Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations, 27345-27351 [2014-10718]

Agencies

• NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 92 (Tuesday, May 13, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27345-27351]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-10718]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2014-0108]


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 17, 2014 to April 30, 2014. The last 
biweekly notice was published on April 29, 2014.

DATES: Comments must be filed by June 12, 2014. A request for a hearing 
must be filed by July 14, 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-2014-0108. 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: Mable A. Henderson, Office, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 
301-415-3760, email: Mable.Henderson@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Accessing Information and Submitting Comments

A. Accessing Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2014-0108 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-2014-0108.

[[Page 27346]]

     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-2014-0108 in the subject line of your 
comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make 
your comment submission available to the public in this docket.
    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact 
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your 
comment submission. The NRC 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 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

[[Page 27347]]

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 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

[[Page 27348]]

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.
South Carolina Electric and Gas Company, South Carolina Public Service 
Authority, Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station (VCSNS), 
Unit 1, Fairfield County, South Carolina
    Date of amendment request: March 26, 2014. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS Package under Accession No. ML14091A487.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment includes a 
significant revision to the site's Radiation Emergency Plan.
    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration 
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has 
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards 
consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed changes to the VCSNS emergency plan do not impact 
the physical function of plant structures, systems, or components 
(SSC) or the manner in which SSCs perform their design function. The 
proposed changes neither adversely affect accident initiators or 
precursors, nor alter design assumptions. The proposed changes do 
not alter or prevent the ability of SSCs to perform their intended 
function to mitigate the consequences of an initiating event within 
assumed acceptance limits. No operating procedures or administrative 
controls that function to prevent or mitigate accidents are affected 
by the proposed changes.
    Therefore, the proposed changes do 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 do not involve a physical alteration of the 
plant (i.e., no new or different type of equipment will be installed 
or removed) or a change in the method of plant operation. The 
proposed changes will not introduce failure modes that could result 
in a new accident, and the change does not alter assumptions made in 
the safety analysis. The proposed changes to the location of the 
TSC, activation times of facilities, and aligning ERO structure are 
not initiators of any accidents.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility 
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    Margin of safety is associated with the ability of the fission 
product barriers (i.e., fuel cladding, reactor coolant system 
pressure boundary, and containment structure) to limit the level of 
radiation dose to the public. The proposed changes do not impact 
operation of the plant or its response to transients or accidents. 
The changes do not affect the Technical Specifications or the 
operating license. The proposed changes do not involve a change in 
the method of plant operation, and no accident analyses will be 
affected by the proposed changes. Additionally, the proposed changes 
will not relax any criteria used to establish safety limits and will 
not relax any safety system settings. The safety analysis acceptance 
criteria are not affected by these changes. The proposed changes 
will not result in plant operation in a configuration outside the 
design basis. The proposed changes do not adversely affect systems 
that respond to safely shut down the plant and to maintain the plant 
in a safe shutdown condition. The emergency plan will continue to 
activate an emergency response commensurate with the extent of 
degradation of plant 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: J. Hagood Hamilton, Jr., South Carolina 
Electric & Gas Company, Post Office Box 764, Columbia, SC 29218.
    NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. Pascarelli.
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 18, 2014. A publicly-available 
version is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML14108A096.
    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 1 
(and corresponding Combined License Appendix C information) and Tier 2 
material by making changes to the annex and radwaste building 
structures and layout by:
    (1) Updating the annex building column line designations on 
affected Tier 1 Figures and Tier 2 Figure 3.7.2-19; and
    (2) Revising the radwaste building configuration including the 
shielding design and radiation monitoring.
    Because this proposed change requires a departure from Tier 1 
information in the Westinghouse Advanced Passive 1000 DCD, the licensee 
also requested an exemption from the requirements of the Generic DCD 
Tier 1 in accordance with 52.63(b)(1).
    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration 
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has 
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards 
consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed annex building changes updating column line 
designations and the radwaste building change to add three bunkers 
for storage of moderate and high activity waste, incorporate the 
Waste Accumulation Room and the Packaged Waste Storage Room, revise 
shield wall thicknesses, and eliminate a radiation monitor no longer 
needed do not alter the assumed initiators to any analyzed event. 
These proposed changes do not affect the operation of any systems or 
equipment that could initiate an analyzed accident. The proposed 
changes to the annex building column line designations update the 
annex building column line designations in the UFSAR figures to make 
them consistent with the [Updated Final Safety Analysis Report] 
UFSAR figure for the auxiliary building. The radwaste building 
proposed changes do not affect any accident initiators, because 
there is no accident initiator located within that building. Based 
on the above, the

[[Page 27349]]

probability of an accident previously evaluated will not be 
increased by these proposed changes.
    The proposed annex and radwaste building configuration changes 
do not affect any radiological dose consequence analysis for UFSAR 
Chapter 15. No accident source term parameter or fission product 
barrier is impacted by these changes. Structures, systems, and 
components (SSCs) required for mitigation of analyzed accidents are 
not affected by these changes, and the functions of these buildings 
are not adversely affected by these changes. Consequently, this 
activity will not increase the consequences of any analyzed 
accident, including the main steam line limiting break.
    Therefore, the proposed activity 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 annex building changes updating column line 
designations and the radwaste building change to add three bunkers 
for storage of moderate and high activity waste, incorporate the 
Waste Accumulation Room and the Packaged Waste Storage Room, revise 
shield wall thicknesses, and eliminate a radiation monitor no longer 
needed, do not change the design function of the either of these 
buildings or any of the systems or equipment contained therein or in 
any other Nuclear Island structures. These proposed changes do not 
adversely affect any system design functions or methods of 
operation. These changes do not introduce any new equipment or 
components or change the operation of any existing systems or 
equipment in a manner that would result in a new failure mode, 
malfunction, or sequence of events that could affect safety-related 
or non-safety-related equipment or result in a radioactive material 
release. This activity does not allow for a new radioactive material 
release path or result in a new radioactive material barrier failure 
mode.
    Therefore, this activity 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 proposed changes do not affect any safety-related equipment, 
design code compliance, design function, design analysis, safety 
analysis input or result, or design/safety margin. The margin in the 
design of the annex and radwaste buildings is determined by the use 
of the current codes and standards and adherence to the assumptions 
used in the analyses of this structure and the events associated 
with this structure. The column line designations for the annex 
building in UFSAR Tier 2 figures are updated to make them consistent 
with the UFSAR figures for the auxiliary building. This change has 
no adverse impact on plant construction or operation. The design of 
the radwaste building, including the newly added bunkers for 
moderate and high activity waste, merging of the Waste Accumulation 
Room and the Packaged Waste Storage Room, will continue to be in 
accordance with the same codes and standards as stated in the UFSAR. 
The activity has no effect on off-site dose analysis for analyzed 
accidents.
    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: 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 27, 2014. A publicly-available 
version is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML14086A544.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed change would amend 
Combined License Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92 for the VEGP, Units 3 and 4 to 
revise the Emergency Plan to relocate the Operations Support Centers 
(OSCs) and revise the description of the plant monitoring system. The 
OSCs are proposed to be relocated from the Control Support Areas (CSAs) 
of each unit to a common OSC located in the Maintenance Support 
Building. Changes to the plant monitoring system used to initiate 
emergency actions and to conduct accident assessment are proposed due 
to changes in the plant design. The requested amendment will also 
revise plant-specific emergency planning inspections, tests, analyses, 
and acceptance criteria (ITAAC) in Appendix C of the VEGP, Units 3 and 
4 combined licenses (COLs). Changes to the plant-specific emergency 
planning ITAAC are proposed due to changes in the proposed location for 
the OSC, changes in plant design, changes in expected NRC action 
regarding regulatory guidance documents, and changes in drill and 
exercise objective acceptance criteria.
    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 VEGP, Units 3 and 4 Emergency Plan provides assurance that 
the requirements of emergency preparedness regulations are met. The 
VEGP, Units 3 and 4 emergency planning inspections, tests, analyses, 
and acceptance criteria (ITAAC) provide assurance that the facility 
has been constructed and will be operated in conformity with the 
license, the provisions of the Act, and the Commission's rules and 
regulations. The proposed changes do not affect the design of a 
system, structure, or component (SSC) used to meet the design bases 
of the nuclear plant. Nor do the changes affect the construction or 
operation of the nuclear plant itself, so there is no change to the 
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 
Changing the VEGP, Units 3 and 4 Emergency Plan and the emergency 
planning ITAAC do 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 as the purpose of the plan is to implement emergency 
preparedness regulations. No safety-related structure, system, 
component (SSC) or function is adversely affected. The changes do 
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. Because the changes do not involve any 
safety-related SSC or function used to mitigate an accident, the 
consequences of the accidents evaluated in the UFSAR are not 
affected.
    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 VEGP, Units 3 and 4 Emergency Plan provides assurance that 
the requirements of emergency preparedness regulations are met. The 
VEGP, Units 3 and 4 emergency planning ITAAC provide assurance that 
the facility has been constructed and will be operated in conformity 
with the license, the provisions of the Act, and the Commission's 
rules and regulations. The changes do not affect the design of an 
SSC used to meet the design bases of the nuclear plant. Nor do the 
changes affect the construction or operation of the nuclear plant. 
Consequently, there is no new or different kind of accident from any 
accident previously evaluated. The changes do not affect safety-
related equipment, nor do they affect equipment which, if it failed, 
could initiate an accident or a failure of a fission product 
barrier. In addition, the changes do not result in a new failure 
mode, malfunction or sequence of events that could affect safety or 
safety-related equipment. No analysis is adversely affected. No 
system or

[[Page 27350]]

design function or equipment qualification is adversely affected by 
the changes. 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.
    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 VEGP, Units 3 and 4 Emergency Plan provides assurance that 
the requirements of emergency preparedness regulations are met. The 
VEGP, Units 3 and 4 emergency planning ITAAC provide assurance that 
the facility has been constructed and will be operated in conformity 
with the license, the provisions of the Act, and the Commission's 
rules and regulations. The changes do not affect the assessments or 
the plant itself. The changes do not adversely interface with 
safety-related equipment or fission product barriers. No safety 
analysis or design basis acceptance limit/criterion is challenged or 
exceeded by the proposed change.
    Therefore, the proposed amendment 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: 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., Docket No. 50-336, Millstone Power 
Station (MPS), Unit 2, New London County, Connecticut
    Date of amendment request: May 3, 2013, as supplemented by letters 
dated June 27, 2013, July 19, 2013, July 30, 2013, August 1, 2013, and 
October 2, 2013.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would 
revise the MPS, Unit 2 Technical Specification (TS) 3/4.7.11, 
``Ultimate Heat Sink,'' to increase the current ultimate heat sink 
water temperature limit from 75[emsp14][deg]F to 80[emsp14][deg]F and 
change the TS Action to state, ``With the ultimate heat sink water 
temperature greater than 80[emsp14][deg]F, be in HOT STANDBY within 6 
hours and in COLD SHUTDOWN within the following 30 hours.''
    Date of issuance: April 18, 2014.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance, and shall be 
implemented within 60 days.
    Amendment No.: 318. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under 
Accession No. ML14037A408; documents related to this amendment are 
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-65: Amendment revised 
the License and Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 20, 2013 (78 FR 
51225). The supplemental letters dated June 27, 2013, July 19, 2013, 
July 30, 2013, August 1, 2013, and October 2, 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.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated April 18, 2014.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

DTE Electric Company, Docket No. 50-341, Fermi 2, Monroe County, 
Michigan

    Date of application for amendment: April 17, 2013.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the Fermi 2 
Action and Surveillance Requirements in technical specification (TS) 
3.7.3, ``Control Room Emergency Filtration (CREF) System,'' and added a 
new administrative controls program, TS 5.5.14, ``Control Room Envelope 
Habitability Program.''
    Date of issuance: April 18, 2014.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 60 days of issuance.
    Amendment No.: 198. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under 
Accession No. ML14098A062; documents related to this amendment are 
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
    Facility Operating License No. NPF-43: Amendment revised the 
Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 20, 2013 (78 FR 
51222).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated April 18, 2014.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Nebraska Public Power District, Docket No. 50-298, Cooper Nuclear 
Station, Nemaha County, Nebraska
    Date of application for amendment: April 24, 2012, as supplemented 
by letters dated July 12, and August 23, 2012; January 14, February 12, 
March 13, June 13, and December 12, 2013; and January 17, February 18, 
and April 11, 2014.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment authorizes the 
transition of the Cooper Nuclear Station fire protection program to a 
risk-informed, performance-based program based on National Fire 
Protection Association (NFPA) 805, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.48(c). 
NFPA 805 allows the use of performance-based methods such as fire 
modeling and risk-informed methods such as fire probabilistic risk 
assessment to demonstrate compliance with the nuclear safety 
performance criteria.

[[Page 27351]]

    Date of issuance: April 29, 2014.
    Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented 
by 12 months from the date of issuance.
    Amendment No.: 248. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under 
Accession No. ML14055A023; documents related to this amendment are 
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-46: The amendment 
revised the Operating License and Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 26, 2012 (78 
FR 70593). The supplements dated December 12, 2013; and January 17, 
February 18, and April 11, 2014, 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 29, 2014.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Virginia Electric and Power Company, et al., Docket Nos. 50-280 and 50-
281, Surry Power Station, Units 1 and 2, Surry County, Virginia
    Date of application for amendments: May 13, 2013, as supplemented 
by letters dated September 9, 2013, and March 13, 2014.
    Brief Description of amendments: The amendments revise Surry, Units 
1 and 2, Technical Specifications 4.17, ``Shock Suppressors 
(Snubbers),'' to delete detailed surveillance requirements for snubbers 
and add TS 6.4.T, ``Inservice Examination, Testing, and Service Life 
Monitoring Program for Snubbers,'' which requires the surveillance 
requirements for snubbers be in accordance with the ASME OM Code, 
Subsection ISTD, as provided in NRC regulations. The amendments also 
relocate the detailed surveillance requirements to the Surry, Units 1 
and 2, Inservice Examination, Testing and Service Life Monitoring 
Program Plans for Snubbers.
    Date of issuance: April 24, 2014.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 60 days.
    Amendment Nos.: 281, 281. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS 
under Accession No. ML14073A405; documents related to this amendment 
are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-32 and DPR-37: 
Amendments change the licenses and the technical specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 9, 2013 (78 FR 
41122). The supplements dated September 9, 2013 and March 13, 2014, 
provided additional information that clarified the application, did not 
expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not 
change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards 
consideration determination.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated April 24, 2014.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day of May 2014.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Michele G. Evans,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2014-10718 Filed 5-12-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P