Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Notices 18801 

Building 12, Room C100D. All non-U.S. 

citizens must fax a copy of their 

passport, and print or type their name, 

current address, citizenship, company 

affiliation (if applicable) to include 

address, telephone number, and their 

title, place of birth, date of birth, U.S. 

visa information to include type, 

number and expiration date, U.S. Social 

Security Number (if applicable), and 

place and date of entry into the U.S., to 

Ms. Tereda J. Frazier, Executive 

Secretary, Information Technology 

Infrastructure Committee, NASA 

Advisory Council, at e-mail 

tereda.j.frazier@nasa.gov or by 

telephone at (202) 358–2595 by no later 

than April 19, 2011. To expedite 

admittance, attendees with U.S. 

citizenship can provide identifying 

information 3 working days in advance 

by contacting Ms. Tereda J. Frazier via 

e-mail at tereda.j.frazier@nasa.gov or by 

telephone at 202–358–2595. Persons 

with disabilities who require assistance 

should indicate this. 

Dated: March 29, 2011. 

P. Diane Rausch, 

Advisory Committee Management Officer, 

National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7952 Filed 4–4–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7510–13–P 

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS 

BOARD 

Sunshine Act Meetings: April 2011 

TIME AND DATES: All meetings are held at 

2:30 p.m. 

Tuesday, April 5; 

Wednesday, April 6; 

Thursday, April 7; 

Tuesday, April 12; 

Wednesday, April 13; 

Thursday, April 14; 

Tuesday, April 19; 

Wednesday, April 20; 

Thursday, April 21; 

Tuesday, April 26; 

Wednesday, April 27; 

Thursday, April 28; 

PLACE: Board Agenda Room, No. 11820, 

1099 14th St., NW., Washington DC 

20570. 

STATUS: Closed. 

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Pursuant to 

§ 102.139(a) of the Board’s Rules and 

Regulations, the Board or a panel 

thereof will consider ‘‘the issuance of a 

subpoena, the Board’s participation in a 

civil action or proceeding or an 

arbitration, or the initiation, conduct, or 

disposition * * * of particular 

representation or unfair labor practice 

proceedings under section 8, 9, or 10 of 

the [National Labor Relations] Act, or 

any court proceedings collateral or 

ancillary thereto.’’ See also 5 U.S.C. 

552b(c)(10). 

DATED: April 1, 2011. 

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Lester A. Heltzer, Executive Secretary, 

(202) 273–1067. 

Lester A. Heltzer, 

Executive Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2011–8221 Filed 4–1–11; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 7545–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[NRC–2011–0071] 

Biweekly Notice; Applications and 

Amendments to Facility Operating 

Licenses Involving No Significant 

Hazards Considerations 

I. Background 

Pursuant to Section 189a. (2) of the 

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended 

(the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (the Commission or NRC) 

is publishing this regular biweekly 

notice. The Act requires the 

Commission publish notice of any 

amendments issued, or proposed to be 

issued and grants the Commission the 

authority to issue and make 

immediately effective any amendment 

to an operating license upon a 

determination by the Commission that 

such amendment involves no significant 

hazards consideration, notwithstanding 

the pendency before the Commission of 

a request for a hearing from any person. 

This biweekly notice includes all 

notices of amendments issued, or 

proposed to be issued from March 10, 

2011, to March 23, 2011. The last 

biweekly notice was published on 

March 22, 2011 (76 FR 16004). 

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of 

Amendments to Facility Operating 

Licenses, Proposed No Significant 

Hazards Consideration Determination, 

and Opportunity for a Hearing 

The Commission has made a 

proposed determination that the 

following amendment requests involve 

no significant hazards consideration. 

Under the Commission’s regulations in 

Title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (10 CFR), 50.92, this means 

that operation of the facility in 

accordance with the proposed 

amendment would not (1) involve a 

significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated; or (2) create the possibility of 

a new or different kind of accident from 

any accident previously evaluated; or 

(3) involve a significant reduction in a 

margin of safety. The basis for this 

proposed determination for each 

amendment request is shown below. 

The Commission is seeking public 

comments on this proposed 

determination. Any comments received 

within 30 days after the date of 

publication of this notice will be 

considered in making any final 

determination. 

Normally, the Commission will not 

issue the amendment until the 

expiration of 60 days after the date of 

publication of this notice. The 

Commission may issue the license 

amendment before expiration of the 60- 

day period provided that its final 

determination is that the amendment 

involves no significant hazards 

consideration. In addition, the 

Commission may issue the amendment 

prior to the expiration of the 30-day 

comment period should circumstances 

change during the 30-day comment 

period such that failure to act in a 

timely way would result, for example in 

derating or shutdown of the facility. 

Should the Commission take action 

prior to the expiration of either the 

comment period or the notice period, it 

will publish in the Federal Register a 

notice of issuance. Should the 

Commission make a final No Significant 

Hazards Consideration Determination, 

any hearing will take place after 

issuance. The Commission expects that 

the need to take this action will occur 

very infrequently. 

Written comments may be submitted 

by mail to the Chief, Rules, 

Announcements and Directives Branch 

(RADB), TWB–05–B01M, Division of 

Administrative Services, Office of 

Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 

0001, and should cite the publication 

date and page number of this Federal 

Register notice. Written comments may 

also be faxed to the RADB at 301–492– 

3446. Documents may be examined, 

and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC’s 

Public Document Room (PDR), located 

at One White Flint North, Room O1– 

F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), 

Rockville, Maryland 20852. 

Within 60 days after the date of 

publication of this notice, any person(s) 

whose interest may be affected by this 

action may file a request for a hearing 

and a petition to intervene with respect 

to issuance of the amendment to the 

subject facility operating license. 

Requests for a hearing and a petition for 

leave to intervene shall be filed in 

accordance with the Commission’s 

‘‘Rules of Practice for Domestic 

Licensing Proceedings’’ in 10 CFR part 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
18802 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Notices 

2. Interested person(s) should consult a 

current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is 

available at the Commission’s PDR, 

located at One White Flint North, Room 

O1–F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 

floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. 

Publicly available records will be 

accessible from the Agencywide 

Documents Access and Management 

System’s (ADAMS) Public Electronic 

Reading Room on the Internet at the 

NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/ 

reading-rm/adams.html. If a request for 

a hearing or petition for leave to 

intervene is filed by the above date, the 

Commission or a presiding officer 

designated by the Commission or by the 

Chief Administrative Judge of the 

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 

Panel, will rule on the request and/or 

petition; and the Secretary or the Chief 

Administrative Judge of the Atomic 

Safety and Licensing Board will issue a 

notice of a hearing or an appropriate 

order. 

As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a 

petition for leave to intervene shall set 

forth with particularity the interest of 

the petitioner in the proceeding, and 

how that interest may be affected by the 

results of the proceeding. The petition 

should specifically explain the reasons 

why intervention should be permitted 

with particular reference to the 

following general requirements: (1) The 

name, address, and telephone number of 

the requestor or petitioner; (2) the 

nature of the requestor’s/petitioner’s 

right under the Act to be made a party 

to the proceeding; (3) the nature and 

extent of the requestor’s/petitioner’s 

property, financial, or other interest in 

the proceeding; and (4) the possible 

effect of any decision or order which 

may be entered in the proceeding on the 

requestor’s/petitioner’s interest. The 

petition must also identify the specific 

contentions which the requestor/ 

petitioner seeks to have litigated at the 

proceeding. 

Each contention must consist of a 

specific statement of the issue of law or 

fact to be raised or controverted. In 

addition, the requestor/petitioner shall 

provide a brief explanation of the bases 

for the contention and a concise 

statement of the alleged facts or expert 

opinion which support the contention 

and on which the requestor/petitioner 

intends to rely in proving the contention 

at the hearing. The requestor/petitioner 

must also provide references to those 

specific sources and documents of 

which the petitioner is aware and on 

which the requestor/petitioner intends 

to rely to establish those facts or expert 

opinion. The petition must include 

sufficient information to show that a 

genuine dispute exists with the 

applicant on a material issue of law or 

fact. Contentions shall be limited to 

matters within the scope of the 

amendment under consideration. The 

contention must be one which, if 

proven, would entitle the requestor/ 

petitioner to relief. A requestor/ 

petitioner who fails to satisfy these 

requirements with respect to at least one 

contention will not be permitted to 

participate as a party. 

Those permitted to intervene become 

parties to the proceeding, subject to any 

limitations in the order granting leave to 

intervene, and have the opportunity to 

participate fully in the conduct of the 

hearing. 

If a hearing is requested, the 

Commission will make a final 

determination on the issue of no 

significant hazards consideration. The 

final determination will serve to decide 

when the hearing is held. If the final 

determination is that the amendment 

request involves no significant hazards 

consideration, the Commission may 

issue the amendment and make it 

immediately effective, notwithstanding 

the request for a hearing. Any hearing 

held would take place after issuance of 

the amendment. If the final 

determination is that the amendment 

request involves a significant hazards 

consideration, then any hearing held 

would take place before the issuance of 

any amendment. 

All documents filed in NRC 

adjudicatory proceedings, including a 

request for hearing, a petition for leave 

to intervene, any motion or other 

document filed in the proceeding prior 

to the submission of a request for 

hearing or petition to intervene, and 

documents filed by interested 

governmental entities participating 

under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in 

accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule 

(72 FR 49139, August 28, 2007). The EFiling process requires participants to 

submit and serve all adjudicatory 

documents over the internet, or in some 

cases to mail copies on electronic 

storage media. Participants may not 

submit paper copies of their filings 

unless they seek an exemption in 

accordance with the procedures 

described below. 

To comply with the procedural 

requirements of E-Filing, at least ten 

(10) days prior to the filing deadline, the 

participant should contact the Office of 

the Secretary by e-mail at 

hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone 

at 301–415–1677, to request (1) a digital 

identification (ID) certificate, which 

allows the participant (or its counsel or 

representative) to digitally sign 

documents and access the E-Submittal 

server for any proceeding in which it is 

participating; and (2) advise the 

Secretary that the participant will be 

submitting a request or petition for 

hearing (even in instances in which the 

participant, or its counsel or 

representative, already holds an NRCissued digital ID certificate. Based upon 

this information, the Secretary will 

establish an electronic docket for the 

hearing in this proceeding if the 

Secretary has not already established an 

electronic docket. 

Information about applying for a 

digital ID certificate is available on 

NRC’s public Web site at http:// 

www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/ 

apply-certificates.html. System 

requirements for accessing the ESubmittal server are detailed in NRC’s 

‘‘Guidance for Electronic Submission,’’ 

which is available on the agency’s 

public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/ 

site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants 

may attempt to use other software not 

listed on the Web site, but should note 

that the NRC’s E-Filing system does not 

support unlisted software, and the NRC 

Meta System Help Desk will not be able 

to offer assistance in using unlisted 

software. 

If a participant is electronically 

submitting a document to the NRC in 

accordance with the E-Filing rule, the 

participant must file the document 

using the NRC’s online, Web-based 

submission form. In order to serve 

documents through the Electronic 

Information Exchange System, users 

will be required to install a Web 

browser plug-in from the NRC Web site. 

Further information on the Web-based 

submission form, including the 

installation of the Web browser plug-in, 

is available on the NRC’s public Web 

site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. 

Once a participant has obtained a 

digital ID certificate and a docket has 

been created, the participant can then 

submit a request for hearing or petition 

for leave to intervene. Submissions 

should be in Portable Document Format 

(PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance 

available on the NRC public Web site at 

http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. A filing is considered 

complete at the time the documents are 

submitted through the NRC’s E-Filing 

system. To be timely, an electronic 

filing must be submitted to the E-Filing 

system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern 

Time on the due date. Upon receipt of 

a transmission, the E-Filing system 

time-stamps the document and sends 

the submitter an e-mail notice 

confirming receipt of the document. The 

E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access to the 

document to the NRC Office of the 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Notices 18803 

General Counsel and any others who 

have advised the Office of the Secretary 

that they wish to participate in the 

proceeding, so that the filer need not 

serve the documents on those 

participants separately. Therefore, 

applicants and other participants (or 

their counsel or representative) must 

apply for and receive a digital ID 

certificate before a hearing request/ 

petition to intervene is filed so that they 

can obtain access to the document via 

the E-Filing system. 

A person filing electronically using 

the agency’s adjudicatory E-Filing 

system may seek assistance by 

contacting the NRC Meta System Help 

Desk through the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link 

located on the NRC Web site at http:// 

www.nrc.gov/site-help/ 

e-submittals.html, by e-mail at 

MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a tollfree call at 1–866–672–7640. The NRC 

Meta System Help Desk is available 

between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern 

Time, Monday through Friday, 

excluding government holidays. 

Participants who believe that they 

have a good cause for not submitting 

documents electronically must file an 

exemption request, in accordance with 

10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper 

filing requesting authorization to 

continue to submit documents in paper 

format. Such filings must be submitted 

by: (1) First class mail addressed to the 

Office of the Secretary of the 

Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 

0001, Attention: Rulemaking and 

Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, 

express mail, or expedited delivery 

service to the Office of the Secretary, 

Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 

11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Maryland, 20852, Attention: 

Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. 

Participants filing a document in this 

manner are responsible for serving the 

document on all other participants. 

Filing is considered complete by firstclass mail as of the time of deposit in 

the mail, or by courier, express mail, or 

expedited delivery service upon 

depositing the document with the 

provider of the service. A presiding 

officer, having granted an exemption 

request from using E-Filing, may require 

a participant or party to use E-Filing if 

the presiding officer subsequently 

determines that the reason for granting 

the exemption from use of E-Filing no 

longer exists. 

Documents submitted in adjudicatory 

proceedings will appear in NRC’s 

electronic hearing docket which is 

available to the public at http:// 

ehd1.nrc.gov/EHD/, unless excluded 

pursuant to an order of the Commission, 

or the presiding officer. Participants are 

requested not to include personal 

privacy information, such as social 

security numbers, home addresses, or 

home phone numbers in their filings, 

unless an NRC regulation or other law 

requires submission of such 

information. With respect to 

copyrighted works, except for limited 

excerpts that serve the purpose of the 

adjudicatory filings and would 

constitute a Fair Use application, 

participants are requested not to include 

copyrighted materials in their 

submission. 

Petitions for leave to intervene must 

be filed no later than 60 days from the 

date of publication of this notice. Nontimely filings will not be entertained 

absent a determination by the presiding 

officer that the petition or request 

should be granted or the contentions 

should be admitted, based on a 

balancing of the factors specified in 10 

CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)–(viii). 

For further details with respect to this 

license amendment application, see the 

application for amendment which is 

available for public inspection at the 

Commission’s PDR, located at One 

White Flint North, Room O1–F21, 11555 

Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 

Maryland 20852. Publicly available 

records will be accessible from the 

ADAMS Public Electronic Reading 

Room on the Internet at the NRC Web 

site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ 

adams.html. Persons who do not have 

access to ADAMS or who encounter 

problems in accessing the documents 

located in ADAMS, should contact the 

NRC PDR Reference staff at 1–800–397– 

4209, 301–415–4737, or by e-mail to 

pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 

STP Nuclear Operating Company, 

Docket Nos. 50–498 and 50–499, South 

Texas Project, Units 1 and 2, Matagorda 

County, Texas 

Date of amendment request: 

November 22, 2010. 

Description of amendment request: 

The proposed change would revise the 

application of Risk-Managed Technical 

Specifications (RMTS) to Technical 

Specification (TS) 3.7.7, ‘‘Control Room 

Makeup and Cleanup Filtration 

System.’’ This change will correct a 

misapplication of the Configuration Risk 

Management Program (CRMP) that is 

currently allowed by the Specification. 

Basis for proposed no significant 

hazards consideration determination: 

As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the 

licensee has provided its analysis of the 

issue of no significant hazards 

consideration, which is presented 

below: 

1. Does the proposed change involve a 

significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change allows the 

Configuration Risk Management Program 

(CRMP) to be applied to Technical 

Specification (TS) 3.7.7, ‘‘Control Room 

Makeup and Cleanup Filtration Systems’’ for 

the condition where one train of CRHVAC 

[Control Room Makeup and Cleanup 

Filtration System] is inoperable only due to 

the unavailability of cooling. The proposed 

change extends the AOT [allowed outage 

time] from 72 hours to 7 days for the 

condition where two trains of CRHVAC are 

inoperable only due to the unavailability of 

cooling. The CRMP cannot be applied to the 

loss of two trains of cooling. 

The change does not involve a significant 

increase in the probability of an accident 

previously evaluated because the change 

does not involve a change to the plant or its 

modes of operation. In addition, the riskinformed configuration management program 

will be applied to effectively manage the 

availability of required structures, systems, 

and components to assure there is no 

significant increase in the probability of an 

accident. 

This proposed change does not increase 

the consequences of an accident because the 

design-basis mitigation function of the 

affected systems is not changed and the riskinformed configuration management program 

will be applied to effectively manage the 

availability of structures, systems, and 

components required to mitigate the 

consequences of an accident. 

Therefore, the proposed change does not 

involve a significant increase in the 

probability or consequences of an accident 

previously evaluated. 

2. Does the proposed change create the 

possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change allows the 

Configuration Risk Management Program 

(CRMP) to be applied to Technical 

Specification (TS) 3.7.7, ‘‘Control Room 

Makeup and Cleanup Filtration Systems’’ for 

the condition where one train of CRHVAC is 

inoperable only due to the unavailability of 

cooling. The proposed change extends the 

AOT from 72 hours to 7 days for the 

condition where two trains of CRHVAC are 

inoperable only due to the unavailability of 

cooling. The CRMP cannot be applied to the 

loss of two trains of cooling. 

The proposed change will not alter the 

plant configuration (no new or different type 

of equipment will be installed) or require any 

unusual operator actions. The proposed 

change will not alter the way any structure, 

system, or component functions, and will not 

significantly alter the manner in which the 

plant is operated. The response of the plant 

and the operators following an accident will 

not be different. In addition, the proposed 

change does not introduce any new failure 

modes. 

Therefore, the proposed change does not 

create the possibility of a new or different 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
18804 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Notices 

kind of accident from any previously 

evaluated. 

3. Does the proposed change involve a 

significant reduction to a margin of safety? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change allows the 

Configuration Risk Management Program 

(CRMP) to be applied to Technical 

Specification (TS) 3.7.7, ‘‘Control Room 

Makeup and Cleanup Filtration Systems’’ for 

the condition where one train of CRHVAC is 

inoperable only due to the unavailability of 

cooling. The proposed change extends the 

AOT from 72 hours to 7 days for the 

condition where two trains of CRHVAC are 

inoperable only due to the unavailability of 

cooling. The CRMP cannot be applied to the 

loss of two trains of cooling. 

The CRMP implements a risk-informed 

configuration risk management program in a 

manner to assure that adequate margins of 

safety are maintained. Application of the 

configuration risk management program to 

TS 3.7.7 complements the risk assessment 

required by the Maintenance Rule and 

effectively manages the risk for limiting 

condition for operation when the Control 

Room Makeup and Cleanup Filtration 

Systems are inoperable. 

The condition where two trains of 

CRHVAC are inoperable only due to 

unavailability of cooling is analogous to the 

condition where one train of CRHVAC is 

inoperable due to an adverse impact on the 

dose mitigation capability. The condition 

does not make the design basis accident any 

more probable. The safety function can still 

be achieved assuming no single failure 

during the AOT should a low probability 

DBA [design-basis accident] occur. Therefore, 

the extension of the AOT for the loss of two 

cooling trains to the same AOT as that for the 

loss of one train impacting the dose 

mitigation function does not significantly 

reduce the margin of safety. 

Therefore, the proposed change does not 

involve a significant reduction in a margin of 

safety. 

The NRC staff has reviewed the 

licensee’s analysis and, based on this 

review, it appears that the standards of 

10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, 

the NRC staff proposes to determine that 

the request for amendments involves no 

significant hazards consideration. 

Attorney for licensee: A. H. 

Gutterman, Esq., Morgan, Lewis & 

Bockius, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20004. 

NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. 

Markley. 

STP Nuclear Operating Company, 

Docket Nos. 50–498 and 50–499, South 

Texas Project, Units 1 and 2, Matagorda 

County, Texas 

Date of amendment request: 

December 21, 2010. 

Description of amendment request: 

The proposed change would revise 

Technical Specification (TS) 5.3.1, ‘‘Fuel 

Assemblies,’’ to add Optimized 

ZIRLOTM as an approved fuel rod 

cladding material, and TS 6.9.1.6, ‘‘Core 

Operating Limits Report (COLR),’’ to add 

a Westinghouse topical report to the 

analytical methods used to determine 

the core operating limits. This change is 

consistent with use of Optimized 

ZIRLOTM for fuel rod cladding material 

as described in Addendum 1–A to 

Westinghouse topical report WCAP– 

12610–P–A & CENPD–404–P–A, 

‘‘Optimized ZIRLOTM.’’ 

STP Nuclear Operating Company has 

also requested an exemption from the 

provisions of 10 CFR 50.46, ‘‘Acceptance 

criteria for emergency core cooling 

systems for light-water nuclear power 

reactors,’’ and Appendix K to 10 CFR 

Part 50, ‘‘ECCS Evaluation Models,’’ to 

allow fuel rods with Optimized 

ZIRLOTM cladding to be used in core 

reloads. 

Basis for proposed no significant 

hazards consideration determination: 

As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the 

licensee has provided its analysis of the 

issue of no significant hazards 

consideration, which is presented 

below: 

1. Does the proposed change involve a 

significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed Technical Specification 

change is to add Optimized ZIRLOTM to the 

allowable or approved cladding materials to 

be used at the South Texas Project. Adding 

Optimized ZIRLOTM cladding material does 

not increase the probability or consequences 

of an accident previously evaluated. 

Westinghouse topical report WCAP– 

12610–P–A & CENPD–404–P–A, Addendum 

1–A ‘‘Optimized ZIRLOTM,’’ July 2006, 

provides the details and results of material 

testing of Optimized ZIRLOTM compared to 

standard ZIRLOTM as well as the material 

properties to be used in various models and 

methodologies when analyzing Optimized 

ZIRLOTM. As the nuclear industry pursues 

longer operating cycles with increased fuel 

discharge burnup and fuel duty, the 

corrosion performance requirements for the 

nuclear fuel cladding become more 

demanding. Optimized ZIRLOTM was 

developed to meet these needs and provides 

a reduced corrosion rate while maintaining 

the benefits of mechanical strength and 

resistance to accelerated corrosion from 

abnormal chemistry conditions. In addition, 

fuel rod internal pressures (resulting from the 

increased fuel duty, use of integral fuel 

burnable absorbers, and corrosion/ 

temperature feedback effects) have become 

more limiting with respect to fuel rod design 

criteria. Reducing the associated corrosion 

buildup and thus minimizing temperature 

feedback effects, provides additional margin 

to the fuel rod internal pressure design 

criterion. Therefore, adding Optimized 

ZIRLOTM to the approved fuel rod cladding 

materials does not significantly increase the 

probability or consequences of an accident 

previously evaluated. 

The NRC allows Optimized ZIRLOTM to be 

used as fuel cladding material in 

Westinghouse-fueled reactors provided that 

licensees ensure compliance with the 

conditions and limitations set forth within 

NRC Safety Evaluation for the topical report. 

The conditions and limitations are the 

current requirements and confirmation of 

these conditions is required as part of the 

core reload process. 

2. Does the proposed change create the 

possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

Optimized ZIRLO TM provides a reduced 

fuel cladding corrosion rate while 

maintaining the benefits of mechanical 

strength and resistance to accelerated 

corrosion from abnormal chemistry 

conditions. The fuel rod design bases are 

established to satisfy the general and specific 

safety criteria addressed in UFSAR [Updated 

Final Safety Analysis Report] Chapter 15, 

Accident Analyses and in Technical 

Specifications. Fuel rods are designed to 

prevent excessive fuel temperatures, 

excessive internal rod gas pressures due to 

fission gas releases, and excessive cladding 

stresses and strains. WCAP–12610–P–A & 

CENPD–404–P–A, Addendum 1–A 

‘‘Optimized ZIRLO TM,’’ July 2006, provides 

the details and results of material testing of 

Optimized ZIRLO TM compared to standard 

ZIRLO TM as well as the material properties 

to be used in various models and 

methodologies when analyzing Optimized 

ZIRLO TM. The original design-basis 

requirements are maintained. Therefore, the 

change in material does not create the 

possibility of an accident or malfunction not 

previously evaluated. 

3. Does the proposed change involve a 

significant reduction in a margin of safety? 

Response: No. 

The cladding material used in the fuel rods 

is designed and tested to prevent excessive 

fuel temperatures, excessive internal rod gas 

pressure due to fission gas releases, and 

excessive cladding stresses and strains. 

Optimized ZIRLO TM was developed to meet 

these needs and provides a reduced corrosion 

rate while maintaining the benefits of 

mechanical strength and resistance to 

accelerated corrosion from abnormal 

chemistry conditions. Westinghouse topical 

report WCAP–12610–P–A & CENPD–404–P– 

A, ‘‘Optimized ZIRLO TM,’’ July 2006, 

provides the details and results of material 

testing of Optimized ZIRLO TM compared to 

standard ZIRLO TM as well as the material 

properties to be used in various models and 

methodologies when analyzing Optimized 

ZIRLO TM. The NRC approved use of 

Optimized ZIRLO TM fuel cladding material 

as detailed in the Safety Evaluation. The 

original design-basis requirements are 

maintained. 

The change in material does not 

significantly reduce margin required to 

preclude or reduce the effects of an accident 

or malfunction previously evaluated in the 

UFSAR. 

The NRC staff has reviewed the 

licensee’s analysis and, based on this 

review, it appears that the standards of 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Notices 18805 

10 CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, 

the NRC staff proposes to determine that 

the request for amendments involves no 

significant hazards consideration. 

Attorney for licensee: A. H. 

Gutterman, Esq., Morgan, Lewis & 

Bockius, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, 

NW., Washington, DC 20004. 

NRC Branch Chief: Michael T. 

Markley. 

Notice of Issuance of Amendments to 

Facility Operating Licenses 

During the period since publication of 

the last biweekly notice, the 

Commission has issued the following 

amendments. The Commission has 

determined for each of these 

amendments that the application 

complies with the standards and 

requirements of the Atomic Energy Act 

of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the 

Commission’s rules and regulations. 

The Commission has made appropriate 

findings as required by the Act and the 

Commission’s rules and regulations in 

10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in 

the license amendment. 

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of 

Amendment to Facility Operating 

License, Proposed No Significant 

Hazards Consideration Determination, 

and Opportunity for A Hearing in 

connection with these actions was 

published in the Federal Register as 

indicated. 

Unless otherwise indicated, the 

Commission has determined that these 

amendments satisfy the criteria for 

categorical exclusion in accordance 

with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant 

to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental 

impact statement or environmental 

assessment need be prepared for these 

amendments. If the Commission has 

prepared an environmental assessment 

under the special circumstances 

provision in 10 CFR 51.22(b) and has 

made a determination based on that 

assessment, it is so indicated. 

For further details with respect to the 

action see (1) The applications for 

amendment, (2) the amendment, and (3) 

the Commission’s related letter, Safety 

Evaluation and/or Environmental 

Assessment as indicated. All of these 

items are available for public inspection 

at the Commission’s Public Document 

Room (PDR), located at One White Flint 

North, Room O1–F21, 11555 Rockville 

Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 

20852. Publicly available records will be 

accessible from the Agencywide 

Documents Access and Management 

System (ADAMS) Public Electronic 

Reading Room on the internet at the 

NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/ 

reading-rm/adams.html. If you do not 

have access to ADAMS or if there are 

problems in accessing the documents 

located in ADAMS, contact the PDR 

Reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301– 

415–4737 or by e-mail to 

pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, LLC, 

Docket No. 50–318, Calvert Cliffs 

Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2, Calvert 

County, Maryland 

Date of application for amendment: 

October 4, 2010, as supplemented by 

letter dated December 9, 2010. 

Brief description of amendment: The 

amendment will revise Technical 

Specification 5.5.16, ‘‘Containment 

Leakage Rate Testing Program,’’ to allow 

a one-time 5-year extension of the 

containment Integrated leak rate test 

(CILRT) interval from 10 to 15 years. 

This will require the licensee to perform 

its next CILRT no later than May 1, 

2016. 

Date of issuance: March 22, 2011. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance to be implemented within 45 

days. 

Amendment No.: 274. 

Renewed License No. DPR–69: 

Amendment revised the License and 

Technical Specifications. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: January 11, 2011 (76 FR 1646). 

The letter dated December 9, 2010, 

provided additional information that 

clarified the application, did not expand 

the scope of the application as originally 

noticed, and did not change the staff’s 

original proposed no significant hazards 

consideration determination as 

published in the Federal Register. 

The Commission’s related evaluation 

of the amendment is contained in a 

Safety Evaluation dated March 22, 2011. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket 

Nos. 50–269, 50–270, and 50–287, 

Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 

3, Oconee County, South Carolina 

Date of application of amendments: 

March 17, 2010, as supplemented 

January 14, 2011. 

Brief description of amendments: The 

amendments revised the Technical 

Specifications (TSs) to adopt Technical 

Specification Task Force (TSTF)—425, 

Revision 3, ‘‘Relocate Surveillance 

Frequencies to Licensee Control—Risk 

Informed TSTF Initiative 5b’’. When 

implemented, TSTF–425 Revision 3 

relocates specific periodic frequencies 

of TSs surveillances to a licenseecontrolled program, the Surveillance 

Frequency Control Program, and will 

provide requirements for the new 

program in the Administrative Controls 

section of TSs. 

Date of Issuance: March 21, 2011. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance and shall be implemented 

within 180 days from the date of 

issuance. 

Amendment Nos.: Unit 1–372, Unit 

2–374, and Unit 3–373. 

Renewed Facility Operating License 

Nos. DPR–38, DPR–47, and DPR–55: 

Amendments revised the licenses and 

the technical specifications. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: September 7, 2010 (75 FR 

54393). The supplement dated January 

14, 2011, provided additional 

information that clarified the 

application, did not expand the scope of 

the application as originally noticed, 

and did not change the staff’s original 

proposed no significant hazards 

consideration determination. 

The Commission’s related evaluation 

of the amendments is contained in a 

Safety Evaluation dated March 21, 2011. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

Energy Northwest, Docket No. 50–397, 

Columbia Generating Station, Benton 

County, Washington 

Date of amendment request: March 

29, 2010, as supplemented by letter 

dated January 14, 2011. 

Brief description of amendment: The 

amendment revised Technical 

Specification (TS) 3.3.6.1, ‘‘Primary 

Containment Isolation Instrumentation,’’ 

by deleting channel check Surveillance 

Requirement 3.3.6.1.1 from TS Table 

3.3.6.1–1, ‘‘Primary Containment 

Isolation Instrumentation,’’ for the 

traversing in-core probe (TIP) isolation 

instrumentation. 

Date of issuance: March 18, 2011. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance and shall be implemented 

within 30 days of issuance. 

Amendment No.: 220. 

Facility Operating License No. NPF– 

21: Amendment revised the Facility 

Operating License and Technical 

Specifications. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: June 1, 2010 (75 FR 30444). 

The supplemental letter dated January 

14, 2011, provided additional 

information that clarified the 

application, did not expand the scope of 

the application as originally noticed, 

and did not change the staff’s original 

proposed no significant hazards 

consideration determination as 

published in the Federal Register. 

The Commission’s related evaluation 

of the amendment is contained in a 

Safety Evaluation dated March 18, 2011. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
18806 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Notices 

Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50– 

382, Waterford Steam Electric Station, 

Unit 3, St. Charles Parish, Louisiana 

Date of amendment request: February 

22, 2010, as supplemented by letters 

dated June 8 and August 12, 2010, and 

January 4 and March 7, 2011. 

Brief description of amendment: The 

amendment added valve SI–4052A 

(Reactor Coolant Loop (RCL) 2 

Shutdown Cooling (SDC) suction inside 

containment bypass isolation) and valve 

SI–4052B (RCL 1 SDC suction inside 

containment bypass isolation) to 

Technical Specification Table 3.4–1, 

‘‘Reactor Coolant System Pressure 

Isolation Valves.’’ This bypass line 

equalizes the SDC system pressure 

downstream of valve SI–405A (RCL 2 

SDC suction inside containment 

isolation) and valve SI–405B (RCL 1 

SDC suction inside containment 

isolation) in order to minimize the 

pressure transient in the system when 

valves SI–405A(B) are opened. 

Date of issuance: March 23, 2011. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance and shall be implemented 

prior to Mode 4 following refueling 

outage 17. 

Amendment No.: 233. 

Facility Operating License No. NPF– 

38: The amendment revised the Facility 

Operating License and Technical 

Specifications. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: April 20, 2010 (75 FR 20633). 

The supplemental letters dated June 8 

and August 12, 2010, and January 4 and 

March 7, 2011, provided additional 

information that clarified the 

application, did not expand the scope of 

the application as originally noticed, 

and did not change the staff’s original 

proposed no significant hazards 

consideration determination as 

published in the Federal Register. 

The Commission’s related evaluation 

of the amendment is contained in a 

Safety Evaluation dated March 23, 2011. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC, 

Docket No. 50–220, Nine Mile Point 

Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (NMP1), Oswego 

County, New York 

Date of application for amendment: 

March 18, 2010. 

Brief description of amendment: The 

amendment revises the NMP1 Technical 

Specifications (TSs) for snubbers by 

removing TS 3⁄4.6.4, ‘‘Shock Suppressors 

(Snubbers),’’ relocating these 

requirements to a licensee-controlled 

document, and adding a new limiting 

condition for operation, LCO 3.0.8, 

related to snubbers. In addition, the TS 

Table of Contents is revised to reflect 

these changes. The addition of LCO 

3.0.8 is consistent with the industry 

Technical Specification Task Force 

(TSTF) Traveler TSTF 372–A, Revision 

4, ‘‘Addition of LCO 3.0.8, Inoperability 

of Snubbers.’’ A notice of the TSTF– 

372–A, Revision 4 TS improvement was 

published in the Federal Register on 

May 4, 2005 (70 FR 23252) as part of the 

Consolidated Line Item Improvement 

Process. 

Date of issuance: March 10, 2011. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance to be implemented within 60 

days. 

Amendment No.: 207. 

Renewed Facility Operating License 

No. DPR–63: The amendment revises 

the License and TSs. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: July 13, 2010 (75 FR 39979). 

The Commission’s related evaluation 

of the amendment is contained in a 

Safety Evaluation dated March 10, 2011. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC, 

Docket No. 50–220, Nine Mile Point 

Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1 (NMP1), 

Oswego County, New York 

Date of application for amendment: 

March 22, 2010. 

Brief description of amendment: The 

amendment revises the NMP1 Technical 

Specifications (TSs) Surveillance 

Requirement (SR) 4.3.7.b. by modifying 

the frequency of this SR from ‘‘at least 

once per operating cycle’’ to ‘‘following 

maintenance that could result in nozzle 

blockage.’’ Additionally, the SR is 

revised to be more reflective of the 

Standard TS SR by deleting references 

to the type of test (e.g., air) performed 

and deleting references to the spray 

headers. 

Date of issuance: March 16, 2011. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance to be implemented within 60 

days. 

Amendment No.: 208. 

Renewed Facility Operating License 

No. DPR–63: The amendment revises 

the License and TSs. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: July 13, 2010 (75 FR 39980). 

The Commission’s related evaluation 

of the amendment is contained in a 

Safety Evaluation dated March 16, 2011. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50–272 

and 50–311, Salem Nuclear Generating 

Station, Unit 1 and 2, Salem County, 

New Jersey 

Date of application for amendments: 

March 23, 2010, as supplemented on 

November 19, 2010, January 31, 2011, 

and February 23, 2011. 

Brief description of amendments: The 

amendments modify the Technical 

Specifications (TSs) by relocating 

specific surveillance frequencies to a 

licensee-controlled program. The 

changes are based on Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission-approved TS 

Task Force (TSTF) change TSTF–425, 

Revision 3, ‘‘Relocate Surveillance 

Frequencies to Licensee Control— 

RITSTF [Risk-Informed TSTF] Initiative 

5b.’’ 

Date of issuance: March 21, 2011. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance, to be implemented within 120 

days. 

Amendment Nos.: 299 and 282. 

Facility Operating License Nos. DPR– 

70 and DPR–75: The amendments 

revised the TSs and the Facility 

Operating Licenses. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: June 15, 2010 (75 FR 33843). 

The letters dated November 19, 2010, 

January 31, 2011, and February 23, 

2011, provided clarifying information 

that did not change the initial proposed 

no significant hazards consideration 

determination or expand the application 

beyond the scope of the original Federal 

Register notice. 

The Commission’s related evaluation 

of the amendments is contained in a 

Safety Evaluation dated March 21, 2011. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, 

Inc., Docket Nos. 50–424 and 50–425, 

Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 

and 2, Burke County, Georgia 

Date of application for amendments: 

November 23, 2010. 

Brief description of amendments: The 

amendments revised the Technical 

Specifications (TSs) 5.5.9, ‘‘Steam 

Generator (SG) Program,’’ to exclude 

portions of the tube below the top of the 

SG tubesheet from periodic SG tube 

inspection for Unit 1 during Refueling 

Outage 16 and the subsequent operating 

cycle and for Unit 2 during Refueling 

Outage 15 and the subsequent operating 

cycle. In addition, this amendment 

revised TS 5.6.10, ‘‘Steam Generator 

Tube Inspection Report,’’ to remove the 

reference to previous interim alternate 

repair criteria and provide reporting 

requirements specific to the temporary 

alternate repair criteria. 

Date of issuance: March 14, 2011. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance and shall be implemented 

within 30 days from the date of 

issuance. 

Amendment Nos.: Unit 1–160 and 

Unit 2–142. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 65 / Tuesday, April 5, 2011 / Notices 18807 

Facility Operating License Nos. NPF– 

68 and NPF–81: Amendments revised 

the licenses and the technical 

specifications. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: January 4, 2011 (76 FR 388). 

The Commission’s related evaluation 

of the amendments is contained in a 

Safety Evaluation dated March 14, 2011. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

STP Nuclear Operating Company, 

Docket Nos. 50–498 and 50–499, South 

Texas Project, Units 1 and 2, Matagorda 

County, Texas 

Date of amendment request: May 18, 

2010, as supplemented by letter dated 

October 5, 2010. 

Brief description of amendments: The 

amendments eliminated the Residual 

Heat Removal (RHR) system design 

criterion for diversity among the three 

Reactor Coolant System pressure 

transmitters that generate interlocks for 

three series-pairs of RHR suction 

isolation valves. The change allows 

similarly qualified pressure transmitters 

to be used in more than one RHR train 

as necessary regardless of manufacturer 

of the transmitters. The revision is 

incorporated in the Updated Final 

Safety Analysis Report for South Texas 

Project, Units 1 and 2. 

Date of issuance: March 22, 2011. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance and shall be implemented 

within 60 days of issuance. 

Amendment Nos.: Unit 1–194; Unit 

2–182. 

Facility Operating License Nos. NPF– 

76 and NPF–80: The amendments 

revised the Facility Operating Licenses 

and Updated Final Safety Analysis 

Report. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: September 21, 2010 (75 FR 

57528). The supplemental letter dated 

October 5, 2010, provided additional 

information that clarified the 

application, did not expand the scope of 

the application as originally noticed, 

and did not change the staff’s original 

proposed no significant hazards 

consideration determination as 

published in the Federal Register. 

The Commission’s related evaluation 

of the amendments is contained in a 

Safety Evaluation dated March 22, 2011. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day 

of March 2011. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Joseph G. Giitter, 

Director, Division of Operating Reactor 

Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 2011–7740 Filed 4–4–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[NRC–2010–0073] 

Proposed Generic Communication; 

Licensee Justification of Long-Term 

Surveillance Charge 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of opportunity for public 

comment. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is proposing to issue 

a regulatory issue summary (RIS) to reaffirm its existing interpretation of the 

regulatory policy regarding the scope 

and corresponding dollar amount of the 

long-term surveillance charge (LTSC) to 

be paid to the general treasury of the 

United States, or to an appropriate State 

agency. This LTSC is paid prior to the 

transfer of title to a uranium mill, 

covered by Title II of the Uranium Mill 

Tailings Radiation Control Act 

(UMTRCA) of 1978 (UMTRCA Title II 

site), to the long-term custodian for 

long-term care and license termination. 

This Federal Register notice is available 

through the NRC’s Agencywide 

Documents Access and Management 

System (ADAMS) under accession 

number ML102080569. 

DATES: Comment period expires May 5, 

2011. Comments submitted after this 

date will be considered if it is practical 

to do so, but assurance of consideration 

cannot be given except for comments 

received on or before this date. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any one of the following methods. 

Please include Docket ID NRC–2011– 

0073 in the subject line of your 

comments. Comments submitted in 

writing or in electronic form will be 

posted on the NRC website and on the 

Federal rulemaking website 

Regulations.gov. Because your 

comments will not be edited to remove 

any identifying or contact information, 

the NRC cautions you against including 

any information in your submission that 

you do not want to be publicly 

disclosed. 

The NRC requests that any party 

soliciting or aggregating comments 

received from other persons for 

submission to the NRC inform those 

persons that the NRC will not edit their 

comments to remove any identifying or 

contact information, and therefore, they 

should not include any information in 

their comments that they do not want 

publicly disclosed. 

Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and search 

for documents filed under Docket ID 

NRC–2011–0073. Address questions 

about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher 

301–492–3668; e-mail 

Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. 

Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, 

Chief, Rules, Announcements, and 

Directives Branch (RADB), Office of 

Administration, Mail Stop: TWB–05– 

B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 

0001, or by fax to RADB at 301–492– 

3446. 

You can access publicly available 

documents related to this notice using 

the following methods: 

NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR): 

The public may examine and have 

copied for a fee publicly available 

documents at the NRC’s PDR, Room O1 

F21, One White Flint North, 11555 

Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 

20852. 

NRC’s Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System 

(ADAMS): Publicly available documents 

created or received at the NRC are 

available electronically at the NRC’s 

Electronic Reading Room at http:// 

www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. 

From this page, the public can gain 

entry into ADAMS, which provides text 

and image files of NRC’s public 

documents. If you do not have access to 

ADAMS or if there are problems in 

accessing the documents located in 

ADAMS, contact the NRC’s PDR 

reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301– 

415–4737, or by e-mail to 

pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 

Federal Rulemaking Web site: Public 

comments and supporting materials 

related to this notice can be found at 

http://www.regulations.gov by searching 

on Docket ID: NRC–2011–0073. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Roman A. Przygodzki at 301–415–5143 

or by e-mail at 

roman.przygodzki@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Draft Regulatory Issue Summary 2010– 

XX, ‘‘Licensee Justification of LongTerm Surveillance Charge’’ 

Addressees 

All holders of operating licenses for 

conventional or heap leach uranium 

recovery facilities, all holders of 

licenses for conventional or heap leach 

uranium recovery facilities in 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES