Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2016 / Notices 66301

Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson life; having prop guards on propeller Procedures for Access to Sensitive Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230. tips, a flotation device if operated over Unclassified Non-Safeguards FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: water, and a ‘‘go home’’ feature in case Information,’’ published on July 5, 2016, Nature McGinn, ACA Permit Officer, at of loss of control link or low battery; see 81 FR 43661–43669, the Bellefonte the above address or ACApermits@ having an observer on the lookout for Efficiency & Sustainability Team/ nsf.gov. wildlife, people, and other hazards; and Mothers Against Tennessee River SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The ensuring that the separation between the Radiation (BEST/MATRR) filed a National Science Foundation, as operator and UAV does not exceed an Petition to Intervene and Request for directed by the Antarctic Conservation operational range of 500 meters. The Hearing on September 9, 2016. Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95–541), as applicant is seeking a Waste Permit to The Board is comprised of the amended by the Antarctic Science, cover any accidental releases that may following Administrative Judges: Tourism and Conservation Act of 1996, result from flying a UAV. Paul S. Ryerson, Chairman, Atomic has developed regulations for the Location Safety and Licensing Board Panel, establishment of a permit system for U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Camping: Possible locations include various activities in Antarctica and Washington, DC 20555–0001 designation of certain animals and Damoy Point/Dorian Bay, Danco Island, Dr. Gary S. Arnold, Atomic Safety and ´ certain geographic areas as requiring Ronge Island, the Errera Channel, Licensing Board Panel, U.S. Nuclear special protection. The regulations Paradise Bay (including Almirante Regulatory Commission, Washington, establish such a permit system to Brown/Base Brown or Skontorp Cove), DC 20555–0001 designate Antarctic Specially Protected the Argentine Islands, Andvord Bay, Nicholas G. Trikouros, Atomic Safety Areas. Pleneau Island, Hovgaard Island, Orne and Licensing Board Panel, U.S. Harbour, Leith Cove, Prospect Point and Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Application Details Portal Point. Washington, DC 20555–0001 Permit Application: 2017–011 UAV filming: Western Antarctic Peninsula region. All correspondence, documents, and 1. Applicant: Brandon Harvey, Director other materials shall be filed in Expedition Operations, Polar Latitudes, Dates accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule. Inc., 2206 Jericho Street, White River October 31, 2016 to March 13, 2017. See 10 CFR 2.302. Junction, VT 05001. Rockville, Maryland, September 20, 2016. Nadene G. Kennedy, E. Roy Hawkens, Activity for Which Permit Is Requested: Polar Coordination Specialist, Division of Waste Permit Polar Programs. Chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel. For Coastal Camping: The applicant [FR Doc. 2016–23246 Filed 9–26–16; 8:45 am] [FR Doc. 2016–23104 Filed 9–26–16; 8:45 am] seeks permission for no more than 30 BILLING CODE 7555–01–P campers and two expedition staff to BILLING CODE 7590–01–P camp overnight at select locations for a maximum of 10 hours ashore. Camping NUCLEAR REGULATORY NUCLEAR REGULATORY would be away from vegetated sites and COMMISSION COMMISSION >150m from wildlife concentrations or [Docket Nos. 50–259, 50–260, & 50–296–LA; lakes, protected areas, historical sites, ASLBP No. 16–948–03–LA–BD01] [NRC–2016–0202] and scientific stations. Tents would be pitched on snow, ice, or bare smooth Establishment of Atomic Safety and Biweekly Notice; Applications and rock, at least 15m from the high water Licensing Board; Tennessee Valley Amendments to Facility Operating line. No food, other than emergency Authority Licenses and Combined Licenses rations, would be brought onshore and Involving No Significant Hazards all wastes, including human waste, Pursuant to delegation by the Considerations would be collected and returned to the Commission, see 37 FR 28710 (Dec. 29, ship for proper disposal. The applicant 1972), and the Commission’s AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory is seeking a Waste Permit to cover any regulations, see, e.g., 10 CFR 2.104, Commission. accidental releases that may result from 2.105, 2.300, 2.309, 2.313, 2.318, 2.321, ACTION: Biweekly notice. camping. notice is hereby given that an Atomic For Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Safety and Licensing Board (Board) is SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section 189a.(2) Commercial Filming: The applicant being established to preside over the of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as wishes to fly small, battery operated, following proceeding: Tennessee Valley amended (the Act), the U.S. Nuclear remotely controlled copters equipped Authority (Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Regulatory Commission (NRC) is with a camera to take scenic photos and Units 1, 2, and 3). publishing this regular biweekly notice. film of the Antarctic. The UAVs would This proceeding involves a challenge The Act requires the Commission to not be flown over concentrations of to an application by Tennessee Valley publish notice of any amendments birds or mammals or over Antarctic Authority for an amendment to the issued, or proposed to be issued, and Specially Protected Areas. The UAVs operating licenses for the Browns Ferry grants the Commission the authority to would only be flown by operators with Nuclear Plant Units 1, 2, and 3, located issue and make immediately effective extensive experience (>20 hours), who in Athens, Alabama. In response to a any amendment to an operating license are pre-approved by the Expedition Federal Register Notice, ‘‘Applications or combined license, as applicable, Leader. Several measures would be and Amendments to Facility Operating upon a determination by the taken to prevent against loss of the UAV Licenses and Combined Licenses Commission that such amendment including painting them a highly visible Involving Proposed No Significant involves no significant hazards color; only flying when the wind is less Hazards Considerations and Containing consideration, notwithstanding the than 25 knots; flying for only 15 Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards pendency before the Commission of a minutes at a time to preserve battery Information and Order Imposing request for a hearing from any person.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Sep 26, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 66302 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2016 / Notices

This biweekly notice includes all Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, proposed determination for each notices of amendments issued, or please contact the NRC’s Public amendment request is shown below. proposed to be issued, from August 30, Document Room (PDR) reference staff at The Commission is seeking public 2016, to September 12, 2016. The last 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by comments on this proposed biweekly notice was published on email to [email protected]. The determination. Any comments received September 13, 2016. ADAMS accession number for each within 30 days after the date of DATES: Comments must be filed by document referenced (if it is available in publication of this notice will be October 27, 2016. A request for a ADAMS) is provided the first time that considered in making any final it is mentioned in this document. determination. hearing must be filed by November 28, • 2016. NRC’s PDR: You may examine and Normally, the Commission will not purchase copies of public documents at issue the amendment until the ADDRESSES: You may submit comments the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One expiration of 60 days after the date of by any of the following methods (unless White Flint North, 11555 Rockville publication of this notice. The this document describes a different Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. Commission may issue the license method for submitting comments on a amendment before expiration of the 60- specific subject): B. Submitting Comments day period provided that its final • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to Please include Docket ID NRC–2016– determination is that the amendment http://www.regulations.gov and search 0202 facility name, unit number(s), involves no significant hazards for Docket ID NRC–2016–0202. Address plant docket number, application date, consideration. In addition, the questions about NRC dockets to Carol and subject in your comment Commission may issue the amendment Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463; submission. prior to the expiration of the 30-day email: [email protected]. For The NRC cautions you not to include comment period if circumstances technical questions, contact the identifying or contact information that change during the 30-day comment individual listed in the FOR FURTHER you do not want to be publicly period such that failure to act in a INFORMATION CONTACT section of this disclosed in your comment submission. timely way would result, for example in document. The NRC will post all comment derating or shutdown of the facility. If • Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, submissions at http:// the Commission takes action prior to the Office of Administration, Mail Stop: www.regulations.gov as well as enter the expiration of either the comment period OWFN–12–H08, U.S. Nuclear comment submissions into ADAMS. or the notice period, it will publish in Regulatory Commission, Washington, The NRC does not routinely edit the Federal Register a notice of DC 20555–0001. comment submissions to remove issuance. If the Commission makes a For additional direction on obtaining identifying or contact information. final no significant hazards information and submitting comments, If you are requesting or aggregating consideration determination, any see ‘‘Obtaining Information and comments from other persons for hearing will take place after issuance. Submitting Comments’’ in the submission to the NRC, then you should The Commission expects that the need SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of inform those persons not to include to take this action will occur very this document. identifying or contact information that infrequently. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing Janet Burkhardt, Office of Nuclear and Petition for Leave To Intervene Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Your request should state that the NRC Regulatory Commission, Washington, does not routinely edit comment Within 60 days after the date of DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– submissions to remove such information publication of this notice, any persons 1384, email: [email protected]. before making the comment (petitioner) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a request SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: submissions available to the public or entering the comment submissions into for a hearing and a petition to intervene I. Obtaining Information and ADAMS. (petition) with respect to issuance of the Submitting Comments amendment to the subject facility II. Notice of Consideration of Issuance operating license or combined license. A. Obtaining Information of Amendments to Facility Operating Petitions shall be filed in accordance Please refer to NRC–2016–0202, Licenses and Combined Licenses and with the Commission’s ‘‘Agency Rules facility name, unit number(s), plant Proposed No Significant Hazards of Practice and Procedure’’ in 10 CFR docket number, application date, and Consideration Determination part 2. Interested persons should subject when contacting the NRC about The Commission has made a consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, the availability of information for this proposed determination that the which is available at the NRC’s PDR, action. You may obtain publicly- following amendment requests involve located at One White Flint North, Room available information related to this no significant hazards consideration. O1–F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first action by any of the following methods: Under the Commission’s regulations in floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. The • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to § 50.92 of title 10 of the Code of Federal NRC’s regulations are accessible http://www.regulations.gov and search Regulations (10 CFR), this means that electronically from the NRC Library on for Docket ID NRC–2016–0202. operation of the facility in accordance the NRC’s Web site at http:// • NRC’s Agencywide Documents with the proposed amendment would www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc- Access and Management System not (1) involve a significant increase in collections/cfr/. If a petition is filed (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly- the probability or consequences of an within 60 days, the Commission or a available documents online in the accident previously evaluated, or (2) presiding officer designated by the ADAMS Public Documents collection at create the possibility of a new or Commission or by the Chief http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ different kind of accident from any Administrative Judge of the Atomic adams.html. To begin the search, select accident previously evaluated; or (3) Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then involve a significant reduction in a rule on the petition; and the Secretary select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS margin of safety. The basis for this or the Chief Administrative Judge of the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Sep 26, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2016 / Notices 66303

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will date of publication of this notice. limited appearance may make an oral or issue a notice of a hearing or an Requests for hearing, petitions for leave written statement of position on the appropriate order. to intervene, and motions for leave to issues, but may not otherwise As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a file new or amended contentions that participate in the proceeding. A limited petition shall set forth with particularity are filed after the 60-day deadline will appearance may be made at any session the interest of the petitioner in the not be entertained absent a of the hearing or at any prehearing proceeding, and how that interest may determination by the presiding officer conference, subject to the limits and be affected by the results of the that the filing demonstrates good cause conditions as may be imposed by the proceeding. The petition should by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR presiding officer. Details regarding the specifically explain the reasons why 2.309(c)(1)(i)–(iii). opportunity to make a limited intervention should be permitted with If a hearing is requested, and the appearance will be provided by the particular reference to the following Commission has not made a final presiding officer if such sessions are general requirements: (1) The name, determination on the issue of no scheduled. address, and telephone number of the significant hazards consideration, the petitioner; (2) the nature of the Commission will make a final B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing) petitioner’s right under the Act to be determination on the issue of no All documents filed in NRC made a party to the proceeding; (3) the significant hazards consideration. The adjudicatory proceedings, including a nature and extent of the petitioner’s final determination will serve to decide request for hearing, a petition for leave property, financial, or other interest in when the hearing is held. If the final to intervene, any motion or other the proceeding; and (4) the possible determination is that the amendment document filed in the proceeding prior effect of any decision or order which request involves no significant hazards to the submission of a request for may be entered in the proceeding on the consideration, the Commission may hearing or petition to intervene petitioner’s interest. The petition must issue the amendment and make it (hereinafter ‘‘petition’’), and documents also set forth the specific contentions immediately effective, notwithstanding filed by interested governmental entities which the petitioner seeks to have the request for a hearing. Any hearing participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c), litigated at the proceeding. held would take place after issuance of must be filed in accordance with the Each contention must consist of a the amendment. If the final NRC’s E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139; specific statement of the issue of law or determination is that the amendment August 28, 2007, as amended at 77 FR fact to be raised or controverted. In request involves a significant hazards 46562; August 3, 2012). The E-Filing addition, the petitioner shall provide a consideration, then any hearing held process requires participants to submit brief explanation of the bases for the would take place before the issuance of and serve all adjudicatory documents contention and a concise statement of any amendment unless the Commission over the internet, or in some cases to the alleged facts or expert opinion finds an imminent danger to the health mail copies on electronic storage media. which support the contention and on or safety of the public, in which case it Participants may not submit paper which the petitioner intends to rely in will issue an appropriate order or rule copies of their filings unless they seek proving the contention at the hearing. under 10 CFR part 2. an exemption in accordance with the The petitioner must also provide A State, local governmental body, procedures described below. references to those specific sources and Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or To comply with the procedural documents of which the petitioner is agency thereof, may submit a petition to requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 aware and on which the petitioner the Commission to participate as a party days prior to the filing deadline, the intends to rely to establish those facts or under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). participant should contact the Office of expert opinion to support its position on The petition should state the nature the Secretary by email at the issue. The petition must include and extent of the petitioner’s interest in [email protected], or by telephone sufficient information to show that a the proceeding. The petition should be at 301–415–1677, to request (1) a digital genuine dispute exists with the submitted to the Commission by identification (ID) certificate, which applicant on a material issue of law or November 28, 2016. The petition must allows the participant (or its counsel or fact. Contentions shall be limited to be filed in accordance with the filing representative) to digitally sign matters within the scope of the instructions in the ‘‘Electronic documents and access the E-Submittal amendment under consideration. The Submissions (E-Filing)’’ section of this server for any proceeding in which it is contention must be one which, if document, and should meet the participating; and (2) advise the proven, would entitle the petitioner to requirements for petitions set forth in Secretary that the participant will be relief. A petitioner who fails to satisfy this section, except that under 10 CFR submitting a petition (even in instances these requirements with respect to at 2.309(h)(2) a State, local governmental in which the participant, or its counsel least one contention will not be body, or Federally-recognized Indian or representative, already holds an NRC- permitted to participate as a party. Tribe, or agency thereof does not need issued digital ID certificate). Based upon Those permitted to intervene become to address the standing requirements in this information, the Secretary will parties to the proceeding, subject to any 10 CFR 2.309(d) if the facility is located establish an electronic docket for the limitations in the order granting leave to within its boundaries. A State, local hearing in this proceeding if the intervene, and have the opportunity to governmental body, Federally- Secretary has not already established an participate fully in the conduct of the recognized Indian Tribe, or agency electronic docket. hearing with respect to resolution of thereof may also have the opportunity to Information about applying for a that person’s admitted contentions, participate under 10 CFR 2.315(c). digital ID certificate is available on the including the opportunity to present If a hearing is granted, any person NRC’s public Web site at http:// evidence and to submit a cross- who does not wish, or is not qualified, www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/ examination plan for cross-examination to become a party to the proceeding getting-started.html. System of witnesses, consistent with the NRC’s may, in the discretion of the presiding requirements for accessing the E- regulations, policies, and procedures. officer, be permitted to make a limited Submittal server are available on the Petitions for leave to intervene must appearance pursuant to the provisions NRC’s public Web site at http:// be filed no later than 60 days from the of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person making a www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Sep 26, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 66304 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2016 / Notices

adjudicatory-sub.html. Participants may Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Energy Northwest, Docket No. 50–397, attempt to use other software not listed Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention: Columbia Generating Station on the Web site, but should note that the Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (Columbia), Benton County, Washington NRC’s E-Filing system does not support (2) courier, express mail, or expedited Date of amendment request: July 14, unlisted software, and the NRC delivery service to the Office of the 2016. A publicly-available version is in Electronic Filing Help Desk will not be Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White ADAMS under Accession No. able to offer assistance in using unlisted Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, ML16196A419. software. Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Description of amendment request: Once a participant has obtained a Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. The amendment would change digital ID certificate and a docket has Participants filing a document in this Technical Specification (TS) 5.5.6, been created, the participant can then manner are responsible for serving the ‘‘Inservice Testing [IST] Program,’’ to submit a petition. Submissions should document on all other participants. remove requirements duplicated in be in Portable Document Format (PDF). Filing is considered complete by first- American Society of Mechanical Additional guidance on PDF class mail as of the time of deposit in Engineers (ASME) Code for Operations submissions is available on the NRC’s the mail, or by courier, express mail, or and Maintenance of Nuclear Power public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/ expedited delivery service upon Plants (OM Code), Case OMN–20, site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A depositing the document with the ‘‘Inservice Test Frequency.’’ This filing is considered complete at the time provider of the service. A presiding change, thereby, will then adopt the documents are submitted through officer, having granted an exemption Technical Specification Task Force the NRC’s E-Filing system. To be timely, request from using E-Filing, may require (TSTF) TSTF–545, Revision 3, ‘‘TS an electronic filing must be submitted to a participant or party to use E-Filing if Inservice Testing Program Removal & the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 the presiding officer subsequently Clarify SR [Surveillance Requirement] p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. determines that the reason for granting Usage Rule Application to Section 5.5 Upon receipt of a transmission, the E- the exemption from use of E-Filing no Testing.’’ Filing system time-stamps the document longer exists. Basis for proposed no significant and sends the submitter an email notice Documents submitted in adjudicatory hazards consideration determination: confirming receipt of the document. The proceedings will appear in the NRC’s As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the E-Filing system also distributes an email electronic hearing docket which is licensee has provided its analysis of the notice that provides access to the available to the public at http:// issue of no significant hazards document to the NRC’s Office of the ehd1.nrc.gov/ehd/, unless excluded consideration, which is presented General Counsel and any others who pursuant to an order of the Commission, below: have advised the Office of the Secretary or the presiding officer. Participants are that they wish to participate in the requested not to include personal 1. Does the proposed change involve a proceeding, so that the filer need not privacy information, such as social significant increase in the probability or serve the documents on those security numbers, home addresses, or consequences of an accident previously participants separately. Therefore, home phone numbers in their filings, evaluated? Response: No. applicants and other participants (or unless an NRC regulation or other law The proposed change revises TS Chapter 5, their counsel or representative) must requires submission of such ‘‘Administrative Controls,’’ Section 5.5, apply for and receive a digital ID information. However, in some ‘‘Programs and Manuals,’’ by eliminating the certificate before a hearing petition to instances, a petition will require ‘‘Inservice Testing Program’’ specification. intervene is filed so that they can obtain including information on local Most requirements in the Inservice Testing access to the document via the E-Filing residence in order to demonstrate a Program are removed, as they are duplicative system. proximity assertion of interest in the of requirements in the ASME OM Code, as A person filing electronically using proceeding. With respect to copyrighted clarified by Code Case OMN–20, ‘‘Inservice the NRC’s adjudicatory E-Filing system Test Frequency,’’ which has been approved works, except for limited excerpts that for use at Columbia. The remaining may seek assistance by contacting the serve the purpose of the adjudicatory requirements in the Section 5.5 IST Program NRC Electronic Filing Help Desk filings and would constitute a Fair Use are eliminated because the NRC has through the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link located application, participants are requested determined their inclusion in the TS is on the NRC’s public Web site at http:// not to include copyrighted materials in contrary to regulations. A new defined term, www.nrc.gov/site-help/e- their submission. ‘‘Inservice Testing Program,’’ is added to the submittals.html, by email to The Commission will issue a notice or TS, which references the requirements of 10 [email protected], or by a toll- order granting or denying a hearing CFR 50.55a(f). free call at 1–866–672–7640. The NRC request or intervention petition, Performance of inservice testing is not an Electronic Filing Help Desk is available designating the issues for any hearing initiator to any accident previously evaluated. As a result, the probability of between 9 a.m. and 7 p.m., Eastern that will be held and designating the occurrence of an accident is not significantly Time, Monday through Friday, Presiding Officer. A notice granting a affected by the proposed change. Inservice excluding government holidays. hearing will be published in the Federal test frequencies under Code Case OMN–20 Participants who believe that they Register and served on the parties to the are equivalent to the current testing period have a good cause for not submitting hearing. allowed by the TS with the exception that documents electronically must file an For further details with respect to testing frequencies greater than 2 years may exemption request, in accordance with these license amendment applications, be extended by up to 6 months to facilitate 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper see the application for amendment test scheduling and consideration of plant filing stating why there is good cause for which is available for public inspection operating conditions that may not be suitable not filing electronically and requesting in ADAMS and at the NRC’s PDR. For for performance of the required testing. The testing frequency extension will not affect the authorization to continue to submit additional direction on accessing ability of the components to mitigate any documents in paper format. Such filings information related to this document, accident previously evaluated as the must be submitted by: (1) First class see the ‘‘Obtaining Information and components are required to be operable mail addressed to the Office of the Submitting Comments’’ section of this during the testing period extension. Secretary of the Commission, U.S. document. Performance of inservice tests utilizing the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Sep 26, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2016 / Notices 66305

allowances in OMN–20 will not significantly standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are not change the design function of any system, affect the reliability of the tested satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff structure, or component and does not change components. As a result, the availability of proposes to determine that the the way the plant is operated or maintained. the affected components, as well as their amendment request involves no The proposed amendment does not create a ability to mitigate the consequences of credible failure mechanism, malfunction, or accidents previously evaluated, is not significant hazards consideration. accident initiator not already considered in affected. Attorney for licensee: William A. the design and licensing basis. Therefore, the proposed change does not Horin, Esq., Winston & Strawn, 1700 K Therefore, the proposed amendment does involve a significant increase in the Street NW., Washington, DC 20006– not create the possibility of a new or different probability or consequences of an accident 3817. kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. previously evaluated. 2. Does the proposed change create the Pascarelli. 3. Does the proposed amendment involve possibility of a new or different kind of a significant reduction in a margin of safety? accident from any accident previously Energy Northwest, Docket No. 50–397, Response: No. evaluated? Columbia Generating Station Margin of safety is associated with the Response: No. (Columbia), Benton County, Washington ability of the fission product barriers (i.e., The proposed change does not alter the Date of amendment request: July 28, fuel cladding, reactor coolant system design or configuration of the plant. The pressure boundary, and containment proposed change does not involve a physical 2016. A publicly-available version is in structure) to limit the level of radiation dose alteration of the plant; no new or different ADAMS under Accession No. to the public. The proposed amendment does kind of equipment will be installed. The ML16210A528. not impact operation of the plant and no proposed change does not alter the types of Description of amendment request: accident analyses are affected by the inservice testing performed. In most cases, The amendment would revise the proposed amendment. The proposed the frequency of inservice testing is current Columbia Emergency Plan amendment does not affect the Technical unchanged. However, the frequency of Emergency Action Level scheme to one Specifications or the method of operating the testing would not result in a new or different plant. Additionally, the proposed kind of accident from any previously based on Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) guidance established in NEI 99–01, amendment will not relax any criteria used evaluated since the testing methods are not to establish safety limits and will not relax altered. ‘‘Development of Emergency Action any safety system settings. The safety Therefore, the proposed change does not Levels for Non-Passive Reactors,’’ analysis acceptance criteria are not affected create the possibility of a new or different Revision 6, which has been endorsed by by this amendment. The proposed kind of accident from any previously the NRC. amendment will not result in plant operation evaluated. Basis for proposed no significant in a configuration outside the design basis. 3. Does the proposed change involve a hazards consideration determination: The proposed amendment does not adversely significant reduction in a margin of safety? As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the affect systems that respond to safely shut Response: No. licensee has provided its analysis of the down the plant and to maintain the plant in The proposed change eliminates some a safe shutdown condition. requirements from the TS in lieu of issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented Therefore, the proposed amendment does requirements in the ASME Code, as modified not involve a significant reduction in the by use of Code Case OMN–20. Compliance below: margin of safety. with the ASME Code is required by 10 CFR 1. Does the proposed amendment involve The NRC staff has reviewed the 50.55a. The proposed change also allows a significant increase in the probability or inservice tests with frequencies greater than consequences of an accident previously licensee’s analysis and, based on this 2 years to be extended by 6 months to evaluated? review, it appears that the three facilitate test scheduling and consideration of Response: No. standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are plant operating conditions that may not be The proposed amendment affects the satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff suitable for performance of the required Columbia Generating Station (Columbia) testing. The testing frequency extension will proposes to determine that the Emergency Plan (EP) and associated amendment request involves no not affect the ability of the components to Emergency Action Levels (EALs); it does not respond to an accident as the components are significant hazards consideration. alter the Operating License or the Technical required to be operable during the testing Attorney for licensee: William A. Specifications. The proposed amendment period extension. The proposed change will Horin, Esq., Winston & Strawn, 1700 K does not change the design function of any eliminate the existing TS SR 3.0.3 allowance system, structure, or component and does not Street NW., Washington, DC 20006– to defer performance of missed inservice tests change the way the plant is maintained or 3817. up to the duration of the specified testing operated. The proposed amendment does not NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. frequency, and instead will require an affect any accident mitigating feature or Pascarelli. assessment of the missed test on equipment increase the likelihood of malfunction for operability. This assessment will consider Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., plant structures, systems, and components. the effect on a margin of safety (equipment Docket No. 50–286, Indian Point operability). Should the component be The proposed amendment will not change any of the analyses associated with the Nuclear Generating Unit No. 3 (IP3), inoperable, the Technical Specifications Westchester County, New York provide actions to ensure that the margin of Columbia Final Safety Analysis Report safety is protected. The proposed change also Chapter 15 accidents because plant Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., eliminates a statement that nothing in the operation, structures, systems, components, Docket No. 50–333, James A. FitzPatrick ASME Code should be construed to accident initiators, and accident mitigation functions remain unchanged. Nuclear Power Plant (FitzPatrick), supersede the requirements of any TS. The Oswego County, New York NRC has determined that statement to be Therefore, the proposed amendment does incorrect. However, elimination of the not involve a significant increase in the Date of amendment request: August statement will have no effect on plant probability or consequences of an accident 16, 2016. A publicly-available version is operation or safety. previously evaluated. in ADAMS under Accession No. Therefore, the proposed change does not 2. Does the proposed amendment create the possibility of a new or different kind of ML16230A308. involve a significant reduction in a margin of Description of amendment request: safety. accident from any accident previously evaluated? The amendment would transfer the The NRC staff has reviewed the Response: No. beneficial interest in the Power licensee’s analysis and, based on this The proposed amendment affects the Authority of the State of New York review, it appears that the three Columbia EP and associated EALs; it does (PASNY) Master Decommissioning

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Sep 26, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 66306 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2016 / Notices

Trust (Master Trust), including all rights probability or consequences of an accident replace existing license condition and obligations thereunder, held by previously evaluated. 2.C.(4) with a new license condition to PASNY for IP3 and FitzPatrick to 2. Do the proposed amendments create the state that technical specification (TS) Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (ENO). possibility of a new or different kind of surveillance requirement (SR) 3.1.4.3 is ENO also requests the NRC’s consent to accident from any accident previously evaluated? not required for control rod drive 13 amendments to the Master Response: No. (CRD–13) during cycle 25 until the next Decommissioning Trust Agreement This request involves administrative entry into Mode 3. In addition, the dated July 25, 1990, as amended (Master changes to licenses that will be consistent condition would state that CRD–13 seal Trust Agreement), governing the Master with the NRC’s regulations at 10 CFR leakage shall be repaired prior to Trust to facilitate this transfer. Finally, 50.75(h) and to change the name of the entity entering Mode 2, following the next ENO seeks approval of license responsible under the Master Trust for Mode 3 entry, and that the reactor shall amendments to modify the existing decommissioning from a non-licensee to a be shut down if CRD–13 seal leakage trust-related license conditions to reflect licensee. exceeds two gallons per minute. The No actual plant equipment or accident the proposed transfer of the Master proposed amendment also requests Trust to ENO and to delete other analyses will be affected by the proposed changes and no failure modes not bounded replacement of the obsolete note in TS conditions so as to apply the by previously evaluated accidents will be SR 3.1.4.3 with a note to clarify that TS requirements of 10 CFR 50.75(h)(1). created. SR 3.1.4.3 is not required to be ENO and Exelon Generation Company, Therefore, the proposed change does not performed or met for CRD–13 during LLC. (Exelon), jointly filed an create the possibility of a new or different cycle 25 provided CRD–13 is application for a direct license transfer kind of accident from any previously administratively declared immovable, of FitzPatrick to Exelon on August 18, evaluated. but trippable, and Condition D is 2016. A separate Federal Register notice 3. Do the proposed amendments involve a entered for CRD–13. details the NRC’s consideration of significant reduction in a margin of safety? Basis for proposed no significant approval for the FitzPatrick license Response: No. The request involves administrative hazards consideration determination: transfer. changes to the licenses that will be consistent As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the Basis for proposed no significant with the NRC’s regulations at 10 CFR licensee has provided its analysis of the hazards consideration determination: 50.75(h) and to change the name of the entity issue of no significant hazards As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the responsible under the Master Trust for consideration, which is presented licensee has provided its analysis of the decommissioning from a non-licensee to a below: issue of no significant hazards licensee. 1. Does the proposed amendment involve Margin of safety is associated with consideration, which is presented a significant increase in the probability or confidence in the ability of the fission below: consequences of an accident previously product barriers to limit the level of radiation evaluated? 1. Do the proposed amendments involve a doses to the public. No actual plant significant increase in the probability or Response: No. equipment or accident analyses will be The proposed license amendment replaces consequences of an accident previously affected by the proposed change. evaluated? an obsolete license condition concerning Additionally, the proposed changes will not CRD–22 testing that applied only to operating Response: No. relax any criteria used to establish safety The requested changes delete certain cycle 21 with a new license condition to limits, will not relax any safety systems license conditions pertaining to the forgo the remaining two required settings, or will not relax the bases for any decommissioning trust agreements currently surveillance tests of CRD–13 from the PNP limiting conditions of operation. in sections 2.Q to 2.X of the IP3 Operating TS surveillance requirement for partial Therefore, the proposed change does not License and sections 2.H to 2.O of the movement every 92 days during cycle 25. FitzPatrick Operating License. In addition, involve a significant reduction in the margin Since CRD–13 remains trippable, the conforming changes to 2.W and 2.X of the IP3 of safety. proposed license condition does not affect or Operating License and 2.P and 2.Q of the The NRC staff has reviewed the create any accident initiators or precursors. FitzPatrick Operating License are necessary licensee’s analysis and, based on this As such, the proposed license condition does [to] reflect the transfer of the Master Trust not increase the probability of an accident. review, it appears that the three The proposed license amendment does not from PASNY to ENO. standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are The requested changes are consistent with increase the consequences of an accident. the types of license amendments permitted in satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff The ability to move a full-length control rod 10 CFR 50.75(h)(5). proposes to determine that the by its drive mechanism is not an initial The regulations of 10 CFR 50.75(h)(4) state amendment request involves no assumption used in the safety analyses. The that ‘‘Unless otherwise determined by the significant hazards consideration. safety analyses assume full-length control rod Commission with regard to a specific Attorney for licensee: Jeanne Cho, insertion, except the most reactive rod, upon application, the Commission has determined Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., 440 reactor trip. The surveillance requirement that any amendment to the license of a performed during the last refueling outage Hamilton Avenue, White Plains, New verified control rod drop times are within utilization facility that does no more than York, 10601. delete specific license conditions relating to accident analysis assumptions. ENO [Entergy the terms and conditions of decommissioning NRC Branch Chief: Travis L. Tate. Nuclear Operations] has determined that trust agreements involves ‘no significant Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., CRD seal leakage does not increase the hazards consideration.’ ’’ Docket No. 50–255, Palisades Nuclear likelihood of an untrippable control rod. The assumptions of the safety analyses will be In addition the requested changes seek Plant (PNP), Van Buren County, changes to the Master Trust agreement only maintained, and the consequences of an to the extent that they replace PASNY, a non- Michigan accident will not be increased. licensee, with ENO, a licensee. No other Date of amendment request: August Therefore, operation of the facility in changes to the Master Trust agreement are 22, 2016, as supplemented by letter accordance with the proposed license contemplated. dated September 8, 2016. Publicly- condition would not involve a significant This request involves changes that are increase in the probability or consequences administrative in nature. No actual plant available versions are in ADAMS under of an accident previously evaluated. equipment or accident analyses will be Accession Nos. ML16235A195 and 2. Does the proposed amendment create affected by the proposed changes. ML16252A351, respectively. the possibility of a new or different kind of Therefore, the proposed amendments do Description of amendment request: accident from any accident previously not involve a significant increase in the The proposed amendment would evaluated?

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Sep 26, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2016 / Notices 66307

Response: No. Core Safety Limits 2.1.A and 2.1.B does not 3. Do the proposed changes involve a The proposed license amendment does not alter the use of the analytical methods used significant reduction in a margin of safety? involve a physical alteration of any structure, to determine the safety limits that have been Response: No. system or component (SSC) or change the previously reviewed and approved by the The margin of safety is established through way any SSC is operated. The proposed NRC. Additionally, the proposed change to the design of the plant structures, systems, license condition does not involve operation NMP1 for the reactor steam dome pressure in and components, and through the parameters of any required SSCs in a manner or Reactor Core Safety Limits 2.1.1.a and 2.1.1.b for safe operation and setpoints for the configuration differently from those does not alter the use of the analytical actuation of equipment relied upon to previously recognized or evaluated. No new methods used to determine the safety limits respond to transients and design basis failure mechanisms would be introduced by that have been previously reviewed and accidents. Evaluation of the 10 CFR part 21 the requested SR interval extension. approved by the NRC. The proposed change condition by GE [General Electric] Therefore, the proposed amendment does is in accordance with an NRC approved determined that since the MCPR [minimum not create the possibility of a new or different critical power correlation methodology, and critical power ratio] improves during the kind of accident from any accident as such, maintains required safety margins. PRFO [pressure regulator failure-maximum previously evaluated. The proposed change does not adversely demand (open)] transient, there is no 3. Does the proposed amendment involve affect accident initiators or precursors, nor decrease in the safety margin and therefore a significant reduction in a margin of safety? does it alter the design assumptions, there is not a threat to fuel cladding integrity. Response: No. conditions, or configuration of the facility or The proposed change in reactor dome The proposed license amendment does not the manner in which the plant is operated pressure supports the current safety margin, affect trippability of the control rod. It will and maintained. which protects the fuel cladding integrity have the same capability to mitigate an The proposed change does not alter or during a depressurization transient, but does accident as it had prior to the proposed prevent the ability of structures, systems, and not change the requirements governing license condition. components (SSCs) from performing their operation or availability of safety equipment Therefore, the proposed amendment would intended function to mitigate the assumed to operate to preserve the margin of not involve a significant reduction in a consequences of an initiating event within safety. The change does not alter the behavior margin of safety. the assumed acceptance limits. The proposed of plant equipment, which remains The NRC staff has reviewed the change does not require any physical change unchanged. The proposed change to Reactor Core licensee’s analysis and, based on this to any plant SSCs nor does it require any change in systems or plant operations. The Safety Limits 2.1.A and 2.1.B is consistent review, it appears that the three with and within the capabilities of the standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are proposed change is consistent with the safety analysis assumptions and resultant applicable NRC approved critical power correlation for the fuel designs in use at satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff consequences. OCNGS. Additionally, the proposed change proposes to determine that the Lowering the value of reactor steam dome to Reactor Core Safety Limits 2.1.1.a and amendment request involves no pressure in the TS has no physical effect on 2.1.1.b is consistent with and within the significant hazards consideration. plant equipment and therefore, no impact on capabilities of the NRC approved critical Attorney for licensee: Jeanne Cho, the course of plant transients. The change is power correlation for the fuel designs in use Senior Counsel, Entergy Nuclear an analytical exercise to demonstrate the at NMP1. No setpoints at which protective applicability of correlations and Operations, Inc., 440 Hamilton Ave., actions are initiated are altered by the White Plains, NY 10601. methodologies. There are no known proposed change. The proposed change does NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona. operational or safety benefits. not alter the manner in which the safety Therefore, the proposed changes do not Exelon Generation Company, LLC, limits are determined. This change is involve a significant increase in the consistent with plant design and does not Docket No. 50–219, Oyster Creek probability or consequences of an accident change the TS operability requirements; thus, Nuclear Generating Station (OCNGS), previously evaluated. previously evaluated accidents are not Ocean County, New Jersey; and Docket 2. Do the proposed changes create the affected by this proposed change. No. 50–220, Nine Mile Point Nuclear possibility of a new or different kind of Therefore, the proposed changes do not Station, Unit 1 (NMP1), Oswego County, accident from any accident previously involve a significant reduction in a margin of evaluated? safety. New York Response: No. Date of amendment request: August 1, The proposed reduction in the reactor The NRC staff has reviewed the 2016. A publicly-available version is in dome pressure safety limit from 800 psia licensee’s analysis and, based on this ADAMS under Accession No. [pounds per square inch absolute] to 700 psia review, it appears that the three ML16215A128. is a change based upon previously approved standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are Description of amendment request: documents and does not involve changes to satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff The amendments would revise the plant hardware or its operating proposes to determine that the characteristics. As a result, no new failure amendment request involves no OCNGS’s Technical Specification (TS) modes are being introduced. There are no Section 2.1, ‘‘Safety Limit—Fuel hardware changes nor are there any changes significant hazards consideration. Cladding Integrity,’’ and NMP1’s TS in the method by which any plant systems Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, Section 2.1.1, ‘‘Fuel Cladding Integrity,’’ perform a safety function. No new accident Associate General Counsel, Exelon to reduce the steam dome pressure. scenarios, failure mechanisms, or limiting Generation Company, LLC, 4300 Basis for proposed no significant single failures are introduced as a result of Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555. hazards consideration determination: the proposed change. NRC Acting Branch Chief: Shaun M. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the The proposed change does not introduce Anderson. any new accident precursors, nor does it licensee has provided its analysis of the Indiana Michigan Power Company issue of no significant hazards involve any physical plant alterations or changes in the methods governing normal (I&M), Docket Nos. 50–315 and 50–316, consideration, which is presented plant operation. Also, the change does not Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 below, with NRC edits in [brackets]: impose any new or different requirements or and 2, Berrien County, Michigan eliminate any existing requirements. The 1. Do the proposed changes involve a Date of amendment request: July 21, significant increase in the probability or change does not alter assumptions made in consequences of an accident previously the safety analysis. 2016. A publicly-available version is in evaluated? Therefore, the proposed changes do not ADAMS under Accession No. Response: No. create the possibility of a new or different ML16208A076. The proposed change to the OCNGS TS for kind of accident from any accident Description of amendment request: the reactor steam dome pressure in Reactor previously evaluated. The proposed changes are consistent

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Sep 26, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 66308 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2016 / Notices

with the NRC-approved Technical Therefore, the proposed change does not NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona. Specifications Task Force (TSTF) involve a significant increase in the Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Traveler, TSTF–545, Revision 3, ‘‘TS probability or consequences of an accident Docket Nos. 52–025 and 52–026, Vogtle [Technical Specification] Inservice previously evaluated. 2. Does the proposed change create the Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, Testing [IST] Program Removal & Clarify possibility of a new or different kind of Burke County, Georgia SR [Surveillance Requirement] Usage accident from any accident previously Rule Application to Section 5.5 evaluated? Date of amendment request: August Testing.’’ The proposed change would Response: No. 11, 2016. A publicly-available version is revise the TSs to eliminate the Section The proposed change does not alter the in ADAMS under Accession No. 5.5.6, ‘‘Inservice Testing Program.’’ A design or configuration of the plant. The ML16224B122. new defined term, ‘‘INSERVICE proposed change does not involve a physical Description of amendment request: TESTING PROGRAM,’’ would be added alteration of the plant; no new or different The amendment request proposes kind of equipment will be installed. The to the TS Definitions section. TS SRs changes to plant-specific Tier 2 proposed change does not alter the types of information incorporated into the that currently refer to the Inservice inservice testing performed. In most cases, Testing Program from Section 5.5.6 the frequency of IST is unchanged. However, Updated Final Safety Analysis Report would be revised to refer to the new the frequency of testing would not result in (UFSAR), and involves changes to defined term, ‘‘INSERVICE TESTING a new or different kind of accident from any combined license Appendix C (and PROGRAM.’’ previously evaluated since the testing corresponding plant-specific Tier 1 methods are not altered. information). The proposed changes are Basis for proposed no significant Therefore, the proposed change does not to information identifying the frontal hazards consideration determination: create the possibility of a new or different face area and screen surface area for the As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the kind of accident from any previously In-Containment Refueling Water Storage evaluated. licensee has provided its analysis of the Tank (IRWST) screens, the location and issue of no significant hazards 3. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? dimensions of the protective plate consideration, which is presented located above the containment below: Response: No. The proposed change eliminates some recirculation (CR) screens, and 1. Does the proposed change involve a requirements from the TS in lieu of increasing the maximum Normal significant increase in the probability or requirements in the ASME Code, as modified Residual Heat Removal System flowrate consequences of an accident previously by use of Code Case OMN–20. Compliance through the IRWST and CR screens. evaluated? with the ASME Code is required by 10 CFR Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 50.55a. The proposed change also allows Response: No. 52.63(b)(1), an exemption from elements The proposed change revises TS Chapter 5, inservice tests with frequencies greater than ‘‘Administrative Controls,’’ Section 5.5, 2 years to be extended by 6 months to of the design as certified in the 10 CFR ‘‘Programs and Manuals,’’ by eliminating the facilitate test scheduling and consideration of part 52, appendix D, design certification ‘‘Inservice Testing Program’’ specification. plant operating conditions that may not be rule is also requested for the plant- Most requirements in the IST Program are suitable for performance of the required specific Design Control Document Tier removed, as they are duplicative of testing. The testing frequency extension will 1 material departures. requirements in the ASME [American Society not affect the ability of the components to Basis for proposed no significant of Mechanical Engineers] OM [Operation and respond to an accident as the components are hazards consideration determination: Maintenance] Code, as clarified by Code Case required to be operable during the testing As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the period extension. The proposed change will OMN–20, ‘‘Inservice Test Frequency.’’ The licensee has provided its analysis of the remaining requirements in the Section 5.5.6 eliminate the existing TS SR 3.0.3 allowance to defer performance of missed inservice tests issue of no significant hazards IST Program are eliminated because the NRC consideration, which is presented below has determined their inclusion in the TS is up to the duration of the specified testing contrary to regulations. A new defined term, frequency, and instead will require an with the NRC staff’s edits in square ‘‘Inservice Testing Program,’’ is added to the assessment of the missed test on equipment brackets: operability. This assessment will consider TS, which references the requirements of 10 1. Does the proposed amendment involve the effect on a margin of safety (equipment CFR 50.55a(f). a significant increase in the probability or operability). Should the component be Performance of IST is not an initiator to consequences of an accident previously inoperable, the TS provide actions to ensure any accident previously evaluated. As a evaluated? that the margin of safety is protected. The result, the probability of occurrence of an Response: No. proposed change also eliminates a statement accident is not significantly affected by the The proposed changes to the location and that nothing in the ASME Code should be proposed change. Inservice test frequencies dimensions of the protective plate continues construed to supersede the requirements of under Code Case OMN–20 are equivalent to to provide sufficient space surrounding the any TS. The NRC has determined that the current testing period allowed by the TS containment recirculation screens for debris statement to be incorrect. However, with the exception that testing frequencies to settle before reaching the screens as elimination of the statement will have no greater than 2 years may be extended by up confirmed by an evaluation demonstrating effect on plant operation or safety. to 6 months to facilitate test scheduling and that the protective plate continues to fulfill Therefore, the proposed change does not consideration of plant operating conditions its design function of preventing debris from involve a significant reduction in a margin of that may not be suitable for performance of reaching the screens. In addition, the safety. the required testing. The testing frequency increase to the minimum IRWST screen size extension will not affect the ability of the The NRC staff has reviewed the reinforces the ability of the screens to components to mitigate any accident licensee’s analysis and, based on this perform their design function with the previously evaluated as the components are review, it appears that the three increased [Residual Heat Removal System required to be operable during the testing standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are (RNS)] maximum flowrate proposed. The period extension. Performance of inservice satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff proposed changes do not adversely affect any tests utilizing the allowances in OMN–20 accident initiating component, and thus the will not significantly affect the reliability of proposes to determine that the probabilities of the accidents previously the tested components. As a result, the amendment request involves no evaluated are not affected. The affected availability of the affected components, as significant hazards consideration. equipment does not adversely affect the well as their ability to mitigate the Attorney for licensee: Robert B. ability of equipment to contain radioactive consequences of accidents previously Haemer, Senior Nuclear Counsel, One material. Because the proposed change does evaluated, is not affected. Cook Place, Bridgman, MI 49106. not affect a release path or increase the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Sep 26, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2016 / Notices 66309

expected dose rates, the potential Description of amendment request: may initiate a new or different kind of radiological releases in the UFSAR accident The amendment request proposes accident, or alter any SSC such that a new analyses are unaffected. changes to the Fire Pump Head and accident initiator or initiating sequence of Therefore, the proposed amendment does Diesel Fuel Day Tank. Because, this events is created. The proposed changes to not involve a significant increase in the the fire pump performance specifications and probability or consequences of an accident proposed change requires a departure fire pump fuel day tank volume do not affect previously evaluated. from Tier 1 information in the any safety-related equipment, nor do they 2. Does the proposed amendment create Westinghouse Electric Company’s add any new interface to safety-related SSCs. the possibility of a new or different kind of AP1000 Design Control Document No system or design function or equipment accident from any accident previously (DCD), the licensee also requested an qualification is affected by this change. The evaluated? exemption from the requirements of the changes do not introduce a new failure mode, Response: No. Generic DCD Tier 1 in accordance with malfunction, or sequence of events that could The proposed activity to change the 10 CFR 52.63(b)(1). affect safety or safety-related equipment. location and dimensions of the protective Basis for proposed no significant Therefore, the proposed amendment does plate above the containment recirculation hazards consideration determination: not create the possibility of a new or different screens, to change the minimum IRWST kind of accident from any accident screen size, and to increase the maximum As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the previously evaluated. RNS flowrate through the IRWST and CR licensee has provided its analysis of the 3. Does the proposed amendment involve screens does not alter the method in which issue of no significant hazards a significant reduction in a margin of safety? safety functions are accomplished. The consideration, which is presented Response: No. analyses demonstrate that the screens are below: The proposed changes maintain compliance with the applicable Codes and able to perform their functions in a similar 1. Does the proposed amendment involve manner and perform adequately in response a significant increase in the probability or Standards, thereby maintaining the margin of to an accident, and no new failure modes are consequences of an accident previously safety associated with these SSCs. The introduced by the proposed change. evaluated? proposed changes do not alter any applicable Therefore, the proposed amendment does Response: No. design codes, code compliance, design not create the possibility of a new or different The increase in head pressure by the function, or safety analysis. Consequently, no kind of accident from any accident proposed change to the fire protection system safety analysis or design basis acceptance previously evaluated. (FPS) motor-driven and diesel-driven fire limit/criterion is challenged or exceeded by 3. Does the proposed amendment involve pumps maintains compliance with National the proposed change, thus the margin of a significant reduction in a margin of safety? Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard safety is not reduced. Response: No. NFPA–14, Standard for the Installation of Because no safety analysis or design basis The proposed change to the design does Standpipe, Private Hydrants, and Hose acceptance limit/criterion is challenged or not change any of the codes or standards to Systems, 2000 Edition, requirements by exceeded by these changes, no margin of which the IRWST screens, containment providing adequate pressure in the standpipe safety is reduced. recirculation screens, and containment and automatic sprinkler system to maintain Therefore, the proposed amendment does recirculation screen protective plate are the ability to fight and/or contain a not involve a significant reduction in a designed as documented in the UFSAR. The postulated fire. The proposed change to the margin of safety. containment recirculation screen protective diesel-driven fire pump fuel day tank volume The NRC staff has reviewed the plate continues to prevent debris from maintains the availability of the diesel-driven licensee’s analysis and, based on this reaching the CR screens, and the IRWST and fire pump for service upon failure of the CR screens maintain their ability to block electric motor-driven fire pump or a loss of review, it appears that the three debris while at the proposed increase in RNS offsite power by providing a fuel day tank standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are maximum flowrate. that is reserved exclusively for the diesel- satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff No safety analysis or design basis driven pump and meets the minimum proposes to determine that the acceptance limit/criterion is challenged or capacity requirements of NFPA 20, Standard amendment request involves no exceeded by the proposed changes. for the Installation of Stationary Pumps for significant hazards consideration. Therefore, the proposed amendment does Fire Protection, 1999 Edition. These changes Attorney for licensee: Mr. M. Stanford not involve a significant reduction in a do not affect the operation of any systems or Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 1710 margin of safety. equipment that initiate an analyzed accident Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL The NRC staff has reviewed the or alter any structures, systems, and [components (SSCs)] accident initiator or 35203–2015. licensee’s analysis and, based on this initiating sequence of events. NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon- review, it appears that the three These changes have no adverse impact on Herrity. standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are the support, design, or operation of Southern Nuclear Operating Company, satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff mechanical and fluid systems. The response Inc., Docket Nos. 50–321 and 50–366, proposes to determine that the of systems to postulated accident conditions Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. amendment request involves no is not adversely affected by the proposed 1 and 2, Appling County, Georgia significant hazards consideration. changes. There is no change to the predicted Attorney for licensee: M. Stanford radioactive releases due to normal operation Date of amendment request: July 28, or postulated accident conditions. 2016. A publicly-available version is in Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 1710 Consequently, the plant response to Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL previously evaluated accidents is not ADAMS under Accession No. 35203–2015. impacted, nor does the proposed change ML16214A252. NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer Dixon- create any new accident precursors. Description of amendment request: Herrity. Therefore, the proposed amendment does The amendments would revise the not involve a significant increase in the technical specifications (TSs) at the Southern Nuclear Operating Company, probability or consequences of an accident Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 Docket Nos. 52–025 and 52–026, Vogtle previously evaluated. and 2, to eliminate the ‘‘lnservice Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, 2. Does the proposed amendment create Testing Program’’ from TS 5.5, Burke County, Georgia the possibility of a new or different kind of ‘‘Programs and Manuals,’’ and add a accident from any accident previously Date of amendment request: August evaluated? new defined term, ‘‘INSERVICE 23, 2016. A publicly-available version is Response: No. TESTING PROGRAM,’’ to TS 1.1, in ADAMS under Accession No. The proposed changes do not affect the ‘‘Definitions.’’ This request is submitted ML16236A265. operation of any systems or equipment that in accordance with Technical

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Sep 26, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 66310 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2016 / Notices

Specifications Task Force (TSTF) alteration of the plant; no new or different Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Traveler TSTF–545, Revision 3, ‘‘TS kind of equipment will be installed. The Inc., Docket Nos. 50–348 and 50–364, lnservice Testing Program Removal & proposed change does not alter the types of Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 Clarify SR [Surveillance Requirement] inservice testing performed. In most cases, and 2, Houston County, Alabama the frequency of inservice testing is Usage Rule Application to Section 5.5 Date of amendment request: July 28, Testing.’’ unchanged. However, the frequency of testing would not result in a new or different 2016. A publicly-available version is in Basis for proposed no significant ADAMS under Accession No. hazards consideration determination: kind of accident from any previously evaluated since the testing methods are not ML16214A252. As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the Description of amendment request: licensee has provided its analysis of the altered. Therefore, the proposed change does not The amendments would revise the issue of no significant hazards create the possibility of a new or different technical specifications (TSs) at the consideration, which is presented kind of accident from any accident Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 below: previously evaluated. and 2, to eliminate the ‘‘lnservice 1. Does the proposed change involve a 3. Does the proposed change involve a Testing Program’’ from TS 5.5, significant increase in the probability or significant reduction in a margin of safety? ‘‘Programs and Manuals,’’ and add a consequences of an accident previously Response: No. new defined term, ‘‘INSERVICE evaluated? The proposed change eliminates some TESTING PROGRAM,’’ to TS 1.1, Response: No. requirements from the TS in lieu of ‘‘Definitions.’’ This request is submitted The proposed change revises TS Chapter 5, requirements in the ASME Code, as modified in accordance with Technical ‘‘Administrative Controls,’’ Section 5.5, by use of Code Case OMN–20. Compliance ‘‘Programs and Manuals,’’ by eliminating the Specifications Task Force (TSTF) with the ASME Code is required by 10 CFR Traveler TSTF–545, Revision 3, ‘‘TS ‘‘lnservice Testing Program’’ specification. 50.55a. The proposed change also allows lnservice Testing Program Removal & Most requirements in the lnservice Testing inservice tests with frequencies greater than Program are removed, as they are duplicative 2 years to be extended by 6 months to Clarify SR [Surveillance Requirement] of requirements in the ASME OM [American facilitate test scheduling and consideration of Usage Rule Application to Section 5.5 Society of Mechanical Engineers Operation plant operating conditions that may not be Testing.’’ and Maintenance] Code, as clarified by Code Basis for proposed no significant Case OMN–20, ‘‘lnservice Test Frequency.’’ suitable for performance of the required testing. The testing frequency extension will hazards consideration determination: The remaining requirements in the Section As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the 5.5 IST [Inservice Testing] Program are not affect the ability of the components to eliminated because the NRC has determined respond to an accident as the components are licensee has provided its analysis of the their inclusion in the TS is contrary to required to be operable during the testing issue of no significant hazards regulations. A new defined term, period extension. consideration, which is presented ‘‘INSERVICE TESTING PROGRAM,’’ is added The proposed change will eliminate the below: existing TS SR 3.0.3 allowance to defer to the TS, which references the requirements 1. Does the proposed change involve a of 10 CFR 50.55a(f). performance of missed inservice tests up to significant increase in the probability or Performance of inservice testing is not an the duration of the specified testing consequences of an accident previously initiator to any accident previously frequency, and instead will require an evaluated? evaluated. As a result, the probability of assessment of the missed test on equipment Response: No. occurrence of an accident is not significantly operability. This assessment will consider The proposed change revises TS Chapter 5, affected by the proposed change. lnservice the effect on a margin of safety (equipment ‘‘Administrative Controls,’’ Section 5.5, test frequencies under Code Case OMN–20 operability). Should the component be ‘‘Programs and Manuals,’’ by eliminating the are equivalent to the current testing period inoperable, the Technical Specifications ‘‘lnservice Testing Program’’ specification. allowed by the TS with the exception that provide actions to ensure that the margin of Most requirements in the lnservice Testing testing frequencies greater than 2 years may safety is protected. The proposed change also Program are removed, as they are duplicative be extended by up to 6 months to facilitate eliminates a statement that nothing in the of requirements in the ASME OM Code test scheduling and consideration of plant ASME Code should be construed to [American Society of Mechanical Engineers operating conditions that may not be suitable supersede the requirements of any TS. The Operation and Maintenance Code], as for performance of the required testing. The NRC has determined that statement to be clarified by Code Case OMN–20, ‘‘lnservice testing frequency extension will not affect the Test Frequency.’’ The remaining ability of the components to mitigate any incorrect. However, elimination of the statement will have no effect on plant requirements in the Section 5.5 IST accident previously evaluated as the [Inservice Testing] Program are eliminated operation or safety. components are required to be operable because the NRC has determined their Therefore, the proposed change does not during the testing period extension. inclusion in the TS is contrary to regulations. Performance of inservice tests utilizing the involve a significant reduction in a margin of A new defined term, ‘‘INSERVICE TESTING allowances in OMN–20 will not significantly safety. PROGRAM,’’ is added to the TS, which affect the reliability of the tested references the requirements of 10 CFR components. As a result, the availability of The NRC staff has reviewed the 50.55a(f). the affected components, as well as their licensee’s analysis and, based on this Performance of inservice testing is not an ability to mitigate the consequences of review, it appears that the three initiator to any accident previously accidents previously evaluated, is not standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are evaluated. As a result, the probability of affected. satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff occurrence of an accident is not significantly Therefore, the proposed change does not proposes to determine that the affected by the proposed change. lnservice involve a significant increase in the amendment request involves no test frequencies under Code Case OMN–20 probability or consequences of an accident significant hazards consideration. are equivalent to the current testing period previously evaluated. allowed by the TS with the exception that 2. Does the proposed change create the Attorney for licensee: Jennifer M. testing frequencies greater than 2 years may possibility of a new or different kind of Buettner, Associate General Counsel, be extended by up to 6 months to facilitate accident from any accident previously Southern Nuclear Operating Company, test scheduling and consideration of plant evaluated? Inc., 40 Inverness Center Parkway, operating conditions that may not be suitable Response: No. Birmingham, AL 35242. for performance of the required testing. The The proposed change does not alter the testing frequency extension will not affect the design or configuration of the plant. The NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. ability of the components to mitigate any proposed change does not involve a physical Markley. accident previously evaluated as the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Sep 26, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2016 / Notices 66311

components are required to be operable The NRC staff has reviewed the Performance of inservice testing is not an during the testing period extension. licensee’s analysis and, based on this initiator to any accident previously Performance of inservice tests utilizing the review, it appears that the three evaluated. As a result, the probability of allowances in OMN–20 will not significantly standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are occurrence of an accident is not significantly affect the reliability of the tested affected by the proposed change. lnservice components. As a result, the availability of satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff test frequencies under Code Case OMN–20 the affected components, as well as their proposes to determine that the are equivalent to the current testing period ability to mitigate the consequences of amendment request involves no allowed by the TS with the exception that accidents previously evaluated, is not significant hazards consideration. testing frequencies greater than 2 years may affected. Attorney for licensee: Jennifer M. be extended by up to 6 months to facilitate Therefore, the proposed change does not Buettner, Associate General Counsel, test scheduling and consideration of plant involve a significant increase in the operating conditions that may not be suitable probability or consequences of an accident Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., 40 Iverness Center Parkway, for performance of the required testing. The previously evaluated. testing frequency extension will not affect the 2. Does the proposed change create the Birmingham, AL 35242. ability of the components to mitigate any possibility of a new or different kind of NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. accident previously evaluated as the accident from any accident previously Markley. components are required to be operable evaluated? during the testing period extension. Response: No. Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Performance of inservice tests utilizing the The proposed change does not alter the Inc., Docket Nos. 50–424 and 50–425, allowances in OMN–20 will not significantly design or configuration of the plant. The Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 affect the reliability of the tested proposed change does not involve a physical and 2, Burke County, Georgia components. As a result, the availability of alteration of the plant; no new or different the affected components, as well as their kind of equipment will be installed. The Date of amendment request: July 28, ability to mitigate the consequences of proposed change does not alter the types of 2016. A publicly-available version is in accidents previously evaluated, is not inservice testing performed. In most cases, ADAMS under Accession No. affected. the frequency of inservice testing is ML16214A252. Therefore, the proposed change does not unchanged. However, the frequency of Description of amendment request: involve a significant increase in the testing would not result in a new or different probability or consequences of an accident kind of accident from any previously The amendments would revise the technical specifications (TSs) at the previously evaluated. evaluated since the testing methods are not 2. Does the proposed change create the altered. Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 possibility of a new or different kind of Therefore, the proposed change does not and 2, to eliminate the ‘‘lnservice accident from any accident previously create the possibility of a new or different Testing Program’’ from the TS 5.5, evaluated? kind of accident from any accident ‘‘Programs and Manuals,’’ section and to Response: No. previously evaluated. add a new defined term, ‘‘INSERVICE The proposed change does not alter the 3. Does the proposed change involve a TESTING PROGRAM,’’ to the TS 1.1, significant reduction in a margin of safety? design or configuration of the plant. The Response: No. ‘‘Definitions,’’ section. This request is proposed change does not involve a physical The proposed change eliminates some submitted in accordance with Technical alteration of the plant; no new or different requirements from the TS in lieu of Specifications Task Force (TSTF) kind of equipment will be installed. The requirements in the ASME Code, as modified Traveler TSTF–545, Revision 3, ‘‘TS proposed change does not alter the types of by use of Code Case OMN–20. Compliance lnservice Testing Program Removal & inservice testing performed. In most cases, with the ASME Code is required by 10 CFR the frequency of inservice testing is Clarify SR Usage Rule Application to unchanged. However, the frequency of 50.55a. The proposed change also allows Section 5.5 Testing.’’ inservice tests with frequencies greater than testing would not result in a new or different 2 years to be extended by 6 months to Basis for proposed no significant kind of accident from any previously facilitate test scheduling and consideration of hazards consideration determination: evaluated since the testing methods are not plant operating conditions that may not be As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the altered. suitable for performance of the required licensee has provided its analysis of the Therefore, the proposed change does not testing. The testing frequency extension will issue of no significant hazards create the possibility of a new or different not affect the ability of the components to consideration, which is presented kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. respond to an accident as the components are below: required to be operable during the testing 3. Does the proposed change involve a period extension. 1. Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? The proposed change will eliminate the significant increase in the probability or Response: No. existing TS SR 3.0.3 allowance to defer consequences of an accident previously The proposed change eliminates some performance of missed in service tests up to evaluated? requirements from the TS in lieu of the duration of the specified testing Response: No. requirements in the ASME Code, as modified frequency, and instead will require an The proposed change revises TS Chapter 5, by use of Code Case OMN–20. Compliance assessment of the missed test on equipment ‘‘Administrative Controls,’’ Section 5.5, with the ASME Code is required by 10 CFR operability. This assessment will consider ‘‘Programs and Manuals,’’ by eliminating the 50.55a. The proposed change also allows the effect on a margin of safety (equipment ‘‘lnservice Testing Program’’ specification. inservice tests with frequencies greater than operability). Should the component be Most requirements in the lnservice Testing 2 years to be extended by 6 months to inoperable, the Technical Specifications Program are removed, as they are duplicative facilitate test scheduling and consideration of provide actions to ensure that the margin of of requirements in the ASME OM [American plant operating conditions that may not be safety is protected. The proposed change also Society of Mechanical Engineers Operation suitable for performance of the required eliminates a statement that nothing in the and Maintenance] Code, as clarified by Code testing. The testing frequency extension will ASME Code should be construed to Case OMN–20, ‘‘lnservice Test Frequency.’’ not affect the ability of the components to supersede the requirements of any TS. The The remaining requirements in the Section respond to an accident as the components are NRC has determined that statement to be 5.5 IST [Inservice Testing] Program are required to be operable during the testing incorrect. However, elimination of the eliminated because the NRC has determined period extension. statement will have no effect on plant their inclusion in the TS is contrary to The proposed change will eliminate the operation or safety. regulations. A new defined term, existing TS SR 3.0.3 allowance to defer Therefore, the proposed change does not ‘‘INSERVICE TESTING PROGRAM,’’ is added performance of missed in service tests up to involve a significant reduction in a margin of to the TS, which references the requirements the duration of the specified testing safety. of 10 CFR 50.55a(f). frequency, and instead will require an

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Sep 26, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 66312 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2016 / Notices

assessment of the missed test on equipment under the special circumstances Exelon Generation Company, LLC, operability. This assessment will consider provision in 10 CFR 51.22(b) and has Docket Nos. 50–317 and 50–318, Calvert the effect on a margin of safety (equipment made a determination based on that Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 operability). Should the component be assessment, it is so indicated. and 2, Calvert County, Maryland inoperable, the Technical Specifications provide actions to ensure that the margin of For further details with respect to the Date of amendment request: safety is protected. The proposed change also action see (1) the applications for September 24, 2013, as supplemented eliminates a statement that nothing in the amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3) by letters dated February 9, March 11, ASME Code should be construed to the Commission’s related letter, Safety April 13, July 6, and August 13, 2015; supersede the requirements of any TS. The Evaluation and/or Environmental and February 24 and April 22, 2016. NRC has determined that statement to be Assessment as indicated. All of these Brief description of amendments: incorrect. However, elimination of the items can be accessed as described in These amendments modify the statement will have no effect on plant operating licenses and technical operation or safety. the ‘‘Obtaining Information and Therefore, the proposed change does not Submitting Comments’’ section of this specifications (TSs) to incorporate a involve a significant reduction in a margin of document. new fire protection licensing basis in safety. accordance with 10 CFR 50.48(c). The Arizona Public Service Company, et al., amendments authorize the transition of The NRC staff has reviewed the Docket Nos. STN 50–528, STN 50–529, the licensee’s fire protection program to licensee’s analysis and, based on this and STN 50–530, Palo Verde Nuclear a risk-informed, performance-based review, it appears that the three Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1, 2, and program based on the 2001 Edition of standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 3, Maricopa County, Arizona National Fire Protection Association satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff Date of application for amendments: Standard 805, ‘‘Performance-Based proposes to determine that the Standard for Fire Protection for Light amendment request involves no October 9, 2015, as supplemented by letter dated May 12, 2016. Water Reactor Electric Generating significant hazards consideration. Plants.’’ Attorney for licensee: Jennifer M. Brief description of amendments: The Date of issuance: August 30, 2016. Buettner, Associate General Counsel, amendments approve a revision to the Effective date: As of the date of Southern Nuclear Operating Company, emergency action levels from a scheme issuance and shall be implemented in Inc., 40 Inverness Center Parkway, based on Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) accordance with the schedule contained Birmingham, AL 35242. 99–01, Revision 5, ‘‘Methodology for in the revised paragraph 2.E. and page NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. Development of Emergency Action 12 of Appendix C, Additional Markley. Levels,’’ to a scheme provided in the Conditions to the Renewed Facility III. Notice of Issuance of Amendments subsequent Revision 6 of NEI 99–01. Operating Licenses. to Facility Operating Licenses and Date of issuance: September 8, 2016. Amendment Nos.: 318 and 296. A Combined Licenses Effective date: As of the date of publicly-available version is in ADAMS issuance and shall be implemented under Accession No. ML16175A359; During the period since publication of documents related to these amendments the last biweekly notice, the within 365 days from the date of issuance. are listed in the Safety Evaluation Commission has issued the following enclosed with the amendments. amendments. The Commission has Amendment Nos.: Unit 1—198; Unit Renewed Facility Operating License determined for each of these 2—198; Unit 3—198. A publicly- Nos. DPR–53 and DPR–69: Amendments amendments that the application available version is in ADAMS under revised the Renewed Facility Operating complies with the standards and Accession No. ML16180A109; Licenses and TSs. requirements of the Atomic Energy Act documents related to these amendments Date of initial notice in Federal of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the are listed in the Safety Evaluation Register: August 5, 2014 (79 FR 45488). Commission’s rules and regulations. enclosed with the amendments. The supplemental letters dated February The Commission has made appropriate Renewed Facility Operating License 9, March 11, April 13, July 6, and findings as required by the Act and the Nos. NPF–41, NPF–51, and NPF–74: The August 13, 2015; and February 24 and Commission’s rules and regulations in amendments revised the Operating April 22, 2016, provided additional 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in Licenses. information that clarified the the license amendment. Date of initial notice in Federal application, did not expand the scope of A notice of consideration of issuance Register: December 8, 2015 (80 FR the application as originally noticed, of amendment to facility operating 76318). The supplemental letter dated and did not change the NRC staff’s license or combined license, as May 12, 2016, provided additional original proposed no significant hazards applicable, proposed no significant information that clarified the consideration determination as hazards consideration determination, application, incorporated recent published in the Federal Register. and opportunity for a hearing in emergency preparedness frequently The Commission’s related evaluation connection with these actions, was asked questions, did not expand the of the amendment is contained in a published in the Federal Register as scope of the application as originally Safety Evaluation dated August 30, indicated. noticed, and did not change the staff’s 2016. Unless otherwise indicated, the original proposed no significant hazards No significant hazards consideration Commission has determined that these consideration determination as comments received: No. amendments satisfy the criteria for published in the Federal Register. categorical exclusion in accordance Exelon Generation Company, LLC, with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant The Commission’s related evaluation Docket Nos. 50–220 and 50–410, Nine to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental of the amendments is contained in a Mile Point Nuclear Station, Units 1 and impact statement or environmental Safety Evaluation dated September 8, 2, Oswego County, New York assessment need be prepared for these 2016. Date of amendment request: October amendments. If the Commission has No significant hazards consideration 8, 2015, as supplemented by letter dated prepared an environmental assessment comments received: No. April 7, 2016.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Sep 26, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2016 / Notices 66313

Brief description of amendment: The Date of initial notice in Federal Program,’’ to state that the program shall amendments modified the technical Register: November 24, 2015 (80 FR be in accordance with Nuclear Energy specifications (TSs) to allow for brief, 73237). The supplemental letters dated Institute (NEI) 94–01, Revision 3–A, inadvertent simultaneous opening of April 20 and July 15, 2016, provided ‘‘Industry Guideline for Implementing redundant secondary containment additional information that clarified the Performance-Based Option of 10 CFR personnel access doors during brief application, did not expand the scope of part 50, appendix J.’’ entry and exit conditions. the application as originally noticed, Date of issuance: August 30, 2016. Date of issuance: August 31, 2016. and did not change the staff’s original Effective date: As of the date of Effective date: As of the date of proposed no significant hazards issuance and shall be implemented issuance and shall be implemented consideration determination as within 60 days. within 60 days of issuance. published in the Federal Register. Amendment No.: 296. A publicly- Amendment Nos.: 223 (Unit 1) and The Commission’s related evaluation available version is in ADAMS under 157 (Unit 2). A publicly-available of the amendment is contained in a Accession No. ML16210A008; version is in ADAMS under Accession Safety Evaluation dated August 30, documents related to this amendment No. ML16197A486; documents related 2016. are listed in the Safety Evaluation to these amendments are listed in the No significant hazards consideration enclosed with the amendments. Safety Evaluation enclosed with the comments received: No. Renewed Facility Operating License No. DPR–49: The amendment revised amendments. NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC, Renewed Facility Operating License the Technical Specifications. Docket No. 50–331, Duane Arnold Federal Nos. DPR–63 and NPF–69: Amendments Date of initial notice in Energy Center (DAEC), Linn County, Register: October 27, 2015 (80 FR revised the Renewed Facility Operating Iowa Licenses and TSs. 65814). The supplemental letters dated Date of initial notice in Federal Date of amendment request: May 18, January 29, April 14, and May 31, 2016, Register: January 5, 2016 (81 FR 262). 2016. provided additional information that The supplemental letter dated April 7, Brief description of amendment: The clarified the application, did not expand 2016, provided additional information amendment revised the DAEC technical the scope of the application as originally that clarified the application, did not specifications (TSs) Section 2.1.1, noticed, and did not change the staff’s expand the scope of the application as ‘‘Reactor Core [Safety Limits],’’ to original proposed no significant hazards originally noticed, and did not change change the Safety Limit Minimum consideration determination as the staff’s original proposed no Critical Power Ratio (SLMCPR) for two published in the Federal Register. The Commission’s related evaluation significant hazards consideration recirculation loop operation and for of the amendment is contained in a determination as published in the single recirculation loop operation. The Safety Evaluation dated August 30, Federal Register. changes reflected the cycle-specific analysis. The amendment also removed 2016. The Commission’s related evaluation an outdated historical footnote from TS No significant hazards consideration of the amendment is contained in a Table 3.3.5.1–1. comments received: No. Safety Evaluation dated August 31, Date of issuance: September 12, 2016. NextEra Energy, Point Beach, LLC, 2016. Effective date: As of the date of Docket Nos. 50–266 and 50–301, Point No significant hazards consideration issuance and shall be implemented Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, comments received: No. within 60 days. Town of Two Creeks, Manitowoc Amendment No.: 297. A publicly- Florida Power & Light Company, et al., County, Wisconsin Docket Nos. 50–335 and 50–389, St. available version is in ADAMS under Lucie Plant Unit Nos. 1 and 2, St. Lucie Accession No. ML16211A514; Date of amendment request: June 26, County, Florida documents related to this amendment 2013, as supplemented by letters dated are listed in the Safety Evaluation September 16, 2013, July 29, August 28, Date of amendment request: August enclosed with the amendment. September 25, November 14, December 31, 2015, as supplemented by letters Renewed Facility Operating License 19, 2014; January 16, May 12, August dated April 20 and July 15, 2016. No. DPR–49: The amendment revised 26, 2015; and February 22, April 7, and Brief description of amendments: The the Technical Specifications. May 3, 2016. amendments revised the Technical Date of initial notice in Federal Brief description of amendments: The Specifications (TSs) consistent with Register: July 5, 2016 (81 FR 43665). amendments authorized the transition Technical Specification Task Force The Commission’s related evaluation of the Point Beach fire protection Traveler 422, Revision 2, ‘‘Change in of the amendment is contained in a program to a risk-informed, Technical Specifications End States (CE Safety Evaluation dated September 12, performance-based program based on NPSD–1186).’’ 2016. National Fire Protection Association Date of issuance: August 30, 2016. No significant hazards consideration Standard 805 (NFPA 805), Effective date: As of the date of comments received: No. ‘‘Performance-Based Standard for Fire issuance and shall be implemented Protection for Light Water Reactor NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC, within 60 days of issuance. Electric Generating Plants,’’ 2001 Docket No. 50–331, Duane Arnold Amendment Nos.: 234 and 184. A Edition, in accordance with 10 CFR Energy Center, Linn County, Iowa publicly-available version is in ADAMS 50.48(c). under Accession No. ML16210A374; Date of amendment request: August Date of issuance: September 8, 2016. documents related to these amendments 18, 2015, as supplemented by letters Effective date: As of the date of are listed in the Safety Evaluation dated January 29, April 14, and May 31, issuance and shall be implemented as enclosed with the amendments. 2016. described in the Transition License Renewed Facility Operating License Brief description of amendment: The Conditions. Nos. DPR–67 and NPF–16: Amendments amendment revised Technical Amendment Nos.: 256 and 260. A revised the Renewed Facility Operating Specification (TS) 5.5.12, ‘‘Primary publicly-available version is in ADAMS Licenses and TSs. Containment Leakage Rate Testing under Accession No. ML16196A093;

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Sep 26, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 66314 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2016 / Notices

documents related to these amendments consideration determination as FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For are listed in the Safety Evaluation published in the Federal Register. information regarding this Notice, enclosed with the amendments. The Commission’s related evaluation please contact Stacey Standridge at Renewed Facility Operating License of the amendment is contained in a National Nanotechnology Coordination Nos. DPR–24 and DPR–27: Amendments Safety Evaluation dated September 6, Office, by telephone (703) 292–8103 or revised the Facility Operating License 2016. email [email protected]. and Technical Specifications. No significant hazards consideration Additional information about the CORs Date of initial notice in Federal comments received: No. and their upcoming meetings is posted at http://us-eu.org/. Register: July 8, 2014 (79 FR 28580). Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day The supplemental letters dated of September 2016. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: There are September 16, 2013, July 29, August 28, For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. seven Communities of Research September 25, November 14, December Anne T. Boland, addressing complementary themes: 19, 2014; January 16, May 12, August Director, Division of Operating Reactor • Characterization 26, 2015; and February 22, April 7, and • May 3, 2016, provided additional Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Databases and Computational Regulation. Modeling for NanoEHS information that clarified the • application, did not expand the scope of [FR Doc. 2016–23097 Filed 9–26–16; 8:45 am] Exposure through Product Life • the application as originally noticed, BILLING CODE 7590–01–P Ecotoxicity and did not change the staff’s original • Human Toxicity proposed no significant hazards • Risk Assessment • consideration determination as OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND Risk Management and Control published in the Federal Register. TECHNOLOGY POLICY The CORs directly address Objectives The Commission’s related evaluation 4.1.4 (‘‘Participate in international of the amendments is contained in a U.S.-EU Communities of Research on efforts, particularly those aimed at Safety Evaluation dated September 8, Environmental, Health, and Safety generating [nanoEHS] best practices’’) 2016. Issues Related to Nanomaterials; and 4.2.3 (‘‘Participate in coordinated No significant hazards consideration Notice of Public Meetings international efforts focused on sharing comments received: No. data, guidance, and best practices for ACTION: Notice of public meeting. Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket No. environmental and human risk assessment and management’’) of the 50–391, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 2, SUMMARY: The National Nanotechnology 2014 National Nanotechnology Initiative Rhea County, Tennessee Coordination Office (NNCO), on behalf Strategic Plan, available at http:// of the Nanoscale Science, Engineering, Date of amendment request: www.nano.gov/node/1113. However, and Technology (NSET) Subcommittee December 15, 2015, as supplemented by the CORs are not envisioned to provide of the Committee on Technology, letters dated May 4, 2016, and June 1, any government agency with advice or National Science and Technology 2016. recommendations. Brief description of amendment: The Council (NSTC) and in collaboration with the European Commission, will Registration: Individuals wishing to amendment revised the Technical participate in any of the CORs should Specifications to allow implementation host meetings for the U.S.-EU Communities of Research (CORs) on the send the participant’s name, affiliation, of the F* (F-star) alternate repair and country of residence to criterion for steam generator tubes. topic of environmental, health, and safety issues related to nanomaterials [email protected] or mail the Date of issuance: September 6, 2016. information to Stacey Standridge, 4201 Effective date: As of the date of (nanoEHS) between the publication date of this Notice and September 30, 2017. Wilson Blvd., Stafford II, Suite 405, issuance and shall be implemented Arlington, VA 22230. NNCO will collect within 60 days of issuance. The CORs are a platform for scientists to develop a shared repertoire of email addresses from registrants to Amendment No.: 2. A publicly- ensure that they are added to the COR available version is in ADAMS under protocols and methods to overcome research gaps and barriers. The co- listserv(s) to receive meeting Accession No. ML16203A365; information and other updates relevant documents related to this amendment chairs for each COR will convene meetings and set meeting agendas with to the COR scope from other COR are listed in the Safety Evaluation members. Email addresses are submitted enclosed with the amendment. administrative support from the European Commission and the NNCO. on a completely voluntary basis. Facility Operating License No. NPF– Meeting Accommodations: DATES: 96: Amendment revised the Facility The CORs will hold multiple Individuals requiring special Operating License and Technical webinars and/or conference calls accommodation to access these public Specifications. between the publication date of this meetings should contact Stacey Date of initial notice in Federal Notice and September 30, 2017. Standridge via telephone at (703) 292– Register: February 16, 2016 (81 FR ADDRESSES: Teleconferences and web 8103 at least ten business days prior to 7844). The supplemental letters dated meetings for the CORs will take place each meeting so that appropriate May 4, 2016, and June 1, 2016, provided periodically between the publication arrangements can be made. additional information that clarified the date of this Notice and September 30, application, did not expand the scope of 2017. Meeting dates, call-in information, Ted Wackler, the application as originally noticed, and other COR updates will be posted Deputy Chief of Staff and Assistant Director. and did not change the staff’s original on the Community of Research page at [FR Doc. 2016–23245 Filed 9–26–16; 8:45 am] proposed no significant hazards http://us-eu.org/. BILLING CODE 3270–F6–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:08 Sep 26, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27SEN1.SGM 27SEN1 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES