[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 182 (Tuesday, September 22, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48318-48323]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-22605]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2009-0407]
BiWeekly Notice Applications and Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses; Involving No Significant Hazards Considerations
I. 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 August 27, 2009 to September 9, 2009. The
last biweekly notice was published on September 8, 2009 (74 FR 46239).
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.
Written comments may be submitted by mail to the Chief, Rulemaking
and Directives Branch (RDB), TWB-05-B01M, Division of Administrative
Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, and should cite the publication date and
page number of this Federal Register notice. Written comments may also
be faxed to the RDB at 301-492-3446. Documents may be examined, and/or
copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at
One White Flint North, Public File Area O-1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
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
[[Page 48319]]
available at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North,
Public File Area O-1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from
the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System's (ADAMS) Public
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, 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 petitioner/requestor
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
petitioner/requestor 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 petitioner/
requestor intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The
petitioner/requestor must also provide references to those specific
sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the
petitioner/requestor 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 petitioner/requestor to relief. A petitioner/
requestor who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at
least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding,
subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene,
and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing.
If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If
the final determination is that the amendment request involves no
significant hazards consideration, the Commission may issue the
amendment and make it immediately effective, notwithstanding the
request for a hearing. Any hearing held would take place after issuance
of the amendment. If the final determination is that the amendment
request involves a significant hazards consideration, 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, which the NRC
promulgated in August 2007 (72 FR 49139, August 28, 2007). The E-Filing
process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory
documents over the Internet, or in some cases to mail copies on
electronic storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies of
their filings unless they seek an exemption in accordance with the
procedures described below.
To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least
ten (10) days prior to the filing deadline, the petitioner/requestor
should contact the Office of the Secretary by e-mail at
[email protected], or by calling (301) 415-1677, to request (1) a
digital 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/or (2)
creation of an electronic docket for the proceeding (even in instances
in which the petitioner/requestor (or its counsel or representative)
already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Each petitioner/
requestor will need to download the Workplace Forms ViewerTM
to access the Electronic Information Exchange (EIE), a component of the
E-Filing system. The Workplace Forms ViewerTM is free and is
available at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/install-viewer.html. Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is
available on NRC's public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html.
Once a petitioner/requestor has obtained a digital ID certificate,
had a docket created, and downloaded the EIE viewer, it 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 filer submits its documents through EIE. To be timely, an
electronic filing must be submitted to the EIE 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
EIE 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 through the ``Contact Us'' link
located on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html or by calling the NRC electronic filing Help Desk,
which is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday
through Friday, excluding government holidays. The toll-free help line
number is 1-866-672-7640. A person filing electronically may also seek
assistance by sending an e-mail to the NRC electronic filing Help Desk
at [email protected].
[[Page 48320]]
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.
Non-timely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be
entertained absent a determination by the Commission, the presiding
officer, or the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the request and/
or petition should be granted and/or the contentions should be
admitted, based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR
2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii).
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at
http://ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp, unless excluded pursuant
to an order of the Commission, an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, or
a 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 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 submissions.
For further details with respect to this license amendment
application, see the application for amendment which is available for
public inspection at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint
North, Public File Area O-1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from
the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web
site, 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].
Southern California Edison Company, et al., Docket Nos. 50-361 and 50-
362, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3, San Diego
County, California
Date of amendment requests: January 30, 2009, as supplemented by
letter dated March 16, 2009.
Description of amendment requests: Southern California Edison (SCE)
is requesting an amendment to Technical Specification 5.7.1.5, ``Core
Operating Limits Report (COLR),'' to allow the use of the CASMO-4
computer program methodology to perform nuclear design calculations.
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 changes do not involve a significant increase in
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
SCE is adding the CASMO-4 computer program to its physics
analysis methodology and will use the program for nuclear design
analysis. This will allow the use of the CASMO-4 methodology to
perform all steady-state pressurized water reactor (PWR) nuclear
design analyses. The probability of occurrence of an accident
previously evaluated will not be increased by the proposed change in
the particular computer programs used for physics calculations for
nuclear design analysis. The results of nuclear design analyses are
used as inputs to the analysis of accidents that are evaluated in
the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). These inputs do
not alter physical characteristics or modes of operation of any
system, structure, or component involved in the initiation of an
accident. Thus, there is no significant increase in the probability
of an accident previously evaluated as a result of this change.
The consequences of an accident evaluated in the UFSAR are
affected by the values of the physics inputs to the safety analysis.
An extensive benchmark of CASMO-4 was performed with both San Onofre
measured and predicted data, and with critical experiments. The
accuracy of the CASMO-4 model is similar to the accuracy of the
CASMO-3 model. Furthermore, there is the potential for the value of
the nuclear design parameters to change solely as a result of the
new core reload full core loading pattern. Regardless of the source
of a change, an assessment is made of changes to the nuclear design
parameters with respect to their effects on the consequences of
accidents previously evaluated in the UFSAR. Thus, the nuclear
design parameters are intermediate results and by themselves will
not result in an increase in the consequences of an accident
evaluated in the UFSAR.
Therefore, the use of the CASMO-4 methodology, which will
perform the same functions as the existing CASMO-3 methodology with
similar accuracy, does not significantly increase the 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 does not create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated.
The possibility for a new or different kind of accident
evaluated previously in the UFSAR will not be created by the change
to the particular methodologies used for physics calculations for
nuclear design analyses. The change involves adding CASMO-4 to the
SCE physics analysis methodology. CASMO-4 is an update to the CASMO-
3 methodology currently approved for use at San Onofre. The results
of nuclear design analyses are used as inputs to the analysis of
accidents that are evaluated in the UFSAR. These inputs do not alter
the physical characteristics or modes of operation of any system,
structure or component involved in the initiation of an accident.
Therefore, the addition of CASMO-4, which will perform the same
functions as CASMO-3 with similar accuracy, 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 change does not involve a significant reduction in
a margin of safety. The margin of safety as defined in the basis for
any technical specification will not be reduced by the proposed
change to the computer programs used for physics calculations for
nuclear design analyses.
The change involves the addition of CASMO-4 to the SCE physics
analysis methodology for nuclear design analysis. Extensive
benchmarking of CASMO-4 has demonstrated that the values of those
parameters used in the safety analysis are not significantly changed
relative to the values obtained using the NRC approved CASMO-3
methodology. For any changes in the calculated values that do occur,
the application of appropriate biases and uncertainties ensures that
the current margin of safety is maintained. Specifically, use of
these code specific biases and uncertainties in safety analyses
continues to provide the
[[Page 48321]]
same statistical assurance that the values of the nuclear parameters
used in the safety analysis are conservative with respect to the
actual values on at least a 95/95 probability/confidence basis.
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 requests involve no significant hazards consideration.
Attorney for licensee: Douglas K. Porter, Esquire, Southern
California Edison Company, 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue, Rosemead,
California 91770
NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. Markley.
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 Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint
North, Public File Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from
the Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) Public
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, 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].
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 application for amendments: August 7, 2008, as supplemented
on May 7, 2009.
Brief description of amendments: The submittal contains an
amendment with six proposed changes that modify the PBAPS Units 2 and 3
Operating Licenses DPR-44 and DPR-56, respectively. Four of the six
changes incorporate Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF) travelers
that have been previously approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC). The remaining proposed changes modify the PBAPS Units 2 and 3
Technical Specifications (TSs) to incorporate administrative changes
and clarifications.
A TS change is issued to incorporate TSTF-485-A, ``Correct Example
1.4-1,'' Revision 0, to modify the PBAPS Units 2 and 3 TS Section 1.4,
``Frequency.'' Specifically, Example 1.4-1 is revised to be consistent
with the requirements of Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.0.4 which was
revised by TSTF-359, ``Increase Flexibility in Mode Restraints,''
Revision 9. The current version of Example 1.4-1 is not consistent with
the current requirements of SR 3.0.4. Example 1.4-1 is modified to
reflect that it is possible to enter the MODE or other specified
condition in the applicability of a limited condition for operation
(LCO) with a surveillance not performed within the frequency
requirements of SR 3.0.2 without resulting in a violation of SR 3.0.4.
A TS change is issued to modify the PBAPS Units 2 and 3 TS to
incorporate two administrative changes. The first change modifies TS
Table 3.3.8.1-1, ``Loss of Power Instrumentation.'' TS Table 3.3.8.1-1
lists the TS functions associated with the Loss of Power
Instrumentation and include note (a) at the bottom of Table 3.3.8.1-1.
The original intent of this footnote was to temporarily retain a record
of the previous Loss of Power Instrumentation values to allow for
appropriate transition during the period of time that modifications
were being installed on Units 2 and 3. This footnote was to expire no
later than March 1, 2000 (as stated in the footnote). The note has
expired and is no longer necessary. Therefore, note (a) at the bottom
of Table 3.3.8.1-1 is eliminated as an administrative change to the TS.
The second change modifies TS Table 3.3.3.1-1, ``Post Accident
Monitoring Instrumentation,'' to correct a typographical error. A
previous license amendment incorporated TSTF-295, Revision 0, ``Post
Accident Monitoring Clarifications,'' which included changing the title
for Function 8 in TS Table 3.3.3.1-1 from, ``PCIV Position,'' to
``Penetration Flow Path PCIV Position.'' However, Function 8 was
inadvertently revised on the PBAPS, Unit 2 page to state ``Penetration
Flaw Path PCIV Position.'' The amendment corrects this typographical
error for Function 8 in Table 3.3.3.1-1 of the Unit 2 PBAPS TS.
A TS change is issued to modify the PBAPS Units 2 and 3 TS to
incorporate an administrative change to Table 3.3.1.1-1, ``Reactor
Protection System Instrumentation.'' Specifically, the proposed change
would modify TS Table 3.3.1.1-1 to delete the ``NA'' from the Allowable
Value column for Function 2.f, ``OPRM [oscillation power range monitor]
Upscale.'' The reference to footnote ``(d)'' which states: ``See COLR
[core operating limits report] for OPRM period based detection
algorithm (PBDA) setpoint limits,'' will remain in the Allowable Value
column for Function 2.f in TS Table 3.3.1.1-1.
Footnote ``(d)'' in TS Table 3.3.1.1-1 references the PBAPS COLR
which contains the trip setpoint for the setpoint limits associated
with Function 2.f. Therefore, the ``NA'' designation associated with
note ``d'' is eliminated to preclude possible confusion.
The licensee's application also proposed a TS change to incorporate
TSTF-363-A, ``Revise Topical Report References in ITS [improved
technical specifications] 5.6.5, COLR,'' Revision 0, to modify the
PBAPS Units 2 and 3 TS 5.6.5, ``Core Operating Limits Report (COLR),''
to remove the requirement to maintain COLR Topical Report references by
number, title, date, and NRC staff-approved document, if included. This
proposed TS change to incorporate TSTF-363-A, Revision 0, remains under
review by the NRC staff and is not being issued under this Notice.
[[Page 48322]]
The licensee's application also proposed a TS change to incorporate
TSTF-400-A, ``Clarification of Surveillance Requirement on Bypass of
Noncritical DG [diesel generator] Automatic Trips,'' Revision 1, to
modify the PBAPS Units 2 and 3 TS SR 3.8.1.13 to clarify the intent of
the SR. This proposed TS change to incorporate TSTF-400-A, Revision 1,
remains under review by the NRC staff and is not being issued under
this Notice.
The licensee's application also proposed a TS change to incorporate
TSTF-439-A, ``Elimination of Second Completion Times Limiting Time From
Discovery of Failure To Meet an LCO,'' Revision 2, to modify the PBAPS
Units 2 and 3 TS Section 1.3, ``Completion Times,'' regarding second
completion times for TS Action statements. This proposed TS change to
incorporate TSTF-439-A, Revision 2, remains under review by the NRC
staff and is not being issued under this Notice.
Date of issuance: August 31, 2009.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 90 days from the date of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: 273 and 277.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-44 and DPR-56:
Amendments revised the License and Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: May 5, 2009, (74 FR
20744). The supplement dated May 7, 2009, clarified the application,
did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and
did not change the initial proposed no significant hazards
consideration determination.
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated August 31, 2009.
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: September 11, 2008, as
supplemented by letter dated August 11, 2009.
Brief description of amendments: The amendment removes time, cycle,
or modification-related items from the operating license and Technical
Specifications (TS). Additionally, the amendment corrects a
typographical error introduced into the TS from a previous amendment.
Date of issuance: August 27, 2009.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 30 days.
Amendment Nos.: 193/180.
Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-11 and NPF-18: The amendments
revised the Technical Specifications and License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 30, 2008 (73
FR 79931). The supplemental letter contained clarifying information,
did not change the initial no significant hazards consideration
determination, and did not expand the scope of the original Federal
Register notice.
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated August 27, 2009.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company, et al., Docket No. 50-440, Perry
Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. 1, Lake County, Ohio
Date of application for amendment: March 11, 2009.
Brief description of amendment: This amendment revises the
technical specification (TS) surveillance requirement frequency in TS
3.1.3, ``Control Rod OPERABILITY,'' and revises Example 1.4-3 in
Section 1.4, ``Frequency,'' to clarify the applicability of the 1.25
surveillance test interval extension.
Date of issuance: September 1, 2009.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 90 days.
Amendment No.: 153.
Facility Operating License No. NPF-58: This amendment revised the
Technical Specifications and License.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: May 5, 2009 (74 FR
20748).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated September 1, 2009.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Florida Power and Light Company, Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251, Turkey
Point Plant, Units 3 and 4, Miami-Dade County, Florida
Date of application for amendments: April 13, 2009.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments revise the Turkey
Point Technical Specification (TS) to eliminate working hour
restrictions from TS 6.8.5 to support compliance with Code of Federal
Regulations Title 10 Part 26.
Date of issuance: August 31, 2009.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
by October 1, 2009.
Amendment Nos: 240 and 235.
Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-31 and DPR-41:
Amendments revised the Technical Specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 30, 2009.
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated August 31, 2009.
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
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, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Appling County, Georgia
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., Docket Nos. 50-424 and 50-
425, Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2, Burke County,
Georgia
Date of application for amendments: May 19, 2009.
Brief description of amendments: The amendments delete those
portions of technical specifications (TSs) superseded by Title 10 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 26, Subpart I. This
change is consistent with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)-
approved Revision 0 to Technical Specification Task Force (TSTF)
Traveler, TSTF-511, ``Eliminate Working Hour Restrictions from TS 5.2.2
to Support Compliance with 10 CFR Part 26.''
Date of issuance: September 4, 2009.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
by October 1, 2009.
Amendment Nos.: Farley Unit 1--182; Unit 2--175; Hatch Unit 1--262;
Unit 2--206; Vogtle Unit 1--156; Unit 2--137.
Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-2 and NPF-8; DPR-57 and NPF-5;
NPF-68 and NPF-81: Amendments revised the licenses and the technical
specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 30, 2009 (74 FR
31325).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated September 4, 2009.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
[[Page 48323]]
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket No. 50-390, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant
(WBN), Unit 1, Rhea County, Tennessee
Date of application for amendment: June 5, 2009, as supplemented
July 10, 2009.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised WBN Unit 1
Technical Specification (TS) 3.6.3, ``Containment Isolation Valves.''
The amendment revised Required Action A.2, Required Action C.2,
Required Action E.2, Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.6.3.2, and SR
3.6.3.3 to provide alternatives for valve position verification.
Date of issuance: September 3, 2009.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 60 days of issuance.
Amendment No.: 79.
Facility Operating License No. NPF-90: Amendment revises the TS
3.6.3.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 30, 2009 (74 FR
31327). The supplement dated July 10, 2009, 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 September 3, 2009.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket No. 50-390, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant
(WBN), Unit 1, Rhea County, Tennessee
Date of application for amendment: June 5, 2009.
Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised WBN Unit 1
Technical Specification (TS) 3.3.2, ``[Engineered Safety Feature
Actuation System] ESFAS Instrumentation.'' The amendment revised the
logic connector from ``OR'' to ``AND'' between Condition I, Required
Actions I.2.1 and I.2.2 of TS 3.3.2.
Date of issuance: September 8, 2009.
Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented
within 30 days of issuance.
Amendment No.: 80.
Facility Operating License No. NPF-90: Amendment revises the TS
3.3.2.
Date of initial notice in Federal Register: June 30, 2009 (74 FR
31326).
The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained
in a Safety Evaluation dated September 8, 2009.
No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of September 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Joseph G. Giitter,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E9-22605 Filed 9-21-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P