[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 153 (Tuesday, August 9, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48908-48919]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-19775]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2011-0175]
Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility
Operating Licenses Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations
Background
Pursuant to Section 189a. (2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the
Commission or NRC) is publishing this regular biweekly notice. The Act
requires the Commission publish notice of any amendments issued, or
proposed to be issued and grants the Commission the authority to issue
and make immediately effective any amendment to an operating license
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 July 14, 2011, to July 27, 2011. The last
biweekly notice was published on July 26, 2011 (76 FR 44614).
ADDRESSES: Please include Docket ID NRC-2011-0175 in the subject line
of your comments. Comments submitted in writing or in electronic form
will be posted on the NRC Web site and on the Federal rulemaking Web
site http://www.regulations.gov. Because your comments will not be
edited to remove any identifying or contact information, the NRC
cautions you against including any information in your submission that
you do not want to be publicly disclosed.
[[Page 48909]]
The NRC requests that any party soliciting or aggregating comments
received from other persons for submission to the NRC inform those
persons that the NRC will not edit their comments to remove any
identifying or contact information, and therefore, they should not
include any information in their comments that they do not want
publicly disclosed.
You may submit comments by any one of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for documents filed under Docket ID NRC-
2011-0175. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher 301-
492-3668; e-mail [email protected].
Mail comments to: Chief, Rules, Announcements, and
Directives Branch (RADB), Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWB-05-
B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
Fax comments to: RADB at 301-492-3446.
You can access publicly available documents related to this notice
using the following methods:
NRC's Public Document Room (PDR): The public may examine
and have copied, for a fee, publicly available documents at the NRC's
PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland 20852.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC
are accessible electronically through ADAMS in the NRC Library at
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this page, the public
can gain entry into ADAMS, which provides text and image files of the
NRC's public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there
are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the
NRC's PDR reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail
to [email protected].
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Public comments and
supporting materials related to this notice can be found at http://www.regulations.gov by searching on Docket ID: NRC-2011-0175.
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination,
and Opportunity for a Hearing
The Commission has made a proposed determination that the following
amendment requests involve no significant hazards consideration. Under
the Commission's regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), Section 50.92, this means that operation of the
facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1)
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated;
or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The basis
for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown
below.
The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final
determination.
Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the
expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The
Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-
day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment
involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the
Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-
day comment period should circumstances change during the 30-day
comment period such that failure to act in a timely way would result,
for example in derating or shutdown of the facility. Should the
Commission take action prior to the expiration of either the comment
period or the notice period, it will publish in the Federal Register a
notice of issuance. Should the Commission make a final No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination, any hearing will take place after
issuance. The Commission expects that the need to take this action will
occur very infrequently.
Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any
person(s) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a
request for a hearing and a petition to intervene with respect to
issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license.
Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be
filed in accordance with the Commission's ''Rules of Practice for
Domestic Licensing Proceedings'' in 10 CFR part 2. Interested person(s)
should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at
the NRC's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Room O1-F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. NRC
regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on the
NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If
a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by
the above date, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the
Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety
and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition;
and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an
appropriate order.
As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene
shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in
the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of
the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons
why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the
following general requirements: (1) The name, address, and telephone
number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the
requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the
proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's
property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the
possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the
proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must
also identify the specific contentions which the requestor/petitioner
seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.
Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue
of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the
requestor/petitioner shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for
the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert
opinion which support the contention and on which the requestor/
petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing.
The requestor/petitioner must also provide references to those specific
sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the
requestor/petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert
opinion. The petition must include sufficient information to show that
a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law
or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of
the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if
proven, would entitle the requestor/petitioner to relief. A requestor/
petitioner who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at
least one
[[Page 48910]]
contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding,
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene,
and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing.
If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If
the final determination is that the amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the
amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance
of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment
request involves a significant hazards consideration, then any hearing
held would take place before the issuance of any amendment.
All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a
request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or
other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a
request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by
interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c),
must be filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139,
August 28, 2007). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit
and serve all adjudicatory documents over the Internet, or in some
cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not
submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in
accordance with the procedures described below.
To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10
days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the
Office of the Secretary by e-mail at [email protected], or by
telephone at 301-415-1677, to request (1) a digital identification (ID)
certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or
representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal
server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise
the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a request or
petition for hearing (even in instances in which the participant, or
its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID
certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish
an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the
Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is
available on the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html. System requirements for accessing
the E-Submittal server are detailed in the NRC's ``Guidance for
Electronic Submission,'' which is available on the agency's public Web
site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants
may attempt to use other software not listed on the Web site, but
should note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted
software, and the NRC Meta System Help Desk will not be able to offer
assistance in using unlisted software.
If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC
in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the
document using the NRC's online, Web-based submission form. In order to
serve documents through the Electronic Information Exchange System,
users will be required to install a Web browser plug-in from the NRC
Web site. Further information on the Web-based submission form,
including the installation of the Web browser plug-in, is available on
the NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.
Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a
docket has been created, the participant can then submit a request for
hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in
Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance
available on the NRC public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the
documents are submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be
timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system
no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of
a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends
the submitter an e-mail notice confirming receipt of the document. The
E-Filing system also distributes an e-mail notice that provides access
to the document to the NRC Office of the General Counsel and any others
who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to
participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the
documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and
other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for
and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition
to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document
via the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically using the agency's adjudicatory E-
Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Meta System
Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC Web site
at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by e-mail at
[email protected], or by a toll-free call at 1-866-672-7640. The
NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.,
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.
Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not
submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention:
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth
Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland
20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants
filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the
document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by
first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier,
express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the
document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having
granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a
participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer
subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from
use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at
http://ehd1.nrc.gov/EHD/, unless excluded pursuant to an order of the
Commission, or the presiding officer. Participants are requested not to
include personal privacy information, such as social security numbers,
home addresses, or home phone numbers in their filings, unless an NRC
regulation or other law requires submission of such information. With
respect to copyrighted works, except for limited
[[Page 48911]]
excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would
constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested not to
include copyrighted materials in their submission.
Petitions for leave to intervene must be filed no later than 60
days from the date of publication of this notice. Non-timely filings
will not be entertained absent a determination by the presiding officer
that the petition or request should be granted or the contentions
should be admitted, based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10
CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii).
For further details with respect to this license amendment
application, see the application for amendment which is available for
public inspection at the NRC's PDR, located at One White Flint North,
Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland
20852. Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC are
accessible electronically through ADAMS in the NRC Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to
ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in
ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209,
301-415-4737, or by e-mail to [email protected].
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-352 and 50-353, Limerick
Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania
Date of amendment request: April 6, 2011.
Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would
modify the actions to be taken when the containment atmosphere gaseous
radioactivity monitoring system and the primary containment pressure
and temperature monitoring system are the only operable reactor coolant
leakage detection monitoring systems. The modified actions require
additional, more frequent monitoring of other indications of Reactor
Coolant System (RCS) leakage and provide appropriate time to restore
another monitoring system to operable status. This change is consistent
with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approved safety
evaluation on Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) Traveler, TSTF-
514-A, Revision 3, ``Revise BWR [Boiling Water Reactor] Operability
Requirements and Actions for RCS Leakage Instrumentation,'' dated
November 24, 2010.
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, with NRC edits in brackets:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No
The proposed changes [ ] modify the time allowed for the plant
to operate when the only operable RCS leakage detection
instrumentation monitors are the containment atmosphere gaseous
radioactivity monitoring system and the primary containment pressure
and temperature monitoring system. The monitoring of RCS leakage is
not a precursor to any accident previously evaluated. The monitoring
of RCS leakage is not a direct method used to mitigate the
consequences of any accident previously evaluated. [The RCS leakage
detection instruments are used to detect a degradation of the RCS
pressure boundary and are used to determine the need to initiate
mitigative actions.] Therefore, the proposed amendment does not
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of
an accident previously evaluated.
The proposed changes also renumber [certain] current TS Actions
to accommodate the new TS Action. This change is administrative in
nature and does not involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed changes [ ] modify the time allowed for the plant
to operate when the only operable RCS leakage detection
instrumentation monitor monitors are the containment atmosphere
gaseous radioactivity monitoring system and the primary containment
pressure and temperature monitoring system. The proposed changes do
not involve a physical alteration of the plant (no new or different
type of equipment will be installed) or a change in the methods
governing normal plant operation.
Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident
previously evaluated. The proposed changes also renumber [certain]
current TS Actions to accommodate the new TS Action. This change is
administrative in nature and does not create the possibility of a
new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
Response: No.
The proposed changes [ ] increase the time allowed for the
drywell floor drain sump flow monitoring system and the drywell unit
coolers condensate flow rate monitoring system to be inoperable
concurrently from 12 hours to 7 days. Increasing the amount of time
the plant is allowed to operate with these two leakage detection
monitors inoperable does not significantly decrease the margin of
safety due to the addition of compensatory actions to analyze grab
samples of the primary containment atmosphere once per 12 hours and
monitor RCS leakage by administrative means once per 12 hours. The
overall likelihood that an increase in RCS leakage will be detected
before it potentially results in gross failure is maintained with
the addition of the actions. Therefore, the proposed amendment does
not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The proposed changes also renumber [certain] current TS Actions
to accommodate the new TS Action. This change is administrative in
nature and does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of
safety. 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, including the edits in brackets above, it appears that the
three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the NRC
staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: J. Bradley Fewell, Esquire, Associate
General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road,
Warrenville, IL 60555.
NRC Branch Chief: Harold K. Chernoff.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-352 and 50-353, Limerick
Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania
Date of amendment request: June 2, 2011.
Description of amendment request: The proposed change would revise
the Technical Specifications for each unit by changing the method of
calculating core reactivity for the purpose of performing the
reactivity anomaly surveillance at Limerick Generating Station, Units 1
and 2. The proposed change would allow performance of the surveillance
based on a comparison of predicted to actual (or monitored) core
reactivity. The reactivity anomaly verification is currently determined
by a comparison of predicted versus actual control rod density.
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, with NRC edits in brackets:
1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in
the probability or
[[Page 48912]]
consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No
The proposed Technical Specifications changes do not affect any
plant systems, structures, or components designed for the prevention
or mitigation of previously evaluated accidents. The amendment would
only change how the reactivity anomaly surveillance is performed.
Verifying that the core reactivity is consistent with predicted
values ensures that accident and transient safety analyses remain
valid. This amendment changes the Technical Specification
requirements such that, rather than performing the surveillance by
comparing predicted to actual control rod density, the surveillance
is performed by a direct comparison of [effective multiplication
factor] keff. Present day on-line core monitoring
systems, such as the one in use at Limerick Generating Station
(LGS), Units 1 and 2 are capable of performing the direct
measurement of reactivity.
Therefore, since the reactivity anomaly surveillance will
continue to be performed by a viable method, the proposed amendment
does not involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequence 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.
This Technical Specifications amendment request does not involve
any changes to the operation [ ] or maintenance of any safety-
related, or otherwise important to safety systems. All systems
important to safety will continue to be operated and maintained
within their design bases. The proposed changes to the reactivity
anomaly Technical Specifications will only provide a new, more
efficient method of detecting an unexpected change in core
reactivity.
Since all systems continue to be operated within their design
bases, no new failure modes are introduced and the possibility of a
new or different kind of accident is not created.
3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction
in a margin of safety?
Response: No.
This proposed Technical Specifications amendment proposes to
change the method for performing the reactivity anomaly surveillance
from a comparison of predicted to actual control rod density to a
comparison of predicted to actual keff. The direct
comparison of keff provides a technically superior method
of calculating any differences in the expected core reactivity. The
reactivity anomaly surveillance will continue to be performed at the
same frequency as is currently required by the Technical
Specifications, only the method of performing the surveillance will
be changed. Consequently, core reactivity assumptions made in safety
analyses will continue to be adequately verified.
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: J. Bradley Fewell, Esquire, Associate
General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road,
Warrenville, IL 60555.
NRC Branch Chief: Harold K. Chernoff.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-352 and 50-353, Limerick
Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania
Date of amendment request: June 14, 2011.
Description of amendment request: The proposed change would revise
the Technical Specification (TS) 3.4.3.1, ``LEAKAGE DETECTION
SYSTEMS,'' to support the addition of an alternative method of
verifying that unidentified leakage in the drywell is within limits.
The proposed alternate method uses the installed drywell equipment
drain sump (DWEDS) monitoring system, with the drywell floor drain sump
(DWFDS) overflowing to the DWEDS, to verify that Reactor Coolant System
leakage in the drywell is within limits. This configuration would only
be used when the DWFDS monitoring system is unavailable.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards
consideration, which is presented below:
1. Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change does not involve physical changes to any
plant structure, system, or component. As a result, no new failure
modes of the Reactor Coolant System (RCS) leakage detection systems
are being introduced. Additionally, the RCS leakage detection
systems have no impact on any initiating event frequency.
The consequences of a previously analyzed accident are dependent
on the initial conditions assumed for the analysis, the behavior of
the fuel during the analyzed accident, the availability and
successful functioning of the equipment assumed to operate in
response to the analyzed event, and the setpoints at which these
actions are initiated. The RCS leakage detection systems do not
perform an accident mitigating function. Emergency Core Cooling
System, Reactor Protection System, and primary and secondary
containment isolation actuations are not affected by the proposed
change. The proposed change has no impact on any setpoints or
functions related to these actuations. There are no changes in the
types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents
released offsite.
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
Response: No.
The proposed change allows use of the drywell equipment drain
system as an alternative method of quantifying unidentified leakage
in the drywell. The drywell equipment drain system will continue to
be used for leakage collection and quantification. There is no
alteration to the parameters within which the plant is normally
operated or in the setpoints that initiate protective or mitigative
actions. As a result, no new failure modes are being introduced.
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 change involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety?
Response: No.
The current TS require a periodic measurement of RCS leakage.
The proposed change maintains the existing level of safety by
allowing use of the drywell equipment drain sump system to quantify
unidentified leakage in the drywell. No changes are being made to
any of the RCS leakage limits specified in the TS. The impact of the
change is that measured unidentified and identified leakage within
the drywell will be quantified as equivalent values since the
drywell equipment drain sump monitoring system will also be used to
measure leakage into the drywell floor drain sump. In addition, the
alternative method conservatively assumes that all leakage in the
drywell is unidentified leakage.
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: J. Bradley Fewell, Esquire, Associate
General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road,
Warrenville, IL 60555.
NRC Branch Chief: Harold K. Chernoff.
[[Page 48913]]
NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC, Docket No. 50-443, Seabrook Station, Unit
1, Rockingham County, New Hampshire
Date of amendment request: April 21, 2011.
Description of amendment request: The proposed change would revise
operability requirements for the leakage detection systems, eliminate
redundant Technical Specification (TS) requirements, and revise the TS
actions to include conditions and required actions for inoperable
leakage detection systems similar to those in NUREG 1431, ``Standard
Technical Specifications--Westinghouse Plants.'' The proposed amendment
would also incorporate the requirements of TSTF-513, Revision 3,
``Revise [Pressurized Water Reactor] Operability Requirements and
Actions for [Reactor Coolant System] Leakage Instrumentation.''
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration (NSHC)
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has
provided its analysis of the issue of NSHC, which is presented below,
with NRC edits shown in square brackets:
1. The proposed change does not involve a significant increase
in the probability or consequences of an accident previously
evaluated.
The proposed change does not impact the physical function of
plant structures, systems, or components (SSCs) or the manner in
which SSCs perform their design function. The proposed change
neither adversely affects accident initiators or precursors, nor
alters design assumptions. The proposed change does not alter or
prevent the ability of operable SSCs to perform their design
function to mitigate the consequences of an initiating event within
assumed acceptance limits. The [reactor coolant system (RCS)]
leakage detection instruments are not used in [the] mitigation of
any accidents. [The RCS leakage detection instruments are used to
detect a degradation of the RCS pressure boundary and are used to
determine the need to initiate mitigative actions].
Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident
previously evaluated.
2. The proposed change does not create the possibility of a new
or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
The proposed change will not impact the accident analysis. The
change does not involve a physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no
new or different type of equipment will be installed), a significant
change in the method of plant operation, or new operator actions [to
mitigate an accident]. The proposed change will not introduce
failure modes that could result in a new accident. The change does
not alter assumptions made in the safety analysis.
Therefore, the proposed change does not create the possibility
of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously
evaluated.
3. The proposed changes do not involve a significant reduction
in the margin of safety.
Margin of safety is associated with confidence in the ability of
the fission product barriers (i.e., fuel cladding, reactor coolant
system pressure boundary, and containment structure) to limit the
level of radiation dose to the public. The proposed change does not
involve a significant change in the method of plant operation, and
no accident analyses will be affected by the proposed changes.
Additionally, the proposed changes will not relax any criteria used
to establish safety limits and will not relax any safety system
settings. The safety analysis acceptance criteria are not affected
by this change. The proposed change will not result in plant
operation in a configuration outside the design basis. The proposed
change does not adversely affect systems that respond to safely
shutdown the plant and to maintain the plant in a safe shutdown
condition.
Therefore, these 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 50.92(c) are
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the
amendment request involves NSHC.
Attorney for licensee: M.S. Ross, Florida Power & Light Company,
P.O. Box 14000, Juno Beach, FL 33408-0420.
NRC Branch Chief: Harold K. Chernoff.
Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating 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.
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility
Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration
Determination, and Opportunity for A Hearing in connection with these
actions was published in the Federal Register as indicated.
Unless otherwise indicated, the Commission has determined that
these amendments satisfy the criteria for categorical exclusion in
accordance with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b),
no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be
prepared for these amendments. If the Commission has prepared an
environmental assessment under the special circumstances provision in
10 CFR 51.22(b) and has made a determination based on that assessment,
it is so indicated.
For further details with respect to the action see (1) the
applications for amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3) the Commission's
related letter, Safety Evaluation and/or Environmental Assessment as
indicated. All of these items are available for public inspection at
the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North,
Room O1-F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland
20852. Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC are
accessible electronically through the Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS) in the NRC Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there
are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the
PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to
[email protected].
Arizona Public Service Company, et al., Docket Nos. STN 50-528, STN 50-
529, and STN 50-530, Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 1, 2,
and 3, Maricopa County, Arizona
Date of application for amendment: July 22, 2010, as supplemented
by letters dated September 29 and November 30, 2010, and January 20,
March 31, and June 29, 2011.
Brief description of amendment: The amendments approved the cyber
security plan and associated implementation schedule, and revise
Paragraph 2.E of Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-41, NPF-51, and
NPF-74, respectively, to provide a license condition to require the
licensee to fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of
the NRC-approved Cyber Security Plan. The proposed change is consistent
with Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 08-09, Revision 6, ``Cyber Security
Plan for Nuclear Power Reactors.''
Date of issuance: July 26, 2011.
Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date
of its issuance. The implementation of the cyber security plan (CSP),
including the key intermediate milestone dates and the full
implementation date, shall be in accordance with the implementation
schedule submitted by the licensee on March 31, 2011, and approved by
the NRC staff with this license amendment.
[[Page 48914]]
All subsequent changes to the NRC-approved CSP implementation schedule
will require prior NRC approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90.
Amendment No.: Unit 1--185; Unit 2--185; Unit 3--185.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-41, NPF-51, and NPF-74:
The amendment revised the Operating Licenses.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 9, 2010 (75 FR
68833). The supplemental letters dated September 29 and November 30,
2010, and January 20, March 31, and June 29, 2011, 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 amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated July 26, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287,
Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3, Oconee County, South
Carolina
Date of application of amendments: October 19, 2009, as
supplemented November 15, 2010.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments revised the
Technical Specifications to allow the use of gadolinia as an integral
burnable absorber in the uranium oxide fuel matrix.
Date of Issuance: July 21, 2011.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 30 days from the date of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: 374, 376, and 375.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47, and DPR-55:
Amendments revised the licenses and the technical specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: March 16, 2010 (75 FR
12576).
The supplement dated November 15, 2010, provided additional
information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of
the application as originally noticed, and did not change the staff's
original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated July 21, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Energy Northwest, Docket No. 50-397, Columbia Generating Station,
Benton County, Washington
Date of application for amendment: July 22, 2010, as supplemented
by letters dated September 27 and November 30, 2010, and March 31,
2011.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment approved the cyber
security plan and associated implementation schedule, and revised
Paragraph 2.E of Facility Operating License No. NPF-21 to provide a
license condition to require the licensee to fully implement and
maintain in effect all provisions of the NRC-approved Cyber Security
Plan. The proposed change is consistent with Nuclear Energy Institute
(NEI) 08-09, Revision 6, ``Cyber Security Plan for Nuclear Power
Reactors.''
Date of issuance: July 27, 2011.
Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date
of its issuance. The implementation of the cyber security plan (CSP),
including the key intermediate milestone dates and the full
implementation date, shall be in accordance with the implementation
schedule submitted by the licensee on March 31, 2011, and approved by
the NRC staff with this license amendment. All subsequent changes to
the NRC-approved CSP implementation schedule will require prior NRC
approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90.
Amendment No.: 222.
Facility Operating License No. NPF-21: The amendment revised the
Facility Operating License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 20, 2010 (75 FR
51492). The supplemental letters dated September 27 and November 30,
2010, and March 31, 2011, 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 July 27, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-255, Palisades Nuclear
Plant, Van Buren County, Michigan
Date of application for amendment: July 20, 2010.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revises Technical
Specification (TS) 3.8.3, ``Diesel Fuel, Lube Oil, and Starting Air,''
by relocating the current stored diesel fuel oil and lube oil numerical
volume requirements from TS to the TS Bases so that they may be
modified under licensee control. The TS are modified so that the stored
diesel fuel oil and lube oil inventory will require that a 7-day supply
be available for either diesel generator. Condition A and Condition B
in the Action table are revised and Surveillance Requirements (SR)
3.8.3.1 and 3.8.3.2 are revised to reflect the above change. The
amendment also revises TS 3.8.3 by reducing the Completion Time for
Condition C.
Date of issuance: July 26, 2011.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 60 days of issuance.
Amendment No.: 242.
Facility Operating License No. DPR-20: Amendment revised the
Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 14, 2010 (75
FR 77912).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated July 26, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-293, Pilgrim Nuclear
Power Station, Plymouth County, Massachusetts
Date of application for amendment: July 15, 2010, as supplemented
by letters dated February 15, and April 4, 2011.
Brief description of amendment: The proposed amendment to the
Facility Operating License (FOL) includes: (1) the proposed Pilgrim
Nuclear Power Station (PNPS) Cyber Security Plan, (2) an implementation
schedule, and (3) a proposed sentence to be added to the existing FOL
Physical Protection license condition for PNPS requiring Entergy to
fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the
Commission-approved PNPS Cyber Security Plan as required by 10 CFR
73.54, ``Protection of digital computer and communication systems and
networks.'' A Federal Register notice dated March 27, 2009, issued the
final rule that amended 10 CFR part 73. The regulations in 10 CFR
73.54, establish the requirements for a Cyber Security Program. This
regulation specifically requires each licensee currently licensed to
operate a nuclear power plant under part 50 of this chapter to submit a
cyber security plan that satisfies the requirements of the Rule. Each
submittal must include a proposed implementation schedule and
implementation of the licensee's Cyber Security Program must be
consistent with the approved schedule. The
[[Page 48915]]
background for this application is addressed by the NRC Notice of
Availability, Federal Register Notice, Final Rule 10 CFR part 73, Power
Reactor Security Requirements, published on March 27, 2009 (74 FR
13926).
Date of issuance: July 22, 2011.
Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date
of its issuance. The implementation of the CSP, including the key
intermediate milestone dates and the full implementation date, shall be
in accordance with the implementation schedule submitted by the
licensee on July 15, 2010, as supplemented by letters dated February 15
and April 4, 2011, and approved by the NRC staff with this license
amendment. All subsequent changes to the NRC-approved CSP
implementation schedule will require prior NRC approval pursuant to 10
CFR 50.90.
Amendment No.: 236.
Facility Operating License No. DPR-35: The amendment revised the
License
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 20, 2010 (75 FR
51493).
The supplements dated February 15, and April 4, 2011, 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 July 22, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC and Entergy Nuclear Operations,
Inc., Docket No. 50-271, Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Vernon,
Vermont
Date of application for amendment: July 16, 2010, as supplemented
by letters dated February 15 and April 4, 2011.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment to the Renewed
Facility Operating License (FOL) includes: (1) the Vermont Yankee
Nuclear Power Station (VY) Cyber Security Plan (CSP), (2) an
implementation schedule, and (3) a proposed sentence to be added to the
existing FOL Physical Protection license condition for VY requiring
Entergy to fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the
Commission-approved VY CSP as required by Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 73.54 ``Protection of digital computer and
communication systems and networks.'' A Federal Register notice dated
March 27, 2009, issued the final rule that amended 10 CFR part 73. The
regulations in 10 CFR 73.54 establish the requirements for a CSP. This
regulation specifically requires each licensee currently licensed to
operate a nuclear power plant under part 50 of this chapter to submit a
CSP that satisfies the requirements of the Rule. Each submittal must
include a proposed implementation schedule and implementation of the
licensee's CSP must be consistent with the approved schedule. The
background for this application is addressed by the NRC Notice of
Availability, Federal Register Notice, Final Rule 10 CFR part 73, Power
Reactor Security Requirements, published on March 27, 2009 (74 FR
13926).
Date of Issuance: July 20, 2011.
Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date
of its issuance. The implementation of the CSP, including the key
intermediate milestone dates and the full implementation date, shall be
in accordance with the implementation schedule submitted by the
licensee on July 16, 2010, as supplemented by letters dated February 15
and April 4, 2011, and approved by the NRC staff with this license
amendment. All subsequent changes to the NRC-approved CSP
implementation schedule will require prior NRC approval pursuant to 10
CFR 50.90.
Amendment No.: 247.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-28: The amendment
revised the License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 20, 2010 (75 FR
51494).
The supplements dated February 15 and April 4, 2011, 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 this amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated July 20, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket Nos. 50-313 and 50-368, Arkansas
Nuclear One, Unit 1 and 2, Pope County, Arkansas
Date of amendment request: July 9, 2010, as supplemented by letters
dated September 23 and November 30, 2010, and February 15 and April 1,
2011.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment approved the Arkansas
Nuclear One, Units 1 and 2 cyber security plan and associated
implementation schedule, and revised Paragraph 2.c.(4) of Renewed
Facility Operating License No. DPR-51 for Unit 1 and Paragraph 2.D of
Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-6 for Unit 2 to provide a
license condition to require the licensee to fully implement and
maintain in effect all provisions of the NRC-approved Cyber Security
Plan. The change is consistent with Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 08-
09, Revision 6, ``Cyber Security Plan for Nuclear Power Reactors.''
Date of issuance: July 27, 2011.
Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date
of its issuance. The implementation of the cyber security plan (CSP),
including the key intermediate milestone dates and the full
implementation date, shall be in accordance with the implementation
schedule submitted by the licensee on April 1, 2011, and approved by
the NRC staff with this license amendment. All subsequent changes to
the NRC-approved CSP implementation schedule will require prior NRC
approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90.
Amendment Nos.: Unit 1--244; Unit 2--294.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-51 and NPF-6: Amendment
revised the operating licenses.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 12, 2010 (75 FR
62597). The supplemental letters dated September 23 and November 30,
2010, and February 15 and April 1, 2011, 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 July 27, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Entergy Operations, Inc., System Energy Resources, Inc., South
Mississippi Electric Power Association, and Entergy Mississippi, Inc.,
Docket No. 50-416, Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Claiborne
County, Mississippi
Date of application for amendment: July 22, 2010, as supplemented
by letters dated September 23 and November 30, 2010, and February 15
and April 4, 2011.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment approved the cyber
security plan and associated implementation
[[Page 48916]]
schedule, and revised Paragraph 2.E of Facility Operating License No.
NPF-29 to provide a license condition to require the licensee to fully
implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the NRC-approved
Cyber Security Plan. The proposed change is generally consistent with
Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 08-09, Revision 6, ``Cyber Security Plan
for Nuclear Power Reactors.''
Date of issuance: July 27, 2011.
Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date
of its issuance. The implementation of the cyber security plan (CSP),
including the key intermediate milestone dates and the full
implementation date, shall be in accordance with the implementation
schedule submitted by the licensee on April 4, 2011, and approved by
the NRC staff with this license amendment. All subsequent changes to
the NRC-approved CSP implementation schedule will require prior NRC
approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90.
Amendment No: 186.
Facility Operating License No. NPF-29: The amendment revises the
Facility Operating License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 20, 2010 (75 FR
51494). The supplemental letters dated September 23 and November 30,
2010, and February 15 and April 4, 2011, 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 July 27, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-382, Waterford Steam Electric
Station, Unit 3, St. Charles Parish, Louisiana
Date of amendment request: July 15, 2010, as supplemented by
letters dated September 27 and November 30, 2010, and February 15 and
April 4, 2011.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment approved the cyber
security plan and associated implementation schedule, and revised
Paragraph 2.E of Facility Operating License No. NPF-38 to provide a
license condition to require the licensee to fully implement and
maintain in effect all provisions of the NRC-approved Cyber Security
Plan. The proposed change is consistent with Nuclear Energy Institute
(NEI) 08-09, Revision 6, ``Cyber Security Plan for Nuclear Power
Reactors.''
Date of issuance: July 20, 2011.
Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date
of its issuance. The implementation of the cyber security plan (CSP),
including the key intermediate milestone dates and the full
implementation date, shall be in accordance with the implementation
schedule submitted by the licensee on April 4, 2011, and approved by
the NRC staff with this license amendment. All subsequent changes to
the NRC-approved CSP implementation schedule will require prior NRC
approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90.
Amendment No.: 234.
Facility Operating License No. NPF-38: The amendment revised the
Facility Operating License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 12, 2010 (75 FR
62598). The supplemental letters dated September 27 and November 30,
2010, and February 15 and April 4, 2011, 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 July 20, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-373 and 50-374, LaSalle
County Station, Units 1 and 2, LaSalle County, Illinois
Date of application for amendments: January 6, 2010, as
supplemented by letters dated August 20, October 14, and December 2,
2010, and February 7, 2011.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments changes paragraph
2.B.(5) of Facility Operating License (FOL) Nos. NFP-11 and NPF-18 for
LaSalle County Station (LSCS), Units 1 and 2 which enable LSCS to
possess and store byproduct material from Braidwood Station, Units 1
and 2, Byron Station, Units 1 and 2, and Clinton Power Station, Unit 1
in the LSCS Interim Radwaste Storage Facility.
Date of issuance: July 21, 2011.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 30 days.
Amendment Nos.: 202/189.
Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-11 and NPF-18: The amendments
revised paragraph 2.B.(5) of FOL Nos. NFP-11 and NPF-18.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 21, 2010 (75 FR
42465). The August 20, October 14, and December 2, 2010, and February
7, 2011 supplements, contained clarifying information and did not
change the Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff's initial proposed
finding of no significant hazards consideration.
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated July 21, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Luminant Generation Company LLC, Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446,
Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 and 2, Somervell County,
Texas
Date of amendment request: July 15, 2010, as supplemented by
letters dated September 27 and November 30, 2010, and March 31, 2011.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments approved the cyber
security plan and associated implementation schedule, and revised
Paragraph 2.H of Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-87 and NPF-89 for
Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, respectively, to
provide a license condition to require the licensee to fully implement
and maintain in effect all provisions of the NRC-approved Cyber
Security Plan. The proposed change is consistent with Nuclear Energy
Institute (NEI) 08-09, Revision 6, ``Cyber Security Plan for Nuclear
Power Reactors.''
Date of issuance: July 26, 2011.
Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date
of its issuance. The implementation of the cyber security plan (CSP),
including the key intermediate milestone dates and the full
implementation date, shall be in accordance with the implementation
schedule submitted by the licensee on March 31, 2011, and approved by
the NRC staff with this license amendment. All subsequent changes to
the NRC-approved CSP implementation schedule will require prior NRC
approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90.
Amendment Nos.: Unit 1--155; Unit 2--155.
Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-87 and NPF-89: The amendments
revised the Facility Operating Licenses.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 12, 2010 (75 FR
62601). The supplemental letters dated September 27 and November 30,
2010, and March 31, 2011, 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.
[[Page 48917]]
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated July 26, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Nebraska Public Power District, Docket No. 50-298, Cooper Nuclear
Station, Nemaha County, Nebraska
Date of amendment request: July 20, 2010, as supplemented by
letters dated September 27 and November 30, 2010, and March 30, 2011.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment approved the cyber
security plan and associated implementation schedule, and revised
Paragraph 2.C.(3) of Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-46 to
provide a license condition to require the licensee to fully implement
and maintain in effect all provisions of the NRC-approved Cyber
Security Plan. The proposed change is consistent with Nuclear Energy
Institute (NEI) 08-09, Revision 6, ``Cyber Security Plan for Nuclear
Power Reactors.''
Date of issuance: July 27, 2011.
Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date
of its issuance. The implementation of the cyber security plan (CSP),
including the key intermediate milestone dates and the full
implementation date, shall be in accordance with the implementation
schedule submitted by the licensee on March 30, 2011, and approved by
the NRC staff with this license amendment. All subsequent changes to
the NRC-approved CSP implementation schedule will require prior NRC
approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90.
Amendment No.: 238.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-46: Amendment revised
the Facility Operating License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 12, 2010 (75 FR
62602). The supplemental letters dated September 27 and November 30,
2010, and March 30, 2011, 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 July 27, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
NextEra Energy Point Beach, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-266 and 50-301, Point
Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Town of Two Creeks, Manitowoc
County, Wisconsin
Date of application for amendments: July 8, 2010, as supplemented
by letters dated September 28, November 12, and November 23 of 2010,
and March 31 and June 29 of 2011.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments approve the Cyber
Security Plan (CSP) and associated implementation schedule, and adds a
new License Condition D to the Renewed Facility Operating Licenses for
Units 1 and 2. The amendments will specify that NextEra Energy Point
Beach fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the
Commission approved CSP as required by 10 CFR 73.54.
Date of issuance: July 21, 2011.
Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date
of issuance. The implementation of the CSP, including the key
intermediate milestone dates and the full implementation date, shall be
in accordance with the implementation schedule submitted by the
licensee on March 31, 2011, and approved by the NRC staff with this
license amendment. All subsequent changes to the NRC-approved CSP
implementation schedule will require prior NRC approval pursuant to 10
CFR 50.90.
Amendment Nos.: 243 (for Unit 1) and 247 (for Unit 2).
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-24 and DPR-27:
Amendments revised the Renewed Facility Operating License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: April 12, 2011 (76 FR
20380).
The supplements contained clarifying information and did not change
the NRC staff's initial proposed finding of no significant hazards
consideration.
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated July 21, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Omaha Public Power District, Docket No. 50-285, Fort Calhoun Station,
Unit 1, Washington County, Nebraska
Date of amendment request: July 26, 2010, as supplemented by
letters dated September 27 and November 30, 2010, and March 31 and
April 8, 2011.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment approved the cyber
security plan and associated implementation schedule, and revised
Paragraph 3.C of Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-40 to
provide a license condition to require the licensee to fully implement
and maintain in effect all provisions of the NRC-approved Cyber
Security Plan. The proposed change is consistent with Nuclear Energy
Institute (NEI) 08-09, Revision 6, ``Cyber Security Plan for Nuclear
Power Reactors.''
Date of issuance: July 27, 2011.
Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date
of its issuance. The implementation of the cyber security plan (CSP),
including the key intermediate milestone dates and the full
implementation date, shall be in accordance with the implementation
schedule submitted by the licensee on April 8, 2011, and approved by
the NRC staff with this license amendment. All subsequent changes to
the NRC-approved CSP implementation schedule will require prior NRC
approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90.
Amendment No.: 266.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-40: The amendment
revised the operating license.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 16, 2010 (75
FR 70035). The supplemental letters dated September 27 and November 30,
2010, and March 31 and April 8, 2011, 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 July 27, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323, Diablo
Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 and 2, San Luis Obispo County,
California
Date of application for amendments: July 22, 2010, as supplemented
by letters dated August 19, September 29, and November 30, 2010, and
February 8 and April 4, 2011.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments approved the cyber
security plan and associated implementation schedule, and revised
Paragraph 2.E of Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-80 and DPR-82 for
Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, respectively, to provide
a license condition to require the licensee to fully implement and
maintain in effect all provisions of the NRC-approved Cyber Security
Plan. The proposed change is consistent with Nuclear Energy Institute
(NEI) 08-09, Revision 6, ``Cyber
[[Page 48918]]
Security Plan for Nuclear Power Reactors.''
Date of issuance: July 15, 2011.
Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date
of its issuance. The implementation of the cyber security plan (CSP),
including the key intermediate milestone dates and the full
implementation date, shall be in accordance with the implementation
schedule submitted by the licensee on April 4, 2011, and approved by
the NRC staff with this license amendment. All subsequent changes to
the NRC-approved CSP implementation schedule will require prior NRC
approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90.
Amendment Nos.: Unit 1--210; Unit 2--212.
Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-80 and DPR-82: The amendments
revised the Facility Operating Licenses.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 12, 2010 (75 FR
62605). The supplemental letters dated August 19, September 29, and
November 30, 2010, and February 8 and April 4, 2011, 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 amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated July 15, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
PPL Susquehanna, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388, Susquehanna Steam
Electric Station, Units 1 and 2, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania
Date of application for amendments: July 22, 2010, as supplemented
by letter dated April 4, 2011.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments to the Renewed
Facility Operating Licenses (FOL) include: (1) the proposed SSES Units
1 and 2 Cyber Security Plan (CSP), (2) an implementation schedule, and
(3) a proposed sentence to be added to the existing renewed FOL
Physical Protection license condition for SSES Units 1 and 2 requiring
PPL Susquehanna, LLC to fully implement and maintain in effect all
provisions of the Commission-approved SSES Units 1 and 2 CSP as
required by Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 73.54,
``Protection of digital computer and communication systems and
networks.'' A Federal Register notice dated March 27, 2009, issued the
final rule that amended 10 CFR part 73. The regulations in 10 CFR
73.54, establish the requirements for a CSP. This regulation
specifically requires each licensee currently licensed to operate a
nuclear power plant under part 50 of this chapter to submit a CSP that
satisfies the requirements of the Rule. Each submittal must include a
proposed implementation schedule and implementation of the licensee's
CSP must be consistent with the approved schedule. The background for
this application is addressed by the NRC Notice of Availability,
Federal Register Notice, Final Rule 10 CFR part 73, Power Reactor
Security Requirements, published on March 27, 2009 (74 FR 13926).
Date of issuance: July 21, 2011.
Effective date: These license amendments are effective as of the
date of its issuance. The implementation of the CSP, including the key
intermediate milestone dates and the full implementation date, shall be
in accordance with the implementation schedule submitted by the
licensee on July 22, 2010, as supplemented by letter dated April 4,
2011, and approved by the NRC staff with these license amendments. All
subsequent changes to the NRC-approved CSP implementation schedule will
require prior NRC approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90.
Amendment Nos.: 255 for Unit 1 and 235 for Unit 2.
Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-14 and NPF-22: The amendments
revised the license.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 12, 2010, 75 FR
62606.
The supplement dated April 4, 2011, 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 July 21, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-
364, Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Houston County,
Alabama
Date of amendment request: October 29, 2010, as supplemented on
February 21, 2011.
Brief description of amendment request: The amendments revise the
Technical Specifications (TSs) to reflect the adoption of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission-approved TS Task Force (TSTF) traveler TSTF-425,
Revision 3, ``Relocate Surveillance Frequencies to Licensee Control--
RITSTF [Risk-Informed TSTF] Initiative 5b.''
Date of issuance: July 18, 2011.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 120 days.
Amendment Nos: 185 and 180
Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-2 and NPF-8: The amendments
changed the licenses and the technical specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 14, 2010 (75
FR 77915).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated July 18, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
STP Nuclear Operating Company, Docket Nos. 50-498 and 50-499, South
Texas Project, Units 1 and 2, Matagorda County, Texas
Date of amendment request: July 27, 2010, as supplemented by
letters dated September 23 and November 30, 2010, and April 4, April
28, May 18, and June 28, 2011.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments approved the cyber
security plan and associated implementation schedule, and revised
Paragraph 2.F of Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-76 and NPF-80 for
South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2, respectively, to provide a license
condition to require the licensee to fully implement and maintain in
effect all provisions of the NRC-approved Cyber Security Plan. The
proposed change is generally consistent with Nuclear Energy Institute
(NEI) 08-09, Revision 6, ``Cyber Security Plan for Nuclear Power
Reactors.''
Date of issuance: July 26, 2011.
Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date
of its issuance. The implementation of the cyber security plan (CSP),
including the key intermediate milestone dates and the full
implementation date, shall be in accordance with the implementation
schedule submitted by the licensee on June 28, 2011, and approved by
the NRC staff with this license amendment. All subsequent changes to
the NRC-approved CSP implementation schedule will require prior NRC
approval pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90.
Amendment Nos.: Unit 1--197; Unit 2--185.
Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-76 and NPF-80: The amendments
revised the Facility Operating Licenses.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: November 9, 2010 (75 FR
68837). The supplemental letters dated September 23 and November 30,
2010,
[[Page 48919]]
and April 4, April 28, May 18, and June 28, 2011, 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 amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated July 26, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, Docket No. 50-482, Wolf Creek
Generating Station, Coffey County, Kansas
Date of amendment request: July 19, 2010, as supplemented by
letters dated September 24 and November 24, 2010, and January 20, April
1, and April 14, 2011.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment approved the cyber
security plan (CSP) and associated implementation schedule, and revised
Paragraph 2.E of Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-42 to
provide a license condition to require the licensee to fully implement
and maintain in effect all provisions of the NRC-approved Cyber
Security Plan. The proposed change is consistent with Nuclear Energy
Institute (NEI) 08-09, Revision 6, ``Cyber Security Plan for Nuclear
Power Reactors.''
Date of issuance: July 27, 2011.
Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date
of its issuance. The implementation of the CSP, including the key
intermediate milestone dates and the full implementation date, shall be
in accordance with the implementation schedule submitted by the
licensee on April 1, 2011, and approved by the NRC staff with this
license amendment. All subsequent changes to the NRC-approved CSP
implementation schedule will require prior NRC approval pursuant to 10
CFR 50.90.
Amendment No.: 197.
Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-42. The amendment
revised the Operating License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 12, 2010 (75 FR
62607). The supplemental letters dated September 24 and November 24,
2010, and January 20, April 1, and April 14, 2011, 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 July 27, 2011.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 28th day of July 2011.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Louise Lund,
Deputy Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2011-19775 Filed 8-8-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P