Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations, 24021-24027 [2014-09489]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 29, 2014 / Notices
awarding grants and cooperative
agreements (financial assistance) for the
NRC. The Acquisition Management
Division collects information from
assistance recipients in accordance with
grant and cooperative agreement
provisions in order to administer NRC’s
financial assistance program. The
information collected under the
provisions ensures that the
Government’s rights are protected, the
agency adheres to public laws, the work
proceeds on schedule, and that disputes
between the Government and the
recipient are settled.
Submit, by June 30, 2014, comments
that address the following questions:
1. Is the proposed collection of
information necessary for the NRC to
properly perform its functions? Does the
information have practical utility?
2. Is the burden estimate accurate?
3. Is there a way to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected?
4. How can the burden of the
information collection be minimized,
including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology?
The public may examine and have
copied for a fee publicly-available
documents, including the draft
supporting statement, at the NRC’s
Public Document Room, Room O–1F21,
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The
OMB clearance requests are available at
the NRC’s Web site: https://www.nrc.gov/
public-involve/doc-comment/omb/
index.html. The document will be
available on the NRC’s home page site
for 60 days after the signature date of
this notice.
Comments submitted in writing or in
electronic form will be made available
for public inspection. Because your
comments will not be edited to remove
any identifying or contact information,
the NRC cautions you against including
any information in your submission that
you do not want to be publicly
disclosed. Comments submitted should
reference Docket No. NRC–2011–0091.
You may submit your comments by any
of the following methods: Electronic
comments go to https://
www.regulations.gov and search for
Docket No. NRC–2011–0091. Mail
comments to the Acting NRC Clearance
Officer, Kristen Benney (T–5 F53), U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001.
Questions about the information
collection requirements may be directed
to the Acting NRC Clearance Officer,
Kristen Benney (T–5 F53), U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415–
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:56 Apr 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
6355, or by email to
INFOCOLLECTS.Resource@NRC.GOV.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd
day of April, 2014.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Kristen Benney,
Acting NRC Clearance Officer, Office of
Information Services.
[FR Doc. 2014–09631 Filed 4–28–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2014–0095]
Biweekly Notice; Applications and
Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses and Combined Licenses
Involving No Significant Hazards
Considerations
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Biweekly notice.
AGENCY:
Pursuant to Section 189a. (2)
of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) is
publishing this regular biweekly notice.
The Act requires the Commission to
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 April 3,
2014 to April 16, 2014. The last
biweekly notice was published on April
15, 2014.
DATES: Comments must be filed by May
29, 2014. A request for a hearing must
be filed by June 30, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods (unless
this document describes a different
method for submitting comments on a
specific subject):
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2014–0095. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol
Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422;
email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
• Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey,
Office of Administration, Mail Stop:
3WFN–06–44M, U.S. Nuclear
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24021
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001.
For additional direction on accessing
information and submitting comments,
see ‘‘Accessing Information and
Submitting Comments’’ in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Beverly A. Clayton, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415–
3475, email: Beverly.Clayton@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Accessing Information and
Submitting Comments
A. Accessing Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2014–
0095 when contacting the NRC about
the availability of information regarding
this document. You may access
publicly-available information related to
this document by any of the following
methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2014–0095.
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may access publicly
available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection 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–2014–
0095 in the subject line of your
comment submission, in order to ensure
that the NRC is able to make your
comment submission available to the
public in this docket.
The NRC cautions you not to include
identifying or contact information that
you do not want to be publicly
disclosed in you comment submission.
The NRC will post all comment
submissions at https://
www.regulations.gov as well as enter the
comment submissions into ADAMS.
The NRC does not routinely edit
E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM
29APN1
24022
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 29, 2014 / Notices
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
comment submissions to remove
identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating
comments from other persons for
submission to the NRC, then you should
inform those persons not to include
identifying or contact information that
they do not want to be publicly
disclosed in their comment submission.
Your request should state that the NRC
does not routinely edit comment
submissions to remove such information
before making the comment
submissions available to the public or
entering the comment submissions into
ADAMS.
II. Notice of Consideration of Issuance
of Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses and Combined Licenses and
Proposed No Significant Hazards
Consideration Determination
The Commission has made a
proposed determination that the
following amendment requests involve
no significant hazards consideration.
Under the Commission’s regulations in
§ 50.92 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), this means that
operation of the facility in accordance
with the proposed amendment would
not (1) involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated, or (2)
create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any
accident previously evaluated; or (3)
involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety. The basis for this
proposed determination for each
amendment request is shown below.
The Commission is seeking public
comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received
within 30 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be
considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not
issue the amendment until the
expiration of 60 days after the date of
publication of this notice. The
Commission may issue the license
amendment before expiration of the 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:56 Apr 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
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.
A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing
and Petition for Leave To Intervene
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 ‘‘Agency Rules
of Practice and Procedure’’ in 10 CFR
part 2. Interested person(s) should
consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309,
which is available at the NRC’s PDR,
located at One White Flint North, Room
O1–F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. The
NRC’s regulations are accessible
electronically from the NRC Library on
the NRC’s Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/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/
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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.
B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)
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
E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM
29APN1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 29, 2014 / Notices
accordance with the NRC’s 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 email at
hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone
at 301–415–1677, to request (1) a digital
identification (ID) certificate, which
allows the participant (or its counsel or
representative) to digitally sign
documents and access the E-Submittal
server for any proceeding in which it is
participating; and (2) advise the
Secretary that the participant will be
submitting a request or petition for
hearing (even in instances in which the
participant, or its counsel or
representative, already holds an 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 the
NRC’s public Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/
getting-started.html. System
requirements for accessing the ESubmittal 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/esubmittals.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 Webbased submission form, including the
installation of the Web browser plug-in,
is available on the NRC’s public Web
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:56 Apr 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
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’s public Web site
at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. A filing is considered
complete at the time the documents are
submitted through the NRC’s E-Filing
system. To be timely, an electronic
filing must be submitted to the E-Filing
system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern
Time on the due date. Upon receipt of
a transmission, the E-Filing system
time-stamps the document and sends
the submitter an 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 NRC’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 public Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html, by email to
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,
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24023
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.
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. However, a request to
intervene will require including
information on local residence in order
to demonstrate a proximity assertion of
interest in the proceeding. With respect
to copyrighted works, except for limited
excerpts that serve the purpose of the
adjudicatory filings and would
constitute a Fair Use application,
participants are requested not to include
copyrighted materials in their
submission.
Petitions for leave to intervene must
be filed no later than 60 days from the
date of publication of this notice.
Requests for hearing, petitions for leave
to intervene, and motions for leave to
file new or amended contentions that
are filed after the 60-day deadline will
not be entertained absent a
determination by the presiding officer
that the filing demonstrates good cause
by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR
2.309(c)(1)(i)–(iii).
For further details with respect to
these license amendment applications,
see the application for amendment
which is available for public inspection
in ADAMS and at the NRC’s PDR. For
additional direction on accessing
information related to this document,
see the ‘‘Accessing Information and
Submitting Comments’’ section of this
document.
E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM
29APN1
24024
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 29, 2014 / Notices
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
South Carolina Electric and Gas
Company, Docket Nos.: 52–027 and 52–
028, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station
(VCSNS), Units 2 and 3, Fairfield
County, South Carolina
Date of amendment request: February
27, 2014. A publicly-available version is
in ADAMS under Accession No.
ML14065A021.
Description of amendment request:
The proposed change would amend
Combined License Nos. NPF–93 and
NPF–94 for VCSNS, Units 2 and 3,
respectively, by revising Tier 2* and
associated Tier 2 information related to
the construction of Module CA03. Some
of these changes include the
clarification of various materials in the
design, increasing anchoring supports,
and allowing the use of anchor bars
with hooks.
Basis for proposed no significant
hazards consideration determination:
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the
licensee has provided its analysis of the
issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented
below:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve
a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The design functions of the nuclear island
structures are to provide support, protection,
and separation for the seismic Category I
mechanical and electrical equipment located
in the nuclear island. The nuclear island
structures are structurally designed to meet
seismic Category I requirements as defined in
Regulatory Guide 1.29 (ADAMS Accession
No. ML070310052).
The change to the design details for the incontainment refueling water storage tank
(IRWST) west wall does not have an adverse
impact on the response of the nuclear island
structures to safe shutdown earthquake
ground motions or loads due to anticipated
transients or postulated accident conditions,
nor does it change the seismic Category I
classification. The change to the design
details for the IRWST west wall does not
impact the support, design, or operation of
mechanical and fluid systems. There is no
change to plant systems or the response of
systems to postulated accident conditions.
There is no change to the predicted
radioactive releases due to postulated
accident conditions. The plant response to
previously evaluated accidents or external
events is not adversely affected, nor does the
change described create any new accident
precursors.
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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:56 Apr 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
The proposed change is to revise design
details for the IRWST west wall. The change
of the design details for the IRWST west wall
does not change the design requirements of
the nuclear island structures, nor the seismic
Category I classification. The change of the
design details for the IRWST west wall does
not change the design function, support,
design, or operation of mechanical and fluid
systems. The change of the design details for
the IRWST west wall does not result in a new
failure mechanism for the nuclear island
structures or introduce any new accident
precursors. As a result, the design function
of the nuclear island structures is not
adversely affected by the proposed change.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does
not create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve
a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
No safety analysis or design basis
acceptance limit/criterion is involved by the
requested changes, thus, no margin of safety
is reduced.
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: Kathryn M.
Sutton, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLC,
1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20004–2514.
NRC Branch Chief: Lawrence J.
Burkhart.
South Carolina Electric and Gas
Company, Docket Nos. 52–027 and 52–
028, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station
(VCSNS), Units 2 and 3, Fairfield
County, South Carolina
Date of amendment request: April 3,
2014. A publicly-available version is in
ADAMS under Accession No.
ML14093B258.
Description of amendment request:
The proposed change would amend
Combined License Nos. NPF–93 and
NPF–94 for the VCSNS, Units 2 and 3
by departing from the plant-specific
Design Control Document (DCD) Tier 2*
to identify design details of the floors of
the auxiliary building that may vary due
to design and loading conditions, in
accordance with code requirements.
Basis for proposed no significant
hazards consideration determination:
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the
licensee has provided its analysis of the
issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented
below:
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1. Does the proposed amendment involve
a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The design functions of the auxiliary
building floors are to provide support,
protection, and separation for the seismic
Category I mechanical and electrical
equipment located in the auxiliary building.
The auxiliary building is a seismic Category
I structure and is designed for dead, live,
thermal, pressure, safe shutdown earthquake
loads, and loads due to postulated pipe
breaks. The proposed changes to [Updated
Final Safety Analysis Report] UFSAR
descriptions and figures are intended to
address changes in the detail design of floors
in the auxiliary building. The proposed
changes also incorporate requirements for
development and anchoring of headed
reinforcement. The properties of the concrete
and reinforcement included in the auxiliary
building structure are not altered. As a result,
the design function of the auxiliary building
structure is not adversely affected by the
proposed changes. There is no change to
plant systems or the response of systems to
postulated accident conditions. There is no
change to the predicted radioactive releases
due to postulated accident conditions. The
plant response to previously evaluated
accidents or external events is not adversely
affected, nor do the changes described create
any new accident precursors.
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.
The proposed changes to UFSAR
descriptions and figures are proposed to
address changes in the detail design of floors
in the auxiliary building. The proposed
changes also incorporate the requirements for
development and anchoring of headed
reinforcement which were previously
approved. The thickness, geometry, and
strength of the structures are not adversely
altered. The concrete and reinforcement
materials are not altered. The properties of
the concrete are not altered. The changes to
the design details of the auxiliary building
structure do not create any new accident
precursors. As a result, the design function
of the auxiliary building structure is not
adversely affected by the proposed changes.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does
not create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve
a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The criteria and requirements of American
Concrete institute (ACI) 349 and American
Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) N690
provide a margin of safety to structural
failure. The design of the auxiliary building
structure conforms to applicable criteria and
requirements in ACI 349 and AISC N690 and
therefore maintains the margin of safety. The
E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM
29APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 29, 2014 / Notices
proposed changes to the UFSAR address
changes in the detail design of floors in the
auxiliary building. The proposed changes
also incorporate the requirements for
development and anchoring of headed
reinforcement which were previously
approved. There is no change to design
requirements of the auxiliary building
structure. There is no change to the method
of evaluation from that used in the design
basis calculations. There is not a significant
change to the in structure response spectra.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does
not result in 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: Kathryn M.
Sutton, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLC,
1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20004–2514.
NRC Branch Chief: Lawrence
Burkhart.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Southern Nuclear Operating Company,
Docket Nos. 52–025 and 52–026, Vogtle
Electric Generating Plant (VEGP), Units
3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia
Date of amendment request: April 4,
2014. A publicly-available version is in
ADAMS under Accession No.
ML14094A348.
Description of amendment request:
The proposed change would amend
Combined License Nos. NPF–91 and
NPF–92 for the VEGP, Units 3 and 4 by
departing from the plant-specific Design
Control Document (DCD) Tier 2* to
identify design details of the floors of
the auxiliary building that may vary due
to design and loading conditions, in
accordance with code requirements.
Basis for proposed no significant
hazards consideration determination:
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the
licensee has provided its analysis of the
issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented
below:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve
a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No
The design functions of the auxiliary
building floors are to provide support,
protection, and separation for the seismic
Category I mechanical and electrical
equipment located in the auxiliary building.
The auxiliary building is a seismic Category
I structure and is designed for dead, live,
thermal, pressure, safe shutdown earthquake
loads, and loads due to postulated pipe
breaks. The proposed changes to [Updated
Final Safety Analysis Report] UFSAR
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:56 Apr 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
descriptions and figures are intended to
address changes in the detail design of floors
in the auxiliary building. The proposed
changes also incorporate requirements for
development and anchoring of headed
reinforcement. The properties of the concrete
and reinforcement included in the auxiliary
building structure are not altered. As a result,
the design function of the auxiliary building
structure is not adversely affected by the
proposed changes. There is no change to
plant systems or the response of systems to
postulated accident conditions. There is no
change to the predicted radioactive releases
due to postulated accident conditions. The
plant response to previously evaluated
accidents or external events is not adversely
affected, nor do the changes described create
any new accident precursors.
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.
The proposed changes to UFSAR
descriptions and figures are proposed to
address changes in the detail design of floors
in the auxiliary building. The proposed
changes also incorporate the requirements for
development and anchoring of headed
reinforcement which were previously
approved. The thickness, geometry, and
strength of the structures are not adversely
altered. The concrete and reinforcement
materials are not altered. The properties of
the concrete are not altered. The changes to
the design details of the auxiliary building
structure do not create any new accident
precursors. As a result, the design function
of the auxiliary building structure is not
adversely affected by the proposed changes.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does
not create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve
a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The criteria and requirements of American
Concrete institute (ACI) 349 and American
Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) N690
provide a margin of safety to structural
failure. The design of the auxiliary building
structure conforms to applicable criteria and
requirements in ACI 349 and AISC N690 and
therefore maintains the margin of safety. The
proposed changes to the UFSAR address
changes in the detail design of floors in the
auxiliary building. The proposed changes
also incorporate the requirements for
development and anchoring of headed
reinforcement which were previously
approved. There is no change to design
requirements of the auxiliary building
structure. There is no change to the method
of evaluation from that used in the design
basis calculations. There is not a significant
change to the in structure response spectra.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does
not result in a significant reduction in a
margin of safety.
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24025
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: M. Stanford
Blanton, Blach & Bingham LLP, 1710
Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL
35203–2015.
NRC Branch Chief: Lawrence J.
Burkhart.
Southern Nuclear Operating Company,
Inc., Docket Nos. 52–025 and 52–026,
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP),
Units 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia
Date of amendment request: March
17, 2014. A publicly-available version is
in ADAMS under Accession No.
ML14076A173.
Description of amendment request:
The proposed change would amend
Combined License Nos. NPF–91 and
NPF–92 for the VEGP, Units 3 and 4.
The requested amendment proposes
changes to revise the VEGP Updated
Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR)
by clarifying how human diversity was
applied during the design process for
the Component Interface Module (CIM)
and Diverse Actuation System (DAS).
This license amendment request (LAR)
proposes the addition of Appendix 7A
to VEGP, Units 3 and 4 UFSAR Chapter
7 to modify information related to
human diversity, as presented in a Tier
2* document, WCAP–17179–NP,
‘‘AP1000 Component Interface Module
Technical Report,’’ Revision 2 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML102170259), and two
Tier 2 documents, WCAP–15775,
‘‘AP1000 Instrumentation and Control
Defense-in-Depth and Diversity Report,’’
Revision 4 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML101530048) and WCAP–17184–NP,
‘‘AP1000 Diverse Actuation System
Planning and Functional Design
Summary Technical Report,’’ Revision 2
(ADAMS Accession No. ML102170263)
that are incorporated by reference in the
VEGP, Units 3 and 4 UFSAR.
Basis for proposed no significant
hazards consideration determination:
As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the
licensee has provided its analysis of the
issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented
below:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve
a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The requested amendment proposes
changes to licensing basis documents to
clarify the position on the human diversity
E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM
29APN1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
24026
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 29, 2014 / Notices
aspects of design diversity as related to the
Component Interface Module (CIM) and
Diverse Actuation System (DAS) design
processes. A review confirmed that the
clarified position on human diversity would
not change the CIM or DAS design. The
requested changes to information presented
in the Tier 2* and Tier 2 supporting
documentation clarify the level of human
diversity applied. The change continues to
comply with the regulatory guidance in
NUREG/CR–6303 [‘‘Method for Performing
Diversity and Defense-in-Depth Analyses of
Reactor Protection Systems,’’ (ADAMS
Accession No. ML071790509)] regarding
credible defenses against a postulated
Common Cause Failure (CCF) of the Plant
Monitoring and Safety System. The proposed
change does not affect the plant itself. The
change does not affect prevention and
mitigation of abnormal events, e.g., accidents,
anticipated operational occurrences,
earthquakes, floods and turbine missiles, or
their safety or design analyses. No safetyrelated structure, system, or component
(SSC) or function is adversely affected. The
change does not involve nor interface with
any SSC accident initiator or initiating
sequence of events, and thus, the
probabilities of the accidents evaluated in the
Updated Final Safety Analysis Report
(UFSAR) are not affected. This activity will
not allow for a new fission product release
path, nor will it result in a new fission
product barrier failure mode, nor create a
new sequence of events that would result in
significant fuel cladding failures. Because the
proposed changes do not change any safety
related SSC or function credited in the
mitigation of an accident, the consequences
of the accidents evaluated in the UFSAR are
not affected.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does
not involve an increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously
evaluated.
2. Does the proposed amendment create
the possibility of a new or different kind of
accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes clarify the position
on human diversity and show that the CIM/
DAS diversity meets the regulatory guidance
in NUREG/CR–6303. The clarified
descriptions do not affect the plant itself.
Therefore, the proposed changes do not affect
any safety-related equipment itself, nor do
they affect equipment whose failure could
initiate an accident or a failure of a fission
product barrier. No analysis is adversely
affected by the proposed changes. No system
or design function or equipment qualification
would be adversely affected by the proposed
changes. Furthermore, the proposed changes
do not result in a new failure mode,
malfunction or sequence of events that could
affect safety or safety-related equipment.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does
not create the possibility of a new or different
kind of accident.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve
a significant reduction in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed changes to information
presented in referenced licensing basis
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:56 Apr 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
documents clarify the position regarding
human diversity and do not affect the plant
itself. The proposed changes do not adversely
affect the design, construction, or operation
of any plant SSCs, including any equipment
whose failure could initiate an accident or a
failure of a fission product barrier. No
analysis is adversely affected by the proposed
changes. Furthermore, no system function,
design function, or equipment qualification
will be adversely affected by the changes.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does
not reduce 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: M. Stanford
Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 1710
Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL
35203–2015.
NRC Branch Chief: Lawrence J.
Burkhart.
III. 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 can be accessed as described in
the ‘‘Accessing Information and
Submitting Comments’’ section of this
document.
Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., et
al., Docket No. 50–423, Millstone Power
Station, Unit 3, New London County,
Connecticut
Date of application for amendment:
April 25, 2013, as supplemented by
letters dated September 19, and
December 11, 2013.
Brief description of amendment: The
Amendment revises the Technical
Specifications Section 6.8.4.f,
‘‘Containment Leakage Rate Testing
Program’’ to increase the value of the
calculated peak containment internal
pressure, Pa, from 41.4 pounds per
square inch gage (psig) to 41.9 psig. This
increase is needed to address an
increase in the calculated mass and
energy (M&E) release during the
blowdown phase of the design basis
Loss-of-Coolant Accident (LOCA).
Date of issuance: April 8, 2014.
Effective date: As of the date of
issuance and shall be implemented
within 60 days from the date of
issuance.
Amendment No.: 259. A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML14073A055;
documents related to this amendment
are listed in the Safety Evaluation
enclosed with the amendment.
Renewed Facility Operating License
No. NPF–49: Amendment revised the
License and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: June 25, 2013 (78 FR 38081).
The supplements dated September 19
and December 11, 2013, 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 April 8, 2014.
No significant hazards consideration
comments received: No.
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.,
Docket No. 50–333, James A. FitzPatrick
Nuclear Power Plant, Oswego County,
New York
Date of amendment request: June 7,
2012.
E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM
29APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 82 / Tuesday, April 29, 2014 / Notices
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Brief description of amendment: The
amendment adopts the NRC’s-approved
Technical Specifications Task Force
(TSTF) Standard Technical
Specifications Change Traveler TSTF–
535, ‘‘Revise Shutdown Margin
Definition to Address Advanced Fuel
Designs,’’ ADAMS Accession No.
ML112200436 dated August 8, 2011; to
modify the TS definition of ‘‘Shutdown
Margin’’ (SDM).
The change requires the calculation of
the SDM at a reactor moderator
temperature of 68 °F or higher, to a
temperature that represents the most
reactive state of the core throughout the
reactor operating cycle. This change is
needed to address new Boiling Water
Reactor fuel designs which may be more
reactive at shutdown temperatures
above 68 °F.
Date of issuance: April 14, 2014.
Effective date: As of the date of
issuance, and shall be implemented
within 60 days.
Amendment No.: 305. A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML14085A446;
documents related to this amendment
are listed in the Safety Evaluation
enclosed with the amendment.
Renewed Facility Operating License
No. DPR–59: The amendment revised
the License and the Technical
Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: November 26, 2013 (78 FR
70592).
The Commission’s related evaluation
of the amendment is contained in a
Safety Evaluation dated April 14, 2014.
No significant hazards consideration
comments received: No.
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket No.
50–390, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 1,
Rhea County, Tennessee
Date of application for amendment:
April 12, 2013.
Description of amendment request:
The amendment revised Technical
Specification (TS) 5.9.2. ‘‘Annual
Radiological Environmental Operating
Report,’’ to delete the reference to
collocated dosimeters in relation to the
NRC thermoluminescent dosimeters
program. This change is consistent with
the NRC’s-approved Technical
Specification Task Force (TSTF) change
TSTF–348. In addition, it would correct
a cross-reference error in TS 5.9.8,
‘‘PAMS Post Accident Monitoring
System Report.’’
Date of issuance: April 7, 2014.
Effective date: As of the date of
issuance and shall be implemented no
later than 30 days from date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 96. A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:56 Apr 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
Accession No. ML14071A339;
documents related to this amendment
are listed in the Safety Evaluation
enclosed with the amendment.
Facility Operating License No. NPF–
90: Amendment revised the License and
TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: August 20, 2013 (78 FR
51230).
The Commission’s related evaluation
of the amendment is contained in a
Safety Evaluation dated April 7, 2014.
No significant hazards consideration
comments received: None.
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket No.
50–390, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 1,
Rhea County, Tennessee
Date of application for amendment:
July 30, 2013.
Brief description of amendment: The
amendment revised Technical
Specification (TS) 4.3.1.1, ‘‘Criticality,’’
to clarify the requirements for storage of
new and spent fuel assemblies in the
spent fuel racks. This change updated
the current Unit 1 TS to ensure
consistency with the proposed TS
4.3.1.1 for Unit 2. In addition, editorial
changes are being made to TS 4.3.1.
Date of issuance: April 7, 2014.
Effective date: As of the date of
issuance and shall be implemented no
later than 60 days from date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 95. A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML14071A290;
documents related to this amendment
are listed in the Safety Evaluation
enclosed with the amendment.
Facility Operating License No. NPF–
90: Amendment revised the License and
TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: December 10, 2013 (78 FR
74185).
The Commission’s related evaluation
of the amendment is contained in a
Safety Evaluation dated April 7, 2014.
No significant hazards consideration
comments received: None.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day
of April 2014.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
A. Louise Lund,
Deputy Director, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2014–09489 Filed 4–28–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24027
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Advisory Committee on Reactor
Safeguards (ACRS); Meeting of the
ACRS Subcommittee on Digital I&C;
Notice of Meeting
The ACRS Subcommittee on Digital
I&C will hold a briefing on May 20,
2014, Room T–2B1, 11545 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland.
The entire meeting will be open to
public attendance.
The agenda for the subject meeting
shall be as follows:
Tuesday, May 20, 2014—8:30 a.m. Until
5:00 p.m.
The Subcommittee will review a
revision to 10 CFR 50.55a(h) endorsing
IEEE 603–2009, ‘‘Criteria for Safety
Systems for Nuclear Power Generating
Stations.’’ The Subcommittee will hear
presentations by and hold discussions
with the NRC staff and other interested
persons regarding this matter. The
Subcommittee will gather information,
analyze relevant issues and facts, and
formulate proposed positions and
actions, as appropriate, for deliberation
by the Full Committee.
Members of the public desiring to
provide oral statements and/or written
comments should notify the Designated
Federal Official (DFO), Christina
Antonescu (Telephone 301–415–6792 or
Email: Christina.Antonescu@nrc.gov)
five days prior to the meeting, if
possible, so that appropriate
arrangements can be made. Thirty-five
hard copies of each presentation or
handout should be provided to the DFO
thirty minutes before the meeting. In
addition, one electronic copy of each
presentation should be emailed to the
DFO one day before the meeting. If an
electronic copy cannot be provided
within this timeframe, presenters
should provide the DFO with a CD
containing each presentation at least
thirty minutes before the meeting.
Electronic recordings will be permitted
only during those portions of the
meeting that are open to the public.
Detailed procedures for the conduct of
and participation in ACRS meetings
were published in the Federal Register
on November 8, 2013 (78 CFR 67205–
67206).
Detailed meeting agendas and meeting
transcripts are available on the NRC
Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/doc-collections/acrs. Information
regarding topics to be discussed,
changes to the agenda, whether the
meeting has been canceled or
rescheduled, and the time allotted to
present oral statements can be obtained
E:\FR\FM\29APN1.SGM
29APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 82 (Tuesday, April 29, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24021-24027]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-09489]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2014-0095]
Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility
Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant
Hazards Considerations
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Biweekly notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 189a. (2) of the Atomic Energy Act of
1954, as amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) is publishing this regular biweekly notice. The Act requires the
Commission to 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 April 3, 2014 to April 16, 2014. The last
biweekly notice was published on April 15, 2014.
DATES: Comments must be filed by May 29, 2014. A request for a hearing
must be filed by June 30, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods
(unless this document describes a different method for submitting
comments on a specific subject):
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2014-0095. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-
3422; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Office of Administration,
Mail Stop: 3WFN-06-44M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555-0001.
For additional direction on accessing information and submitting
comments, see ``Accessing Information and Submitting Comments'' in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Beverly A. Clayton, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3475, email: Beverly.Clayton@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Accessing Information and Submitting Comments
A. Accessing Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2014-0095 when contacting the NRC
about the availability of information regarding this document. You may
access publicly-available information related to this document by any
of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2014-0095.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may access publicly available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection 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-2014-0095 in the subject line of your
comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make
your comment submission available to the public in this docket.
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in you
comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at https://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into
ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit
[[Page 24022]]
comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to
include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be
publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should
state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to
remove such information before making the comment submissions available
to the public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.
II. Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility
Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses and Proposed No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following
amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under
the Commission's regulations in Sec. 50.92 of Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (10 CFR), this means that operation of the facility
in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) involve a
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated, or (2) create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; or
(3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The basis
for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown
below.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the
expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The
Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-
day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment
involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the
Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-
day comment period should circumstances change during the 30-day
comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result,
for example in derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the
Commission take action prior to the expiration of either the comment
period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a
notice of issuance. Should the Commission make a final No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will take place after
issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will
occur very infrequently.
A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To Intervene
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 ``Agency
Rules of Practice and Procedure'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested
person(s) should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is
available at the NRC's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Room O1-
F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. The
NRC's 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.
B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)
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
[[Page 24023]]
accordance with the NRC's 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 email at hearing.docket@nrc.gov,
or by telephone at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital
identification (ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its
counsel or representative) to digitally sign documents and access the
E-Submittal server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and
(2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a
request or petition for hearing (even in instances in which the
participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-
issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the
Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this
proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic
docket.
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is
available on the NRC's public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.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 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 NRC'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 public
Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email to
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The
NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.,
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.
Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not
submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention:
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth
Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland, 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff.
Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for
serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered
complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or
by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing
the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer,
having 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.
However, a request to intervene will require including information on
local residence in order to demonstrate a proximity assertion of
interest in the proceeding. With respect to copyrighted works, except
for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings
and would constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested
not to include copyrighted materials in their submission.
Petitions for leave to intervene must be filed no later than 60
days from the date of publication of this notice. Requests for hearing,
petitions for leave to intervene, and motions for leave to file new or
amended contentions that are filed after the 60-day deadline will not
be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer that the
filing demonstrates good cause by satisfying the three factors in 10
CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(iii).
For further details with respect to these license amendment
applications, see the application for amendment which is available for
public inspection in ADAMS and at the NRC's PDR. For additional
direction on accessing information related to this document, see the
``Accessing Information and Submitting Comments'' section of this
document.
[[Page 24024]]
South Carolina Electric and Gas Company, Docket Nos.: 52-027 and 52-
028, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station (VCSNS), Units 2 and 3, Fairfield
County, South Carolina
Date of amendment request: February 27, 2014. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML14065A021.
Description of amendment request: The proposed change would amend
Combined License Nos. NPF-93 and NPF-94 for VCSNS, Units 2 and 3,
respectively, by revising Tier 2* and associated Tier 2 information
related to the construction of Module CA03. Some of these changes
include the clarification of various materials in the design,
increasing anchoring supports, and allowing the use of anchor bars with
hooks.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented below:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The design functions of the nuclear island structures are to
provide support, protection, and separation for the seismic Category
I mechanical and electrical equipment located in the nuclear island.
The nuclear island structures are structurally designed to meet
seismic Category I requirements as defined in Regulatory Guide 1.29
(ADAMS Accession No. ML070310052).
The change to the design details for the in-containment
refueling water storage tank (IRWST) west wall does not have an
adverse impact on the response of the nuclear island structures to
safe shutdown earthquake ground motions or loads due to anticipated
transients or postulated accident conditions, nor does it change the
seismic Category I classification. The change to the design details
for the IRWST west wall does not impact the support, design, or
operation of mechanical and fluid systems. There is no change to
plant systems or the response of systems to postulated accident
conditions. There is no change to the predicted radioactive releases
due to postulated accident conditions. The plant response to
previously evaluated accidents or external events is not adversely
affected, nor does the change described create any new accident
precursors.
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.
The proposed change is to revise design details for the IRWST
west wall. The change of the design details for the IRWST west wall
does not change the design requirements of the nuclear island
structures, nor the seismic Category I classification. The change of
the design details for the IRWST west wall does not change the
design function, support, design, or operation of mechanical and
fluid systems. The change of the design details for the IRWST west
wall does not result in a new failure mechanism for the nuclear
island structures or introduce any new accident precursors. As a
result, the design function of the nuclear island structures is not
adversely affected by the proposed change.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
No safety analysis or design basis acceptance limit/criterion is
involved by the requested changes, thus, no margin of safety is
reduced.
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: Kathryn M. Sutton, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius
LLC, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004-2514.
NRC Branch Chief: Lawrence J. Burkhart.
South Carolina Electric and Gas Company, Docket Nos. 52-027 and 52-028,
Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station (VCSNS), Units 2 and 3, Fairfield
County, South Carolina
Date of amendment request: April 3, 2014. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML14093B258.
Description of amendment request: The proposed change would amend
Combined License Nos. NPF-93 and NPF-94 for the VCSNS, Units 2 and 3 by
departing from the plant-specific Design Control Document (DCD) Tier 2*
to identify design details of the floors of the auxiliary building that
may vary due to design and loading conditions, in accordance with code
requirements.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented below:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The design functions of the auxiliary building floors are to
provide support, protection, and separation for the seismic Category
I mechanical and electrical equipment located in the auxiliary
building. The auxiliary building is a seismic Category I structure
and is designed for dead, live, thermal, pressure, safe shutdown
earthquake loads, and loads due to postulated pipe breaks. The
proposed changes to [Updated Final Safety Analysis Report] UFSAR
descriptions and figures are intended to address changes in the
detail design of floors in the auxiliary building. The proposed
changes also incorporate requirements for development and anchoring
of headed reinforcement. The properties of the concrete and
reinforcement included in the auxiliary building structure are not
altered. As a result, the design function of the auxiliary building
structure is not adversely affected by the proposed changes. There
is no change to plant systems or the response of systems to
postulated accident conditions. There is no change to the predicted
radioactive releases due to postulated accident conditions. The
plant response to previously evaluated accidents or external events
is not adversely affected, nor do the changes described create any
new accident precursors.
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.
The proposed changes to UFSAR descriptions and figures are
proposed to address changes in the detail design of floors in the
auxiliary building. The proposed changes also incorporate the
requirements for development and anchoring of headed reinforcement
which were previously approved. The thickness, geometry, and
strength of the structures are not adversely altered. The concrete
and reinforcement materials are not altered. The properties of the
concrete are not altered. The changes to the design details of the
auxiliary building structure do not create any new accident
precursors. As a result, the design function of the auxiliary
building structure is not adversely affected by the proposed
changes.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The criteria and requirements of American Concrete institute
(ACI) 349 and American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) N690
provide a margin of safety to structural failure. The design of the
auxiliary building structure conforms to applicable criteria and
requirements in ACI 349 and AISC N690 and therefore maintains the
margin of safety. The
[[Page 24025]]
proposed changes to the UFSAR address changes in the detail design
of floors in the auxiliary building. The proposed changes also
incorporate the requirements for development and anchoring of headed
reinforcement which were previously approved. There is no change to
design requirements of the auxiliary building structure. There is no
change to the method of evaluation from that used in the design
basis calculations. There is not a significant change to the in
structure response spectra.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not result in 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: Kathryn M. Sutton, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius
LLC, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004-2514.
NRC Branch Chief: Lawrence Burkhart.
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026,
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP), Units 3 and 4, Burke County,
Georgia
Date of amendment request: April 4, 2014. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML14094A348.
Description of amendment request: The proposed change would amend
Combined License Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92 for the VEGP, Units 3 and 4 by
departing from the plant-specific Design Control Document (DCD) Tier 2*
to identify design details of the floors of the auxiliary building that
may vary due to design and loading conditions, in accordance with code
requirements.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented below:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No
The design functions of the auxiliary building floors are to
provide support, protection, and separation for the seismic Category
I mechanical and electrical equipment located in the auxiliary
building. The auxiliary building is a seismic Category I structure
and is designed for dead, live, thermal, pressure, safe shutdown
earthquake loads, and loads due to postulated pipe breaks. The
proposed changes to [Updated Final Safety Analysis Report] UFSAR
descriptions and figures are intended to address changes in the
detail design of floors in the auxiliary building. The proposed
changes also incorporate requirements for development and anchoring
of headed reinforcement. The properties of the concrete and
reinforcement included in the auxiliary building structure are not
altered. As a result, the design function of the auxiliary building
structure is not adversely affected by the proposed changes. There
is no change to plant systems or the response of systems to
postulated accident conditions. There is no change to the predicted
radioactive releases due to postulated accident conditions. The
plant response to previously evaluated accidents or external events
is not adversely affected, nor do the changes described create any
new accident precursors.
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.
The proposed changes to UFSAR descriptions and figures are
proposed to address changes in the detail design of floors in the
auxiliary building. The proposed changes also incorporate the
requirements for development and anchoring of headed reinforcement
which were previously approved. The thickness, geometry, and
strength of the structures are not adversely altered. The concrete
and reinforcement materials are not altered. The properties of the
concrete are not altered. The changes to the design details of the
auxiliary building structure do not create any new accident
precursors. As a result, the design function of the auxiliary
building structure is not adversely affected by the proposed
changes.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The criteria and requirements of American Concrete institute
(ACI) 349 and American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) N690
provide a margin of safety to structural failure. The design of the
auxiliary building structure conforms to applicable criteria and
requirements in ACI 349 and AISC N690 and therefore maintains the
margin of safety. The proposed changes to the UFSAR address changes
in the detail design of floors in the auxiliary building. The
proposed changes also incorporate the requirements for development
and anchoring of headed reinforcement which were previously
approved. There is no change to design requirements of the auxiliary
building structure. There is no change to the method of evaluation
from that used in the design basis calculations. There is not a
significant change to the in structure response spectra.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not result in 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: M. Stanford Blanton, Blach & Bingham LLP,
1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35203-2015.
NRC Branch Chief: Lawrence J. Burkhart.
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-
026, Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP), Units 3 and 4, Burke
County, Georgia
Date of amendment request: March 17, 2014. A publicly-available
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML14076A173.
Description of amendment request: The proposed change would amend
Combined License Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92 for the VEGP, Units 3 and 4.
The requested amendment proposes changes to revise the VEGP Updated
Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) by clarifying how human diversity
was applied during the design process for the Component Interface
Module (CIM) and Diverse Actuation System (DAS). This license amendment
request (LAR) proposes the addition of Appendix 7A to VEGP, Units 3 and
4 UFSAR Chapter 7 to modify information related to human diversity, as
presented in a Tier 2* document, WCAP-17179-NP, ``AP1000 Component
Interface Module Technical Report,'' Revision 2 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML102170259), and two Tier 2 documents, WCAP-15775, ``AP1000
Instrumentation and Control Defense-in-Depth and Diversity Report,''
Revision 4 (ADAMS Accession No. ML101530048) and WCAP-17184-NP,
``AP1000 Diverse Actuation System Planning and Functional Design
Summary Technical Report,'' Revision 2 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML102170263) that are incorporated by reference in the VEGP, Units 3
and 4 UFSAR.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented below:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The requested amendment proposes changes to licensing basis
documents to clarify the position on the human diversity
[[Page 24026]]
aspects of design diversity as related to the Component Interface
Module (CIM) and Diverse Actuation System (DAS) design processes. A
review confirmed that the clarified position on human diversity
would not change the CIM or DAS design. The requested changes to
information presented in the Tier 2* and Tier 2 supporting
documentation clarify the level of human diversity applied. The
change continues to comply with the regulatory guidance in NUREG/CR-
6303 [``Method for Performing Diversity and Defense-in-Depth
Analyses of Reactor Protection Systems,'' (ADAMS Accession No.
ML071790509)] regarding credible defenses against a postulated
Common Cause Failure (CCF) of the Plant Monitoring and Safety
System. The proposed change does not affect the plant itself. The
change does not affect prevention and mitigation of abnormal events,
e.g., accidents, anticipated operational occurrences, earthquakes,
floods and turbine missiles, or their safety or design analyses. No
safety-related structure, system, or component (SSC) or function is
adversely affected. The change does not involve nor interface with
any SSC accident initiator or initiating sequence of events, and
thus, the probabilities of the accidents evaluated in the Updated
Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) are not affected. This activity
will not allow for a new fission product release path, nor will it
result in a new fission product barrier failure mode, nor create a
new sequence of events that would result in significant fuel
cladding failures. Because the proposed changes do not change any
safety related SSC or function credited in the mitigation of an
accident, the consequences of the accidents evaluated in the UFSAR
are not affected.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve an increase
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously
evaluated.
2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes clarify the position on human diversity and
show that the CIM/DAS diversity meets the regulatory guidance in
NUREG/CR-6303. The clarified descriptions do not affect the plant
itself. Therefore, the proposed changes do not affect any safety-
related equipment itself, nor do they affect equipment whose failure
could initiate an accident or a failure of a fission product
barrier. No analysis is adversely affected by the proposed changes.
No system or design function or equipment qualification would be
adversely affected by the proposed changes. Furthermore, the
proposed changes do not result in a new failure mode, malfunction or
sequence of events that could affect safety or safety-related
equipment.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed changes to information presented in referenced
licensing basis documents clarify the position regarding human
diversity and do not affect the plant itself. The proposed changes
do not adversely affect the design, construction, or operation of
any plant SSCs, including any equipment whose failure could initiate
an accident or a failure of a fission product barrier. No analysis
is adversely affected by the proposed changes. Furthermore, no
system function, design function, or equipment qualification will be
adversely affected by the changes.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not reduce 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: M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP,
1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35203-2015.
NRC Branch Chief: Lawrence J. Burkhart.
III. 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 can be accessed as described in the
``Accessing Information and Submitting Comments'' section of this
document.
Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., et al., Docket No. 50-423,
Millstone Power Station, Unit 3, New London County, Connecticut
Date of application for amendment: April 25, 2013, as supplemented
by letters dated September 19, and December 11, 2013.
Brief description of amendment: The Amendment revises the Technical
Specifications Section 6.8.4.f, ``Containment Leakage Rate Testing
Program'' to increase the value of the calculated peak containment
internal pressure, Pa, from 41.4 pounds per square inch gage
(psig) to 41.9 psig. This increase is needed to address an increase in
the calculated mass and energy (M&E) release during the blowdown phase
of the design basis Loss-of-Coolant Accident (LOCA).
Date of issuance: April 8, 2014.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 60 days from the date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 259. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML14073A055; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-49: Amendment revised
the License and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 25, 2013 (78 FR
38081). The supplements dated September 19 and December 11, 2013,
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 April 8, 2014.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-333, James A.
FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, Oswego County, New York
Date of amendment request: June 7, 2012.
[[Page 24027]]
Brief description of amendment: The amendment adopts the NRC's-
approved Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Standard Technical
Specifications Change Traveler TSTF-535, ``Revise Shutdown Margin
Definition to Address Advanced Fuel Designs,'' ADAMS Accession No.
ML112200436 dated August 8, 2011; to modify the TS definition of
``Shutdown Margin'' (SDM).
The change requires the calculation of the SDM at a reactor
moderator temperature of 68[emsp14][deg]F or higher, to a temperature
that represents the most reactive state of the core throughout the
reactor operating cycle. This change is needed to address new Boiling
Water Reactor fuel designs which may be more reactive at shutdown
temperatures above 68[emsp14][deg]F.
Date of issuance: April 14, 2014.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance, and shall be
implemented within 60 days.
Amendment No.: 305. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML14085A446; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-59: The amendment
revised the License and the Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 26, 2013 (78
FR 70592).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated April 14, 2014.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket No. 50-390, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant,
Unit 1, Rhea County, Tennessee
Date of application for amendment: April 12, 2013.
Description of amendment request: The amendment revised Technical
Specification (TS) 5.9.2. ``Annual Radiological Environmental Operating
Report,'' to delete the reference to collocated dosimeters in relation
to the NRC thermoluminescent dosimeters program. This change is
consistent with the NRC's-approved Technical Specification Task Force
(TSTF) change TSTF-348. In addition, it would correct a cross-reference
error in TS 5.9.8, ``PAMS Post Accident Monitoring System Report.''
Date of issuance: April 7, 2014.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
no later than 30 days from date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 96. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML14071A339; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Facility Operating License No. NPF-90: Amendment revised the
License and TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 20, 2013 (78 FR
51230).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated April 7, 2014.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: None.
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket No. 50-390, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant,
Unit 1, Rhea County, Tennessee
Date of application for amendment: July 30, 2013.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised Technical
Specification (TS) 4.3.1.1, ``Criticality,'' to clarify the
requirements for storage of new and spent fuel assemblies in the spent
fuel racks. This change updated the current Unit 1 TS to ensure
consistency with the proposed TS 4.3.1.1 for Unit 2. In addition,
editorial changes are being made to TS 4.3.1.
Date of issuance: April 7, 2014.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
no later than 60 days from date of issuance.
Amendment No.: 95. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under
Accession No. ML14071A290; documents related to this amendment are
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
Facility Operating License No. NPF-90: Amendment revised the
License and TSs.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 10, 2013 (78
FR 74185).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated April 7, 2014.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: None.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of April 2014.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
A. Louise Lund,
Deputy Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2014-09489 Filed 4-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
