20 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2019 / Notices 

extension for the authority to conduct 

the information collection request (ICR) 

titled, ‘‘Required Elements for 

Submission of the Unified or Combined 

State Plan and Plan Modifications under 

the Workforce Innovation and 

Opportunity Act.’’ This comment 

request is part of continuing 

Departmental efforts to reduce 

paperwork and respondent burden in 

accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). 

DATES: Consideration will be given to all 

written comments received by March 4, 

2019. 

ADDRESSES: A copy of this ICR with 

applicable supporting documentation; 

including a description of the likely 

respondents, proposed frequency of 

response, and estimated total burden 

may be obtained free by contacting Sean 

Fox by telephone at 202–693–2946, TTY 

1–877–889–5627 (these are not toll-free 

numbers), or by email at fox.sean@

dol.gov. Submit written comments 

about, or requests for a copy of, this ICR 

by mail or courier to the U.S. 

Department of Labor, Employment and 

Training Administration, Office of 

Workforce Investment, 200 Constitution 

Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20210; by 

email: WIOA.PLAN@dol.gov or by Fax at 

202–693–3817. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sean Fox by telephone 202.693.2946 

(this is not a toll-free number) or by 

email at fox.sean@dol.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOL, as 

part of continuing efforts to reduce 

paperwork and respondent burden, 

conducts a pre-clearance consultation 

program to provide the general public 

and Federal agencies an opportunity to 

comment on proposed and/or 

continuing collections of information 

before submitting them to the OMB for 

final approval. This program helps to 

ensure requested data can be provided 

in the desired format, reporting burden 

(time and financial resources) is 

minimized, collection instruments are 

clearly understood, and the impact of 

collection requirements can be properly 

assessed. 

This ICR collects the required 

information for the submission of WIOA 

State Plans and Modifications. The 

information covered includes the State’s 

strategic focus for its public workforce 

system and then several key items for 

operationalizing the strategic goals. 

Information in the WIOA State Plan 

includes an overview of the State’s 

governance structure, resources, 

programs, career pathways, and sector 

strategy initiatives. The ICR also 

includes assurances that the WIOA 

program in the State is compliant with 

statutory and regulatory requirements. 

In February 2016, OMB approved the 

Information Collection Request (ICR), 

OMB control number 1205–0522, that 

allows the Department of Labor and 

Department of Education (the 

Departments) to collect State Plans 

required by the Workforce Innovation 

and Opportunity Act (WIOA). OMB 

granted approval for the ICR through 

September of 2019. U.S.C. 3101 (The 

Workforce Innovation and Opportunity 

Act) authorizes this information 

collection. 

This information collection is subject 

to the PRA. A Federal agency generally 

cannot conduct or sponsor a collection 

of information, and the public is 

generally not required to respond to an 

information collection, unless it is 

approved by OMB under the PRA and 

displays a currently valid OMB Control 

Number. In addition, notwithstanding 

any other provisions of law, no person 

shall generally be subject to penalty for 

failing to comply with a collection of 

information that does not display a 

valid Control Number. See 5 CFR 

1320.5(a) and 1320.6. 

Interested parties are encouraged to 

provide comments to the contact shown 

in the ADDRESSES section. Comments 

must be written to receive 

consideration, and they will be 

summarized and included in the request 

for OMB approval of the final ICR. In 

order to help ensure appropriate 

consideration, comments should 

mention OMB control number 1205– 

0522. 

Submitted comments will also be a 

matter of public record for this ICR and 

posted on the internet, without 

redaction. DOL encourages commenters 

not to include personally identifiable 

information, confidential business data, 

or other sensitive statements/ 

information in any comments. 

DOL is particularly interested in 

comments that: 

• Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; 

• Evaluate the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; 

• Enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

• Minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including through the 

use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology, 

e.g., permitting electronic submission of 

responses. 

Agency: DOL–ETA. 

Type of Review: Extension without 

Changes. 

Title of Collection: Required Elements 

for Submission of the Unified or 

Combined State Plan and Plan 

Modifications under the Workforce 

Innovation and Opportunity Act. 

Form: None. 

OMB Control Number: 1205–0522. 

Affected Public: State and local 

workforce development board members, 

chief local elected officials, job-seekers, 

and employers. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

38. For the last version of this ICR, we 

listed 38 respondents. In this extension 

request, we retain the calculation for 38 

respondents. 

Frequency: Every 2 years (an initial 

Plan and 2-year modification as 

needed). 

Total Estimated Annual Responses: 

38. 

Estimated Average Time per 

Response: 214 hours. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 8,136 hours. 

Total Estimated Annual Other Cost 

Burden: $388,819. 

Authority: 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A). 

Molly E. Conway, 

Acting Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2018–28358 Filed 12–31–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–30–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[NRC–2018–0287] 

Biweekly Notice; Applications and 

Amendments to Facility Operating 

Licenses and Combined Licenses 

Involving No Significant Hazards 

Considerations 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Biweekly notice. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Atomic 

Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the 

Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is publishing this 

regular biweekly notice. The Act 

requires the Commission to publish 

notice of any amendments issued, or 

proposed to be issued, and grants the 

Commission the authority to issue and 

make immediately effective any 

amendment to an operating license or 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2019 / Notices 21 

combined license, as applicable, upon a 

determination by the Commission that 

such amendment involves no significant 

hazards consideration, notwithstanding 

the pendency before the Commission of 

a request for a hearing from any person. 

This biweekly notice includes all 

notices of amendments issued, or 

proposed to be issued, from December 4, 

2018, to December 14, 2018. The last 

biweekly notice was published on 

December 18, 2018. 

DATES: Comments must be filed by 

February 1, 2019. A request for a 

hearing must be filed by March 4, 2019. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any of the following methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking website: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and search 

for Docket ID NRC–2018–0287. Address 

questions about Docket IDs in 

Regulations.gov to Krupskaya Castellon; 

telephone: 301–287–9221; email: 

Krupskaya.Castellon@nrc.gov. For 

technical questions, contact the 

individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

document. 

• Mail comments to: May Ma, Office 

of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN–7– 

A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 

0001. 

For additional direction on obtaining 

information and submitting comments, 

see ‘‘Obtaining Information and 

Submitting Comments’’ in the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kay 

Goldstein, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 

0001; telephone: 301–415–1506, 

Kay.Goldstein@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Obtaining Information and 

Submitting Comments 

A. Obtaining Information 

Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2018– 

0287, facility name, unit number(s), 

plant docket number, application date, 

and subject when contacting the NRC 

about the availability of information for 

this action. You may obtain publiclyavailable information related to this 

action by any of the following methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking website: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and search 

for Docket ID NRC–2018–0287. 

• NRC’s Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System 

(ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable documents online in the 

ADAMS Public Documents collection at 

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

adams.html. To begin the search, select 

‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For 

problems with ADAMS, please contact 

the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) 

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

415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@

nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number 

for each document referenced (if it is 

available in ADAMS) is provided the 

first time that it is mentioned in this 

document. 

• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and 

purchase copies of public documents at 

the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One 

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 

Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. 

B. Submitting Comments 

Please include Docket ID NRC–2018– 

0287, facility name, unit number(s), 

plant docket number, application date, 

and subject in your comment 

submission. 

The NRC cautions you not to include 

identifying or contact information that 

you do not want to be publicly 

disclosed in your comment submission. 

The NRC will post all comment 

submissions at http://www.regulations. 

gov as well as enter the comment 

submissions into ADAMS. The NRC 

does not routinely edit comment 

submissions to remove identifying or 

contact information. 

If you are requesting or aggregating 

comments from other persons for 

submission to the NRC, then you should 

inform those persons not to include 

identifying or contact information that 

they do not want to be publicly 

disclosed in their comment submission. 

Your request should state that the NRC 

does not routinely edit comment 

submissions to remove such information 

before making the comment 

submissions available to the public or 

entering the comment into ADAMS. 

II. Background 

Pursuant to Section 189a.(2) of the 

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended 

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

Commission (NRC) is publishing this 

regular biweekly notice. The Act 

requires the Commission to publish 

notice of any amendments issued, or 

proposed to be issued, and grants the 

Commission the authority to issue and 

make immediately effective any 

amendment to an operating license or 

combined license, as applicable, upon a 

determination by the Commission that 

such amendment involves no significant 

hazards consideration, notwithstanding 

the pendency before the Commission of 

a request for a hearing from any person. 

III. Notice of Consideration of Issuance 

of Amendments to Facility Operating 

Licenses and Combined Licenses and 

Proposed No Significant Hazards 

Consideration Determination 

The Commission has made a 

proposed determination that the 

following amendment requests involve 

no significant hazards consideration. 

Under the Commission’s regulations in 

§ 50.92 of title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (10 CFR), this means that 

operation of the facility in accordance 

with the proposed amendment would 

not: (1) Involve a significant increase in 

the probability or consequences of an 

accident previously evaluated; or (2) 

create the possibility of a new or 

different kind of accident from any 

accident previously evaluated; or (3) 

involve a significant reduction in a 

margin of safety. The basis for this 

proposed determination for each 

amendment request is shown below. 

The Commission is seeking public 

comments on this proposed 

determination. Any comments received 

within 30 days after the date of 

publication of this notice will be 

considered in making any final 

determination. 

Normally, the Commission will not 

issue the amendment until the 

expiration of 60 days after the date of 

publication of this notice. The 

Commission may issue the license 

amendment before expiration of the 60- 

day period provided that its final 

determination is that the amendment 

involves no significant hazards 

consideration. In addition, the 

Commission may issue the amendment 

prior to the expiration of the 30-day 

comment period if 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. If 

the Commission takes 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. If the Commission makes 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. 

A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing 

and Petition for Leave To Intervene 

Within 60 days after the date of 

publication of this notice, any persons 

(petitioner) whose interest may be 

affected by this action may file a request 

for a hearing and petition for leave to 

intervene (petition) with respect to the 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
22 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2019 / Notices 

action. Petitions shall be filed in 

accordance with the Commission’s 

‘‘Agency Rules of Practice and 

Procedure’’ in 10 CFR part 2. Interested 

persons should consult a current copy 

of 10 CFR 2.309. The NRC’s regulations 

are accessible electronically from the 

NRC Library on the NRC’s website at 

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/cfr/. Alternatively, a copy of 

the regulations is available at the NRC’s 

Public Document Room, located at One 

White Flint North, Room O1–F21, 11555 

Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 

Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, 

the Commission or a presiding officer 

will rule on the petition and, if 

appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be 

issued. 

As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the 

petition should specifically explain the 

reasons why intervention should be 

permitted with particular reference to 

the following general requirements for 

standing: (1) The name, address, and 

telephone number of the petitioner; (2) 

the nature of the petitioner’s right under 

the Act to be made a party to the 

proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of 

the 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 petitioner’s interest. 

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), 

the petition must also set forth the 

specific contentions which the 

petitioner seeks to have litigated in the 

proceeding. Each contention must 

consist of a specific statement of the 

issue of law or fact to be raised or 

controverted. In addition, the petitioner 

must provide a brief explanation of the 

bases for the contention and a concise 

statement of the alleged facts or expert 

opinion which support the contention 

and on which the petitioner intends to 

rely in proving the contention at the 

hearing. The petitioner must also 

provide references to the specific 

sources and documents on which the 

petitioner intends to rely to support its 

position on the issue. The petition must 

include sufficient information to show 

that a genuine dispute exists with the 

applicant or licensee on a material issue 

of law or fact. Contentions must be 

limited to matters within the scope of 

the proceeding. The contention must be 

one which, if proven, would entitle the 

petitioner to relief. A petitioner who 

fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 

CFR 2.309(f) 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. Parties have the opportunity 

to participate fully in the conduct of the 

hearing with respect to resolution of 

that party’s admitted contentions, 

including the opportunity to present 

evidence, consistent with the NRC’s 

regulations, policies, and procedures. 

Petitions must be filed no later than 

60 days from the date of publication of 

this notice. Petitions and motions for 

leave to file new or amended 

contentions that are filed after the 

deadline will not be entertained absent 

a determination by the presiding officer 

that the filing demonstrates good cause 

by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 

2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii). The petition 

must be filed in accordance with the 

filing instructions in the ‘‘Electronic 

Submissions (E-Filing)’’ section of this 

document. 

If a hearing is requested, and the 

Commission has not made a final 

determination on the issue of no 

significant hazards consideration, the 

Commission will make a final 

determination on the issue of no 

significant hazards consideration. The 

final determination will serve to 

establish 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 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 the amendment 

unless the Commission finds an 

imminent danger to the health or safety 

of the public, in which case it will issue 

an appropriate order or rule under 10 

CFR part 2. 

A State, local governmental body, 

Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or 

agency thereof, may submit a petition to 

the Commission to participate as a party 

under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition 

should state the nature and extent of the 

petitioner’s interest in the proceeding. 

The petition should be submitted to the 

Commission no later than 60 days from 

the date of publication of this notice. 

The petition must be filed in accordance 

with the filing instructions in the 

‘‘Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)’’ 

section of this document, and should 

meet the requirements for petitions set 

forth in this section, except that under 

10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local 

governmental body, or Federallyrecognized Indian Tribe, or agency 

thereof does not need to address the 

standing requirements in 10 CFR 

2.309(d) if the facility is located within 

its boundaries. Alternatively, a State, 

local governmental body, Federallyrecognized Indian Tribe, or agency 

thereof may participate as a non-party 

under 10 CFR 2.315(c). 

If a hearing is granted, any person 

who is not a party to the proceeding and 

is not affiliated with or represented by 

a party may, at the discretion of the 

presiding officer, be permitted to make 

a limited appearance pursuant to the 

provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person 

making a limited appearance may make 

an oral or written statement of his or her 

position on the issues but may not 

otherwise participate in the proceeding. 

A limited appearance may be made at 

any session of the hearing or at any 

prehearing conference, subject to the 

limits and conditions as may be 

imposed by the presiding officer. Details 

regarding the opportunity to make a 

limited appearance will be provided by 

the presiding officer if such sessions are 

scheduled. 

B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing) 

All documents filed in NRC 

adjudicatory proceedings, including a 

request for hearing and petition for 

leave to intervene (petition), 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 that 

request to participate under 10 CFR 

2.315(c), must be filed in accordance 

with the NRC’s E-Filing rule (72 FR 

49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 

77 FR 46562; August 3, 2012). 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. Detailed guidance on 

making electronic submissions may be 

found in the Guidance for Electronic 

Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC 

website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/ 

e-submittals.html. Participants may not 

submit paper copies of their filings 

unless they seek an exemption in 

accordance with the procedures 

described below. 

To comply with the procedural 

requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 

days prior to the filing deadline, the 

participant should contact the Office of 

the Secretary by email at hearing 

.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone at 

301–415–1677, to: (1) Request a digital 

identification (ID) certificate, which 

allows the participant (or its counsel or 

representative) to digitally sign 

submissions and access the E-Filing 

system for any proceeding in which it 

is participating; and (2) advise the 

Secretary that the participant will be 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2019 / Notices 23 

submitting a petition or other 

adjudicatory document (even in 

instances in which the participant, or its 

counsel or representative, already holds 

an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). 

Based upon this information, the 

Secretary will establish an electronic 

docket for the hearing in this proceeding 

if the Secretary has not already 

established an electronic docket. 

Information about applying for a 

digital ID certificate is available on the 

NRC’s public website at http://

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

getting-started.html. Once a participant 

has obtained a digital ID certificate and 

a docket has been created, the 

participant can then submit 

adjudicatory documents. Submissions 

must be in Portable Document Format 

(PDF). Additional guidance on PDF 

submissions is available on the NRC’s 

public website at http://www.nrc.gov/ 

site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A 

filing is considered complete at the time 

the document is 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 EFiling system time-stamps the document 

and sends the submitter an email notice 

confirming receipt of the document. The 

E-Filing system also distributes an email 

notice that provides access to the 

document to the NRC’s Office of the 

General Counsel and any others who 

have advised the Office of the Secretary 

that they wish to participate in the 

proceeding, so that the filer need not 

serve the document on those 

participants separately. Therefore, 

applicants and other participants (or 

their counsel or representative) must 

apply for and receive a digital ID 

certificate before adjudicatory 

documents are filed so that they can 

obtain access to the documents via the 

E-Filing system. 

A person filing electronically using 

the NRC’s adjudicatory E-Filing system 

may seek assistance by contacting the 

NRC’s Electronic Filing Help Desk 

through the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link located 

on the NRC’s public website at http://

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

.html, by email to MSHD.Resource@

nrc.gov, or by a toll-free call at 1–866– 

672–7640. The NRC Electronic Filing 

Help Desk is available between 9 a.m. 

and 6 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 stating why there is good cause for 

not filing electronically and 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, 11555 Rockville Pike, 

Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: 

Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. 

Participants filing adjudicatory 

documents in this manner are 

responsible for serving the document on 

all other participants. Filing is 

considered complete by first-class mail 

as of the time of deposit in the mail, or 

by courier, express mail, or expedited 

delivery service upon depositing the 

document with the provider of the 

service. A presiding officer, having 

granted an exemption request from 

using E-Filing, may require a participant 

or party to use E-Filing if the presiding 

officer subsequently determines that the 

reason for granting the exemption from 

use of E-Filing no longer exists. 

Documents submitted in adjudicatory 

proceedings will appear in the NRC’s 

electronic hearing docket which is 

available to the public at https://

adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded 

pursuant to an order of the Commission 

or the presiding officer. If you do not 

have an NRC-issued digital ID certificate 

as described above, click cancel when 

the link requests certificates and you 

will be automatically directed to the 

NRC’s electronic hearing dockets where 

you will be able to access any publicly 

available documents in a particular 

hearing docket. Participants are 

requested not to include personal 

privacy information, such as social 

security numbers, home addresses, or 

personal phone numbers in their filings, 

unless an NRC regulation or other law 

requires submission of such 

information. For example, in some 

instances, individuals provide home 

addresses in order to demonstrate 

proximity to a facility or site. 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. 

For further details with respect to 

these license amendment applications, 

see the application for amendment 

which is available for public inspection 

in ADAMS and at the NRC’s PDR. For 

additional direction on accessing 

information related to this document, 

see the ‘‘Obtaining Information and 

Submitting Comments’’ section of this 

document. 

FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating 

Company, Docket No. 50–440, Perry 

Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. 1, Lake 

County, Ohio 

Date of amendment request: 

November 28, 2018. A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under 

Accession No. ML18332A500. 

Description of amendment request: 

The proposed amendment would revise 

the Perry Nuclear Power Plant (PNPP) 

Emergency Plan to transfer rescue and 

first aid duties from two on-shift 

security force members to on-shift fire 

brigade personnel, reduce the number of 

radiation monitoring teams by one, and 

make other related changes. 

Basis for proposed no significant 

hazards consideration determination: 

As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the 

licensee has provided its analysis of the 

issue of no significant hazards 

consideration, which is presented 

below: 

1. Does the proposed change involve a 

significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed changes to reduce the 

number of radiation monitoring teams, 

transfer responsibility for radiological 

surveys in certain areas, redefine the 

boundary of certain survey areas, and transfer 

on-shift responsibility for rescue and first aid 

duties [do] not affect structures, systems, and 

components (SSCs) of the plant, normal plant 

operation, design functions or analyses that 

verify the capability of an SSC to perform a 

design function. Therefore, the proposed 

changes do not increase the likelihood of a 

malfunction of an SSC. 

With the proposed changes the emergency 

response organization will continue to be 

capable of performing their intended 

functions to mitigate the consequences of an 

accident or event. The ability of the on-shift 

emergency response organization to respond 

adequately to radiological emergencies has 

been demonstrated as acceptable through a 

staffing analysis as required by 10 CFR 50, 

Appendix E, paragraph IV.A.9. 

Therefore, the proposed PNPP Emergency 

Plan changes do not involve a significant 

increase in the probability or consequences 

of an accident previously evaluated. 

2. Does the proposed amendment create 

the possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed changes to reduce the 

number of radiation monitoring teams, 

transfer responsibility for radiological 

surveys in certain areas, redefine the 

boundary of certain survey areas, and transfer 

on-shift responsibility for rescue and first aid 

duties [do] not involve a physical alteration 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
24 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2019 / Notices 

of the plant (that is, no new or different type 

of equipment will be installed), a change in 

the method of plant operation, or the ability 

of SSCs to perform their design function. 

Since SSCs are not affected, there are no new 

failure mechanisms, malfunctions, or 

accident initiators not considered in the 

design and licensing basis. 

Therefore, the proposed changes do not 

create the possibility of a new or different 

kind of accident from any accident 

previously evaluated. 

3. Does the proposed amendment involve 

a significant reduction in a margin of safety? 

Response: No. 

The proposed changes to reduce the 

number of radiation monitoring teams, 

transfer responsibility for radiological 

surveys in certain areas, redefine the 

boundary of certain survey areas, and transfer 

on-shift responsibility for rescue and first aid 

duties [do] not impact operation of the plant 

or its response to transients or accidents. The 

proposed changes do not affect the Technical 

Specifications, accident analyses, safety 

margins applied to design and licensing basis 

functions or to controlling parameters to 

account for uncertainties to avoid exceeding 

regulatory or licensing limits established in 

the licensing basis. 

Therefore, the proposed changes do not 

involve a significant reduction in a margin of 

safety. 

The NRC staff has reviewed the 

licensee’s analysis and, based on this 

review, it appears that the three 

standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 

satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff 

proposes to determine that the 

amendment request involves no 

significant hazards consideration. 

Attorney for licensee: Rick C. 

Giannantonio, General Counsel, 

FirstEnergy Corporation, Mail Stop A– 

GO–15, 76 South Main Street, Akron, 

OH 44308. 

NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona. 

Florida Power and Light Company, et 

al., Docket No. 50–389, St. Lucie Plant, 

Unit No. 2, St. Lucie County, Florida 

Date of amendment request: 

November 9, 2018. A publicly-available 

version is in ADAMS under Accession 

No. ML18316A028. 

Description of amendment request: 

The amendment would revise the 

Technical Specifications by eliminating 

the requirements for the Iodine Removal 

System (IRS). The proposed amendment 

would also revise the surveillance 

requirements for the trisodium 

phosphate dodecahydrate (TSP) basket. 

Basis for proposed no significant 

hazards consideration determination: 

As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the 

licensee has provided its analysis of the 

issue of no significant hazards 

consideration, which is presented 

below: 

1. Does the proposed amendment involve 

a significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The IRS is used post-LOCA [loss-of-coolant 

accident] and is not an accident initiator. 

Therefore, there is no increase in the 

probability of an accident as a result of 

hydrazine removal. The Safety Evaluation for 

Unit 2 extended power uprate [(EPU)] (TAC 

No. ME5843) states that PSL [St. Lucie Plant, 

Unit 2] evaluated the radiological 

consequences resulting from the postulated 

LOCA at the exclusion area boundary, the 

low population zone and control room 

comply with the reference values and the 

control room dose criterion provided in 10 

CFR 50.67 and the accident specific dose 

guidelines specified in SRP [Standard 

Review Plant] Section 15.0.1 and Regulatory 

Guide [(RG)] 1.183. The NRC review 

determined that this analysis, the 

assumptions and inputs are consistent with 

the applicable regulatory guidance. The NRC 

concluded that the estimates for dose 

consequences of a design basis LOCA will 

comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 

50.67 and the guidelines of Regulatory Guide 

1.183 and are therefore acceptable. Per the 

Unit 2 UFSAR [Updated Final Safety 

Analysis Report], hydrazine addition is not 

credited for the EPU dose assessment. 

Therefore, the proposed change does not 

involve a significant increase in the 

probability or consequences of an accident 

previously evaluated. 

2. Does the proposed amendment create 

the possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The IRS is used post-LOCA and is not an 

accident initiator. Therefore, there is no new 

or different kind of accident from an accident 

previously evaluated. There is no equipment 

added by this change, only removal of iodine 

removal system equipment. 

Therefore, the proposed change does not 

create the possibility of a new or different 

kind of accident from any accident 

previously evaluated. 

3. Does the proposed amendment involve 

a significant reduction in a margin of safety? 

Response: No. 

The Safety Evaluation for Unit 2 extended 

power uprate (TAC No. ME5843) states that 

PSL evaluated the radiological consequences 

resulting from the postulated LOCA at the 

exclusion area boundary, the low population 

zone and control room comply with the 

reference values and the control room dose 

criterion provided in 10 CFR 50.67 and the 

accident specific dose guidelines specified in 

SRP Section 15.0.1 and RG 1.183. The NRC 

review determined that this analysis, the 

assumptions and inputs are consistent with 

the applicable regulatory guidance. The NRC 

concluded that the estimates for dose 

consequences of a design basis LOCA will 

comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 

50.67 and the guidelines of Regulatory Guide 

1.183 and are therefore acceptable. Per the 

Unit 2 UFSAR, hydrazine addition is not 

credited for the EPU dose assessment. There 

is no reduction in a margin of safety as there 

is no credit taken for hydrazine to ensure 

containment spray iodine removal. 

Per the guidance from SRP 6.5.2, iodine 

deposited in the containment sump water 

can be assumed to remain in solution as long 

as the containment sump pH is maintained 

at or above 7. The containment sump pH is 

maintained by TSP baskets which dissolve as 

the post-LOCA water level increases. For 

EPU, PSL conducted an evaluation and 

determined that the sump pH will be 

maintained at or above 7 without the use of 

hydrazine. 

Therefore, the proposed change does not 

involve a significant reduction in a margin of 

safety. 

The NRC staff has reviewed the 

licensee’s analysis and, based on this 

review, it appears that the three 

standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 

satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff 

proposes to determine that the 

amendment request involves no 

significant hazards consideration. 

Attorney for licensee: Debbie Hendell, 

Managing Attorney—Nuclear, Florida 

Power & Light Company, 700 Universe 

Blvd. MS LAW/JB, Juno Beach, Florida 

33408–0420. 

NRC Branch Chief: Undine Shoop. 

Northern States Power Company— 

Minnesota (NSPM), Docket No. 50–263, 

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant 

(MNGP), Wright County, Minnesota 

Date of amendment request: 

November 12, 2018. A publicly 

available version is in ADAMS under 

Accession No. ML18317A172. 

Description of amendment request: 

The proposed amendment would revise 

the Limiting Condition for Operation 

(LCO) of technical specification (TS) 

Specification 3.5.1, ‘‘[Emergency Core 

Cooling System] ECCS—Operating,’’ to 

remove the LCO note. 

Basis for proposed no significant 

hazards consideration determination: 

As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the 

licensee has provided its analysis of the 

issue of no significant hazards 

consideration, which is presented 

below: 

1. Does the proposed amendment involve 

a significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

No physical changes to the facility will 

occur as a result of this TS change. The 

proposed change will not alter the physical 

design of the facility. The current LCO note 

could make the MNGP susceptible to 

potential water hammer in the [residual heat 

removal] RHR System if in the Shutdown 

Cooling mode of RHR in Mode 3 when 

swapping from SDC to the Low Pressure 

Coolant Injection (LPCI) mode of RHR. The 

proposed license amendment request will 

eliminate the risk for cavitation of the RHR 

pumps and voiding in the suction piping, 

thereby avoiding the potential to damage the 

RHR System, including water hammer. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2019 / Notices 25 

Therefore, the proposed change does not 

involve a significant increase in the 

probability or consequences of an accident 

previously evaluated. 

2. Does the proposed amendment create 

the possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any previously evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change does not alter the 

physical design, safety limits, or safety 

analysis assumptions associated with 

operation of the plant. Accordingly, the 

change does not introduce any new accident 

initiators, nor does it reduce or adversely 

affect the capabilities of any plant structure, 

system, or component to perform their safety 

function. Removal of the LCO note is 

appropriate because this current TS 

allowance could put the plant at risk for 

potential cavitation of the RHR pumps and 

voiding in the suction piping, resulting in the 

potential occurrence of water hammer and 

damage to the RHR System. 

Therefore, the proposed change does not 

create the possibility of a new or different 

kind of accident from any accident 

previously evaluated. 

3. Does the proposed amendment involve 

a significant reduction in a margin of safety? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change conforms to NRC 

regulatory guidance regarding the content of 

the TSs. The proposed change does not affect 

the capabilities of any plant structure, 

system, or component to perform its 

associated safety function. Since the safety 

analysis assumptions are unaffected the 

associated safety margins are also not 

impacted. Removal of the LCO note is 

appropriate because the current TS 

requirement could put the plant at risk of 

damage to the RHR System and impact the 

LPCI function. 

Therefore, the proposed change does not 

involve a significant reduction in a margin of 

safety. 

The NRC staff has reviewed the 

licensee’s analysis and, based on this 

review, it appears that the three 

standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 

satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff 

proposes to determine that the 

amendment request involves no 

significant hazards consideration. 

Attorney for licensee: Peter M. Glass, 

Assistant General Counsel, Xcel Energy 

Services, Inc., 414 Nicollet Mall, 

Minneapolis, MN 55401. 

NRC Branch Chief: David J. Wrona. 

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, 

Docket Nos. 52–025 and 52–026, Vogtle 

Electric Generating Plant, Units 3 and 4, 

Burke County, Georgia 

Date of amendment request: 

November 16, 2018. A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under 

Accession No. ML18320A225. 

Description of amendment request: 

The amendment request includes a 

departure from information in the 

Updated Final Safety Analysis Report 

(UFSAR) Tier 2 information (which 

includes the plant-specific Design 

Control Document (DCD) Tier 2 

information) and involves related 

changes to plant-specific Tier 1 

information, with corresponding 

changes to the associated Combined 

License (COL) Appendix C information. 

The proposed changes would revise the 

routing for the passive containment 

cooling system associated Class 1E 

cables. Pursuant to the provisions of 10 

CFR 52.63(b)(1), an exemption from 

elements of the design as certified in the 

10 CFR part 52, Appendix D, design 

certification rule is also requested for 

the plant-specific DCD Tier 1 material 

departures. 

Basis for proposed no significant 

hazards consideration determination: 

As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the 

licensee has provided its analysis of the 

issue of no significant hazards 

consideration, which is presented 

below: 

1. Does the proposed amendment involve 

a significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed routing of Class 1E cables 

has been found to continue to comply with 

divisional separation design requirements to 

maintain required functional capability of the 

safety systems for previously evaluated 

accidents, including the safe shutdown 

evaluation for a fire event. The cables 

continue to be qualified for the environments 

of the rooms through which they are 

proposed to be routed, and no changes are 

proposed to the cable design. The pertinent 

cables are not an initiator of any accident 

analyzed in Chapter 15 of the UFSAR. The 

changes do not involve an interface with any 

SSC accident initiator or initiating sequence 

of events, and thus, the probabilities of the 

accidents evaluated in the UFSAR are not 

affected. The proposed changes do not 

involve a change to any mitigation sequence 

or the predicted radiological releases due to 

postulated accident conditions, thus, the 

consequences of the accidents evaluated in 

the UFSAR are not affected. 

Therefore, the proposed amendment does 

not involve a significant increase in the 

probability or consequences of an accident 

previously evaluated. 

2. Does the proposed amendment create 

the possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed routing of Class 1E cables 

has been found to continue to comply with 

divisional separation design requirements to 

maintain required functional capability of the 

safety systems for previously evaluated 

accidents, including the safe shutdown for a 

fire event. The cables continue to be qualified 

for the environments of the rooms through 

which they are proposed to be routed, and no 

changes are proposed to the cable design. 

The routing of the pertinent cables does not 

change the function of the related systems, 

and thus, the changes do not introduce a new 

failure mode, malfunction or sequence of 

events that could adversely affect safety or 

safety-related equipment. 

Therefore, the proposed amendment does 

not create the possibility of a new or different 

kind of accident from any accident 

previously evaluated. 

3. Does the proposed amendment involve 

a significant reduction in a margin of safety? 

Response: No. 

The proposed routing of Class 1E cables 

has been found to continue to comply with 

divisional separation design requirements to 

maintain required functional capability of the 

safety systems for previously evaluated 

accidents, including the safe shutdown 

evaluation for a fire event. The cables 

continue to be qualified for the environments 

of the rooms through which they are 

proposed to be routed, and no changes are 

proposed to the cable design. The routing of 

the pertinent cables does not change the 

function of the related systems or affect the 

margins provided by the systems, and thus, 

the changes do not affect any safety-related 

design code, function, design analysis, safety 

analysis input or result, or existing design/ 

safety margin. No safety analysis or design 

basis acceptance limit/criterion is challenged 

or exceeded by the requested changes. 

Therefore, the proposed amendment does 

not involve a significant reduction in a 

margin of safety. 

The NRC staff has reviewed the 

licensee’s analysis and, based on this 

review, it appears that the three 

standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 

satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff 

proposes to determine that the 

amendment request involves no 

significant hazards consideration. 

Attorney for licensee: M. Stanford 

Blanton, Balch & Bingham LLP, 1710 

Sixth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL 

35203–2015. 

NRC Branch Chief: Jennifer L. DixonHerrity. 

STP Nuclear Operating Company, 

Docket Nos. 50–498 and 50–499, South 

Texas Project (STP), Units 1 and 2 

(STP), Matagorda County, Texas 

Date of amendment request: 

September 27, 2018. A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under 

Accession No. ML18270A319. 

Description of amendment request: 

The amendment would revise the STP, 

Units 1 and 2, Technical Specification 

Surveillance Requirement 4.7.7.b, 

‘‘Control Room Makeup and Cleanup 

Filtration System,’’ to operate for at least 

15 continuous minutes at a frequency 

controlled in accordance with the 

Surveillance Frequency Control 

Program by adoption of Technical 

Specifications Task Force (TSTF) 

Traveler TSTF–522, Revision 0, ‘‘Revise 

Ventilation System Surveillance 

Requirements to Operate for 10 Hours 

per Month.’’ The NRC approved TSTF– 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
26 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2019 / Notices 

522, Revision 0, as a part of the 

consolidated line item improvement 

process on September 20, 2012 (77 FR 

58421). 

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 replaces an existing 

Surveillance Requirement to operate the 

Control Room Makeup and Cleanup 

Filtration System with electric heaters for a 

continuous 10 hour period at a frequency 

controlled in accordance with the 

Surveillance Frequency Control Program 

with a requirement to operate the system for 

15 continuous minutes with the heaters 

operating. 

This system is not an accident initiator, 

and therefore, the changes do not involve a 

significant increase in the probability of an 

accident. The proposed system and filter 

testing changes are consistent with current 

regulatory guidance for these systems and 

will continue to assure that these systems 

perform their design function which may 

include mitigating accidents. Thus, the 

change does not involve a significant 

increase in the consequences of an accident. 

Therefore, it is concluded that this 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 replaces an existing 

Surveillance Requirement to operate the 

Control Room Makeup and Cleanup 

Filtration System with electric heaters for a 

continuous 10 hour period at a frequency 

controlled in accordance with the 

Surveillance Frequency Control Program 

with a requirement to operate the system for 

15 continuous minutes with the heaters 

operating. 

The change proposed for the system does 

not change any system operations or 

maintenance activities. Testing requirements 

will be revised and will continue to 

demonstrate that the Limiting Conditions for 

Operation are met. The change does not 

create new failure modes or mechanisms and 

no new accident precursors are generated. 

Therefore, it is concluded that this change 

does not create the possibility of a new or 

different kind of accident from any accident 

previously evaluated. 

3. Does the proposed change involve a 

significant reduction in a margin of safety? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change replaces an existing 

Surveillance Requirement to operate the 

Control Room Makeup and Cleanup 

Filtration System with electric heaters for a 

continuous 10 hour period at a frequency 

controlled in accordance with the 

Surveillance Frequency Control Program 

with a requirement to operate the system for 

15 continuous minutes with the heaters 

operating. 

The design basis for the system’s heater is 

to heat the incoming air which reduces the 

relative humidity. The heater testing change 

proposed will continue to demonstrate that 

the heaters are capable of heating the air and 

will perform their design function. The 

proposed change is consistent with 

regulatory guidance. 

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: Kym Harshaw, 

Vice President and General Counsel, 

STP Nuclear Operating Company, P.O. 

Box 289, Wadsworth, TX 77483. 

NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. 

Pascarelli. 

Vistra Operations Company LLC, Docket 

Nos. 50–445 and 50–446, Comanche 

Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 

and 2 (CPNPP), Somervell County, 

Texas 

Date of amendment request: October 

31, 2018. A publicly-available version is 

in ADAMS under Package Accession 

No. ML18309A320. 

Description of amendment request: 

The amendments would revise the 

CPNPP Emergency Plan to extend staff 

augmentation times and reduce the 

number of required Emergency 

Response Organization positions. 

Basis for proposed no significant 

hazards consideration determination: 

As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), the 

licensee has provided its analysis of the 

issue of no significant hazards 

consideration, which is presented 

below: 

1. Do the proposed changes involve a 

significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change to the CPNPP 

Emergency Plan is administrative in nature. 

This proposed change does not alter accident 

analysis assumptions, add any initiators, or 

affect the function of plant systems or the 

manner in which systems are operated, 

maintained, modified, tested, or inspected. 

The proposed change does not require any 

plant modifications which affect the 

performance capability of the structures, 

systems, and components (SSCs) relied upon 

to mitigate the consequences of postulated 

accidents and has no impact on the 

probability or consequences of an accident 

previously evaluated. 

Therefore, the proposed changes do not 

involve a significant increase in the 

probability or consequences of an accident 

previously evaluated. 

2. Do the proposed changes create the 

possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change to the CPNPP 

Emergency Plan is administrative in nature. 

This proposed change does not alter accident 

analysis assumptions, add any initiators, or 

affect the function of plant systems or the 

manner in which systems are operated, 

maintained, modified, tested, or inspected. 

The proposed change does not require any 

plant modifications which affect the 

performance capability of the SSCs relied 

upon to mitigate the consequences of 

postulated accidents and does not create the 

possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any accident previously 

evaluated. 

Therefore, the proposed change does not 

create the possibility of a new or different 

kind of accident from any previously 

evaluated. 

3. Do the proposed changes involve a 

significant reduction in a margin of safety? 

Response: No. 

Plant safety margins are established 

through limiting conditions for operation, 

limiting safety systems settings, and safety 

limits specified in the technical 

specifications. The proposed change to the 

CPNPP Emergency Plan is administrative in 

nature. Since the proposed change is 

administrative in nature, there are no 

changes to these established safety margins. 

Therefore, the proposed change does not 

involve a significant reduction in a margin of 

safety. 

The NRC staff has reviewed the 

licensee’s analysis and, based on this 

review, it appears that the three 

standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 

satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff 

proposes to determine that the 

amendment request involves no 

significant hazards consideration. 

Attorney for licensee: Timothy P. 

Matthews, Esq., Morgan, Lewis and 

Bockius, 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20004. 

NRC Branch Chief: Robert J. 

Pascarelli. 

IV. Notice of Issuance of Amendments 

to Facility Operating Licenses and 

Combined Licenses 

During the period since publication of 

the last biweekly notice, the 

Commission has issued the following 

amendments. The Commission has 

determined for each of these 

amendments that the application 

complies with the standards and 

requirements of the Atomic Energy Act 

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

Commission’s rules and regulations. 

The Commission has made appropriate 

findings as required by the Act and the 

Commission’s rules and regulations in 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2019 / Notices 27 

10 CFR chapter I, which are set forth in 

the license amendment. 

A notice of consideration of issuance 

of amendment to facility operating 

license or combined license, as 

applicable, proposed no significant 

hazards consideration determination, 

and opportunity for a hearing in 

connection with these actions, was 

published in the Federal Register as 

indicated. 

Unless otherwise indicated, the 

Commission has determined that these 

amendments satisfy the criteria for 

categorical exclusion in accordance 

with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant 

to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental 

impact statement or environmental 

assessment need be prepared for these 

amendments. If the Commission has 

prepared an environmental assessment 

under the special circumstances 

provision in 10 CFR 51.22(b) and has 

made a determination based on that 

assessment, it is so indicated. 

For further details with respect to the 

action see: (1) The applications for 

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

the Commission’s related letter, Safety 

Evaluation and/or Environmental 

Assessment as indicated. All of these 

items can be accessed as described in 

the ‘‘Obtaining Information and 

Submitting Comments’’ section of this 

document. 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 

Docket No. 50–220, Nine Mile Point 

Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Oswego County, 

New York 

Date of amendment request: March 

13, 2018. 

Brief description of amendment: The 

amendment relocated the frequencies 

for Technical Specifications 

Surveillance Requirements 4.2.7.d and 

4.2.7.1.a to the Nine Mile Point Nuclear 

Station, Unit 1, Inservice Testing 

Program. 

Date of issuance: December 13, 2018. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance and shall be implemented 

within 90 days of issuance. 

Amendment No.: 233. A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under 

Accession No. ML18324A723; 

documents related to this amendment 

are listed in the Safety Evaluation 

enclosed with the amendment. 

Renewed Facility Operating License 

No. DPR–63: The amendment revised 

the Renewed Facility Operating License 

and Technical Specifications. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: July 3, 2018 (83 FR 31184). 

On July 10, 2018, a correction notice 

was issued in the Federal Register (83 

FR 31981) to correct the hearing date in 

the original notice. The correction 

notice did not change the NRC staff’s 

original proposed no significant hazards 

consideration determination. 

The Commission’s related evaluation 

of the amendment is contained in a 

Safety Evaluation dated December 13, 

2018. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 

Docket Nos. STN 50–456 and STN 50– 

457, Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2, 

Will County, Illinois and Docket Nos. 

STN 50–454 and STN 50–455, Byron 

Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Ogle County, 

Illinois 

Date of amendment request: April 2, 

2018. A Publicly-available version is in 

ADAMS under Accession Nos. 

ML18092B081. 

Brief description of amendments: The 

amendments revised Technical 

Specification 3.2.3 to require that the 

axial flux difference be maintained 

within the limits specified in the core 

operating limits report during MODE 1 

with reactor thermal power greater or 

equal to 50 percent. An associated 

change was also made to the NOTE 

modifying surveillance 3.2.3.1. 

Date of issuance: December 12, 2018. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance and shall be implemented 

within 90 days from the date of 

issuance. 

Amendment Nos: 200, 200 

(Braidwood), and 205, 205 (Byron). A 

publicly-available version is in ADAMS 

under Accession No. ML18302A227; 

documents related to these amendments 

are listed in the related Safety 

Evaluation enclosed with the 

amendments. 

Renewed Facility Operating License 

Nos. NPF–72, NPF–77, NPF–37, and 

NPF–66: The amendments revised the 

technical specifications, the 

surveillance requirements and the 

Renewed Facility Operating Licenses. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: June 5, 2018 (83 FR 26104). 

The Commission’s related evaluation 

of the amendments is contained in a 

Safety Evaluation dated December 12, 

2018. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating 

Company, Docket No. 50–440, Perry 

Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. 1, Lake 

County, Ohio 

Date of amendment request: 

December 6, 2017, as supplemented by 

letter dated July 24, 2018. 

Brief description of amendment: The 

amendment revised existing PNPP, Unit 

No. 1 technical specification (TS) 

requirements related to ‘‘operations 

with a potential for draining the reactor 

vessel’’ with new requirements on 

reactor pressure vessel water inventory 

control to protect TS 2.1.1.3 Safety 

Limit. The revised changes are based on 

Technical Specifications Task Force 

(TSTF) traveler TSTF–542, Revision 2, 

‘‘Reactor Pressure Vessel Water 

Inventory Control.’’ 

Date of issuance: December 12, 2018. 

Effective date: As of its date of 

issuance, and shall be implemented 

within 90 days of issuance. 

Amendment No.: 184. A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under 

Accession No. ML18292A816; 

documents related to this amendment 

are listed in the Safety Evaluation 

enclosed with the amendment. 

Facility Operating License No. NPF– 

58: The amendment revised the Facility 

Operating License and TS. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: January 30, 2018 (83 FR 

4293). The supplemental letter dated 

July 24, 2018, provided additional 

information that clarified the 

application, did not expand the scope of 

the application as originally noticed, 

and did not change the staff’s original 

proposed no significant hazards 

consideration determination as 

published in the Federal Register. 

The Commission’s related evaluation 

of the amendment is contained in a 

Safety Evaluation dated December 12, 

2018. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

Florida Power & Light Company, Docket 

Nos. 50–250 and 50–251, Turkey Point 

Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4, 

Miami-Dade County, Florida 

Date of amendment request: 

December 23, 2014, as supplemented by 

letters dated June 16, and August 11, 

2016; February 9, April 27, and October 

30, 2017; and February 15, March 22, 

June 12, and September 6, 2018. 

Brief description of amendments: The 

amendments revised the Technical 

Specifications (TSs) related to 

Completion Times for Required Actions 

to provide the option to calculate a 

longer, risk-informed completion time. 

A new program, the Risk-Informed 

Completion Time Program, was added 

to TS Section 6.0, ‘‘Administrative 

Controls.’’ The methodology for using 

the Risk-Informed Completion Time 

Program is described in Nuclear Energy 

Institute Report 06–09, ‘‘Risk-Informed 

Technical Specifications Initiative 4b, 

Risk-Managed Technical Specifications 

(RMTS) Guidelines,’’ Revision 0–A 

(ADAMS Accession No. ML12286A322). 

Date of issuance: December 3, 2018. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
28 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2019 / Notices 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance and shall be implemented 

within 180 days of issuance. 

Amendment Nos.: 284 and 278. A 

publicly-available version is in ADAMS 

under Accession No. ML18270A429; 

documents related to these amendments 

are listed in the Safety Evaluation 

enclosed with the amendments. 

Renewed Facility Operating License 

Nos. DPR–31 and DPR–41: Amendments 

revised the Renewed Facility Operating 

Licenses and TSs. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: April 28, 2015 (80 FR 23604). 

The supplemental letters dated June 16, 

and August 11, 2016; February 9, April 

27, and October 30, 2017; and February 

15, March 22, June 12, and September 

6, 2018, provided additional 

information that clarified the 

application, did not expand the scope of 

the application as originally noticed, 

and did not change the staff’s original 

proposed no significant hazards 

consideration determination as 

published in the Federal Register. 

The Commission’s related evaluation 

of the amendments is contained in a 

Safety Evaluation dated December 3, 

2018. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

V. Notice of Issuance of Amendments to 

Facility Operating Licenses and 

Combined Licenses and Final 

Determination of No Significant 

Hazards Consideration and 

Opportunity for a Hearing (Exigent 

Public Announcement or Emergency 

Circumstances) 

During the period since publication of 

the last biweekly notice, the 

Commission has issued the following 

amendments. The Commission has 

determined for each of these 

amendments that the application for the 

amendment complies with the 

standards and requirements of the 

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended 

(the Act), and the Commission’s rules 

and regulations. The Commission has 

made appropriate findings as required 

by the Act and the Commission’s rules 

and regulations in 10 CFR chapter I, 

which are set forth in the license 

amendment. 

Because of exigent or emergency 

circumstances associated with the date 

the amendment was needed, there was 

not time for the Commission to publish, 

for public comment before issuance, its 

usual notice of consideration of 

issuance of amendment, proposed no 

significant hazards consideration 

determination, and opportunity for a 

hearing. 

For exigent circumstances, the 

Commission has either issued a Federal 

Register notice providing opportunity 

for public comment or has used local 

media to provide notice to the public in 

the area surrounding a licensee’s facility 

of the licensee’s application and of the 

Commission’s proposed determination 

of no significant hazards consideration. 

The Commission has provided a 

reasonable opportunity for the public to 

comment, using its best efforts to make 

available to the public means of 

communication for the public to 

respond quickly, and in the case of 

telephone comments, the comments 

have been recorded or transcribed as 

appropriate and the licensee has been 

informed of the public comments. 

In circumstances where failure to act 

in a timely way would have resulted, for 

example, in derating or shutdown of a 

nuclear power plant or in prevention of 

either resumption of operation or of 

increase in power output up to the 

plant’s licensed power level, the 

Commission may not have had an 

opportunity to provide for public 

comment on its no significant hazards 

consideration determination. In such 

case, the license amendment has been 

issued without opportunity for 

comment. If there has been some time 

for public comment but less than 30 

days, the Commission may provide an 

opportunity for public comment. If 

comments have been requested, it is so 

stated. In either event, the State has 

been consulted by telephone whenever 

possible. 

Under its regulations, the Commission 

may issue and make an amendment 

immediately effective, notwithstanding 

the pendency before it of a request for 

a hearing from any person, in advance 

of the holding and completion of any 

required hearing, where it has 

determined that no significant hazards 

consideration is involved. 

The Commission has applied the 

standards of 10 CFR 50.92 and has made 

a final determination that the 

amendment involves no significant 

hazards consideration. The basis for this 

determination is contained in the 

documents related to this action. 

Accordingly, the amendments have 

been issued and made effective as 

indicated. 

Unless otherwise indicated, the 

Commission has determined that these 

amendments satisfy the criteria for 

categorical exclusion in accordance 

with 10 CFR 51.22. Therefore, pursuant 

to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental 

impact statement or environmental 

assessment need be prepared for these 

amendments. If the Commission has 

prepared an environmental assessment 

under the special circumstances 

provision in 10 CFR 51.12(b) and has 

made a determination based on that 

assessment, it is so indicated. 

For further details with respect to the 

action see: (1) The application for 

amendment, (2) the amendment to 

Facility Operating License or Combined 

License, as applicable, and (3) the 

Commission’s related letter, Safety 

Evaluation and/or Environmental 

Assessment, as indicated. All of these 

items can be accessed as described in 

the ‘‘Obtaining Information and 

Submitting Comments’’ section of this 

document. 

A. Opportunity To Request a Hearing 

and Petition for Leave To Intervene 

The Commission is also offering an 

opportunity for a hearing with respect to 

the issuance of the amendment. Within 

60 days after the date of publication of 

this notice, any persons (petitioner) 

whose interest may be affected by this 

action may file a request for a hearing 

and petition for leave to intervene 

(petition) with respect to the action. 

Petitions shall be filed in accordance 

with the Commission’s ‘‘Agency Rules 

of Practice and Procedure’’ in 10 CFR 

part 2. Interested persons should 

consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309. 

The NRC’s regulations are accessible 

electronically from the NRC Library on 

the NRC’s website at http://

www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/cfr/. Alternatively, a copy of 

the regulations is available at the NRC’s 

Public Document Room, located at One 

White Flint North, Room O1–F21, 11555 

Rockville Pike (First Floor), Rockville, 

Maryland 20852. If a petition is filed, 

the Commission or a presiding officer 

will rule on the petition and, if 

appropriate, a notice of a hearing will be 

issued. 

As required by 10 CFR 2.309(d) the 

petition should specifically explain the 

reasons why intervention should be 

permitted with particular reference to 

the following general requirements for 

standing: (1) The name, address, and 

telephone number of the petitioner; (2) 

the nature of the petitioner’s right under 

the Act to be made a party to the 

proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of 

the 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 petitioner’s interest. 

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.309(f), 

the petition must also set forth the 

specific contentions which the 

petitioner seeks to have litigated in the 

proceeding. Each contention must 

consist of a specific statement of the 

issue of law or fact to be raised or 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2019 / Notices 29 

controverted. In addition, the petitioner 

must provide a brief explanation of the 

bases for the contention and a concise 

statement of the alleged facts or expert 

opinion which support the contention 

and on which the petitioner intends to 

rely in proving the contention at the 

hearing. The petitioner must also 

provide references to the specific 

sources and documents on which the 

petitioner intends to rely to support its 

position on the issue. The petition must 

include sufficient information to show 

that a genuine dispute exists with the 

applicant or licensee on a material issue 

of law or fact. Contentions must be 

limited to matters within the scope of 

the proceeding. The contention must be 

one which, if proven, would entitle the 

petitioner to relief. A petitioner who 

fails to satisfy the requirements at 10 

CFR 2.309(f) 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. Parties have the opportunity 

to participate fully in the conduct of the 

hearing with respect to resolution of 

that party’s admitted contentions, 

including the opportunity to present 

evidence, consistent with the NRC’s 

regulations, policies, and procedures. 

Petitions must be filed no later than 

60 days from the date of publication of 

this notice. Petitions and motions for 

leave to file new or amended 

contentions that are filed after the 

deadline will not be entertained absent 

a determination by the presiding officer 

that the filing demonstrates good cause 

by satisfying the three factors in 10 CFR 

2.309(c)(1)(i) through (iii). The petition 

must be filed in accordance with the 

filing instructions in the ‘‘Electronic 

Submissions (E-Filing)’’ section of this 

document. 

If a hearing is requested, and the 

Commission has not made a final 

determination on the issue of no 

significant hazards consideration, the 

Commission will make a final 

determination on the issue of no 

significant hazards consideration. The 

final determination will serve to 

establish 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 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 the amendment 

unless the Commission finds an 

imminent danger to the health or safety 

of the public, in which case it will issue 

an appropriate order or rule under 10 

CFR part 2. 

A State, local governmental body, 

Federally-recognized Indian Tribe, or 

agency thereof, may submit a petition to 

the Commission to participate as a party 

under 10 CFR 2.309(h)(1). The petition 

should state the nature and extent of the 

petitioner’s interest in the proceeding. 

The petition should be submitted to the 

Commission no later than 60 days from 

the date of publication of this notice. 

The petition must be filed in accordance 

with the filing instructions in the 

‘‘Electronic Submissions (E-Filing)’’ 

section of this document, and should 

meet the requirements for petitions set 

forth in this section, except that under 

10 CFR 2.309(h)(2) a State, local 

governmental body, or Federallyrecognized Indian Tribe, or agency 

thereof does not need to address the 

standing requirements in 10 CFR 

2.309(d) if the facility is located within 

its boundaries. Alternatively, a State, 

local governmental body, Federallyrecognized Indian Tribe, or agency 

thereof may participate as a non-party 

under 10 CFR 2.315(c). 

If a hearing is granted, any person 

who is not a party to the proceeding and 

is not affiliated with or represented by 

a party may, at the discretion of the 

presiding officer, be permitted to make 

a limited appearance pursuant to the 

provisions of 10 CFR 2.315(a). A person 

making a limited appearance may make 

an oral or written statement of his or her 

position on the issues but may not 

otherwise participate in the proceeding. 

A limited appearance may be made at 

any session of the hearing or at any 

prehearing conference, subject to the 

limits and conditions as may be 

imposed by the presiding officer. Details 

regarding the opportunity to make a 

limited appearance will be provided by 

the presiding officer if such sessions are 

scheduled. 

B. Electronic Submissions (E-Filing) 

All documents filed in NRC 

adjudicatory proceedings, including a 

request for hearing and petition for 

leave to intervene (petition), 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 that 

request to participate under 10 CFR 

2.315(c), must be filed in accordance 

with the NRC’s E-Filing rule (72 FR 

49139; August 28, 2007, as amended at 

77 FR 46562; August 3, 2012). 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. Detailed guidance on 

making electronic submissions may be 

found in the Guidance for Electronic 

Submissions to the NRC and on the NRC 

website at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/ 

e-submittals.html. Participants may not 

submit paper copies of their filings 

unless they seek an exemption in 

accordance with the procedures 

described below. 

To comply with the procedural 

requirements of E-Filing, at least 10 

days prior to the filing deadline, the 

participant should contact the Office of 

the Secretary by email at 

hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone 

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

identification (ID) certificate, which 

allows the participant (or its counsel or 

representative) to digitally sign 

submissions and access the E-Filing 

system for any proceeding in which it 

is participating; and (2) advise the 

Secretary that the participant will be 

submitting a petition or other 

adjudicatory document (even in 

instances in which the participant, or its 

counsel or representative, already holds 

an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). 

Based upon this information, the 

Secretary will establish an electronic 

docket for the hearing in this proceeding 

if the Secretary has not already 

established an electronic docket. 

Information about applying for a 

digital ID certificate is available on the 

NRC’s public website at http://

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

getting-started.html. Once a participant 

has obtained a digital ID certificate and 

a docket has been created, the 

participant can then submit 

adjudicatory documents. Submissions 

must be in Portable Document Format 

(PDF). Additional guidance on PDF 

submissions is available on the NRC’s 

public website at http://www.nrc.gov/ 

site-help/electronic-sub-ref-mat.html. A 

filing is considered complete at the time 

the document is 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 EFiling system time-stamps the document 

and sends the submitter an email notice 

confirming receipt of the document. The 

E-Filing system also distributes an email 

notice that provides access to the 

document to the NRC’s Office of the 

General Counsel and any others who 

have advised the Office of the Secretary 

that they wish to participate in the 

proceeding, so that the filer need not 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
30 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 1 / Wednesday, January 2, 2019 / Notices 

serve the document on those 

participants separately. Therefore, 

applicants and other participants (or 

their counsel or representative) must 

apply for and receive a digital ID 

certificate before adjudicatory 

documents are filed so that they can 

obtain access to the documents via the 

E-Filing system. 

A person filing electronically using 

the NRC’s adjudicatory E-Filing system 

may seek assistance by contacting the 

NRC’s Electronic Filing Help Desk 

through the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link located 

on the NRC’s public website at http://

www.nrc.gov/site-help/ 

e-submittals.html, by email to 

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

Electronic Filing Help Desk is available 

between 9 a.m. and 6 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 stating why there is good cause for 

not filing electronically and 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, 11555 Rockville Pike, 

Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: 

Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. 

Participants filing adjudicatory 

documents in this manner are 

responsible for serving the document on 

all other participants. Filing is 

considered complete by first-class mail 

as of the time of deposit in the mail, or 

by courier, express mail, or expedited 

delivery service upon depositing the 

document with the provider of the 

service. A presiding officer, having 

granted an exemption request from 

using E-Filing, may require a participant 

or party to use E-Filing if the presiding 

officer subsequently determines that the 

reason for granting the exemption from 

use of E-Filing no longer exists. 

Documents submitted in adjudicatory 

proceedings will appear in the NRC’s 

electronic hearing docket which is 

available to the public at https://

adams.nrc.gov/ehd, unless excluded 

pursuant to an order of the Commission 

or the presiding officer. If you do not 

have an NRC-issued digital ID certificate 

as described above, click cancel when 

the link requests certificates and you 

will be automatically directed to the 

NRC’s electronic hearing dockets where 

you will be able to access any publicly 

available documents in a particular 

hearing docket. Participants are 

requested not to include personal 

privacy information, such as social 

security numbers, home addresses, or 

personal phone numbers in their filings, 

unless an NRC regulation or other law 

requires submission of such 

information. For example, in some 

instances, individuals provide home 

addresses in order to demonstrate 

proximity to a facility or site. 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. 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 

Docket No. 50–410, Nine Mile Point 

Nuclear Station, Unit 2, Oswego County, 

New York 

Date of amendment request: 

December 6, 2018, as supplemented by 

letter dated December 7, 2018. Publiclyavailable versions are in ADAMS under 

Accession Nos. ML18340A142 and 

ML18341A343, respectively. 

Brief description of amendment: The 

amendment modified the Nine Mile 

Point Nuclear Station, Unit 2, Technical 

Specification 3.5.1, ‘‘ECCS [Emergency 

Core Cooling System]—Operating,’’ for a 

one-time extension of the high pressure 

core spray completion time. 

Specifically, the amendment revised the 

completion time for an inoperable high 

pressure core spray system from 14 days 

to 35 days, until the diesel engine 

replacement and restoration of the 

diesel generator is returned to operable 

status, not to exceed 0100 hours eastern 

time on December 10, 2018. 

Additionally, the amendment allows 

extending the completion of several 

surveillance requirements of equipment 

that is being protected during the 

replacement of the high pressure core 

spray diesel generator. 

Date of issuance: December 9, 2018. 

Effective date: December 9, 2018. 

Amendment No.: 174. A publiclyavailable version is in ADAMS under 

Accession No. ML18342A015; 

documents related to this amendment 

are listed in the Safety Evaluation 

enclosed with the amendment. 

Renewed Facility Operating License 

No. NPF–69: The amendment revised 

the Renewed Facility Operating License 

and Technical Specifications. 

Public comments requested as to 

proposed no significant hazards 

consideration: No. 

The Commission’s related evaluation 

of the amendments, finding of 

emergency circumstances, State 

consultation, and final no significant 

hazards consideration determination are 

contained in a Safety Evaluation dated 

December 9, 2018. 

Attorney for licensee: Tamra Domeyer, 

Associate General Counsel, Exelon 

Generation Company, LLC, 4300 

Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555. 

NRC Branch Chief: James G. Danna. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day 

of December, 2018. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Craig G. Erlanger, 

Director, Division of Operating Reactor 

Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 2018–27915 Filed 12–31–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1