Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations, 12763-12768 [2011-4829]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 8, 2011 / Notices
Dated: March 3, 2011.
Suzanne H. Plimpton,
Reports Clearance Officer, National Science
Foundation.
[FR Doc. 2011–5151 Filed 3–7–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555–01–P
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Comment Request
National Science Foundation.
Submission for OMB review;
comment request.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The National Science
Foundation (NSF) has submitted the
following information collection
requirements to OMB for review and
clearance under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–
13. Comments regarding (a) whether the
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of burden including
the validity of the methodology and
assumptions used; (c) ways to enhance
the quality, utility and clarity of the
information to be collected; (d) ways to
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 should be
addressed to: Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs of OMB, Attention:
Desk Officer for National Science
Foundation, 725—17th Street, NW.,
Room 10235, Washington, DC 20503,
and to Suzanne H. Plimpton, Reports
Clearance Officer, National Science
Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard,
Suite 295, Arlington, Virginia 22230 or
send e-mail to splimpto@nsf.gov.
Comments regarding these information
collections are best assured of having
their full effect if received within 30
days of this notification. Copies of the
submission(s) may be obtained by
calling 703–292–7556.
NSF may not conduct or sponsor a
collection of information unless the
collection of information displays a
currently valid OMB control number
and the agency informs potential
persons who are to respond to the
collection of information that such
persons are not required to respond to
the collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:12 Mar 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
Title: Survey of Earned Doctorates.
OMB Control Number: 3145–0019.
Summary of Collection: The Survey of
Earned Doctorates has been conducted
continuously since 1958 and is jointly
sponsored by six Federal agencies in
order to avoid duplication. It is an
accurate, timely source of information
on our Nation’s most precious
resource—highly educated individuals.
Data are obtained via paper
questionnaire or Web survey from each
person earning a research doctorate at
the time they receive the degree.
Graduate schools help distribute the
Survey of Earned Doctorates to their
graduating doctorate recipients. Data are
collected on the doctorate recipient’s
field of specialty, educational
background, sources of support in
graduate school, debt level,
postgraduation plans for employment,
and demographic characteristics.
The survey will be collected in
conformance with the National Science
Foundation Act of 1950, as amended,
and the Privacy Act of 1974. Responses
from individuals are voluntary. NSF
will ensure that all individually
identifiable information collected will
be kept strictly confidential and will be
used for research or statistical purposes,
analyzing data, and preparing scientific
reports and articles.
Comment: On December 10, 2010 we
published in the Federal Register (75
FR 77008) a 60-day notice of our intent
to request reinstatement of this
information collection authority from
OMB. In that notice, we solicited public
comments for 60 days ending February
10, 2011. One comment was received
from the public notice. The comment
came from Ms. Jean Public of Floram
Park, NJ, via e-mail on December 10,
2010. Ms. Public objected to the
information collection. Ms. Public had
no specific suggestions for altering the
data collection plans other than to
discontinue them entirely.
Response: We responded to Ms.
Public on December 20, 2010 describing
the program, the frequency and the cost
issues raised by Ms. Public. NSF
believes the comment does not pertain
to the collection of information on the
required forms for which NSF is seeking
OMB approval, and so NSF is
proceeding with the clearance request.
Need and Use of the Information: The
Federal government, universities,
researchers, and others use the
information extensively. The National
Science Foundation, as the lead agency,
publishes statistics from the survey in
several reports, but primarily in the
annual publication series, ‘‘Science and
Engineering Doctorate Awards’’ and the
Interagency Report, ‘‘Doctorate
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
12763
Recipients from U.S. Universities.’’
These reports are available on the Web.
NSF uses this information to prepare
congressionally mandated reports such
as Science and Engineering Indicators
and Women, Minorities and Persons
with Disabilities in Science and
Engineering.
Description of Respondents:
Individuals.
Number of Respondents: 51,000.
Frequency of Responses: Annually.
Total Burden Hours: 29,009.
Dated: March 3, 2011.
Suzanne H. Plimpton,
Reports Clearance Officer, National Science
Foundation.
[FR Doc. 2011–5213 Filed 3–7–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2011–0049]
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 February 8,
2011 to February 23, 2011. The last
biweekly notice was published on
February 22, 2011 (76 FR 9821).
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
E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM
08MRN1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
12764
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 8, 2011 / Notices
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, Rules,
Announcements and Directives Branch
(RADB), 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 notice. Written comments may
also be faxed to the RADB 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, Room O1–
F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland 20852.
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:12 Mar 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
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, Room
O1–F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 NRC E-Filing rule
(72 FR 49139, August 28, 2007). The EFiling 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
E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM
08MRN1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 8, 2011 / Notices
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 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 ESubmittal 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 the Electronic
Information Exchange System, 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/esubmittals.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 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:12 Mar 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
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 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 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
12765
Documents submitted in adjudicatory
proceedings will appear in NRC’s
electronic hearing docket which is
available to the public at https://
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. 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. Nontimely 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, Room O1–F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland 20852. 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.
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: July 23,
2009.
Description of amendment request:
The proposed amendment would revise
several of the Required Actions in the
Ginna Technical Specifications that
require the suspension of operations
involving positive reactivity additions
or suspension of operations that would
cause the reduction of the reactor
coolant system boron concentration.
The proposed changes are similar to
those documented in Industry Technical
Specification Task Force (TSTF)-286,
Revision 2, Define ‘‘Operations
E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM
08MRN1
12766
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 8, 2011 / Notices
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Involving Positive Reactivity
Additions.’’
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 Technical Specifications (TS)
addressed in this proposed change prevent
inadvertent addition of positive reactivity
which could challenge the shutdown margin
of the reactor core. The current TS contain
rigid requirements that sometimes pose
operational difficulties without significantly
increasing safety. The intent of the change is
to allow small, controlled, and safe insertions
of positive reactivity that are now
categorically prohibited to allow operational
flexibility. These new activities could result
in a slight change in the probability of an
event occurring because reactor coolant
system (RCS) manipulations that are
currently prohibited would now be allowed.
However, to preclude an increase in the
probability of a reactivity addition accident,
RCS manipulations are rigidly controlled to
ensure that the reactivity remains within the
required shutdown margin.
The proposed change does not permit the
shutdown margin to be reduced below that
required by the TS. While the proposed
change will permit changes in the
discretionary boron concentration above the
TS requirements, this excess concentration is
not credited in the Updated Final Safety
Analysis Report accident analysis. Because
the initial conditions assumed in the safety
analysis are preserved, no increase in the
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated would occur. In addition, small
temperature changes in the RCS impose
reactivity changes by means of the moderator
temperature coefficient of reactivity. These
small changes are within the required
shutdown margin which also bounds the
reactivity addition accident analysis ensuring
there is no increase in the consequence of an
accident previously evaluated.
Therefore the proposed changes do 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.
This proposed amendment allows for
minor plant operational adjustments without
adversely impacting the safety analysis
required shut down margin. It does not
involve any change to plant equipment or the
shutdown margin requirements in the TS,
and no new accident precursors are created.
Therefore, the proposed change will not
create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:12 Mar 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
3. Does the proposed change involve a
significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The margin of safety in Modes 3, 4, 5, and
6 is preserved by the TS required shutdown
margin which prevents a return to criticality.
The proposed change will permit reductions
in the discretionary shutdown margin only
within the limits of the TS, thereby
maintaining the margin of safety within the
accident analysis.
Therefore, the proposed change will not
involve a significant reduction in the margin
of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the
licensee’s analysis and, based on this
review, it appears that the three
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Carey Fleming,
Sr. Counsel—Nuclear Generation,
Constellation Group, LLC, 750 East Pratt
Street, 17th Floor, Baltimore, MD 21202.
NRC Branch Chief: Nancy L. Salgado.
Union Electric Company, Docket No.
50–483, Callaway Plant, Unit 1,
Callaway County, Missouri
Date of amendment request:
December 10, 2010.
Description of amendment request:
The proposed amendment would
modify the Callaway Plant, Unit 1,
Technical Specifications (TSs) by
adding new Surveillance Requirement
(SR) 3.3.8.6, to TS 3.3.8, ‘‘Emergency
Exhaust System (EES) Actuation
Instrumentation.’’ The new SR would
require the performance of response
time testing on the portion of the EES
required to isolate the normal fuel
building ventilation exhaust flow path
and initiate the fuel building ventilation
isolation signal (FBVIS) mode of
operation. The new SR 3.3.8.6 would
have a note excluding the radiation
monitor detectors from response time
testing. In addition, the amendment
would revise TS Table 3.3.8–1 to
indicate that the new SR 3.3.8.6 applies
to automatic actuation Function 2,
‘‘Automatic Actuation Logic and
Actuation Relays (BOP ESFAS [Balance
of Plant Emergency Safety Features
Actuation System]),’’ and Function 3,
‘‘Fuel Building Exhaust Radiation—
Gaseous.’’ Finally, there will be
corresponding changes to the Final
Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).
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:
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1. Does the proposed change involve a
significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
There are no design changes associated
with the proposed change. All design,
material, and construction standards that
were applicable prior to this amendment
request will continue to be applicable.
The proposed change will not affect
accident initiators or precursors nor
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. There will be no
change to fuel handling methods and
procedures. Therefore, there will be no
changes that would serve to increase the
likelihood of occurrence of a fuel handling
accident.
The proposed change changes a
performance requirement, but it does not
physically alter safety-related systems nor
affect the way in which safety-related
systems perform their functions.
The proposed TS change will serve to
assure that the fuel building ventilation
exhaust ESF [emergency safety feature]
response time is tested and confirmed to be
in accordance with the system design and
consistent with the assumptions of the fuel
building FHA [fuel handling accident]
analysis (as revised). 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.
The proposed change will not affect the
source term used in evaluating the
radiological consequences of a fuel handling
accident in the fuel building. However, the
Fuel Building Ventilation Exhaust ESF
response time has been increased to 90
seconds in recognition of the total delay
times involved in the generation of a fuel
building ventilation isolation signal (FBVIS)
and the times required for actuated
components to change state to their required
safety configurations. Consequently, the fuel
handling accident radiological consequences
as reported in FSAR [Final Safety Analysis
Report] Table 15.7–8 have increased.
However, the increases are much less than
the upper limit of ‘‘minimal’’ as defined
pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59(c)(2)(iii) and NEI
[Nuclear Energy Institute] 96–07 Revision 1
[‘‘Guidelines for 10 CFR 50.59
Implementation,’’ November 2000].
Therefore, there is no significant increase in
the calculated consequences of a postulated
design basis fuel handling accident in the
fuel building. The applicable radiological
dose criteria of 10 CFR 100.11, 10 CFR 50
Appendix A General Design Criterion 19, and
SRP [NUREG–0800, ‘‘Standard Review Plan
for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for
Nuclear Power Plants: LWR [Light-WaterReactor] Edition’’] 15.7.4 will continue to be
met. New SR 3.3.8.6 is added to ensure
system performance consistent with the
accident analyses and associated dose
calculations (as revised).
E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM
08MRN1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 8, 2011 / Notices
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 proposed design
changes 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 or change
any operating parameters. No new accident
scenarios, transient precursors, failure
mechanisms, or limiting single failures will
be introduced as a result of this amendment.
The proposed amendment will not alter the
design or performance of the 7300 Process
Protection System, Nuclear Instrumentation
System, Solid State Protection System, BOP
ESFAS, MSFIS [Main Steam and Feed
Isolation System], or LSELS [Load Shedding
and Emergency Load Sequencing] used in the
plant protection systems.
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. 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 (FDH), 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. The proposed change would
add a new Technical Specification
Surveillance Requirement for assuring the
satisfactory performance of the fuel building
ventilation exhaust ESF function in response
to a[n] FBVIS. The accident analysis for a
fuel handling accident in the fuel building
was re-performed to support the proposed
Fuel Building Ventilation Exhaust ESF
response time, and this reanalysis
demonstrated that the acceptance criteria
continue to be met with only a slight increase
in radiological consequences (i.e., less than
one percent).
Therefore, the proposed change does not
involve a significant reduction in a margin of
safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the
licensee’s analysis and, based on this
review, it appears that the three
standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:12 Mar 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: John O’Neill,
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
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
Room (PDR), located at One White Flint
North, Room O1–F21, 11555 Rockville
Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland
20852. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
12767
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.
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, LLC,
Docket Nos. 50–317 and 50–318, Calvert
Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 and
2, Calvert County, Maryland
Date of application for amendments:
November 23, 2009, as supplemented by
letters dated January 26, April 22, July
23, August 9, October 29, November 19,
December 30, 2010, and January 14,
January 18, January 28, February 11, and
February 15, 2011.
Brief description of amendments: The
amendments revise the licensing basis
and the Technical Specifications to
allow the use of AREVA Advanced CE–
14 HTP fuel in the Calvert Cliffs
reactors. The AREVA Advanced CE–14
HTP fuel design consists of standard
uranium dioxide (U02) fuel pellets with
gadolinium oxide (Gd203) burnable
poison and M5 cladding.
Date of issuance: February 18, 2011.
Effective date: As of the date of
issuance to be implemented within 30
days.
Amendment Nos.: 297 and 273.
Renewed Facility Operating License
Nos. DPR–53 and DPR–69: Amendments
revised the License and Technical
Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: May 4, 2010 (75 FR 23810).
The letters dated July 23, August 9,
October 29, November 19, December 30,
2010, and January 14, January 18,
January 28, February 11, and February
15, 2011, provided additional
information that clarified the
application, did not expand the scope of
the application as originally noticed,
and did not change the staff’s original
proposed no significant hazards
consideration determination as
published in the Federal Register.
The Commission’s related evaluation
of these amendments is contained in a
Safety Evaluation dated February 18,
2011.
No significant hazards consideration
comments received: No.
Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50–
382, Waterford Steam Electric Station,
Unit 3, St Charles Parish, Louisiana
Date of amendment request: February
22, 2010, as supplemented by letters
dated December 3, 2010, and January
19, 2011.
Brief description of amendment: The
amendment modified Technical
Specification (TS) 3⁄4.9.4, ‘‘Containment
Building Penetrations,’’ to allow
alternative means of penetration closure
during core alterations or irradiated fuel
E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM
08MRN1
12768
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 8, 2011 / Notices
movement while in refueling
operations. In addition, certain
improvements to this TS, as well as the
elimination of TS 3⁄4.9.9, ‘‘Containment
Purge Valve Isolation System,’’ were
made. The changes are similar to
Revision 3 of NUREG–1432, ‘‘Standard
Technical Specifications, Combustion
Engineering Plants.’’
Date of issuance: February 23, 2011.
Effective date: As of the date of
issuance and shall be implemented 90
days from the date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 231.
Facility Operating License No. NPF–
38: The amendment revised the Facility
Operating License and Technical
Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: May 4, 2010 (75 FR 23813).
The supplemental letters dated
December 3, 2010, and January 19, 2011,
provided additional information that
clarified the application, did not expand
the scope of the application as originally
noticed, and did not change the staff’s
original proposed no significant hazards
consideration determination as
published in the Federal Register.
The Commission’s related evaluation
of the amendment is contained in a
Safety Evaluation dated February 23,
2011.
No significant hazards consideration
comments received: No.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Exelon Generation Company, LLC,
Docket No. 50–461, Clinton Power
Station, Unit 1, DeWitt County, Illinois
Date of application for amendment:
February 15, 2010, as supplemented by
letter dated May 21, 2010.
Brief description of amendment: The
amendment relocates selected
Surveillance Requirement frequencies
from the Clinton Power Station, (CPS)
Unit No. 1, technical specifications
(TSs) to a licensee-controlled program.
This change is based on the NRCapproved Industry Technical
Specifications Task Force (TSTF)
change TSTF–425, ‘‘Relocate
Surveillance Frequencies to Licensee
Control—Risk Informed Technical
Specification Task Force (RITSTF)
Initiative 5b,’’ Revision 3, (Agencywide
Documents Access and Management
System (ADAMS) Accession Package
No. ML090850642). Furthermore, some
plant-specific deviations from TSTF–
425 were also incorporated into the CPS
TSs.
Date of issuance: February 15, 2011.
Effective date: As of the date of
issuance and shall be implemented
within 120 days.
Amendment No.: 192.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:12 Mar 07, 2011
Jkt 223001
Facility Operating License No. NPF–
62: The amendment revised the
Technical Specifications and License.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: May 4, 2010 (75 FR 23814).
The May 21, 2010, supplement
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 February 15,
2011.
No significant hazards consideration
comments received: No.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC,
Docket Nos. 50–254 and 50–265, Quad
Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1
and 2, Rock Island County,
Date of amendment request: February
16, 2010, as supplemented by letter
dated June 22, 2010.
Brief description of amendments: The
amendments relocate selected
Surveillance Requirement frequencies
from the Quad Cities Nuclear Power
Station Units 1 and 2 Technical
Specifications (TSs) to a licenseecontrolled program. This change is
based on the NRC-approved Industry
Technical Specifications Task Force
(TSTF) change TSTF–425, ‘‘Relocate
Surveillance Frequencies to Licensee
Control—Risk Informed Technical
Specification Task Force (RITSTF)
Initiative 5b,’’ Revision 3, (Agencywide
Documents Access and Management
System (ADAMS) Accession Package
No. ML090850642).
Date of issuance: February 18, 2011.
Effective date: As of the date of
issuance and shall be implemented
within 120 days.
Amendment Nos.: 248/243.
Renewed Facility Operating License
Nos. DPR–29 and DPR–30: The
amendments revised the Technical
Specifications and License.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: April 20, 2010 (75 FR 20638).
The June 22, 2010, supplement,
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 amendments is contained in a
Safety Evaluation dated February 18,
2011.
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:
February 24, 2010, as supplemented
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
September 20, 2010, and November 5,
2010.
Brief description of amendment: The
amendment revises the Technical
Specification (TS) 3.7.11, ‘‘Control Room
Emergency Air Temperature Control
System (CREATCS).’’ The amendment
will only be applicable during plant
modifications to upgrade the CREATCS
chillers. This ‘‘one-time’’ TS change will
be implemented during WBN Unit 1
Cycles 10 and 11 beginning March 1,
2011, and ending April 30, 2012.
Date of issuance: February 8, 2011.
Effective date: As of the date of
issuance and shall be implemented no
later than 90 days from date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 85.
Facility Operating License No. NPF–
90: Amendment revised the License and
TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: June 1, 2010 (75 FR 30447).
The supplements dated September 20
and November 5, 2010, provided
additional information that clarified the
application, did not expand the scope of
the application as originally noticed,
and did not change the staff’s original
proposed no significant hazards
consideration determination as
published in the Federal Register.
The Commission’s related evaluation
of the amendment is contained in a
Safety Evaluation dated February 8,
2011.
No significant hazards consideration
comments received: No.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day
of February 2011.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Joseph G. Giitter,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2011–4829 Filed 3–7–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2011–0006]
Sunshine Act Notice
Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.
DATES: Weeks of March 7, 14, 21, 28,
April 4, 11, 2011.
PLACE: Commissioners’ Conference
Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland.
STATUS: Public and Closed.
AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETINGS:
Week of March 7, 2011
Thursday, March 10, 2011
3:30 p.m.
E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM
08MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 45 (Tuesday, March 8, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12763-12768]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4829]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2011-0049]
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 February 8, 2011 to February 23, 2011. The
last biweekly notice was published on February 22, 2011 (76 FR 9821).
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
[[Page 12764]]
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, Rules,
Announcements and Directives Branch (RADB), 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 notice.
Written comments may also be faxed to the RADB 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, Room O1-F21,
11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852.
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, Room O1-F21,
11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. 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, 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 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
[[Page 12765]]
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 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 the Electronic Information Exchange System,
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 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 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 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://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. 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. 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, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland 20852. 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.
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: July 23, 2009.
Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would
revise several of the Required Actions in the Ginna Technical
Specifications that require the suspension of operations involving
positive reactivity additions or suspension of operations that would
cause the reduction of the reactor coolant system boron concentration.
The proposed changes are similar to those documented in Industry
Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF)-286, Revision 2, Define
``Operations
[[Page 12766]]
Involving Positive Reactivity Additions.''
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 Technical Specifications (TS) addressed in this proposed
change prevent inadvertent addition of positive reactivity which
could challenge the shutdown margin of the reactor core. The current
TS contain rigid requirements that sometimes pose operational
difficulties without significantly increasing safety. The intent of
the change is to allow small, controlled, and safe insertions of
positive reactivity that are now categorically prohibited to allow
operational flexibility. These new activities could result in a
slight change in the probability of an event occurring because
reactor coolant system (RCS) manipulations that are currently
prohibited would now be allowed. However, to preclude an increase in
the probability of a reactivity addition accident, RCS manipulations
are rigidly controlled to ensure that the reactivity remains within
the required shutdown margin.
The proposed change does not permit the shutdown margin to be
reduced below that required by the TS. While the proposed change
will permit changes in the discretionary boron concentration above
the TS requirements, this excess concentration is not credited in
the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report accident analysis. Because
the initial conditions assumed in the safety analysis are preserved,
no increase in the consequences of an accident previously evaluated
would occur. In addition, small temperature changes in the RCS
impose reactivity changes by means of the moderator temperature
coefficient of reactivity. These small changes are within the
required shutdown margin which also bounds the reactivity addition
accident analysis ensuring there is no increase in the consequence
of an accident previously evaluated.
Therefore the proposed changes do 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.
This proposed amendment allows for minor plant operational
adjustments without adversely impacting the safety analysis required
shut down margin. It does not involve any change to plant equipment
or the shutdown margin requirements in the TS, and no new accident
precursors are created.
Therefore, the proposed change will 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 margin of safety in Modes 3, 4, 5, and 6 is preserved by the
TS required shutdown margin which prevents a return to criticality.
The proposed change will permit reductions in the discretionary
shutdown margin only within the limits of the TS, thereby
maintaining the margin of safety within the accident analysis.
Therefore, the proposed change will not involve a significant
reduction in the margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Carey Fleming, Sr. Counsel--Nuclear
Generation, Constellation Group, LLC, 750 East Pratt Street, 17th
Floor, Baltimore, MD 21202.
NRC Branch Chief: Nancy L. Salgado.
Union Electric Company, Docket No. 50-483, Callaway Plant, Unit 1,
Callaway County, Missouri
Date of amendment request: December 10, 2010.
Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would
modify the Callaway Plant, Unit 1, Technical Specifications (TSs) by
adding new Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.3.8.6, to TS 3.3.8,
``Emergency Exhaust System (EES) Actuation Instrumentation.'' The new
SR would require the performance of response time testing on the
portion of the EES required to isolate the normal fuel building
ventilation exhaust flow path and initiate the fuel building
ventilation isolation signal (FBVIS) mode of operation. The new SR
3.3.8.6 would have a note excluding the radiation monitor detectors
from response time testing. In addition, the amendment would revise TS
Table 3.3.8-1 to indicate that the new SR 3.3.8.6 applies to automatic
actuation Function 2, ``Automatic Actuation Logic and Actuation Relays
(BOP ESFAS [Balance of Plant Emergency Safety Features Actuation
System]),'' and Function 3, ``Fuel Building Exhaust Radiation--
Gaseous.'' Finally, there will be corresponding changes to the Final
Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).
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 design changes associated with the proposed change.
All design, material, and construction standards that were
applicable prior to this amendment request will continue to be
applicable.
The proposed change will not affect accident initiators or
precursors nor 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. There will be no change to fuel handling methods and
procedures. Therefore, there will be no changes that would serve to
increase the likelihood of occurrence of a fuel handling accident.
The proposed change changes a performance requirement, but it
does not physically alter safety-related systems nor affect the way
in which safety-related systems perform their functions.
The proposed TS change will serve to assure that the fuel
building ventilation exhaust ESF [emergency safety feature] response
time is tested and confirmed to be in accordance with the system
design and consistent with the assumptions of the fuel building FHA
[fuel handling accident] analysis (as revised). 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.
The proposed change will not affect the source term used in
evaluating the radiological consequences of a fuel handling accident
in the fuel building. However, the Fuel Building Ventilation Exhaust
ESF response time has been increased to 90 seconds in recognition of
the total delay times involved in the generation of a fuel building
ventilation isolation signal (FBVIS) and the times required for
actuated components to change state to their required safety
configurations. Consequently, the fuel handling accident
radiological consequences as reported in FSAR [Final Safety Analysis
Report] Table 15.7-8 have increased. However, the increases are much
less than the upper limit of ``minimal'' as defined pursuant to 10
CFR 50.59(c)(2)(iii) and NEI [Nuclear Energy Institute] 96-07
Revision 1 [``Guidelines for 10 CFR 50.59 Implementation,'' November
2000]. Therefore, there is no significant increase in the calculated
consequences of a postulated design basis fuel handling accident in
the fuel building. The applicable radiological dose criteria of 10
CFR 100.11, 10 CFR 50 Appendix A General Design Criterion 19, and
SRP [NUREG-0800, ``Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety
Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants: LWR [Light-Water-Reactor]
Edition''] 15.7.4 will continue to be met. New SR 3.3.8.6 is added
to ensure system performance consistent with the accident analyses
and associated dose calculations (as revised).
[[Page 12767]]
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 proposed design changes 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 or change any operating parameters. No new accident
scenarios, transient precursors, failure mechanisms, or limiting
single failures will be introduced as a result of this amendment.
The proposed amendment will not alter the design or performance
of the 7300 Process Protection System, Nuclear Instrumentation
System, Solid State Protection System, BOP ESFAS, MSFIS [Main Steam
and Feed Isolation System], or LSELS [Load Shedding and Emergency
Load Sequencing] used in the plant protection systems.
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. 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[Delta]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. The proposed change would add a new Technical
Specification Surveillance Requirement for assuring the satisfactory
performance of the fuel building ventilation exhaust ESF function in
response to a[n] FBVIS. The accident analysis for a fuel handling
accident in the fuel building was re-performed to support the
proposed Fuel Building Ventilation Exhaust ESF response time, and
this reanalysis demonstrated that the acceptance criteria continue
to be met with only a slight increase in radiological consequences
(i.e., less than one percent).
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant
reduction in a margin of safety.
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: John O'Neill, 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
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 Room (PDR), located at One White Flint
North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland 20852. 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.
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-317 and 50-318,
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 and 2, Calvert County,
Maryland
Date of application for amendments: November 23, 2009, as
supplemented by letters dated January 26, April 22, July 23, August 9,
October 29, November 19, December 30, 2010, and January 14, January 18,
January 28, February 11, and February 15, 2011.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments revise the
licensing basis and the Technical Specifications to allow the use of
AREVA Advanced CE-14 HTP fuel in the Calvert Cliffs reactors. The AREVA
Advanced CE-14 HTP fuel design consists of standard uranium dioxide
(U02) fuel pellets with gadolinium oxide
(Gd203) burnable poison and M5 cladding.
Date of issuance: February 18, 2011.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance to be implemented within
30 days.
Amendment Nos.: 297 and 273.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-53 and DPR-69:
Amendments revised the License and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: May 4, 2010 (75 FR
23810). The letters dated July 23, August 9, October 29, November 19,
December 30, 2010, and January 14, January 18, January 28, February 11,
and February 15, 2011, provided additional information that clarified
the application, did not expand the scope of the application as
originally noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no
significant hazards consideration determination as published in the
Federal Register.
The Commission's related evaluation of these amendments is
contained in a Safety Evaluation dated February 18, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-382, Waterford Steam Electric
Station, Unit 3, St Charles Parish, Louisiana
Date of amendment request: February 22, 2010, as supplemented by
letters dated December 3, 2010, and January 19, 2011.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment modified Technical
Specification (TS) \3/4\.9.4, ``Containment Building Penetrations,'' to
allow alternative means of penetration closure during core alterations
or irradiated fuel
[[Page 12768]]
movement while in refueling operations. In addition, certain
improvements to this TS, as well as the elimination of TS \3/4\.9.9,
``Containment Purge Valve Isolation System,'' were made. The changes
are similar to Revision 3 of NUREG-1432, ``Standard Technical
Specifications, Combustion Engineering Plants.''
Date of issuance: February 23, 2011.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
90 days from the date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 231.
Facility Operating License No. NPF-38: The amendment revised the
Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: May 4, 2010 (75 FR
23813). The supplemental letters dated December 3, 2010, and January
19, 2011, provided additional information that clarified the
application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally
noticed, and did not change the staff's original proposed no
significant hazards consideration determination as published in the
Federal Register.
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated February 23, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-461, Clinton Power
Station, Unit 1, DeWitt County, Illinois
Date of application for amendment: February 15, 2010, as
supplemented by letter dated May 21, 2010.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment relocates selected
Surveillance Requirement frequencies from the Clinton Power Station,
(CPS) Unit No. 1, technical specifications (TSs) to a licensee-
controlled program. This change is based on the NRC-approved Industry
Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) change TSTF-425, ``Relocate
Surveillance Frequencies to Licensee Control--Risk Informed Technical
Specification Task Force (RITSTF) Initiative 5b,'' Revision 3,
(Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession
Package No. ML090850642). Furthermore, some plant-specific deviations
from TSTF-425 were also incorporated into the CPS TSs.
Date of issuance: February 15, 2011.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 120 days.
Amendment No.: 192.
Facility Operating License No. NPF-62: The amendment revised the
Technical Specifications and License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: May 4, 2010 (75 FR
23814). The May 21, 2010, supplement 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 February 15, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, Quad
Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, Rock Island County,
Date of amendment request: February 16, 2010, as supplemented by
letter dated June 22, 2010.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments relocate selected
Surveillance Requirement frequencies from the Quad Cities Nuclear Power
Station Units 1 and 2 Technical Specifications (TSs) to a licensee-
controlled program. This change is based on the NRC-approved Industry
Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) change TSTF-425, ``Relocate
Surveillance Frequencies to Licensee Control--Risk Informed Technical
Specification Task Force (RITSTF) Initiative 5b,'' Revision 3,
(Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession
Package No. ML090850642).
Date of issuance: February 18, 2011.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 120 days.
Amendment Nos.: 248/243.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-29 and DPR-30: The
amendments revised the Technical Specifications and License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: April 20, 2010 (75 FR
20638). The June 22, 2010, supplement, 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 amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated February 18, 2011.
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: February 24, 2010, as
supplemented September 20, 2010, and November 5, 2010.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revises the Technical
Specification (TS) 3.7.11, ``Control Room Emergency Air Temperature
Control System (CREATCS).'' The amendment will only be applicable
during plant modifications to upgrade the CREATCS chillers. This ``one-
time'' TS change will be implemented during WBN Unit 1 Cycles 10 and 11
beginning March 1, 2011, and ending April 30, 2012.
Date of issuance: February 8, 2011.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
no later than 90 days from date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 85.
Facility Operating License No. NPF-90: Amendment revised the
License and TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 1, 2010 (75 FR
30447). The supplements dated September 20 and November 5, 2010,
provided additional information that clarified the application, did not
expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not
change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards
consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated February 8, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of February 2011.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Joseph G. Giitter,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2011-4829 Filed 3-7-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P