Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Nuclear Regulatory Commission

## 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 October 21, 2010 to November 3, 2010. The last biweekly notice was published on November 2, 2010 (75 FR 67399).

## 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.                           ( print page 70033)                        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, Public File Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland.                

                    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 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, Public File Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. 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/​doc-collections/​cfr/​.*                     If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order.                

As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must also identify the specific contentions which the requestor/petitioner seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.

Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the requestor/petitioner shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the requestor/petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The requestor/petitioner must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the requestor/petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the requestor/petitioner to relief. A requestor/petitioner who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.

Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing.

If a hearing is requested, the Commission will make a final determination on the issue of no significant hazards consideration. The final determination will serve to decide when the hearing is held. If the final 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, any hearing held would take place before the issuance of any amendment.

All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139, August 28, 2007). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in accordance with the procedures described below.

                    To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least ten                           ( print page 70034)                        (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 ID certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a request or petition for hearing (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.                

                    Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on NRC's public Web site at                     *http://www.nrc.gov/​site-help/​e-submittals/​apply-certificates.html.*                     System requirements for accessing the E-Submittal server are detailed in NRC's “Guidance for Electronic Submission,” which is available on the agency's public Web site at                     *http://www.nrc.gov/​site-help/​e-submittals.html.*                     Participants may attempt to use other software not listed on the Web site, but should note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted software, and the NRC Meta System Help Desk will not be able to offer assistance in using unlisted software.                

                    If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the document using the NRC's online, Web-based submission form. In order to serve documents through EIE, 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/​e-submittals.html.*

                    Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant can then submit a request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance available on the NRC public Web site at                     *http://www.nrc.gov/​site-help/​e-submittals.html.*                     A filing is considered complete at the time the documents are submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an e-mail notice confirming receipt of the document. The E-Filing system also distributes an e-mail notice that provides access to the document to the NRC Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document via the E-Filing system.                

                    A person filing electronically using the agency's adjudicatory E-Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Meta System Help Desk through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC Web site at                     *http://www.nrc.gov/​site-help/​e-submittals.html,*                     by e-mail at                     *MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov,*                     or by a toll-free call at 866-672-7640. The NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.                

                    Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001,                     *Attention:*                     Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852,                     *Attention:*                     Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from use of E-Filing no longer exists.                

                    Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in NRC's electronic hearing docket which is available to the public at                     *http://ehd.nrc.gov/​EHD_​Proceeding/​home.asp,*                     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. Non-timely 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, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. 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.*

### Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, et al., Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414, Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, York County, South Carolina

*Date of amendment request:*                     March 31, 2010.                

*Description of amendment request:*                     The amendments would revise the Technical Specifications (TSs) to relocate specific surveillance frequency requirements to a licensee-controlled program using a risk-informed justification.                

*Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:*                     As required by Title 10 of the Code of                           ( print page 70035)                        Federal Regulations (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 any accident previously evaluated?

*Response:*                         No.                    

The proposed change relocates the specified frequencies for periodic [surveillance requirements] SRs to licensee control under a new Surveillance Frequency Control Program. Surveillance frequencies are not an initiator to any accident previously evaluated. As a result, the probability of any accident previously evaluated is not significantly increased. The systems and components required by the TS for which the [surveillance frequencies] SFs are relocated are still required to be operable, meet the acceptance criteria for the surveillance requirements (SRs), and be capable of performing any mitigation function assumed in the accident analysis. As a result, the consequences of any accident previously evaluated are not significantly increased.

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 previously evaluated?

*Response:*                         No.                    

                        No new or different accidents result from utilizing the proposed changes. The changes do not involve a physical alteration of the plant (                        *i.e.,*                         no new or different type of equipment will be installed) or a change in the methods governing normal plant operation. In addition, the changes do not impose any new or different requirements.                    

The changes do not alter assumptions made in the safety analysis. The proposed changes are consistent with the safety analysis assumptions and current plant operating practice.

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 change involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety?

*Response:*                         No.                    

The design, operation, testing methods, and acceptance criteria for systems, structures, and components (SSCs), specified in applicable codes and standards (or alternatives approved for use by the NRC) will continue to be met as described in the plant licensing basis (including the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report and Bases to the Technical Specifications), since these are not affected by changes to the SFs. Similarly, there is no impact to safety analysis acceptance criteria as described in the plant licensing basis.

To evaluate a change in the relocated SF, Duke Energy will perform a probabilistic risk evaluation using the guidance contained in NRC approved NEI 04-10, Rev. 1 in accordance with the TS [surveillance frequency control program] SFCP. NEI 04-10, Rev. 1, methodology provides reasonable acceptance guidelines and methods for evaluating the risk increase of proposed changes to SFs consistent with Regulatory Guide 1.177.

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:*                     Lara S. Nichols, Associate General Counsel, Duke Energy Corporation, 526 South Church Street—EC07H, Charlotte, NC 28202.                

*NRC Branch Chief:*                     Gloria Kulesa.                

### Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370, McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, Mecklenburg County, North Carolina

*Date of amendment request:*                     March 24, 2010.                

*Description of amendment request:*                     The proposed amendments would revise the Technical Specifications (TSs) to relocate specific surveillance frequency requirements to a licensee controlled program using a risk-informed justification.                

*Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:*                     As required by Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (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 any accident previously evaluated?

*Response:*                         No.                    

The proposed change relocates the specified frequencies for periodic surveillance requirements to licensee control under a new Surveillance Frequency Control Program. Surveillance frequencies are not an initiator to any accident previously evaluated. As a result, the probability of any accident previously evaluated is not significantly increased. The systems and components required by the Technical Specifications for which the surveillance frequencies are relocated are still required to be operable, meet the acceptance criteria for the surveillance requirements, and be capable of performing any mitigation function assumed in the accident analysis. As a result, the consequences of any accident previously evaluated are not significantly increased.

Therefore, the proposed change does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.

2. Does the proposed create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any previously evaluated?

*Response:*                         No.                    

No new or different accidents result from utilizing the proposed change. The changes do not involve a physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no new or different type of equipment will be installed) or a change in the methods governing normal plant operation. In addition, the changes do not impose any new or different requirements. The changes do not alter assumptions made in the safety analysis. The proposed changes are consistent with the safety analysis assumptions and current plant operating practice.

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 change involve a significant reduction in the margin of safety?

*Response:*                         No.                    

The design, operation, testing methods, and acceptance criteria for systems, structures, and components (SSCs), specified in applicable codes and standards (or alternatives approved for use by the NRC) will continue to be met as described in the plant licensing basis (including the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report and Bases to the Technical Specifications), since these are not affected by changes to the surveillance frequencies. Similarly, there is no impact to safety analysis acceptance criteria as described in the plant licensing basis. To evaluate a change in the relocated surveillance frequency, Duke Energy will perform a probabilistic risk evaluation using the guidance contained in NRC-approved NEI 04-10, Revision 1 in accordance with the TS (surveillance frequency control program) SFCP. NEI 04-10, Revision 1, methodology provides reasonable acceptance guidelines and methods for evaluating the risk increase of proposed changes to surveillance frequencies consistent with Regulatory Guide 1.177.

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:*                     Lara S. Nichols, Associate General Counsel, Duke Energy Corporation, 526 South Church Street—EC07H, Charlotte, NC 28202.                

*NRC Branch Chief:*                     Gloria Kulesa.                

### Omaha Public Power District, Docket No. 50-285, Fort Calhoun Station, Unit No. 1, Washington County, Nebraska

*Date of amendment request:*                     July 26, 2010.                

*Description of amendment request:*                     The proposed amendment would approve the Fort Calhoun Station, Unit                           ( print page 70036)                        1 cyber security plan and associated implementation schedule, and revise the physical protect license condition to require the licensee to fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the NRC-approved Cyber Security Plan. The proposed change is consistent with Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 08-09, Revision 6, “Cyber Security Plan for Nuclear Power Reactors.”                

*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 amendment incorporates a new requirement in the Facility Operating License to implement and maintain a Cyber Security Plan as part of the facility's overall program for physical protection. Inclusion of the Cyber Security Plan in the Facility Operating License (FOL) itself does not involve any modifications to the safety-related structures, systems or components (SSCs). Rather, the Cyber Security Plan describes how the requirements of 10 CFR 73.54 are to be implemented to identify, evaluate, and mitigate cyber attacks up to and including the design basis cyber attack threat, thereby achieving high assurance that the facility's digital computer and communications systems and networks are protected from cyber attacks. The implementation and incorporation of the Cyber Security Plan into the FOL will not alter previously evaluated Updated Safety Analysis Report (USAR) design basis accident analysis assumptions, add any accident initiators, or affect the function of the plant safety-related SSCs as to how they are operated, maintained, modified, tested, or inspected.

Therefore, the proposed amendment does 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?

No.

The proposed amendment provides assurance that safety-related SSCs are protected from cyber attacks. Implementation of 10 CFR 73.54 and inclusion of the Cyber Security Plan in the FOL do not result in the need for any new or different USAR design basis accident analysis. It does not introduce new equipment that could create a new or different kind of accident, and no new equipment failure modes are created. As a result, no new accident scenarios, failure mechanisms, or limiting single failures are introduced as a result of the proposed amendment.

Therefore, the proposed amendment does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident than those previously evaluated.

3. Do the proposed changes involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety?

No.

The margin of safety is associated with the confidence in the ability of the fission product barriers (i.e., fuel cladding, reactor coolant pressure boundary, and containment structure) to limit the level of radiation to the public. The proposed amendment would not alter the way any safety-related SSC functions and would not alter the way the plant is operated. The amendment provides assurance that safety related SSCs are protected from cyber attacks. The proposed amendment would not introduce any new uncertainties or change any existing uncertainties associated with any safety limit. The proposed amendment would have no impact on the structural integrity of the fuel cladding, reactor coolant pressure boundary, or containment structure. Based on the above considerations, the proposed amendment would not degrade confidence in the ability of the fission product barriers to limit the level of radiation to the public.

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:*                     David A. Repka, Esq., Winston & Strawn, 1700 K Street, NW., Washington, DC 20006-3817.                

*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, Public File Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. 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.*

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

*Date of application for amendment:*                     June 10, 2009, supplemented by letters dated September 16, 2009, July 23, 2010, and October 4, 2010.                

*Brief description of amendment:*                     The amendment revises Table 3.3.8.1-1 to add a new time delay logic associated with Function 2 for degraded voltage concurrent with a loss-of-coolant accident to address issues discussed in NRC Inspection Report 05000341/2008008, dated June 20, 2008. The amendment also revises the maximum and minimum allowable values for the 4160 V emergency bus undervoltage for Surveillance Requirements 3.8.1.2, 3.8.1.7, 3.8.1.10, 3.8.1.11, 3.8.1.14, and 3.8.1.17.                

*Date of issuance:*                     October 20, 2010.                

*Effective date:*                     As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented upon completion of fourteenth refueling outage.                

*Amendment No.:*                     183.                

*Facility Operating License No. NPF-43:*                     Amendment revised the Technical Specifications and License.                          ( print page 70037)    

*Date of initial notice in**Federal Register:*                     August 11, 2009 (74 FR 40235). Supplemental information submitted on July 23, 2010, expanded the scope of application and was described in a revised notice published on August 10, 2010 (75 FR 48373). Supplemental information submitted on October 4, 2010, did not further change the proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published on August 10, 2010.                

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated October 20, 2010.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

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

*Date of application for amendment:*                     February 8, 2010, as supplemented by letter dated August 17, 2010.                

*Brief description of amendment:*                     The amendment modified Technical Specification (TS) requirements related to TS 3.1.3, “Control Rod OPERABILITY,” and TS 3.1.5, “Control Rod Scram Accumulators,” to be consistent with NUREG-1433, “Standard Technical Specifications General Electric Plants, BWR/4.” The amendment also corrects certain typographical errors.                

*Date of issuance:*                     October 25, 2010.                

*Effective date:*                     As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented within 90 days from the date of issuance.                

*Amendment No.:*                     216.                

*Facility Operating License No. NPF-21:*                     The amendment revised the Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.                

*Date of initial notice in**Federal Register*                    : April 6, 2010 (75 FR 17442). The supplemental letter dated August 17, 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 October 25, 2010.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

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

*Date of application for amendment:*                     April 28, 2010, as supplemented by letter dated August 9, 2010.                

*Brief description of amendment:*                     The amendment revised the Final Safety Analysis Report to support U.S. Department of Energy non-intrusive surveillance and characterization activities within the 618-11 High-Level Waste Burial Ground.                

*Date of issuance:*                     October 25, 2010.                

*Effective date:*                     As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days from the date of issuance.                

*Amendment No.:*                     217.                

*Facility Operating License No. NPF-21:*                     The amendment revised the Facility Operating License.                

*Date of initial notice in**Federal Register*                    : June 29, 2010 (75 FR 37473). The supplemental letter dated August 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 October 25, 2010.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

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

*Date of application for amendment:*                     April 28, 2010, as supplemented by letter dated August 9, 2010.                

*Brief description of amendment:*                     The proposed change revised the Emergency Plan to address U.S. Department of Energy non-intrusive surveillance and characterization activities within the 618-11 Waste Burial Ground.                

*Date of issuance:*                     November 3, 2010.                

*Effective date:*                     As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days from the date of issuance.                

*Amendment No.:*                     218.                

*Facility Operating License No. NPF-21:*                     The amendment revised the Facility Operating License and the Emergency Plan.                

*Date of initial notice in**Federal Register:*                     June 29, 2010 (75 FR 37473). The supplemental letter dated August 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 November 3, 2010.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

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

*Date of application for amendment:*                     March 31, 2010.                

*Brief description of amendment:*                     The amendment revised the Technical Specifications (TSs) to add a channel check surveillance requirement to TS 3.3.6.1, “Primary Containment Isolation Instrumentation,” for the reactor pressure vessel low water level isolation signal to the primary containment isolation valves.                

*Date of issuance:*                     November 3, 2010.                

*Effective date:*                     As of its date of issuance and shall be implemented prior to entry into Mode 2 during restart from Refueling Outage R-20, currently scheduled for spring 2011.                

*Amendment No.:*                     219.                

*Facility Operating License No. NPF-21:*                     The amendment revised the Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.                

*Date of initial notice in**Federal Register*                    : June 1, 2010 (75 FR 30445).                

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated November 3, 2010.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

### Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, LLC, and Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 50-458, River Bend Station, Unit 1, West Feliciana Parish, Louisiana

*Date of amendment request:*                     January 28, 2010.                

*Brief description of amendment:*                     The amendment revised Section 13.3.4.2.2.4, “Plant Systems Engineering, Repair, and Corrective Actions,” and Table 13.3-17, “Shift Staffing and Augmentation Capabilities,” of the River Bend Station (RBS) Emergency Plan. The revision will allow two maintenance positions on shift to be filled with any combination of the three maintenance craft disciplines. Currently, Table 13.3-17 of the Emergency Plan only allows electrical or instrumentation and control technicians to fill these two positions.                

*Date of issuance:*                     October 21, 2010.                

*Effective date:*                     As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented 90 days from the date of issuance.                          ( print page 70038)    

*Amendment No.:*                     169.                

*Facility Operating License No. NPF-47:*                     The amendment revised the Facility Operating License and Technical Specifications.                

*Date of initial notice in**Federal Register:*                     April 6, 2010 (75 FR 17442).                

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated October 21, 2010.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

### Luminant Generation Company LLC, Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446, Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Somervell County, Texas

*Date of amendment request:*                     October 26, 2009, as supplemented by letter dated May 4, 2010.                

*Brief description of amendments:*                     The amendments revised Technical Specification (TS) 3.8.1 entitled “AC [Alternating Current] Sources—Operating,” to extend, on a one-time basis, the allowable Completion Time of Required Action A.3 for one offsite circuit inoperable, from 72 hours to 14 days. This change is only applicable to startup transformer (ST) XST2 and will expire on March 1, 2011. This change is needed to allow sufficient time to make final terminations as part of a plant modification to facilitate connection of either ST XST2 or the spare ST to the Class 1E buses.                

*Date of issuance:*                     October 29, 2010.                

*Effective date:*                     As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 120 days from the date of issuance.                

*Amendment Nos.:*                     Unit 1-152; Unit 2-152.                

*Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-87 and NPF-89:*                     The amendments revised the Facility Operating Licenses and Technical Specifications.                

*Date of initial notice in**Federal Register*                    : January 26, 2010 (75 FR 4117). The supplemental letter dated May 4, 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 October 29, 2010.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

### Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket Nos. 50-259, 50-260, and 50-296, Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, and 3, Limestone County, Alabama

*Date of application for amendment:*                     October 20, 2009.                

*Brief description of amendment:*                     The amendments delete paragraph d of Technical Specification (TS) 5.2.2, “Unit Staff,” to eliminate working-hour restrictions in the TS, as similar requirements are sufficiently imposed by Title 10 of the                     *Code of Federal Regulations*                     (10 CFR), Part 26, Subpart I.                

*Date of issuance:*                     October 29, 2010.                

*Effective date:*                     As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 30 days.                

*Amendment Nos.:*                     278, 305, and 264.                

*Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-33, DPR-52, and DPR-68:*                     Amendment revised the License and TSs.                

*Date of initial notice in**Federal Register*                    : December 1, 2009 (74 FR 62836).                

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated October 29, 2010.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: Nos. 278, 305, and 264.

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

*Date of application for amendment:*                     September 28, 2009, as supplemented by letters dated  April 8, and May 10, 2010.                

*Brief description of amendment:*                     The amendments revised the Technical Specifications (TSs) by adding new Conditions B and C with associated Action Statements and Completion Times to TS 3.7.12 and modifying Conditions A and D. The changes specifically addressed the filtration function of the Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) Pump Room Exhaust Air Cleanup System (PREACS).                

*Date of issuance:*                     November 1, 2010.                

*Effective date:*                     As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented within 60 days from the date of issuance.                

*Amendment Nos.:*                     260 and 241.                

*Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-4 and NPF-7:*                     Amendments changed the licenses and the TSs.                

*Date of initial notice in**Federal Register*                    : December 1, 2009 (74 FR 62838).                

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendments is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated November 1, 2010. The supplemental letters 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 hazard consideration determination.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

### Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, Docket No. 50-482, Wolf Creek Generating Station, Coffey County, Kansas

*Date of amendment request:*                     January 28, 2010.                

*Brief description of amendment:*                     The amendment revised the Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) of Technical Specification 3.6.3, “Containment Isolation Valves,” for Wolf Creek Generating Station. A note has been added to LCO 3.6.3 to allow the reactor coolant pump seal injection valves to be considered OPERABLE with the valves open and power removed.                

*Date of issuance:*                     November 3, 2010.                

*Effective date:*                     As the date of issuance and will be implemented within 90 days of the date of issuance.                

*Amendment No.:*                     190.                

*Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-42.*                     The amendment revised the Operating License and Technical Specifications.                

*Date of initial notice in**Federal Register*                    : March 23, 2010 (75 FR 13792).                

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment is contained in a Safety Evaluation dated November 3, 2010.

No significant hazards consideration comments received: No.

## Notice of Issuance of Amendments To Facility Operating 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,                           ( print page 70039)                        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, 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, Public File Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. 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 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.*

                    The Commission is also offering an opportunity for a hearing with respect to the issuance of the amendment. Within 60 days after the date of publication of this notice, any person(s) whose interest may be affected by this action may file a request for a hearing and a petition to intervene with respect to issuance of the amendment to the subject facility operating license. Requests for a hearing and a petition for leave to intervene shall be filed in accordance with the Commission's “Rules of Practice for Domestic Licensing Proceedings” in 10 CFR Part 2. Interested person(s) should consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is available at the Commission's PDR, located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 01F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland, and electronically on the Internet at the NRC Web site,                     *http://www.nrc.gov/​reading-rm/​doc-collections/​cfr/​.*                     If there are problems in accessing the document, contact the PDR Reference staff at 1 (800) 397-4209, (301) 415-4737, or by e-mail to                     *pdr.resource@nrc.gov.*                     If a request for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene is filed by the above date, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order.                

As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the requestor's/petitioner's right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor's/petitioner's property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestor's/petitioner's interest. The petition must also identify the specific contentions which the requestor/petitioner seeks to have litigated at the proceeding.

                    Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the requestor/petitioner shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner is aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact.[1]                                          Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner to relief. A requestor/petitioner who fails to satisfy                           ( print page 70040)                        these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party.                

Each contention shall be given a separate numeric or alpha designation within one of the following groups:

1. Technical—primarily concerns/issues relating to technical and/or health and safety matters discussed or referenced in the applications.

2. Environmental—primarily concerns/issues relating to matters discussed or referenced in the environmental analysis for the applications.

3. Miscellaneous—does not fall into one of the categories outlined above.

As specified in 10 CFR 2.309, if two or more petitioners/requestors seek to co-sponsor a contention, the petitioners/requestors shall jointly designate a representative who shall have the authority to act for the petitioners/requestors with respect to that contention. If a requestor/petitioner seeks to adopt the contention of another sponsoring requestor/petitioner, the requestor/petitioner who seeks to adopt the contention must either agree that the sponsoring requestor/petitioner shall act as the representative with respect to that contention, or jointly designate with the sponsoring requestor/petitioner a representative who shall have the authority to act for the petitioners/requestors with respect to that contention.

Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing. Since the Commission has made a final determination that the amendment involves no significant hazards consideration, if a hearing is requested, it will not stay the effectiveness of the amendment. Any hearing held would take place while the amendment is in effect.

All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139, August 28, 2007). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit and serve all adjudicatory documents over the internet, or in some cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in accordance with the procedures described below.

                    To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 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 ID certificate, which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal server for any proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary that the participant will be submitting a request or petition for hearing (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate). Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not already established an electronic docket.                

                    Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is available on NRC's public Web site at                     *http://www.nrc.gov/​site-help/​e-submittals/​apply-certificates.html.*                     System requirements for accessing the E-Submittal server are detailed in NRC's “Guidance for Electronic Submission,” which is available on the agency's public Web site at                     *http://www.nrc.gov/​site-help/​e-submittals.html.*                     Participants may attempt to use other software not listed on the Web site, but should note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted software, and the NRC Meta System Help Desk will not be able to offer assistance in using unlisted software.                

                    If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the document using the NRC's online, Web-based submission form. In order to serve documents through EIE, 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/​e-submittals.html.*

                    Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a docket has been created, the participant can then submit a request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance available on the NRC public Web site at                     *http://www.nrc.gov/​site-help/​e-submittals.html.*                     A filing is considered complete at the time the documents are submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends the submitter an e-mail notice confirming receipt of the document. The E-Filing system also distributes an e-mail notice that provides access to the document to the NRC Office of the General Counsel and any others who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document via the E-Filing system.                

                    A person filing electronically using the agency's adjudicatory E-Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Meta System Help Desk through the “Contact Us” link located on the NRC Web site at                     *http://www.nrc.gov/​site-help/​e-submittals.html,*                     by e-mail at                     *MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov,*                     or by a toll-free call at 866-672-7640. The NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.                

                    Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001,                     *Attention:*                     Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852,                     *Attention:*                     Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier, express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a participant                           ( print page 70041)                        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://ehd.nrc.gov/​EHD_​Proceeding/​home.asp,*                     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.                

### Northern States Power Company—Minnesota, Docket No. 50-282, Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant (PINGP), Unit 1, Goodhue County, Minnesota

*Date of amendment request:*                     October 14, 2010, as supplemented by letters dated October 16, October 17, October 18 and October 20, 2010.                

*Description of amendment request:*                     This amendment revises the Technical Specifications Surveillance Requirement (SR) 3.8.1.10(c), by allowing the PINGP Unit 1 12 Battery Charger to not be energized during the safety injection testing of emergency diesel generator D2, until a modification is completed during the Unit 1 2011 refueling outage. Prior to start up from the 2011 refueling outage, the 12 Battery Charger will be tested in accordance with SR 3.8.1.10(c).                

*Date of issuance:*                     October 22, 2010.                

*Effective date:*                     As of the date of issuance and shall be implemented immediately.                

*Amendment No.:*                     198.                

*Facility Operating License No. DPR-42:*                     Amendment revises the Technical Specifications                

*Public comments requested as to proposed no significant hazards consideration (NSHC):*                     Yes. Public notice of the proposed amendment was published in the                     *Red Wing Republican Eagle*                     newspaper, located in Red Wing, Goodhue County, Minnesota, and the                     *Minneapolis Star Tribune*                     newspaper, located in Minneapolis, Minnesota, on October 20, 2010. The notice provided an opportunity to submit comments on the Commission's proposed NSHC determination. No comments have been received.                

The supplemental letters contained clarifying information and did not change this initial no significant hazard consideration determination, and did not expand the scope of the original notice.

The Commission's related evaluation of the amendment, finding of exigent circumstances, state consultation, and final NSHC determination are contained in a safety evaluation dated October 22, 2010.

*Attorney for licensee:*                     Peter M. Glass, Assistant General Counsel, Xcel Energy Services, Inc., 414 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, MN 55401.                

*NRC Branch Chief:*                     Robert J. Pascarelli.                

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of November 2010.

For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Joseph G. Giitter,

Director, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

# Footnotes

1.                             To the extent that the applications contain attachments and supporting documents that are not publicly available because they are asserted to contain safeguards or proprietary information, petitioners desiring access to this information should contact the applicant or applicant's counsel and discuss the need for a protective order.                    
        Back to Citation      

[FR Doc. 2010-28822 Filed 11-15-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P