Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations, 38094-38099 [2012-15176]

Agencies

• NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 123 (Tuesday, June 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38094-38099]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15176]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2012-0143]


Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility 
Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant 
Hazards Considerations

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 or 
combined license, as applicable, upon a determination by the Commission 
that such amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, 
notwithstanding the pendency before the Commission of a request for a 
hearing from any person.
    This biweekly notice includes all notices of amendments issued, or 
proposed to be issued from May 31, 2012 to June 27, 2012. The last 
biweekly notice was published on June 12, 2012 (77 FR 35069).

ADDRESSES: You may access information and comment submissions related 
to this document, which the NRC possesses and are publicly available, 
by searching on https://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-2012-
0143. You may submit comments by the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2012-0143. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-492-
3668; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
     Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules, 
Announcements, and Directives Branch (RADB), Office of Administration, 
Mail Stop: TWB-05-B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 
DC 20555-0001.
     Fax comments to: RADB at 301-492-3446.
    For additional direction on accessing information and submitting 
comments, see ``Accessing Information and Submitting Comments'' in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Accessing Information and Submitting Comments

A. Accessing Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2012-0143 when contacting the NRC 
about the availability of information regarding this document. You may 
access information related to this document, which the NRC possesses 
and is publicly available, by the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2012-0143.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may access publicly available documents online in the NRC 
Library at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the 
search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and then select ``Begin Web-
based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's 
Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-
4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. Documents may be viewed in 
ADAMS by performing a search on the document date and docket number.
     NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public 
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2012-0143 in the subject line of your 
comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make 
your comment submission available to the public in this docket.
    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact 
information in comment submissions that you do not want to be publicly 
disclosed. The NRC posts all comment submissions at https://www.regulations.gov as well as entering the comment submissions into 
ADAMS, and the NRC does not edit comment submissions to remove 
identifying or contact information.
    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons 
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to 
include identifying or contact information in their comment submissions 
that they do not want to be publicly disclosed. Your request should 
state that the NRC will not edit comment submissions to remove such 
information before making the comment submissions available to the 
public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.

[[Page 38095]]

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating 
Licenses and Combined Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards 
Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing

    The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following 
amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under 
the Commission's regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR) 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.
    Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any 
person(s) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a 
request for a hearing and a petition to intervene with respect to 
issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license or 
combined license. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to 
intervene shall be filed in accordance with the 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 NRC's PDR, located at One White Flint North, 
Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 
20852. The NRC regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC 
Library on the NRC's Web site at 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 the NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including 
a request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or 
other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a 
request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by 
interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c), 
must be filed in accordance with the 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 10 
days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the 
Office of the Secretary by email at hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by 
telephone at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital identification (ID) 
certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or 
representative) to digitally sign

[[Page 38096]]

documents and access the E-Submittal server for any proceeding in which 
it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant 
will be submitting a request or petition for hearing (even in instances 
in which the participant, or its counsel or representative, already 
holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this 
information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the 
hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not already established 
an electronic docket.
    Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is 
available on the 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 the 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's 
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 the NRC guidance 
available on the NRC's 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 email notice confirming receipt of the document. The 
E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access 
to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any 
others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to 
participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the 
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's Web site 
at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email 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 the 
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 NRC's PDR, located at One White Flint North, 
Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 
20852. Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC are 
accessible online in the NRC Library at 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's PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by 
email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.

Northern States Power Company--Minnesota, Docket No. 50-263, Monticello 
Nuclear Generating Plant, Wright County, Minnesota

    Date of amendment request: May 25, 2012.
    Description of amendment request: The licensee proposed to revise 
the licensing basis regarding the time delay assumed in the safety 
analyses for the degraded voltage transfer logic associated with the 
1AR Transformer, which is governed by Technical Specifications 3.3.8.1, 
``Loss of Power (LOP) Instrumentation.'' Specifically, the revision 
will remove the capability to automatically transfer to the 1AR 
Transformer as a source of power to the essential buses on degraded 
voltage and instead directly transfer to the Emergency Diesel 
Generators (EDGs). This transfer will ensure that Class 1E

[[Page 38097]]

equipment is capable of performing its function to meet the 
requirements of the current licensing basis.
    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 (NSHC) analysis. The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's 
NSHC analysis and has prepared its own as follows:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed amendment does not affect any previously used 
accident initiators or precursors, and does not change the initial 
conditions contributing to the severity or consequences of 
previously analyzed accidents or malfunctions. The power transfer 
scheme was not a precursor of previously analyzed accidents, and 
took no part in determining the consequences of previously analyzed 
accidents. As a result, all previous safety analyses will continue 
to meet all applicable acceptance criteria since the proposed 
amendment will not degrade the performance of structures, systems, 
and components (SSCs) important to safety.
    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated?
    Response: No.
    No new accident scenarios, precursors, failure mechanisms, or 
limiting single failures will be introduced as a result of the 
proposed amendment. The proposed revision of the degraded voltage 
transfer logic scheme (i.e., to transfer directly to the EDG instead 
of first attempting to transfer to the IAR Transformer) was 
previously licensed for Monticello, and is typical for the industry. 
The delay time associated with the degraded voltage transfer logic 
was not postulated as an initiator of any previously analyzed 
accident, and is not expected to create any new system interactions 
or failure modes of any SSCs. Thus, equipment important to safety 
will continue to operate as designed, and the proposed change will 
not result in any adverse conditions or any increase in challenges 
to safety systems.
    Therefore, operation of the plant in accordance with the 
proposed amendment will not create the possibility of a new or 
different type of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed amendment aims to correct non-conservative values 
assumed in the analyses for the degraded voltage protection 
function. The proposed amendment assures that the design 
requirements of the emergency electrical power system will continue 
to be met. The proposed amendment does not affect previously used 
safety acceptance criteria, assumptions, scenarios, and analysis 
methodology.
    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve any reduction 
in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
its own analysis, concludes that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) 
are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the 
proposed amendment involves no significant hazards consideration.
    Attorney for the licensee: Peter M. Glass, Assistant General 
Counsel, Xcel Energy Services, Inc., 414 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, MN 
55401.
    NRC Branch Chief: Istvan Frankl, Acting.

Union Electric Company, Docket No. 50-483, Callaway Plant, Unit 1, 
Callaway County, Missouri

    Date of amendment request: September 22, 2011.
    Description of amendment request: The amendment would revise 
Required Action B.1 of Technical Specification (TS) 3.3.6, 
``Containment Purge Isolation Instrumentation,'' such that a Note would 
be added to the Required Action to conditionally allow containment 
mini-purge supply and exhaust valves that have been closed in 
accordance with the Action to be opened under administrative controls 
as required for certain operational needs. The proposed change is 
similar to allowances already in place in TS 3.6.3, ``Containment 
Isolation Valves,'' and TS 3.9.4, ``Containment Penetrations.''
    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.
    Overall protection system performance will remain within the 
bounds of the previously performed accident analyses since there are 
no design changes. All design, material, and construction standards 
that were applicable prior to this amendment request will be 
maintained. There will be no changes to any design or operating 
limits.
    The proposed change does not involve or result in any changes to 
accident initiators or precursors, nor does it alter the design 
assumptions or conditions of the plant. The proposed change for the 
mini-purge valves which support the mitigation of certain accidents 
would not affect the initiation of those accidents and therefore 
does not affect the probability of occurrence of an accident.
    Per the provisions of the proposed Note for Required Action B.1 
of TS 3.3.6, the automatic containment isolation function(s) 
associated with a Phase A containment isolation signal (which is the 
trip function/signal credited in the accident analysis) would 
continue to be required Operable. At the same time, the proposed 
change helps to support venting of containment to ensure the initial 
condition assumptions for containment pressure in the accident 
analyses are met during a TS-allowed period of radiation monitor 
inoperability. There are no design changes to the containment mini-
purge isolation valves or the associated actuation circuitry. There 
will be no changes to the operation of these valves other than the 
limited durations during which they may be open under administrative 
controls with inoperable actuation instrumentation (i.e. while a TS 
Required Action is in effect). Exceptions to Technical Specification 
requirements are allowed in situations where plant operation would 
otherwise be restricted in a manner that is not commensurate with 
the desired safety objective, especially when those exceptions are 
of short duration and are accompanied by compensatory measures. 
Therefore, 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 as assumed in the accident analysis.
    The proposed change does not physically alter the design of any 
safety-related systems, nor does it affect the way in which safety-
related systems are assumed to perform their functions.
    The proposed change will not affect the source term, containment 
isolation, or radiological release assumptions used in evaluating 
the radiological consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 
The applicable radiological dose criteria will continue to be met.
    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.
    There are no proposed design changes, nor are there any changes 
in the method by which any safety-related plant structure, system, 
or component (SSC) is assumed to perform its specified safety 
function. The proposed change will not affect the normal method of 
plant operation or change any operating parameters. Equipment 
performance necessary to fulfill safety analysis missions will be 
unaffected. The proposed change will not alter any assumptions 
required to meet the safety analysis acceptance criteria. No new 
accident scenarios, transient precursors, failure mechanisms, or 
limiting single failures will be introduced as a result of this 
amendment. There will be no adverse effect or challenges imposed on 
any safety-related system as a result of this amendment.

[[Page 38098]]

    The proposed amendment will not alter the design or performance 
of the 7300 Process Protection System, Nuclear Instrumentation 
System, or Solid State Protection System 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. 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 margin of safety. Mode-specific required 
shutdown margins in the COLR [Core Operating Limits Report] will not 
be changed. The applicable radiological dose consequence acceptance 
criteria will continue to be met. The proposed changes do not alter 
the design of the containment mini-purge system or the supporting 
instrumentation. As containment is a principal safety barrier to the 
release of radioactivity to the environment for postulated design 
basis accidents, there will be continued assurance that the 
containment mini-purge isolation system will perform its intended 
function of supporting containment such that the assumptions in the 
accident analyses remain valid.
    The proposed change does not eliminate any surveillances or 
alter the frequency of surveillances required by the Technical 
Specifications. None of the acceptance criteria for any accident 
analysis will be changed.
    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 and 
Combined Licenses

    During the period since publication of the last biweekly notice, 
the Commission has issued the following amendments. The Commission has 
determined for each of these amendments that the application complies 
with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, 
as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The 
Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the 
Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set 
forth in the license amendment.
    A notice of consideration of issuance of amendment to facility 
operating license or combined license, as applicable, proposed no 
significant hazards consideration determination, and opportunity for a 
hearing in connection with these actions, was published in the Federal 
Register as indicated.
    Unless otherwise indicated, the Commission has determined that 
these amendments satisfy the criteria for categorical exclusion in 
accordance with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), 
no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be 
prepared for these amendments. If the Commission has prepared an 
environmental assessment under the special circumstances provision in 
10 CFR 51.22(b) and has made a determination based on that assessment, 
it is so indicated.
    For further details with respect to the action see (1) the 
applications for amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3) the Commission's 
related letter, Safety Evaluation and/or Environmental Assessment as 
indicated. All of these items are available for public inspection 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. Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC are 
accessible electronically online in the NRC Library at 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's Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by 
email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.

Carolina Power and Light Company, et al., Docket No. 50-400, Shearon 
Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Wake and Chatham Counties, North 
Carolina

    Date of amendment request: August 22, 2011, as supplemented by 
letter dated February 23, March 20, and April 2, 2012.
    Description of amendment request: The amendment revised Technical 
Specification (TS) 6.9.1.6, ``Core Operating Limits Report,'' to add 
plant-specific methodology, ANP-3011 (P), ``Harris Nuclear Plant Unit 1 
Realistic Large Break LOCA [loss-of-coolant accident] Analysis,'' 
Revision 1, that implements AREVA's NRC-approved topical report, EMF-
2103(P)(A), ``Realistic Large Break LOCA Methodology for Pressurized 
Water Reactors'' Revision 0.
    Date of issuance: May 30, 2012.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 60 days of issuance.
    Amendment No.: 138.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-63: The amendment 
revised the TSs and the Facility Operating License.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: January 10, 2012 (77 FR 
1516). The February 23, March 20, and April 2, 2012, supplements 
provided additional information that clarified the application, did not 
expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not 
change the NRC staff's initial proposed no significant hazards 
consideration determination.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated May 30, 2012.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
    NRC Branch Chief: Douglas A. Broaddus.

Carolina Power and Light Company, et al., Docket No. 50-400, Shearon 
Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Wake and Chatham Counties, North 
Carolina

    Date of application for amendment: April 28, 2011, as supplemented 
by letters dated June 23,August 3, August 15, August 25, August 30, 
August 31, September 6, September 7, October 20,October 21, October 28, 
November 28, December 20, 2011, February 9, and March 26, 2012.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment increases the rated 
thermal power (RTP)level from 2900 megawatts thermal (MWt) to 2948 MWt, 
and makes technical specification changes as necessary to support 
operation at the uprated power level. The change is an increase in RTP 
of approximately 1.66 percent. The power uprate is characterized as a 
measurement uncertainty recapture using the Cameron Leading Edge Flow 
Meter CheckPlusSystem to improve plant calorimetric heat balance 
measurement accuracy.
    Date of issuance: May 30, 2012.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 120 days of issuance.
    Amendment No.: 139.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-63: Amendment revises 
the Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: September 13, 2011 (76 
FR 56486). The June 23, August 3, August

[[Page 38099]]

15, August 25, August 30, August 31, September 6, September 7, October 
20, October 21, October 28, November 28, December 20, 2011, February 9, 
and March 26, 2012, supplements provided additional information that 
clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application 
as originally noticed and did not change the NRC staff's initial 
proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a safety evaluation dated May 30, 2012.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC, Docket No. 50-331, Duane Arnold 
Energy Center (DAEC), Linn County, Iowa

    Date of application for amendment: May 31, 2011, as supplemented by 
letters dated March 16, 2012, and April 5, 2012.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment upgrades DAEC 
Emergency Action Levels based on Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 99-01, 
Revision 5, ``Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels,'' 
using the guidance of NRC Regulatory Issue Summary 2003-18, Supplement 
2, ``Use of Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 99-01, ``Methodology for 
Development of Emergency Action Levels.''
    Date of issuance: June 1, 2012.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 120 days.
    Amendment No.: 281.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-49: The amendment 
revised the Duane Arnold Energy Center Emergency Plan.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 15, 2011 (76 
FR 70774).
    The supplemental information dated March 16, 2012, and April 5, 
2012 contained clarifying information, did not change the scope of the 
May 31, 2011, application on the initial no significant hazards 
consideration determination, and did not expand the scope of the 
original Federal Register notice.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated June 1, 2012.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day of June 2012.
A. Louise Lund,
Deputy Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of 
Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2012-15176 Filed 6-25-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P