[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 33 (Tuesday, February 19, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11688-11699]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-03582]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2013-0032]


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 (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 January 24, 2013, to February 6, 2013. The 
last biweekly notice was published on February 5, 2013 (78 FR 8195).

ADDRESSES: You may access information and comment submissions related 
to this document, which the NRC possesses and are publically available, 
by searching on http://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-2013-
0032. You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-0032. 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.

[[Page 11689]]

     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-2013-0032 when contacting the NRC 
about the availability of information regarding this document. You may 
access information related to this document by any of the following 
methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-0032.
     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 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-2013-0032 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 that that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your 
comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into 
ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove 
identifying or contact information.
    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons 
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to 
include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be 
publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should 
state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to 
remove such information before making the comment submissions available 
to the public or entering the comment 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 Section 50.92 of Title 10 of the Code 
of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), this means that operation of the 
facility in accordance with the proposed amendment would not (1) 
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an 
accident previously evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated; 
or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. The basis 
for this proposed determination for each amendment request is shown 
below.
    The Commission is seeking public comments on this proposed 
determination. Any comments received within 30 days after the date of 
publication of this notice will be considered in making any final 
determination.
    Normally, the Commission will not issue the amendment until the 
expiration of 60 days after the date of publication of this notice. The 
Commission may issue the license amendment before expiration of the 60-
day period provided that its final determination is that the amendment 
involves no significant hazards consideration. In addition, the 
Commission may issue the amendment prior to the expiration of the 30-
day comment period 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 ``Agency 
Rules of Practice and Procedures'' 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. The 
NRC regulations are accessible electronically from the NRC Library on 
the NRC's 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

[[Page 11690]]

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 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 the 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's 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 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'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 the NRC's guidance 
available on the NRC's 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 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 email at 
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, 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

[[Page 11691]]

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 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's PDR Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 
301-415-4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.

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

    Date of amendment request: November 29, 2012, as supplemented by 
letter dated January 3, 2013.
    Description of amendment request: The amendment revised the 
Technical Specification (TS) surveillance requirements for addressing a 
missed surveillance, and is consistent with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission approved Revision 6 of Technical Specification Task Force 
(TSTF) Standard TSs Change Traveler TSTF-358, ``Missed Surveillance 
Requirements.''
    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 revises the Technical Specifications (TS) 
Table 3.3-4, Functional Unit 9.b. Loss of Offsite Power, 6.9 kV 
(kilovolt) Emergency Bus Undervoltage--Secondary time delay values. 
The Loss of Offsite Power, 6.9 kV (kilovolt) Emergency Bus 
Undervoltage--Secondary instrumentation functions are not initiators 
to any accident previously evaluated. As such, the probability of an 
accident previously evaluated is not increased. The revised values 
continue to provide reasonable assurance that the Loss of Offsite 
Power, 6.9 kV (kilovolt) Emergency Bus Undervoltage--Secondary 
function will continue to perform its intended safety functions. As 
a result, the proposed change will not increase the consequences of 
an accident previously evaluated.
    Concurrent with this proposed change, the Harris Nuclear Plant 
is revising its large break loss of coolant accident analysis. The 
revised analysis will be evaluated in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59 
to confirm that a change to the technical specifications 
incorporated in the license is not required, and the change does not 
meet any of the criteria in Paragraph (c)(2) of that regulation. The 
revised analysis will employ the plant-specific methodology ANP-
3011(P), Harris Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, Realistic Large Break LOCA 
Analysis, Revision 1, as approved by NRC Safety Evaluation dated May 
30, 2012.
    Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change revises the Technical Specification (TS) 
Table 3.3-4, Functional Unit 9.b. Loss of Offsite Power, 6.9 kV 
(kilovolt) Emergency Bus Undervoltage--Secondary time delay values. 
No new operational conditions beyond those currently allowed are 
introduced. This change is consistent with the safety analyses 
assumptions and current plant operating practices. This simply 
corrects the setpoint consistent with the accident analyses and 
therefore cannot create the possibility of a new or different kind 
of accident from any previously evaluated accident.
    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 
the margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed change revises the Technical Specifications (TS) 
Table 3.3-4, Functional Unit 9.b. Loss of Offsite Power, 6.9 kV 
(kilovolt) Emergency Bus Undervoltage--Secondary time delay values. 
This proposed change implements a reduced time delay to isolate 
safety buses from offsite power if a Loss of Coolant Accident were 
to occur coincident with a sustained degraded voltage condition. 
This provides improved margin to ensure that emergency core cooling 
system pumps inject water into the reactor vessel within the time 
assumed and evaluated in the accident analysis.
    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: David T. Conley, Manager--Senior Counsel--
Legal Department, Progress Energy Service Company, LLC, Post Office Box 
1551, Raleigh, North Carolina 27602.
    NRC Branch Chief: Jessie F. Quichocho.

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287, 
Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 (ONS1, ONS2, and ONS3), 
Oconee County, South Carolina

    Date of amendment request: October 30, 2012.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would 
revise the Technical Specifications (TSs) to specify that TS 3.8.1 
Required Action (RA) C.2.2.5 is cumulative over a 3-year time period 
for each Keowee Hydroelectric Unit (KHU). The two KHUs serve as the 
emergency power supply for ONS1, ONS2, and ONS3. RA C.2.2.5 currently 
allows a 45-day Completion Time once every 3 years to

[[Page 11692]]

restore an inoperable KHU to service. This revision would allow the 45-
day Completion Time to be used as a cumulative allowance over 3 years, 
rather than once every 3 years. This Completion Time is used for major 
Keowee Hydroelectric Unit (KHU) maintenance.
    Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration 
determination: As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the licensee 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 amendment adds a note to the 45-day Completion Time 
for Technical Specification (TS) 3.8.1 Required Action (RA) C.2.2.5 
to clarify the 45 days is cumulative for each Keowee Hydroelectric 
Unit (KHU) over a rolling 3-year time period rather than limited to 
one continuous 45-day time period. During the time that one KHU is 
inoperable for > 72 hours, a Lee Combustion Turbine (LCT) will be 
energizing both standby buses, two offsite power sources will be 
maintained available, and maintenance on electrical distribution 
systems will not be performed unless necessary.
    There is no adverse impact on containment integrity, 
radiological release pathways, fuel design, filtration systems, main 
steam relief valve set points, or radwaste systems. No new 
radiological release pathways are created.
    The consequences of an event occurring during the modified 45-
day Completion Time, which clarifies the 45 days is cumulative for 
each KHU over a rolling 3-year time period, are the same as those 
that would occur during a continuous 45-day Completion Time. Duke 
Energy reviewed the Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) to gain 
additional insights concerning the configuration of ONS with one KHU 
inoperable for one continuous 45 day period versus multiple time 
periods totally [totaling] 45-days. Based on this review, Duke 
Energy concluded that there is no change in risk.
    Therefore, the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated is not significantly increased.
    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 amendment adds a note to the 45-day Completion Time 
for TS 3.8.1 Required Action C.2.2.5 to clarify the 45 days is 
cumulative for each KHU over a rolling 3-year time period rather 
than limited to one continuous 45-day time period. During the time 
period that one KHU is inoperable and the 45-day Completion Time is 
being applied, the redundancy requirement for the emergency power 
source will be fulfilled by an LCT [Lee Combustion Turbine] and 
other compensatory measures required by TS 3.8.1 RA C.2.2.1, 
C.2.2.2, C.2.2.3, and C.2.2.4 will be in place to minimize 
electrical power system vulnerabilities.
    The proposed change to the 45-day Completion Time does not 
involve a physical effect on the Oconee Units, nor is there any 
increased risk of an Oconee Unit trip or reactivity excursion. No 
new failure modes or credible accident scenarios are postulated from 
this activity.
    Therefore, the possibility of a new or different kind of 
accident from any kind of accident previously evaluated is not 
created.
    3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a 
margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The proposed amendment adds a note to the 45-day Completion Time 
for TS 3.8.1 RA C.2.2.5 to clarify the 45 days is cumulative for 
each KHU over a rolling 3-year time period rather than limited to 
one continuous 45-day time period. During the time period that one 
KHU is inoperable and the 45-day Completion Time is being applied, 
the redundancy requirement for the emergency power source will be 
fulfilled by an LCT and other compensatory measures required by TS 
3.8.1 RA C.2.2.1, C.2.2.2, C.2.2.3, and C.2.2.4 will be in place to 
minimize electrical power system vulnerabilities.
    The proposed TS change does not involve: 1) a physical 
alteration of the Oconee Units; 2) the installation of new or 
different equipment; 3) operating any installed equipment in a new 
or different manner; 4) a change to any set points for parameters 
which initiate protective or mitigation action; or 5) any impact on 
the fission product barriers or safety limits.
    Therefore, this request 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: Lara S. Nichols, Associate General Counsel, 
Duke Energy Corporation, 526 South Church Street--EC07H, Charlotte, NC 
28202-1802.
    NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. Pascarelli.

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: October 30, 2012.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed amendments would 
decrease the time limits in certain actions and surveillance 
requirements of Technical Specification (TS) 3.5.2, ``ECCS [emergency 
core cooling system] Subsystems,'' and revise certain footnotes of TS 
3.5.2 for clarity.
    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?
    No. The proposed amendment does not change or modify the design 
or operation of ECCS systems, subsystems, or components. The 
proposed amendment does not affect any precursors to any accident 
previously evaluated or do not adversely affect known mitigation 
equipment or strategies. The proposed amendment provides better 
assurance that the ECCS systems, subsystems, and components are 
properly aligned to support safe reactor operation consistent with 
the licensing and design basis requirements. The proposed changes 
addressing cascading of emergency power requirements are considered 
non-intent changes. Therefore, the proposed amendment does not 
involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of 
an accident previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated?
    No. The proposed amendment provides better assurance that the 
ECCS systems, subsystems, and components are properly aligned to 
support safe reactor operation consistent with the licensing and 
design basis requirements. No new accident initiators are introduced 
directly or indirectly by the proposed changes. The changes 
addressing cascading of emergency power requirements are considered 
non-intent 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 amendment involve a significant reduction 
in the margin of safety?
    No. The proposed amendment provides better assurance that the 
ECCS systems, subsystems, and components are properly aligned to 
support safe reactor operation consistent with the licensing and 
design basis requirements. The proposed changes correct deficiencies 
regarding TS LCO [limiting condition for operation] 3.5.2.d and TS 
SR [surveillance requirement] 4.5.2.a to assure ECCS availability is 
maintained within the assumptions of the safety analysis. Therefore, 
the proposed amendment does 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 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

[[Page 11693]]

Power & Light, P.O. Box 14000, Juno Beach, Florida 33408-0420.
    NRC Branch Chief: Jessie F. Quichocho.

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

    Date of amendment request: December 7, 2012, and revised on January 
25, 2013.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed change would amend 
Combined License Nos. NPF-91 and NPF-92 for Vogtle Electric Generating 
Plant (VEGP) Units 3 and 4 in regard to the Primary Sampling System 
(PSS) by: (1) replacing containment air return check valve PSS-PL-V024 
with a solenoid-operated valve, and (2) redesigning the PSS inside-
containment header and adding a PSS containment penetration.
    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 Primary Sampling System (PSS) provides the safety-related 
function of preserving containment integrity by isolation of the PSS 
lines penetrating containment. The proposed amendment will enhance 
the ability of the PSS to perform its nonsafety-related function of 
providing the capability to obtain reactor coolant and containment 
atmosphere samples, while maintaining the ability of the PSS to 
perform its safety-related containment isolation function. The 
replacement of a check valve with a solenoid-operated containment 
isolation valve and the redesigned inside-containment header does 
not affect the safety-related function of isolating the PSS lines 
for containment isolation. The components added by this proposed 
activity, including tubing and the solenoid-operated containment 
isolation valve, are designed to the same codes and standards as 
other components addressed in the certified design that perform 
similar functions. The additional PSS containment penetration is a 
passive extension of containment and is identical in form, fit, and 
function to other PSS sampling containment penetrations currently 
addressed in the certified AP1000 plant design. The addition of a 
new PSS containment penetration will not change the maximum 
allowable leakage rate allowed by Technical Specifications and 
verified periodically in accordance with regulations. Furthermore, 
the proposed PSS configuration changes will neither impact any 
accident source term parameter or fission product barrier nor affect 
radiological dose consequence analysis.
    Therefore, the proposed amendment does not involve a significant 
increase in the probability or consequences of an accident 
previously evaluated.
    2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new 
or different kind of accident from any accident previously 
evaluated?
    Response: No.
    The additional containment penetration is similar in form, fit, 
and function to the PSS penetrations that are currently described in 
the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report. Because the PSS changes 
use valve types, piping, and a containment penetration consistent 
with those already described in the Updated Final Safety Analysis 
Report, no new failure modes or equipment failure initiators are 
introduced by these changes. Accordingly, the proposed changes do 
not create any new malfunctions, failure mechanisms, or accident 
initiators.
    Therefore, the proposed amendment will not create the 
possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident 
previously evaluated.
    3. Does the proposed amendment involve a significant reduction 
in a margin of safety?
    Response: No.
    The containment isolation function is not changed by this 
activity and is bounded by the existing design. The proposed PSS 
containment penetration is similar in form, fit, and function to 
other containment penetrations in similar applications in the 
current certified AP1000 plant design. The additional PSS 
containment penetration is an extension of containment, and, 
therefore, does not affect containment or its ability to perform its 
design function. The addition of PSS components, including the 
solenoid-operated containment isolation valve, the additional PSS 
containment penetration, and the associated tubing, do not exceed or 
alter a design basis or safety limit. Because the containment 
isolation function, containment leakage rate limit, potential 
containment leakage, and protective shielding are not changed by 
this activity and are bounded by the existing design, there is no 
change to any current margin of safety.
    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: Mr. M. Stanford Blanton, Balch & Bingham 
LLP, 1710 Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 35203-2015.
    NRC Acting Branch Chief: Lawrence Burkhart.

Previously Published Notices 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 following notices were previously published as separate 
individual notices. The notice content was the same as above. They were 
published as individual notices either because time did not allow the 
Commission to wait for this biweekly notice or because the action 
involved exigent circumstances. They are repeated here because the 
biweekly notice lists all amendments issued or proposed to be issued 
involving no significant hazards consideration.
    For details, see the individual notice in the Federal Register on 
the day and page cited. This notice does not extend the notice period 
of the original notice.

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

    Date of application for amendments: September 6, 2012.
    Description of amendments request: The proposed amendments would 
reduce the minimum sodium tetraborate basket loading to 7500 pounds 
mass in order to lessen the long term sump pH profile, recover design 
margin, and facilitate sodium tetraborate basket loading and 
maintenance activities.
    Date of publication of individual notice in the Federal Register: 
January 25, 2013 (78 FR 5505).
    Expiration date of individual notice: February 25, 2013 (Public 
comments) and March 26, 2013 (Hearing requests).

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

[[Page 11694]]

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's Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by email to 
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.

Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc., Docket No. 50-423, Millstone Power 
Station, Unit 3, New London County, Connecticut

    Date of amendment request: April 2, 2012.
    Description of amendment request: The proposed amendment would 
revise the Millstone Power Station, Unit 3 Technical Specification 
surveillance requirements for snubbers to conform to the Snubber 
Examination, Testing, and Service Life Monitoring Program Plan.
    Date of issuance: February 6, 2013.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance, and shall be 
implemented within 30 days.
    Amendment No.: 257.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-49: Amendment revised 
the License and Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: May 29, 2012 (77 FR 
31657).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated February 6, 2013.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

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

    Date of application for amendment: January 9, 2012, as supplemented 
by letters dated July 30 and November 14, 2012.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment implements formatting 
changes to the Operating License and Technical Specifications (TSs) and 
the adoption of TSTF-GG-05-01, ``Writers Guide for Plant-Specific 
Improved Technical Specifications,'' Revision 1. In addition to these 
administrative changes, the amendment implements editorial changes 
which do not result in any changes to the technical or operating 
requirements.
    Date of issuance: January 29, 2013.
    Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 30 days from the date of issuance.
    Amendment No.: 225.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-21: The amendment 
revised the Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 24, 2012 (77 FR 
43374). The supplemental letters dated July 30 and November 14, 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 January 29, 2013.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

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

    Date of application for amendment: January 11, 2012, and as 
supplemented on January 24, 2013.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revises Technical 
Specification Table 3.3.6-1, ``Containment Purge System and Pressure 
Relief Line Isolation Instrumentation,'' by changing the column titled 
``ALLOWABLE VALUE'' to ``TRIP SETPOINT,'' and replacing the trip 
setpoint value of ``<= 3 x background'' with a reference to the Offsite 
Dose Calculation Manual.
    Date of issuance: January 29, 2013.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance, and shall be 
implemented within 30 days.
    Amendment No.: 272.
    Facility Operating License No. DPR-26: The amendment revised the 
License and the Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: May 1, 2012 (77 FR 
25758). The January 24, 2013, supplement 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 January 29, 2013.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-286, Indian Point 
Nuclear Generating Unit 3, Westchester County, New York

    Date of application for amendment: February 6, 2012, as 
supplemented on May 2 and August 6, 2012.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment approves changes to 
Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) Section 9.13, ``Backup 
Spent Fuel Pool Cooling System,'' to allow use of the backup spent fuel 
pool cooling system when the spent fuel pool cooling system is out of 
service.
    Date of issuance: January 28, 2013.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance, and shall be 
implemented within 30 days. Implementation of the amendment shall also 
include revision of the UFSAR as described in the licensee's letter 
dated February 6, 2012, as supplemented by letters dated May 2 and 
August 6, 2012.
    Amendment No.: 249.
    Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-26 and DPR-64: The amendment 
revised the License and the UFSAR.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: August 21, 2012 (77 FR 
50537). The supplements dated May 2 and August 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 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 January 28, 2013.

[[Page 11695]]

    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: February 1, 2012, as supplemented by 
letters dated August 7 and November 20, 2012.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised Technical 
Specification (TS) 4.7.A.6.b.3 for performing the drywell-to- 
suppression chamber leak rate test during an operating cycle instead of 
during a refueling outage.
    Date of Issuance: January 30, 2013.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance, and shall be 
implemented within 60 days.
    Amendment No.: 254.
    Facility Operating License No. DPR-28: The amendment revised the 
Renewed Facility Operating License and the Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: April 3, 2012 (77 FR 
20074). The supplemental letters dated August 7 and November 20, 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 this amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated January 30, 2013.
    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: February 1, 2012, as supplemented by 
letter dated May 8, 2012.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revised Technical 
Specification 3.3.B.3 for bypassing the Rod Worth Minimizer consistent 
with the allowances and required actions recommended in the Standard 
Technical Specifications, NUREG-1433, Revision 3.
    Date of Issuance: January 30, 2013.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance, and shall be 
implemented within 60 days.
    Amendment No.: 255.
    Facility Operating License No. DPR-28: The amendment revised the 
License and the Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: April 17, 2012 (77 FR 
22812). The supplemental letter dated May 8, 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 January 30, 2013.
    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: August 16, 2012.
    Brief description of amendments: The amendments revise Technical 
Specification 5.3, ``Facility Staff Qualifications,'' to clarify the 
required qualifications of the Operations Manager.
    Date of issuance: January 29, 2013.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
with 30 days from the date of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: 248 (Unit 1) and 252 (Unit 2).
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-24 and DPR-27: 
Amendments revise the Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical 
Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 30, 2012 (77 FR 
65725).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated January 29, 2013.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No

NextEra Energy Seabrook, LLC, Docket No. 50-443, Seabrook Station, Unit 
No. 1, Rockingham County, New Hampshire

    Date of amendment request: April 30, 2012.
    Description of amendment request: The amendment made changes to the 
Seabrook Emergency Plan associated with the initiating conditions 
involving a loss of safety system annunciation or indication in the 
control room. The amendment revises the emergency action levels (EALs) 
to include radiation monitoring indications within the aggregate of 
safety system indications that are considered when evaluating a loss of 
safety system indications rather than separate EALs.
    Date of issuance: January 31, 2013.
    Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 90 days.
    Amendment No.: 133.
    Facility Operating License No. NPF-86: The amendment revised the 
License.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: May 29, 2012 (77 FR 
31661).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated January 31, 2013.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

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

    Date of application for amendment: May 8, 2012.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendment revises the Technical 
Specification, Section 3.3.1.1, ``Reactor Protection System (RPS) 
Instrumentation,'' requirements pertaining to the Average Power Range 
Monitors (APRMs). Specifically, it allows a time period for restoration 
before declaring the channels inoperable when the absolute difference 
between the APRM channel power and calculated thermal power exceeds the 
limit of Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement 3.3.1.2.
    Date of issuance: January 25, 2013.
    Effective date: This license amendment is effective as of the date 
of its issuance, and shall be implemented within 90 days of issuance.
    Amendment No.: 171.
    Facility Operating License No. DPR-22. Amendment revises the 
Renewed Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: July 24, 2012 (77 FR 
43378).
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated January 25, 2013.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Northern States Power Company--Minnesota, Docket Nos. 50-282 and 50-
306, Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2, Goodhue 
County, Minnesota

    Date of application for amendments: October 27, 2009, as 
supplemented by letters dated April 29, May 25, June 23, August 12, and 
December 17 of 2010; June 22, July 11, August 9, and December 8 of 
2011; February 13, February 24, and September 13 of 2012.
    Brief description of amendments: These amendments modify the 
Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1

[[Page 11696]]

and 2, Technical Specifications (TSs) and licensing basis that supports 
a full scope implementation of the Alternative Source Term Methodology. 
The amendments also incorporate TS Task Force-490, ``Deletion of E-Bar 
Definition and Revision to RCS [Reactor Coolant System] Specific 
Activity Tech Spec,'' Revision 0.
    Date of issuance: January 22, 2013.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance. The license conditions 
shall be implemented within 30 days. The balance of the license 
amendment shall be implemented in accordance with the terms of the 
license conditions.
    Amendment Nos.: 206, 193.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-42 and DPR-60: 
Amendments revised the Facility Operating Licenses, Appendix B, and the 
Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: April 6, 2010 (75 FR 
17466). The supplemental letters contained clarifying information and 
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 January 22, 2013.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323, Diablo 
Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, San Luis Obispo County, 
California

    Date of application for amendment: June 1, 2011, as supplemented by 
letters dated February 6, May 31, August 6, and November 1, 2012.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendments revised Technical 
Specifications (TS) 3.7.5, ``Auxiliary Feedwater (AFW) System,'' 3.6.6, 
``Containment Spray and Cooling Systems,'' 3.8.1, ``AC Sources--
Operating,'' 3.8.9, ``Distribution Systems--Operating,'' and Example 
1.3-3 to clarify the operability of an AFW train during alternate 
alignments; establish conditions, required actions, and completion 
times when one steam supply to the turbine driven AFW pump is 
inoperable concurrent with an inoperable motor driven AFW train; and 
remove second completion times from TSs. These changes are consistent 
with the guidance provided in Technical Specifications Task Force 
(TSTF) Travelers TSTF-245, Revision 1, ``AFW Train Operable when in 
Service,'' TSTF-340, Revision 3, ``Allow 7 day completion Time for a 
Turbine-driven AFW Pump Inoperable,'' TSTF-412, Revision 3, ``Provide 
Actions for One Steam Supply to Turbine Driven AFW/EFW Pump 
Inoperable,'' and TSTF-439, Revision 2, ``Eliminate Second Completion 
Times Limiting Time From Discovery of Failure to Meet an LCO.''
    Date of issuance: January 31, 2013.
    Effective date: As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 90 days from the date of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: Unit 1-215; Unit 2-217.
    Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-80 and DPR-82: The amendments 
revised the Facility Operating Licenses and Technical Specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: December 31, 2011 (76 
FR 77569). The supplemental letters dated February 6, May 31, August 6, 
and November 1, 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 the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated January 31, 2013.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Virginia Electric and Power Company, et al., Docket Nos. 50-280 and 50-
281, Surry Power Station, Units 1 and 2, Surry County, Virginia

    Date of application for amendments: July 28, 2012.
    Brief Description of amendments: These amendments revise Limiting 
Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.1.H, ``Steam Generator (SG) Tube 
Integrity,'' Specification 6.4.Q, ``Steam Generator (SG) Program,'' and 
Specification 6.6.A.3, ``Steam Generator Tube Inspection Report,'' and 
include technical specification (TS) Bases changes that summarize and 
clarify the purpose of the TS in accordance with TS Task Force Traveler 
(TSTF) 510, ``Revision to Steam Generator Program Inspection 
Frequencies and Tube Sample Selection.''
    Date of issuance: January 28, 2013.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 60 days.
    Amendment Nos.: 278, 278.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-32 and DPR-37: 
Amendments change the licenses and the technical specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 16, 2012 (77 FR 
63351). The supplements dated November 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 staff's 
original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination.
    The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated January 28, 2013.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

Virginia Electric and Power Company, Docket Nos. 50-338 and 50-339, 
North Anna Power Station, Units 1 and 2, Louisa County, Virginia

    Date of application for amendment: July 30, December 13, 2012.
    Brief description of amendment: The amendments revised the North 
Anna Technical Specifications (TSs) regarding steam generator tube 
inspections and reporting as described in TSTF-510, Revision 2, 
``Revision to Steam Generator Program Inspection Frequencies and Tube 
Sample Selection.'' The changes are consistent with NRC-approved 
Industry TSTF Standard Technical Specifications change TSTF-510, 
Revision 2.
    Date of issuance: January 28, 2013.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 
within 60 days from the date of issuance.
    Amendment Nos.: Unit 1-269 and Unit 2-250.
    Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-4 and NPF-7: Amendments 
changed the licenses and the technical specifications.
    Date of initial notice in Federal Register: October 2, 2012 (77 FR 
60155). The supplement dated December 13, 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 the amendments is contained 
in a Safety Evaluation dated January 28, 2013.
    No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

[[Page 11697]]

Notice of Issuance of Amendments to Facility Operating Licenses and 
Combined Licenses and Final Determination of No Significant Hazards 
Consideration and Opportunity for a Hearing (Exigent Public 
Announcement or Emergency Circumstances)

    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 for the 
amendment 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.
    Because of exigent or emergency circumstances associated with the 
date the amendment was needed, there was not time for the Commission to 
publish, for public comment before issuance, its usual notice of 
consideration of issuance of amendment, proposed no significant hazards 
consideration determination, and opportunity for a hearing.
    For exigent circumstances, the Commission has either issued a 
Federal Register notice providing opportunity for public comment or has 
used local media to provide notice to the public in the area 
surrounding a licensee's facility of the licensee's application and of 
the Commission's proposed determination of no significant hazards 
consideration. The Commission has provided a reasonable opportunity for 
the public to comment, using its best efforts to make available to the 
public means of communication for the public to respond quickly, and in 
the case of telephone comments, the comments have been recorded or 
transcribed as appropriate and the licensee has been informed of the 
public comments.
    In circumstances where failure to act in a timely way would have 
resulted, for example, in derating or shutdown of a nuclear power plant 
or in prevention of either resumption of operation or of increase in 
power output up to the plant's licensed power level, the Commission may 
not have had an opportunity to provide for public comment on its no 
significant hazards consideration determination. In such case, the 
license amendment has been issued without opportunity for comment. If 
there has been some time for public comment but less than 30 days, the 
Commission may provide an opportunity for public comment. If comments 
have been requested, it is so stated. In either event, the State has 
been consulted by telephone whenever possible.
    Under its regulations, the Commission may issue and make an 
amendment immediately effective, notwithstanding the pendency before it 
of a request for a hearing from any person, in advance of the holding 
and completion of any required hearing, where it has determined that no 
significant hazards consideration is involved.
    The Commission has applied the standards of 10 CFR 50.92 and has 
made a final determination that the amendment involves no significant 
hazards consideration. The basis for this determination is contained in 
the documents related to this action. Accordingly, the amendments have 
been issued and made effective 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 51.12(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 
application for amendment, (2) the amendment to Facility Operating 
License or Combined License, as applicable, 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's Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by email to 
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
    The Commission is also offering an opportunity for a hearing with 
respect to the issuance of the amendment. 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 ``Agency Rules of Practice and Procedures'' 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, and electronically on the Internet at the NRC's Web 
site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/. If there are 
problems in accessing the document, contact the PDR's Reference staff 
at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 
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 petitioner 
intends to

[[Page 11698]]

rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also 
provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the 
petitioner is aware and on which the 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 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. Since the Commission has made a final determination that the 
amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, if a hearing 
is requested, it will not stay the effectiveness of the amendment. Any 
hearing held would take place while the amendment is in effect.
    All documents filed in the 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's 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 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 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 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'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 the NRC guidance 
available on the NRC's 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 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's Web site 
at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by email at 
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, 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 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

[[Page 11699]]

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.

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, LLC, Docket No. 50-318, Calvert 
Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2, Calvert County, Maryland

    Date of amendment request: January 22, 2013, as supplemented by 
letter dated January 24, 2013.
    Description of amendment request: The amendment revised Appendix C 
of the Renewed Facility Operating License by adding a license condition 
for Technical Specification 3.6.6, which will allow the ``B'' train of 
the Containment Cooling System to be considered operable with a single 
containment cooling fan and cooler by limiting the refueling water 
storage tank water temperature, containment average air temperature, 
containment air pressure, and saltwater inlet temperature for the 
period from January 26, to February 17, 2013.
    Date of issuance: January 25, 2013.
    Effective date: As of the date of issuance, and shall be 
implemented within 30 days.
    Amendment No.: 280.
    Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR-69: Amendment revised 
the License and Appendix C.
    Public comments requested as to proposed no significant hazards 
consideration (NSHC): No. The Commission's related evaluation of the 
amendment, finding of emergency circumstances, state consultation, and 
final NSHC determination are contained in a safety evaluation dated 
January 25, 2013.
    Attorney for licensee: Steven L. Miller, General Counsel, 
Constellation Energy Nuclear Group, LLC, 100 Constellation Way, Suite 
200c, Baltimore, MD 21202.
    NRC Branch Chief: George Wilson.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of February 2013.
    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michele G. Evans,
Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2013-03582 Filed 2-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P