[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 5 (Tuesday, January 8, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1267-1274]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-31710]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2012-0321]


Biweekly Notice; Applications and Amendments to Facility 
Operating Licenses and Combined 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 or 
combined license, as applicable, upon a determination by the Commission 
that such amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, 
notwithstanding the pendency before the Commission of a request for a 
hearing from any person.
    This biweekly notice includes all notices of amendments issued, or 
proposed to be issued from December 13, 2012 to December 26, 2012. The 
last biweekly notice was published on December 11, 2012 (77 FR 73684).

ADDRESSES: You may access information and comment submissions related 
to this document, which the NRC possesses and is publicly available, by 
searching on http://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-2012-0321. 
You may submit comments by the following methods:
     Federal rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2012-0321. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-492-
3668; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
     Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, 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.
    For additional direction on accessing information and submitting 
comments, see ``Accessing Information and Submitting Comments'' in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Accessing Information and Submitting Comments

A. Accessing Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2012-0321 when contacting the NRC 
about the availability of information regarding this document. You may 
access information related to this document, which the NRC possesses 
and is publicly available, by the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2012-0321.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may access publicly available documents online in the NRC 
Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the 
search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and then select ``Begin Web-
based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's 
Public

[[Page 1268]]

Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or 
by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. Documents may be viewed in ADAMS by 
performing a search on the document date and docket number.
     NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public 
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2012-0321 in the subject line of your 
comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make 
your comment submission available to the public in this docket.
    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact 
information in comment submissions that you do not want to be publicly 
disclosed. The NRC posts all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as entering the comment submissions into 
ADAMS, and the NRC does not edit comment submissions to remove 
identifying or contact information.
    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons 
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to 
include identifying or contact information in their comment submissions 
that they do not want to be publicly disclosed. Your request should 
state that the NRC will not edit comment submissions to remove such 
information before making the comment submissions available to the 
public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating 
Licenses and Combined 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; (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 or 
combined 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 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

[[Page 1269]]

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 email at hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by 
telephone at 301-415-1677, to (1) request a digital identification (ID) 
certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or 
representative) to digitally sign 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 NRC'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's 
Web site. Further information on the Web-based submission form, 
including the installation of the Web browser plug-in, is available on 
the NRC's public Web site at 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 email notice confirming receipt of the document. The 
E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access 
to the document to the NRC's Office of the General Counsel and any 
others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to 
participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the 
documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and 
other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for 
and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition 
to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document 
via the E-Filing system.
    A person filing electronically using the NRC's adjudicatory E-
Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Meta System 
Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC's public 
Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email to 
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll-free call to 1-866 672-7640. The 
NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., 
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.
    Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not 
submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in 
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing 
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper 
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail 
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: 
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or 
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth 
Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 
20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants 
filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the 
document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by 
first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, 
express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the 
document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having 
granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a 
participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer 
subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from 
use of E-Filing no longer exists.
    Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in the 
NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at 
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 excerpts that serve 
the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would constitute a Fair Use 
application, participants are requested not to include copyrighted 
materials in their submission.
    Petitions for leave to intervene must be filed no later than 60 
days from the date of publication of this notice. Requests for hearing, 
petitions for leave to intervene, and motions for leave to file new or 
amended contentions that are filed after the 60-day deadline will not 
be entertained absent a

[[Page 1270]]

determination by the presiding officer that the filing demonstrates 
good cause by satisfying the following three factors in 10 CFR 
2.309(c)(1): (i) The information upon which the filing is based was not 
previously available; (ii) the information upon which the filing is 
based is materially different from information previously available; 
and (iii) the filing has been submitted in a timely fashion based on 
the availability of the subsequent information.
    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 email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.

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: November 14, 2012.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would 
relocate the Technical Specification (TS) requirements for motor-
operated valve thermal overload protection from the TSs to the 
Technical Requirements Manual (TRM). The TRM is a licensee-controlled 
document.
    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration 
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has 
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards 
consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Do the proposed changes involve a significant increase in the 
probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed changes relocate the motor operated valve (MOV) 
thermal overload (TOL) protection operability and surveillance 
requirements from the Limerick Generating Station (LGS) Technical 
Specifications (TS) to a licensee-controlled document under the 
control of 10 CFR 50.59.
    The proposed changes do not alter the physical design of any 
plant structure, system, or component; therefore, the proposed 
changes have no adverse effect on plant operation, or the 
availability or operation of any accident mitigation equipment. The 
plant response to the design basis accidents does not change. 
Operation or failure of the MOV TOL protection bypass capability is 
not assumed to be an initiator of any analyzed event in the Updated 
Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) and cannot cause an accident. 
Whether the requirements for the MOV TOL protection bypass 
capability are located in TS or another licensee-controlled document 
has no effect on the probability or consequences of any accident 
previously evaluated.
    The proposed changes conform to NRC regulatory requirements 
regarding the content of plant TS as identified in 10 CFR 50.36, and 
also the guidance as approved by the NRC in NUREG-1433, ``Standard 
Technical Specifications--General Electric BWR/4 Plants.''
    Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    2. Do the proposed changes create the possibility of a new or 
different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed changes relocate the MOV TOL protection operability 
and surveillance requirements from the LGS TS to a licensee-
controlled document under the control of 10 CFR 50.59.
    The proposed changes do not alter the plant configuration (no 
new or different type of equipment is being installed) or require 
any new or unusual operator actions. The proposed changes do not 
alter the safety limits or safety analysis assumptions associated 
with the operation of the plant. The proposed changes do not 
introduce any new failure modes that could result in a new accident. 
The proposed changes do not reduce or adversely affect the 
capabilities of any plant structure, system, or component in the 
performance of their safety function.
    Also, the response of the plant and the operators following the 
design basis accidents is unaffected by the proposed changes.
    Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of 
a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    3. Do the proposed changes involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed changes have no adverse effect on plant operation, 
or the availability or operation of any accident mitigation 
equipment. The plant response to the design basis accidents does not 
change. The proposed changes do not adversely affect existing plant 
safety margins or the reliability of the equipment assumed to 
operate in the safety analyses. There is no change being made to 
safety analysis assumptions, safety limits or limiting safety system 
settings that would adversely affect plant safety as a result of the 
proposed changes.
    In addition, the relocated requirements do not meet any of the 
10 CFR 50.36c(2)(ii) criteria on items for which TS must be 
established. Operability and surveillance requirements will be 
established in a licensee-controlled document to ensure the 
reliability of MOV TOL protection bypass capability. Changes to 
these requirements will be subject to the controls of 10 CFR 50.59, 
providing the appropriate level of regulatory control.
    Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant 
reduction in a margin of safety.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the 
amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
    Attorney for licensee: J. Bradley Fewell, Esquire, Associate 
General Counsel, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Winfield Road, 
Warrenville, IL 60555.
    NRC Branch Chief: Meena K. Khanna.

FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC), et al., Docket No. 50-
440, Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. 1 (PNPP), Lake County, Ohio

    Date of amendment request: September 5, 2012.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would 
modify PNPP's Technical Specifications (TS) Table 3.3.5.1, ``Emergency 
Core Cooling System (ECCS) Instrumentation,'' footnote (a) to require 
ECCS instrumentation to be operable only when the associated ECCS 
subsystems are required to be operable. This proposed change is 
consistent with Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)-approved TS Task 
Force (TSTF) Change Traveler TSTF-275-A, Revision 0.
    Additionally, the proposed amendment would add exceptions to the 
diesel generator (DG) surveillance requirements (SRs) for TS 3.8.2, 
``AC Sources--Shutdown,'' to eliminate the requirement that the DG be 
capable of responding to ECCS initiation signals while the ECCS 
subsystems are not required to be operable. This proposed change is 
consistent with NRC-approved TSTF-300-A, Revision 0.
    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration 
determination: As required by Title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR), Section 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.
    This proposed amendment involves changes to Technical 
Specification Table

[[Page 1271]]

3.3.5.1-1, ``Emergency Core Cooling System [ECCS] Instrumentation,'' 
and Surveillance Requirement 3.8.2.1 for alternating current sources 
during shutdown.
    The proposed changes to Table 3.3.5.1-1 ensures that ECCS 
instrumentation is only required to be operable when the ECCS 
subsystems and annulus exhaust gas treatments subsystems are 
required to be operable. These changes ensure ECCS instrumentation 
that actuates ECCS subsystems and annulus exhaust gas treatment 
subsystems are required to be operable to perform their function as 
described in the safety analysis, and do not involve physical 
changes to plant systems, structures or components. The proposed 
changes to Table 3.3.5.1-1 do not affect plant operations or design 
functions, and do not increase the likelihood of a malfunction.
    The surveillance requirement change eliminates the requirement 
that the diesel generator be capable of responding to ECCS 
initiation signals when the ECCS injection/spray subsystems are not 
required to be operable. The modified surveillance requirements do 
not involve physical changes to plant systems, structures or 
components, and would not cause the plant to be operated in a new or 
different manner. No new failure mechanisms, malfunctions, or 
accident initiators would be introduced by the proposed changes. The 
required equipment continues to be tested in a manner and at a 
frequency necessary to provide confidence that the equipment can 
perform its intended safety function. If the ECCS subsystems are not 
required to be operable, there is no benefit to maintaining diesel 
generator capability to respond to ECCS initiation signals. The 
proposed surveillance requirement change does not affect plant 
operations or design functions, and does not increase the likelihood 
of a malfunction.
    Therefore, the proposed amendment 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 Technical Specification changes would correctly 
identify the applicable modes or other specified conditions for 
which ECCS instrumentation is required to be operable and revises 
requirements for when certain surveillances are to be performed. 
These changes would not result in revisions of plant design, 
physical alteration of a plant structure, system, or component, or 
installation of new different types equipment. No new failure 
mechanisms, malfunctions, or accident initiators would be introduced 
by the proposed changes. Therefore, the proposed amendment does not 
create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from 
any accident previously evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed changes have no effect on design basis, safety 
limits, or safety analysis assumptions or methods of performing 
safety analyses. The changes do not adversely affect system 
operability or design requirements and the equipment continues to be 
tested in a manner and at a frequency necessary to provide 
confidence that the equipment can perform its intended safety 
function.
    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not result in any 
reduction in a margin of safety.
    Based on the above, FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company 
concludes that the proposed amendment does not involve a significant 
hazards consideration under the standards set forth in 10 CFR 
50.92(c), and, accordingly, a finding of ``no significant hazards 
consideration'' is justified.

    The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on 
this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 
satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposes to determine that the 
requested amendment involves no significant hazards consideration.
    Attorney for licensee: David W. Jenkins, Attorney, FirstEnergy 
Corporation, Mail Stop.
    A-GO-15, 76 South Main Street, Akron, OH 44308.
    NRC Branch Chief: Michael I. Dudek.
    NRC Branch Chief: Michael I. Dudek.

Florida Power and Light Company, Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251, Turkey 
Point Nuclear Generating Units 3 and 4, Miami-Dade County, Florida

    Date of amendment request: September 14, 2012.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed amendments would 
revise the licenses and the Technical Specifications (TSs) to (1) close 
and remove license conditions that have been fully satisfied as of the 
end of the Unit 3 Cycle 26 refueling outage, (2) revise TS 5.5.1 to 
remove related license conditions, (3) correct several inadvertent 
errors in the TS, and (4) update the reference to the Physical Security 
Plan to the latest approved revision in the related license conditions.
    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration 
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee has 
provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards 
consideration, which is presented below:

    1. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant increase in 
the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed amendments do not change or modify the fuel, fuel 
handling processes, fuel storage racks, number of fuel assemblies 
that may be stored in the spent fuel pool (SFP), decay heat 
generation rate, or the spent fuel pool cooling and cleanup system. 
The proposed amendments only limit crediting of burnable absorbers 
in the spent fuel pool to Integrated Fuel Burnable Absorber (IFBA) 
rods that were specifically addressed in the currently approved 
criticality analysis [WCAP-17094-P, Revision 3, ``Turkey Point, 
Units 3 and 4 New Fuel Storage Rack and Spent Fuel Pool Criticality 
Analysis,'' February 2011]. The removal of the phrase ``or an 
equivalent amount of another burnable absorber'' eliminates the 
possibility of crediting a burnable absorber other than IFBA for 
storage of spent fuel assemblies in the spent fuel pool without 
prior NRC [U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission] approval. The 
deletion of the license condition associated with the Boraflex 
Remedy is editorial as it is no longer applicable. The proposed 
amendments do not affect the ability of the BAST [boric acid storage 
tank] to perform its function or the ability of the CREVS [control 
room emergency ventilation system] to perform its function. These 
latter proposed TS changes correct inadvertent errors and are 
consistent with the stated intent of original license submittals or 
delete license conditions that have been fully satisfied.
    The proposed amendments do not cause any physical change to the 
existing spent fuel storage configuration or fuel makeup. The 
proposed amendments do not affect any precursors to any accident 
previously evaluated or do not affect any known mitigation equipment 
or strategies.
    Therefore, the proposed changes do not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed amendments do not change or modify the fuel, fuel 
handling processes, fuel racks, number of fuel assemblies that may 
be stored in the pool, decay heat generation rate, or the spent fuel 
pool cooling and cleanup system. The proposed amendments do not 
result in any changes to spent fuel or to fuel storage 
configurations. The removal of the phrase ``or an equivalent amount 
of another burnable absorber'' eliminates the possibility of 
crediting a burnable absorber other than IFBA for storage of spent 
fuel assemblies in the spent fuel pool without prior NRC approval. 
The proposed amendments do not affect the ability of the BAST to 
perform its function or the ability of the CREVS to perform its 
function. These latter proposed TS changes correct inadvertent 
errors and are consistent with the stated intent of the original 
license submittals, delete license conditions that are no longer 
applicable or have been fully satisfied.
    Therefore, the proposed changes do not create the possibility of 
a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction 
in the margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed amendments do not change or modify the fuel, fuel 
handling processes,

[[Page 1272]]

fuel racks, number of fuel assemblies that may be stored in the 
pool, decay heat generation rate, or the spent fuel pool cooling and 
cleanup system. Therefore, the proposed amendments have no impact to 
the existing margin of safety for subcriticality required by 10 CFR 
50.68 (b)(4). The other proposed TS changes correct inadvertent 
errors and are consistent with the stated intent of the original 
license submittals or delete license conditions that are no longer 
applicable or have been fully satisfied.
    Therefore, the proposed amendments do not involve a significant 
reduction in the 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: James Petro, Managing Attorney--Nuclear, 
Florida Power & Light, P.O. Box 14000, Juno Beach, Florida 33408-0420.
    NRC Acting Branch Chief: Jessie F. Quichocho.

Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and 
Combined Licenses

    During the period since publication of the last biweekly notice, 
the Commission has issued the following amendments. The Commission has 
determined for each of these amendments that the application complies 
with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, 
as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations. The 
Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the 
Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set 
forth in the license amendment.
    A notice of consideration of issuance of amendment to facility 
operating license or combined license, as applicable, proposed no 
significant hazards consideration determination, and opportunity for a 
hearing in connection with these actions, was published in the Federal 
Register as indicated.
    Unless otherwise indicated, the Commission has determined that 
these amendments satisfy the criteria for categorical exclusion in 
accordance with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), 
no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be 
prepared for these amendments. If the Commission has prepared an 
environmental assessment under the special circumstances provision in 
10 CFR 51.22(b) and has made a determination based on that assessment, 
it is so indicated.
    For further details with respect to the action see (1) the 
applications for amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3) the Commission's 
related letter, Safety Evaluation and/or Environmental Assessment as 
indicated. All of these items are available for public inspection at 
the Commission'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's Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by 
email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.

Arizona Public Service Company, et al., Docket Nos. STN 50-528, STN 50-
529, and STN 50-530, Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 
1, 2, and 3, Maricopa County, Arizona

    Date of application for amendment: August 10, 2012, as supplemented 
by letters dated September 4, October 11, and November 16, 2012.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendments revised the basis 
and description for Milestones 6 and 7 of the licensee's Cyber Security 
Plan implementation schedule. In addition, the amendments revised 
paragraph 2.E of the facility operating licenses.
    Date of issuance: December 13, 2012.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 60 days from the date of issuance.
    Amendment No.: Unit 1--190; Unit 2--190; Unit 3--190.
    Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-41, NPF-51, and NPF-74: The 
amendments revised the Operating Licenses.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 9, 2012 (77 FR 
61436). The supplemental letters dated October 11 and November 16, 
2012, 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 December 13, 2012.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Carolina Power and Light Company, Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324, 
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2, Brunswick County, North 
Carolina

Carolina Power & Light Company, Docket No. 50-261, H. B. Robinson Steam 
Electric Plant, Unit No. 2, Darlington County, South Carolina

Carolina Power & Light Company, et al., Docket No. 50-400, Shearon 
Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Wake and Chatham Counties, North 
Carolina

Florida Power Corporation, et al., Docket No. 50-302, Crystal River 
Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant Citrus County, Florida

    Date of application for amendments: September 12, 2012.
    Brief Description of amendments: These amendments revised the Cyber 
Security Plan Implementation Schedule as approved in the license 
amendments issued on July 29, 2011 (ADAMS Accession No. ML11193A028).
    Date of issuance: December 18, 2012.
    Effective date: These license amendments are effective as of the 
date of their issuance and shall be implemented by December 31, 2012.
    Amendment Nos.: Brunswick 1: 261, Brunswick 2: 289, Robinson 2: 
230, Shearon Harris 1: 140, and Crystal River 3: 242.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-71, DPR-62, DPR-23, and 
NPF-63; and Facility Operating License No. DPR-72.
    Amendments revised the facility operating licenses.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 16, 2012 (77 FR 
63347).
    The Commission's related evaluation of these amendments is 
contained in a Safety Evaluation dated December 18, 2012.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Detroit Edison Company, Docket No. 50-341, Fermi 2, Monroe County, 
Michigan

    Date of application for amendment: January 10, 2012, supplemented 
by letter dated July 6, 2012.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revises Surveillance 
Requirement (SR) 3.4.3.2, in TS 3.4.3, ``Safety Relief Valves (SRVs)'', 
SR 3.5.1.13, in TS 3.5.1, ``ECCS-Operating,'' and SR 3.6.1.6.1, in TS 
3.6.1.6, ``Low-Low Set (LLS) Valves.'' The amendment replaces the 
current requirement in these TS SRs to verify the SRV opens

[[Page 1273]]

when manually actuated with an alternate requirement that verifies the 
SRV is capable of being opened.
    Date of issuance: December 21, 2012.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
prior to startup from Refueling Outage 16.
    Amendment No.: 190.
    Facility Operating License No. NPF-43: Amendment revised the 
Technical Specifications and License.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: May 1, 2012 (77 FR 
25756).
    The supplemental letter dated July 6, 2012, provided additional 
information that clarified the application, did not expand the scope of 
the application as originally noticed, and did not change the U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff's original proposed no significant 
hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal 
Register on May 1, 2012 (77 FR 25756). The Commission's related 
evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated 
December 21, 2012.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Detroit Edison Company, Docket No. 50-341, Fermi 2, Monroe County, 
Michigan

    Date of application for amendment: January 10, 2012.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised Technical 
Specification (TS) 3.6.2.3, ``RHR [Residual Heat Removal] Suppression 
Pool Cooling,'' to specify a new minimum developed RHR pump flow rate 
in Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.6.2.3.2. This change brings the flow 
required in the plant design basis in alignment with the TS SR. The 
change would increase the operating margin of the RHR Suppression Pool 
Cooling system to the SR. Also, this change would clarify that SR 
3.6.2.3.2 applies to only the RHR pumps required to meet Limiting 
Condition of Operation (LCO) 3.6.2.3.
    Date of issuance: December 21, 2012.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 60 days.
    Amendment No.: 191.
    Facility Operating License No. NPF-43: Amendment revised the 
Technical Specifications and License.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: May 1, 2012 (77 FR 
25755).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated December 21, 2012.
    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 amendment request: December 22, 2011, as supplemented by 
letter dated October 3, 2012.
    Description of amendment request: The amendment revised the 
Operating License Condition 3.S to allow Boiling Water Reactor Vessel 
and Internals Project (BWRVIP)-139-A, ``BWR Vessel and Internals 
Project Steam Dryer Inspection and Flaw Evaluation Guidelines,'' to be 
the basis for future steam dryer monitoring and inspections on an 
inspection interval of at least every third refueling outage.
    Date of Issuance: December 19, 2012.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance, and shall be 
implemented within 60 days.
    Amendment No.: 252.
    Facility Operating License No. DPR-28: Amendment revised the 
Operating License.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: April 3, 2012 (77 FR 
20073).
    The supplemental letter dated October 3, 2012, 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 this amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated December 19, 2012.
    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: November 11, 2011, as supplemented by 
letter dated November 26, 2012.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment relocated the 
following Technical Specifications (TS) to the Waterford Steam Electric 
Station, Unit 3, Technical Requirements Manual: (a) TS 3.4.6, 
``Chemistry,'' (b) TS 3.7.5, ``Flood Protection,'' (c) TS 3.7.9, 
``Sealed Source Contamination,'' and (d) TS 3.9.5, ``Communications.''
    Date of issuance: December 20, 2012.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 90 days from the date of issuance.
    Amendment No.: 238.
    Facility Operating License No. NPF-38: The amendment revised the 
Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: April 17, 2012 (77 FR 
22814). The supplemental letter dated November 26, 2012, 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 on April 17, 2012 
(77 FR 22814).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated December 20, 2012.
    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: June 28, 2012.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the scope of 
Cyber Security Plan (CSP) Implementation Schedule Milestone 6 
and paragraph 2.E of the facility operating license. The amendment 
modified the scope of Milestone 6 to apply to the technical 
cyber security controls only. The operational and management controls, 
as described in Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 08-09, Revision 6, would 
be implemented concurrent with the full implementation of the cyber 
security program (Milestone 8). Thus, all CSP activities would 
be fully implemented by the completion date, currently identified in 
Milestone 8 of the licensee's CSP implementation schedule.
    Date of issuance: December 20, 2012.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
by December 31, 2012.
    Amendment No.: 239.
    Facility Operating License No. NPF-38: The amendment revised the 
Facility Operating License.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 9, 2012 (77 FR 
61437).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated December 20, 2012.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Florida Power and Light Company, et al., Docket Nos. 50-335 and 50-389, 
St. Lucie Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, St. Lucie County, Florida

    Date of application for amendments: June 21, 2012.
    Brief description of amendments: Amendments modify paragraph 3.F, 
``Physical Protection,'' of the licenses of

[[Page 1274]]

both units. The changes revise the scope of Cyber Security Plan 
Implementation Schedule Milestone No. 6.
    Date of Issuance: December 17, 2012.
    Effective Date: These license amendments are effective as of the 
date of their issuance and shall be implemented by December 31, 2012.
    Amendment Nos.: Unit 1--214 and Unit 2--164.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-67 and NPF-16: 
Amendments revised the license.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 9, 2012 (77 FR 
61438). The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is 
contained in a Safety Evaluation dated December 17, 2012.
    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: June 13, 2012.
    Brief description of amendments: Amendments modify paragraph 3.E, 
``Physical Protection,'' of the licenses of both units. The changes 
revise the scope of Cyber Security Plan Implementation Schedule 
Milestone No. 6.
    Date of Issuance: December 17, 2012.
    Effective Date: These license amendments are effective as of the 
date of their issuance and shall be implemented by December 31, 2012.
    Amendment Nos.: Unit 3--256 and Unit 4--252.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-31 and DPR-41: 
Amendments revised the license.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: September 11, 2012 (77 
FR 55872). The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is 
contained in a Safety Evaluation dated December 17, 2012.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Indiana Michigan Power Company, Docket Nos. 50-315 and 50-316, Donald 
C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, Berrien County, Michigan

    Date of application for amendments: September 11, 2012.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments approve changes to 
the Cyber Security Plan Implementation Schedule for Milestone 6 at the 
Donald C. Cook Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2.
    Date of issuance: December 13, 2012.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
by December 31, 2012.
    Amendment Nos.: 319, 303.
    Facility Operating License No. DPR-58 and DPR-74: Amendments revise 
the Renewed Facility Operating License.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 9, 2012 (77 FR 
61438).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated December 13, 2012.
    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: June 27, 2012.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised the scope of 
Cyber Security Plan (CSP) Implementation Schedule Milestone 6 
and paragraph 2.C.(3) of the renewed facility operating license. The 
amendment modified the scope of Milestone 6 to apply to the 
technical cyber security controls only. The operational and management 
controls, as described in Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 08-09, 
Revision 6, would be implemented concurrent with the full 
implementation of the cyber security program (Milestone 8). 
Thus, all CSP activities would be fully implemented by the completion 
date, currently identified in Milestone 8 of the licensee's 
CSP implementation schedule.
    Date of issuance: December 13, 2012.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
by December 31, 2012.
    Amendment No.: 244.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-46: Amendment revised 
the Facility Operating License.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 9, 2012 (77 FR 
61439).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated December 13, 2012.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

South Carolina Electric and Gas Company, South Carolina Public Service 
Authority, Docket No. 50-395, Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit 
No. 1, Fairfield County, South Carolina

    Date of application for amendment: August 30, 2012.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment includes a deviation 
to the scope of the Cyber Security Plan Implementation Schedule 
Milestone 6 and a revision to the Facility Operating License Condition 
2.E to include the deviation.
    Date of issuance: December 21, 2012.
    Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date 
of its issuance.
    Amendment No.: 193.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-12: Amendment revises 
the License.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 9, 2012 (77 FR 
61440).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated December 21, 2012.
    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: May 2, 2012, as supplemented by letter 
dated October 15, 2012.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised Technical 
Specification (TS) 3.6.6, ``Containment Spray and Cooling Systems,'' to 
replace the current 10-year surveillance frequency for testing the 
containment spray nozzles, as specified in TS Surveillance Requirement 
3.6.6.8, with an event-based frequency.
    Date of issuance: December 21, 2012.
    Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 90 days of issuance.
    Amendment No.: 203.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-42: The amendment 
revised the Operating License and Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: September 4, 2012 (77 
FR 53931). The supplemental letter dated October 15, 2012, 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 December 21, 2012. No significant hazards 
consideration comments received: No.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of December 2012.

    For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michele G. Evans,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2012-31710 Filed 1-7-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P