Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and Combined Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations, 50078-50087 [2019-20507]

Agencies

• NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 24, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50078-50087]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-20507]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2019-0187]


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 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 August 27, 2019 to September 9, 2019. The 
last biweekly notice was published on September 10, 2019.

DATES: Comments must be filed by October 24, 2019. A request for a 
hearing must be filed by November 25, 2019.

ADDRESSES: 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-2019-0187. Address 
questions about NRC dockets IDs in Regulations.gov 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: Office of Administration, Mail Stop: 
TWFN-7-A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001, ATTN: Program Management, Announcements and Editing Staff.
    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, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 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-2019-0187, 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-2019-0187.
     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/

[[Page 50079]]

adams.html. To begin the search, 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-2019-0187, 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. Background

    Pursuant to Section 189a.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 
amended (the Act), the 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.

III. 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 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

[[Page 50080]]

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 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

[[Page 50081]]

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. 50-352 and 50-353, Limerick 
Generating Station (Limerick), Units 1 and 2, Montgomery County, 
Pennsylvania

    Date of amendment request: August 1, 2019. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19213A246.
    Description of amendment request: The amendments would relocate the 
following operability and surveillance requirements from the Limerick 
Technical Specifications (TSs) to the Limerick Technical Requirements 
Manual: TS Section 3.3.7.8.1, ``Chlorine Detection System,'' and TS 
Section 3.3.7.8.2, ``Toxic Gas Detection System.''
    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. Do the proposed changes involve a significant increase in the 
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed changes do not alter the physical design of any 
plant structure, system, or component; therefore, the proposed 
changes have no adverse effect on plant operation, or the 
availability or operation of any accident mitigation equipment. The 
plant response to the design basis accidents does not change. 
Operation or failure of the Chlorine Detection System and the Toxic 
Gas Detection System are not assumed to be initiators of any 
analyzed event in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) 
and cannot cause an accident. Whether the requirements for the 
Chlorine Detection System and the Toxic Gas Detection System are in 
TS or another licensee-controlled document has no effect on the 
probability or consequences of any accident previously evaluated.
    Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    2. Do the proposed changes create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed changes do not alter the plant configuration (no 
new or different type of equipment is being installed) or require 
any new or unusual operator actions. The proposed changes do not 
alter the safety limits or safety analysis assumptions associated 
with the operation of the plant. The proposed changes do not 
introduce any new failure modes that could result in a new accident. 
The proposed changes do not reduce or adversely affect the 
capabilities of any plant structure, system, or component in the 
performance of their safety function. Also, the response of the 
plant and the operators following the design basis accidents is 
unaffected by the proposed changes.
    Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of 
a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    3. Do the proposed changes involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed changes have no adverse effect on plant operation, 
or the availability or operation of any accident mitigation 
equipment. The plant response to the design basis accidents does not 
change. The proposed changes do not adversely affect existing plant 
safety margins or the reliability of the equipment assumed to 
operate in the safety analyses. There is no change being made to 
safety analysis assumptions, safety limits or limiting safety system 
settings that would adversely affect plant safety as a result of the 
proposed changes.
    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: Tamra Domeyer, Associate General Counsel, 
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 
60555.
    NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna.

[[Page 50082]]

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50-456 and STN 50-457, 
Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2, Will County, Illinois

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50-454 and STN 50-455, 
Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Ogle County, Illinois

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-461, Clinton Power 
Station, Unit No. 1, DeWitt County, Illinois

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-010, 50-237, and 50-249, 
Dresden NuclearPower Station, Units 1, 2, and 3, Grundy County, 
Illinois

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374, LaSalle 
County Station, Units 1 and 2, LaSalle County, Illinois

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-254 and 50-265, Quad 
Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, Rock Island County, 
Illinois

    Date of amendment request: August 23, 2019. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19239A006.
    Description of amendment request: The amendments would revise the 
emergency plans for each of these facilities by removing specific 
references to radiation monitoring instrumentation in emergency action 
level (EAL) RA3.
    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 for each site, 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 change to EAL RA3.1 for the Exelon facilities noted 
meets the guidance established in NEI 99-01, Revision 6, as endorsed 
by the NRC and does not reduce the capability to meet the emergency 
planning requirements established in 10 CFR 50.47 and 10 CFR 50, 
Appendix E. The proposed change does not reduce the functionality, 
performance, or capability of Exelon's ERO [emergency response 
organization] to respond in mitigating the consequences of any 
design basis accident.
    The probability of a reactor accident requiring implementation 
of Emergency Plan EALs has no relevance in determining whether the 
proposed change to EAL RA3.1 will reduce the effectiveness of the 
Emergency Plans. As discussed in Section D, ``Planning Basis,'' of 
NUREG-0654, Revision 1, ``Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of 
Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of 
Nuclear Power Plants'':
    ``. . . The overall objective of emergency response plans is to 
provide dose savings (and in some cases immediate life saving) for a 
spectrum of accidents that could produce offsite doses in excess of 
Protective Action Guides (PAGs). No single specific accident 
sequence should be isolated as the one for which to plan because 
each accident could have different consequences, both in nature and 
degree. Further, the range of possible selection for a planning 
basis is very large, starting with a zero point of requiring no 
planning at all because significant offsite radiological accident 
consequences are unlikely to occur, to planning for the worst 
possible accident, regardless of its extremely low likelihood. . . 
.''
    Therefore, Exelon did not consider the risk insights regarding 
any specific accident initiation or progression in evaluating the 
proposed change involving EAL RA3.
    The proposed change to EAL RA3.1 does not involve any physical 
changes to plant equipment or systems, nor does the proposed change 
alter the assumptions of any accident analyses. The proposed change 
does not adversely affect accident initiators or precursors nor does 
the proposed change alter the design assumptions, conditions, and 
configuration or the manner in which the plants are operated and 
maintained. The proposed change does not adversely affect the 
ability of Structures, Systems, or Components (SSCs) to perform 
their intended safety functions in mitigating the consequences of an 
initiating event within the assumed acceptance limits.
    Therefore, the proposed change to EAL RA3.1 for the affected 
sites does not involve a significant increase in the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change to EAL RA3.1 for the Exelon facilities noted 
meets the guidance established in NEI 99-01, Revision 6, as endorsed 
by the NRC and does not involve any physical changes to plant 
systems or equipment. The proposed change does not involve the 
addition of any new plant equipment. The proposed change will not 
alter the design configuration, or method of operation of plant 
equipment beyond its normal functional capabilities. Exelon ERO 
functions will continue to be performed as required. The proposed 
change does not create any new credible failure mechanisms, 
malfunctions, or accident initiators.
    Therefore, the proposed change to EAL RA3.1 for the affected 
sites does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of 
accident from those that have been previously evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change to EAL RA3.1 for the Exelon facilities noted 
meets the guidance established in the guidance in NEI 99-01, 
Revision 6, as endorsed by the NRC and does not alter or exceed a 
design basis or safety limit. There is no change being made to 
safety analysis assumptions, safety limits, or limiting safety 
system settings that would adversely affect plant safety as a result 
of the proposed change. There are no changes to setpoints or 
environmental conditions of any SSC or the manner in which any SSC 
is operated. Margins of safety are unaffected by the proposed change 
to EAL RA3. The applicable requirements of 10 CFR 50.47 and 10 CFR 
50, Appendix E will continue to be met.
    Therefore, the proposed change to EAL RA3.1 for the affected 
sites does not involve any reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis for each site 
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 Acting Branch Chief: Lisa M. Regner.

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket No. 52-026, Vogtle Electric 
Generating Plant (VEGP), Unit 4, Burke County, Georgia

    Date of amendment request: August 22, 2019. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19234A327.
    Description of amendment request: The amendment proposes to depart 
from AP1000 Design Control Document Tier 2* material that has been 
incorporated into the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). The 
proposed departure consists of changes to Tier 2* information in the 
UFSAR to change the provided area of horizontal reinforcement for VEGP 
Unit 4 Wall L and Wall 7.3 from elevation 117'-6'' to 135'-3''.
    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.
    As described in UFSAR Subsections 3H.5.1.2 and 3H.5.1.3, 
interior Wall 7.3 and Wall L are located in the auxiliary building.
    UFSAR, Section 3H.5 classifies Interior Wall on Column Line 7.3, 
from elevation (EL) 66'-6'' to 160'-6'' as a ``Critical Section.'' 
UFSAR, Section 3H.5 classifies Interior Wall

[[Page 50083]]

on Column Line L, from EL 117'-6'' to 153-0'' as a Critical 
Section.'' Deviations were identified in the constructed walls from 
the design requirements. The proposed changes modify the provided 
area of steel horizontal reinforcement for VEGP Unit 4 Wall L and 
Wall 7.3 from elevation 117'-6'' to 135'-3''. These changes maintain 
conformance to American Concrete Institute (ACI) 349-01 and have no 
adverse impact on the seismic response of Wall L and Wall 7.3 Wall L 
and Wall 7.3 continue to withstand the design basis loads without 
loss of structural integrity or the safety-related functions. The 
proposed changes do not affect the operation of any system or 
equipment that initiates an analyzed accident or alter any 
structures, systems, and components (SSC) accident initiator or 
initiating sequence of events.
    This change does not adversely affect the design function of 
VEGP Unit 4 Wall L and Wall 7.3, or the SSCs contained within the 
auxiliary building. This change does not involve any accident 
initiating components or events, thus leaving the probabilities of 
an accident unaltered.
    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of a previously 
evaluated accident.
    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change modifies the provided area of steel 
horizontal reinforcement for VEGP Unit 4 Wall L and Wall 7.3 from 
elevation 117'-6'' to 135-3''. As demonstrated by the continued 
conformance to the applicable codes and standards governing the 
design of the structures, the walls withstand the same effects as 
previously evaluated. The proposed change does not affect the 
operation of any systems or equipment that may initiate a new of 
different kind of accident or alter any SSC such that a new accident 
initiator or initiating sequence of events is created. The proposed 
change does not adversely affect the design function of auxiliary 
building Wall L and Wall 7.3, or any other SSC design functions or 
methods of operation in a manner that results in a new failure mode, 
malfunction, or sequence of events that affect safety-related or 
non-safety-related equipment. This change does not allow for a new 
fission product release path, result in a new fission product 
barrier failure mode, or create a new sequence of events that result 
in significant fuel cladding failures.
    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the 
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident 
previously evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change modifies the provided area of steel 
horizontal reinforcement for VEGP Unit 4 Wall L and Wall 7.3 from 
elevation 117'-6'' to 135'-3''. This change maintains conformance to 
ACI 349-01. The changes to Wall L and Wall 7.3 horizontal 
reinforcement from elevation 117'-6'' to 135'-3'' do not change the 
performance of the affected portion of the auxiliary building for 
postulated loads. The criteria and requirements of ACI 349-01 
provide a margin of safety to structural failure. The design of the 
auxiliary building structure conforms to criteria and requirements 
in ACI 349-01 and therefore, maintains the margin of safety. The 
change does not alter any design function, design analysis, or 
safety analysis input or result, and sufficient margin exists to 
justify departure from the Tier 2* requirements for the walls. As 
such, because the system continues to respond to design basis 
accidents in the same manner as before without any changes to the 
expected response of the structure, no safety analysis or design 
basis acceptance limit/criterion is challenged or exceeded by the 
proposed changes. Accordingly, no significant safety margin is 
reduced by the change.
    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant 
reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the 
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
    Attorney for licensee: M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 
1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35203-2015.
    NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer L. Dixon-Herrity.
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 52-025 and 52-026, 
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP), Units 3 and 4, Burke County, 
Georgia
    Date of amendment request: July 26, 2019. A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19207A727.
    Description of amendment request: The amendment request proposes 
changes to the Combined License (COL) Numbers NPF-91 and NPF-92 for 
VEGP, Units 3 and 4, and Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). 
Specifically, the requested amendment would eliminate COL condition 
2.D.(2)(a)1 which describes a first plant Pressurizer Surge Line 
Stratification Evaluation and make related revisions to the UFSAR Tier 
2 information.
    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 change does not affect the operation of any systems 
or equipment that initiates an analyzed accident or alter any 
structures, systems, or components [SSC] accident initiator or 
initiating sequence of events. The proposed changes remove the 
requirement to perform the Pressurizer Surge Line Stratification 
Evaluation first plant tests based on a number of factors that 
render the testing unnecessary. The changes do not adversely affect 
any methodology which would increase the probability or consequences 
of a previously evaluated accident.
    The change does not impact the support, design, or operation of 
mechanical or fluid systems. There is no change to plant systems or 
the response of systems to postulated accident conditions. There is 
no change to predicted radioactive releases due to normal operation 
or postulated accident conditions. The plant response to previously 
evaluated accidents or external events is not adversely affected, 
nor does the proposed change create any new accident precursors.
    The proposed changes do not involve a change to any mitigation 
sequence or the predicted radiological releases due to postulated 
accident conditions, thus, the consequences of the accidents 
evaluated in the UFSAR are not affected.
    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of a previously 
evaluated accident.
    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 remove the requirement to perform the 
Pressurizer Surge Line Stratification Evaluation first plant tests 
based on a number of factors that render the testing unnecessary. 
The proposed changes do not adversely affect any design function of 
any SSC design functions or methods of operation in a manner that 
results in a new failure mode, malfunction, or sequence of events 
that affect safety-related or non-safety-related equipment. This 
proposed change does not allow for a new fission product release 
path, result in a new fission product barrier failure mode, or 
create a new sequence of events that result in significant fuel 
cladding failures.
    These proposed changes do not adversely affect any other SSC 
design functions or methods of operation in a manner that results in 
a new failure mode, malfunction, or sequence of events that affect 
safety-related or non-safety-related equipment. Therefore, this 
proposed change does not allow for a new fission product release 
path, result in a new fission product barrier failure mode, or 
create a new sequence of events that results in significant fuel 
cladding failures.
    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the 
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident 
previously evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change maintains existing safety margin and 
provides adequate protection through continued application of the 
existing design requirements in the

[[Page 50084]]

UFSAR. The proposed change satisfies the same design functions in 
accordance with the same codes and standards as stated in the UFSAR. 
This change does not adversely affect any design code, function, 
design analysis, safety analysis input or result, or design/safety 
margin.
    No safety analysis or design basis acceptance limit/criterion is 
challenged or exceeded by this change, and no significant margin of 
safety is reduced.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the 
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
    Attorney for licensee: M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 
1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35203-2015.
    NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon-Herrity.

IV. 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. 50-413 and 50-414, Catawba 
Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, York County, South Carolina

    Date of amendment requests: May 2, 2017, as supplemented by letters 
dated July 20 and November 21, 2017; December 3, 2018; and March 7, 
April 8, July 10, and August 1, 2019.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments modified Catawba's 
Technical Specifications (TSs) to extend the Completion Time (CT) of TS 
3.8.1, ``AC Sources--Operating,'' Required Action B.6 (existing 
Required Action B.4, numbered as B.6) for an inoperable emergency 
diesel generator (EDG) from 72 hours to 14 days. To support this 
request, the licensee will add a supplemental power source (i.e., two 
supplemental diesel generators (SDGs) per station) with the capability 
to power any emergency bus.
    The SDGs will have the capacity to bring the affected unit to cold 
shutdown. Additionally, the amendments would modify TS 3.8.1 to add new 
two limiting conditions for operation (LCOs), TS LCO 3.8.1.c and TS LCO 
3.8.1.d, to ensure that at least one train of shared components has an 
operable emergency power supply. Corresponding Conditions, Required 
Actions and CTs of TS 3.8.1 are revised to account for the new 
supplemental AC power source.
    Date of issuance: August 27, 2019.
    Effective date: These license amendments are effective as of its 
date of issuance and shall be implemented within 120 days of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: 304 (Unit 1) and 300 (Unit 2). A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19212A655; documents related 
to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with 
the amendments.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-35 and NPF-52: 
Amendments revised the Renewed Licenses and TSs.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: February 27, 2018 (83 
FR 8512). The supplemental letters dated July 20 and November 21, 2017; 
December 3, 2018; and March 7, April 8, July 10, and August 1, 2019, 
provided additional information that clarified the application, did not 
expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not 
change the staff's original proposed no significant hazards 
consideration determination as published in the Federal Register.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated August 27, 2019.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-247, Indian Point 
Nuclear Generating Unit No. 2, Westchester County, New York

    Date of amendment request: December 11, 2017, as supplemented by 
letter dated June 6, 2019.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised Technical 
Specification (TS) Limiting Condition for Operation 3.7.13, ``Spent 
Fuel Pit Storage,'' and TS 4.0, ``Design Features,'' Section 4.3, 
``Fuel Storage.'' The amendment resolves a non-conservative TS 
associated with TS Limiting Condition for Operation 3.7.13 and negates 
the need for the associated compensatory measures, while taking no 
credit for installed Boraflex panels.
    Date of issuance: September 4, 2019.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 120 days.
    Amendment No.: 290. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under 
Accession No. ML19209C966; documents related to this amendment are 
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
    Facility Operating License No. DPR-26: The amendment revised the 
Renewed Facility Operating License and TSs.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: March 13, 2018 (83 FR 
10916). The supplemental letter dated June 6, 2019, 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 September 4, 2019.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

[[Page 50085]]

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, and PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50-
277 and 50-278, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (Peach Bottom), Units 
2 and 3, York and Lancaster Counties, Pennsylvania

    Date of amendment request: September 28, 2018, as supplemented by 
letters dated February 15, 2019; March 26, 2019; and May 23, 2019.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the design 
and licensing basis described in the Peach Bottom Updated Final Safety 
Analysis Report to reduce the design pressure rating of the high-
pressure service water (HPSW) system. This change provides additional 
corrosion margin in the HPSW system pipe wall thickness, thereby 
increasing the margin of safety for the existing piping. In addition, 
this change also temporarily revises certain Technical Specifications 
(TSs) to allow sufficient time to perform modifications of the HPSW 
system to support the proposed reduction of the HPSW design pressure 
and to allow for timely repairs of a heat exchanger on Peach Bottom, 
Unit 3.
    Date of issuance: August 28, 2019.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 60 days of issuance.
    Amendments Nos.: 327 (Unit 2) and 330 (Unit 3). A publicly-
available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19182A006; 
documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety 
Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-44 and DPR-56: The 
amendments revised TSs 3.6.2.3, 3.6.2.4, 3.6.2.5, and 3.7.1.
    Date of initial notice in: November 6, 2018 (83 FR 55566).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated August 28, 2019.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-461, Clinton Power 
Station (CPS), Unit No. 1, DeWitt County, Illinois

Exelon Generation Company, LLC and Exelon FitzPatrick, LLC, Docket No. 
50-333, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAF), Oswego County, 
New York

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374, LaSalle 
County Station (LCS), Units 1 and 2, LaSalle County, Illinois

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-352 and 50-353, Limerick 
Generating Station (LGS), Units 1 and 2, Montgomery County, 
Pennsylvania

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-410, Nine Mile Point 
Nuclear Station (NMP), Unit 2, Oswego County, New York

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, and PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50-
277 and 50-278, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (PBAPS), Units 2 and 
3, York and Lancaster Counties, Pennsylvania

    Date of amendment request: February 1, 2019, as supplemented by 
letter dated March 7, 2019.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments revise the 
Technical Specification (TS) requirements for these facilities related 
to the safety limit minimum critical power ratio (MCPR) and the core 
operating limits report. The amendments are based on Technical 
Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF-564, Revision 2, ``Safety 
Limit MCPR'' (ADAMS Accession No. ML18297A361). The amendments for LGS 
and JAF also make changes to these requirements that are outside the 
scope of TSTF-564, Revision 2.
    Date of issuance: August 28, 2019.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
as shown in the following table.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Implementation
                     Facility                            requirement
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CPS Unit 1........................................  prior to entering
                                                     Mode 4 following
                                                     refueling outage
                                                     C1R19.
JAF...............................................  prior to entering
                                                     Mode 4 following
                                                     refueling outage
                                                     FPR24.
LCS Unit 1........................................  prior to entering
                                                     Mode 4 following
                                                     refueling outage
                                                     L1R18.
LCS Unit 2........................................  prior to LCS Unit 1
                                                     entering Mode 4
                                                     following refueling
                                                     outage L1R18.
LGS Unit 1........................................  prior to entering
                                                     Operational
                                                     Condition 4
                                                     following refueling
                                                     outage Li1R18.
LGS Unit 2........................................  prior to entering
                                                     Operational
                                                     Condition 4
                                                     following refueling
                                                     outage Li2R16.
NMP Unit 2........................................  prior to entering
                                                     Mode 4 following
                                                     refueling outage
                                                     N2R17.
PBAPS Unit 2......................................  prior to entering
                                                     Mode 4 following
                                                     refueling outage
                                                     P2R23
PBAPS Unit 3......................................  prior to entering
                                                     Mode 4 following
                                                     refueling outage
                                                     P3R22.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Amendment Nos.: CPS-225, JAF-327, LCS-238/224, LGS-236/199, NMP2-
176, and PBAPS-326/329. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under 
Accession No. ML19176A033. Documents related to these amendments are 
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.
    Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-62, DPR-59, NPF-11, NPF-18, 
NPF-39, NPF-85, NPF-69, DPR-44, and DPR-56: Amendments revised the 
Facility Operating Licenses and TSs.
    Date of initial notice in: April 9, 2019 (84 FR 14146).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated August 28, 2019.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. STN 50-456 and STN 50-457, 
Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2, Will County, Illinois and Docket Nos. 
STN 50-454 and STN 50-455, Byron Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Ogle 
County, Illinois

    Date of amendment request: January 31, 2019, as supplemented by 
letter dated August 9, 2019.

[[Page 50086]]

    Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised Technical 
Specifications (TSs) for inoperable snubbers by adding limiting 
condition for operation (LCO) 3.0.9. The change is consistent with the 
NRC-approved Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Standard 
Technical Specifications Change Traveler, TSTF-372, ``Addition of LCO 
3.0.8, lnoperability of Snubbers.''
    Date of issuance: August 28, 2019.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 30 days from the date of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: 202/208 (Braidwood, Units 1 and 2), and 208/208 
(Byron, Unit Nos. 1 and 2). A publicly-available version is in ADAMS 
under Accession No. ML19190A081; documents related to these amendments 
are listed in the related Safety Evaluation enclosed with the 
amendments.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-72, NPF-77, NPF-37, and 
NPF-66: The amendments revised the TSs and the Renewed Facility 
Operating Licenses.
    Date of initial notice in: May 7, 2019 (84 FR 19970).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated August 28, 2019.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket No. 50-289, Three Mile Island 
Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (TMI-1), Dauphin County, Pennsylvania

    Date of amendment request: July 25, 2018, as supplemented by letter 
dated March 6, 2019.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the TMI-1 
Renewed Facility Operating License and the associated Technical 
Specifications (TSs) to permanently defueled TSs, consistent with the 
permanent cessation of reactor operation and permanent defueling of the 
reactor. The amendment also changed the current licensing basis 
mitigation strategies for flood mitigation and aircraft impact 
protection in the air intake tunnel.
    Date of issuance: August 29, 2019.
    Effective date: The amendment is effective following the docketing 
of the certifications required by 10 CFR 50.82(a)(1)(i) and (ii) that 
TMI-1 has been permanently shut down and defueled. The amendment shall 
be implemented within 30 days of the effective date of the amendment, 
but will not exceed December 31, 2019.
    Amendment No.: 297. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under 
Accession No. ML19211D317; documents related to this amendment are 
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-50: The amendment 
revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and TSs.
    Date of initial notice in: November 20, 2018 (83 FR 58611). The 
supplemental letter dated March 6, 2019, 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 August 29, 2019.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Holtec Pilgrim, LLC and Holtec Decommissioning International, LLC, 
Docket No. 50-293, Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station (Pilgrim), Plymouth 
County, Massachusetts

    Date of amendment request: November 16, 2018, as supplemented by 
letters dated November 16, 2018; April 17, 2019; and July 29, 2019.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised Renewed 
Facility Operating License No. DPR-35 to reflect the indirect transfer 
of Pilgrim Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-35 and the 
general license for the Pilgrim Independent Spent Fuel Storage 
Installation from Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (ENOI) to Holtec 
International; the name change for Entergy Nuclear Generation Company 
to Holtec Pilgrim, LLC; and the direct transfer of ENOI's operating 
authority to Holtec Decommissioning International, LLC.
    Date of issuance: August 27, 2019.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 30 days of issuance.
    Amendment No.: 249. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under 
Accession No. ML19235A050; documents related to this amendment are 
listed in the Safety Evaluation referenced in the letter dated August 
22, 2019 (ADAMS Accession No. ML19170A101).
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-35: The amendment 
revised the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical 
Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in: January 31, 2019 (84 FR 816).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated August 27, 2019.

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

    Date of amendment request: March 28, 2018, as supplemented by 
letters dated March 13, 2019, and May 15, 2019.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment added a condition to 
the MNGP renewed facility operating license to allow the implementation 
of 10 CFR 50.69, ``Risk-informed categorization and treatment of 
structures, systems and components for nuclear power reactors.''
    Date of issuance: August 29, 2019.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 90 days of issuance.
    Amendment No.: 203. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under 
Accession No. ML19176A421; documents related to this amendment are 
listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with the amendment.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-22: Amendment revised 
the Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in: May 22, 2018 (83 FR 23735). The 
supplemental letters dated March 13, 2019, and May 15, 2019, provided 
additional information that clarified the application, did not expand 
the scope of the application as originally noticed, and did not change 
the staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration 
determination as published in the Federal Register.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated August 29, 2019.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

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

    Date of amendment request: April 18, 2019.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised Hope Creek 
Generating Station Technical Specification (TS) 3.6.5.1, ``Secondary 
Containment Integrity,'' Surveillance Requirements (SRs) 4.6.5.1.a and 
4.6.5.1.b.2.a. SR 4.6.5.1.a is revised to address conditions during 
which the secondary containment pressure may not meet the SR pressure 
requirements. SR 4.6.5.1.b.2.a is modified to

[[Page 50087]]

acknowledge that both secondary containment access openings may be 
simultaneously open for entry and exit. Additionally, TS Definitions 
1.39.d and 1.39.g are revised to conform to the changes to these two 
SRs.
    Date of issuance: September 6, 2019.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 60 days of the date of issuance.
    Amendment No.: 218. A publicly-available version is in ADAMS under 
Accession No. ML19205A306; 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 TSs.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 4, 2019 (84 FR 
25839).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated September 6, 2019.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Georgia Power Company, 
Oglethorpe Power Corporation, Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, 
City of Dalton, Georgia, Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366, Edwin I. Hatch 
Nuclear Plant (Hatch), Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Appling County, Georgia

    Date of amendment request: October 17, 2018.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments modified the 
required actions associated with the Hatch, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, 
Technical Specification (TS) 3.6.4.1, ``Secondary Containment,'' to 
allow up to 7 days to determine and correct the cause of secondary 
containment degradation when at least one combination of standby gas 
treatment subsystems can maintain adequate secondary containment 
vacuum.
    Date of issuance: September 4, 2019.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 90 days of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: 298 (Unit 1) and 243 (Unit 2). A publicly-available 
version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19198A104; documents related 
to these amendments are listed in the Safety Evaluation enclosed with 
the amendments.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-57 and NPF-5: 
Amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses and TSs.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: March 26, 2019 (84 FR 
11342).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated September 4, 2019.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Docket Nos. 50-259, 50-260, and 50-
296, Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (Browns Ferry), Units 1, 2, and 3, 
Limestone County, Alabama

TVA Docket Nos. 50-327 and 50-328, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (Sequoyah), 
Units 1 and 2, Hamilton County, Tennessee

TVA Docket Nos. 50-390 and 50-391, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant (Watts Bar), 
Units 1 and 2, Rhea County, Tennessee

    Date of amendment request: November 17, 2017, as supplemented by 
letter dated June 18, 2018, and as subsequently revised by letter dated 
November 19, 2018, and supplemented by letter dated January 25, 2019.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments added a new level 
of protection regarding ``unbalanced voltage'' to the Technical 
Specifications (TSs) for the loss of power instrumentation. 
Implementation of these amendments provides for equipment protection 
from the effects of an unbalanced voltage in a similar fashion to the 
existing degraded and loss of voltage protection schemes. Specifically, 
the amendments added a new condition to TS 3.3.8.1 and revised TS Table 
3.3.8.1-1 for Browns Ferry, and added a new condition to TS 3.3.5 and 
revised TS Table 3.3.5-1 for Sequoyah and Watts Bar to reflect the 
implementation of the Class 1E ``unbalanced voltage'' relays for Browns 
Ferry, Sequoyah, and Watts Bar TSs loss of power instrumentation.
    Date of issuance: August 27, 2019.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 120 days of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: 309, 332, and 292 (Browns Ferry, Units 1, 2, and 3 
respectively); 345 and 339 (Sequoyah, Units 1 and 2, respectively); and 
128 and 31 (Watts Bar, Units 1 and 2, respectively). A publicly-
available version is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18277A110; 
documents related to these amendments are listed in the Safety 
Evaluation enclosed with the amendments.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-33, DPR-52, DPR-68, 
DPR-77, and DPR-79, and Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-90 and NPF-
96: The amendments revised the Facility Operating Licenses and TSs.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: January 16, 2018 (83 FR 
2231). The supplemental letter dated June 18, 2018, and as subsequently 
revised by letter dated November 19, 2018, and supplemented by letter 
dated January 25, 2019, 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 August 27, 2019.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of September 2019.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jessica A. Bielecki,
Acting Deputy Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office 
of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2019-20507 Filed 9-23-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P