Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations, 20858-20866 [2018-09244]

Download as PDF 20858 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 8, 2018 / Notices • 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. They will also become a matter of public record. Deborah F. Bloxon, NASA Federal Liaison Officer. [FR Doc. 2018–09685 Filed 5–7–18; 8:45 am] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: BILLING CODE 7510–13–P Anthony de Jesus, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 0001; telephone: 301–287–9219, email: Anthony.deJesus@nrc.gov. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC–2018–0091] Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Categorization of notice. AGENCY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is notifying the public that documents regarding draft and final Regulatory Issue Summaries that historically have published in the ‘‘Notices’’ section of the Federal Register will now be published in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ and ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ sections of the Federal Register. The Office of the Federal Register (OFR) recently informed the NRC that under OFR guidelines, these documents fall into the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ and ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ categories and requested that NRC reclassify these notices. ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2018–0091 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2018–0091. Address questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301–287–9127; email: Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. • NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable 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. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:41 May 07, 2018 The NRC issues Regulatory Issue Summaries to communicate with stakeholders on a broad range of matters. This may include clarification of existing requirements and regulations. This may also include communicating and clarifying the NRC’s technical or policy positions on regulatory matters that have not been communicated to, or are not broadly understood by, the nuclear industry. Documents regarding Regulatory Issue Summaries historically have been published in the ‘‘Notices’’ section of the Federal Register. Under the Federal Register Act (44 U.S.C. chapter 15), the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register issues regulations regarding publishing documents in the Federal Register (see chapter I of title 1 of the Code of Federal Regulations (1 CFR)). Based on these governing regulations, the OFR classifies agency documents published in the Federal Register in one of three categories: Rules and regulations, proposed rules, and notices. The regulation establishing document types is available in 1 CFR 5.9. In accordance with the OFR’s request that the NRC reclassify Regulatory Issue Summaries, these documents will be published in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ or ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of the Federal Register. This change is effective immediately. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Relocation of Regulatory Issue Summary Notices in the Federal Register Jkt 244001 Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of May 2018. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Cindy K. Bladey, Federal Register Liaison Officer, Division of Rulemaking, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. 2018–09687 Filed 5–7–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC–2018–0085] 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 10, 2018, to April 23, 2018. The last biweekly notice was published on April 24, 2018. DATES: Comments must be filed by June 7, 2018. A request for a hearing must be filed by July 9, 2018. 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 Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2018–0085. Address questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301–287–9127; email: Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. • Mail comments to: May Ma, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN–7– A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 0001. For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see ‘‘Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments’’ in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shirley Rohrer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\08MYN1.SGM 08MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 8, 2018 / Notices Commission, Washington DC 20555– 0001; telephone: 301–415–5411, email: Shirley.Rohrer@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2018– 0085, facility name, unit number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publiclyavailable information related to this action by any of the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2018–0085. • NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable 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. The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this document • 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. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES B. Submitting Comments Please include Docket ID NRC–2018– 0085, facility name, unit number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject in your comment submission. 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:41 May 07, 2018 Jkt 244001 does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment 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 if 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. If the Commission takes 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. If the Commission makes 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. PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 20859 A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing and Petition for Leave To Intervene Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any persons (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a request for a hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition) with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in accordance with the Commission’s ‘‘Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure’’ in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309. The NRC’s regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC’s website at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/cfr/. Alternatively, a copy of the regulations is available at the NRC’s Public Document Room, located at One White Flint North, Room O1–F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, the Commission or a presiding officer will rule on the petition and, if appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be issued. As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements for standing: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the petitioner; (2) the nature of the petitioner’s right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the 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 petitioner’s interest. In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), the petition must also set forth the specific contentions which the petitioner seeks to have litigated in 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 petitioner must 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 petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to the specific sources and documents on which the petitioner intends to rely to support its position on the issue. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant or licensee on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions must be limited to matters within the scope of the proceeding. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the E:\FR\FM\08MYN1.SGM 08MYN1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES 20860 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 8, 2018 / Notices petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 CFR 2.309(f) 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. Parties have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing with respect to resolution of that party’s admitted contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence, consistent with the NRC’s regulations, policies, and procedures. Petitions must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. Petitions and motions for leave to file new or amended contentions that are filed after the 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) through (iii). The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the ‘‘Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)’’ section of this document. If a hearing is requested, and the Commission has not made a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to establish 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 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 the amendment unless the Commission finds an imminent danger to the health or safety of the public, in which case it will issue an appropriate order or rule under 10 CFR part 2. A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition should state the nature and extent of the petitioner’s interest in the proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission no later than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. The petition must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the ‘‘Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)’’ VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:41 May 07, 2018 Jkt 244001 section of this document, and should meet the requirements for petitions set forth in this section, except that under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local governmental body, or Federallyrecognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof does not need to address the standing requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(d) if the facility is located within its boundaries. Alternatively, a State, local governmental body, Federallyrecognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof may participate as a non-party under 10 CFR 2.315(c). If a hearing is granted, any person who is not a party to the proceeding and is not affiliated with or represented by a party may, at the discretion of the presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited appearance pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a limited appearance may make an oral or written statement of his or her position on the issues but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding. A limited appearance may be made at any session of the hearing or at any prehearing conference, subject to the limits and conditions as may be imposed by the presiding officer. Details regarding the opportunity to make a limited appearance will be provided by the presiding officer if such sessions are scheduled. B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing) All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition), 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 that request to participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC’s E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 FR 46562; August 3, 2012). 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. Detailed guidance on making electronic submissions may be found in the Guidance for Electronic Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC website at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/ e-submittals.html. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in accordance with the procedures described below. To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the Office of the Secretary by email at PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone at 301–415–1677, to (1) request a digital identification (ID) certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign submissions and access the E-Filing system for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a petition or other adjudicatory document (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 website at https:// www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/ getting-started.html. Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant can then submit adjudicatory documents. Submissions must be in Portable Document Format (PDF). Additional guidance on PDF submissions is available on the NRC’s public website at https://www.nrc.gov/ site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the document is 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 EFiling 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 document on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before adjudicatory documents are filed so that they can obtain access to the documents via the E-Filing system. A person filing electronically using the NRC’s adjudicatory E-Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC’s Electronic Filing Help Desk through the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link located on the NRC’s public website 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 E:\FR\FM\08MYN1.SGM 08MYN1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 8, 2018 / Notices Electronic Filing Help Desk is available between 9 a.m. and 6 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 stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and 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, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing adjudicatory documents 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:// adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the Commission or the presiding officer. If you do not have an NRC-issued digital ID certificate as described above, click cancel when the link requests certificates and you will be automatically directed to the NRC’s electronic hearing dockets where you will be able to access any publicly available documents in a particular hearing docket. Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers, home addresses, or personal phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law requires submission of such information. For example, in some instances, individuals provide home addresses in order to demonstrate proximity to a facility or site. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use application, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:41 May 07, 2018 Jkt 244001 participants are requested not to include copyrighted materials in their submission. 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 ‘‘Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments’’ section of this document. Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50–317 and 50–318, Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant (CCNPP), Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Calvert County, Maryland Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50–220 and 50–410, Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station (NMP), Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Oswego County, New York Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50–244, R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant (Ginna), Wayne County, New York Date of amendment request: March 26, 2018. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18086A138. Description of amendment request: The amendments would revise the licenses to eliminate the Nuclear Advisory Committee. Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below: 1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The proposed amendment deletes license conditions associated with the establishment of the Nuclear Advisory Committee (NAC) as provided in the orders approving the corporate merger between Exelon Corporation and Constellation Energy Group, Inc., and the resultant transfer of the renewed facility operating licenses for CCNPP, Units 1 and 2; NMP, Units 1 and 2; and Ginna on February 15, 2012. The NAC’s oversight function helps to ensure that Constellation Energy Nuclear Group (CENG) remains in compliance with laws and regulations regarding foreign domination and control of nuclear operations, and that a decision of a foreign government could not adversely affect or interfere with the reliable and safe operation of any nuclear assets of CENG or its affiliates. The NAC is an advisory committee and does not function in a decision-making role. If the NAC becomes aware of a Foreign Ownership, Control, or Domination (FOCD) PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 20861 event or issue, it will bring it to the attention of CENG management and/or the CENG Board of Directors. The NAC advises the CENG Board of Directors and provides its recommendations regarding the regulatory or safety significance of the issue, and recommended actions to address the issue. Eliminating the NAC will not impact compliance with FOCD requirements, nor will it impair the ability to identify and resolve any FOCD issues that could impact the safe or reliable operation of the nuclear units. Multiple avenues exist to resolve any concerns regarding FOCD issues. These include the ability of personnel to report an FOCD concern to their supervisor, enter a potential FOCD concern into the corrective action program, or raise the concern with the Employee Concerns Program. In addition, personnel are always free to report any concern directly to the NRC. This proposed administrative change enables the elimination of the NAC and does not alter: 1) The extent of the ownership of the reactors, 2) the authority to operate the reactors, 3) the directors or officers and details concerning the relevant companies, 4) access to restricted data, or; 5) details concerning ownership of the foreign parent company. This change does not alter compliance with the Atomic Energy Act, 10 CFR 50.38, ‘‘Ineligibility of Certain Applicants,’’ or the guidance provided in the Standard Review Plan (SRP), Final Standard Review Plan on Foreign Ownership, Control, or Domination. Additionally, this administrative change will not impact reactor operations or safety analyses. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? Response: No. This proposed administrative change enables the elimination of the NAC and does not alter: 1) The extent of the ownership of the reactors, 2) the authority to operate the reactors, 3) the directors or officers and details concerning the relevant companies, 4) access to restricted data, or; 5) details concerning ownership of the foreign parent company. This change does not alter compliance with the Atomic Energy Act, 10 CFR 50.38, ‘‘Ineligibility of Certain Applicants,’’ or the guidance provided in the Standard Review Plan (SRP), Final Standard Review Plan on Foreign Ownership, Control, or Domination. Eliminating the NAC will not impact compliance with FOCD requirements, nor will it impair the ability to identify and resolve any FOCD issues that could impact the safe or reliable operation of the nuclear units. FOCD issues will be addressed via current processes (employees reporting to their supervisor, entering an issue into the corrective action program, raising the concern to the Employee Concerns Program, or reporting directly to the NRC). This is an administrative change, and no new operating configuration is being imposed that would create a new failure E:\FR\FM\08MYN1.SGM 08MYN1 20862 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 8, 2018 / Notices scenario. In addition, no new failure modes are being created for any plant equipment. This change does not result in any new or different accident scenarios. Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated. 3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response: No. This is an administrative change. No safety analyses are being changed or modified as a result of this proposed change. This proposed administrative change does not alter the manner in which safety limits, limiting safety system settings, or limiting conditions for operation are determined. Margins associated with the current safety analyses acceptance criteria are unaffected. The safety systems credited in the safety analyses will continue to be available to perform their mitigation functions. Therefore, the proposed change does not result in a significant reduction in a margin of safety. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES 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 requested amendments involve no significant hazards consideration. Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555. NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona. Indiana Michigan Power Company, Docket No. 50–315, Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant (CNP), Unit No. 1, Berrien County, Michigan Date of amendment request: March 7, 2018. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18072A012. Description of amendment request: The proposed change would allow for the application of leak-before-break (LBB) methodology to piping for the accumulator, residual heat removal, and safety injection systems at the CNP, Unit No. 1. In addition, the proposed change would modify technical specification (TS) 3.4.13, ‘‘RCS [Reactor Coolant System] Operational LEAKAGE.’’ 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. Overall protection system performance will remain within the bounds of the previously VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:41 May 07, 2018 Jkt 244001 performed accident analyses. The design of the protection systems will be unaffected. The reactor protection system and engineered safety feature actuation system will continue to function in a manner consistent with the plant design basis. All design, material and construction standards that were applicable prior to the request are maintained. For CNP, Unit 1, the bounding accident for pipe breaks is a Large Break Loss of Coolant Accident (LBLOCA). Since the application of the LBB analysis verifies the integrity of the piping attached to the reactor coolant system, the probability of a previously evaluated accident is not increased. The consequences of a LBLOCA have been previously evaluated and found to be acceptable. The application of the LBB analysis will cause no change in the dose analysis associated with a LBLOCA, and therefore, does not affect the consequences of an accident. The proposed amendment will not alter any assumptions or change any mitigation actions in the radiological consequence evaluations in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). 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 previously evaluated? Response: No. No new accident scenarios, failure mechanisms, or single failures are introduced as a result of the proposed change. All systems, structures, and components previously required for the mitigation of an event remain capable of fulfilling their intended design function. The proposed change has no adverse effects on any safety related systems or components and does not challenge the performance or integrity of any safety related system. Further, there are no changes in the method by which any safetyrelated plant system performs its safety function. This amendment will not affect the normal method of power operation or change any operating parameters. Therefore, the proposed changes do 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 related to the ability of the fission product barriers to perform their design functions during and following accident conditions. These barriers include the fuel cladding, the reactor coolant system, and the containment. The proposed amendment request does not involve a change to any of these barriers. The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety because the proposed changes do not reduce the margin of safety that exists in the present CNP Unit 1 TS or UFSAR. The operability requirements of the TS are consistent with the initial condition assumptions of the safety analyses. This proposed amendment uses LBB technology combined with leakage monitoring to show that it is acceptable to PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 exclude the dynamic effects associated with postulated pipe ruptures from the licensing basis for the systems evaluated that are attached to the RCS. The enclosed analysis demonstrates that the LBB margins discussed in NUREG–1061, Volume 3 are satisfied. Therefore, the proposed changes do 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: Robert B. Haemer, Senior Nuclear Counsel, One Cook Place, Bridgman, MI 49106. NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona. Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), Docket No. 50–259, Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN), Unit 1, Limestone County, Alabama Date of amendment request: March 16, 2018, as supplemented by letter dated April 19, 2018. Publicly-available versions are in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML18080A171 and ML18109A573. Description of amendment request: The amendment would revise License Condition 2.C(18)(a)3 for Unit 1 that requires the submittal of a revised Unit 1 replacement steam dryer (RSD) analysis utilizing the Unit 3 on-dryer strain gauge based end-to-end bias and uncertainties at extended power conditions ‘‘at least 90 days prior to the start of the BFN Unit 1 EPU [extended power uprate] outage.’’ TVA is unable to submit the revised Unit 1 RSD analysis 90 days prior to the start of the Unit 1 EPU outage, because of delays in Unit 3 power ascension. In its supplement dated April 19, 2018, TVA proposed to revise Unit 1 analysis submittal from 90 days before the outage to 60 days prior to exceeding 3458 megawatt thermal (MWt) after the outage. The license amendment request was originally noticed in the Federal Register on April 10, 2018 (83 FR 15418). The renotice replaces and supersedes the original notice in its entirety. 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 consequence of an accident previously evaluated? Response: No. E:\FR\FM\08MYN1.SGM 08MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 8, 2018 / Notices sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES The proposed license amendment reduces the length of time, from 90 days prior to the outage to 60 days prior to exceeding 3458 MWt after the outage, by which a revised analysis of the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) Unit 1 replacement steam dryer (RSD), performed using an NRC-approved methodology benchmarked on the BFN Unit 3 RSD, must be submitted to the NRC for information. There is no required review or approval of the revised analysis needed to satisfy the license condition. The proposed change is an administrative change to the period before the outage and does not impact any system, structure or component in such a way as to affect the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. The proposed amendment is purely administrative and has no technical or safety aspects. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated. 2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? Response: No. The proposed license amendment reduces the length of time, from 90 days prior to the outage to 60 days prior to exceeding 3458 MWt after the outage, by which a revised analysis of the BFN Unit 1 RSD must be submitted to the NRC for information. The proposed amendment is purely administrative and has no technical or safety aspects. 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. The proposed license amendment reduces the length of time, from 90 days prior to the outage to 60 days prior to exceeding 3458 MWt after the outage, by which a revised analysis of the BFN Unit 1 RSD must be submitted to the NRC for information. The proposed amendment is purely administrative and has no technical or safety aspects. 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: General Counsel, Tennessee Valley Authority, 400 West Summit Hill Drive, 6A West Tower, Knoxville, TN 37902. NRC Acting Branch Chief: Brian W. Tindell. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:41 May 07, 2018 Jkt 244001 United States Maritime Administration (MARAD), Docket No. 50–238, Nuclear Ship Savannah (NSS), Baltimore, Maryland Date of amendment request: March 30, 2018. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18093A377. Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would amend the Technical Specifications to establish controls for all accesses to the Containment Vessel (CV) in support of two structural modifications. One modification will construct a horizontal access portal to the CV that will be secured by a new D Deck CV Door. The other modification will restore the original forward access between the Cold Chemistry Laboratory (CCL) at D Deck and the Reactor Compartment (RC) Lower Level. 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 will modify the Technical Specifications (TSs) to include all CV accesses into TS 3.7.1.1 and add two additional accesses into TS 3.7.1.5. The proposed changes are required by two modifications to plant equipment. The completed modification improved personnel access to the RC Lower Level by restoring access between the CCL at D Deck and the RC Lower Level and the proposed modification will improve personnel access to the CV by constructing a horizontal access portal that will be secured by the D Deck CV Door. Neither the proposed changes to the TSs nor the modifications that require those changes affect basic plant operation of a permanently shutdown and defueled facility. The completed modification restored the original forward access between the CCL at D Deck and the RC Lower Level to improve normal personnel access to the RC Lower Level. It also improved the ability to remove an injured person from the RC Lower Level. Prior to completing the modification, the only access to the RC Lower Level was via a 12 in. radius access trunk down an approximately 36 ft. ladder from B Deck of the RC to the RC Lower Level at the Tank Top. Emergency personnel egress from the RC Lower Level will be available through either the D Deck opening or the 12 in. radius access trunk down an approximately 36 ft. ladder from B Deck of the RC to the RC Lower Level at the Tank Top. This modification effectively expanded the boundary of the RC to include the CCL and therefore, requires the proposed change to TS 3.7.1.5 to include the C Deck entrance to the CCL. PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 20863 The proposed modification—to construct a horizontal access portal that will be secured by the D Deck CV Door—is an improvement in personnel safety. Emergency personnel egress from the CV, in addition to that provided by existing ladders, will be available through the open D Deck CV Door. The proposed modification will add an access to the CV that has not previously existed and therefore, requires the proposed change to TS 3.7.1.5 to include the D Deck CV Door. Note that this door will open into a passageway similar to the B Beck RC door that is currently the only door listed in TS 3.7.1.5. However, since the proposed D Deck CV Door will provide a direct access to the CV, a change is also proposed to TS 3.7.1.1 to include all CV entrances into its scope. If any event requires shutting any door to the CV or RC, the limiting closure time is the time it would take for the door guard to simply swing the door shut and secure it with installed dogs or quick closure operators. The worst case time to secure any door is the time to secure the D Deck CV Door, a watertight double door. The time to secure it is estimated to be approximately 120 seconds after the CV and RC have been checked to be free of personnel. Administrative controls will be put in place to ensure that (1) the swing path of the door is not blocked, (2) the door shall not be fouled and (3) trained personnel will be in the immediate vicinity of the door and available to close it in a timely manner following any event where closing the door is appropriate. The NSS’s reactor is not operational and the level of radioactivity in the NSS has significantly decreased from the levels that existed when the 1976 Possession-only License was issued. No aspect of any of the proposed changes is an initiator of any accident previously evaluated. Consequently, the probability of an accident previously evaluated is not significantly increased. 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 will modify the Technical Specifications (TSs) to include all CV accesses into TS 3.7.1.1 and add two additional accesses into TS 3.7.1.5. The proposed changes are required by two modifications to plant equipment. The completed modification improved personnel access to the RC Lower Level by restoring access between the CCL at D Deck and the RC Lower Level and the proposed modification will improve personnel access to the CV by constructing a horizontal access portal that will be secured by the D Deck CV Door. Neither the proposed changes to the TSs nor the modifications that require those changes affect basic plant operation of a permanently shutdown and defueled facility. In both cases, the physical alteration of plant equipment is similar to that which was previously allowed by Technical Specifications. Specifically, since November E:\FR\FM\08MYN1.SGM 08MYN1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES 20864 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 8, 2018 / Notices 1995, the C Deck Door to the Cold Chemistry Laboratory has been locked from the outside and fitted with an intrusion alarm that alerts a security monitoring station. When opened, the door has been manned and protected. Likewise, the D Deck CV Door shall be locked from the outside and fitted with an intrusion alarm that alerts a security monitoring station; when opened the D Deck CV Door shall be manned and protected. Neither of the proposed changes to TS 3.7.1.1 and TS 3.7.1.5 will change the method by which any safety-related system performs its function. As such, no new or different types of equipment will be installed, and the basic operation of installed equipment is unchanged. The methods governing plant operation and testing remain consistent with current safety analysis assumptions. Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated. 3. Does the change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Response: No. The proposed changes will modify the Technical Specifications (TSs) to include all CV accesses into TS 3.7.1.1 and add two additional accesses into TS 3.7.1.5. The proposed changes are required by two modifications to plant equipment. The completed modification improved personnel access to the RC Lower Level by restoring access between the CCL at D Deck and the RC Lower Level and the proposed modification will improve personnel access to the CV by constructing a horizontal access portal that will be secured by the D Deck CV Door. Neither the proposed changes to the TSs nor the modifications that require those changes affect any margins of safety that are relevant to the ship’s defueled and partially dismantled reactor. The completed modification improved personnel access to the RC Lower Level by restoring access between the CCL at D Deck and the RC Lower Level. The proposed modification will improve personnel access to the CV by constructing a horizontal access portal that will be secured by the D Deck CV Door. As such, there are no changes being made to safety analysis assumptions, safety limits or safety system settings that would adversely affect plant safety or are relevant to the ship’s defueled and partially dismantled reactor as a result of the proposed changes. Additionally, when any door to the CV or RC door is open, administrative controls will be put in place to ensure that (1) the swing path of the door is not blocked, (2) the door shall not be fouled and (3) trained personnel will be in the immediate vicinity of the door and available to close it in a timely manner following any event where closing the door is appropriate. Therefore, the proposed changes do 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:41 May 07, 2018 Jkt 244001 satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Advisor for licensee: Erhard W. Koehler, U.S. Department of Transportation, Maritime Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, DC 20590. NRC Branch Chief: Bruce Watson. 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 ‘‘Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments’’ section of this document. Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket Nos. 50–269, 50–270, and 50–287, Oconee Nuclear Station, Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3, Oconee County, South Carolina Date of amendment request: March 30, 2017, as supplemented by letters PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 dated May 11 and October 16, 2017, and April 4, 2018. Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the Technical Specifications in accordance with the NRC-approved Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Standard Technical Specifications Change Traveler TSTF– 448, Revision 3, ‘‘Control Room Habitability,’’ with variations from TSTF–448 because of the plant’s design and licensing basis. Date of issuance: April 12, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 180 days of issuance. Amendment Nos.: 408, 410, and 409. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18040A194; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments. Facility Operating License Nos. DPR– 38, DPR–47 and DPR–55: Amendments revised the Facility Operating Licenses and Technical Specifications. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 18, 2017 (82 FR 32879). The supplemental letters dated October 16, 2017, and April 4, 2018, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the NRC staff’s 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 12, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Duke Energy Progress Inc., Docket No. 50–261, H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 (Robinson), Darlington County, South Carolina Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket No. 50–400, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 (Harris), Wake and Chatham Counties, North Carolina Date of amendment request: November 19, 2015, as superseded by application dated October 3, 2016, and as supplemented by letters dated November 10, 2016, and October 9, October 30, and December 19, 2017. Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the Robinson Technical Specification (TS) 5.6.5.b and the Harris TS 6.9.1.6.2 to adopt the methodology reports DPC–NE–3008–P, Revision 0, ‘‘Thermal-Hydraulic Models for Transient Analysis,’’ and DPC–NE– 3009–P, Revision 0, ‘‘FSAR/UFSAR Chapter 15 Transient Analysis Methodology,’’ for application specific to Robinson and Harris. E:\FR\FM\08MYN1.SGM 08MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 8, 2018 / Notices sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES Date of issuance: April 10, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 120 days of issuance. Amendment Nos.: 164 (Robinson) and 257 (Harris). A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18060A401; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments. Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–23 and NPF–63: Amendments revised the Facility Operating Licenses and TSs. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: April 5, 2016 (81 FR 19645). The supplemental letter dated October 3, 2016, provided additional information that expanded the scope of the application as originally noticed, and changed the NRC staff’s original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register. Accordingly, the NRC published a second proposed no significant hazards consideration determination in the Federal Register on May 2, 2017 (82 FR 20496). This notice superseded the original notice in its entirety. The supplemental letters dated November 10, 2016, and October 9, October 30, and December 19, 2017, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope beyond the second notice, and did not change the NRC staff’s proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register. The Commission’s related evaluations of the amendments are contained in the Safety Evaluation dated April 10, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket Nos. 50–325 and 50–324, Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (Brunswick), Brunswick County, North Carolina Date of amendment request: June 29, 2017, as supplemented by letters dated January 4 and January 23, 2018. Brief description of amendments: The amendments adopted Technical Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF–542, Revision 2, ‘‘Reactor Pressure Vessel Water Inventory Control [RPVWIC].’’ The amendments replaced existing technical specification (TS) requirements associated with ‘‘operations with the potential for draining the reactor vessel,’’ with revised TSs providing alternative requirements for RPVWIC. These alternative requirements protect Safety Limit 2.1.1.3, which states, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:41 May 07, 2018 Jkt 244001 ‘‘Reactor vessel water level shall be greater than the top of active irradiated fuel.’’ Date of issuance: April 13, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented: (1) For Unit 1, within 180 days of issuance and (2) for Unit 2, prior to its 2019 refueling outage. Amendment Nos.: 283 (Unit No. 1) and 311 (Unit No. 2). A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18039A444; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments. Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–71 and DPR–62: Amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and TSs. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: September 12, 2017 (82 FR 42846). The supplemental letters dated January 4 and January 23, 2018, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the NRC staff’s original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register. The Commission’s related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated April 13, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Energy Northwest, Docket No. 50–397, Columbia Generating Station, Benton County, Washington Date of amendment request: August 30, 2016, as supplemented by letter dated November 20, 2017. Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the Columbia Generating Station Final Safety Analysis Report to reclassify reactor water cleanup piping, valves, pumps, and mechanical modules located outside of the primary and secondary containment in the radwaste building from Quality Group C to Quality Group D. Date of issuance: April 17, 2018. Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented within 120 days from the date of issuance. Amendment No.: 248. A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18075A351; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment. Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF–21: The amendment revised the Final Safety Analysis Report. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 6, 2016 (81 FR 87968). The supplemental letter dated PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 20865 November 20, 2017, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the NRC staff’s 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 17, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. PSEG Nuclear LLC and Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50–272 and 50–311, Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Salem County, New Jersey Date of amendment request: September 27, 2017. Brief description of amendments: The amendments relocated the Reactor Coolant System Pressure Isolation Valve Table from the Technical Specifications to the Technical Requirements Manual. The amendments also removed references to the table and moved all notes and leakage acceptance criteria from the table to the Technical Specification surveillance requirements. Date of issuance: April 18, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days of issuance. Amendment Nos.: 323 (Unit No. 1) and 304 (Unit No. 2). A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18040A778; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments. Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–70 and DPR–75: The amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and Technical Specifications. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 21, 2017 (82 FR 55408). The Commission’s related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated April 18, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. PSEG Nuclear LLC and Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50–272 and 50–311, Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Salem County, New Jersey Date of amendment request: February 8, 2018. Brief description of amendments: The amendments modified the Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Technical Specification (TS)allowed outage time for more than one inoperable analog rod position indicator E:\FR\FM\08MYN1.SGM 08MYN1 20866 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 8, 2018 / Notices sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES from 1 hour to 24 hours and changed the basis for entry into the TS actions for inoperable rod position indicators from ‘‘per bank’’ to ‘‘per group.’’ The amendments also separated existing TS 3.1.3.2.1, Action a.1, into two separate actions and removed the duplicative Action b (Unit No. 1 only). Date of issuance: April 18, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 30 days from the date of issuance. Amendment Nos.: 324 (Unit No. 1) and 305 (Unit No. 2). A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18085B198; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments. Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–70 and DPR–75: The amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and TSs. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: March 1, 2018 (83 FR 8904). The Commission’s related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated April 18, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket No. 50–354, Hope Creek Generating Station (HCGS), Salem County, New Jersey Date of amendment request: November 9, 2017, as supplemented by letter dated January 22, 2018. Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the HCGS Technical Specifications. Specifically, the amendment revised the safety limit minimum critical power ratio for two recirculation loop operation and single recirculation loop operation based on the HCGS Cycle 22 specific analysis. Date of issuance: April 11, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented prior to startup following the spring 2018 refueling outage. Amendment No.: 211. A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18081A044; documents related to this amendment are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment. Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF–57: The amendment revised the renewed facility operating license and technical specifications. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: February 6, 2018 (83 FR 5281). The supplemental letter dated January 22, 2018, provided additional information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change the NRC staff’s VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:41 May 07, 2018 Jkt 244001 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 11, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 52–025 and 52–026, Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP), Unit Nos. 3 and 4, Burke County, Georgia Date of amendment request: September 13, 2017. Description of amendment: The amendments authorized changes to the VEGP, Unit Nos. 3 and 4, Updated Final Safety Analysis Report in the form of departures from the plant-specific Design Control Document Tier 2 information and involved related changes to the VEGP, Units 3 and 4, Combined License (COL) Appendix A, Technical Specifications. The amendments authorized changes to the mass of trisodium phosphate required inside containment to provide adjustment of the pH of the water in the containment following an accident in which the containment floods. These changes are reflected in COL Appendix A. Date of issuance: February 27, 2018. Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 30 days of issuance. Amendment Nos.: 110 (Unit No. 3) and 109 (Unit No. 4). A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under Package Accession No. ML18030A612; documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments. Facility Combined Licenses Nos. NPF– 91 and NPF–92: Amendments revised the facility COL. Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 21, 2017 (82 FR 55401). The Commission’s related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated February 27, 2018. No significant hazards consideration comments received: No. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of April 2018. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Tara Inverso, Acting Deputy Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 2018–09244 Filed 5–7–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 52–025 and 52–026; NRC– 2018–0071] Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving Proposed No Significant Hazards Considerations and Containing Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: License amendment request; notice of opportunity to comment, request a hearing, and petition for leave to intervene; order imposing procedures. AGENCY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) received and is considering approval of one amendment request for Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4. The NRC proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration. Because the amendment request contains sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI), an order imposes procedures to obtain access to SUNSI for contention preparation. SUMMARY: Comments must be filed by June 7, 2018. A request for a hearing must be filed by July 9, 2018. Any potential party, as defined in § 2.4 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), who believes access to SUNSI is necessary to respond to this notice must request document access by May 18, 2018. DATES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2018–0071. Address questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301–287–9127; email: Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. • Mail comments to: May Ma, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN–7– A60, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 0001. For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see ‘‘Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments’’ in the ADDRESSES: E:\FR\FM\08MYN1.SGM 08MYN1

Agencies

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 89 (Tuesday, May 8, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20858-20866]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-09244]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2018-0085]


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 10, 2018, to April 23, 2018. The last 
biweekly notice was published on April 24, 2018.

DATES: Comments must be filed by June 7, 2018. A request for a hearing 
must be filed by July 9, 2018.

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 Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0085. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-
9127; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact 
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 
this document.
     Mail comments to: May Ma, Office of Administration, Mail 
Stop: TWFN-7-A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001.
    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting 
comments, see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Shirley Rohrer, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory

[[Page 20859]]

Commission, Washington DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-5411, email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments

A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0085, facility name, unit 
number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject when 
contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this 
action. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this 
action by any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0085.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may obtain 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 [email protected]. The 
ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available 
in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this 
document
     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-2018-0085, facility name, unit 
number(s), plant docket number, application date, and subject in your 
comment submission.
    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 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 if 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. If the Commission 
takes 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. If the Commission makes 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 
persons (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may 
file a request for a hearing and petition for leave to intervene 
(petition) with respect to the action. Petitions shall be filed in 
accordance with the Commission's ``Agency Rules of Practice and 
Procedure'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested persons should consult a 
current copy of 10 CFR 2.309. The NRC's regulations are accessible 
electronically from the NRC Library on the NRC's website at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. Alternatively, a copy of 
the regulations is available at the NRC's Public Document Room, located 
at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 
floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, the 
Commission or a presiding officer will rule on the petition and, if 
appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be issued.
    As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the petition should specifically 
explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with 
particular reference to the following general requirements for 
standing: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the 
petitioner; (2) the nature of the petitioner's right under the Act to 
be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the 
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 petitioner's interest.
    In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), the petition must also set 
forth the specific contentions which the petitioner seeks to have 
litigated in 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 petitioner must 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 petitioner 
intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The 
petitioner must also provide references to the specific sources and 
documents on which the petitioner intends to rely to support its 
position on the issue. The petition must include sufficient information 
to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant or licensee on 
a material issue of law or fact. Contentions must be limited to matters 
within the scope of the proceeding. The contention must be one which, 
if proven, would entitle the

[[Page 20860]]

petitioner to relief. A petitioner who fails to satisfy the 
requirements at 10 CFR 2.309(f) 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. 
Parties have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the 
hearing with respect to resolution of that party's admitted 
contentions, including the opportunity to present evidence, consistent 
with the NRC's regulations, policies, and procedures.
    Petitions must be filed no later than 60 days from the date of 
publication of this notice. Petitions and motions for leave to file new 
or amended contentions that are filed after the 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) through (iii). The petition must be filed in 
accordance with the filing instructions in the ``Electronic Submissions 
(E-Filing)'' section of this document.
    If a hearing is requested, and the Commission has not made a final 
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration, the 
Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no 
significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve 
to establish 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 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 the amendment unless the Commission finds an imminent 
danger to the health or safety of the public, in which case it will 
issue an appropriate order or rule under 10 CFR part 2.
    A State, local governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian 
Tribe, or agency thereof, may submit a petition to the Commission to 
participate as a party under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition should 
state the nature and extent of the petitioner's interest in the 
proceeding. The petition should be submitted to the Commission no later 
than 60 days from the date of publication of this notice. The petition 
must be filed in accordance with the filing instructions in the 
``Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)'' section of this document, and 
should meet the requirements for petitions set forth in this section, 
except that under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local governmental body, 
or Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof does not need 
to address the standing requirements in 10 CFR 2.309(d) if the facility 
is located within its boundaries. Alternatively, a State, local 
governmental body, Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or agency thereof 
may participate as a non-party under 10 CFR 2.315(c). If a hearing is 
granted, any person who is not a party to the proceeding and is not 
affiliated with or represented by a party may, at the discretion of the 
presiding officer, be permitted to make a limited appearance pursuant 
to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a limited 
appearance may make an oral or written statement of his or her position 
on the issues but may not otherwise participate in the proceeding. A 
limited appearance may be made at any session of the hearing or at any 
prehearing conference, subject to the limits and conditions as may be 
imposed by the presiding officer. Details regarding the opportunity to 
make a limited appearance will be provided by the presiding officer if 
such sessions are scheduled.

B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)

    All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a 
request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene (petition), 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 that request to 
participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the 
NRC's E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 FR 
46562; August 3, 2012). 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. Detailed 
guidance on making electronic submissions may be found in the Guidance 
for Electronic Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC website at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants may not submit 
paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in 
accordance with the procedures described below.
    To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 
days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the 
Office of the Secretary by email at [email protected], or by 
telephone at 301-415-1677, to (1) request a digital identification (ID) 
certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or 
representative) to digitally sign submissions and access the E-Filing 
system for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise 
the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a petition or 
other adjudicatory document (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 website at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/getting-started.html. Once a participant has obtained a 
digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant 
can then submit adjudicatory documents. Submissions must be in Portable 
Document Format (PDF). Additional guidance on PDF submissions is 
available on the NRC's public website at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A filing is considered complete at the 
time the document is 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 
document on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and 
other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for 
and receive a digital ID certificate before adjudicatory documents are 
filed so that they can obtain access to the documents via the E-Filing 
system.
    A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-
Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC's Electronic 
Filing Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC's 
public website at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by 
email to [email protected], or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-
7640. The NRC

[[Page 20861]]

Electronic Filing Help Desk is available between 9 a.m. and 6 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 
stating why there is good cause for not filing electronically and 
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, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and 
Adjudications Staff. Participants filing adjudicatory documents 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://adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the 
Commission or the presiding officer. If you do not have an NRC-issued 
digital ID certificate as described above, click cancel when the link 
requests certificates and you will be automatically directed to the 
NRC's electronic hearing dockets where you will be able to access any 
publicly available documents in a particular hearing docket. 
Participants are requested not to include personal privacy information, 
such as social security numbers, home addresses, or personal phone 
numbers in their filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law 
requires submission of such information. For example, in some 
instances, individuals provide home addresses in order to demonstrate 
proximity to a facility or site. 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.
    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 
``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' section of this 
document.

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-317 and 50-318, Calvert 
Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant (CCNPP), Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Calvert County, 
Maryland

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-220 and 50-410, Nine 
Mile Point Nuclear Station (NMP), Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Oswego County, New 
York

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-244, R.E. Ginna Nuclear 
Power Plant (Ginna), Wayne County, New York

    Date of amendment request: March 26, 2018. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18086A138.
    Description of amendment request: The amendments would revise the 
licenses to eliminate the Nuclear Advisory Committee.
    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration 
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has 
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards 
consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed amendment deletes license conditions associated 
with the establishment of the Nuclear Advisory Committee (NAC) as 
provided in the orders approving the corporate merger between Exelon 
Corporation and Constellation Energy Group, Inc., and the resultant 
transfer of the renewed facility operating licenses for CCNPP, Units 
1 and 2; NMP, Units 1 and 2; and Ginna on February 15, 2012.
    The NAC's oversight function helps to ensure that Constellation 
Energy Nuclear Group (CENG) remains in compliance with laws and 
regulations regarding foreign domination and control of nuclear 
operations, and that a decision of a foreign government could not 
adversely affect or interfere with the reliable and safe operation 
of any nuclear assets of CENG or its affiliates.
    The NAC is an advisory committee and does not function in a 
decision-making role. If the NAC becomes aware of a Foreign 
Ownership, Control, or Domination (FOCD) event or issue, it will 
bring it to the attention of CENG management and/or the CENG Board 
of Directors. The NAC advises the CENG Board of Directors and 
provides its recommendations regarding the regulatory or safety 
significance of the issue, and recommended actions to address the 
issue.
    Eliminating the NAC will not impact compliance with FOCD 
requirements, nor will it impair the ability to identify and resolve 
any FOCD issues that could impact the safe or reliable operation of 
the nuclear units. Multiple avenues exist to resolve any concerns 
regarding FOCD issues. These include the ability of personnel to 
report an FOCD concern to their supervisor, enter a potential FOCD 
concern into the corrective action program, or raise the concern 
with the Employee Concerns Program. In addition, personnel are 
always free to report any concern directly to the NRC.
    This proposed administrative change enables the elimination of 
the NAC and does not alter: 1) The extent of the ownership of the 
reactors, 2) the authority to operate the reactors, 3) the directors 
or officers and details concerning the relevant companies, 4) access 
to restricted data, or; 5) details concerning ownership of the 
foreign parent company. This change does not alter compliance with 
the Atomic Energy Act, 10 CFR 50.38, ``Ineligibility of Certain 
Applicants,'' or the guidance provided in the Standard Review Plan 
(SRP), Final Standard Review Plan on Foreign Ownership, Control, or 
Domination. Additionally, this administrative change will not impact 
reactor operations or safety analyses.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated?
    Response: No.
    This proposed administrative change enables the elimination of 
the NAC and does not alter: 1) The extent of the ownership of the 
reactors, 2) the authority to operate the reactors, 3) the directors 
or officers and details concerning the relevant companies, 4) access 
to restricted data, or; 5) details concerning ownership of the 
foreign parent company. This change does not alter compliance with 
the Atomic Energy Act, 10 CFR 50.38, ``Ineligibility of Certain 
Applicants,'' or the guidance provided in the Standard Review Plan 
(SRP), Final Standard Review Plan on Foreign Ownership, Control, or 
Domination.
    Eliminating the NAC will not impact compliance with FOCD 
requirements, nor will it impair the ability to identify and resolve 
any FOCD issues that could impact the safe or reliable operation of 
the nuclear units. FOCD issues will be addressed via current 
processes (employees reporting to their supervisor, entering an 
issue into the corrective action program, raising the concern to the 
Employee Concerns Program, or reporting directly to the NRC).
    This is an administrative change, and no new operating 
configuration is being imposed that would create a new failure

[[Page 20862]]

scenario. In addition, no new failure modes are being created for 
any plant equipment. This change does not result in any new or 
different accident scenarios.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility 
of a new or different kind of accident from any previously 
evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    This is an administrative change. No safety analyses are being 
changed or modified as a result of this proposed change. This 
proposed administrative change does not alter the manner in which 
safety limits, limiting safety system settings, or limiting 
conditions for operation are determined. Margins associated with the 
current safety analyses acceptance criteria are unaffected. The 
safety systems credited in the safety analyses will continue to be 
available to perform their mitigation functions.
    Therefore, the proposed change 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 
requested amendments involve no significant hazards consideration.
    Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, 
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 
60555.
    NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona.

Indiana Michigan Power Company, Docket No. 50-315, Donald C. Cook 
Nuclear Plant (CNP), Unit No. 1, Berrien County, Michigan

    Date of amendment request: March 7, 2018. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18072A012.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed change would allow 
for the application of leak-before-break (LBB) methodology to piping 
for the accumulator, residual heat removal, and safety injection 
systems at the CNP, Unit No. 1. In addition, the proposed change would 
modify technical specification (TS) 3.4.13, ``RCS [Reactor Coolant 
System] Operational LEAKAGE.''
    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.
    Overall protection system performance will remain within the 
bounds of the previously performed accident analyses. The design of 
the protection systems will be unaffected. The reactor protection 
system and engineered safety feature actuation system will continue 
to function in a manner consistent with the plant design basis. All 
design, material and construction standards that were applicable 
prior to the request are maintained.
    For CNP, Unit 1, the bounding accident for pipe breaks is a 
Large Break Loss of Coolant Accident (LBLOCA). Since the application 
of the LBB analysis verifies the integrity of the piping attached to 
the reactor coolant system, the probability of a previously 
evaluated accident is not increased. The consequences of a LBLOCA 
have been previously evaluated and found to be acceptable. The 
application of the LBB analysis will cause no change in the dose 
analysis associated with a LBLOCA, and therefore, does not affect 
the consequences of an accident.
    The proposed amendment will not alter any assumptions or change 
any mitigation actions in the radiological consequence evaluations 
in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR).
    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 previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    No new accident scenarios, failure mechanisms, or single 
failures are introduced as a result of the proposed change. All 
systems, structures, and components previously required for the 
mitigation of an event remain capable of fulfilling their intended 
design function. The proposed change has no adverse effects on any 
safety related systems or components and does not challenge the 
performance or integrity of any safety related system. Further, 
there are no changes in the method by which any safety-related plant 
system performs its safety function. This amendment will not affect 
the normal method of power operation or change any operating 
parameters.
    Therefore, the proposed changes do 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 related to the ability of the fission 
product barriers to perform their design functions during and 
following accident conditions. These barriers include the fuel 
cladding, the reactor coolant system, and the containment. The 
proposed amendment request does not involve a change to any of these 
barriers.
    The proposed change does not involve a significant reduction in 
a margin of safety because the proposed changes do not reduce the 
margin of safety that exists in the present CNP Unit 1 TS or UFSAR. 
The operability requirements of the TS are consistent with the 
initial condition assumptions of the safety analyses.
    This proposed amendment uses LBB technology combined with 
leakage monitoring to show that it is acceptable to exclude the 
dynamic effects associated with postulated pipe ruptures from the 
licensing basis for the systems evaluated that are attached to the 
RCS. The enclosed analysis demonstrates that the LBB margins 
discussed in NUREG-1061, Volume 3 are satisfied.
    Therefore, the proposed changes do 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: Robert B. Haemer, Senior Nuclear Counsel, 
One Cook Place, Bridgman, MI 49106.
    NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona.

Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), Docket No. 50-259, Browns Ferry 
Nuclear Plant (BFN), Unit 1, Limestone County, Alabama

    Date of amendment request: March 16, 2018, as supplemented by 
letter dated April 19, 2018. Publicly-available versions are in ADAMS 
under Accession Nos. ML18080A171 and ML18109A573.
    Description of amendment request: The amendment would revise 
License Condition 2.C(18)(a)3 for Unit 1 that requires the submittal of 
a revised Unit 1 replacement steam dryer (RSD) analysis utilizing the 
Unit 3 on-dryer strain gauge based end-to-end bias and uncertainties at 
extended power conditions ``at least 90 days prior to the start of the 
BFN Unit 1 EPU [extended power uprate] outage.'' TVA is unable to 
submit the revised Unit 1 RSD analysis 90 days prior to the start of 
the Unit 1 EPU outage, because of delays in Unit 3 power ascension. In 
its supplement dated April 19, 2018, TVA proposed to revise Unit 1 
analysis submittal from 90 days before the outage to 60 days prior to 
exceeding 3458 megawatt thermal (MWt) after the outage. The license 
amendment request was originally noticed in the Federal Register on 
April 10, 2018 (83 FR 15418). The renotice replaces and supersedes the 
original notice in its entirety.
    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 consequence of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.

[[Page 20863]]

    The proposed license amendment reduces the length of time, from 
90 days prior to the outage to 60 days prior to exceeding 3458 MWt 
after the outage, by which a revised analysis of the Browns Ferry 
Nuclear Plant (BFN) Unit 1 replacement steam dryer (RSD), performed 
using an NRC-approved methodology benchmarked on the BFN Unit 3 RSD, 
must be submitted to the NRC for information. There is no required 
review or approval of the revised analysis needed to satisfy the 
license condition. The proposed change is an administrative change 
to the period before the outage and does not impact any system, 
structure or component in such a way as to affect the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated. The proposed 
amendment is purely administrative and has no technical or safety 
aspects. Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a 
significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed license amendment reduces the length of time, from 
90 days prior to the outage to 60 days prior to exceeding 3458 MWt 
after the outage, by which a revised analysis of the BFN Unit 1 RSD 
must be submitted to the NRC for information. The proposed amendment 
is purely administrative and has no technical or safety aspects. 
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.
    The proposed license amendment reduces the length of time, from 
90 days prior to the outage to 60 days prior to exceeding 3458 MWt 
after the outage, by which a revised analysis of the BFN Unit 1 RSD 
must be submitted to the NRC for information. The proposed amendment 
is purely administrative and has no technical or safety aspects. 
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: General Counsel, Tennessee Valley Authority, 
400 West Summit Hill Drive, 6A West Tower, Knoxville, TN 37902.
    NRC Acting Branch Chief: Brian W. Tindell.

United States Maritime Administration (MARAD), Docket No. 50-238, 
Nuclear Ship Savannah (NSS), Baltimore, Maryland

    Date of amendment request: March 30, 2018. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18093A377.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would 
amend the Technical Specifications to establish controls for all 
accesses to the Containment Vessel (CV) in support of two structural 
modifications. One modification will construct a horizontal access 
portal to the CV that will be secured by a new D Deck CV Door. The 
other modification will restore the original forward access between the 
Cold Chemistry Laboratory (CCL) at D Deck and the Reactor Compartment 
(RC) Lower Level.
    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 will modify the Technical Specifications 
(TSs) to include all CV accesses into TS 3.7.1.1 and add two 
additional accesses into TS 3.7.1.5. The proposed changes are 
required by two modifications to plant equipment. The completed 
modification improved personnel access to the RC Lower Level by 
restoring access between the CCL at D Deck and the RC Lower Level 
and the proposed modification will improve personnel access to the 
CV by constructing a horizontal access portal that will be secured 
by the D Deck CV Door. Neither the proposed changes to the TSs nor 
the modifications that require those changes affect basic plant 
operation of a permanently shutdown and defueled facility.
    The completed modification restored the original forward access 
between the CCL at D Deck and the RC Lower Level to improve normal 
personnel access to the RC Lower Level. It also improved the ability 
to remove an injured person from the RC Lower Level.
    Prior to completing the modification, the only access to the RC 
Lower Level was via a 12 in. radius access trunk down an 
approximately 36 ft. ladder from B Deck of the RC to the RC Lower 
Level at the Tank Top. Emergency personnel egress from the RC Lower 
Level will be available through either the D Deck opening or the 12 
in. radius access trunk down an approximately 36 ft. ladder from B 
Deck of the RC to the RC Lower Level at the Tank Top.
    This modification effectively expanded the boundary of the RC to 
include the CCL and therefore, requires the proposed change to TS 
3.7.1.5 to include the C Deck entrance to the CCL.
    The proposed modification--to construct a horizontal access 
portal that will be secured by the D Deck CV Door--is an improvement 
in personnel safety. Emergency personnel egress from the CV, in 
addition to that provided by existing ladders, will be available 
through the open D Deck CV Door.
    The proposed modification will add an access to the CV that has 
not previously existed and therefore, requires the proposed change 
to TS 3.7.1.5 to include the D Deck CV Door. Note that this door 
will open into a passageway similar to the B Beck RC door that is 
currently the only door listed in TS 3.7.1.5. However, since the 
proposed D Deck CV Door will provide a direct access to the CV, a 
change is also proposed to TS 3.7.1.1 to include all CV entrances 
into its scope.
    If any event requires shutting any door to the CV or RC, the 
limiting closure time is the time it would take for the door guard 
to simply swing the door shut and secure it with installed dogs or 
quick closure operators. The worst case time to secure any door is 
the time to secure the D Deck CV Door, a watertight double door. The 
time to secure it is estimated to be approximately 120 seconds after 
the CV and RC have been checked to be free of personnel. 
Administrative controls will be put in place to ensure that (1) the 
swing path of the door is not blocked, (2) the door shall not be 
fouled and (3) trained personnel will be in the immediate vicinity 
of the door and available to close it in a timely manner following 
any event where closing the door is appropriate.
    The NSS's reactor is not operational and the level of 
radioactivity in the NSS has significantly decreased from the levels 
that existed when the 1976 Possession-only License was issued. No 
aspect of any of the proposed changes is an initiator of any 
accident previously evaluated. Consequently, the probability of an 
accident previously evaluated is not significantly increased.
    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 will modify the Technical Specifications 
(TSs) to include all CV accesses into TS 3.7.1.1 and add two 
additional accesses into TS 3.7.1.5. The proposed changes are 
required by two modifications to plant equipment. The completed 
modification improved personnel access to the RC Lower Level by 
restoring access between the CCL at D Deck and the RC Lower Level 
and the proposed modification will improve personnel access to the 
CV by constructing a horizontal access portal that will be secured 
by the D Deck CV Door. Neither the proposed changes to the TSs nor 
the modifications that require those changes affect basic plant 
operation of a permanently shutdown and defueled facility.
    In both cases, the physical alteration of plant equipment is 
similar to that which was previously allowed by Technical 
Specifications. Specifically, since November

[[Page 20864]]

1995, the C Deck Door to the Cold Chemistry Laboratory has been 
locked from the outside and fitted with an intrusion alarm that 
alerts a security monitoring station. When opened, the door has been 
manned and protected. Likewise, the D Deck CV Door shall be locked 
from the outside and fitted with an intrusion alarm that alerts a 
security monitoring station; when opened the D Deck CV Door shall be 
manned and protected.
    Neither of the proposed changes to TS 3.7.1.1 and TS 3.7.1.5 
will change the method by which any safety-related system performs 
its function. As such, no new or different types of equipment will 
be installed, and the basic operation of installed equipment is 
unchanged. The methods governing plant operation and testing remain 
consistent with current safety analysis assumptions.
    Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of 
a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated.
    3. Does the change involve a significant reduction in a margin 
of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed changes will modify the Technical Specifications 
(TSs) to include all CV accesses into TS 3.7.1.1 and add two 
additional accesses into TS 3.7.1.5. The proposed changes are 
required by two modifications to plant equipment. The completed 
modification improved personnel access to the RC Lower Level by 
restoring access between the CCL at D Deck and the RC Lower Level 
and the proposed modification will improve personnel access to the 
CV by constructing a horizontal access portal that will be secured 
by the D Deck CV Door. Neither the proposed changes to the TSs nor 
the modifications that require those changes affect any margins of 
safety that are relevant to the ship's defueled and partially 
dismantled reactor.
    The completed modification improved personnel access to the RC 
Lower Level by restoring access between the CCL at D Deck and the RC 
Lower Level. The proposed modification will improve personnel access 
to the CV by constructing a horizontal access portal that will be 
secured by the D Deck CV Door.
    As such, there are no changes being made to safety analysis 
assumptions, safety limits or safety system settings that would 
adversely affect plant safety or are relevant to the ship's defueled 
and partially dismantled reactor as a result of the proposed 
changes.
    Additionally, when any door to the CV or RC door is open, 
administrative controls will be put in place to ensure that (1) the 
swing path of the door is not blocked, (2) the door shall not be 
fouled and (3) trained personnel will be in the immediate vicinity 
of the door and available to close it in a timely manner following 
any event where closing the door is appropriate.
    Therefore, the proposed changes do 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.
    Advisor for licensee: Erhard W. Koehler, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, Maritime Administration, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, 
Washington, DC 20590.
    NRC Branch Chief: Bruce Watson.

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 
``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' section of this 
document.

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287, 
Oconee Nuclear Station, Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3, Oconee County, South 
Carolina

    Date of amendment request: March 30, 2017, as supplemented by 
letters dated May 11 and October 16, 2017, and April 4, 2018.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the 
Technical Specifications in accordance with the NRC-approved Technical 
Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Standard Technical Specifications 
Change Traveler TSTF-448, Revision 3, ``Control Room Habitability,'' 
with variations from TSTF-448 because of the plant's design and 
licensing basis.
    Date of issuance: April 12, 2018.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 180 days of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: 408, 410, and 409. A publicly-available version is 
in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18040A194; documents related to these 
amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the 
amendments.
    Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47 and DPR-55: 
Amendments revised the Facility Operating Licenses and Technical 
Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 18, 2017 (82 FR 
32879). The supplemental letters dated October 16, 2017, and April 4, 
2018, provided additional information that clarified the application, 
did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and 
did not change the NRC staff's 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 12, 2018.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Duke Energy Progress Inc., Docket No. 50-261, H.B. Robinson Steam 
Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 (Robinson), Darlington County, South 
Carolina

Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket No. 50-400, Shearon Harris Nuclear 
Power Plant, Unit 1 (Harris), Wake and Chatham Counties, North Carolina

    Date of amendment request: November 19, 2015, as superseded by 
application dated October 3, 2016, and as supplemented by letters dated 
November 10, 2016, and October 9, October 30, and December 19, 2017.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the 
Robinson Technical Specification (TS) 5.6.5.b and the Harris TS 
6.9.1.6.2 to adopt the methodology reports DPC-NE-3008-P, Revision 0, 
``Thermal-Hydraulic Models for Transient Analysis,'' and DPC-NE-3009-P, 
Revision 0, ``FSAR/UFSAR Chapter 15 Transient Analysis Methodology,'' 
for application specific to Robinson and Harris.

[[Page 20865]]

    Date of issuance: April 10, 2018.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 120 days of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: 164 (Robinson) and 257 (Harris). A publicly-
available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18060A401; 
documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety 
Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-23 and NPF-63: 
Amendments revised the Facility Operating Licenses and TSs.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: April 5, 2016 (81 FR 
19645). The supplemental letter dated October 3, 2016, provided 
additional information that expanded the scope of the application as 
originally noticed, and changed the NRC staff's original proposed no 
significant hazards consideration determination as published in the 
Federal Register. Accordingly, the NRC published a second proposed no 
significant hazards consideration determination in the Federal Register 
on May 2, 2017 (82 FR 20496). This notice superseded the original 
notice in its entirety. The supplemental letters dated November 10, 
2016, and October 9, October 30, and December 19, 2017, provided 
additional information that clarified the application, did not expand 
the scope beyond the second notice, and did not change the NRC staff's 
proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as 
published in the Federal Register.
    The Commission's related evaluations of the amendments are 
contained in the Safety Evaluation dated April 10, 2018.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Duke Energy Progress, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324, Brunswick 
Steam Electric Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (Brunswick), Brunswick County, 
North Carolina

    Date of amendment request: June 29, 2017, as supplemented by 
letters dated January 4 and January 23, 2018.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments adopted Technical 
Specifications Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-542, Revision 2, 
``Reactor Pressure Vessel Water Inventory Control [RPVWIC].'' The 
amendments replaced existing technical specification (TS) requirements 
associated with ``operations with the potential for draining the 
reactor vessel,'' with revised TSs providing alternative requirements 
for RPVWIC. These alternative requirements protect Safety Limit 
2.1.1.3, which states, ``Reactor vessel water level shall be greater 
than the top of active irradiated fuel.''
    Date of issuance: April 13, 2018.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be 
implemented: (1) For Unit 1, within 180 days of issuance and (2) for 
Unit 2, prior to its 2019 refueling outage.
    Amendment Nos.: 283 (Unit No. 1) and 311 (Unit No. 2). A publicly-
available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18039A444; 
documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety 
Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-71 and DPR-62: 
Amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and TSs.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: September 12, 2017 (82 
FR 42846). The supplemental letters dated January 4 and January 23, 
2018, provided additional information that clarified the application, 
did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and 
did not change the NRC staff's original proposed no significant hazards 
consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated April 13, 2018.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Energy Northwest, Docket No. 50-397, Columbia Generating Station, 
Benton County, Washington

    Date of amendment request: August 30, 2016, as supplemented by 
letter dated November 20, 2017.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the Columbia 
Generating Station Final Safety Analysis Report to reclassify reactor 
water cleanup piping, valves, pumps, and mechanical modules located 
outside of the primary and secondary containment in the radwaste 
building from Quality Group C to Quality Group D.
    Date of issuance: April 17, 2018.
    Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 120 days from the date of issuance.
    Amendment No.: 248. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under 
Accession No. ML18075A351; documents related to this amendment are 
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-21: The amendment 
revised the Final Safety Analysis Report.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 6, 2016 (81 FR 
87968). The supplemental letter dated November 20, 2017, provided 
additional information that clarified the application, did not expand 
the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change 
the NRC staff's 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 17, 2018.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

PSEG Nuclear LLC and Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-272 
and 50-311, Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Salem 
County, New Jersey

    Date of amendment request: September 27, 2017.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments relocated the 
Reactor Coolant System Pressure Isolation Valve Table from the 
Technical Specifications to the Technical Requirements Manual. The 
amendments also removed references to the table and moved all notes and 
leakage acceptance criteria from the table to the Technical 
Specification surveillance requirements.
    Date of issuance: April 18, 2018.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 60 days of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: 323 (Unit No. 1) and 304 (Unit No. 2). A publicly-
available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18040A778; 
documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety 
Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-70 and DPR-75: The 
amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and 
Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 21, 2017 (82 
FR 55408).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated April 18, 2018.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

PSEG Nuclear LLC and Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-272 
and 50-311, Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Salem 
County, New Jersey

    Date of amendment request: February 8, 2018.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments modified the Salem 
Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Technical Specification 
(TS)-allowed outage time for more than one inoperable analog rod 
position indicator

[[Page 20866]]

from 1 hour to 24 hours and changed the basis for entry into the TS 
actions for inoperable rod position indicators from ``per bank'' to 
``per group.'' The amendments also separated existing TS 3.1.3.2.1, 
Action a.1, into two separate actions and removed the duplicative 
Action b (Unit No. 1 only).
    Date of issuance: April 18, 2018.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 30 days from the date of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: 324 (Unit No. 1) and 305 (Unit No. 2). A publicly-
available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18085B198; 
documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety 
Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-70 and DPR-75: The 
amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and TSs.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: March 1, 2018 (83 FR 
8904).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated April 18, 2018.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket No. 50-354, Hope Creek Generating Station 
(HCGS), Salem County, New Jersey

    Date of amendment request: November 9, 2017, as supplemented by 
letter dated January 22, 2018.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the HCGS 
Technical Specifications. Specifically, the amendment revised the 
safety limit minimum critical power ratio for two recirculation loop 
operation and single recirculation loop operation based on the HCGS 
Cycle 22 specific analysis.
    Date of issuance: April 11, 2018.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
prior to startup following the spring 2018 refueling outage.
    Amendment No.: 211. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under 
Accession No. ML18081A044; documents related to this amendment are 
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-57: The amendment 
revised the renewed facility operating license and technical 
specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: February 6, 2018 (83 FR 
5281). The supplemental letter dated January 22, 2018, provided 
additional information that clarified the application, did not expand 
the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change 
the NRC staff's 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 11, 2018.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026, 
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP), Unit Nos. 3 and 4, Burke 
County, Georgia

    Date of amendment request: September 13, 2017.
    Description of amendment: The amendments authorized changes to the 
VEGP, Unit Nos. 3 and 4, Updated Final Safety Analysis Report in the 
form of departures from the plant-specific Design Control Document Tier 
2 information and involved related changes to the VEGP, Units 3 and 4, 
Combined License (COL) Appendix A, Technical Specifications.
    The amendments authorized changes to the mass of trisodium 
phosphate required inside containment to provide adjustment of the pH 
of the water in the containment following an accident in which the 
containment floods. These changes are reflected in COL Appendix A.
    Date of issuance: February 27, 2018.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 30 days of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: 110 (Unit No. 3) and 109 (Unit No. 4). A publicly-
available version is in ADAMS under Package Accession No. ML18030A612; 
documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety 
Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.
    Facility Combined Licenses Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92: Amendments 
revised the facility COL.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 21, 2017 (82 
FR 55401).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated February 27, 2018.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of April 2018.
    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Tara Inverso,
Acting Deputy Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office 
of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2018-09244 Filed 5-7-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.