Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations, 6408-6412 [2010-2554]
Download as PDF
Cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
6408
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 9, 2010 / Notices
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Kathy Dakon, Aerospace Safety
Advisory Panel Executive Director,
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Washington, DC 20546,
(202) 358–0732.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel will
hold its 1st Quarterly Meeting for 2010.
This discussion is pursuant to carrying
out its statutory duties for which the
Panel reviews, identifies, evaluates, and
advises on those program activities,
systems, procedures, and management
activities that can contribute to program
risk. Priority is given to those programs
that involve the safety of human flight.
The agenda will include Marshall Space
Flight Center Safety Mission Assurance
Overview; NASA Safety and Mission
Assurance Technical Excellence;
Overview of Marshall Space Flight
Center Launch Abort System
Responsibilities; and Marshall Space
Flight Center Industrial Safety, New
Initiatives, Proactive Approaches,
Specific Safety Issues, Identified
Opportunities, and Near Misses.
The meeting will be open to the
public up to the seating capacity of the
room. Seating will be on a first-come
basis. Visitors will be requested to sign
a visitor’s register. Photographs will
only be permitted during the first 10
minutes of the meeting. During the first
30 minutes of the meeting, members of
the public may make a 5-minute verbal
presentation to the Panel on the subject
of safety in NASA. To do so, please
contact Ms. Susan Burch at
susan.burch@nasa.gov at least 48 hours
in advance. Any member of the public
is permitted to file a written statement
with the Panel at the time of the
meeting. Verbal presentations and
written comments should be limited to
the subject of safety in NASA. All U.S.
citizens desiring to attend the Aerospace
Safety Advisory Panel meeting at the
Marshall Space Flight Center must
provide their full name, company
affiliation (if applicable), citizenship,
place of birth, and date of birth to the
Marshall Space Flight Center Protective
Services Office no later than close of
business on February 17, 2010. All nonU.S. citizens must submit their name;
current address; citizenship; company
affiliation (if applicable) to include
address, telephone number, and title;
place of birth; date of birth; U.S. visa
information to include type, number,
and expiration date; U.S. Social Security
Number (if applicable); Permanent
Resident Alien card number and
expiration date (if applicable); place and
date of entry into the U.S.; and Passport
information to include Country of issue,
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:39 Feb 08, 2010
Jkt 220001
number, and expiration date to the
Marshall Space Flight Center Security
Office no later than close of business on
February 11, 2010. If the above
information is not received by the noted
dates, attendees should expect a
minimum delay of two (2) hours. All
visitors to this meeting will be required
to process in through the Redstone/
Marshall Space Flight Center Joint
Visitor Control Center located on
Rideout Road, north of Gate 9, prior to
entering Marshall Space Flight Center.
Please provide the appropriate data, via
fax at (256) 544–2101, noting at the top
of the page ‘‘Public Admission to the
ASAP Meeting at MSFC.’’ For security
questions, please call Becky Hopson at
(256) 544–4541. It is imperative that the
meeting be held on this date to
accommodate the scheduling priorities
of the key participants.
Dated: February 2, 2010.
P. Diane Rausch,
Advisory Committee Management Officer,
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2010–2711 Filed 2–8–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510–13–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2010–0040]
Biweekly Notice; Applications and
Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses Involving No Significant
Hazards Considerations
I. Background
Pursuant to section 189a. (2) of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
(the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (the Commission or NRC)
is publishing this regular biweekly
notice. The Act requires the
Commission publish notice of any
amendments issued, or proposed to be
issued and grants the Commission the
authority to issue and make
immediately effective any amendment
to an operating license upon a
determination by the Commission that
such amendment involves no significant
hazards consideration, notwithstanding
the pendency before the Commission of
a request for a hearing from any person.
This biweekly notice includes all
notices of amendments issued, or
proposed to be issued from January 14
to January 27. The last biweekly notice
was published on January 26, 2010 (75
FR 4111).
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of
Amendments to Facility Operating
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 Commission’s regulations in
Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), Section 50.92,
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 60day 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.
Written comments may be submitted
by mail to the Chief, Rulemaking and
Directives Branch (RDB), TWB–05–
B01M, Division of Administrative
Services, Office of Administration, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001, and
should cite the publication date and
page number of this Federal Register
E:\FR\FM\09FEN1.SGM
09FEN1
Cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 9, 2010 / Notices
notice. Written comments may also be
faxed to the RDB at 301–492–3446.
Documents may be examined, and/or
copied for a fee, at the NRC’s Public
Document Room (PDR), located at One
White Flint North, Public File Area
O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland.
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.
Requests for a hearing and a petition for
leave to intervene shall be filed in
accordance with the Commission’s
‘‘Rules of Practice for Domestic
Licensing Proceedings’’ in 10 CFR Part
2. Interested person(s) should consult a
current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is
available at the Commission’s PDR,
located at One White Flint North, Public
File Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
Publicly available records will be
accessible from the Agencywide
Documents Access and Management
System’s (ADAMS) Public Electronic
Reading Room on the Internet at the
NRC Web site, https://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 requestor’s/petitioner’s
right under the Act to be made a party
to the proceeding; (3) the nature and
extent of the requestor’s/petitioner’s
property, financial, or other interest in
the proceeding; and (4) the possible
effect of any decision or order which
may be entered in the proceeding on the
requestor’s/petitioner’s interest. The
petition must also identify the specific
contentions which the requestor/
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:39 Feb 08, 2010
Jkt 220001
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 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, 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 NRC E–Filing rule
(72 FR 49139, August 28, 2007). The E–
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6409
Filing process requires participants to
submit and serve all adjudicatory
documents over the Internet, or in some
cases to mail copies on electronic
storage media. Participants may not
submit paper copies of their filings
unless they seek an exemption in
accordance with the procedures
described below.
To comply with the procedural
requirements of E–Filing, at least ten
(10) days prior to the filing deadline, the
participant should contact the Office of
the Secretary by e-mail at
hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone
at (301) 415–1677, to request (1) a
digital 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 NRCissued 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
NRC’s public Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/
apply-certificates.html. System
requirements for accessing the E–
Submittal server are detailed in NRC’s
‘‘Guidance for Electronic Submission,’’
which is available on the agency’s
public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/
site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants
may attempt to use other software not
listed on the Web site, but should note
that the NRC’s E–Filing system does not
support unlisted software, and the NRC
Meta System Help Desk will not be able
to offer assistance in using unlisted
software.
If a participant is electronically
submitting a document to the NRC in
accordance with the E–Filing rule, the
participant must file the document
using the NRC’s online, Web-based
submission form. In order to serve
documents through EIE, users will be
required to install a Web browser plugin from the NRC Web site. Further
information on the Web-based
submission form, including the
installation of the Web browser plug-in,
is available on the NRC’s public Web
site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html.
Once a participant has obtained a
digital ID certificate and a docket has
been created, the participant can then
E:\FR\FM\09FEN1.SGM
09FEN1
Cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
6410
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 9, 2010 / Notices
submit a request for hearing or petition
for leave to intervene. Submissions
should be in Portable Document Format
(PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance
available on the NRC public Web site at
https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. A filing is considered
complete at the time the documents are
submitted through the NRC’s E–Filing
system. To be timely, an electronic
filing must be submitted to the E–Filing
system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern
Time on the due date. Upon receipt of
a transmission, the E–Filing system
time-stamps the document and sends
the submitter an e-mail notice
confirming receipt of the document. The
E–Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access to the
document to the NRC 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 agency’s adjudicatory E–Filing
system may seek assistance by
contacting the NRC Meta System Help
Desk through the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link
located on the NRC Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html, by e-mail at
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a tollfree call at (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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:39 Feb 08, 2010
Jkt 220001
document on all other participants.
Filing is considered complete by firstclass mail as of the time of deposit in
the mail, or by courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service upon
depositing the document with the
provider of the service. A presiding
officer, having granted an exemption
request from using E–Filing, may
require a participant or party to use E–
Filing if the presiding officer
subsequently determines that the reason
for granting the exemption from use of
E–Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory
proceedings will appear in NRC’s
electronic hearing docket which is
available to the public at https://
ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp,
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. 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
February 9, 2010. Non-timely filings
will not be entertained absent a
determination by the presiding officer
that the petition or request should be
granted or the contentions should be
admitted, based on a balancing of the
factors specified in 10 CFR
2.309(c)(1)(i)–(viii).
For further details with respect to this
license amendment application, see the
application for amendment which is
available for public inspection at the
Commission’s PDR, located at One
White Flint North, Public File Area
O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly
available records will be accessible from
the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading
Room on the Internet at the NRC Web
site, https://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
NRC PDR Reference staff at 1–800–397–
4209, 301–415–4737, or by e-mail to
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Exelon Generation Company, LLC,
Docket Nos. 50–237 and 50–249,
Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2
and 3, Grundy County, Illinois
Docket Nos. 50–254 and 50–265, Quad
Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1
and 2, Rock Island County, Illinois
Date of application for amendment
request: November 10, 2009.
Description of amendment request:
The proposed amendment revises
Technical Specification (TS) 3.1.7,
‘‘Standby Liquid Control (SLC) System,’’
to extend the completion time (CT) for
Condition B (i.e., ‘‘Two SLC subsystems
inoperable’’) from 8 hours to 72 hours.
Basis for proposed no significant
hazards consideration determination:
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the
licensee has provided its analysis of the
issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented
below:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve
a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed amendment revises
Technical Specification (TS) 3.1.7, ‘‘Standby
Liquid Control (SLC) System,’’ to extend the
completion time (CT) for Condition B (i.e.,
‘‘Two SLC subsystems inoperable.’’) from
eight hours to 72 hours.
The proposed change is based on a riskinformed evaluation performed in
accordance with Regulatory Guides (RG)
1.174, ‘‘An Approach for Using Probabilistic
Risk Assessment in Risk-Informed Decisions
On Plant-Specific Changes to the Licensing
Basis,’’ and RG 1.177, ‘‘An Approach for
Plant-Specific, Risk-Informed Decisionmaking: Technical Specifications.’’
The proposed amendment modifies an
existing CT for a dual-train SLC system
inoperability. The condition evaluated, the
action requirements, and the associated CT
do not impact any initiating conditions for
any accident previously evaluated.
The proposed amendment does not
increase postulated frequencies or the
analyzed consequences of an Anticipated
Transient Without Scram (ATWS).
Requirements associated with 10 CFR 50.62
will continue to be met. In addition, the
proposed amendment does not increase
postulated frequencies or the analyzed
consequences or a large-break loss-of-coolant
accident for which the SLC system is used for
pH control. The new action requirement
provides appropriate remedial actions to be
taken in response to a dual-train SLC system
inoperability while minimizing the risk
associated with continued operation.
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?
E:\FR\FM\09FEN1.SGM
09FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 9, 2010 / Notices
Cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Response: No.
The proposed amendment revises TS 3.1.7
to extend the CT for Condition B from eight
hours to 72 hours. The proposed amendment
does not involve any change to plant
equipment or system design functions. This
proposed TS amendment does not change the
design function of the SLC system and does
not affect the system’s ability to perform its
design function. The SLC system provides a
method to bring the reactor, at any time in
a fuel cycle, from full power and minimum
control rod inventory to a subcritical
condition with the reactor in the most
reactive xenon free state without taking
credit for control rod movement. Required
actions and surveillance requirements are
sufficient to ensure that the SLC system
functions are maintained. No new accident
initiators are introduced by this amendment.
Therefore, the proposed amendment 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 amendment revises TS 3.1.7
to extend the CT for Condition B from eight
hours to 72 hours. The proposed amendment
does not involve any change to plant
equipment or system design functions. The
margin of safety is established through the
design of the plant structures, systems, and
components, the parameters within which
the plant is operated, and the setpoints for
the actuation of equipment relied upon to
respond to an event.
Safety margins applicable to the SLC
system include pump capacity, boron
concentration, boron enrichment, and system
response timing. The proposed amendment
does not modify these safety margins or the
setpoints at which SLC is initiated, nor does
it affect the system’s ability to perform its
design function. In addition, the proposed
change complies with the intent of the
defense-in-depth philosophy and the
principle that sufficient safety margins are
maintained, consistent with RG 1.177
requirements (i.e., Section C, ‘‘Regulatory
Position,’’ paragraph 2.2, ‘‘Traditional
Engineering Considerations’’).
The NRC staff has reviewed the
licensee’s analysis and, based on this
review, it appears that the three
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Mr. Bradley J.
Fewell, Associate General Counsel,
Exelon Nuclear, 4300 Winfield Road,
Warrenville, IL 60555.
NRC Branch Chief: Stephen J.
Campbell.
R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC,
Docket No. 50–244, R.E. Ginna Nuclear
Power Plant, Wayne County, New York
Date of amendment request:
November 30, 2009.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:39 Feb 08, 2010
Jkt 220001
Description of amendment request:
The proposed changes would use the
guidance in Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) Regulatory Issue
Summary 2003–18 Supplement 2, ‘‘Use
of Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 99–01,
Methodology for Development of
Emergency Action Levels,’’ to modify
several Ginna Emergency Action Levels
based on NEI 99–01. NRC approval,
prior to implementation of the proposed
change, is being requested pursuant to
10 CFR 50.54(q).
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:
Criterion 1: Does the proposed amendment
involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated?
Response: No.
These changes affect the R.E. Ginna
Nuclear Power Plant Emergency Plan and do
not alter any of the requirements of the
Operating License or the Technical
Specifications. The proposed changes do not
modify any plant equipment and do not
impact any failure modes that could lead to
an accident. Additionally, the proposed
changes have no effect on the consequence of
any analyzed accident since the changes do
not affect any equipment related to accident
mitigation. Based on this discussion, the
proposed amendment does not increase the
probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
Criterion 2: Does the proposed amendment
create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated?
Response: No.
These changes affect the R.E. Ginna
Nuclear Power Plant Emergency Plan and do
not alter any of the requirements of the
Operating License or the Technical
Specifications. They do not modify any plant
equipment and there is no impact on the
capability of the existing equipment to
perform their intended functions. No system
set points are being modified and no changes
are being made to the method in which plant
operations are conducted. No new failure
modes are introduced by the proposed
changes. The proposed amendment does not
introduce accident initiator or malfunctions
that would cause a new or different kind of
accident. Therefore, the proposed
amendment does not create the possibility of
a new or different kind of accident from any
accident previously evaluated.
Criterion 3: Does the proposed amendment
involve a significant reduction in a margin of
safety?
Response: No.
These changes affect the R.E. Ginna
Nuclear Power Plant Emergency Plan and do
not alter any of the requirements of the
Operating License or the Technical
Specifications. The proposed changes do not
affect any of the assumptions used in the
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
6411
accident analysis, nor do they affect any
operability requirements for equipment
important to plant safety. Therefore, the
proposed changes will not result in a
significant reduction in the margin of safety
as defined in the bases for technical
specifications covered in this license
amendment request.
The NRC staff has reviewed the
licensee’s analysis and, based on this
review, it appears that the three
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Carey Fleming,
Sr. Counsel—Nuclear Generation,
Constellation Group, LLC, 750 East Pratt
Street, 17th Floor, Baltimore, MD 21202.
NRC Branch Chief: Nancy L. Salgado.
Notice of Issuance of Amendments to
Facility Operating Licenses
During the period since publication of
the last biweekly notice, the
Commission has issued the following
amendments. The Commission has
determined for each of these
amendments that the application
complies with the standards and
requirements of the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the
Commission’s rules and regulations.
The Commission has made appropriate
findings as required by the Act and the
Commission’s rules and regulations in
10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in
the license amendment.
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of
Amendment to Facility Operating
License, Proposed No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination,
and Opportunity for a Hearing in
connection with these actions was
published in the Federal Register as
indicated.
Unless otherwise indicated, the
Commission has determined that these
amendments satisfy the criteria for
categorical exclusion in accordance
with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant
to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental
impact statement or environmental
assessment need be prepared for these
amendments. If the Commission has
prepared an environmental assessment
under the special circumstances
provision in 10 CFR 51.22(b) and has
made a determination based on that
assessment, it is so indicated.
For further details with respect to the
action see (1) The applications for
amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3)
the Commission’s related letter, Safety
Evaluation and/or Environmental
Assessment as indicated. All of these
items are available for public inspection
at the Commission’s Public Document
E:\FR\FM\09FEN1.SGM
09FEN1
6412
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 26 / Tuesday, February 9, 2010 / Notices
Room (PDR), located at One White Flint
North, Public File Area 01F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland. Publicly available records
will be accessible from the Agencywide
Documents Access and Management
System (ADAMS) Public Electronic
Reading Room on the internet at the
NRC Web site, https://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 PDR
Reference staff at 1 (800) 397–4209,
(301) 415–4737 or by e-mail to
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
Cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC
and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.,
Docket No. 50–271, Vermont Yankee
Nuclear Power Station, Vernon,
Vermont
Date of amendment request:
September 16, 2009, as supplemented
by letter dated November 16, 2009.
Description of amendment request:
The proposed amendment revised
Technical Specification (TS) Section
3.7.D.2 to allow reactor operation to
continue, in the event any containment
isolation valve becomes inoperable,
provided the affected penetration flow
path is isolated by the use of at least one
closed and de-activated automatic valve,
closed manual valve, or blind flange.
The corresponding change to TS Section
4.7.D.2 is consistent with NUREG–1433
actions and completion times.
Date of Issuance: January 26, 2010.
Effective date: As of the date of
issuance, and shall be implemented
within 60 days.
Amendment No.: 242.
Facility Operating License No. DPR–
28: Amendment revised the License and
Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: November 3, 2009 (74 FR
56886). The supplement letter dated
November 16, 2009, provided additional
information that clarified the
application, did not expand the scope of
the application as originally noticed,
and did not change the staff’s original
proposed no significant hazards
consideration determination. The
Commission’s related evaluation of this
amendment is contained in a Safety
Evaluation dated January 26, 2010.
No significant hazards consideration
comments received: No.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC,
Docket No. 50–461, Clinton Power
Station, Unit No. 1, DeWitt County,
Illinois
Date of application for amendment:
June 26, 2009, as supplemented by
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:35 Feb 08, 2010
Jkt 220001
letters dated November 4, November 17,
November 20, December 9, December
14, December 17, December 28, 2009,
and January 11, 2010.
Brief description of amendment: The
amendment modifies CPS License
Condition 2.B.(6) and create new
License Conditions 1.J, 2.B.(7), and
2.C.(25) as part of a pilot program to
irradiate Cobalt (Co)-59 target to
produce Co-60. In addition to the
proposed license condition changes, the
amendment would modify Technical
Specification 4.2.1, ‘‘Fuel Assemblies,’’
to describe the Isotope Test Assemblies
being used.
Date of issuance: January 15, 2010.
Effective date: As of the date of
issuance and shall be implemented
within 30 days.
Amendment No.: 190.
Facility Operating License No. NPF–
62: The amendment revised the
Technical Specifications and License.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: December 14, 2009 (74 FR
66159–66163).
The November 20, December 9,
December 14, December 17, December
28, 2009, and January 11, 2010
supplements, contained clarifying
information and did not change the NRC
staff’s initial proposed finding of no
significant hazards consideration.
The Commission’s related evaluation
of the amendment is contained in a
Safety Evaluation dated January 15,
2010.
No significant hazards consideration
comments
Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC,
Docket No. 50–220, Nine Mile Point
Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1 (NMP 1),
Oswego County, New York
Date of application for amendment:
March 3, 2009, as supplemented on
December 17, 2009.
Brief description of amendments: The
amendment modifies Technical
Specification (TS) Section 3.2.1,
‘‘Reactor Vessel Heatup and Cooldown
Rates,’’ and Section 3.2.2, ‘‘Minimum
Reactor Vessel Temperature for
Pressurization,’’ by replacing the
existing reactor vessel heatup and
cooldown rate limits and the pressure
and temperature limit curves with
references to the Pressure and
Temperature Limits Report (PTLR). In
addition, the amendment adds a new
definition for PTLR to TS Section 1.0,
‘‘Definitions,’’ and a new section
addressing administrative requirements
for the PTLR to TS Section 6.0,
‘‘Administrative Controls.’’
Date of issuance: January 21, 2010.
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Effective date: As of the date of
issuance to be implemented within 30
days of the date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 204.
Renewed Facility Operating License
No. DPR–063: The amendment revises
the License and TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: May 19, 2009 (74 FR 23447).
The supplemental letter dated December
17, 2009, provided additional
information that clarified the
application, did not expand the scope of
the application as originally noticed,
and did not change the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission staff’s initial
proposed no significant hazards
consideration determination.
The Commission’s related evaluation
of the amendment is contained in a
Safety Evaluation dated January 21,
2010.
No significant hazards consideration
comments received: No.
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket No.
50–390, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant (WBN),
Unit 1, Rhea County, Tennessee
Date of application for amendment:
October 20, 2009.
Brief description of amendment: The
amendment deletes paragraph d of
Technical Specification (TS) 5.2.2, ‘‘Unit
Staff,’’ to eliminate working-hour
restrictions in the TS, as similar
requirements are sufficiently imposed
by Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations Part 26, Subpart I.
Date of issuance: January 20, 2010.
Effective date: As of the date of
issuance and shall be implemented
within 30 days.
Amendment No.: 83.
Facility Operating License No. NPF–
90: Amendment revised the License and
TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: November 17, 2009 (74 FR
59264).
The Commission’s related evaluation
of the amendment is contained in a
Safety Evaluation dated January 20,
2010.
No significant hazards consideration
comments received: No.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day
of January 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Joseph G. Giitter,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010–2554 Filed 2–8–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
E:\FR\FM\09FEN1.SGM
09FEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 26 (Tuesday, February 9, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6408-6412]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-2554]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2010-0040]
Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility
Operating Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations
I. Background
Pursuant to section 189a. (2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the
Commission or NRC) is publishing this regular biweekly notice. The Act
requires the Commission publish notice of any amendments issued, or
proposed to be issued and grants the Commission the authority to issue
and make immediately effective any amendment to an operating license
upon a determination by the Commission that such amendment involves no
significant hazards consideration, notwithstanding the pendency before
the Commission of a request for a hearing from any person.
This biweekly notice includes all notices of amendments issued, or
proposed to be issued from January 14 to January 27. The last biweekly
notice was published on January 26, 2010 (75 FR 4111).
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating
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 Commission's regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), Section 50.92, 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.
Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rulemaking
and Directives Branch (RDB), TWB-05-B01M, Division of Administrative
Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and
page number of this Federal Register
[[Page 6409]]
notice. Written comments may also be faxed to the RDB at 301-492-3446.
Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public
Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area
O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
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.
Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be
filed in accordance with the Commission's ``Rules of Practice for
Domestic Licensing Proceedings'' in 10 CFR Part 2. Interested person(s)
should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at
the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File
Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
Publicly available records will be accessible from the Agencywide
Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Electronic
Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, https://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
requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the
proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's
property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the
possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the
proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The 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 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, 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 NRC E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139,
August 28, 2007). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit
and serve all adjudicatory documents over the Internet, or in some
cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not
submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in
accordance with the procedures described below.
To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least
ten (10) days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should
contact the Office of the Secretary by e-mail at
hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone at (301) 415-1677, to request
(1) a digital 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 NRC's public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html. System requirements for accessing
the E-Submittal server are detailed in NRC's ``Guidance for Electronic
Submission,'' which is available on the agency's public Web site at
https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants may
attempt to use other software not listed on the Web site, but should
note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted software,
and the NRC Meta System Help Desk will not be able to offer assistance
in using unlisted software.
If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC
in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the
document using the NRC's online, Web-based submission form. In order to
serve documents through EIE, users will be required to install a Web
browser plug-in from the NRC Web site. Further information on the Web-
based submission form, including the installation of the Web browser
plug-in, is available on the NRC's public Web site at https://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
[[Page 6410]]
submit a request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene.
Submissions should be in Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance
with NRC guidance available on the NRC public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered
complete at the time the documents are submitted through the NRC's E-
Filing system. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to
the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due
date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps
the document and sends the submitter an e-mail notice confirming
receipt of the document. The E-Filing system also distributes an e-mail
notice that provides access to the document to the NRC 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 agency's adjudicatory E-
Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Meta System
Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC Web site
at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by e-mail at
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll-free call at (866) 672-7640. The
NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.,
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.
Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not
submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) first class mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention:
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth
Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff.
Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for
serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered
complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or
by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing
the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer,
having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a
participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer
subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from
use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at
https://ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp, 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. 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 February 9, 2010. Non-timely filings will not be entertained
absent a determination by the presiding officer that the petition or
request should be granted or the contentions should be admitted, based
on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-
(viii).
For further details with respect to this license amendment
application, see the application for amendment which is available for
public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint
North, Public File Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from
the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web
site, https://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 NRC PDR Reference staff at 1-800-
397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-237 and 50-249, Dresden
Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Grundy County, Illinois
Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units
1 and 2, Rock Island County, Illinois
Date of application for amendment request: November 10, 2009.
Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment revises
Technical Specification (TS) 3.1.7, ``Standby Liquid Control (SLC)
System,'' to extend the completion time (CT) for Condition B (i.e.,
``Two SLC subsystems inoperable'') from 8 hours to 72 hours.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented below:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed amendment revises Technical Specification (TS)
3.1.7, ``Standby Liquid Control (SLC) System,'' to extend the
completion time (CT) for Condition B (i.e., ``Two SLC subsystems
inoperable.'') from eight hours to 72 hours.
The proposed change is based on a risk-informed evaluation
performed in accordance with Regulatory Guides (RG) 1.174, ``An
Approach for Using Probabilistic Risk Assessment in Risk-Informed
Decisions On Plant-Specific Changes to the Licensing Basis,'' and RG
1.177, ``An Approach for Plant-Specific, Risk-Informed Decision-
making: Technical Specifications.''
The proposed amendment modifies an existing CT for a dual-train
SLC system inoperability. The condition evaluated, the action
requirements, and the associated CT do not impact any initiating
conditions for any accident previously evaluated.
The proposed amendment does not increase postulated frequencies
or the analyzed consequences of an Anticipated Transient Without
Scram (ATWS). Requirements associated with 10 CFR 50.62 will
continue to be met. In addition, the proposed amendment does not
increase postulated frequencies or the analyzed consequences or a
large-break loss-of-coolant accident for which the SLC system is
used for pH control. The new action requirement provides appropriate
remedial actions to be taken in response to a dual-train SLC system
inoperability while minimizing the risk associated with continued
operation. 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?
[[Page 6411]]
Response: No.
The proposed amendment revises TS 3.1.7 to extend the CT for
Condition B from eight hours to 72 hours. The proposed amendment
does not involve any change to plant equipment or system design
functions. This proposed TS amendment does not change the design
function of the SLC system and does not affect the system's ability
to perform its design function. The SLC system provides a method to
bring the reactor, at any time in a fuel cycle, from full power and
minimum control rod inventory to a subcritical condition with the
reactor in the most reactive xenon free state without taking credit
for control rod movement. Required actions and surveillance
requirements are sufficient to ensure that the SLC system functions
are maintained. No new accident initiators are introduced by this
amendment. Therefore, the proposed amendment 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 amendment revises TS 3.1.7 to extend the CT for
Condition B from eight hours to 72 hours. The proposed amendment
does not involve any change to plant equipment or system design
functions. The margin of safety is established through the design of
the plant structures, systems, and components, the parameters within
which the plant is operated, and the setpoints for the actuation of
equipment relied upon to respond to an event.
Safety margins applicable to the SLC system include pump
capacity, boron concentration, boron enrichment, and system response
timing. The proposed amendment does not modify these safety margins
or the setpoints at which SLC is initiated, nor does it affect the
system's ability to perform its design function. In addition, the
proposed change complies with the intent of the defense-in-depth
philosophy and the principle that sufficient safety margins are
maintained, consistent with RG 1.177 requirements (i.e., Section C,
``Regulatory Position,'' paragraph 2.2, ``Traditional Engineering
Considerations'').
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Mr. Bradley J. Fewell, Associate General
Counsel, Exelon Nuclear, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555.
NRC Branch Chief: Stephen J. Campbell.
R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, LLC, Docket No. 50-244, R.E. Ginna
Nuclear Power Plant, Wayne County, New York
Date of amendment request: November 30, 2009.
Description of amendment request: The proposed changes would use
the guidance in Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Regulatory Issue
Summary 2003-18 Supplement 2, ``Use of Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)
99-01, Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels,'' to
modify several Ginna Emergency Action Levels based on NEI 99-01. NRC
approval, prior to implementation of the proposed change, is being
requested pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(q).
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:
Criterion 1: Does the proposed amendment involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated?
Response: No.
These changes affect the R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant
Emergency Plan and do not alter any of the requirements of the
Operating License or the Technical Specifications. The proposed
changes do not modify any plant equipment and do not impact any
failure modes that could lead to an accident. Additionally, the
proposed changes have no effect on the consequence of any analyzed
accident since the changes do not affect any equipment related to
accident mitigation. Based on this discussion, the proposed
amendment does not increase the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated.
Criterion 2: Does the proposed amendment create the possibility
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
These changes affect the R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant
Emergency Plan and do not alter any of the requirements of the
Operating License or the Technical Specifications. They do not
modify any plant equipment and there is no impact on the capability
of the existing equipment to perform their intended functions. No
system set points are being modified and no changes are being made
to the method in which plant operations are conducted. No new
failure modes are introduced by the proposed changes. The proposed
amendment does not introduce accident initiator or malfunctions that
would cause a new or different kind of accident. Therefore, the
proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
Criterion 3: Does the proposed amendment involve a significant
reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
These changes affect the R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant
Emergency Plan and do not alter any of the requirements of the
Operating License or the Technical Specifications. The proposed
changes do not affect any of the assumptions used in the accident
analysis, nor do they affect any operability requirements for
equipment important to plant safety. Therefore, the proposed changes
will not result in a significant reduction in the margin of safety
as defined in the bases for technical specifications covered in this
license amendment request.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Carey Fleming, Sr. Counsel--Nuclear
Generation, Constellation Group, LLC, 750 East Pratt Street, 17th
Floor, Baltimore, MD 21202.
NRC Branch Chief: Nancy L. Salgado.
Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses
During the period since publication of the last biweekly notice,
the Commission has issued the following amendments. The Commission has
determined for each of these amendments that the application complies
with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,
as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The
Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the
Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set
forth in the license amendment.
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility
Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration
Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing in connection with these
actions was published in the Federal Register as indicated.
Unless otherwise indicated, the Commission has determined that
these amendments satisfy the criteria for categorical exclusion in
accordance with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b),
no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be
prepared for these amendments. If the Commission has prepared an
environmental assessment under the special circumstances provision in
10 CFR 51.22(b) and has made a determination based on that assessment,
it is so indicated.
For further details with respect to the action see (1) The
applications for amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3) the Commission's
related letter, Safety Evaluation and/or Environmental Assessment as
indicated. All of these items are available for public inspection at
the Commission's Public Document
[[Page 6412]]
Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 01F21,
11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly
available records will be accessible from the Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on
the internet at the NRC Web site, https://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 PDR Reference
staff at 1 (800) 397-4209, (301) 415-4737 or by e-mail to
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC and Entergy Nuclear Operations,
Inc., Docket No. 50-271, Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Vernon,
Vermont
Date of amendment request: September 16, 2009, as supplemented by
letter dated November 16, 2009.
Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment revised
Technical Specification (TS) Section 3.7.D.2 to allow reactor operation
to continue, in the event any containment isolation valve becomes
inoperable, provided the affected penetration flow path is isolated by
the use of at least one closed and de-activated automatic valve, closed
manual valve, or blind flange. The corresponding change to TS Section
4.7.D.2 is consistent with NUREG-1433 actions and completion times.
Date of Issuance: January 26, 2010.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance, and shall be
implemented within 60 days.
Amendment No.: 242.
Facility Operating License No. DPR-28: Amendment revised the
License and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 3, 2009 (74 FR
56886). The supplement letter dated November 16, 2009, provided
additional information that clarified the application, did not expand
the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change
the staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination. The Commission's related evaluation of this amendment is
contained in a Safety Evaluation dated January 26, 2010.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-461, Clinton Power
Station, Unit No. 1, DeWitt County, Illinois
Date of application for amendment: June 26, 2009, as supplemented
by letters dated November 4, November 17, November 20, December 9,
December 14, December 17, December 28, 2009, and January 11, 2010.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment modifies CPS License
Condition 2.B.(6) and create new License Conditions 1.J, 2.B.(7), and
2.C.(25) as part of a pilot program to irradiate Cobalt (Co)-59 target
to produce Co-60. In addition to the proposed license condition
changes, the amendment would modify Technical Specification 4.2.1,
``Fuel Assemblies,'' to describe the Isotope Test Assemblies being
used.
Date of issuance: January 15, 2010.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 30 days.
Amendment No.: 190.
Facility Operating License No. NPF-62: The amendment revised the
Technical Specifications and License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 14, 2009 (74
FR 66159-66163).
The November 20, December 9, December 14, December 17, December 28,
2009, and January 11, 2010 supplements, contained clarifying
information and did not change the NRC staff's initial proposed finding
of no significant hazards consideration.
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated January 15, 2010.
No significant hazards consideration comments
Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC, Docket No. 50-220, Nine Mile
Point Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1 (NMP 1), Oswego County, New York
Date of application for amendment: March 3, 2009, as supplemented
on December 17, 2009.
Brief description of amendments: The amendment modifies Technical
Specification (TS) Section 3.2.1, ``Reactor Vessel Heatup and Cooldown
Rates,'' and Section 3.2.2, ``Minimum Reactor Vessel Temperature for
Pressurization,'' by replacing the existing reactor vessel heatup and
cooldown rate limits and the pressure and temperature limit curves with
references to the Pressure and Temperature Limits Report (PTLR). In
addition, the amendment adds a new definition for PTLR to TS Section
1.0, ``Definitions,'' and a new section addressing administrative
requirements for the PTLR to TS Section 6.0, ``Administrative
Controls.''
Date of issuance: January 21, 2010.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance to be implemented within
30 days of the date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 204.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-063: The amendment
revises the License and TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: May 19, 2009 (74 FR
23447). The supplemental letter dated December 17, 2009, provided
additional information that clarified the application, did not expand
the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff's initial proposed no
significant hazards consideration determination.
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated January 21, 2010.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket No. 50-390, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant
(WBN), Unit 1, Rhea County, Tennessee
Date of application for amendment: October 20, 2009.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment deletes paragraph d
of Technical Specification (TS) 5.2.2, ``Unit Staff,'' to eliminate
working-hour restrictions in the TS, as similar requirements are
sufficiently imposed by Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
Part 26, Subpart I.
Date of issuance: January 20, 2010.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 30 days.
Amendment No.: 83.
Facility Operating License No. NPF-90: Amendment revised the
License and TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 17, 2009 (74
FR 59264).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated January 20, 2010.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of January 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Joseph G. Giitter,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-2554 Filed 2-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P