously evaluated is not                    amendment request involves no                        safety limits or safety analysis assumptions significantly increased, if at all. The                significant hazards consideration.                    associated with the operation of the plant.
consequences of an accident while relying on              Attorney for licensee: William Dennis,            Hence, the proposed changes do not the allowance provided by proposed LCO                                                                        introduce any new accident initiators, nor do Assistant General Counsel, Entergy 3.0.9 are no different than the consequences                                                                  they reduce or adversely affect the of an accident while relying on the TS                  Nuclear Operations, Inc., 440 Hamilton capabilities of any plant structure or system required actions in effect without the                  Ave., White Plains, NY 10601.                        in the performance of their safety function.
allowance provided by proposed LCO 3.0.9.                  NRC Branch Chief: Robert D. Carlson.              The proposed amendment revises the USAR Therefore, the consequences of an accident                Omaha Public Power District, Docket                to include the necessary information to previously evaluated are not significantly              No. 50-285, Fort Calhoun Station, Unit                support the implementation of the affected by this change. The addition of a              1, Washington County, Nebraska                        modification allowing for maintaining RW requirement to assess and manage the risk                  Date of amendment request: August                  pump operation during an abnormal introduced by this change will further                  16, 2013.                                            operating procedure AOP-01 flooding event minimize possible concerns.                                Description of amendment request:                  at FCS.
Therefore, this change does not involve a            The proposed amendment would revise                      Therefore, the proposed change does not significant increase in the probability or                                                                    create the possibility of a new or different the design basis method in the Fort consequences of an accident previously                                                                        kind of accident from any previously evaluated.                                              Calhoun Station Updated Safety Analysis Report for controlling the raw              evaluated.
Criterion 2The Proposed Change Does Not                                                                        3. Does the proposed amendment involve water intake cell level during periods of            a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Create the Possibility of a New or Different Kind of Accident from any Previously                    elevated river levels.                                  Response: No.
Evaluated                                                  Basis for proposed no significant                    The proposed modification, which hazards consideration determination:                  provides control of the intake cell level by The proposed change does not involve a physical alteration of the plant (no new or As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the                  operation of the manual valves, and the different type of equipment will be installed).        licensee has provided its analysis of the            associated USAR changes do not alter the Allowing delay times for entering supported            issue of no significant hazards                      safety limits or safety analysis assumptions system TS when inoperability is due solely              consideration, which is presented                    associated with the operation of the plant.
to an unavailable barrier, if risk is assessed          below:                                                The proposed modification and associated and managed, will not introduce new failure                                                                  USAR revisions ensure there is adequate
: 1. Does the proposed amendment involve            protection to the RW pumps from an external modes or effects and will not, in the absence a significant increase in the probability or          flood hazard thus assuring adequate of other unrelated failures, lead to an consequences of an accident previously                protection during a flood. Providing RW accident whose consequences exceed the evaluated?                                            pump intake cell level control during consequences of accidents previously Response: No.                                      flooding conditions allows for adjustment of evaluated. The addition of a requirement to assess and manage the risk introduced by this              The proposed modification engineering              flow and control of the intake cell level change will further minimize possible                  change (EC) 55394, Raw Water [RW] Pump                throughout the duration of the flood since the concerns.                                              Operation and Safety Classification of               new valves are located inside the intake Thus, this change does not create the                Components during a Flood, installed intake          structure; thereby ensuring the RW pumps possibility of a new or different kind of              cell flood water inlet valves at Fort Calhoun        remain operable during a flood condition and accident from an accident previously                    Station (FCS). The modification would                will not adversely impact any margin of emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES evaluated.                                              employ the trash rack blowdown portion of            safety.
the circulating water system to allow river              Therefore, the proposed change does not Criterion 3The Proposed Change Does Not                water to flow into four of those pipes and            involve a significant reduction in a margin of Involve a Significant Reduction in the Margin          then through four newly installed safety class        safety.
of Safety.                                              valves for control of cell level (RW pump The proposed change allows a delay time              suction level) using river level as the driving          The NRC staff has reviewed the for entering a supported system TS when the            force. This modification EC 55394 enhances            licensees analysis and, based on this inoperability is due solely to an unavailable          the flood protection provided to the RW              review, it appears that the three barrier, if risk is assessed and managed. The          pumps for an external flooding event thus            standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are VerDate Mar<15>2010  18:34 Mar 17, 2014  Jkt 232001  PO 00000  Frm 00055  Fmt 4703  Sfmt 4703  E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM  18MRN1


Commission (NRC) is publishing this
15150                        Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff                    thermal conductivity and oxidation                    crack exclusion allowance to Final proposes to determine that the                          progression and effects for the inorganic zinc        Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) Standard amendment request involves no                          coating of the containment vessel is used to         Plant Section 3.6.2.1.2.4, ASME eliminate non-mechanistic modeling of significant hazards consideration.                      inorganic zinc thermal conductivity in the
 
[American Society of Mechanical Attorney for licensee: David A. Repka,              containment integrity analyses to show that          Engineers] Section III and Non-Nuclear Esq., Winston & Strawn, 1700 K Street                  the value for inorganic zinc thermal                  Piping-Moderate-Energy, and FSAR NW., Washington, DC 20006-3817.                        conductivity used in the containment                  Standard Plant Table 3.6-2, Design NRC Branch Chief: Michael T.                        integrity analyses is conservative, but is not        Comparison to Regulatory Positions of Markley.                                                used to change any of the parameters used in          Regulatory Guide 1.46, Revision 0, Southern Nuclear Operating                          the containment peak pressure analysis. The          dated May 1973, titled Protection Company, Inc. Docket Nos. 52-025 and                    change in methodology does not change the            Against Pipe Whip Inside 52-026, Vogtle Electric Generating                      condition of containment; therefore, no new accident initiator is created. The containment Containment, in particular regard to Plant, Units 3 and 4, Burke County,                                                                           the high-density polyethylene (HDPE) peak pressure analysis as currently evaluated Georgia                                                is not affected, and the consequences                piping installed in ASME Class 3 line Date of amendment request:                           previously reported are not changed. The              segments of the essential service water November 21, 2013.                                     new methodology does not change the                  (ESW) system. New Reference 25 would Description of amendment request:                   containment; therefore, no new fault or              be added to FSAR Standard Plant The proposed change would amend                        sequence of events that could lead to                Section 3.6.3 to cite the NRC-approved Combined License Nos. NPF-91 and                       containment failure or release of radioactive        version of the HDPE requirements NPF-92 for the Vogtle Electric                          material is created.
regular biweekly notice. The Act
covered by Relief Request I3R-10.
 
Generating Plant (VEGP) Units 3 and 4                      Therefore, the proposed amendment does by departing from the approved AP1000                  not create the possibility of a new or different        Basis for proposed no significant Design Control Document (DCD) Tier 2                    kind of accident.                                    hazards consideration determination:
requires the Commission to publish
: 3. Does the proposed amendment involve            As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the information as incorporated into the                    a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
 
Updated Final Safety Analysis Report                                                                          licensee has provided its analysis of the Response: No.
notice of any amendments issued, or
(UFSAR) to allow use of a new                                                                                issue of no significant hazards The proposed implementation of a methodology to determine the effective                  methodology which specifies an effective              consideration, which is presented thermal conductivity resulting from                    thermal conductivity and oxidation                    below:
 
oxidation of the inorganic zinc (IOZ)                   progression and effects for the inorganic zinc          1. Does the proposed change involve a used in the containment vessel coating                  coating of the containment vessel is used to          significant increase in the probability or system.                                                eliminate non-mechanistic modeling of                consequences of an accident previously inorganic zinc thermal conductivity in the           evaluated?
proposed to be issued and grants the  
Basis for proposed no significant containment integrity analyses to show that             Response: No.
 
hazards consideration determination:                   the value for inorganic zinc thermal                    There are no new design changes As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the                    conductivity used in the containment                  associated with the proposed amendment.
Commission the authority to issue and
licensee has provided its analysis of the               integrity analyses is conservative, but is not       All design, material, and construction issue of no significant hazards                        used to change any of the parameters used in         standards that were applicable prior to this consideration, which is presented                      the containment peak pressure analysis. The          amendment request, including those below:                                                  change in methodology does not change the             standards in place following the NRC condition of the containment and the                 approval of using the HDPE piping, will
 
: 1. Does the proposed amendment involve              integrity of the containment vessel is not a significant increase in the probability or                                                                  continue to be applicable.
make immediately effective any
affected. The containment peak pressure                  The proposed change will not increase the consequences of an accident previously                  analysis as currently evaluated is not evaluated?                                                                                                    likelihood of accident initiators or precursors affected, and the consequences previously            or adversely alter the design assumptions, Response: No.                                        reported are not changed. No safety analysis Implementation of a methodology which                                                                      conditions, and configuration of the facility or design basis acceptance limit/criterion is        or the manner in which the plant is operated specifies an effective thermal conductivity            changed by the proposed change, thus no and oxidation progression for the inorganic                                                                  and maintained with respect to such margin of safety is reduced.                          initiators or precursors.
 
zinc coating of the containment vessel is used to eliminate non-mechanistic modeling                Therefore, the proposed amendment                    The proposed changes do not affect the of inorganic zinc thermal conductivity in the          does not reduce the margin of safety.                way in which safety-related systems perform containment integrity analyses to show that                The NRC staff has reviewed the                    their functions.
amendment to an operating license or
the value for inorganic zinc thermal                    licensees analysis and, based on this                   All accident analysis acceptance criteria conductivity used in the containment                    review, it appears that the three                    will continue to be met with the proposed integrity analyses is conservative, but is not                                                                changes. The proposed changes will not standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are                      affect the source term, containment isolation, used to change any of the parameters used in those analyses. There is no change to any satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff                  or radiological release assumptions used in accident initiator or condition of the                 proposes to determine that the                        evaluating the radiological consequences of containment that would affect the probability          amendment request involves no                        an accident previously evaluated. The of any accident. The containment peak                  significant hazards consideration.                    proposed changes will not alter any pressure analysis as reported in the UFSAR                Attorney for licensee: M. Stanford                assumptions or change any mitigation actions is not affected; therefore, the previously              Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 1710                    in the radiological consequence evaluations reported consequences are not affected.                 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL                    in the FSAR.
 
Therefore, the proposed amendment does              35203-2015.                                              The applicable radiological dose not involve an increase in the probability or              NRC Branch Chief: Lawrence J.                      acceptance criteria will continue to be met.
combined license, as applicable, upon a
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES consequences of an accident previously                                                                          Since the proposed change is based on a Burkhart.
 
evaluated.                                                                                                   calculation that demonstrates that a moderate Union Electric Company, Docket No.                energy crack in the ESW HDPE piping is
determination by the Commission that
: 2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of          50-483, Callaway Plant, Unit 1,                       unlikely, there are no impacts on the plants accident from any accident previously                  Callaway County, Missouri                            existing hazard analyses.
 
evaluated?                                                Date of amendment request:                            The proposed change does not physically Response: No.                                        December 6, 2013.                                    alter safety-related systems or affect the way The proposed amendment to implement a                  Description of amendment request:                  in which safety-related systems perform their methodology which specifies an effective                The amendment would add a new pipe                    functions per the intended plant design.
such amendment involves no significant
VerDate Mar<15>2010  18:34 Mar 17, 2014  Jkt 232001  PO 00000  Frm 00056  Fmt 4703  Sfmt 4703  E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM  18MRN1
 
hazards consideration, notwithstanding
 
the pendency before the Commission of
 
a request for a hearing from any person.
This biweekly notice includes all notices of amendments issued, or
 
proposed to be issued from March 5 to  
 
March 18, 2014. The last biweekly
 
notice was published on March 4, 2014
 
(79 FR 12241).
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods (unless
 
this document describes a different
 
method for submitting comments on a
 
specific subject):
*Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2014-0045. Address
 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol
 
Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-3422;  
 
email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact the
 
individual listed in the FORFURTHER INFORMATIONCONTACT section of this document.
*Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules, Announcements, and
 
Directives Branch (RADB), Office of  
 
Administration, Mail Stop: 3WFN
 
44M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014Jkt 232001PO 00000Frm 00050Fmt 4703Sfmt 4703E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM18MRN1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 15145 Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 52/Tuesday, March 18, 2014/Notices Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. For additional direction on accessing information and submitting comments, see Accessing Information and
 
Submitting Comments in the SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATION section of this document. SUPPLEMENTARYINFORMATION
: I. Accessing Information and Submitting Comments A. Accessing Information Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2014-0045 when contacting the NRC about
 
the availability of information regarding
 
this document. You may access
 
publicly-available information related to
 
this action by the following methods:  
*Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2014-0045.  
*NRCs Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may access publicly
 
available documents online in the NRC
 
Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ADAMS Public Documents and
 
then select Begin Web-based ADAMS
 
Search. For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRCs Public
 
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
 
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by
 
email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number for each
 
document referenced in this document (if that document is available in
 
ADAMS) is provided the first time that
 
a document is referenced.  
*NRCs PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at
 
the NRCs PDR, Room O1-F21, One
 
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
 
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
B. Submitting Comments Please include Docket ID NRC-2014-0045 in the subject line of your
 
comment submission, in order to ensure
 
that the NRC is able to make your
 
comment submission available to the  
 
public in this docket.
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that  
 
you do not want to be publicly
 
disclosed in your comment submission.  
 
The NRC posts all comment
 
submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.  
 
The NRC does not routinely edit
 
comment submissions to remove
 
identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for
 
submission to the NRC, then you should
 
inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly
 
disclosed in their comment submission.
 
Your request should state that the NRC
 
does not routinely edit comment
 
submissions to remove such information
 
before making the comment
 
submissions available to the public or
 
entering the comment submissions into
 
ADAMS. Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating
 
Licenses and Combined Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards
 
Consideration Determination, and
 
Opportunity for a Hearing The Commission has made a proposed determination that the  
 
following amendment requests involve
 
no significant hazards consideration.
 
Under the Commissions regulations in
&sect;50.92 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), this means that operation of the facility in accordance
 
with the proposed amendment would
 
not (1) involve a significant increase in  
 
the probability or consequences of an  
 
accident previously evaluated; or (2)
 
create the possibility of a new or  
 
different kind of accident from any
 
accident previously evaluated; or (3)
 
involve a significant reduction in a
 
margin of safety. The basis for this
 
proposed determination for each
 
amendment request is shown below.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed
 
determination. Any comments received
 
within 30 days after the date of
 
publication of this notice will be
 
considered in making any final
 
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the
 
expiration of 60 days after the date of
 
publication of this notice. The  
 
Commission may issue the license
 
amendment before expiration of the 60-
 
day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment
 
involves no significant hazards
 
consideration. In addition, the  
 
Commission may issue the amendment
 
prior to the expiration of the 30-day
 
comment period should circumstances
 
change during the 30-day comment
 
period such that failure to act in a
 
timely way would result, for example in
 
derating or shutdown of the facility.
 
Should the Commission take action
 
prior to the expiration of either the
 
comment period or the notice period, it
 
will publish in the Federal Register a notice of issuance. Should the  
 
Commission make a final No Significant
 
Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will take place after
 
issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will occur very infrequently.
Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any person(s)
 
whose interest may be affected by this
 
action may file a request for a hearing
 
and a petition to intervene with respect
 
to issuance of the amendment to the
 
subject facility operating license or
 
combined license. Requests for a  
 
hearing and a petition for leave to
 
intervene shall be filed in accordance
 
with the Commissions Agency Rules
 
of Practice and Procedure in 10 CFR
 
Part 2. Interested person(s) should
 
consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the NRCs PDR, located at One White Flint North, Room
 
O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
 
floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. The
 
NRC regulations are accessible
 
electronically from the NRC Library on  
 
the NRCs Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-
 
collections/cfr/.
If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed
 
by the above date, the Commission or a
 
presiding officer designated by the  
 
Commission or by the Chief
 
Administrative Judge of the Atomic
 
Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will
 
rule on the request and/or petition; and
 
the Secretary or the Chief
 
Administrative Judge of the Atomic
 
Safety and Licensing Board will issue a
 
notice of a hearing or an appropriate
 
order. As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set
 
forth with particularity the interest of
 
the petitioner in the proceeding, and
 
how that interest may be affected by the
 
results of the proceeding. The petition
 
should specifically explain the reasons
 
why intervention should be permitted
 
with particular reference to the
 
following general requirements: (1) the
 
name, address, and telephone number of
 
the requestor or petitioner; (2) the
 
nature of the requestors/petitioners
 
right under the Act to be made a party
 
to the proceeding; (3) the nature and
 
extent of the requestors/petitioners
 
property, financial, or other interest in
 
the proceeding; and (4) the possible
 
effect of any decision or order which
 
may be entered in the proceeding on the
 
requestors/petitioners interest. The
 
petition must also identify the specific contentions which the requestor/
 
petitioner seeks to have litigated at the
 
proceeding.
Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or
 
fact to be raised or controverted. In
 
addition, the requestor/petitioner shall
 
provide a brief explanation of the bases
 
for the contention and a concise
 
statement of the alleged facts or expert VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014Jkt 232001PO 00000Frm 00051Fmt 4703Sfmt 4703E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM18MRN1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 15146 Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 52/Tuesday, March 18, 2014/Notices opinion which support the contention and on which the requestor/petitioner
 
intends to rely in proving the contention
 
at the hearing. The requestor/petitioner
 
must also provide references to those
 
specific sources and documents of
 
which the petitioner is aware and on
 
which the requestor/petitioner intends
 
to rely to establish those facts or expert
 
opinion. The petition must include
 
sufficient information to show that a
 
genuine dispute exists with the
 
applicant on a material issue of law or
 
fact. Contentions shall be limited to
 
matters within the scope of the
 
amendment under consideration. The
 
contention must be one which, if
 
proven, would entitle the requestor/
 
petitioner to relief. A requestor/
 
petitioner who fails to satisfy these
 
requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to
 
intervene, and have the opportunity to
 
participate fully in the conduct of the
 
hearing. If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final
 
determination on the issue of no
 
significant hazards consideration. The
 
final determination will serve to decide
 
when the hearing is held. If the final
 
determination is that the amendment
 
request involves no significant hazards
 
consideration, the Commission may
 
issue the amendment and make it
 
immediately effective, notwithstanding
 
the request for a hearing. Any hearing
 
held would take place after issuance of
 
the amendment. If the final
 
determination is that the amendment
 
request involves a significant hazards
 
consideration, then any hearing held
 
would take place before the issuance of
 
any amendment.
All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a
 
request for hearing, a petition for leave
 
to intervene, any motion or other
 
document filed in the proceeding prior
 
to the submission of a request for
 
hearing or petition to intervene, and
 
documents filed by interested
 
governmental entities participating
 
under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in
 
accordance with the NRCs E-Filing rule
 
(72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007). The E-Filing process requires participants to
 
submit and serve all adjudicatory
 
documents over the internet, or in some
 
cases to mail copies on electronic
 
storage media. Participants may not
 
submit paper copies of their filings
 
unless they seek an exemption in
 
accordance with the procedures
 
described below.
To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10
 
days prior to the filing deadline, the
 
participant should contact the Office of
 
the Secretary by email at
 
hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital
 
identification (ID) certificate, which
 
allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign
 
documents and access the E-Submittal server for any proceeding in which it is
 
participating; and (2) advise the
 
Secretary that the participant will be
 
submitting a request or petition for
 
hearing (even in instances in which the
 
participant, or its counsel or
 
representative, already holds an NRC-
 
issued digital ID certificate). Based upon
 
this information, the Secretary will
 
establish an electronic docket for the
 
hearing in this proceeding if the
 
Secretary has not already established an
 
electronic docket.
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on the
 
NRCs public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/
 
apply-certificates.html.
System requirements for accessing the E-
 
Submittal server are detailed in the
 
NRCs Guidance for Electronic
 
Submission, which is available on the
 
agencys public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-
 
submittals.html. Participants may attempt to use other software not listed
 
on the Web site, but should note that the
 
NRCs E-Filing system does not support
 
unlisted software, and the NRC Meta
 
System Help Desk will not be able to
 
offer assistance in using unlisted
 
software.
If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC in
 
accordance with the E-Filing rule, the
 
participant must file the document
 
using the NRCs online, Web-based
 
submission form. In order to serve
 
documents through the Electronic
 
Information Exchange System, users
 
will be required to install a Web
 
browser plug-in from the NRCs Web
 
site. Further information on the Web-
 
based submission form, including the
 
installation of the Web browser plug-in, is available on the NRCs public Web
 
site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.
Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has
 
been created, the participant can then
 
submit a request for hearing or petition
 
for leave to intervene. Submissions
 
should be in Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with the NRC
 
guidance available on the NRCs public
 
Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.
A filing is considered complete at the time the documents are submitted through the
 
NRCs E-Filing system. To be timely, an
 
electronic filing must be submitted to
 
the E-Filing system no later than 11:59
 
p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.
 
Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-
 
Filing system time-stamps the document
 
and sends the submitter an email notice
 
confirming receipt of the document. The
 
E-Filing system also distributes an email
 
notice that provides access to the
 
document to the NRCs Office of the
 
General Counsel and any others who
 
have advised the Office of the Secretary
 
that they wish to participate in the
 
proceeding, so that the filer need not
 
serve the documents on those
 
participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or
 
their counsel or representative) must
 
apply for and receive a digital ID
 
certificate before a hearing request/
 
petition to intervene is filed so that they
 
can obtain access to the document via
 
the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically using the agencys adjudicatory E-Filing
 
system may seek assistance by
 
contacting the NRC Meta System Help
 
Desk through the Contact Us link
 
located on the NRC Web site at http:// www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html , by email to MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov , or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The NRC
 
Meta System Help Desk is available
 
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern
 
Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.
Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting
 
documents electronically must file an
 
exemption request, in accordance with
 
10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper
 
filing requesting authorization to
 
continue to submit documents in paper
 
format. Such filings must be submitted
 
by: (1) First class mail addressed to the
 
Office of the Secretary of the
 
Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
 
0001, Attention: Rulemaking and
 
Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery
 
service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking
 
and Adjudications Staff. Participants
 
filing a document in this manner are
 
responsible for serving the document on
 
all other participants. Filing is
 
considered complete by first-class mail
 
as of the time of deposit in the mail, or
 
by courier, express mail, or expedited
 
delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the
 
service. A presiding officer, having VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014Jkt 232001PO 00000Frm 00052Fmt 4703Sfmt 4703E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM18MRN1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 15147 Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 52/Tuesday, March 18, 2014/Notices granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant
 
or party to use E-Filing if the presiding
 
officer subsequently determines that the
 
reason for granting the exemption from
 
use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the NRCs
 
electronic hearing docket which is
 
available to the public at http://ehd1.
nrc.gov/ehd/;, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission, or the
 
presiding officer. Participants are
 
requested not to include personal
 
privacy information, such as social
 
security numbers, home addresses, or
 
home phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law
 
requires submission of such
 
information. However, a request to
 
intervene will require including
 
information on local residence in order
 
to demonstrate a proximity assertion of
 
interest in the proceeding. With respect
 
to copyrighted works, except for limited
 
excerpts that serve the purpose of the
 
adjudicatory filings and would
 
constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested not to include
 
copyrighted materials in their
 
submission.
Petitions for leave to intervene must be filed no later than 60 days from the
 
date of publication of this notice.
 
Requests for hearing, petitions for leave
 
to intervene, and motions for leave to
 
file new or amended contentions that
 
are filed after the 60-day deadline will
 
not be entertained absent a
 
determination by the presiding officer
 
that the filing demonstrates good cause
 
by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR
 
2.309(c)(1)(i)-(iii).
For further details with respect to this license amendment application, see the
 
application for amendment which is
 
available for public inspection at the
 
NRCs PDR, located at One White Flint
 
North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville
 
Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland
 
20852. Publicly available documents
 
created or received at the NRC are
 
accessible electronically through
 
ADAMS in the NRC Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to
 
ADAMS or who encounter problems in
 
accessing the documents located in
 
ADAMS, should contact the NRCs PDR
 
Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-
 
415-4737, or by email to pdr.resource@
nrc.gov. Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-247, Indian Point
 
Nuclear Generating, Unit 2, Westchester
 
County, New York Date of amendment request:
January 16, 2014.
Description of amendment request:
The proposed amendment would revise
 
Technical Specification (TS) 5.5.7, Steam Generator (SG) Program, to
 
exclude portions of the SG tube below
 
the top of the SG tubesheet from
 
periodic inspections and plugging by
 
implementing the H* alternate repair
 
criteria. In addition, TS 5.6.7, Steam
 
Generator Tube Inspection Report,
 
would also be revised to include
 
additional reporting requirements.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:
 
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the
 
licensee has provided its analysis of the
 
issue of no significant hazards
 
consideration, which is presented
 
below: 1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or
 
consequences of an accident previously
 
evaluated?
Response: No.
 
The proposed change excludes the lower portion of steam generator tubes from inspection by implementing the alternate
 
repair criteria H* and does not have a
 
detrimental impact on the integrity of any
 
plant structure, system, or component that
 
initiates an analyzed event. The proposed
 
change has no significant effect upon
 
accident probabilities or consequences.
Of the applicable accidents previously evaluated, the limiting transients with
 
consideration to the proposed change to the
 
steam generator tube inspection and repair
 
criteria are the steam generator tube rupture (SGTR), the main steam line break (MSLB),
Locked Rotor and Control Rod Ejection.
At normal operating pressures, leakage from Primary Water Stress Corrosion
 
Cracking (PWSCC) below the proposed
 
limited inspection depth is limited by both
 
the tube-to-tubesheet crevice and the limited
 
crack opening permitted by the tubesheet
 
constraint. Consequently, negligible normal
 
operating leakage is expected from cracks
 
within the tubesheet region.
For the SGTR event, the required structural integrity margins of the steam generator tubes
 
and the tube-to-tubesheet joint over the H*
 
distance will be maintained. Tube rupture in
 
tubes with cracks within the tubesheet is
 
precluded by the constraint provided by the
 
tube-to-tubesheet joint. This constraint
 
results from the hydraulic expansion process, thermal expansion mismatch between the tube and tubesheet, and from the differential
 
pressure between the primary and secondary
 
side. The structural margins against burst, as
 
discussed in Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.121, Bases for Plugging Degraded PWR Steam
 
Generator Tubes, (Reference 11) and NEI
 
97-06, Steam Generator Program
 
Guidelines (Reference 3) are maintained for
 
both normal and postulated accident
 
conditions. Therefore, the proposed change
 
results in no significant increase in the
 
probability of the occurrence of a SGTR
 
accident.
The probability of a Steam Line Break, Locked Rotor, and Control Rod Ejection are
 
not affected by the potential failure of a SG tube, as the failure of a tube is not an initiator for any of these events. In the supporting
 
Westinghouse analyses, leakage is modeled
 
as flow through a porous medium via the use
 
of the Darcy equation. The leakage model is
 
used to develop a relationship between
 
allowable leakage and leakage at accident
 
conditions that is based on differential
 
pressure across the tubesheet and the
 
viscosity of the fluid. A leak rate ratio was
 
developed to relate the leakage at operating
 
conditions to leakage at accident conditions.
 
The fluid viscosity is based on fluid
 
temperature and it has been shown that for
 
the most limiting accident, the fluid
 
temperature does not exceed the normal
 
operating temperature. Therefore, the
 
viscosity ratio is assumed to be 1.0 and the
 
leak rate ratio is a function of the ratio of the
 
accident differential pressure and the normal
 
operating differential pressure.
The leakage factor of 1.75 for IP2 for a-postulated MSLB, has been calculated as
 
shown in the supporting Westinghouse
 
analysis. IP2 [Indian Point Unit 2] will apply
 
a factor of 1.75 to the normal operating
 
leakage associated with the tubesheet
 
expansion region in the Condition
 
Monitoring Assessment and Operational
 
Assessment. Through application of the
 
limited tubesheet inspection scope, the
 
administrative leakage limit of 75 gpd
 
[gallons per day] provides assurance that
 
excessive leakage (i.e., greater than accident
 
analysis assumptions) will not occur. No
 
leakage factor will be applied to the Locked
 
Rotor or Control Rod Ejection due to their
 
short duration, since the calculated leak rate
 
ratio is less than 1.0. Therefore, the proposed
 
change does not result in a significant
 
increase in the consequences of these
 
accidents.
For the Condition Monitoring Assessment, the component of leakage from the prior
 
cycle from below the H* distance will be
 
multiplied by a factor of 1.75 and added to
 
the total leakage from any other source and
 
compared to the allowable MSLB leakage
 
limit. For the Operational Assessment, the
 
difference in the leakage between the
 
allowable leakage and the accident induced
 
leakage from sources other than the tubesheet
 
expansion region will be divided by 1.75 and
 
compared to the observed operational
 
leakage. As noted above, an administrative
 
limit of 75 gpd has been established at IP2
 
to assure that the allowable accident induced
 
leakage is not exceeded.
Based on the above, the performance criteria of NEI 97-06 and Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.121 continue to be met and the
 
proposed change does not involve a
 
significant increase in the probability or
 
consequences of an accident previously
 
evaluated.
: 2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of
 
accident from any accident previously
 
evaluated?
Response: No.
 
The proposed change excludes the lower portion of steam generator tubes from
 
inspection by implementing the alternate
 
repair criteria (H*). The proposed change
 
does not introduce any new equipment, create new failure modes for existing VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014Jkt 232001PO 00000Frm 00053Fmt 4703Sfmt 4703E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM18MRN1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 15148 Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 52/Tuesday, March 18, 2014/Notices equipment, or create any new limiting single failures resulting from tube degradation. The
 
proposed change does not affect the design
 
of the SGs or their method of operation. In
 
addition, the proposed change does not
 
impact any other plant system or component.
 
Plant operation will not be altered, and all
 
safety functions will continue to perform as
 
previously assumed in accident analyses.
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different
 
kind of accident from any previously
 
evaluated.
: 3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
 
The proposed change defines the safety significant portion of the SG tubing that must
 
be inspected and repaired. WCAP-17828-P
 
identifies the inspection depth below which
 
any type of degradation is shown to have no
 
impact on the steam generator tube integrity
 
performance criteria in NEI 97-06. The
 
proposed change does not affect tube design
 
or operating environment. The proposed
 
change will continue to require monitoring of
 
the physical condition of the SG tubes but
 
will limit inspection within the tubesheet to
 
the portion of the tube from the top of the
 
tubesheet to a distance H* below the top of
 
the tubesheet.
The proposed change maintains the required structural margins of the SG tubes
 
for both normal and accident conditions. For
 
axially oriented cracking located within the
 
tubesheet, tube burst is precluded due to the
 
presence of the tubesheet. For
 
circumferentially oriented cracking, the
 
supporting Westinghouse analyses define a
 
length of degradation-free expanded tubing
 
that provides the necessary resistance to tube
 
pullout due to the pressure induced forces, with applicable safety factors applied.
 
Application of the limited hot and cold leg
 
tubesheet inspection criteria will preclude
 
unacceptable primary to secondary leakage
 
during all plant conditions. The MSLB leak
 
rate factor for IP2 is 1.75. Multiplying the IP2
 
administrative leak rate limit of 75 gpd/SG by
 
this factor shows that the primary-to-
 
secondary leak rate during a postulated SLB
 
is not exceeded.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in any margin
 
of safety.
Based on the above, Entergy concludes that the proposed amendment to the Indian Point
 
2 Technical Specifications presents no
 
significant hazards consideration under the
 
standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c), and
 
accordingly, a finding of no significant
 
hazards consideration is justified.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensees analysis and, based on this
 
review, it appears that the three
 
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
 
proposes to determine that the
 
amendment request involves no
 
significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee:
Jeanne Cho, Assistant General Counsel, Entergy
 
Nuclear Operations, Inc., 440 Hamilton
 
Avenue, White Plains, NY 10601.
NRC Branch Chief:
Benjamin G.
Beasley. Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-255, Palisades Nuclear
 
Plant, Van Buren County, Michigan Date of amendment request:
June 25, 2013, supplemented by letter dated
 
August 7, 2013.
Description of amendment request:
The proposed amendment would revise
 
Palisades Nuclear Plant Site Emergency
 
Plan (SEP) to increase the staff
 
augmentation response times for certain
 
Emergency Response Organization
 
positions from 30 to 60 minutes. Entergy
 
Nuclear Organization has reviewed the
 
proposed changes against the standards in &sect;50.47(b) and the requirements in 10
 
CFR Part 50, Appendix E.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:
 
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the
 
licensee has provided its analysis of the
 
issue of no significant hazards
 
consideration, which is presented
 
below: 1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or
 
consequences of an accident previously
 
evaluated?
Response: No.
 
The proposed extension of staff augmentation times has no effect on normal
 
plant operation or on any accident initiator.
 
The change affects the response to
 
radiological emergencies under the Palisades
 
Nuclear Plant SEP. The ability of the
 
emergency response organization to respond
 
adequately to radiological emergencies has
 
been evaluated. Changes in the on-shift
 
organization, such as the addition of staff and
 
reassignment of key on-shift emergency
 
response functions, provide assurance of
 
emergency response without competing or conflicting duties. An analysis was also
 
performed on the effect of the proposed
 
change on the timeliness of performing major
 
tasks for the major functional areas of the
 
SEP. The analysis concluded that extension


of staff augmentation times would not  
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices                                              15151 As such, the proposed change will not alter          review, it appears that the three                        2. Does the proposed amendment create or prevent the capability of structures,                standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are                      the possibility of a new or different kind of systems, and components (SSCs) to perform              satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff                  accident from any accident previously their intended functions for mitigating the                                                                  evaluated?
proposes to determine that the consequences of an accident and meeting                                                                          Response: No.
applicable acceptance limits.                          amendment request involves no                            The proposed changes will not alter the Therefore, the proposed change does not              significant hazards consideration.                    requirement or function for systems required involve a significant increase in the                      Attorney for licensee: John ONeill,              during accident conditions. The design probability or consequences of an accident              Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman                function of structures, systems and previously evaluated.                                  LLP, 2300 N Street NW., Washington,                  components are not impacted by the
: 2. Does the proposed change create the              DC 20037.                                            proposed change. Evaluation SA-08-006 and possibility of a new or different kind of                  NRC Branch Chief: Michael T.                      Calculation WCNOC-CP-003 determined accident from any accident previously                  Markley.                                              natural circulation is maintained and evaluated?                                                Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating                      adequate core cooling is maintained. The Response: No.                                        Corporation, Docket No. 50-482, Wolf                  fission product boundary integrity is not With respect to any new or different kind                                                                  affected and safe shutdown capability is Creek Generating Station, Coffey of accident, there are no new design changes                                                                  maintained.
being proposed nor are there any changes in            County, Kansas Date of amendment request:                            Therefore, the proposed change does not the method by which any safety-related plant                                                                  create the possibility of a new or different SSC performs its specified safety function.            November 21, 2013.
kind of accident from any accident The proposed change will not affect the                    Description of amendment request:                  previously evaluated.
normal method of plant operation. No new                The amendment would revise the                          3. Does the proposed amendment involve transient precursors will be introduced as a            approved Fire Protection Program as                  a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
result of this amendment.                              described in the Updated Safety                          Response: No.
The HDPE piping design change was                    Analysis Report, based on the reactor                    There will be no effect on the manner in previously approved by the NRC under Relief            coolant system thermal hydraulic                      which safety limits or limiting safety system Request I3R-10. The proposed change in this                                                                  settings are determined nor will there be any response evaluation of a postulated amendment request does not create the                                                                        effect on those plant systems necessary to possibility of a new type of accident, rather          control room fire, performed for changes to the alternative shutdown                          assure the accomplishment of protection the proposed change seeks to eliminate the                                                                    functions. The revised alternative shutdown need to postulate an existing type of hazard            methodology.
methodology provides the ability to achieve event (moderate energy piping leakage crack)              Basis for proposed no significant                  and maintain safe shutdown in the event of for the subject HDPE piping which has been              hazards consideration determination:                  a fire. Evaluation SA-08-006 and Calculation shown to experience such low stresses that              As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the                  WCNOC-CP-003 determined natural such a crack, and the potential flooding for            licensee has provided its analysis of the            circulation is maintained and adequate core that hazard event, need not be postulated.              issue of no significant hazards                      cooling is maintained.
The change does not have a detrimental consideration, which is presented                        Therefore, the proposed change does not impact on the manner in which plant                                                                          involve a significant reduction in a margin of equipment operates or responds to an                    below:
safety.
actuation signal.                                          1. Does the proposed amendment involve The proposed change does not, therefore,            a significant increase in the probability or            The NRC staff has reviewed the create the possibility of a new or different            consequences of an accident previously                licensees analysis and, based on this accident from any accident previously                  evaluated?                                            review, it appears that the three evaluated.                                                Response: No.                                      standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
: 3. Does the proposed change involve a                  The design function of structures, systems satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff significant reduction in a margin of safety?            and components (SSCs) are not impacted by Response: No.                                        the proposed deviations from [10 CFR Part            proposes to determine that the There will be no effect on those plant              50] Appendix R, Sections III.L.1 and III.L.2,        amendment request involves no systems necessary to assure the                        and Calculation XX-E-013. The proposed                significant hazards consideration.
accomplishment of protection functions                  changes to the approved fire protection                  Attorney for licensee: Jay Silberg, Esq.,
associated with reactor operation or the                program are based on the RCS [reactor                Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, reactor coolant system. The design factor              coolant system] thermal-hydraulic response            2300 N Street NW., Washington, DC (DF) of 0.50 discussed in ULNRC-05553                  (Evaluation SA-08-006) for a postulated              20037.
dated October 9, 2008 has not changed. This            control room fire performed for changes to              NRC Branch Chief: Michael T.
DF was approved by the NRC in Relief                    the alternative shutdown methodology outlined in letter SLNRC 84-0109, Fire              Markley.
Request 13R-10 (Reference 6.2 to this Evaluation). There will be no impact on the            Protection Review. Drawing E-1F9915,                  Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating overpower limit, departure from nucleate                Design Basis Document for OFN RP-017,              Corporation, Docket No. 50-482, Wolf boiling ratio (DNBR) limits, heat flux hot              Control Room Evacuation, Revision 5,                Creek Generating Station, Coffey channel factor (FQ), nuclear enthalpy rise hot          Evaluation SA-08-006, RETRAN-3D Post-              County, Kansas channel factor (FDH), loss of coolant accident          Fire Safe Shutdown (PFSSD) Consequence                  Date of amendment request:
peak cladding temperature (LOCA PCT), peak              Evaluation for a Postulated Control Room              December 17, 2013.
local power density, or any other limit and            Fire, Revision 3, and Calculation WCNOC-              Description of amendment request:
associated margin of safety. Required                  CP-003, VIPRE-01 MDNBR Analyses of Control Room Fire Scenarios, Revision 0 The amendment would revise Technical shutdown margins in the COLR [core                                                                            Specification Surveillance Requirement operating limits report] will not be changed.          demonstrate the adequacy of the revised The proposed change does not eliminate any              alternative shutdown procedure, OFN RF-              (SR) 3.7.10.1 and SR 3.7.13.1 to reduce surveillances or alter the frequency of                017. The proposed changes do not alter or            the required run time for periodic emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES surveillances required by the Technical                prevent the ability of SSCs from performing          operation of the control room Specifications.                                        their intended function to mitigate the              pressurization system filter trains and As such, the proposed change does not                consequences of an initiating event within            emergency exhaust system filter trains, involve a significant reduction in a margin of          the assumed acceptance limits.                        with heaters on, from 10 hours to 15 safety as defined in any regulatory                        Therefore, the probability of any accident previously evaluated is not increased.                minutes. The proposed amendment is requirement or guidance document.                                                                            consistent with plant-specific options Equipment required to mitigate an accident The NRC staff has reviewed the                      remains capable of performing the assumed            provided in the NRCs model safety licensees analysis and, based on this                  function.                                            evaluation of Technical Specifications VerDate Mar<15>2010  18:34 Mar 17, 2014  Jkt 232001  PO 00000  Frm 00057  Fmt 4703  Sfmt 4703  E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM  18MRN1


significantly affect the ability to perform the
15152                        Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-522-                    proposed change is consistent with                    (PDR), located at One White Flint North, A, Revision 0, Revise Ventilation                    regulatory guidance.                                 Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike System Surveillance Requirements to                       Therefore, it is concluded that this change         (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852.
 
does not involve a significant reduction in a Operate for 10 hours per Month.                                                                            Publicly available documents created or margin of safety.
required tasks.
Basis for proposed no significant                                                                          received at the NRC are accessible hazards consideration determination:                      The NRC staff has reviewed the                     electronically through the Agencywide As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the                    licensees analysis and, based on this               Documents Access and Management licensee has provided its analysis of the              review, it appears that the three                     System (ADAMS) in the NRC Library at issue of no significant hazards                        standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are                     http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the
consideration, which is presented                      satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff                   adams.html. If you do not have access below:                                                  proposes to determine that the                       to ADAMS or if there are problems in amendment request involves no                         accessing the documents located in
 
: 1. Does the proposed change involve a                significant hazards consideration.
probability or consequences of an accident
significant increase in the probability or                                                                   ADAMS, contact the PDRs Reference Attorney for licensee: Jay Silberg, Esq.,         staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
 
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP,                  or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
previously evaluated.
Response: No.                                       2300 N Street NW., Washington, DC                        Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.,
: 2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of
The proposed change replaces existing                20037.                                               Docket No. 50-423, Millstone Power Surveillance Requirements to operate the                   NRC Branch Chief: Michael T.                       Station, Unit 3, New London County, Control Room Emergency Ventilation System              Markley.                                              Connecticut (CREVS) and the Emergency Exhaust System                                                                        Date of amendment request: October (EES) for a continuous 10 hour period with              Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and                      4, 2012, as supplemented by letters applicable heaters operating every 31 days, with requirements to operate these systems              Combined Licenses                                    dated January 4, April 17, and October for 15 continuous minutes with applicable                                                                    30, 2013.
 
During the period since publication of                Description of amendment request:
accident from any accident previously
heaters operating every 31 days.                       the last biweekly notice, the These systems are not accident initiators                                                                  The proposed amendment would Commission has issued the following                  modify Technical Specifications by (i.e., their malfunction cannot initiate an accident or transient) and therefore, these            amendments. The Commission has                        relocating specific surveillance changes do not involve a significant increase           determined for each of these                          frequencies to a licensee controlled in the probability of an accident. The                  amendments that the application                      program with the adoption of Technical proposed system and filter testing changes             complies with the standards and                      Specification Task Force (TSTF)-425, are consistent with current regulatory                  requirements of the Atomic Energy Act                Revision 3, Relocate Surveillance guidance for these systems and will continue            of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the to assure that these systems perform their Frequencies to Licensee Control[Risk-Commissions rules and regulations.                   Informed Technical Specification Task design function which may include                      The Commission has made appropriate mitigating accidents. Therefore, the change                                                                  Force (RITSTF)] Initiative 5b.
 
findings as required by the Act and the               Additionally, the change would add a does not involve a significant increase in the consequences of an accident.                           Commissions rules and regulations in                 new program, the Surveillance Therefore, it is concluded that this change         10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in              Frequency Control Program (SFCP), to does not involve a significant increase in the         the license amendment.                                Technical Specification Section 6, probability or consequences of an accident                 A notice of consideration of issuance              Administrative Controls.
evaluated?
previously evaluated.                                  of amendment to facility operating                      Date of issuance: February 25, 2014.
Response: No.  
: 2. Does the proposed change create the               license or combined license, as                          Effective date: As of the date of possibility of a new or different kind of               applicable, proposed no significant                  issuance, and shall be implemented accident from any accident previously                   hazards consideration determination, evaluated?                                                                                                   within 90 days.
 
and opportunity for a hearing in                        Amendment No.: 258.
The proposed change affects the required response times for supplementing onsite
 
personnel in response to a radiological
 
emergency. It has been evaluated and
 
determined not to significantly affect the
 
ability to perform that function. It has no
 
effect on the plant design or on the normal
 
operation of the plant and does not affect
 
how the plant is physically operated under
 
emergency conditions. The extension of staff
 
augmentation times in the SEP does not
 
affect the plant operating procedures which are performed by plant staff during all plant conditions.
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different
 
kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
: 3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
 
The proposed change does not affect plant design or method of operation. Section
 
50.47(b) and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E
 
establish emergency planning standards and
 
requirements that require adequate staffing, satisfactory performance of key functional
 
areas and critical tasks, and timely
 
augmentation of the response capability.  
 
Since the SEP was originally developed, there have been improvements in the
 
technology used to support the SEP functions
 
and in the capabilities of onsite personnel. A
 
functional analysis was performed on the
 
effect of the proposed change on the
 
timeliness of performing major tasks for the
 
functional areas of SEP. The analysis
 
concluded that an increase in staff
 
augmentation times would not significantly
 
affect the ability to perform the required SEP
 
tasks. Thus, the proposed change has been
 
determined not to adversely affect the ability
 
to meet the emergency planning standards as
 
described in 10 CFR 50.47(b) and
 
requirements in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of  
 
safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensees analysis and, based on this  
 
review, it appears that the three  
 
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are  
 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff  
 
proposes to determine that the  
 
amendment request involves no  
 
significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee:
William Dennis, Assistant General Counsel, Entergy
 
Nuclear Operations, Inc., 440 Hamilton
 
Ave., White Plains, NY 10601.
NRC Branch Chief:
Robert D. Carlson.
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-255, Palisades Nuclear
 
Plant, Van Buren County, Michigan Date of amendment request:
December 11, 2013.
Description of amendment request:
The proposed amendment would
 
modify Palisades Nuclear Plant
 
technical specifications (TS)
 
requirements for unavailable barriers by
 
adding limiting condition for operation (LCO) 3.0.9. The changes are consistent
 
with the NRCs approved industry/
 
Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Standard Technical
 
Specification (STS) change TSTF-427, Allowance for Non-Technical
 
Specification Barrier Degradation on
 
Supported System OPERABILITY,
 
Revision 2.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:  
 
The licensee has affirmed the VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014Jkt 232001PO 00000Frm 00054Fmt 4703Sfmt 4703E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM18MRN1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 15149 Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 52/Tuesday, March 18, 2014/Notices applicability of the model proposed non-significant hazards consideration  
 
published on October 2, 2006 (71 FR
 
58444), as part of the Consolidated Line
 
Item Improvement Process, Notice of
 
Availability of the Model Safety
 
Evaluation. The licensee has
 
concluded that the findings presented in
 
that evaluation are applicable to PNP
 
and is hereby referenced below:
Criterion 1The Proposed Change Does Not Involve a Significant Increase in the  
 
Probability or Consequences of an Accident
 
Previously Evaluated The proposed change allows a delay time for entering a supported system technical
 
specification (TS) when the inoperability is
 
due solely to an unavailable barrier if risk is
 
assessed and managed. The postulated
 
initiating events which may require a
 
functional barrier are limited to those with
 
low frequencies of occurrence, and the  
 
overall TS system safety function would still
 
be available for the majority of anticipated
 
challenges. Therefore, the probability of an
 
accident previously evaluated is not
 
significantly increased, if at all. The
 
consequences of an accident while relying on the allowance provided by proposed LCO
 
3.0.9 are no different than the consequences
 
of an accident while relying on the TS required actions in effect without the allowance provided by proposed LCO 3.0.9.
 
Therefore, the consequences of an accident  
 
previously evaluated are not significantly
 
affected by this change. The addition of a
 
requirement to assess and manage the risk
 
introduced by this change will further
 
minimize possible concerns.
Therefore, this change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or
 
consequences of an accident previously
 
evaluated.
Criterion 2The Proposed Change Does Not Create the Possibility of a New or Different
 
Kind of Accident from any Previously
 
Evaluated The proposed change does not involve a physical alteration of the plant (no new or
 
different type of equipment will be installed).  
 
Allowing delay times for entering supported
 
system TS when inoperability is due solely
 
to an unavailable barrier, if risk is assessed
 
and managed, will not introduce new failure
 
modes or effects and will not, in the absence
 
of other unrelated failures, lead to an
 
accident whose consequences exceed the
 
consequences of accidents previously
 
evaluated. The addition of a requirement to
 
assess and manage the risk introduced by this
 
change will further minimize possible
 
concerns.
Thus, this change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of
 
accident from an accident previously
 
evaluated.
Criterion 3The Proposed Change Does Not Involve a Significant Reduction in the Margin
 
of Safety.
The proposed change allows a delay time for entering a supported system TS when the
 
inoperability is due solely to an unavailable
 
barrier, if risk is assessed and managed. The postulated initiating events which may require a functional barrier are limited to
 
those with low frequencies of occurrence, and the overall TS system safety function
 
would still be available for the majority of anticipated challenges. The risk impact of the
 
proposed TS changes was assessed following
 
the three-tiered approach recommended in
 
RG 1.177. A bounding risk assessment was
 
performed to justify the proposed TS
 
changes. This application of LCO 3.0.9 is
 
predicated upon the licensees performance
 
of a risk assessment and the management of
 
plant risk. The net change to the margin of
 
safety is insignificant as indicated by the
 
anticipated low levels of associated risk (ICCDP and ICLERP) as shown in Table 1 of
 
Section 3.1.1 in the Safety Evaluation.
Therefore, this change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensees analysis and, based on this
 
review, it appears that the three
 
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
 
proposes to determine that the  
 
amendment request involves no
 
significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee:
William Dennis, Assistant General Counsel, Entergy
 
Nuclear Operations, Inc., 440 Hamilton
 
Ave., White Plains, NY 10601.
NRC Branch Chief:
Robert D. Carlson.
Omaha Public Power District, Docket No. 50-285, Fort Calhoun Station, Unit  
 
1, Washington County, Nebraska Date of amendment request:
August 16, 2013.
Description of amendment request:
The proposed amendment would revise
 
the design basis method in the Fort
 
Calhoun Station Updated Safety
 
Analysis Report for controlling the raw
 
water intake cell level during periods of
 
elevated river levels.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:
 
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the
 
licensee has provided its analysis of the  
 
issue of no significant hazards
 
consideration, which is presented
 
below: 1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or
 
consequences of an accident previously
 
evaluated?
Response: No.
 
The proposed modification engineering change (EC) 55394, Raw Water [RW] Pump Operation and Safety Classification of
 
Components during a Flood, installed intake cell flood water inlet valves at Fort Calhoun
 
Station (FCS). The modification would  
 
employ the trash rack blowdown portion of
 
the circulating water system to allow river
 
water to flow into four of those pipes and
 
then through four newly installed safety class
 
valves for control of cell level (RW pump
 
suction level) using river level as the driving
 
force. This modification EC 55394 enhances
 
the flood protection provided to the RW
 
pumps for an external flooding event thus assuring the availability of the ultimate heat sink and core cooling. As such, the proposed
 
change does not increase the consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
In addition, implementing this strategy eliminates the need for the exterior sluice
 
gates to be safety class and allows for
 
continuous control of the intake cell level
 
during a design basis flood event. The  
 
proposed Updated Safety Analysis Report (USAR) changes for implementing
 
modification EC 55394 allow for maintaining
 
RW pump operation during a flooding event
 
at FCS. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the  
 
probability or consequences of an accident  
 
previously evaluated.  
: 2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of
 
accident from any accident previously
 
evaluated?
Response: No.
 
The proposed modification EC 55394 to provide control of the intake cell level by
 
operation of the manual valves and the
 
associated USAR changes do not alter the
 
safety limits or safety analysis assumptions
 
associated with the operation of the plant.
 
Hence, the proposed changes do not
 
introduce any new accident initiators, nor do
 
they reduce or adversely affect the
 
capabilities of any plant structure or system
 
in the performance of their safety function.
 
The proposed amendment revises the USAR
 
to include the necessary information to
 
support the implementation of the
 
modification allowing for maintaining RW
 
pump operation during an abnormal
 
operating procedure AOP-01 flooding event
 
at FCS. Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different
 
kind of accident from any previously
 
evaluated.
: 3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
 
The proposed modification, which provides control of the intake cell level by
 
operation of the manual valves, and the
 
associated USAR changes do not alter the
 
safety limits or safety analysis assumptions
 
associated with the operation of the plant.
 
The proposed modification and associated
 
USAR revisions ensure there is adequate
 
protection to the RW pumps from an external
 
flood hazard thus assuring adequate
 
protection during a flood. Providing RW
 
pump intake cell level control during
 
flooding conditions allows for adjustment of
 
flow and control of the intake cell level
 
throughout the duration of the flood since the
 
new valves are located inside the intake
 
structure; thereby ensuring the RW pumps
 
remain operable during a flood condition and  
 
will not adversely impact any margin of  
 
safety. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of
 
safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensees analysis and, based on this
 
review, it appears that the three
 
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014Jkt 232001PO 00000Frm 00055Fmt 4703Sfmt 4703E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM18MRN1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 15150 Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 52/Tuesday, March 18, 2014/Notices satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
 
amendment request involves no
 
significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee:
David A. Repka, Esq., Winston & Strawn, 1700 K Street
 
NW., Washington, DC 20006-3817.
NRC Branch Chief:
Michael T.
Markley. Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. Docket Nos. 52-025 and  
 
52-026, Vogtle Electric Generating
 
Plant, Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia Date of amendment request:
November 21, 2013.
Description of amendment request:
The proposed change would amend
 
Combined License Nos. NPF-91 and
 
NPF-92 for the Vogtle Electric
 
Generating Plant (VEGP) Units 3 and 4
 
by departing from the approved AP1000
 
Design Control Document (DCD) Tier 2
 
information as incorporated into the
 
Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) to allow use of a new
 
methodology to determine the effective
 
thermal conductivity resulting from
 
oxidation of the inorganic zinc (IOZ)
 
used in the containment vessel coating
 
system. Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:
 
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the  
 
licensee has provided its analysis of the  
 
issue of no significant hazards
 
consideration, which is presented
 
below: 1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or
 
consequences of an accident previously
 
evaluated?
Response: No.  
 
Implementation of a methodology which specifies an effective thermal conductivity
 
and oxidation progression for the inorganic
 
zinc coating of the containment vessel is
 
used to eliminate non-mechanistic modeling
 
of inorganic zinc thermal conductivity in the  
 
containment integrity analyses to show that
 
the value for inorganic zinc thermal
 
conductivity used in the containment
 
integrity analyses is conservative, but is not
 
used to change any of the parameters used in
 
those analyses. There is no change to any
 
accident initiator or condition of the
 
containment that would affect the probability
 
of any accident. The containment peak
 
pressure analysis as reported in the UFSAR
 
is not affected; therefore, the previously
 
reported consequences are not affected.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve an increase in the probability or  
 
consequences of an accident previously  
 
evaluated.  
: 2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of  
 
accident from any accident previously  
 
evaluated?
Response: No.
Response: No.
The proposed amendment to implement a methodology which specifies an effective thermal conductivity and oxidation progression and effects for the inorganic zinc
The change proposed for these ventilation connection with these actions, was                      Renewed Facility Operating License systems does not change any system                      published in the Federal Register as                  No. NPF-49: Amendment revised the operations or maintenance activities. Testing          indicated.                                            License and Technical Specifications.
requirements will be revised and will                      Unless otherwise indicated, the                      Date of initial notice in Federal continue to demonstrate that the Limiting              Commission has determined that these                  Register: December 11, 2012 (77 FR Conditions for Operation are met and the                amendments satisfy the criteria for                  73687).
system components are capable of                        categorical exclusion in accordance                      The supplemental letters dated performing their intended safety functions.            with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant                January 4, 2013, April 17, 2013, and The change does not create new failure                  to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental                  October 30, 2013, provided additional modes or mechanisms and no new accident                impact statement or environmental precursors are generated.
information that clarified the Therefore, it is concluded that this change assessment need be prepared for these                application, did not expand the scope of does not create the possibility of a new or            amendments. If the Commission has                    the application as originally noticed, different kind of accident from any accident            prepared an environmental assessment                  and did not change the staffs original previously evaluated.                                  under the special circumstances                      proposed no significant hazards
: 3. Does the proposed change involve a                provision in 10 CFR 51.22(b) and has                  consideration determination.
significant reduction in a margin of safety?            made a determination based on that                      The Commissions related evaluation Response: No.                                        assessment, it is so indicated.                      of the amendment is contained in a emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES The design basis for the ventilation system            For further details with respect to the            Safety Evaluation dated February 25, heaters in the EES and in the pressurization            action see (1) the applications for                  2014.
trains of the CREVS includes the capability            amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3)                    No significant hazards consideration to heat the incoming air, reducing the relative humidity (and thereby increasing adsorber the Commissions related letter, Safety              comments received: No.
efficiency). The heater testing change                  Evaluation and/or Environmental                          Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket proposed will continue to demonstrate that              Assessment as indicated. All of these                Nos. 50-369 and 50-370, McGuire the heaters are capable of heating the air and          items are available for public inspection            Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, will thus perform their design function. The            at the NRCs Public Document Room                    Mecklenburg County, North Carolina VerDate Mar<15>2010  18:34 Mar 17, 2014  Jkt 232001  PO 00000  Frm 00058  Fmt 4703  Sfmt 4703  E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM  18MRN1


coating of the containment vessel is used to  
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices                                          15153 Date of application for amendments:                    The Commissions related evaluation                heatup and cooldown curves (also April 16, 2013.                                        of the amendments is contained in a                  referred to as pressure-temperature (P-Brief description of amendments: The                Safety Evaluation dated February 27,                  T) limits) and low temperature amendments remove superseded                            2014.                                                overpressure protection (LTOP) temporary Technical Specification (TS)                    No significant hazards consideration              requirements to cover a lifetime burnup requirements for McGuire Nuclear                        comments received: No.                                of 48 Effective Full Power Years (EFPY),
Station (MNS), Units 1 and 2, in                          Duke Energy Progress Inc., Docket                  which is an increase from the current accordance with a licensee commitment                  Nos. 50-325 and 50-324, Brunswick                    value of 29.2 EFPY.
described in a May 28, 2010, license                    Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2,                    Date of issuance: March 5, 2014.
amendment request.                                      Brunswick County, North Carolina.                        Effective date: As of the date of Date of issuance: February 28, 2014.                    Date of application for amendments:                issuance, and shall be implemented Effective date: This license                        June 19, 2012, as supplemented by                    within 30 days.
amendment is effective as of its date of                letters dated January 21, May 14, and                    Amendment No.: 274.
issuance and shall be implemented                      August 29, 2013, and January 22, 2014.                  Facility Operating License No. DPR-within 60 days of issuance.                                Brief description of amendments: The              26: The amendment revised the License Amendment Nos.: 272 and 252.                        amendments revised the Technical                      and the Technical Specifications.
Renewed Facility Operating License                  Specification (TS) to extend the                        Date of initial notice in Federal Nos. NPF-9 and NPF-17: Amendments                      Completion Time (CT) of TS 3.8.1                      Register: April 2, 2013 (78 FR 19750).
revised the licenses and technical                      Required Action D.4 for an inoperable                    The supplemental letters dated July 9, specifications.                                        diesel generator. A commensurate                      2013, October 3, 2013, and February 24, Date of initial notice in Federal                    change is also made to extend the                    2014, provided additional information Register: June 25, 2013 (78 FR 38081).                  maximum CT of TS 3.8.1 Required                      that clarified the application, did not The Commissions related evaluation                  Actions C.3 and D.4. The licensee will                expand the scope of the application as of the amendments is contained in a                    to add a supplemental AC power source                originally noticed, and did not change Safety Evaluation dated February 28,                    (i.e., a supplemental diesel generator)              the NRC staffs original proposed no 2014.                                                  with the capability to power any                      significant hazards consideration No significant hazards consideration                emergency bus within 1 hour from a                    determination as published in the comments received: No.                                  Station Blackout event, and with the                  Federal Register.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket                  capacity to bring the affected unit to                  The Commissions related evaluation Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287,                        cold shutdown.                                        of the amendment is contained in a Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2 and                    Date of issuance: February 24, 2014.              Safety Evaluation dated March 5, 2014.
3, Oconee County, South Carolina                          Effective date: As of the date of                    No significant hazards consideration Date of application for amendments:                  issuance and shall be implemented                    comments received: No.
February 22, 2013, as supplemented on                  prior to startup from the 2014 Unit 1                    Florida Power and Light Company, September 10, October 25, November                      refueling outage.                                    Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251, Turkey 29, and December 16, 2013.                                Amendment Nos.: 264 and 292.                      Point Nuclear Generating, Units 3 and Brief description of amendments: The                    Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-              4, Miami-Dade County, Florida amendments revise Technical                            62 AND DPR-71: Amendments revised                        Date of application for amendment:
Specification (TS) 3.4.3, to replace its                the License and TSs.                                  March 22, 2013.
current reactor coolant system pressure-                  Date of initial notice in Federal                    Brief description of amendment: The temperature (P-T) limits with new P-T                  Register: October 16, 2013 (77 FR                    amendments revised the Technical limits applicable to 54 effective full                  63346).                                              Specifications (TSs) to allow the use of power years. In addition, the                              The supplements dated January 21,                  Optimized ZIRLOTM as an approved amendments change the operational                      May 14, and August 29, 2013, and                      fuel rod cladding.
requirements for unit heatup and                        January 22, 2014, provided additional                    Date of issuance: February 20, 2014.
cooldown in TS Tables 3.4.3-1 and                      information that clarified the                          Effective date: As of the date of 3.4.3-2.                                                application, did not expand the scope of              issuance and shall be implemented Date of Issuance: February 27, 2014.                the application as originally noticed,                within 60 days of issuance.
Effective date: As of the date of                    and did not change the staffs original                  Amendment No.: 259 and 254.
issuance and shall be implemented                      proposed no significant hazards                          Renewed Facility Operating License within 60 days from the date of                        consideration determination as                        Nos. DPR-31 and DPR-41: Amendments issuance.                                              published in the Federal Register.                    revised the licenses and the TSs.
Amendment Nos.: 384, 386, and 385.                      The Commissions related evaluation                  Date of initial notice in Federal Renewed Facility Operating License                  of the amendment is contained in a                    Register: August 20, 2013 (78 FR Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47, and DPR-55:                        Safety Evaluation dated February 24,                  51219).
Amendments revised the license and                      2014.                                                    The Commissions related evaluation the TSs.                                                  No significant hazards consideration              of the amendments is contained in a Date of initial notice in Federal                    comments received: None.                              Safety Evaluation dated February 20, Register: April 16, 2013, 78 FR 22568.                    Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.,                  2014.
The supplemental letters dated                      Docket No. 50-247, Indian Point                          No significant hazards consideration September 10, October 25, November                      Nuclear Generating, Unit 2, Westchester              comments received: No.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 29, and December 16, 2013, provided                    County, New York                                        Luminant Generation Company LLC, additional information that clarified the                  Date of application for amendment:                Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446, application, did not expand the scope of                February 6, 2013, as supplemented by                  Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, the application as originally noticed,                  letters dated July 9, 2013, October 3,                Units 1 and 2 (CPNPP), Somervell and did not change the staffs original                2013, and February 24, 2014.                          County, Texas proposed no significant hazards                            Brief description of amendment: The                  Date of amendment request: August consideration determination as                          amendment changes the Technical                      29, 2013, as supplemented by letter published in the Federal Register.                      Specifications by revising the reactor                dated February 19, 2014.
VerDate Mar<15>2010  18:34 Mar 17, 2014  Jkt 232001  PO 00000  Frm 00059  Fmt 4703  Sfmt 4703  E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM  18MRN1


eliminate non-mechanistic modeling of  
15154                        Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices Description of amendment request:                    Technical Specifications (TS).                        and 2, San Luis Obispo County, The amendments revised Technical                        Specifically, the amendment revised the              California Specification (TS) 3.4.17, Steam                      TS to allow the use of Optimized                        Date of amendment request: June 6, Generator (SG) Tube Integrity, TS                    ZIRLOTM as an approved fuel rod                      2013.
5.5.9, Unit 1 Model D76 and Unit 2                    cladding material.                                      Description of amendment request:
Model D5 Steam Generator (SG)                              Date of issuance: March 5, 2014.                  The amendments revised Technical Program, and TS 5.6.9, Unit 1 Model                    Effective date: As of its date of                  Specification (TS) 3.7.10, Control D76 and Unit 2 Model D5 Steam                          issuance and shall be implemented                    Room Ventilation System (CRVS), and Generator Tube Inspection Report. The                within 60 days.                                      TS 5.6.5, Core Operating Limits Report changes address implementation issues                      Amendment No.: 139.                                (COLR), to incorporate editorial associated with inspection periods, and                    Facility Operating License No. NPF-                changes. Specifically, the proposed address other administrative changes                    86: The amendment revised the License                amendments delete footnote (1) from the and clarifications. The amendment is                    and TS.                                              TS 3.7.10 Condition A Completion consistent with NRC-approved                              Date of initial notice in Federal                  Time, and revise inconsistent wording Technical Specifications Task Force                    Register: August 20, 2013 (78 FR                      in TS 5.6.5a.4, TS 5.6.5a.5, and TS (TSTF) change traveler TSTF-510,                        51228).                                              5.6.5a.9.
Revision 2, Revision to Steam                            The Commissions related evaluation                  Date of issuance: February 27, 2014.
Generator Program Inspection                            of the amendment is contained in a                      Effective date: As of its date of Frequencies and Tube Sample                            Safety Evaluation dated March 5, 2014.                issuance and shall be implemented Selection, as part of the consolidated                  No significant hazards consideration              within 60 days from the date of line item improvement process.                          comments received: No.                                issuance.
The amendments also incorporated                        Northern States Power Company                        Amendment Nos.: Unit 1217; Unit minor non-technical variations from the                Minnesota (NSPM), Docket No. 50-263,                  2219.
TS changes proposed in TSTF-510,                        Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant,                    Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-Revision 2. The TSs for CPNPP, Units 1                  Wright County, Minnesota                              80 and DPR-82: The amendments and 2 utilize different numbering and                      Date of application for amendment:                revised the Facility Operating Licenses titles than the Standard Technical                      April 19, 2013.                                      and Technical Specifications.
Specifications on which TSTF-510,                          Brief description of amendment: The                  Date of initial notice in Federal Revision 2, is based, since the steam                  amendment allows NSPM to adopt the                    Register: August 6, 2013 (78 FR 47791).
generators for CPNPP, Units 1 and 2, are                NRCs approved Technical                                The Commissions related evaluation of different models. These differences                  Specifications Task Force (TSTF)                      of the amendments is contained in a are administrative in nature and do not                Standard Technical Specifications                    Safety Evaluation dated February 27, affect the applicability of TSTF-510,                  Change Traveler TSTF-535, Revision 0,                2014.
Revision 2, to the TSs for CPNPP, Units                Revise Shutdown Margin Definition to                  No significant hazards consideration 1 and 2.                                                Address Advanced Fuel Designs, dated                comments received: No.
Date of issuance: February 27, 2014.                August 8, 2011. The amendment                            PPL Susquehanna, LLC, Docket Nos.
Effective date: As of its date of                    modifies the Technical Specification                  50-387 and 50-388, Susquehanna issuance and shall be implemented                      definition of shutdown margin (SDM)              Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2, within 90 days from the date of                        to require calculation of the SDM at a                Luzerne County, Pennsylvania issuance.                                              reactor moderator temperature of 68 &deg;F                  Date of application for amendments:
Amendment No.: Unit 1161; Unit                      or higher, representing the most reactive            June 6, 2013, as supplemented by letter 2161.                                                  state throughout the operating cycle.                dated December 4, 2013.
Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-                This change addresses newer boiling-                    Brief description of amendments: The 87 and NPF-89: The amendments                          water reactor fuel designs which may be              amendments change the Technical revised the Facility Operating Licenses                more reactive at shutdown temperatures                Specifications (TSs) for Susquehanna and Technical Specifications.                          above 68 &deg;F.                                          Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2.
Date of initial notice in Federal                      Date of issuance: February 28, 2014.              Specifically, these amendments change Register: October 1, 2013 (78 FR                          Effective date: This license                      TS 3.3.6.1, Primary Containment 60324).                                                amendment is effective as of the date of              Isolation Instrumentation, to add a The February 19, 2014, supplement                    issuance and shall be implemented                    footnote to Function 6.c. in TS Table did not expand the scope of the                        within 90 days from the date of                      3.3.6.1-1, allowing only one Trip application as originally noticed, and                  issuance.                                            System to be operable in MODES 4 and did not change the NRC staffs initial                    Amendment No.: 179.                                5 for the Manual Initiation Function for proposed finding of no significant                        Renewed Facility Operating License                Shutdown Cooling System isolation.
hazards consideration.                                  No. DPR-22: The amendment revises                        Date of issuance: February 26, 2014.
The Commissions related evaluation                  the Renewed Facility Operating License                  Effective date: As of the date of of the amendment is contained in a                      and Technical Specifications.                        issuance and shall be implemented Safety Evaluation dated February 27,                      Date of initial notice in Federal                  within 30 days.
2014.                                                  Register: September 3, 2013 (78 FR                      Amendment Nos.: 259 and 240.
No significant hazards consideration                54285).                                                  Renewed Facility Operating License comments received: No.                                    The Commissions related evaluation                Nos. NPF-14 and NPF-22: The emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC,                        of the amendment is contained in a                    amendments revised the license and the Docket No. 50-443, Seabrook Station,                    Safety Evaluation dated February 28,                  TS.
Unit. 1, Rockingham County, New                        2014.                                                    Date of initial notice in Federal Hampshire                                                  No significant hazards consideration              Register: December 10, 2013 (78 FR Date of amendment request: June 25,                  comments received: No.                                74184).
2013.                                                      Pacific Gas and Electric Company,                    The supplemental letter dated Description of amendment request:                    Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323, Diablo                December 4, 2013, provided additional The amendment revised the Seabrook                      Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1                  information that clarified the VerDate Mar<15>2010  18:34 Mar 17, 2014  Jkt 232001  PO 00000  Frm 00060  Fmt 4703  Sfmt 4703  E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM  18MRN1


inorganic zinc thermal conductivity in the containment integrity analyses to show that  
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices                                            15155 application, did not expand the scope of                which are set forth in the license                    been issued and made effective as the application as originally noticed,                  amendment.                                            indicated.
and did not change the staffs original                    Because of exigent or emergency                      Unless otherwise indicated, the proposed no significant hazards                        circumstances associated with the date                Commission has determined that these consideration determination as                          the amendment was needed, there was                  amendments satisfy the criteria for published in the Federal Register.                      not time for the Commission to publish,              categorical exclusion in accordance The Commissions related evaluation                  for public comment before issuance, its              with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant of the amendments is contained in a                    usual notice of consideration of                      to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental Safety Evaluation dated February 26,                    issuance of amendment, proposed no                    impact statement or environmental 2014.                                                  significant hazards consideration                    assessment need be prepared for these No significant hazards consideration                determination, and opportunity for a                  amendments. If the Commission has comments received: No.                                  hearing.                                              prepared an environmental assessment South Carolina Electric and Gas                        For exigent circumstances, the                    under the special circumstances Company, South Carolina Public                          Commission has either issued a Federal                provision in 10 CFR 51.12(b) and has Service Authority, Docket No. 50-395,                  Register notice providing opportunity                made a determination based on that Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit,                for public comment or has used local                  assessment, it is so indicated.
Fairfield County, South Carolina                        media to provide notice to the public in                For further details with respect to the Date of application for amendment:                  the area surrounding a licensees facility            action see (1) the application for April 2, 2013 as supplemented by letter                of the licensees application and of the              amendment, (2) the amendment to Commissions proposed determination                  Facility Operating License or Combined dated May 16, 2013.
of no significant hazards consideration.              License, as applicable, and (3) the Brief description of amendment: This The Commission has provided a                        Commissions related letter, Safety amendment revises the Technical reasonable opportunity for the public to              Evaluation and/or Environmental Specifications requirements regarding comment, using its best efforts to make              Assessment, as indicated. All of these steam generator tube inspections and available to the public means of                      items are available for public inspection reporting as described in TSTF-510, communication for the public to                      at the NRCs Public Document Room Revision 2, Revision to Steam respond quickly, and in the case of                  (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Generator Program Inspection                            telephone comments, the comments                      Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike Frequencies and Tube Sample                            have been recorded or transcribed as                  (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852.
Selection.                                            appropriate and the licensee has been                Publicly available documents created or Date of issuance: February 28, 2014.                informed of the public comments.                      received at the NRC are accessible Effective date: This license                            In circumstances where failure to act              electronically through the Agencywide amendment is effective as of the date of                in a timely way would have resulted, for              Documents Access and Management its issuance.                                          example, in derating or shutdown of a                System (ADAMS) in the NRC Library at Amendment No.: 196.                                  nuclear power plant or in prevention of              http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
Renewed Facility Operating License                  either resumption of operation or of                  adams.html. If you do not have access No. NPF-12: Amendment revises the                      increase in power output up to the                    to ADAMS or if there are problems in License.                                                plants licensed power level, the                    accessing the documents located in Date of initial notice in Federal                    Commission may not have had an                        ADAMS, contact the PDRs Reference Register: June 25, 2013 (78 FR 38083).                  opportunity to provide for public                    staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 The Commissions related evaluation                  comment on its no significant hazards                or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
of the amendment is contained in a                      consideration determination. In such                    The Commission is also offering an Safety Evaluation dated February 28,                    case, the license amendment has been                  opportunity for a hearing with respect to 2014.                                                  issued without opportunity for                        the issuance of the amendment. Within No significant hazards consideration                comment. If there has been some time                  60 days after the date of publication of comments received: No.                                  for public comment but less than 30                  this notice, any person(s) whose interest days, the Commission may provide an                  may be affected by this action may file Notice of Issuance of Amendments to opportunity for public comment. If                    a request for a hearing and a petition to Facility Operating Licenses and comments have been requested, it is so                intervene with respect to issuance of the Combined Licenses and Final stated. In either event, the State has                amendment to the subject facility Determination of No Significant been consulted by telephone whenever                  operating license or combined license.
Hazards Consideration and possible.                                            Requests for a hearing and a petition for Opportunity for a Hearing (Exigent Under its regulations, the Commission              leave to intervene shall be filed in Public Announcement or Emergency may issue and make an amendment                      accordance with the Commissions Circumstances) immediately effective, notwithstanding                Agency Rules of Practice and During the period since publication of              the pendency before it of a request for              Procedure in 10 CFR Part 2. Interested the last biweekly notice, the                          a hearing from any person, in advance                person(s) should consult a current copy Commission has issued the following                    of the holding and completion of any                  of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at amendments. The Commission has                          required hearing, where it has                        the NRCs PDR, located at One White determined for each of these                            determined that no significant hazards                Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 amendments that the application for the                consideration is involved.                            Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES amendment complies with the                                The Commission has applied the                    Maryland 20852, and electronically on standards and requirements of the                      standards of 10 CFR 50.92 and has made                the Internet at the NRCs Web site, Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended                  a final determination that the                        http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-(the Act), and the Commissions rules                  amendment involves no significant                    collections/cfr/. If there are problems in and regulations. The Commission has                    hazards consideration. The basis for this            accessing the document, contact the made appropriate findings as required                  determination is contained in the                    PDRs Reference staff at 1-800-397-by the Act and the Commissions rules                  documents related to this action.                    4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I,                    Accordingly, the amendments have                      pdr.resource@nrc.gov. If a request for a VerDate Mar<15>2010  18:34 Mar 17, 2014  Jkt 232001  PO 00000  Frm 00061  Fmt 4703  Sfmt 4703  E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM  18MRN1


the value for inorganic zinc thermal
15156                        Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices hearing or petition for leave to intervene              intervene, and have the opportunity to                support unlisted software, and the NRC is filed by the above date, the                        participate fully in the conduct of the              Meta System Help Desk will not be able Commission or a presiding officer                      hearing. Since the Commission has                    to offer assistance in using unlisted designated by the Commission or by the                  made a final determination that the                  software.
Chief Administrative Judge of the                      amendment involves no significant                        If a participant is electronically Atomic Safety and Licensing Board                      hazards consideration, if a hearing is                submitting a document to the NRC in Panel, will rule on the request and/or                  requested, it will not stay the                      accordance with the E-Filing rule, the petition; and the Secretary or the Chief                effectiveness of the amendment. Any                  participant must file the document Administrative Judge of the Atomic                      hearing held would take place while the              using the NRCs online, Web-based Safety and Licensing Board will issue a                amendment is in effect.                              submission form. In order to serve notice of a hearing or an appropriate                      All documents filed in the NRC                    documents through the Electronic order.                                                  adjudicatory proceedings, including a                Information Exchange System, users As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a                      request for hearing, a petition for leave            will be required to install a Web petition for leave to intervene shall set              to intervene, any motion or other                    browser plug-in from the NRCs Web forth with particularity the interest of                document filed in the proceeding prior                site. Further information on the Web-the petitioner in the proceeding, and                  to the submission of a request for                    based submission form, including the how that interest may be affected by the                hearing or petition to intervene, and                installation of the Web browser plug-in, results of the proceeding. The petition                documents filed by interested                        is available on the NRCs public Web should specifically explain the reasons                governmental entities participating                  site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-why intervention should be permitted                    under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in              submittals.html.
with particular reference to the                        accordance with the NRCs E-Filing rule                  Once a participant has obtained a following general requirements: (1) The                (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007). The E-                digital ID certificate and a docket has name, address, and telephone number of                  Filing process requires participants to              been created, the participant can then the requestor or petitioner; (2) the                    submit and serve all adjudicatory                    submit a request for hearing or petition nature of the requestors/petitioners                  documents over the internet, or in some              for leave to intervene. Submissions right under the Act to be made a party                  cases to mail copies on electronic should be in Portable Document Format to the proceeding; (3) the nature and                  storage media. Participants may not (PDF) in accordance with the NRCs extent of the requestors/petitioners                  submit paper copies of their filings guidance available on the NRCs public property, financial, or other interest in              unless they seek an exemption in Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-the proceeding; and (4) the possible                    accordance with the procedures help/e-submittals.html. A filing is effect of any decision or order which                  described below.
To comply with the procedural                      considered complete at the time the may be entered in the proceeding on the requirements of E-Filing, at least 10                documents are submitted through the requestors/petitioners interest. The days prior to the filing deadline, the                NRCs E-Filing system. To be timely, an petition must also identify the specific participant should contact the Office of              electronic filing must be submitted to contentions which the requestor/
petitioner seeks to have litigated at the              the Secretary by email at                            the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 proceeding.                                            hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone              p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.
Each contention must consist of a                    at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital            Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-specific statement of the issue of law or              identification (ID) certificate, which                Filing system time-stamps the document fact to be raised or controverted. In                  allows the participant (or its counsel or            and sends the submitter an email notice addition, the requestor/petitioner shall                representative) to digitally sign                    confirming receipt of the document. The provide a brief explanation of the bases                documents and access the E-Submittal                  E-Filing system also distributes an email for the contention and a concise                        server for any proceeding in which it is              notice that provides access to the statement of the alleged facts or expert                participating; and (2) advise the                    document to the NRCs Office of the opinion which support the contention                    Secretary that the participant will be                General Counsel and any others who and on which the petitioner intends to                  submitting a request or petition for                  have advised the Office of the Secretary rely in proving the contention at the                  hearing (even in instances in which the              that they wish to participate in the hearing. The petitioner must also                      participant, or its counsel or                        proceeding, so that the filer need not provide references to those specific                    representative, already holds an NRC-                serve the documents on those sources and documents of which the                      issued digital ID certificate). Based upon            participants separately. Therefore, petitioner is aware and on which the                    this information, the Secretary will                  applicants and other participants (or petitioner intends to rely to establish                establish an electronic docket for the                their counsel or representative) must those facts or expert opinion. The                      hearing in this proceeding if the                    apply for and receive a digital ID petition must include sufficient                        Secretary has not already established an              certificate before a hearing request/
information to show that a genuine                      electronic docket.                                    petition to intervene is filed so that they dispute exists with the applicant on a                    Information about applying for a                  can obtain access to the document via material issue of law or fact.                          digital ID certificate is available on                the E-Filing system.
Contentions shall be limited to matters                NRCs public Web site at http://                        A person filing electronically using within the scope of the amendment                      www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/                  the agencys adjudicatory E-Filing under consideration. The contention                    apply-certificates.html. System                      system may seek assistance by must be one which, if proven, would                    requirements for accessing the E-                    contacting the NRC Meta System Help emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES entitle the petitioner to relief. A                    Submittal server are detailed in NRCs                Desk through the Contact Us link requestor/petitioner who fails to satisfy              Guidance for Electronic Submission,              located on the NRC Web site at http://
these requirements with respect to at                  which is available on the agencys                    www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-least one contention will not be                        public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/                submittals.html, by email to permitted to participate as a party.                    site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants            MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll-Those permitted to intervene become                  may attempt to use other software not                free call at 1-866-672-7640. The NRC parties to the proceeding, subject to any              listed on the Web site, but should note              Meta System Help Desk is available limitations in the order granting leave to              that the NRCs E-Filing system does not              between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern VerDate Mar<15>2010  18:34 Mar 17, 2014  Jkt 232001  PO 00000  Frm 00062  Fmt 4703  Sfmt 4703  E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM  18MRN1


conductivity used in the containment
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices                                                  15157 Time, Monday through Friday,                               Description of amendment request:                    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 
excluding government holidays.                         The amendments revise Technical                      Michele G. Evans, Participants who believe that they                  Specification (TS) Table 3.3.4-1,                    Director, Division of Operating Reactor have a good cause for not submitting                    Remote Shutdown System                                Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor documents electronically must file an                  Instrumentation and Controls as a result              Regulation.
integrity analyses is conservative, but is not
exemption request, in accordance with                  of an inoperable instrumentation                      [FR Doc. 2014-05645 Filed 3-17-14; 8:45 am]
 
10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper              function on Unit 2. Table 3.3.4-1                    BILLING CODE 7590-01-P filing requesting authorization to                      specifies requirements for Function 3.b.,
used to change any of the parameters used in
continue to submit documents in paper                  Decay Heat Removal via Steam format. Such filings must be submitted                  Generators (SGs)Reactor Coolant                      NUCLEAR REGULATORY by: (1) First class mail addressed to the                                                                     COMMISSION System (RCS) Cold Leg Temperature Office of the Secretary of the Loop A and B as 1 per loop. Loop A                [Docket No. 5200027; NRC-2008-0441]
 
Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-                      of this function is presently inoperable 0001, Attention: Rulemaking and                         on Unit 2 due to a failed resistance                  Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier,                    temperature detector (RTD). Loop B of                Acceptance Criteria; Virgil C. Summer express mail, or expedited delivery                    this function is operable with a reliable            Unit 2 Combined License service to the Office of the Secretary,                maintenance history. The failed RTD on Loop A cannot be replaced in the                      AGENCY:   Nuclear Regulatory Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North,                                                                       Commission.
the containment peak pressure analysis. The
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,                       present operating mode of Unit 2 (Mode 1). Therefore, Duke Energy requested                  ACTION: Determination of inspections, Maryland, 20852, Attention:
 
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff.                     the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory                          tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria Participants filing a document in this                  Commission (NRC) approval to allow                    (ITAAC).
change in methodology does not change the
manner are responsible for serving the                  Unit 2 to remain in Mode 1 until such               
 
condition of containment; therefore, no new
 
accident initiator is created. The containment
 
peak pressure analysis as currently evaluated
 
is not affected, and the consequences
 
previously reported are not changed. The  
 
new methodology does not change the
 
containment; therefore, no new fault or
 
sequence of events that could lead to containment failure or release of radioactive material is created.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different
 
kind of accident.  
: 3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.  
 
The proposed implementation of a methodology which specifies an effective
 
thermal conductivity and oxidation
 
progression and effects for the inorganic zinc
 
coating of the containment vessel is used to
 
eliminate non-mechanistic modeling of
 
inorganic zinc thermal conductivity in the
 
containment integrity analyses to show that
 
the value for inorganic zinc thermal
 
conductivity used in the containment
 
integrity analyses is conservative, but is not
 
used to change any of the parameters used in
 
the containment peak pressure analysis. The
 
change in methodology does not change the  
 
condition of the containment and the
 
integrity of the containment vessel is not
 
affected. The containment peak pressure
 
analysis as currently evaluated is not
 
affected, and the consequences previously
 
reported are not changed. No safety analysis
 
or design basis acceptance limit/criterion is
 
changed by the proposed change, thus no
 
margin of safety is reduced.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not reduce the margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensees analysis and, based on this
 
review, it appears that the three
 
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
 
proposes to determine that the
 
amendment request involves no
 
significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee:
M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 1710
 
Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL
 
35203-2015.
NRC Branch Chief:
Lawrence J.
Burkhart.
Union Electric Company, Docket No.
50-483, Callaway Plant, Unit 1, Callaway County, Missouri Date of amendment request:
December 6, 2013.
Description of amendment request:
The amendment would add a new pipe crack exclusion allowance to Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) Standard
 
Plant Section 3.6.2.1.2.4, ASME
 
[American Society of Mechanical
 
Engineers] Section III and Non-Nuclear Piping-Moderate-Energy, and FSAR
 
Standard Plant Table 3.6-2, Design Comparison to Regulatory Positions of
 
Regulatory Guide 1.46, Revision 0, dated May 1973, titled Protection
 
Against Pipe Whip Inside Containment, in particular regard to
 
the high-density polyethylene (HDPE)
 
piping installed in ASME Class 3 line
 
segments of the essential service water (ESW) system. New Reference 25 would
 
be added to FSAR Standard Plant
 
Section 3.6.3 to cite the NRC-approved
 
version of the HDPE requirements
 
covered by Relief Request I3R-10.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:
 
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the
 
licensee has provided its analysis of the
 
issue of no significant hazards
 
consideration, which is presented
 
below: 1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or
 
consequences of an accident previously
 
evaluated?
Response: No.
 
There are no new design changes associated with the proposed amendment.
 
All design, material, and construction
 
standards that were applicable prior to this
 
amendment request, including those
 
standards in place following the NRC
 
approval of using the HDPE piping, will
 
continue to be applicable.
The proposed change will not increase the likelihood of accident initiators or precursors
 
or adversely alter the design assumptions, conditions, and configuration of the facility
 
or the manner in which the plant is operated
 
and maintained with respect to such
 
initiators or precursors.
The proposed changes do not affect the way in which safety-related systems perform
 
their functions.
All accident analysis acceptance criteria will continue to be met with the proposed
 
changes. The proposed changes will not
 
affect the source term, containment isolation, or radiological release assumptions used in
 
evaluating the radiological consequences of
 
an accident previously evaluated. The
 
proposed changes will not alter any
 
assumptions or change any mitigation actions
 
in the radiological consequence evaluations
 
in the FSAR.
The applicable radiological dose acceptance criteria will continue to be met.
Since the proposed change is based on a calculation that demonstrates that a moderate
 
energy crack in the ESW HDPE piping is
 
unlikely, there are no impacts on the plants
 
existing hazard analyses.
The proposed change does not physically alter safety-related systems or affect the way
 
in which safety-related systems perform their
 
functions per the intended plant design. VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014Jkt 232001PO 00000Frm 00056Fmt 4703Sfmt 4703E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM18MRN1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 15151 Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 52/Tuesday, March 18, 2014/Notices As such, the proposed change will not alter or prevent the capability of structures, systems, and components (SSCs) to perform
 
their intended functions for mitigating the
 
consequences of an accident and meeting
 
applicable acceptance limits.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the
 
probability or consequences of an accident
 
previously evaluated.
: 2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of
 
accident from any accident previously
 
evaluated?
Response: No.
 
With respect to any new or different kind of accident, there are no new design changes
 
being proposed nor are there any changes in
 
the method by which any safety-related plant
 
SSC performs its specified safety function.
 
The proposed change will not affect the
 
normal method of plant operation. No new
 
transient precursors will be introduced as a
 
result of this amendment.
The HDPE piping design change was previously approved by the NRC under Relief
 
Request I3R-10. The proposed change in this
 
amendment request does not create the
 
possibility of a new type of accident, rather
 
the proposed change seeks to eliminate the
 
need to postulate an existing type of hazard
 
event (moderate energy piping leakage crack)
 
for the subject HDPE piping which has been
 
shown to experience such low stresses that
 
such a crack, and the potential flooding for
 
that hazard event, need not be postulated.
The change does not have a detrimental impact on the manner in which plant
 
equipment operates or responds to an
 
actuation signal.
The proposed change does not, therefore, create the possibility of a new or different
 
accident from any accident previously
 
evaluated.
: 3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
 
There will be no effect on those plant systems necessary to assure the
 
accomplishment of protection functions
 
associated with reactor operation or the
 
reactor coolant system. The design factor (DF) of 0.50 discussed in ULNRC-05553
 
dated October 9, 2008 has not changed. This
 
DF was approved by the NRC in Relief
 
Request 13R-10 (Reference 6.2 to this
 
Evaluation). There will be no impact on the
 
overpower limit, departure from nucleate
 
boiling ratio (DNBR) limits, heat flux hot
 
channel factor (FQ), nuclear enthalpy rise hot
 
channel factor (F D H), loss of coolant accident peak cladding temperature (LOCA PCT), peak
 
local power density, or any other limit and
 
associated margin of safety. Required
 
shutdown margins in the COLR [core
 
operating limits report] will not be changed.
 
The proposed change does not eliminate any
 
surveillances or alter the frequency of
 
surveillances required by the Technical
 
Specifications.
As such, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of
 
safety as defined in any regulatory requirement or guidance document.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensees analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
 
proposes to determine that the
 
amendment request involves no
 
significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee:
John ONeill, Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman
 
LLP, 2300 N Street NW., Washington, DC 20037.
NRC Branch Chief:
Michael T.
Markley. Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, Docket No. 50-482, Wolf
 
Creek Generating Station, Coffey
 
County, Kansas Date of amendment request:
November 21, 2013.
Description of amendment request:
The amendment would revise the
 
approved Fire Protection Program as
 
described in the Updated Safety Analysis Report, based on the reactor
 
coolant system thermal hydraulic
 
response evaluation of a postulated
 
control room fire, performed for changes
 
to the alternative shutdown
 
methodology.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:
 
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the
 
licensee has provided its analysis of the
 
issue of no significant hazards
 
consideration, which is presented
 
below: 1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or
 
consequences of an accident previously
 
evaluated?
Response: No.
 
The design function of structures, systems and components (SSCs) are not impacted by
 
the proposed deviations from [10 CFR Part
 
50] Appendix R, Sections III.L.1 and III.L.2, and Calculation XX-E-013. The proposed
 
changes to the approved fire protection
 
program are based on the RCS [reactor
 
coolant system] thermal-hydraulic response (Evaluation SA-08-006) for a postulated
 
control room fire performed for changes to
 
the alternative shutdown methodology
 
outlined in letter SLNRC 84-0109, Fire
 
Protection Review. Drawing E-1F9915, Design Basis Document for OFN RP-017, Control Room Evacuation, Revision 5, Evaluation SA-08-006, RETRAN-3D Post-
 
Fire Safe Shutdown (PFSSD) Consequence
 
Evaluation for a Postulated Control Room
 
Fire, Revision 3, and Calculation WCNOC-
 
CP-003, VIPRE-01 MDNBR Analyses of
 
Control Room Fire Scenarios, Revision 0
 
demonstrate the adequacy of the revised
 
alternative shutdown procedure, OFN RF-
 
017. The proposed changes do not alter or
 
prevent the ability of SSCs from performing
 
their intended function to mitigate the
 
consequences of an initiating event within
 
the assumed acceptance limits.
Therefore, the probability of any accident previously evaluated is not increased.
 
Equipment required to mitigate an accident
 
remains capable of performing the assumed
 
function.
: 2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of
 
accident from any accident previously
 
evaluated?
Response: No.
 
The proposed changes will not alter the requirement or function for systems required
 
during accident conditions. The design
 
function of structures, systems and
 
components are not impacted by the
 
proposed change. Evaluation SA-08-006 and
 
Calculation WCNOC-CP-003 determined
 
natural circulation is maintained and
 
adequate core cooling is maintained. The
 
fission product boundary integrity is not
 
affected and safe shutdown capability is
 
maintained.
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different
 
kind of accident from any accident
 
previously evaluated.
: 3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
 
There will be no effect on the manner in which safety limits or limiting safety system
 
settings are determined nor will there be any
 
effect on those plant systems necessary to
 
assure the accomplishment of protection
 
functions. The revised alternative shutdown
 
methodology provides the ability to achieve
 
and maintain safe shutdown in the event of
 
a fire. Evaluation SA-08-006 and Calculation
 
WCNOC-CP-003 determined natural
 
circulation is maintained and adequate core
 
cooling is maintained.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of
 
safety. The NRC staff has reviewed the licensees analysis and, based on this
 
review, it appears that the three
 
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
 
proposes to determine that the
 
amendment request involves no
 
significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee:
Jay Silberg, Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, 2300 N Street NW., Washington, DC
 
20037. NRC Branch Chief:
Michael T.
Markley. Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, Docket No. 50-482, Wolf
 
Creek Generating Station, Coffey
 
County, Kansas Date of amendment request:
December 17, 2013.
Description of amendment request:
The amendment would revise Technical
 
Specification Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.7.10.1 and SR 3.7.13.1 to reduce
 
the required run time for periodic
 
operation of the control room
 
pressurization system filter trains and
 
emergency exhaust system filter trains, with heaters on, from 10 hours to 15
 
minutes. The proposed amendment is
 
consistent with plant-specific options
 
provided in the NRCs model safety
 
evaluation of Technical Specifications VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014Jkt 232001PO 00000Frm 00057Fmt 4703Sfmt 4703E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM18MRN1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 15152 Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 52/Tuesday, March 18, 2014/Notices Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-522-A, Revision 0, Revise Ventilation
 
System Surveillance Requirements to
 
Operate for 10 hours per Month.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:
 
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the
 
licensee has provided its analysis of the
 
issue of no significant hazards
 
consideration, which is presented
 
below: 1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or
 
consequences of an accident previously
 
evaluated?
Response: No.
 
The proposed change replaces existing Surveillance Requirements to operate the
 
Control Room Emergency Ventilation System (CREVS) and the Emergency Exhaust System (EES) for a continuous 10 hour period with
 
applicable heaters operating every 31 days, with requirements to operate these systems
 
for 15 continuous minutes with applicable
 
heaters operating every 31 days.
These systems are not accident initiators (i.e., their malfunction cannot initiate an
 
accident or transient) and therefore, these
 
changes do not involve a significant increase
 
in the probability of an accident. The
 
proposed system and filter testing changes
 
are consistent with current regulatory
 
guidance for these systems and will continue
 
to assure that these systems perform their
 
design function which may include
 
mitigating accidents. Therefore, the change
 
does not involve a significant increase in the
 
consequences of an accident.
Therefore, it is concluded that this change does not involve a significant increase in the
 
probability or consequences of an accident
 
previously evaluated.
: 2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of
 
accident from any accident previously
 
evaluated?
Response: No.
 
The change proposed for these ventilation systems does not change any system
 
operations or maintenance activities. Testing
 
requirements will be revised and will
 
continue to demonstrate that the Limiting
 
Conditions for Operation are met and the
 
system components are capable of
 
performing their intended safety functions.
 
The change does not create new failure
 
modes or mechanisms and no new accident
 
precursors are generated.
Therefore, it is concluded that this change does not create the possibility of a new or
 
different kind of accident from any accident
 
previously evaluated.
: 3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
 
The design basis for the ventilation system heaters in the EES and in the pressurization
 
trains of the CREVS includes the capability
 
to heat the incoming air, reducing the relative
 
humidity (and thereby increasing adsorber
 
efficiency). The heater testing change
 
proposed will continue to demonstrate that
 
the heaters are capable of heating the air and
 
will thus perform their design function. The proposed change is consistent with regulatory guidance.
Therefore, it is concluded that this change does not involve a significant reduction in a
 
margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensees analysis and, based on this
 
review, it appears that the three
 
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
 
proposes to determine that the
 
amendment request involves no
 
significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee:
Jay Silberg, Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, 2300 N Street NW., Washington, DC
 
20037. NRC Branch Chief:
Michael T.
Markley. Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and
 
Combined Licenses During the period since publication of the last biweekly notice, the
 
Commission has issued the following
 
amendments. The Commission has
 
determined for each of these
 
amendments that the application
 
complies with the standards and
 
requirements of the Atomic Energy Act
 
of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the
 
Commissions rules and regulations.
 
The Commission has made appropriate
 
findings as required by the Act and the
 
Commissions rules and regulations in
 
10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in
 
the license amendment.
A notice of consideration of issuance of amendment to facility operating
 
license or combined license, as
 
applicable, proposed no significant
 
hazards consideration determination, and opportunity for a hearing in
 
connection with these actions, was
 
published in the Federal Register as indicated.
Unless otherwise indicated, the Commission has determined that these
 
amendments satisfy the criteria for
 
categorical exclusion in accordance
 
with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant
 
to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental
 
impact statement or environmental
 
assessment need be prepared for these
 
amendments. If the Commission has
 
prepared an environmental assessment
 
under the special circumstances
 
provision in 10 CFR 51.22(b) and has
 
made a determination based on that
 
assessment, it is so indicated.
For further details with respect to the action see (1) the applications for
 
amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3)
 
the Commissions related letter, Safety
 
Evaluation and/or Environmental
 
Assessment as indicated. All of these
 
items are available for public inspection
 
at the NRCs Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852.
 
Publicly available documents created or
 
received at the NRC are accessible
 
electronically through the Agencywide
 
Documents Access and Management
 
System (ADAMS) in the NRC Library at
 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
 
adams.html.
If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in
 
accessing the documents located in
 
ADAMS, contact the PDRs Reference
 
staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737
 
or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., Docket No. 50-423, Millstone Power
 
Station, Unit 3, New London County, Connecticut Date of amendment request:
October 4, 2012, as supplemented by letters
 
dated January 4, April 17, and October
 
30, 2013.
Description of amendment request:
The proposed amendment would
 
modify Technical Specifications by
 
relocating specific surveillance
 
frequencies to a licensee controlled
 
program with the adoption of Technical
 
Specification Task Force (TSTF)-425, Revision 3, Relocate Surveillance
 
Frequencies to Licensee Control[Risk-
 
Informed Technical Specification Task
 
Force (RITSTF)] Initiative 5b.
 
Additionally, the change would add a
 
new program, the Surveillance
 
Frequency Control Program (SFCP), to
 
Technical Specification Section 6, Administrative Controls.
Date of issuance:
February 25, 2014.
Effective date:
As of the date of issuance, and shall be implemented
 
within 90 days.
Amendment No.:
258. Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-49:
Amendment revised the License and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register:
December 11, 2012 (77 FR 73687). The supplemental letters dated January 4, 2013, April 17, 2013, and
 
October 30, 2013, provided additional
 
information that clarified the
 
application, did not expand the scope of
 
the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staffs original
 
proposed no significant hazards
 
consideration determination.
The Commissions related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a
 
Safety Evaluation dated February 25, 2014. No significant hazards consideration comments received:
No. Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370, McGuire
 
Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014Jkt 232001PO 00000Frm 00058Fmt 4703Sfmt 4703E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM18MRN1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 15153 Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 52/Tuesday, March 18, 2014/Notices Date of application for amendments:
April 16, 2013.
Brief description of amendments:
The amendments remove superseded
 
temporary Technical Specification (TS)
 
requirements for McGuire Nuclear
 
Station (MNS), Units 1 and 2, in
 
accordance with a licensee commitment
 
described in a May 28, 2010, license
 
amendment request.
Date of issuance:
February 28, 2014.
Effective date:
This license amendment is effective as of its date of
 
issuance and shall be implemented
 
within 60 days of issuance.
Amendment Nos.:
272 and 252.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-9 and NPF-17:
Amendments revised the licenses and technical
 
specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register:
June 25, 2013 (78 FR 38081).
The Commissions related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a
 
Safety Evaluation dated February 28, 2014. No significant hazards consideration comments received:
No. Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287, Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2 and
 
3, Oconee County, South Carolina Date of application for amendments:
February 22, 2013, as supplemented on
 
September 10, October 25, November
 
29, and December 16, 2013.
Brief description of amendments:
The amendments revise Technical
 
Specification (TS) 3.4.3, to replace its
 
current reactor coolant system pressure-
 
temperature (P-T) limits with new P-T
 
limits applicable to 54 effective full
 
power years. In addition, the
 
amendments change the operational
 
requirements for unit heatup and
 
cooldown in TS Tables 3.4.3-1 and
 
3.4.3-2. Date of Issuance:
February 27, 2014.
Effective date:
As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
 
within 60 days from the date of
 
issuance.
Amendment Nos.:
384, 386, and 385.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47, and DPR-55:
 
Amendments revised the license and
 
the TSs. Date of initial notice in Federal Register:
April 16, 2013, 78 FR 22568.
The supplemental letters dated September 10, October 25, November
 
29, and December 16, 2013, provided
 
additional information that clarified the
 
application, did not expand the scope of
 
the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staffs original
 
proposed no significant hazards
 
consideration determination as
 
published in the Federal Register. The Commissions related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a
 
Safety Evaluation dated February 27, 2014. No significant hazards consideration comments received:
No. Duke Energy Progress Inc., Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324, Brunswick
 
Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2, Brunswick County, North Carolina.
Date of application for amendments:
June 19, 2012, as supplemented by
 
letters dated January 21, May 14, and August 29, 2013, and January 22, 2014.
Brief description of amendments:
The amendments revised the Technical Specification (TS) to extend the
 
Completion Time (CT) of TS 3.8.1
 
Required Action D.4 for an inoperable
 
diesel generator. A commensurate
 
change is also made to extend the
 
maximum CT of TS 3.8.1 Required
 
Actions C.3 and D.4. The licensee will
 
to add a supplemental AC power source (i.e., a supplemental diesel generator)
 
with the capability to power any
 
emergency bus within 1 hour from a
 
Station Blackout event, and with the
 
capacity to bring the affected unit to
 
cold shutdown.
Date of issuance:
February 24, 2014.
Effective date:
As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
 
prior to startup from the 2014 Unit 1
 
refueling outage.
Amendment Nos.:
264 and 292.
Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-62 AND DPR-71:
Amendments revised the License and TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register:
October 16, 2013 (77 FR 63346). The supplements dated January 21, May 14, and August 29, 2013, and
 
January 22, 2014, provided additional
 
information that clarified the
 
application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staffs original
 
proposed no significant hazards
 
consideration determination as
 
published in the Federal Register. The Commissions related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a
 
Safety Evaluation dated February 24, 2014. No significant hazards consideration comments received:
None. Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-247, Indian Point
 
Nuclear Generating, Unit 2, Westchester
 
County, New York Date of application for amendment:
February 6, 2013, as supplemented by
 
letters dated July 9, 2013, October 3, 2013, and February 24, 2014.
Brief description of amendment:
The amendment changes the Technical
 
Specifications by revising the reactor heatup and cooldown curves (also referred to as pressure-temperature (P-
 
T) limits) and low temperature
 
overpressure protection (LTOP)
 
requirements to cover a lifetime burnup
 
of 48 Effective Full Power Years (EFPY),
which is an increase from the current
 
value of 29.2 EFPY.
Date of issuance:
March 5, 2014.
Effective date:
As of the date of issuance, and shall be implemented
 
within 30 days.
Amendment No.:
274. Facility Operating License No. DPR-26: The amendment revised the License and the Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register:
April 2, 2013 (78 FR 19750).
The supplemental letters dated July 9, 2013, October 3, 2013, and February 24, 2014, provided additional information
 
that clarified the application, did not
 
expand the scope of the application as
 
originally noticed, and did not change
 
the NRC staffs original proposed no
 
significant hazards consideration
 
determination as published in the
 
Federal Register. The Commissions related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a
 
Safety Evaluation dated March 5, 2014.
No significant hazards consideration comments received:
No. Florida Power and Light Company, Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251, Turkey
 
Point Nuclear Generating, Units 3 and
 
4, Miami-Dade County, Florida Date of application for amendment:
March 22, 2013.
Brief description of amendment:
The amendments revised the Technical
 
Specifications (TSs) to allow the use of
 
Optimized ZIRLO TM as an approved fuel rod cladding.
Date of issuance:
February 20, 2014.
Effective date:
As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
 
within 60 days of issuance.
Amendment No.:
259 and 254.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-31 and DPR-41:
Amendments revised the licenses and the TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register:
August 20, 2013 (78 FR 51219). The Commissions related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a
 
Safety Evaluation dated February 20, 2014. No significant hazards consideration comments received:
No. Luminant Generation Company LLC, Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446, Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 (CPNPP), Somervell
 
County, Texas Date of amendment request:
August 29, 2013, as supplemented by letter
 
dated February 19, 2014. VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014Jkt 232001PO 00000Frm 00059Fmt 4703Sfmt 4703E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM18MRN1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 15154 Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 52/Tuesday, March 18, 2014/Notices Description of amendment request:
The amendments revised Technical
 
Specification (TS) 3.4.17, Steam
 
Generator (SG) Tube Integrity, TS
 
5.5.9, Unit 1 Model D76 and Unit 2
 
Model D5 Steam Generator (SG)
 
Program, and TS 5.6.9, Unit 1 Model
 
D76 and Unit 2 Model D5 Steam
 
Generator Tube Inspection Report. The
 
changes address implementation issues
 
associated with inspection periods, and
 
address other administrative changes
 
and clarifications. The amendment is
 
consistent with NRC-approved
 
Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) change traveler TSTF-510, Revision 2, Revision to Steam
 
Generator Program Inspection
 
Frequencies and Tube Sample
 
Selection, as part of the consolidated
 
line item improvement process.
The amendments also incorporated minor non-technical variations from the
 
TS changes proposed in TSTF-510, Revision 2. The TSs for CPNPP, Units 1
 
and 2 utilize different numbering and
 
titles than the Standard Technical
 
Specifications on which TSTF-510, Revision 2, is based, since the steam
 
generators for CPNPP, Units 1 and 2, are
 
of different models. These differences
 
are administrative in nature and do not
 
affect the applicability of TSTF-510, Revision 2, to the TSs for CPNPP, Units
 
1 and 2. Date of issuance:
February 27, 2014.
Effective date:
As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented
 
within 90 days from the date of
 
issuance.
Amendment No.:
Unit 1161; Unit 2161. Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-87 and NPF-89:
The amendments revised the Facility Operating Licenses
 
and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 1, 2013 (78 FR 60324). The February 19, 2014, supplement did not expand the scope of the
 
application as originally noticed, and
 
did not change the NRC staffs initial
 
proposed finding of no significant
 
hazards consideration.
The Commissions related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a
 
Safety Evaluation dated February 27, 2014. No significant hazards consideration comments received:
No. NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC, Docket No. 50-443, Seabrook Station, Unit. 1, Rockingham County, New
 
Hampshire Date of amendment request:
June 25, 2013. Description of amendment request:
The amendment revised the Seabrook Technical Specifications (TS).
Specifically, the amendment revised the
 
TS to allow the use of Optimized
 
ZIRLO TM as an approved fuel rod cladding material.
Date of issuance:
March 5, 2014.
Effective date:
As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented
 
within 60 days.
Amendment No.:
139. Facility Operating License No. NPF-86: The amendment revised the License and TS. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 20, 2013 (78 FR 51228). The Commissions related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a
 
Safety Evaluation dated March 5, 2014.
No significant hazards consideration comments received:
No. Northern States Power Company Minnesota (NSPM), Docket No. 50-263, Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, Wright County, Minnesota Date of application for amendment:
April 19, 2013.
Brief description of amendment:
The amendment allows NSPM to adopt the
 
NRCs approved Technical
 
Specifications Task Force (TSTF)
 
Standard Technical Specifications
 
Change Traveler TSTF-535, Revision 0, Revise Shutdown Margin Definition to
 
Address Advanced Fuel Designs, dated
 
August 8, 2011. The amendment
 
modifies the Technical Specification
 
definition of shutdown margin (SDM)
 
to require calculation of the SDM at a
 
reactor moderator temperature of 68
&deg;F or higher, representing the most reactive
 
state throughout the operating cycle.
 
This change addresses newer boiling-
 
water reactor fuel designs which may be
 
more reactive at shutdown temperatures
 
above 68&deg;F. Date of issuance:
February 28, 2014.
Effective date:
This license amendment is effective as of the date of
 
issuance and shall be implemented
 
within 90 days from the date of
 
issuance.
Amendment No.:
179. Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-22:
The amendment revises the Renewed Facility Operating License
 
and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: September 3, 2013 (78 FR 54285). The Commissions related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a
 
Safety Evaluation dated February 28, 2014. No significant hazards consideration comments received:
No. Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323, Diablo
 
Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, San Luis Obispo County, California Date of amendment request:
June 6, 2013. Description of amendment request:
The amendments revised Technical
 
Specification (TS) 3.7.10, Control
 
Room Ventilation System (CRVS), and
 
TS 5.6.5, Core Operating Limits Report (COLR), to incorporate editorial
 
changes. Specifically, the proposed
 
amendments delete footnote (1) from the
 
TS 3.7.10 Condition A Completion
 
Time, and revise inconsistent wording
 
in TS 5.6.5a.4, TS 5.6.5a.5, and TS
 
5.6.5a.9.
Date of issuance:
February 27, 2014.
Effective date:
As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented
 
within 60 days from the date of
 
issuance.
Amendment Nos.:
Unit 1217; Unit 2219. Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-80 and DPR-82:
The amendments revised the Facility Operating Licenses
 
and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 6, 2013 (78 FR 47791).
The Commissions related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a
 
Safety Evaluation dated February 27, 2014. No significant hazards consideration comments received:
No. PPL Susquehanna, LLC, Docket Nos.
50-387 and 50-388, Susquehanna
 
Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania Date of application for amendments:
June 6, 2013, as supplemented by letter dated December 4, 2013.
Brief description of amendments:
The amendments change the Technical
 
Specifications (TSs) for Susquehanna
 
Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2.
 
Specifically, these amendments change
 
TS 3.3.6.1, Primary Containment
 
Isolation Instrumentation, to add a
 
footnote to Function 6.c. in TS Table
 
3.3.6.1-1, allowing only one Trip
 
System to be operable in MODES 4 and
 
5 for the Manual Initiation Function for
 
Shutdown Cooling System isolation.
Date of issuance:
February 26, 2014.
Effective date:
As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
 
within 30 days.
Amendment Nos.:
259 and 240.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-14 and NPF-22:
The amendments revised the license and the
 
TS. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 10, 2013 (78 FR 74184). The supplemental letter dated December 4, 2013, provided additional
 
information that clarified the VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014Jkt 232001PO 00000Frm 00060Fmt 4703Sfmt 4703E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM18MRN1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 15155 Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 52/Tuesday, March 18, 2014/Notices application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staffs original
 
proposed no significant hazards
 
consideration determination as
 
published in the Federal Register. The Commissions related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a
 
Safety Evaluation dated February 26, 2014. No significant hazards consideration comments received:
No. South Carolina Electric and Gas Company, South Carolina Public
 
Service Authority, Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit, Fairfield County, South Carolina Date of application for amendment:
April 2, 2013 as supplemented by letter
 
dated May 16, 2013.
Brief description of amendment:
This amendment revises the Technical
 
Specifications requirements regarding
 
steam generator tube inspections and
 
reporting as described in TSTF-510, Revision 2, Revision to Steam
 
Generator Program Inspection
 
Frequencies and Tube Sample
 
Selection.
Date of issuance:
February 28, 2014.
Effective date:
This license amendment is effective as of the date of
 
its issuance.
Amendment No.:
196. Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-12:
Amendment revises the License. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 25, 2013 (78 FR 38083).
The Commissions related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a
 
Safety Evaluation dated February 28, 2014. No significant hazards consideration comments received:
No. Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and
 
Combined Licenses and Final
 
Determination of No Significant
 
Hazards Consideration and
 
Opportunity for a Hearing (Exigent
 
Public Announcement or Emergency
 
Circumstances)
During the period since publication of the last biweekly notice, the
 
Commission has issued the following
 
amendments. The Commission has
 
determined for each of these
 
amendments that the application for the
 
amendment complies with the
 
standards and requirements of the
 
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commissions rules
 
and regulations. The Commission has
 
made appropriate findings as required
 
by the Act and the Commissions rules
 
and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendment.
Because of exigent or emergency circumstances associated with the date
 
the amendment was needed, there was
 
not time for the Commission to publish, for public comment before issuance, its
 
usual notice of consideration of
 
issuance of amendment, proposed no
 
significant hazards consideration
 
determination, and opportunity for a
 
hearing. For exigent circumstances, the Commission has either issued a Federal Register notice providing opportunity for public comment or has used local
 
media to provide notice to the public in
 
the area surrounding a licensees facility
 
of the licensees application and of the
 
Commissions proposed determination
 
of no significant hazards consideration.
 
The Commission has provided a
 
reasonable opportunity for the public to
 
comment, using its best efforts to make
 
available to the public means of
 
communication for the public to
 
respond quickly, and in the case of
 
telephone comments, the comments
 
have been recorded or transcribed as
 
appropriate and the licensee has been
 
informed of the public comments.
In circumstances where failure to act in a timely way would have resulted, for
 
example, in derating or shutdown of a
 
nuclear power plant or in prevention of
 
either resumption of operation or of
 
increase in power output up to the
 
plants licensed power level, the
 
Commission may not have had an
 
opportunity to provide for public
 
comment on its no significant hazards
 
consideration determination. In such
 
case, the license amendment has been
 
issued without opportunity for comment. If there has been some time
 
for public comment but less than 30
 
days, the Commission may provide an opportunity for public comment. If comments have been requested, it is so stated. In either event, the State has been consulted by telephone whenever
 
possible.
Under its regulations, the Commission may issue and make an amendment
 
immediately effective, notwithstanding
 
the pendency before it of a request for
 
a hearing from any person, in advance
 
of the holding and completion of any
 
required hearing, where it has
 
determined that no significant hazards
 
consideration is involved.
The Commission has applied the standards of 10 CFR 50.92 and has made
 
a final determination that the
 
amendment involves no significant
 
hazards consideration. The basis for this
 
determination is contained in the
 
documents related to this action.
 
Accordingly, the amendments have been issued and made effective as indicated.
Unless otherwise indicated, the Commission has determined that these
 
amendments satisfy the criteria for
 
categorical exclusion in accordance
 
with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant
 
to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental
 
impact statement or environmental
 
assessment need be prepared for these
 
amendments. If the Commission has
 
prepared an environmental assessment
 
under the special circumstances
 
provision in 10 CFR 51.12(b) and has
 
made a determination based on that
 
assessment, it is so indicated.
For further details with respect to the action see (1) the application for
 
amendment, (2) the amendment to
 
Facility Operating License or Combined
 
License, as applicable, and (3) the
 
Commissions related letter, Safety
 
Evaluation and/or Environmental
 
Assessment, as indicated. All of these
 
items are available for public inspection
 
at the NRCs Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852.
 
Publicly available documents created or
 
received at the NRC are accessible
 
electronically through the Agencywide
 
Documents Access and Management
 
System (ADAMS) in the NRC Library at
 
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
 
adams.html.
If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in
 
accessing the documents located in
 
ADAMS, contact the PDRs Reference
 
staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737
 
or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
The Commission is also offering an opportunity for a hearing with respect to
 
the issuance of the amendment. Within
 
60 days after the date of publication of
 
this notice, any person(s) whose interest
 
may be affected by this action may file
 
a request for a hearing and a petition to
 
intervene with respect to issuance of the
 
amendment to the subject facility
 
operating license or combined license.
 
Requests for a hearing and a petition for
 
leave to intervene shall be filed in
 
accordance with the Commissions
 
Agency Rules of Practice and
 
Procedure in 10 CFR Part 2. Interested
 
person(s) should consult a current copy
 
of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at
 
the NRCs PDR, located at One White
 
Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852, and electronically on
 
the Internet at the NRCs Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-
 
collections/cfr/.
If there are problems in accessing the document, contact the
 
PDRs Reference staff at 1-800-397-
 
4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to
 
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
If a request for a VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014Jkt 232001PO 00000Frm 00061Fmt 4703Sfmt 4703E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM18MRN1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 15156 Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 52/Tuesday, March 18, 2014/Notices hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the
 
Commission or a presiding officer
 
designated by the Commission or by the
 
Chief Administrative Judge of the
 
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
 
Panel, will rule on the request and/or
 
petition; and the Secretary or the Chief
 
Administrative Judge of the Atomic
 
Safety and Licensing Board will issue a
 
notice of a hearing or an appropriate
 
order. As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set
 
forth with particularity the interest of
 
the petitioner in the proceeding, and
 
how that interest may be affected by the
 
results of the proceeding. The petition
 
should specifically explain the reasons
 
why intervention should be permitted
 
with particular reference to the
 
following general requirements: (1) The
 
name, address, and telephone number of
 
the requestor or petitioner; (2) the
 
nature of the requestors/petitioners
 
right under the Act to be made a party
 
to the proceeding; (3) the nature and
 
extent of the requestors/petitioners
 
property, financial, or other interest in
 
the proceeding; and (4) the possible
 
effect of any decision or order which
 
may be entered in the proceeding on the
 
requestors/petitioners interest. The
 
petition must also identify the specific
 
contentions which the requestor/
 
petitioner seeks to have litigated at the
 
proceeding.
Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or
 
fact to be raised or controverted. In
 
addition, the requestor/petitioner shall
 
provide a brief explanation of the bases
 
for the contention and a concise
 
statement of the alleged facts or expert
 
opinion which support the contention
 
and on which the petitioner intends to
 
rely in proving the contention at the
 
hearing. The petitioner must also
 
provide references to those specific
 
sources and documents of which the
 
petitioner is aware and on which the
 
petitioner intends to rely to establish
 
those facts or expert opinion. The
 
petition must include sufficient
 
information to show that a genuine
 
dispute exists with the applicant on a
 
material issue of law or fact.
 
Contentions shall be limited to matters
 
within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention
 
must be one which, if proven, would
 
entitle the petitioner to relief. A
 
requestor/petitioner who fails to satisfy
 
these requirements with respect to at
 
least one contention will not be
 
permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any
 
limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the
 
hearing. Since the Commission has
 
made a final determination that the
 
amendment involves no significant
 
hazards consideration, if a hearing is
 
requested, it will not stay the
 
effectiveness of the amendment. Any
 
hearing held would take place while the
 
amendment is in effect.
All documents filed in the NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or other
 
document filed in the proceeding prior
 
to the submission of a request for
 
hearing or petition to intervene, and
 
documents filed by interested
 
governmental entities participating
 
under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in
 
accordance with the NRCs E-Filing rule
 
(72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007). The E-
 
Filing process requires participants to
 
submit and serve all adjudicatory
 
documents over the internet, or in some
 
cases to mail copies on electronic
 
storage media. Participants may not
 
submit paper copies of their filings
 
unless they seek an exemption in
 
accordance with the procedures
 
described below.
To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10
 
days prior to the filing deadline, the
 
participant should contact the Office of
 
the Secretary by email at
 
hearing.docket@nrc.gov , or by telephone at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital
 
identification (ID) certificate, which
 
allows the participant (or its counsel or
 
representative) to digitally sign
 
documents and access the E-Submittal
 
server for any proceeding in which it is
 
participating; and (2) advise the
 
Secretary that the participant will be
 
submitting a request or petition for
 
hearing (even in instances in which the
 
participant, or its counsel or
 
representative, already holds an NRC-
 
issued digital ID certificate). Based upon
 
this information, the Secretary will
 
establish an electronic docket for the
 
hearing in this proceeding if the
 
Secretary has not already established an
 
electronic docket.
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on NRCs public Web site at http:// www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/
apply-certificates.html.
System requirements for accessing the E-Submittal server are detailed in NRCs
 
Guidance for Electronic Submission,
 
which is available on the agencys
 
public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/
site-help/e-submittals.html.
Participants may attempt to use other software not
 
listed on the Web site, but should note
 
that the NRCs E-Filing system does not support unlisted software, and the NRC Meta System Help Desk will not be able
 
to offer assistance in using unlisted
 
software.
If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC in
 
accordance with the E-Filing rule, the
 
participant must file the document
 
using the NRCs online, Web-based
 
submission form. In order to serve
 
documents through the Electronic
 
Information Exchange System, users
 
will be required to install a Web
 
browser plug-in from the NRCs Web
 
site. Further information on the Web-
 
based submission form, including the
 
installation of the Web browser plug-in, is available on the NRCs public Web
 
site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.
Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has
 
been created, the participant can then
 
submit a request for hearing or petition
 
for leave to intervene. Submissions
 
should be in Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with the NRCs
 
guidance available on the NRCs public
 
Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the
 
documents are submitted through the
 
NRCs E-Filing system. To be timely, an
 
electronic filing must be submitted to
 
the E-Filing system no later than 11:59
 
p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.
 
Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-
 
Filing system time-stamps the document
 
and sends the submitter an email notice
 
confirming receipt of the document. The
 
E-Filing system also distributes an email
 
notice that provides access to the
 
document to the NRCs Office of the
 
General Counsel and any others who
 
have advised the Office of the Secretary
 
that they wish to participate in the
 
proceeding, so that the filer need not
 
serve the documents on those
 
participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or
 
their counsel or representative) must
 
apply for and receive a digital ID
 
certificate before a hearing request/
 
petition to intervene is filed so that they
 
can obtain access to the document via
 
the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically using the agencys adjudicatory E-Filing
 
system may seek assistance by
 
contacting the NRC Meta System Help
 
Desk through the Contact Us link
 
located on the NRC Web site at http:// www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html , by email to MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov , or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The NRC
 
Meta System Help Desk is available
 
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014Jkt 232001PO 00000Frm 00062Fmt 4703Sfmt 4703E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM18MRN1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 15157 Federal Register/Vol. 79, No. 52/Tuesday, March 18, 2014/Notices Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.
Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting
 
documents electronically must file an
 
exemption request, in accordance with
 
10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper
 
filing requesting authorization to
 
continue to submit documents in paper
 
format. Such filings must be submitted
 
by: (1) First class mail addressed to the
 
Office of the Secretary of the
 
Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
 
0001, Attention: Rulemaking and
 
Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery
 
service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention:
 
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff.
 
Participants filing a document in this
 
manner are responsible for serving the
 
document on all other participants.
 
Filing is considered complete by first-
 
class mail as of the time of deposit in
 
the mail, or by courier, express mail, or
 
expedited delivery service upon
 
depositing the document with the
 
provider of the service. A presiding
 
officer, having granted an exemption
 
request from using E-Filing, may require
 
a participant or party to use E-Filing if
 
the presiding officer subsequently
 
determines that the reason for granting
 
the exemption from use of E-Filing no


==SUMMARY==
:  The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory document on all other participants.                    time that the failed RTD can be                      Commission (NRC) staff has determined Filing is considered complete by first-                replaced. The replacement would occur                that the inspections, tests, and analyses class mail as of the time of deposit in                in the next refueling outage or the next              have been successfully completed, and the mail, or by courier, express mail, or              outage that would facilitate                          that the specified acceptance criteria are expedited delivery service upon                        replacement, whichever occurs first.                  met for ITAAC 3.3.00.09, for the Virgil depositing the document with the                          Date of issuance: February 27, 2014.              C. Summer Nuclear Station Unit 2.
provider of the service. A presiding Effective date: As of the date of                  ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID officer, having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require                issuance and shall be implemented                    NRC-2008-0441 when contacting the a participant or party to use E-Filing if              within 30 days from the date of                      NRC about the availability of the presiding officer subsequently                      issuance.                                            information regarding this document.
determines that the reason for granting                                                                      You may access publicly-available Amendment Nos.: 272 and 268.                      information related to this document the exemption from use of E-Filing no Renewed Facility Operating License                using any of the following methods:
longer exists.
longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the NRCs  
Documents submitted in adjudicatory                 Nos. NPF-35 and NPF-52: Amendments
 
* Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to proceedings will appear in the NRCs                   revised the licenses and the technical                http://www.regulations.gov and search electronic hearing docket which is                     specifications.                                      for Docket ID NRC-2008-0441. Address available to the public at http://ehd1.                   Public comments requested as to                    questions about NRC dockets to Carol nrc.gov/ehd/, unless excluded pursuant                 proposed no significant hazards                      Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-3422; to an order of the Commission, or the                   consideration (NSHC): Yes. The NRC                   email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For presiding officer. Participants are                    staff noticed the February 17, 2014,                 technical questions, contact the requested not to include personal                      application in the Rock Hill, SC local               individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER privacy information, such as social                    newspaper, The Herald on Friday,                     INFORMATION CONTACT section of this security numbers, home addresses, or                    February 21, 2014, and Saturday,                     document.
electronic hearing docket which is  
home phone numbers in their filings,                    February 22, 2014. The notice provided
 
* NRCs Agencywide Documents unless an NRC regulation or other law                  an opportunity to submit comments on                 Access and Management System requires submission of such                            the Commissions proposed NSHC                       (ADAMS): You may access publicly information. However, a request to                                                                           available documents online in the NRC determination. No comments have been intervene will require including                                                                              Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-received.
available to the public at http://ehd1.
information on local residence in order                                                                      rm/adams.html. To begin the search, to demonstrate a proximity assertion of                    The Commissions related evaluation                select ADAMS Public Documents and interest in the proceeding. With respect                of the amendment, finding of exigent                  then select Begin Web-based ADAMS to copyrighted works, except for limited                circumstances, state consultation, and                Search. For problems with ADAMS, excerpts that serve the purpose of the                  final NSHC determination are contained                please contact the NRCs Public adjudicatory filings and would                          in a safety evaluation dated February 27,            Document Room (PDR) reference staff at constitute a Fair Use application,                      2014.                                                1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by participants are requested not to include                  Attorney for licensee: Lara S. Nichols,            email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES copyrighted materials in their                          Associate General Counsel, Duke Energy                ADAMS accession number for each submission.                                            Corporation, 526 South Church Street                document referenced in this document Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, et al.,                  EC07H, Charlotte, NC 28202.                          (if that document is available in Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414,                                                                                ADAMS) is provided the first time that NRC Branch Chief: Robert J.                        a document is referenced.
nrc.gov/ehd/, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission, or the  
Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Pascarelli.
 
* NRCs PDR: You may examine and York County, South Carolina Date of amendment request: February                    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day        purchase copies of public documents at 17, 2014.                                              of March 2014.                                        the NRCs PDR, Room O1-F21, One VerDate Mar<15>2010   18:34 Mar 17, 2014  Jkt 232001  PO 00000  Frm 00063  Fmt 4703  Sfmt 4703  E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM  18MRN1}}
presiding officer. Participants are
 
requested not to include personal
 
privacy information, such as social
 
security numbers, home addresses, or
 
home phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law
 
requires submission of such information. However, a request to
 
intervene will require including
 
information on local residence in order
 
to demonstrate a proximity assertion of
 
interest in the proceeding. With respect
 
to copyrighted works, except for limited
 
excerpts that serve the purpose of the
 
adjudicatory filings and would
 
constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested not to include
 
copyrighted materials in their
 
submission.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, et al., Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414, Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, York County, South Carolina Date of amendment request:
February 17, 2014.
Description of amendment request:
The amendments revise Technical
 
Specification (TS) Table 3.3.4-1, Remote Shutdown System
 
Instrumentation and Controls as a result
 
of an inoperable instrumentation
 
function on Unit 2. Table 3.3.4-1
 
specifies requirements for Function 3.b.,
Decay Heat Removal via Steam
 
Generators (SGs)Reactor Coolant
 
System (RCS) Cold Leg Temperature
 
Loop A and B as 1 per loop. Loop A of this function is presently inoperable
 
on Unit 2 due to a failed resistance temperature detector (RTD). Loop B of
 
this function is operable with a reliable
 
maintenance history. The failed RTD on
 
Loop A cannot be replaced in the
 
present operating mode of Unit 2 (Mode
 
1). Therefore, Duke Energy requested
 
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
 
Commission (NRC) approval to allow
 
Unit 2 to remain in Mode 1 until such time that the failed RTD can be
 
replaced. The replacement would occur
 
in the next refueling outage or the next
 
outage that would facilitate
 
replacement, whichever occurs first.
Date of issuance:
February 27, 2014.
Effective date:
As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
 
within 30 days from the date of
 
issuance.
Amendment Nos.:
272 and 268.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-35 and NPF-52:
Amendments revised the licenses and the technical
 
specifications.
Public comments requested as to proposed no significant hazards
 
consideration (NSHC):
Yes. The NRC staff noticed the February 17, 2014, application in the Rock Hill, SC local  
 
newspaper, The Herald on Friday, February 21, 2014, and Saturday, February 22, 2014. The notice provided an opportunity to submit comments on the Commissions proposed NSHC determination. No comments have been received.
The Commissions related evaluation of the amendment, finding of exigent
 
circumstances, state consultation, and
 
final NSHC determination are contained
 
in a safety evaluation dated February 27, 2014. Attorney for licensee:
Lara S. Nichols, Associate General Counsel, Duke Energy
 
Corporation, 526 South Church Street
 
EC07H, Charlotte, NC 28202.
NRC Branch Chief:
Robert J.
Pascarelli.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of March 2014.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michele G. Evans, Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
 
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2014-05645 Filed 3-17-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 5200027; NRC-2008-0441]
Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and
 
Acceptance Criteria; Virgil C. Summer
 
Unit 2 Combined License AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Determination of inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria (ITAAC).
 
==SUMMARY==
: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has determined
 
that the inspections, tests, and analyses
 
have been successfully completed, and
 
that the specified acceptance criteria are
 
met for ITAAC 3.3.00.09, for the Virgil
 
C. Summer Nuclear Station Unit 2.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2008-0441 when contacting the
 
NRC about the availability of
 
information regarding this document.
 
You may access publicly-available
 
information related to this document
 
using any of the following methods:
*Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2008-0441. Address
 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol
 
Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-3422;
 
email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
For technical questions, contact the
 
individuals listed in the FORFURTHER INFORMATIONCONTACT section of this document.
*NRCs Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may access publicly
 
available documents online in the NRC  
 
Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
To begin the search, select ADAMS Public Documents and  
 
then select Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.
For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRCs Public  
 
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at  
 
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by  
 
email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
The ADAMS accession number for each  
 
document referenced in this document (if that document is available in  
 
ADAMS) is provided the first time that  
 
a document is referenced.  
*NRCs PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at  
 
the NRCs PDR, Room O1-F21, One VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014Jkt 232001PO 00000Frm 00063Fmt 4703Sfmt 4703E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM18MRN1 emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES}}

Latest revision as of 11:18, 9 March 2020

NRC000191- Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations, 79 Fed. Reg. 15144 (Mar. 18, 2014)
ML15223A318
Person / Time
Site: Indian Point  Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 03/18/2014
From:
NRC/OGC
To:
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
SECY RAS
References
RAS 28156, ASLBP 07-858-03-LR-BD01, 50-247-LR, 50-286-LR
Download: ML15223A318 (14)
v • d • e


Text

NRC000191 Submitted: August 10, 2015 15144 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices

  • evaluate the accuracy of the

SUMMARY

The National Science Antarctic Specially Protected Area No.

agencys estimate of the burden of the Foundation (NSF) is required to publish 152, Western Bransfield Strait (Area proposed collection of information, a notice of permit applications received around Low Island).

including the validity of the to conduct activities regulated under the Dates methodology and assumptions used; Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978.

  • enhance the quality, utility and NSF has published regulations under June 21, 2014 to October 21, 2014.

clarity of the information to be the Antarctic Conservation Act at Title Nadene G. Kennedy, collected; and 45 Part 670 of the Code of Federal

  • minimize the burden of the Polar Coordination Specialist, Division of Regulations. This is the required notice Polar Programs.

collection of information on those who of permit applications received.

are to respond, including through the [FR Doc. 2014-05881 Filed 3-17-14; 8:45 am]

DATES: Interested parties are invited to use of appropriate automated, submit written data, comments, or BILLING CODE 7555-01-P electronic, mechanical, or other views with respect to this permit technological collection techniques or application by April 17, 2014. This other forms of information technology, application may be inspected by NUCLEAR REGULATORY e.g., permitting electronic submissions interested parties at the Permit Office, COMMISSION of responses. address below. [NRC-2014-0045]

III. Current Actions: The Department ADDRESSES: Comments should be of Labor seeks the approval for the addressed to Permit Office, Room 755, Biweekly Notice; Applications and extension of this currently approved Division of Polar Programs, National Amendments to Facility Operating information collection in order to Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Licenses and Combined Licenses ensure the accurate payment of benefits Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230. Involving No Significant Hazards to current and former Federal FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Considerations employees with recurring work-related Polly Penhale, ACA Permit Officer, at injuries. Background the above address or ACApermits@

Type of Review: Extension. Pursuant to Section 189a. (2) of the nsf.gov or (703) 292-7420.

Agency: Office of Workers Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended Compensation Programs. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Science Foundation, as (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Title:

Notice of Recurrences OMB Number: 1240-0009. directed by the Antarctic Conservation Commission (NRC) is publishing this Agency Number: CA-2a. Act of 1978 (Pub. L.95-541), as regular biweekly notice. The Act Affected Public: Individuals or amended by the Antarctic Science, requires the Commission to publish households. Tourism and Conservation Act of 1996, notice of any amendments issued, or Total Respondents: 258. has developed regulations for the proposed to be issued and grants the Total Annual Responses: 258. establishment of a permit system for Commission the authority to issue and Average Time per Response: 30 various activities in Antarctica and make immediately effective any minutes. designation of certain animals and amendment to an operating license or Estimated Total Burden Hours: 129. certain geographic areas a requiring combined license, as applicable, upon a Frequency: Annually. special protection. The regulations determination by the Commission that Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): establish such a permit system to such amendment involves no significant

$0. designate Antarctic Specially Protected hazards consideration, notwithstanding Total Burden Cost (operating/ Areas. the pendency before the Commission of maintenance): $126. a request for a hearing from any person.

Comments submitted in response to Application Details This biweekly notice includes all this notice will be summarized and/or 1. Applicant: Permit Application: 2014- notices of amendments issued, or included in the request for Office of 030 proposed to be issued from March 5 to Management and Budget approval of the Prof. Chi-Hing Christina Cheng March 18, 2014. The last biweekly information collection request; they will Department of Animal Biology, notice was published on March 4, 2014 also become a matter of public record. University of Illinois, Urbana- (79 FR 12241).

Dated: March 10, 2014. Champaign, IL ADDRESSES: You may submit comments Yoon Ferguson, Activity for Which Permit Is Requested by any of the following methods (unless Agency Clearance Officer, Office of Workers ASPA, Import into USA: This permit this document describes a different Compensation Programs, US Department of method for submitting comments on a Labor.

would allow entry into ASPA 153 Eastern Dallmann Bay and ASPA 152 specific subject):

[FR Doc. 2014-05981 Filed 3-17-14; 8:45 am]

Western Bransfield Strait for the

  • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to BILLING CODE 4510-CH-P purpose of collecting a small number of http://www.regulations.gov and search icefish species via trawling and trapping for Docket ID NRC-2014-0045. Address for a study on freezing avoidance and questions about NRC dockets to Carol NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION evolutionary cold adaptation in Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-3422; Antarctic fishes. Some whole, frozen email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For Notice of Permit Applications Received individuals as well as tissue samples technical questions, contact the emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES Under the Antarctic Conservation Act would be imported back into the U.S.A. individual listed in the FOR FURTHER of 1978 (Pub. L.95-541) for physiological, biochemical, and INFORMATION CONTACT section of this AGENCY: National Science Foundation. molecular studies. Port of Entry is Port document.

Hueneme, CA.

  • Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, ACTION: Notice of Permit Applications Chief, Rules, Announcements, and Received Under the Antarctic Location Directives Branch (RADB), Office of Conservation Act of 1978, Public Law Antarctic Specially Protected Area Administration, Mail Stop: 3WFN 95-541.

No. 153, Eastern Dallmann Bay; and 44M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices 15145 Commission, Washington, DC 20555- identifying or contact information that the need to take this action will occur 0001. they do not want to be publicly very infrequently.

For additional direction on accessing disclosed in their comment submission. Within 60 days after the date of information and submitting comments, Your request should state that the NRC publication of this notice, any person(s) see Accessing Information and does not routinely edit comment whose interest may be affected by this Submitting Comments in the submissions to remove such information action may file a request for a hearing SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of before making the comment and a petition to intervene with respect this document. submissions available to the public or to issuance of the amendment to the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: entering the comment submissions into subject facility operating license or ADAMS. combined license. Requests for a I. Accessing Information and hearing and a petition for leave to Submitting Comments Notice of Consideration of Issuance of intervene shall be filed in accordance Amendments to Facility Operating with the Commissions Agency Rules A. Accessing Information Licenses and Combined Licenses, of Practice and Procedure in 10 CFR Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2014- Proposed No Significant Hazards Part 2. Interested person(s) should 0045 when contacting the NRC about Consideration Determination, and consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, the availability of information regarding Opportunity for a Hearing which is available at the NRCs PDR, this document. You may access The Commission has made a located at One White Flint North, Room publicly-available information related to proposed determination that the O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first this action by the following methods: following amendment requests involve floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. The

  • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to no significant hazards consideration. NRC regulations are accessible http://www.regulations.gov and search Under the Commissions regulations in electronically from the NRC Library on for Docket ID NRC-2014-0045. § 50.92 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal the NRCs Web site at http://
  • NRCs Agencywide Documents Regulations (10 CFR), this means that www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-Access and Management System operation of the facility in accordance collections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing (ADAMS): You may access publicly with the proposed amendment would or petition for leave to intervene is filed available documents online in the NRC not (1) involve a significant increase in by the above date, the Commission or a Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading- the probability or consequences of an presiding officer designated by the rm/adams.html. To begin the search, accident previously evaluated; or (2) Commission or by the Chief select ADAMS Public Documents and create the possibility of a new or Administrative Judge of the Atomic then select Begin Web-based ADAMS different kind of accident from any Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will Search. For problems with ADAMS, accident previously evaluated; or (3) rule on the request and/or petition; and please contact the NRCs Public involve a significant reduction in a the Secretary or the Chief Document Room (PDR) reference staff at margin of safety. The basis for this Administrative Judge of the Atomic 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by proposed determination for each Safety and Licensing Board will issue a email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The amendment request is shown below. notice of a hearing or an appropriate ADAMS accession number for each The Commission is seeking public order.

document referenced in this document comments on this proposed As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a (if that document is available in determination. Any comments received petition for leave to intervene shall set ADAMS) is provided the first time that within 30 days after the date of forth with particularity the interest of a document is referenced. publication of this notice will be the petitioner in the proceeding, and

  • NRCs PDR: You may examine and considered in making any final how that interest may be affected by the purchase copies of public documents at determination. results of the proceeding. The petition the NRCs PDR, Room O1-F21, One Normally, the Commission will not should specifically explain the reasons White Flint North, 11555 Rockville issue the amendment until the why intervention should be permitted Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. expiration of 60 days after the date of with particular reference to the publication of this notice. The following general requirements: (1) the B. Submitting Comments Commission may issue the license name, address, and telephone number of Please include Docket ID NRC-2014- amendment before expiration of the 60- the requestor or petitioner; (2) the 0045 in the subject line of your day period provided that its final nature of the requestors/petitioners comment submission, in order to ensure determination is that the amendment right under the Act to be made a party that the NRC is able to make your involves no significant hazards to the proceeding; (3) the nature and comment submission available to the consideration. In addition, the extent of the requestors/petitioners public in this docket. Commission may issue the amendment property, financial, or other interest in The NRC cautions you not to include prior to the expiration of the 30-day the proceeding; and (4) the possible identifying or contact information that comment period should circumstances effect of any decision or order which you do not want to be publicly change during the 30-day comment may be entered in the proceeding on the disclosed in your comment submission. period such that failure to act in a requestors/petitioners interest. The The NRC posts all comment timely way would result, for example in petition must also identify the specific submissions at http:// derating or shutdown of the facility. contentions which the requestor/

www.regulations.gov as well as entering Should the Commission take action petitioner seeks to have litigated at the emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES the comment submissions into ADAMS. prior to the expiration of either the proceeding.

The NRC does not routinely edit comment period or the notice period, it Each contention must consist of a comment submissions to remove will publish in the Federal Register a specific statement of the issue of law or identifying or contact information. notice of issuance. Should the fact to be raised or controverted. In If you are requesting or aggregating Commission make a final No Significant addition, the requestor/petitioner shall comments from other persons for Hazards Consideration Determination, provide a brief explanation of the bases submission to the NRC, then you should any hearing will take place after for the contention and a concise inform those persons not to include issuance. The Commission expects that statement of the alleged facts or expert VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1

15146 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices opinion which support the contention To comply with the procedural considered complete at the time the and on which the requestor/petitioner requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 documents are submitted through the intends to rely in proving the contention days prior to the filing deadline, the NRCs E-Filing system. To be timely, an at the hearing. The requestor/petitioner participant should contact the Office of electronic filing must be submitted to must also provide references to those the Secretary by email at the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 specific sources and documents of hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.

which the petitioner is aware and on at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-which the requestor/petitioner intends identification (ID) certificate, which Filing system time-stamps the document to rely to establish those facts or expert allows the participant (or its counsel or and sends the submitter an email notice opinion. The petition must include representative) to digitally sign confirming receipt of the document. The sufficient information to show that a documents and access the E-Submittal E-Filing system also distributes an email genuine dispute exists with the server for any proceeding in which it is notice that provides access to the applicant on a material issue of law or participating; and (2) advise the document to the NRCs Office of the fact. Contentions shall be limited to Secretary that the participant will be General Counsel and any others who matters within the scope of the submitting a request or petition for have advised the Office of the Secretary amendment under consideration. The hearing (even in instances in which the that they wish to participate in the contention must be one which, if participant, or its counsel or proceeding, so that the filer need not proven, would entitle the requestor/ representative, already holds an NRC- serve the documents on those petitioner to relief. A requestor/ issued digital ID certificate). Based upon participants separately. Therefore, petitioner who fails to satisfy these this information, the Secretary will applicants and other participants (or requirements with respect to at least one establish an electronic docket for the their counsel or representative) must contention will not be permitted to hearing in this proceeding if the apply for and receive a digital ID participate as a party. Secretary has not already established an certificate before a hearing request/

Those permitted to intervene become electronic docket. petition to intervene is filed so that they parties to the proceeding, subject to any Information about applying for a can obtain access to the document via limitations in the order granting leave to digital ID certificate is available on the the E-Filing system.

intervene, and have the opportunity to NRCs public Web site at http:// A person filing electronically using participate fully in the conduct of the www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/ the agencys adjudicatory E-Filing hearing. apply-certificates.html. System system may seek assistance by If a hearing is requested, the requirements for accessing the E- contacting the NRC Meta System Help Commission will make a final Submittal server are detailed in the Desk through the Contact Us link determination on the issue of no NRCs Guidance for Electronic located on the NRC Web site at http://

significant hazards consideration. The Submission, which is available on the www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-final determination will serve to decide agencys public Web site at http:// submittals.html, by email to when the hearing is held. If the final www.nrc.gov/site-help/e- MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll-determination is that the amendment submittals.html. Participants may free call at 1-866-672-7640. The NRC request involves no significant hazards attempt to use other software not listed Meta System Help Desk is available consideration, the Commission may on the Web site, but should note that the between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern issue the amendment and make it NRCs E-Filing system does not support Time, Monday through Friday, immediately effective, notwithstanding unlisted software, and the NRC Meta excluding government holidays.

the request for a hearing. Any hearing System Help Desk will not be able to Participants who believe that they held would take place after issuance of offer assistance in using unlisted have a good cause for not submitting the amendment. If the final software. documents electronically must file an determination is that the amendment If a participant is electronically exemption request, in accordance with request involves a significant hazards submitting a document to the NRC in 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper consideration, then any hearing held accordance with the E-Filing rule, the filing requesting authorization to would take place before the issuance of participant must file the document continue to submit documents in paper any amendment. 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, accordance with the NRCs E-Filing rule submittals.html. Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007). The E- Once a participant has obtained a and Adjudications Staff. Participants Filing process requires participants to digital ID certificate and a docket has filing a document in this manner are emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES submit and serve all adjudicatory been created, the participant can then responsible for serving the document on documents over the internet, or in some submit a request for hearing or petition all other participants. Filing is cases to mail copies on electronic for leave to intervene. Submissions considered complete by first-class mail storage media. Participants may not should be in Portable Document Format as of the time of deposit in the mail, or submit paper copies of their filings (PDF) in accordance with the NRC by courier, express mail, or expedited unless they seek an exemption in guidance available on the NRCs public delivery service upon depositing the accordance with the procedures Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site- document with the provider of the described below. help/e-submittals.html. A filing is service. A presiding officer, having VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices 15147 granted an exemption request from Description of amendment request: tube, as the failure of a tube is not an initiator using E-Filing, may require a participant The proposed amendment would revise for any of these events. In the supporting or party to use E-Filing if the presiding Technical Specification (TS) 5.5.7, Westinghouse analyses, leakage is modeled as flow through a porous medium via the use officer subsequently determines that the Steam Generator (SG) Program, to of the Darcy equation. The leakage model is reason for granting the exemption from exclude portions of the SG tube below used to develop a relationship between use of E-Filing no longer exists. the top of the SG tubesheet from allowable leakage and leakage at accident Documents submitted in adjudicatory periodic inspections and plugging by conditions that is based on differential proceedings will appear in the NRCs implementing the H* alternate repair pressure across the tubesheet and the electronic hearing docket which is criteria. In addition, TS 5.6.7, Steam viscosity of the fluid. A leak rate ratio was available to the public at http://ehd1. Generator Tube Inspection Report, developed to relate the leakage at operating nrc.gov/ehd/;, unless excluded pursuant would also be revised to include conditions to leakage at accident conditions.

The fluid viscosity is based on fluid to an order of the Commission, or the additional reporting requirements.

temperature and it has been shown that for presiding officer. Participants are Basis for proposed no significant the most limiting accident, the fluid requested not to include personal hazards consideration determination: temperature does not exceed the normal privacy information, such as social As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the operating temperature. Therefore, the security numbers, home addresses, or licensee has provided its analysis of the viscosity ratio is assumed to be 1.0 and the home phone numbers in their filings, issue of no significant hazards leak rate ratio is a function of the ratio of the unless an NRC regulation or other law consideration, which is presented accident differential pressure and the normal requires submission of such below: operating differential pressure.

The leakage factor of 1.75 for IP2 for a-information. However, a request to 1. Does the proposed amendment involve postulated MSLB, has been calculated as intervene will require including a significant increase in the probability or shown in the supporting Westinghouse information on local residence in order consequences of an accident previously analysis. IP2 [Indian Point Unit 2] will apply to demonstrate a proximity assertion of evaluated? a factor of 1.75 to the normal operating interest in the proceeding. With respect Response: No. leakage associated with the tubesheet The proposed change excludes the lower to copyrighted works, except for limited portion of steam generator tubes from expansion region in the Condition excerpts that serve the purpose of the Monitoring Assessment and Operational inspection by implementing the alternate adjudicatory filings and would Assessment. Through application of the repair criteria H* and does not have a constitute a Fair Use application, limited tubesheet inspection scope, the detrimental impact on the integrity of any administrative leakage limit of 75 gpd participants are requested not to include plant structure, system, or component that

[gallons per day] provides assurance that copyrighted materials in their initiates an analyzed event. The proposed excessive leakage (i.e., greater than accident submission. change has no significant effect upon analysis assumptions) will not occur. No Petitions for leave to intervene must accident probabilities or consequences.

leakage factor will be applied to the Locked Of the applicable accidents previously be filed no later than 60 days from the evaluated, the limiting transients with Rotor or Control Rod Ejection due to their date of publication of this notice. short duration, since the calculated leak rate consideration to the proposed change to the Requests for hearing, petitions for leave steam generator tube inspection and repair ratio is less than 1.0. Therefore, the proposed to intervene, and motions for leave to criteria are the steam generator tube rupture change does not result in a significant increase in the consequences of these file new or amended contentions that (SGTR), the main steam line break (MSLB),

Locked Rotor and Control Rod Ejection. accidents.

are filed after the 60-day deadline will For the Condition Monitoring Assessment, not be entertained absent a At normal operating pressures, leakage from Primary Water Stress Corrosion the component of leakage from the prior determination by the presiding officer cycle from below the H* distance will be Cracking (PWSCC) below the proposed that the filing demonstrates good cause limited inspection depth is limited by both multiplied by a factor of 1.75 and added to by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR the tube-to-tubesheet crevice and the limited the total leakage from any other source and 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(iii). crack opening permitted by the tubesheet compared to the allowable MSLB leakage For further details with respect to this constraint. Consequently, negligible normal limit. For the Operational Assessment, the license amendment application, see the operating leakage is expected from cracks difference in the leakage between the within the tubesheet region. allowable leakage and the accident induced application for amendment which is For the SGTR event, the required structural leakage from sources other than the tubesheet available for public inspection at the expansion region will be divided by 1.75 and NRCs PDR, located at One White Flint integrity margins of the steam generator tubes and the tube-to-tubesheet joint over the H* compared to the observed operational North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville distance will be maintained. Tube rupture in leakage. As noted above, an administrative Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland tubes with cracks within the tubesheet is limit of 75 gpd has been established at IP2 20852. Publicly available documents precluded by the constraint provided by the to assure that the allowable accident induced created or received at the NRC are tube-to-tubesheet joint. This constraint leakage is not exceeded.

accessible electronically through results from the hydraulic expansion process, Based on the above, the performance ADAMS in the NRC Library at http:// thermal expansion mismatch between the criteria of NEI 97-06 and Regulatory Guide tube and tubesheet, and from the differential (RG) 1.121 continue to be met and the www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.

pressure between the primary and secondary proposed change does not involve a Persons who do not have access to significant increase in the probability or side. The structural margins against burst, as ADAMS or who encounter problems in discussed in Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.121, consequences of an accident previously accessing the documents located in Bases for Plugging Degraded PWR Steam evaluated.

ADAMS, should contact the NRCs PDR Generator Tubes, (Reference 11) and NEI 2. Does the proposed amendment create Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301- 97-06, Steam Generator Program the possibility of a new or different kind of emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 415-4737, or by email to pdr.resource@ Guidelines (Reference 3) are maintained for accident from any accident previously nrc.gov. both normal and postulated accident evaluated?

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., conditions. Therefore, the proposed change Response: No.

results in no significant increase in the The proposed change excludes the lower Docket No. 50-247, Indian Point portion of steam generator tubes from probability of the occurrence of a SGTR Nuclear Generating, Unit 2, Westchester accident. inspection by implementing the alternate County, New York The probability of a Steam Line Break, repair criteria (H*). The proposed change Date of amendment request: January Locked Rotor, and Control Rod Ejection are does not introduce any new equipment, 16, 2014. not affected by the potential failure of a SG create new failure modes for existing VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1

15148 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices equipment, or create any new limiting single NRC Branch Chief: Benjamin G. are performed by plant staff during all plant failures resulting from tube degradation. The Beasley. conditions.

proposed change does not affect the design Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Therefore, the proposed change does not of the SGs or their method of operation. In Docket No. 50-255, Palisades Nuclear create the possibility of a new or different addition, the proposed change does not kind of accident from any previously Plant, Van Buren County, Michigan evaluated.

impact any other plant system or component.

Date of amendment request: June 25, 3. Does the proposed change involve a Plant operation will not be altered, and all safety functions will continue to perform as 2013, supplemented by letter dated significant reduction in a margin of safety?

previously assumed in accident analyses. August 7, 2013. Response: No.

Therefore, the proposed change does not Description of amendment request: The proposed change does not affect plant create the possibility of a new or different The proposed amendment would revise design or method of operation. Section kind of accident from any previously Palisades Nuclear Plant Site Emergency 50.47(b) and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E evaluated. Plan (SEP) to increase the staff establish emergency planning standards and

3. Does the proposed amendment involve augmentation response times for certain requirements that require adequate staffing, a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Emergency Response Organization satisfactory performance of key functional Response: No. areas and critical tasks, and timely positions from 30 to 60 minutes. Entergy The proposed change defines the safety augmentation of the response capability.

significant portion of the SG tubing that must Nuclear Organization has reviewed the Since the SEP was originally developed, be inspected and repaired. WCAP-17828-P proposed changes against the standards there have been improvements in the identifies the inspection depth below which in § 50.47(b) and the requirements in 10 technology used to support the SEP functions any type of degradation is shown to have no CFR Part 50, Appendix E. and in the capabilities of onsite personnel. A impact on the steam generator tube integrity Basis for proposed no significant functional analysis was performed on the performance criteria in NEI 97-06. The hazards consideration determination: effect of the proposed change on the proposed change does not affect tube design As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the timeliness of performing major tasks for the or operating environment. The proposed licensee has provided its analysis of the functional areas of SEP. The analysis change will continue to require monitoring of issue of no significant hazards concluded that an increase in staff the physical condition of the SG tubes but augmentation times would not significantly consideration, which is presented will limit inspection within the tubesheet to affect the ability to perform the required SEP the portion of the tube from the top of the below: tasks. Thus, the proposed change has been tubesheet to a distance H* below the top of 1. Does the proposed change involve a determined not to adversely affect the ability the tubesheet. significant increase in the probability or to meet the emergency planning standards as The proposed change maintains the consequences of an accident previously described in 10 CFR 50.47(b) and required structural margins of the SG tubes evaluated? requirements in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E.

for both normal and accident conditions. For Response: No. Therefore, the proposed change does not axially oriented cracking located within the The proposed extension of staff involve a significant reduction in a margin of tubesheet, tube burst is precluded due to the augmentation times has no effect on normal safety.

presence of the tubesheet. For plant operation or on any accident initiator.

The change affects the response to The NRC staff has reviewed the circumferentially oriented cracking, the supporting Westinghouse analyses define a radiological emergencies under the Palisades licensees analysis and, based on this length of degradation-free expanded tubing Nuclear Plant SEP. The ability of the review, it appears that the three that provides the necessary resistance to tube emergency response organization to respond standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are pullout due to the pressure induced forces, adequately to radiological emergencies has satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff with applicable safety factors applied. been evaluated. Changes in the on-shift proposes to determine that the Application of the limited hot and cold leg organization, such as the addition of staff and amendment request involves no tubesheet inspection criteria will preclude reassignment of key on-shift emergency significant hazards consideration.

unacceptable primary to secondary leakage response functions, provide assurance of Attorney for licensee: William Dennis, during all plant conditions. The MSLB leak emergency response without competing or conflicting duties. An analysis was also Assistant General Counsel, Entergy rate factor for IP2 is 1.75. Multiplying the IP2 Nuclear Operations, Inc., 440 Hamilton administrative leak rate limit of 75 gpd/SG by performed on the effect of the proposed this factor shows that the primary-to- change on the timeliness of performing major Ave., White Plains, NY 10601.

secondary leak rate during a postulated SLB tasks for the major functional areas of the NRC Branch Chief: Robert D. Carlson.

is not exceeded. SEP. The analysis concluded that extension Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.,

Therefore, the proposed change does not of staff augmentation times would not Docket No. 50-255, Palisades Nuclear involve a significant reduction in any margin significantly affect the ability to perform the Plant, Van Buren County, Michigan of safety. required tasks. Date of amendment request:

Based on the above, Entergy concludes that Therefore, the proposed change does not December 11, 2013.

the proposed amendment to the Indian Point involve a significant increase in the Description of amendment request:

2 Technical Specifications presents no probability or consequences of an accident The proposed amendment would significant hazards consideration under the previously evaluated. modify Palisades Nuclear Plant standards set forth in 10 CFR 50.92(c), and 2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of technical specifications (TS) accordingly, a finding of no significant requirements for unavailable barriers by hazards consideration is justified. accident from any accident previously evaluated? adding limiting condition for operation The NRC staff has reviewed the Response: No. (LCO) 3.0.9. The changes are consistent licensees analysis and, based on this The proposed change affects the required with the NRCs approved industry/

review, it appears that the three response times for supplementing onsite Technical Specification Task Force standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are personnel in response to a radiological (TSTF) Standard Technical emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff emergency. It has been evaluated and Specification (STS) change TSTF-427, proposes to determine that the determined not to significantly affect the Allowance for Non-Technical ability to perform that function. It has no amendment request involves no Specification Barrier Degradation on effect on the plant design or on the normal significant hazards consideration. operation of the plant and does not affect Supported System OPERABILITY, Attorney for licensee: Jeanne Cho, how the plant is physically operated under Revision 2.

Assistant General Counsel, Entergy emergency conditions. The extension of staff Basis for proposed no significant Nuclear Operations, Inc., 440 Hamilton augmentation times in the SEP does not hazards consideration determination:

Avenue, White Plains, NY 10601. affect the plant operating procedures which The licensee has affirmed the VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices 15149 applicability of the model proposed postulated initiating events which may assuring the availability of the ultimate heat non-significant hazards consideration require a functional barrier are limited to sink and core cooling. As such, the proposed published on October 2, 2006 (71 FR those with low frequencies of occurrence, change does not increase the consequences of and the overall TS system safety function an accident previously evaluated.

58444), as part of the Consolidated Line would still be available for the majority of In addition, implementing this strategy Item Improvement Process, Notice of anticipated challenges. The risk impact of the eliminates the need for the exterior sluice Availability of the Model Safety proposed TS changes was assessed following gates to be safety class and allows for Evaluation. The licensee has the three-tiered approach recommended in continuous control of the intake cell level concluded that the findings presented in RG 1.177. A bounding risk assessment was during a design basis flood event. The that evaluation are applicable to PNP performed to justify the proposed TS proposed Updated Safety Analysis Report and is hereby referenced below: changes. This application of LCO 3.0.9 is (USAR) changes for implementing predicated upon the licensees performance modification EC 55394 allow for maintaining Criterion 1The Proposed Change Does Not of a risk assessment and the management of RW pump operation during a flooding event Involve a Significant Increase in the plant risk. The net change to the margin of at FCS.

Probability or Consequences of an Accident safety is insignificant as indicated by the Therefore, the proposed change does not Previously Evaluated anticipated low levels of associated risk involve a significant increase in the The proposed change allows a delay time (ICCDP and ICLERP) as shown in Table 1 of probability or consequences of an accident for entering a supported system technical Section 3.1.1 in the Safety Evaluation. previously evaluated.

specification (TS) when the inoperability is Therefore, this change does not involve a 2. Does the proposed amendment create due solely to an unavailable barrier if risk is significant reduction in a margin of safety. the possibility of a new or different kind of assessed and managed. The postulated accident from any accident previously The NRC staff has reviewed the initiating events which may require a evaluated?

licensees analysis and, based on this Response: No.

functional barrier are limited to those with low frequencies of occurrence, and the review, it appears that the three The proposed modification EC 55394 to overall TS system safety function would still standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are provide control of the intake cell level by be available for the majority of anticipated satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff operation of the manual valves and the challenges. Therefore, the probability of an proposes to determine that the associated USAR changes do not alter the accident previously evaluated is not amendment request involves no safety limits or safety analysis assumptions significantly increased, if at all. The significant hazards consideration. associated with the operation of the plant.

consequences of an accident while relying on Attorney for licensee: William Dennis, Hence, the proposed changes do not the allowance provided by proposed LCO introduce any new accident initiators, nor do Assistant General Counsel, Entergy 3.0.9 are no different than the consequences they reduce or adversely affect the of an accident while relying on the TS Nuclear Operations, Inc., 440 Hamilton capabilities of any plant structure or system required actions in effect without the Ave., White Plains, NY 10601. in the performance of their safety function.

allowance provided by proposed LCO 3.0.9. NRC Branch Chief: Robert D. Carlson. The proposed amendment revises the USAR Therefore, the consequences of an accident Omaha Public Power District, Docket to include the necessary information to previously evaluated are not significantly No. 50-285, Fort Calhoun Station, Unit support the implementation of the affected by this change. The addition of a 1, Washington County, Nebraska modification allowing for maintaining RW requirement to assess and manage the risk Date of amendment request: August pump operation during an abnormal introduced by this change will further 16, 2013. operating procedure AOP-01 flooding event minimize possible concerns. Description of amendment request: at FCS.

Therefore, this change does not involve a The proposed amendment would revise Therefore, the proposed change does not significant increase in the probability or create the possibility of a new or different the design basis method in the Fort consequences of an accident previously kind of accident from any previously evaluated. Calhoun Station Updated Safety Analysis Report for controlling the raw evaluated.

Criterion 2The Proposed Change Does Not 3. Does the proposed amendment involve water intake cell level during periods of a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

Create the Possibility of a New or Different Kind of Accident from any Previously elevated river levels. Response: No.

Evaluated Basis for proposed no significant The proposed modification, which hazards consideration determination: provides control of the intake cell level by The proposed change does not involve a physical alteration of the plant (no new or As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the operation of the manual valves, and the different type of equipment will be installed). licensee has provided its analysis of the associated USAR changes do not alter the Allowing delay times for entering supported issue of no significant hazards safety limits or safety analysis assumptions system TS when inoperability is due solely consideration, which is presented associated with the operation of the plant.

to an unavailable barrier, if risk is assessed below: The proposed modification and associated and managed, will not introduce new failure USAR revisions ensure there is adequate

1. Does the proposed amendment involve protection to the RW pumps from an external modes or effects and will not, in the absence a significant increase in the probability or flood hazard thus assuring adequate of other unrelated failures, lead to an consequences of an accident previously protection during a flood. Providing RW accident whose consequences exceed the evaluated? pump intake cell level control during consequences of accidents previously Response: No. flooding conditions allows for adjustment of evaluated. The addition of a requirement to assess and manage the risk introduced by this The proposed modification engineering flow and control of the intake cell level change will further minimize possible change (EC) 55394, Raw Water [RW] Pump throughout the duration of the flood since the concerns. Operation and Safety Classification of new valves are located inside the intake Thus, this change does not create the Components during a Flood, installed intake structure; thereby ensuring the RW pumps possibility of a new or different kind of cell flood water inlet valves at Fort Calhoun remain operable during a flood condition and accident from an accident previously Station (FCS). The modification would will not adversely impact any margin of emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES evaluated. employ the trash rack blowdown portion of safety.

the circulating water system to allow river Therefore, the proposed change does not Criterion 3The Proposed Change Does Not water to flow into four of those pipes and involve a significant reduction in a margin of Involve a Significant Reduction in the Margin then through four newly installed safety class safety.

of Safety. valves for control of cell level (RW pump The proposed change allows a delay time suction level) using river level as the driving The NRC staff has reviewed the for entering a supported system TS when the force. This modification EC 55394 enhances licensees analysis and, based on this inoperability is due solely to an unavailable the flood protection provided to the RW review, it appears that the three barrier, if risk is assessed and managed. The pumps for an external flooding event thus standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1

15150 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff thermal conductivity and oxidation crack exclusion allowance to Final proposes to determine that the progression and effects for the inorganic zinc Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) Standard amendment request involves no coating of the containment vessel is used to Plant Section 3.6.2.1.2.4, ASME eliminate non-mechanistic modeling of significant hazards consideration. inorganic zinc thermal conductivity in the

[American Society of Mechanical Attorney for licensee: David A. Repka, containment integrity analyses to show that Engineers] Section III and Non-Nuclear Esq., Winston & Strawn, 1700 K Street the value for inorganic zinc thermal Piping-Moderate-Energy, and FSAR NW., Washington, DC 20006-3817. conductivity used in the containment Standard Plant Table 3.6-2, Design NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. integrity analyses is conservative, but is not Comparison to Regulatory Positions of Markley. used to change any of the parameters used in Regulatory Guide 1.46, Revision 0, Southern Nuclear Operating the containment peak pressure analysis. The dated May 1973, titled Protection Company, Inc. Docket Nos.52-025 and change in methodology does not change the Against Pipe Whip Inside 52-026, Vogtle Electric Generating condition of containment; therefore, no new accident initiator is created. The containment Containment, in particular regard to Plant, Units 3 and 4, Burke County, the high-density polyethylene (HDPE) peak pressure analysis as currently evaluated Georgia is not affected, and the consequences piping installed in ASME Class 3 line Date of amendment request: previously reported are not changed. The segments of the essential service water November 21, 2013. new methodology does not change the (ESW) system. New Reference 25 would Description of amendment request: containment; therefore, no new fault or be added to FSAR Standard Plant The proposed change would amend sequence of events that could lead to Section 3.6.3 to cite the NRC-approved Combined License Nos. NPF-91 and containment failure or release of radioactive version of the HDPE requirements NPF-92 for the Vogtle Electric material is created.

covered by Relief Request I3R-10.

Generating Plant (VEGP) Units 3 and 4 Therefore, the proposed amendment does by departing from the approved AP1000 not create the possibility of a new or different Basis for proposed no significant Design Control Document (DCD) Tier 2 kind of accident. hazards consideration determination:

3. Does the proposed amendment involve As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the information as incorporated into the a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

Updated Final Safety Analysis Report licensee has provided its analysis of the Response: No.

(UFSAR) to allow use of a new issue of no significant hazards The proposed implementation of a methodology to determine the effective methodology which specifies an effective consideration, which is presented thermal conductivity resulting from thermal conductivity and oxidation below:

oxidation of the inorganic zinc (IOZ) progression and effects for the inorganic zinc 1. Does the proposed change involve a used in the containment vessel coating coating of the containment vessel is used to significant increase in the probability or system. eliminate non-mechanistic modeling of consequences of an accident previously inorganic zinc thermal conductivity in the evaluated?

Basis for proposed no significant containment integrity analyses to show that Response: No.

hazards consideration determination: the value for inorganic zinc thermal There are no new design changes As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the conductivity used in the containment associated with the proposed amendment.

licensee has provided its analysis of the integrity analyses is conservative, but is not All design, material, and construction issue of no significant hazards used to change any of the parameters used in standards that were applicable prior to this consideration, which is presented the containment peak pressure analysis. The amendment request, including those below: change in methodology does not change the standards in place following the NRC condition of the containment and the approval of using the HDPE piping, will

1. Does the proposed amendment involve integrity of the containment vessel is not a significant increase in the probability or continue to be applicable.

affected. The containment peak pressure The proposed change will not increase the consequences of an accident previously analysis as currently evaluated is not evaluated? likelihood of accident initiators or precursors affected, and the consequences previously or adversely alter the design assumptions, Response: No. reported are not changed. No safety analysis Implementation of a methodology which conditions, and configuration of the facility or design basis acceptance limit/criterion is or the manner in which the plant is operated specifies an effective thermal conductivity changed by the proposed change, thus no and oxidation progression for the inorganic and maintained with respect to such margin of safety is reduced. initiators or precursors.

zinc coating of the containment vessel is used to eliminate non-mechanistic modeling Therefore, the proposed amendment The proposed changes do not affect the of inorganic zinc thermal conductivity in the does not reduce the margin of safety. way in which safety-related systems perform containment integrity analyses to show that The NRC staff has reviewed the their functions.

the value for inorganic zinc thermal licensees analysis and, based on this All accident analysis acceptance criteria conductivity used in the containment review, it appears that the three will continue to be met with the proposed integrity analyses is conservative, but is not changes. The proposed changes will not standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are affect the source term, containment isolation, used to change any of the parameters used in those analyses. There is no change to any satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff or radiological release assumptions used in accident initiator or condition of the proposes to determine that the evaluating the radiological consequences of containment that would affect the probability amendment request involves no an accident previously evaluated. The of any accident. The containment peak significant hazards consideration. proposed changes will not alter any pressure analysis as reported in the UFSAR Attorney for licensee: M. Stanford assumptions or change any mitigation actions is not affected; therefore, the previously Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 1710 in the radiological consequence evaluations reported consequences are not affected. Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL in the FSAR.

Therefore, the proposed amendment does 35203-2015. The applicable radiological dose not involve an increase in the probability or NRC Branch Chief: Lawrence J. acceptance criteria will continue to be met.

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES consequences of an accident previously Since the proposed change is based on a Burkhart.

evaluated. calculation that demonstrates that a moderate Union Electric Company, Docket No. energy crack in the ESW HDPE piping is

2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of 50-483, Callaway Plant, Unit 1, unlikely, there are no impacts on the plants accident from any accident previously Callaway County, Missouri existing hazard analyses.

evaluated? Date of amendment request: The proposed change does not physically Response: No. December 6, 2013. alter safety-related systems or affect the way The proposed amendment to implement a Description of amendment request: in which safety-related systems perform their methodology which specifies an effective The amendment would add a new pipe functions per the intended plant design.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices 15151 As such, the proposed change will not alter review, it appears that the three 2. Does the proposed amendment create or prevent the capability of structures, standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are the possibility of a new or different kind of systems, and components (SSCs) to perform satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff accident from any accident previously their intended functions for mitigating the evaluated?

proposes to determine that the consequences of an accident and meeting Response: No.

applicable acceptance limits. amendment request involves no The proposed changes will not alter the Therefore, the proposed change does not significant hazards consideration. requirement or function for systems required involve a significant increase in the Attorney for licensee: John ONeill, during accident conditions. The design probability or consequences of an accident Esq., Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman function of structures, systems and previously evaluated. LLP, 2300 N Street NW., Washington, components are not impacted by the

2. Does the proposed change create the DC 20037. proposed change. Evaluation SA-08-006 and possibility of a new or different kind of NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. Calculation WCNOC-CP-003 determined accident from any accident previously Markley. natural circulation is maintained and evaluated? Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating adequate core cooling is maintained. The Response: No. Corporation, Docket No. 50-482, Wolf fission product boundary integrity is not With respect to any new or different kind affected and safe shutdown capability is Creek Generating Station, Coffey of accident, there are no new design changes maintained.

being proposed nor are there any changes in County, Kansas Date of amendment request: Therefore, the proposed change does not the method by which any safety-related plant create the possibility of a new or different SSC performs its specified safety function. November 21, 2013.

kind of accident from any accident The proposed change will not affect the Description of amendment request: previously evaluated.

normal method of plant operation. No new The amendment would revise the 3. Does the proposed amendment involve transient precursors will be introduced as a approved Fire Protection Program as a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

result of this amendment. described in the Updated Safety Response: No.

The HDPE piping design change was Analysis Report, based on the reactor There will be no effect on the manner in previously approved by the NRC under Relief coolant system thermal hydraulic which safety limits or limiting safety system Request I3R-10. The proposed change in this settings are determined nor will there be any response evaluation of a postulated amendment request does not create the effect on those plant systems necessary to possibility of a new type of accident, rather control room fire, performed for changes to the alternative shutdown assure the accomplishment of protection the proposed change seeks to eliminate the functions. The revised alternative shutdown need to postulate an existing type of hazard methodology.

methodology provides the ability to achieve event (moderate energy piping leakage crack) Basis for proposed no significant and maintain safe shutdown in the event of for the subject HDPE piping which has been hazards consideration determination: a fire. Evaluation SA-08-006 and Calculation shown to experience such low stresses that As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the WCNOC-CP-003 determined natural such a crack, and the potential flooding for licensee has provided its analysis of the circulation is maintained and adequate core that hazard event, need not be postulated. issue of no significant hazards cooling is maintained.

The change does not have a detrimental consideration, which is presented Therefore, the proposed change does not impact on the manner in which plant involve a significant reduction in a margin of equipment operates or responds to an below:

safety.

actuation signal. 1. Does the proposed amendment involve The proposed change does not, therefore, a significant increase in the probability or The NRC staff has reviewed the create the possibility of a new or different consequences of an accident previously licensees analysis and, based on this accident from any accident previously evaluated? review, it appears that the three evaluated. Response: No. standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are

3. Does the proposed change involve a The design function of structures, systems satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff significant reduction in a margin of safety? and components (SSCs) are not impacted by Response: No. the proposed deviations from [10 CFR Part proposes to determine that the There will be no effect on those plant 50] Appendix R, Sections III.L.1 and III.L.2, amendment request involves no systems necessary to assure the and Calculation XX-E-013. The proposed significant hazards consideration.

accomplishment of protection functions changes to the approved fire protection Attorney for licensee: Jay Silberg, Esq.,

associated with reactor operation or the program are based on the RCS [reactor Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, reactor coolant system. The design factor coolant system] thermal-hydraulic response 2300 N Street NW., Washington, DC (DF) of 0.50 discussed in ULNRC-05553 (Evaluation SA-08-006) for a postulated 20037.

dated October 9, 2008 has not changed. This control room fire performed for changes to NRC Branch Chief: Michael T.

DF was approved by the NRC in Relief the alternative shutdown methodology outlined in letter SLNRC 84-0109, Fire Markley.

Request 13R-10 (Reference 6.2 to this Evaluation). There will be no impact on the Protection Review. Drawing E-1F9915, Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating overpower limit, departure from nucleate Design Basis Document for OFN RP-017, Corporation, Docket No. 50-482, Wolf boiling ratio (DNBR) limits, heat flux hot Control Room Evacuation, Revision 5, Creek Generating Station, Coffey channel factor (FQ), nuclear enthalpy rise hot Evaluation SA-08-006, RETRAN-3D Post- County, Kansas channel factor (FDH), loss of coolant accident Fire Safe Shutdown (PFSSD) Consequence Date of amendment request:

peak cladding temperature (LOCA PCT), peak Evaluation for a Postulated Control Room December 17, 2013.

local power density, or any other limit and Fire, Revision 3, and Calculation WCNOC- Description of amendment request:

associated margin of safety. Required CP-003, VIPRE-01 MDNBR Analyses of Control Room Fire Scenarios, Revision 0 The amendment would revise Technical shutdown margins in the COLR [core Specification Surveillance Requirement operating limits report] will not be changed. demonstrate the adequacy of the revised The proposed change does not eliminate any alternative shutdown procedure, OFN RF- (SR) 3.7.10.1 and SR 3.7.13.1 to reduce surveillances or alter the frequency of 017. The proposed changes do not alter or the required run time for periodic emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES surveillances required by the Technical prevent the ability of SSCs from performing operation of the control room Specifications. their intended function to mitigate the pressurization system filter trains and As such, the proposed change does not consequences of an initiating event within emergency exhaust system filter trains, involve a significant reduction in a margin of the assumed acceptance limits. with heaters on, from 10 hours1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br /> to 15 safety as defined in any regulatory Therefore, the probability of any accident previously evaluated is not increased. minutes. The proposed amendment is requirement or guidance document. consistent with plant-specific options Equipment required to mitigate an accident The NRC staff has reviewed the remains capable of performing the assumed provided in the NRCs model safety licensees analysis and, based on this function. evaluation of Technical Specifications VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1

15152 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-522- proposed change is consistent with (PDR), located at One White Flint North, A, Revision 0, Revise Ventilation regulatory guidance. Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike System Surveillance Requirements to Therefore, it is concluded that this change (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852.

does not involve a significant reduction in a Operate for 10 hours1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br /> per Month. Publicly available documents created or margin of safety.

Basis for proposed no significant received at the NRC are accessible hazards consideration determination: The NRC staff has reviewed the electronically through the Agencywide As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensees analysis and, based on this Documents Access and Management licensee has provided its analysis of the review, it appears that the three System (ADAMS) in the NRC Library at issue of no significant hazards standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/

consideration, which is presented satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff adams.html. If you do not have access below: proposes to determine that the to ADAMS or if there are problems in amendment request involves no accessing the documents located in

1. Does the proposed change involve a significant hazards consideration.

significant increase in the probability or ADAMS, contact the PDRs Reference Attorney for licensee: Jay Silberg, Esq., staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 consequences of an accident previously evaluated?

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.

Response: No. 2300 N Street NW., Washington, DC Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.,

The proposed change replaces existing 20037. Docket No. 50-423, Millstone Power Surveillance Requirements to operate the NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. Station, Unit 3, New London County, Control Room Emergency Ventilation System Markley. Connecticut (CREVS) and the Emergency Exhaust System Date of amendment request: October (EES) for a continuous 10 hour1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br /> period with Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and 4, 2012, as supplemented by letters applicable heaters operating every 31 days, with requirements to operate these systems Combined Licenses dated January 4, April 17, and October for 15 continuous minutes with applicable 30, 2013.

During the period since publication of Description of amendment request:

heaters operating every 31 days. the last biweekly notice, the These systems are not accident initiators The proposed amendment would Commission has issued the following modify Technical Specifications by (i.e., their malfunction cannot initiate an accident or transient) and therefore, these amendments. The Commission has relocating specific surveillance changes do not involve a significant increase determined for each of these frequencies to a licensee controlled in the probability of an accident. The amendments that the application program with the adoption of Technical proposed system and filter testing changes complies with the standards and Specification Task Force (TSTF)-425, are consistent with current regulatory requirements of the Atomic Energy Act Revision 3, Relocate Surveillance guidance for these systems and will continue of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the to assure that these systems perform their Frequencies to Licensee Control[Risk-Commissions rules and regulations. Informed Technical Specification Task design function which may include The Commission has made appropriate mitigating accidents. Therefore, the change Force (RITSTF)] Initiative 5b.

findings as required by the Act and the Additionally, the change would add a does not involve a significant increase in the consequences of an accident. Commissions rules and regulations in new program, the Surveillance Therefore, it is concluded that this change 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in Frequency Control Program (SFCP), to does not involve a significant increase in the the license amendment. Technical Specification Section 6, probability or consequences of an accident A notice of consideration of issuance Administrative Controls.

previously evaluated. of amendment to facility operating Date of issuance: February 25, 2014.

2. Does the proposed change create the license or combined license, as Effective date: As of the date of possibility of a new or different kind of applicable, proposed no significant issuance, and shall be implemented accident from any accident previously hazards consideration determination, evaluated? within 90 days.

and opportunity for a hearing in Amendment No.: 258.

Response: No.

The change proposed for these ventilation connection with these actions, was Renewed Facility Operating License systems does not change any system published in the Federal Register as No. NPF-49: Amendment revised the operations or maintenance activities. Testing indicated. License and Technical Specifications.

requirements will be revised and will Unless otherwise indicated, the Date of initial notice in Federal continue to demonstrate that the Limiting Commission has determined that these Register: December 11, 2012 (77 FR Conditions for Operation are met and the amendments satisfy the criteria for 73687).

system components are capable of categorical exclusion in accordance The supplemental letters dated performing their intended safety functions. with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant January 4, 2013, April 17, 2013, and The change does not create new failure to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental October 30, 2013, provided additional modes or mechanisms and no new accident impact statement or environmental precursors are generated.

information that clarified the Therefore, it is concluded that this change assessment need be prepared for these application, did not expand the scope of does not create the possibility of a new or amendments. If the Commission has the application as originally noticed, different kind of accident from any accident prepared an environmental assessment and did not change the staffs original previously evaluated. under the special circumstances proposed no significant hazards

3. Does the proposed change involve a provision in 10 CFR 51.22(b) and has consideration determination.

significant reduction in a margin of safety? made a determination based on that The Commissions related evaluation Response: No. assessment, it is so indicated. of the amendment is contained in a emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES The design basis for the ventilation system For further details with respect to the Safety Evaluation dated February 25, heaters in the EES and in the pressurization action see (1) the applications for 2014.

trains of the CREVS includes the capability amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3) No significant hazards consideration to heat the incoming air, reducing the relative humidity (and thereby increasing adsorber the Commissions related letter, Safety comments received: No.

efficiency). The heater testing change Evaluation and/or Environmental Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket proposed will continue to demonstrate that Assessment as indicated. All of these Nos. 50-369 and 50-370, McGuire the heaters are capable of heating the air and items are available for public inspection Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, will thus perform their design function. The at the NRCs Public Document Room Mecklenburg County, North Carolina VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices 15153 Date of application for amendments: The Commissions related evaluation heatup and cooldown curves (also April 16, 2013. of the amendments is contained in a referred to as pressure-temperature (P-Brief description of amendments: The Safety Evaluation dated February 27, T) limits) and low temperature amendments remove superseded 2014. overpressure protection (LTOP) temporary Technical Specification (TS) No significant hazards consideration requirements to cover a lifetime burnup requirements for McGuire Nuclear comments received: No. of 48 Effective Full Power Years (EFPY),

Station (MNS), Units 1 and 2, in Duke Energy Progress Inc., Docket which is an increase from the current accordance with a licensee commitment Nos. 50-325 and 50-324, Brunswick value of 29.2 EFPY.

described in a May 28, 2010, license Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2, Date of issuance: March 5, 2014.

amendment request. Brunswick County, North Carolina. Effective date: As of the date of Date of issuance: February 28, 2014. Date of application for amendments: issuance, and shall be implemented Effective date: This license June 19, 2012, as supplemented by within 30 days.

amendment is effective as of its date of letters dated January 21, May 14, and Amendment No.: 274.

issuance and shall be implemented August 29, 2013, and January 22, 2014. Facility Operating License No. DPR-within 60 days of issuance. Brief description of amendments: The 26: The amendment revised the License Amendment Nos.: 272 and 252. amendments revised the Technical and the Technical Specifications.

Renewed Facility Operating License Specification (TS) to extend the Date of initial notice in Federal Nos. NPF-9 and NPF-17: Amendments Completion Time (CT) of TS 3.8.1 Register: April 2, 2013 (78 FR 19750).

revised the licenses and technical Required Action D.4 for an inoperable The supplemental letters dated July 9, specifications. diesel generator. A commensurate 2013, October 3, 2013, and February 24, Date of initial notice in Federal change is also made to extend the 2014, provided additional information Register: June 25, 2013 (78 FR 38081). maximum CT of TS 3.8.1 Required that clarified the application, did not The Commissions related evaluation Actions C.3 and D.4. The licensee will expand the scope of the application as of the amendments is contained in a to add a supplemental AC power source originally noticed, and did not change Safety Evaluation dated February 28, (i.e., a supplemental diesel generator) the NRC staffs original proposed no 2014. with the capability to power any significant hazards consideration No significant hazards consideration emergency bus within 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> from a determination as published in the comments received: No. Station Blackout event, and with the Federal Register.

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket capacity to bring the affected unit to The Commissions related evaluation Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287, cold shutdown. of the amendment is contained in a Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2 and Date of issuance: February 24, 2014. Safety Evaluation dated March 5, 2014.

3, Oconee County, South Carolina Effective date: As of the date of No significant hazards consideration Date of application for amendments: issuance and shall be implemented comments received: No.

February 22, 2013, as supplemented on prior to startup from the 2014 Unit 1 Florida Power and Light Company, September 10, October 25, November refueling outage. Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251, Turkey 29, and December 16, 2013. Amendment Nos.: 264 and 292. Point Nuclear Generating, Units 3 and Brief description of amendments: The Facility Operating License Nos. DPR- 4, Miami-Dade County, Florida amendments revise Technical 62 AND DPR-71: Amendments revised Date of application for amendment:

Specification (TS) 3.4.3, to replace its the License and TSs. March 22, 2013.

current reactor coolant system pressure- Date of initial notice in Federal Brief description of amendment: The temperature (P-T) limits with new P-T Register: October 16, 2013 (77 FR amendments revised the Technical limits applicable to 54 effective full 63346). Specifications (TSs) to allow the use of power years. In addition, the The supplements dated January 21, Optimized ZIRLOTM as an approved amendments change the operational May 14, and August 29, 2013, and fuel rod cladding.

requirements for unit heatup and January 22, 2014, provided additional Date of issuance: February 20, 2014.

cooldown in TS Tables 3.4.3-1 and information that clarified the Effective date: As of the date of 3.4.3-2. application, did not expand the scope of issuance and shall be implemented Date of Issuance: February 27, 2014. the application as originally noticed, within 60 days of issuance.

Effective date: As of the date of and did not change the staffs original Amendment No.: 259 and 254.

issuance and shall be implemented proposed no significant hazards Renewed Facility Operating License within 60 days from the date of consideration determination as Nos. DPR-31 and DPR-41: Amendments issuance. published in the Federal Register. revised the licenses and the TSs.

Amendment Nos.: 384, 386, and 385. The Commissions related evaluation Date of initial notice in Federal Renewed Facility Operating License of the amendment is contained in a Register: August 20, 2013 (78 FR Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47, and DPR-55: Safety Evaluation dated February 24, 51219).

Amendments revised the license and 2014. The Commissions related evaluation the TSs. No significant hazards consideration of the amendments is contained in a Date of initial notice in Federal comments received: None. Safety Evaluation dated February 20, Register: April 16, 2013, 78 FR 22568. Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., 2014.

The supplemental letters dated Docket No. 50-247, Indian Point No significant hazards consideration September 10, October 25, November Nuclear Generating, Unit 2, Westchester comments received: No.

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES 29, and December 16, 2013, provided County, New York Luminant Generation Company LLC, additional information that clarified the Date of application for amendment: Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446, application, did not expand the scope of February 6, 2013, as supplemented by Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, the application as originally noticed, letters dated July 9, 2013, October 3, Units 1 and 2 (CPNPP), Somervell and did not change the staffs original 2013, and February 24, 2014. County, Texas proposed no significant hazards Brief description of amendment: The Date of amendment request: August consideration determination as amendment changes the Technical 29, 2013, as supplemented by letter published in the Federal Register. Specifications by revising the reactor dated February 19, 2014.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1

15154 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices Description of amendment request: Technical Specifications (TS). and 2, San Luis Obispo County, The amendments revised Technical Specifically, the amendment revised the California Specification (TS) 3.4.17, Steam TS to allow the use of Optimized Date of amendment request: June 6, Generator (SG) Tube Integrity, TS ZIRLOTM as an approved fuel rod 2013.

5.5.9, Unit 1 Model D76 and Unit 2 cladding material. Description of amendment request:

Model D5 Steam Generator (SG) Date of issuance: March 5, 2014. The amendments revised Technical Program, and TS 5.6.9, Unit 1 Model Effective date: As of its date of Specification (TS) 3.7.10, Control D76 and Unit 2 Model D5 Steam issuance and shall be implemented Room Ventilation System (CRVS), and Generator Tube Inspection Report. The within 60 days. TS 5.6.5, Core Operating Limits Report changes address implementation issues Amendment No.: 139. (COLR), to incorporate editorial associated with inspection periods, and Facility Operating License No. NPF- changes. Specifically, the proposed address other administrative changes 86: The amendment revised the License amendments delete footnote (1) from the and clarifications. The amendment is and TS. TS 3.7.10 Condition A Completion consistent with NRC-approved Date of initial notice in Federal Time, and revise inconsistent wording Technical Specifications Task Force Register: August 20, 2013 (78 FR in TS 5.6.5a.4, TS 5.6.5a.5, and TS (TSTF) change traveler TSTF-510, 51228). 5.6.5a.9.

Revision 2, Revision to Steam The Commissions related evaluation Date of issuance: February 27, 2014.

Generator Program Inspection of the amendment is contained in a Effective date: As of its date of Frequencies and Tube Sample Safety Evaluation dated March 5, 2014. issuance and shall be implemented Selection, as part of the consolidated No significant hazards consideration within 60 days from the date of line item improvement process. comments received: No. issuance.

The amendments also incorporated Northern States Power Company Amendment Nos.: Unit 1217; Unit minor non-technical variations from the Minnesota (NSPM), Docket No. 50-263, 2219.

TS changes proposed in TSTF-510, Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-Revision 2. The TSs for CPNPP, Units 1 Wright County, Minnesota 80 and DPR-82: The amendments and 2 utilize different numbering and Date of application for amendment: revised the Facility Operating Licenses titles than the Standard Technical April 19, 2013. and Technical Specifications.

Specifications on which TSTF-510, Brief description of amendment: The Date of initial notice in Federal Revision 2, is based, since the steam amendment allows NSPM to adopt the Register: August 6, 2013 (78 FR 47791).

generators for CPNPP, Units 1 and 2, are NRCs approved Technical The Commissions related evaluation of different models. These differences Specifications Task Force (TSTF) of the amendments is contained in a are administrative in nature and do not Standard Technical Specifications Safety Evaluation dated February 27, affect the applicability of TSTF-510, Change Traveler TSTF-535, Revision 0, 2014.

Revision 2, to the TSs for CPNPP, Units Revise Shutdown Margin Definition to No significant hazards consideration 1 and 2. Address Advanced Fuel Designs, dated comments received: No.

Date of issuance: February 27, 2014. August 8, 2011. The amendment PPL Susquehanna, LLC, Docket Nos.

Effective date: As of its date of modifies the Technical Specification 50-387 and 50-388, Susquehanna issuance and shall be implemented definition of shutdown margin (SDM) Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2, within 90 days from the date of to require calculation of the SDM at a Luzerne County, Pennsylvania issuance. reactor moderator temperature of 68 °F Date of application for amendments:

Amendment No.: Unit 1161; Unit or higher, representing the most reactive June 6, 2013, as supplemented by letter 2161. state throughout the operating cycle. dated December 4, 2013.

Facility Operating License Nos. NPF- This change addresses newer boiling- Brief description of amendments: The 87 and NPF-89: The amendments water reactor fuel designs which may be amendments change the Technical revised the Facility Operating Licenses more reactive at shutdown temperatures Specifications (TSs) for Susquehanna and Technical Specifications. above 68 °F. Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2.

Date of initial notice in Federal Date of issuance: February 28, 2014. Specifically, these amendments change Register: October 1, 2013 (78 FR Effective date: This license TS 3.3.6.1, Primary Containment 60324). amendment is effective as of the date of Isolation Instrumentation, to add a The February 19, 2014, supplement issuance and shall be implemented footnote to Function 6.c. in TS Table did not expand the scope of the within 90 days from the date of 3.3.6.1-1, allowing only one Trip application as originally noticed, and issuance. System to be operable in MODES 4 and did not change the NRC staffs initial Amendment No.: 179. 5 for the Manual Initiation Function for proposed finding of no significant Renewed Facility Operating License Shutdown Cooling System isolation.

hazards consideration. No. DPR-22: The amendment revises Date of issuance: February 26, 2014.

The Commissions related evaluation the Renewed Facility Operating License Effective date: As of the date of of the amendment is contained in a and Technical Specifications. issuance and shall be implemented Safety Evaluation dated February 27, Date of initial notice in Federal within 30 days.

2014. Register: September 3, 2013 (78 FR Amendment Nos.: 259 and 240.

No significant hazards consideration 54285). Renewed Facility Operating License comments received: No. The Commissions related evaluation Nos. NPF-14 and NPF-22: The emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC, of the amendment is contained in a amendments revised the license and the Docket No. 50-443, Seabrook Station, Safety Evaluation dated February 28, TS.

Unit. 1, Rockingham County, New 2014. Date of initial notice in Federal Hampshire No significant hazards consideration Register: December 10, 2013 (78 FR Date of amendment request: June 25, comments received: No. 74184).

2013. Pacific Gas and Electric Company, The supplemental letter dated Description of amendment request: Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323, Diablo December 4, 2013, provided additional The amendment revised the Seabrook Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 information that clarified the VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices 15155 application, did not expand the scope of which are set forth in the license been issued and made effective as the application as originally noticed, amendment. indicated.

and did not change the staffs original Because of exigent or emergency Unless otherwise indicated, the proposed no significant hazards circumstances associated with the date Commission has determined that these consideration determination as the amendment was needed, there was amendments satisfy the criteria for published in the Federal Register. not time for the Commission to publish, categorical exclusion in accordance The Commissions related evaluation for public comment before issuance, its with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant of the amendments is contained in a usual notice of consideration of to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental Safety Evaluation dated February 26, issuance of amendment, proposed no impact statement or environmental 2014. significant hazards consideration assessment need be prepared for these No significant hazards consideration determination, and opportunity for a amendments. If the Commission has comments received: No. hearing. prepared an environmental assessment South Carolina Electric and Gas For exigent circumstances, the under the special circumstances Company, South Carolina Public Commission has either issued a Federal provision in 10 CFR 51.12(b) and has Service Authority, Docket No. 50-395, Register notice providing opportunity made a determination based on that Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit, for public comment or has used local assessment, it is so indicated.

Fairfield County, South Carolina media to provide notice to the public in For further details with respect to the Date of application for amendment: the area surrounding a licensees facility action see (1) the application for April 2, 2013 as supplemented by letter of the licensees application and of the amendment, (2) the amendment to Commissions proposed determination Facility Operating License or Combined dated May 16, 2013.

of no significant hazards consideration. License, as applicable, and (3) the Brief description of amendment: This The Commission has provided a Commissions related letter, Safety amendment revises the Technical reasonable opportunity for the public to Evaluation and/or Environmental Specifications requirements regarding comment, using its best efforts to make Assessment, as indicated. All of these steam generator tube inspections and available to the public means of items are available for public inspection reporting as described in TSTF-510, communication for the public to at the NRCs Public Document Room Revision 2, Revision to Steam respond quickly, and in the case of (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Generator Program Inspection telephone comments, the comments Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike Frequencies and Tube Sample have been recorded or transcribed as (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852.

Selection. appropriate and the licensee has been Publicly available documents created or Date of issuance: February 28, 2014. informed of the public comments. received at the NRC are accessible Effective date: This license In circumstances where failure to act electronically through the Agencywide amendment is effective as of the date of in a timely way would have resulted, for Documents Access and Management its issuance. example, in derating or shutdown of a System (ADAMS) in the NRC Library at Amendment No.: 196. nuclear power plant or in prevention of http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/

Renewed Facility Operating License either resumption of operation or of adams.html. If you do not have access No. NPF-12: Amendment revises the increase in power output up to the to ADAMS or if there are problems in License. plants licensed power level, the accessing the documents located in Date of initial notice in Federal Commission may not have had an ADAMS, contact the PDRs Reference Register: June 25, 2013 (78 FR 38083). opportunity to provide for public staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 The Commissions related evaluation comment on its no significant hazards or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.

of the amendment is contained in a consideration determination. In such The Commission is also offering an Safety Evaluation dated February 28, case, the license amendment has been opportunity for a hearing with respect to 2014. issued without opportunity for the issuance of the amendment. Within No significant hazards consideration comment. If there has been some time 60 days after the date of publication of comments received: No. for public comment but less than 30 this notice, any person(s) whose interest days, the Commission may provide an may be affected by this action may file Notice of Issuance of Amendments to opportunity for public comment. If a request for a hearing and a petition to Facility Operating Licenses and comments have been requested, it is so intervene with respect to issuance of the Combined Licenses and Final stated. In either event, the State has amendment to the subject facility Determination of No Significant been consulted by telephone whenever operating license or combined license.

Hazards Consideration and possible. Requests for a hearing and a petition for Opportunity for a Hearing (Exigent Under its regulations, the Commission leave to intervene shall be filed in Public Announcement or Emergency may issue and make an amendment accordance with the Commissions Circumstances) immediately effective, notwithstanding Agency Rules of Practice and During the period since publication of the pendency before it of a request for Procedure in 10 CFR Part 2. Interested the last biweekly notice, the a hearing from any person, in advance person(s) should consult a current copy Commission has issued the following of the holding and completion of any of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at amendments. The Commission has required hearing, where it has the NRCs PDR, located at One White determined for each of these determined that no significant hazards Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 amendments that the application for the consideration is involved. Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES amendment complies with the The Commission has applied the Maryland 20852, and electronically on standards and requirements of the standards of 10 CFR 50.92 and has made the Internet at the NRCs Web site, Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended a final determination that the http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-(the Act), and the Commissions rules amendment involves no significant collections/cfr/. If there are problems in and regulations. The Commission has hazards consideration. The basis for this accessing the document, contact the made appropriate findings as required determination is contained in the PDRs Reference staff at 1-800-397-by the Act and the Commissions rules documents related to this action. 4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, Accordingly, the amendments have pdr.resource@nrc.gov. If a request for a VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1

15156 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices hearing or petition for leave to intervene intervene, and have the opportunity to support unlisted software, and the NRC is filed by the above date, the participate fully in the conduct of the Meta System Help Desk will not be able Commission or a presiding officer hearing. Since the Commission has to offer assistance in using unlisted designated by the Commission or by the made a final determination that the software.

Chief Administrative Judge of the amendment involves no significant If a participant is electronically Atomic Safety and Licensing Board hazards consideration, if a hearing is submitting a document to the NRC in Panel, will rule on the request and/or requested, it will not stay the accordance with the E-Filing rule, the petition; and the Secretary or the Chief effectiveness of the amendment. Any participant must file the document Administrative Judge of the Atomic hearing held would take place while the using the NRCs online, Web-based Safety and Licensing Board will issue a amendment is in effect. submission form. In order to serve notice of a hearing or an appropriate All documents filed in the NRC documents through the Electronic order. adjudicatory proceedings, including a Information Exchange System, users As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a request for hearing, a petition for leave will be required to install a Web petition for leave to intervene shall set to intervene, any motion or other browser plug-in from the NRCs Web forth with particularity the interest of document filed in the proceeding prior site. Further information on the Web-the petitioner in the proceeding, and to the submission of a request for based submission form, including the how that interest may be affected by the hearing or petition to intervene, and installation of the Web browser plug-in, results of the proceeding. The petition documents filed by interested is available on the NRCs public Web should specifically explain the reasons governmental entities participating site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-why intervention should be permitted under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in submittals.html.

with particular reference to the accordance with the NRCs E-Filing rule Once a participant has obtained a following general requirements: (1) The (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007). The E- digital ID certificate and a docket has name, address, and telephone number of Filing process requires participants to been created, the participant can then the requestor or petitioner; (2) the submit and serve all adjudicatory submit a request for hearing or petition nature of the requestors/petitioners documents over the internet, or in some for leave to intervene. Submissions right under the Act to be made a party cases to mail copies on electronic should be in Portable Document Format to the proceeding; (3) the nature and storage media. Participants may not (PDF) in accordance with the NRCs extent of the requestors/petitioners submit paper copies of their filings guidance available on the NRCs public property, financial, or other interest in unless they seek an exemption in Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-the proceeding; and (4) the possible accordance with the procedures help/e-submittals.html. A filing is effect of any decision or order which described below.

To comply with the procedural considered complete at the time the may be entered in the proceeding on the requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 documents are submitted through the requestors/petitioners interest. The days prior to the filing deadline, the NRCs E-Filing system. To be timely, an petition must also identify the specific participant should contact the Office of electronic filing must be submitted to contentions which the requestor/

petitioner seeks to have litigated at the the Secretary by email at the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 proceeding. hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone p.m. Eastern Time on the due date.

Each contention must consist of a at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-specific statement of the issue of law or identification (ID) certificate, which Filing system time-stamps the document fact to be raised or controverted. In allows the participant (or its counsel or and sends the submitter an email notice addition, the requestor/petitioner shall representative) to digitally sign confirming receipt of the document. The provide a brief explanation of the bases documents and access the E-Submittal E-Filing system also distributes an email for the contention and a concise server for any proceeding in which it is notice that provides access to the statement of the alleged facts or expert participating; and (2) advise the document to the NRCs Office of the opinion which support the contention Secretary that the participant will be General Counsel and any others who and on which the petitioner intends to submitting a request or petition for have advised the Office of the Secretary rely in proving the contention at the hearing (even in instances in which the that they wish to participate in the hearing. The petitioner must also participant, or its counsel or proceeding, so that the filer need not provide references to those specific representative, already holds an NRC- serve the documents on those sources and documents of which the issued digital ID certificate). Based upon participants separately. Therefore, petitioner is aware and on which the this information, the Secretary will applicants and other participants (or petitioner intends to rely to establish establish an electronic docket for the their counsel or representative) must those facts or expert opinion. The hearing in this proceeding if the apply for and receive a digital ID petition must include sufficient Secretary has not already established an certificate before a hearing request/

information to show that a genuine electronic docket. petition to intervene is filed so that they dispute exists with the applicant on a Information about applying for a can obtain access to the document via material issue of law or fact. digital ID certificate is available on the E-Filing system.

Contentions shall be limited to matters NRCs public Web site at http:// A person filing electronically using within the scope of the amendment www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/ the agencys adjudicatory E-Filing under consideration. The contention apply-certificates.html. System system may seek assistance by must be one which, if proven, would requirements for accessing the E- contacting the NRC Meta System Help emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES entitle the petitioner to relief. A Submittal server are detailed in NRCs Desk through the Contact Us link requestor/petitioner who fails to satisfy Guidance for Electronic Submission, located on the NRC Web site at http://

these requirements with respect to at which is available on the agencys www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-least one contention will not be public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/ submittals.html, by email to permitted to participate as a party. site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll-Those permitted to intervene become may attempt to use other software not free call at 1-866-672-7640. The NRC parties to the proceeding, subject to any listed on the Web site, but should note Meta System Help Desk is available limitations in the order granting leave to that the NRCs E-Filing system does not between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 52 / Tuesday, March 18, 2014 / Notices 15157 Time, Monday through Friday, Description of amendment request: For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

excluding government holidays. The amendments revise Technical Michele G. Evans, Participants who believe that they Specification (TS) Table 3.3.4-1, Director, Division of Operating Reactor have a good cause for not submitting Remote Shutdown System Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor documents electronically must file an Instrumentation and Controls as a result Regulation.

exemption request, in accordance with of an inoperable instrumentation [FR Doc. 2014-05645 Filed 3-17-14; 8:45 am]

10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper function on Unit 2. Table 3.3.4-1 BILLING CODE 7590-01-P filing requesting authorization to specifies requirements for Function 3.b.,

continue to submit documents in paper Decay Heat Removal via Steam format. Such filings must be submitted Generators (SGs)Reactor Coolant NUCLEAR REGULATORY by: (1) First class mail addressed to the COMMISSION System (RCS) Cold Leg Temperature Office of the Secretary of the Loop A and B as 1 per loop. Loop A [Docket No. 5200027; NRC-2008-0441]

Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555- of this function is presently inoperable 0001, Attention: Rulemaking and on Unit 2 due to a failed resistance Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, temperature detector (RTD). Loop B of Acceptance Criteria; Virgil C. Summer express mail, or expedited delivery this function is operable with a reliable Unit 2 Combined License service to the Office of the Secretary, maintenance history. The failed RTD on Loop A cannot be replaced in the AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, Commission.

11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, present operating mode of Unit 2 (Mode 1). Therefore, Duke Energy requested ACTION: Determination of inspections, Maryland, 20852, Attention:

Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria Participants filing a document in this Commission (NRC) approval to allow (ITAAC).

manner are responsible for serving the Unit 2 to remain in Mode 1 until such

SUMMARY

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory document on all other participants. time that the failed RTD can be Commission (NRC) staff has determined Filing is considered complete by first- replaced. The replacement would occur that the inspections, tests, and analyses class mail as of the time of deposit in in the next refueling outage or the next have been successfully completed, and the mail, or by courier, express mail, or outage that would facilitate that the specified acceptance criteria are expedited delivery service upon replacement, whichever occurs first. met for ITAAC 3.3.00.09, for the Virgil depositing the document with the Date of issuance: February 27, 2014. C. Summer Nuclear Station Unit 2.

provider of the service. A presiding Effective date: As of the date of ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID officer, having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require issuance and shall be implemented NRC-2008-0441 when contacting the a participant or party to use E-Filing if within 30 days from the date of NRC about the availability of the presiding officer subsequently issuance. information regarding this document.

determines that the reason for granting You may access publicly-available Amendment Nos.: 272 and 268. information related to this document the exemption from use of E-Filing no Renewed Facility Operating License using any of the following methods:

longer exists.

Documents submitted in adjudicatory Nos. NPF-35 and NPF-52: Amendments

  • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to proceedings will appear in the NRCs revised the licenses and the technical http://www.regulations.gov and search electronic hearing docket which is specifications. for Docket ID NRC-2008-0441. Address available to the public at http://ehd1. Public comments requested as to questions about NRC dockets to Carol nrc.gov/ehd/, unless excluded pursuant proposed no significant hazards Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-3422; to an order of the Commission, or the consideration (NSHC): Yes. The NRC email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For presiding officer. Participants are staff noticed the February 17, 2014, technical questions, contact the requested not to include personal application in the Rock Hill, SC local individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER privacy information, such as social newspaper, The Herald on Friday, INFORMATION CONTACT section of this security numbers, home addresses, or February 21, 2014, and Saturday, document.

home phone numbers in their filings, February 22, 2014. The notice provided

  • NRCs Agencywide Documents unless an NRC regulation or other law an opportunity to submit comments on Access and Management System requires submission of such the Commissions proposed NSHC (ADAMS): You may access publicly information. However, a request to available documents online in the NRC determination. No comments have been intervene will require including Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-received.

information on local residence in order rm/adams.html. To begin the search, to demonstrate a proximity assertion of The Commissions related evaluation select ADAMS Public Documents and interest in the proceeding. With respect of the amendment, finding of exigent then select Begin Web-based ADAMS to copyrighted works, except for limited circumstances, state consultation, and Search. For problems with ADAMS, excerpts that serve the purpose of the final NSHC determination are contained please contact the NRCs Public adjudicatory filings and would in a safety evaluation dated February 27, Document Room (PDR) reference staff at constitute a Fair Use application, 2014. 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by participants are requested not to include Attorney for licensee: Lara S. Nichols, email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES copyrighted materials in their Associate General Counsel, Duke Energy ADAMS accession number for each submission. Corporation, 526 South Church Street document referenced in this document Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, et al., EC07H, Charlotte, NC 28202. (if that document is available in Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414, ADAMS) is provided the first time that NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. a document is referenced.

Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Pascarelli.

  • NRCs PDR: You may examine and York County, South Carolina Date of amendment request: February Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day purchase copies of public documents at 17, 2014. of March 2014. the NRCs PDR, Room O1-F21, One VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:34 Mar 17, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1
Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML15223A318&oldid=2541540"