46926 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 12, 2008 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Employment and Training 

Administration 

[TA–W–63,604] 

Destron Fearing Corporation, Animal 

Applications Division, South Saint 

Paul, MN; Notice of Revised 

Determination on Reconsideration of 

Alternative Trade Adjustment 

Assistance 

By letter dated July 30, 2008, a State 

agency representative requested 

administrative reconsideration 

regarding Alternative Trade Adjustment 

Assistance (ATAA) applicable to 

workers of the subject firm. The 

negative determination was signed on 

July 17, 2008 and published in the 

Federal Register on July 30, 2008 (73 FR 

44284). 

The workers of Destron Fearing 

Corporation, Animal Applications 

Division, South Saint Paul, Minnesota 

were certified eligible to apply for Trade 

Adjustment Assistance (TAA) on July 

17, 2008. 

The initial ATAA investigation 

determined that the skills of the subject 

worker group are easily transferable to 

other positions in the local area. 

In the request for reconsideration, the 

petitioner provided sufficient 

information confirming that the skills of 

the workers at the subject firm are not 

easily transferable in the local 

commuting area. 

Additional investigation has 

determined that the workers possess 

skills that are not easily transferable. A 

significant number or proportion of the 

worker group are age fifty years or over. 

Competitive conditions within the 

industry are adverse. 

Conclusion 

After careful review of the additional 

facts obtained on reconsideration, I 

conclude that the requirements of 

Section 246 of the Trade Act of 1974, as 

amended, have been met for workers at 

the subject firm. 

In accordance with the provisions of 

the Act, I make the following 

certification: 

All workers of Destron Fearing 

Corporation, Animal Applications Division, 

South Saint Paul, Minnesota, who became 

totally or partially separated from 

employment on or after June 26, 2007 

through July 17, 2010, are eligible to apply 

for trade adjustment assistance under Section 

223 of the Trade Act of 1974 and are also 

eligible to apply for alternative trade 

adjustment assistance under Section 246 of 

the Trade Act of 1974. 

Signed in Washington, DC, this 6th day of 

August 2008. 

Linda G. Poole, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade 

Adjustment Assistance. 

[FR Doc. E8–18584 Filed 8–11–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–FN–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

Biweekly Notice; Applications and 

Amendments to Facility Operating 

Licenses Involving No Significant 

Hazards Considerations 

I. Background 

Pursuant to section 189a. (2) of the 

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended 

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

Commission (the Commission or NRC 

staff) 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 July 17, 

2008 to July 30, 2008. The last biweekly 

notice was published on July 29, 2008 

(73 FR 43953). 

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of 

Amendments to Facility Operating 

Licenses, Proposed No Significant 

Hazards Consideration Determination, 

and Opportunity for a Hearing 

The Commission has made a 

proposed determination that the 

following amendment requests involve 

no significant hazards consideration. 

Under the Commission’s regulations in 

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, Rulemaking, 

Directives and Editing Branch, 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 delivered to Room 6D22, Two 

White Flint North, 11545 Rockville 

Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 

a.m. to 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. 

Copies of written comments received 

may be examined at the Commission’s 

Public Document Room (PDR), located 

at One White Flint North, Public File 

Area O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 

floor), Rockville, Maryland. The filing of 

requests for a hearing and petitions for 

leave to intervene is discussed below. 

Within 60 days after the date of 

publication of this notice, person(s) may 

file a request for a hearing with respect 

to issuance of the amendment to the 

subject facility operating license and 

any person whose interest may be 

affected by this proceeding and who 

wishes to participate as a party in the 

proceeding must file a written request 

via electronic submission through the 

NRC E-Filing system for a hearing and 

a petition for leave to intervene. 

Requests for a hearing and a petition for 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 12, 2008 / Notices 46927 

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. 

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 within 60 

days, 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 set forth the specific 

contentions which the petitioner/ 

requestor 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 petitioner/requestor 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/requestor 

intends to rely in proving the contention 

at the hearing. The petitioner/requestor 

must also provide references to those 

specific sources and documents of 

which the petitioner is aware and on 

which the petitioner/requestor intends 

to rely to establish those facts or expert 

opinion. The petition must include 

sufficient information to show that a 

genuine dispute exists with the 

applicant on a material issue of law or 

fact. Contentions shall be limited to 

matters within the scope of the 

amendment under consideration. The 

contention must be one which, if 

proven, would entitle the petitioner/ 

requestor to relief. A petitioner/ 

requestor 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, 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 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. 

A request for hearing or a petition for 

leave to intervene must be filed in 

accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule, 

which the NRC promulgated in August 

28, 2007 (72 FR 49139). The E-Filing 

process requires participants to submit 

and serve 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 a waiver in 

accordance with the procedures 

described below. 

To comply with the procedural 

requirements of E-Filing, at least five (5) 

days prior to the filing deadline, the 

petitioner/requestor must contact the 

Office of the Secretary by e-mail at 

hearingdocket@nrc.gov, or by calling 

(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/or (2) creation of an 

electronic docket for the proceeding 

(even in instances in which the 

petitioner/requestor (or its counsel or 

representative) already holds an NRCissued digital ID certificate). Each 

petitioner/requestor will need to 

download the Workplace Forms 

ViewerTM to access the Electronic 

Information Exchange (EIE), a 

component of the E-Filing system. The 

Workplace Forms ViewerTM is free and 

is available at http://www.nrc.gov/sitehelp/e-submittals/install-viewer.html. 

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/applycertificates.html. 

Once a petitioner/requestor has 

obtained a digital ID certificate, had a 

docket created, and downloaded the EIE 

viewer, it can then submit a request for 

hearing or petition for leave to 

intervene. Submissions should be in 

Portable Document Format (PDF) in 

accordance with NRC guidance 

available on the NRC public Web site at 

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

complete at the time the filer submits its 

documents through EIE. To be timely, 

an electronic filing must be submitted to 

the EIE 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 

EIE 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 may 

seek assistance through the ‘‘Contact 

Us’’ link located on the NRC Web site 

at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html or by calling the NRC 

technical help line, which is available 

between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., 

Eastern Time, Monday through Friday. 

The help line number is (800) 397–4209 

or locally, (301) 415–4737. 

Participants who believe that they 

have a good cause for not submitting 

documents electronically must file a 

motion, in accordance with 10 CFR 

2.302(g), with their initial paper filing 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
46928 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 12, 2008 / Notices 

requesting authorization to continue to 

submit documents in paper format. 

Such filings must be submitted by: (1) 

First class mail addressed to the Office 

of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention: 

Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or 

(2) courier, express mail, or expedited 

delivery service to the Office of the 

Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White 

Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, 

Rockville, Maryland, 20852, Attention: 

Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. 

Participants filing a document in this 

manner are responsible for serving the 

document on all other participants. 

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

the mail, or by courier, express mail, or 

expedited delivery service upon 

depositing the document with the 

provider of the service. 

Non-timely requests and/or petitions 

and contentions will not be entertained 

absent a determination by the 

Commission, the presiding officer, or 

the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 

that the petition and/or request should 

be granted and/or the contentions 

should be admitted, based on a 

balancing of the factors specified in 10 

CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)-(viii). To be timely, 

filings must be submitted no later than 

11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due 

date. 

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, an Atomic Safety and 

Licensing Board, or a 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. 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 this 

amendment action, 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 01F21, 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. 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. 

AmerGen Energy Company, LLC, 

Docket No. 50–461, Clinton Power 

Station, Unit No. 1, DeWitt County, 

Illinois. 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 

Docket Nos. 50–237 and 50–249, 

Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 

and 3, Grundy County, Illinois. 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 

Docket Nos. 50–373 and 50–374, LaSalle 

County Station, Units 1 and 2, LaSalle 

County, Illinois. 

AmerGen Energy Company, LLC, et 

al., Docket No. 50–219, Oyster Creek 

Nuclear Generating Station, Ocean 

County, New Jersey. 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 

and PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50–

277 and 50–278, Peach Bottom Atomic 

Power Station, Units 2 and 3, York and 

Lancaster Counties, Pennsylvania. 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 

Docket Nos. 50–254 and 50–265, Quad 

Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 

and 2, Rock Island County, Illinois. 

Date of amendment request: June 9, 

2008. 

Description of amendment request: 

The proposed amendments would adopt 

the Technical Specification Task Force 

(TSTF) Standard Technical 

Specification (STS) change TSTF–475, 

Revision 1. The amendments would: (1) 

(a) Revise the TS surveillance 

requirement (SR) frequency in TS 3.1.3, 

‘‘Control Rod OPERABILITY’’ (except 

for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating 

Station), and (b) revise the TS 

surveillance requirement in TS 4.2, 

‘‘Reactivity Control,’’ Specification D 

(for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating 

Station); (2) clarify the requirement to 

fully insert all insertable control rods for 

the limiting condition for operation 

(LCO) in TS 3.3.1.2, Required Action 

E.2, ‘‘Source Range Monitoring 

Instrumentation’’ (Clinton Power 

Station only); and (3) revise Example 

1.4–3 in section 1.4 ‘‘Frequency’’ to 

clarify the applicability of the 1.25 

surveillance test interval extension 

(Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating 

Station excluded). 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

(NRC) staff issued a notice of 

opportunity for comment in the Federal 

Register on November 13, 2007 (72 FR 

63935), on possible license amendments 

adopting TSTF–475 using the NRC’s 

consolidated line item improvement 

process (CLIIP) for amending licensees’

TSs, which included a model safety 

evaluation (SE) and model no 

significant hazards consideration 

(NSHC) determination. The NRC staff 

subsequently issued a notice of 

availability of the models for referencing 

in license amendment applications in 

the Federal Register on August 16, 2007 

(72 FR 46103), which included the 

resolution of public comments on the 

model SE. The August 16, 2007, notice 

of availability referenced the November 

13, 2007, notice. The licensee has 

affirmed the applicability of the 

November 13, 2007, NSHC 

determination in its application. 

Basis for proposed no significant 

hazards consideration determination: 

As required by 10 CFR 50.91(a), an 

analysis of the issue of no significant 

hazards consideration is presented 

below: 

Criterion 1—The Proposed Change Does 

Not Involve a Significant Increase in the 

Probability or Consequences of an 

Accident Previously Evaluated 

The proposed change generically 

implements TSTF–475, Revision 1, 

’’Control Rod Notch Testing Frequency 

and SRM Insert Control Rod Action.’’

TSTF–475, Revision 1, modifies 

NUREG–1433 (BWR/4) and NUREG–

1434 (BWR/6) STS. The changes: (1) 

Revise TS testing frequency for 

surveillance requirement (SR) 3.1.3.2 in 

TS 3.1.3, for the subject plants, except 

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating 

Station, and the TS surveillance 

requirement in TS 4.2, Specification D 

for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating 

Station, (2) clarify the requirement to 

fully insert all insertable control rods for 

the limiting condition for operation 

(LCO) in TS 3.3.1.2, Required Action 

E.2, ’’Source Range Monitoring 

Instrumentation’’ (NUREG–1434 only), 

and (3) revise Example 1.4–3 in Section 

1.4, ‘‘Frequency,’’ to clarify the 

applicability of the 1.25 surveillance 

test interval extension. This change does 

not affect either the design or operation 

of the Control Rod Drive Mechanism 

(CRDM). The affected surveillance and 

Required Action is not considered to be 

an initiator of any analyzed event. 

Revising the frequency for notch testing 

fully withdrawn control rods will not 

affect the ability of the control rods to 

shutdown the reactor if required. Given 

the extremely reliable nature of the 

CRDM, as demonstrated through 

industry operating experience, the 

proposed monthly notch testing of all 

withdrawn control rods continues to 

provide a high level of confidence in 

control rod operability. Hence, the 

overall intent of the notch testing 

surveillances, which is to detect either 

random stuck control rods or identify 

generic concerns affecting control rod 

operability, is not significantly affected 

by the proposed change. Requiring 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 12, 2008 / Notices 46929 

control rods to be fully inserted when 

the associated SRM is inoperable is 

consistent with other similar 

requirements and will increase the 

shutdown margin. The clarification of 

Example 1.4–3 in Section 1.4, 

‘‘Frequency,’’ is an editorial change 

made to provide consistency with other 

discussions in Section 1.4. Therefore, 

the proposed changes do not involve a 

significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated. The consequences of an 

accident after adopting TSTF–475, 

Revision 1, are no different than the 

consequences of an accident prior to 

adoption. Therefore, this change does 

not involve a significant increase in the 

probability or consequences of an 

accident previously evaluated. 

Criterion 2—The Proposed Change Does 

Not Create the Possibility of a New or 

Different Kind of Accident From any 

Accident Previously Evaluated 

The proposed change does not 

involve a physical alteration of the plant 

(no new or different type of equipment 

will be installed) or a change in the 

methods governing normal plant 

operation. The proposed change will not 

introduce new failure modes or effects 

and will not, in the absence of other 

unrelated failures, lead to an accident 

whose consequences exceed the 

consequences of accidents previously 

analyzed. Thus, this change does not 

create the possibility of a new or 

different kind of accident from any 

accident previously evaluated. 

Criterion 3—The Proposed Change Does 

Not Involve a Significant Reduction in 

the Margin of Safety 

TSTF–475, Revision 1, will: (1) Revise 

the TS SR 3.1.3.2 frequency in TS 3.1.3, 

‘‘Control Rod OPERABILITY,’’ (2) 

clarify the requirement to fully insert all 

insertable control rods for the limiting 

condition for operation (LCO) in TS 

3.3.1.2, ‘‘Source Range Monitoring 

Instrumentation,’’ and (3) revise 

Example 1.4–3 in Section 1.4, 

‘‘Frequency,’’ to clarify the applicability 

of the 1.25 surveillance test interval 

extension. The GE Nuclear Energy 

Report, ‘‘CRD Notching Surveillance 

Testing for Limerick Generating 

Station,’’ dated November 2006, 

concludes that extending the control rod 

notch test interval from weekly to 

monthly is not expected to impact the 

reliability of the scram system and that 

the analysis supports the decision to 

change the surveillance frequency. 

Therefore, the proposed changes in 

TSTF–475, Revision 1, do not involve a 

significant reduction in a margin of 

safety. 

The NRC staff proposes to determine 

that the amendment requests involve no 

significant hazards consideration. 

Attorney for licensee: Bradley Fewell, 

Associate General Counsel, Exelon 

Generation Company, LLC, 4300 

Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555. 

NRC Branch Chief: Russell Gibbs. 

Carolina Power & Light Company, et 

al., Docket No. 50–400, Shearon Harris 

Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Wake and 

Chatham Counties, North Carolina. 

Date of amendment request: April 30, 

2008. 

Description of amendment request: 

The proposed amendment would revise 

Technical Specification (TS) section 

3.7.5a to restore the Ultimate Heat Sink 

(UHS) Main Reservoir minimum level to 

the value allowed by the initial 

operating license as a result of 

improvements made to the Emergency 

Service Water system. The change will 

allow continued plant operation to a 

Main Reservoir minimum level of 206 

feet (ft) Mean Sea Level (MSL) in Modes 

1–4, versus the current minimum 

allowed level of 215 ft MSL. 

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 change to decrease the UHS 

Main Reservoir minimum level does not alter 

the function, design, or operating practices 

for plant systems or components. The UHS 

is utilized to remove heat loads from plant 

systems during normal and accident 

conditions. This function is not expected or 

postulated to result in the generation of any 

accident and continues to adequately satisfy 

the associated safety functions with the 

proposed change. Therefore, the probability 

of an accident presently evaluated in the 

safety analyses will not be increased because 

the UHS function does not have the potential 

to be the source of an accident. 

The heat loads that the UHS is designed to 

accommodate have been evaluated for 

functionality with the reduced level 

requirement. The result of these evaluations 

is that there is existing margin associated 

with the systems that utilize the UHS for 

normal and accident conditions. This margin 

is sufficient to accommodate the postulated 

normal and accident heat loads with the 

proposed change to the UHS. Since the safety 

functions of the UHS are maintained, the 

systems that ensure acceptable offsite dose 

consequences will continue to operate as 

designed. Therefore, the proposed change 

does not involve a significant increase in the 

probability or consequences of an accident 

previously evaluated. 

2. Does the proposed amendment create 

the possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change does not introduce 

any new modes of plant operation and will 

not result in a change to the design function 

of any structure, system, or component that 

is used for accident mitigation. By allowing 

the proposed change in the UHS Main 

Reservoir level, only the parameters for UHS 

operation are changed, while the safety 

functions of the UHS and systems that 

provide heat sink capability continue to be 

maintained. The UHS function provides 

accident mitigation capabilities and does not 

reflect the potential for accident generation. 

Therefore, the possibility for creating a new 

or different kind of accident is not feasible 

because the UHS is only utilized for heat 

removal functions that are not a potential 

source for accident generation. 

The proposed change does not result in 

any credible new failure mechanisms, 

malfunctions, or accident initiators not 

considered in the original design and 

licensing basis. The engineering analyses 

performed to support the proposed change 

demonstrate that affected safety-related 

systems and components are capable of 

performing their intended safety functions at 

the reduced Main Reservoir level. Therefore, 

the proposed change will not create the 

possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any previously evaluated. 

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 the margin of 

safety? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change has been evaluated 

for systems that are needed to support 

accident mitigation functions as well as 

normal operational evolutions. Operational 

margins were found to exist in the systems 

that utilize the UHS capabilities such that 

this proposed change will not result in the 

loss of any safety function necessary for 

normal or accident conditions. While 

operating margins have been reduced by the 

proposed changes, safety margins have been 

maintained as assumed in the accident 

analyses for postulated events. Therefore, the 

proposed changes do not involve a 

significant reduction in the margin of safety. 

The NRC staff has reviewed the 

licensee’s analysis and, based on this 

review, it appears that the three 

standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 

satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff 

proposes to determine that the 

amendment request involves no 

significant hazards consideration. 

Attorney for licensee: David T. 

Conley, Associate General Counsel II—

Legal Department, Progress Energy 

Service Company, LLC, Post Office Box 

1551, Raleigh, North Carolina 27602. 

NRC Branch Chief: Thomas H. Boyce. 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 

Docket Nos. 50–373 and 50–374, LaSalle 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
46930 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 12, 2008 / Notices 

County Station, Units 1 and 2, LaSalle 

County, Illinois. 

Date of amendment request: May 2, 

2008. 

Description of amendment request: 

The proposed amendments would 

revise Technical Specification (TS) 

3.8.3, ‘‘Diesel Fuel Oil and Starting 

Air,’’ to replace the numerical volume 

requirements for stored diesel fuel oil 

inventory with requirements that state 

that volumes equivalent to seven days 

and six days of fuel oil are available. 

Exelon Generation Company is 

requesting to move the diesel fuel oil 

numerical volumes equivalent to sevenday and six-day supplies to the TS 

Bases. 

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 TS change involve a 

significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change relocates the 

numerical volume of diesel fuel oil required 

to support seven-day operation of the onsite 

DGs [diesel generators], and the numerical 

volume equivalent to a six-day supply, to 

licensee control. The specific volumes of fuel 

oil equivalent to a seven-day and six day 

supply is calculated considering the DG 

manufacturer’s fuel oil consumption rates 

and the energy content of ULSD [ultra low 

sulfur diesel] fuel. Moreover, these 

calculations consider the entire range of API 

[American Petroleum Industry] gravities 

allowed by the LSCS [LaSalle County 

Station] Diesel Fuel Oil Testing Program. The 

requirement to meet UFSAR [Updated Final 

Safety Analysis Report] 9.5.4.1.1.d, diesel 

loading assumptions, maintain a seven-day 

supply, and the actions taken when the 

volume of fuel oil available is less than a sixday supply have not changed. These 

requirements remain consistent with the 

assumptions in the accident analyses, and 

neither the probability, nor the consequences 

of any accident previously evaluated will be 

affected by the proposed change. 

Therefore, the proposed change does not 

involve a significant increase in the 

probability or consequences of an accident 

previously evaluated. 

2. Does the proposed TS change create the 

possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any previously evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change does not involve any 

physical alteration of the plant (i.e., no new 

or different type of equipment will be 

installed), or affect the control parameters 

governing unit operation, or the response of 

plant equipment to transient conditions. The 

proposed change is consistent with the safety 

analysis assumptions. 

Based on the above information, 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 TS change involve a 

significant reduction in a margin of safety? 

Response: No. 

The proposed change relocates the 

numerical volumes of diesel fuel oil required 

to support seven-day operation of the onsite 

DGs, and the numerical volumes equivalent 

to a six-day supply, to licensee control. As 

the bases for the existing limits on diesel fuel 

oil are not changed, no change is made to the 

accident analysis assumptions, and no 

margin of safety is reduced as part of this 

change. 

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 

requested amendments involve no 

significant hazards consideration. 

Attorney for licensee: Mr. Bradley J. 

Fewell, Associate General Counsel, 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 4300 

Winfield Road, Warrenville, IL 60555. 

NRC Branch Chief: Russell Gibbs. 

Nuclear Management Company, LLC, 

Docket No. 50–263, Monticello Nuclear 

Generating Plant, Wright County, 

Minnesota. 

Date of amendment request: June 26, 

2008. 

Description of amendment request: 

The licensee proposed to amend the 

Technical Specifications, revising 

existing Condition D of Specification 

3.5.1, ‘‘ECCS [Emergency Core Cooling 

System]—Operating,’’ to: (1) Apply to 

two entire Low-Pressure Core Injection 

(LPCI) subsystems being inoperable 

(currently, the Condition applies when 

two LPCl subsystems are inoperable due 

to inoperable injection paths); (2) add a 

new Condition E to provide a 72-hour 

completion time when one Core Spray 

subsystem and one LPCl subsystem (or 

one or two LPCl pump(s) are inoperable; 

(3) add a new Condition F to provide a 

72-hour completion time when both 

Core Spray subsystems are inoperable; 

and (4) re-designate the Conditions and 

Required Actions (starting at existing 

letter E) to reflect the insertion of new 

Conditions E and F (i.e., these are 

purely editorial changes). 

Basis for proposed no significant 

hazards consideration determination: 

As required by Title 10 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 

50.91(a), the licensee has provided its 

analysis of the issue of no significant 

hazards consideration (NSHC). The 

licensee’s NSHC analysis is reproduced 

below: 

1. Does the proposed amendment involve 

a significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The low pressure Emergency Core Cooling 

System (ECCS) subsystems are designed to 

inject to reflood or to spray the core after any 

size break up to and including a design basis 

Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA). The 

proposed changes to the Required Actions 

and associated Completion Times do not 

change the conditions, operating 

configurations, or minimum amount of 

operating equipment assumed in the safety 

analysis for accident mitigation. No changes 

are proposed to the manner in which the 

ECCS provides plant protection or which 

would create new modes of plant operation. 

The proposed changes will not affect the 

probability of any event initiators. There will 

be no degradation in the performance of, or 

an increase in the number of challenges 

imposed on, safety related equipment 

assumed to function during an accident 

situation. There will be no change to normal 

plant operating parameters or accident 

mitigation performance. 

Therefore, the proposed 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. 

There are no hardware changes nor are 

there any changes in the method by which 

any plant systems perform a safety function. 

This request does not affect the normal 

method of plant operation. 

The proposed changes do not introduce 

new equipment, which could create a new or 

different kind of accident. No new external 

threats, release pathways, or equipment 

failure modes are created. No new accident 

scenarios, transient precursors, failure 

mechanisms, or limiting single failures are 

introduced as a result of this request. 

Therefore, the implementation of the 

proposed changes will not create a possibility 

for an accident of a new or different type 

than those previously evaluated. 

3. Does the proposed amendment involve 

a significant reduction in a margin of safety? 

Response: No. 

The ECCS are designed with sufficient 

redundancy such that a division of low 

pressure ECCS may be removed from service 

for maintenance or testing. The remaining 

subsystems are capable of providing water 

and removing heat loads to satisfy the 

Updated Safety Analysis Report requirements 

for accident mitigation or unit safe 

shutdown. 

There will be no change to the manner in 

which the safety limits or limiting safety 

system settings are determined nor will there 

be any change to those plant systems 

necessary to assure the accomplishment of 

protection functions. There will be no change 

to post-LOCA peak clad temperatures. 

For these reasons, the proposed 

amendment does not involve a significant 

reduction in a margin of safety. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 12, 2008 / Notices 46931 

The NRC staff has reviewed the 

licensee’s analysis and, based on the 

NRC staff’s own analysis above, it 

appears that the three standards of 10 

CFR 50.92(c) are satisfied. Therefore, the 

NRC staff proposes to determine that the 

proposed amendment involves no 

significant hazards consideration. 

Attorney for licensee: Peter M. Glass, 

Assistant General Counsel, Xcel Energy 

Services, Inc., 414 Nicollet Mall, 

Minneapolis, MN 55401. 

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 

Systems (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. 

Carolina Power & Light Company, 

Docket No. 50–261, H. B. Robinson 

Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2, 

Darlington County, South Carolina. 

Date of application for amendment: 

July 17, 2007, as supplemented by 

letters dated November 9, 2007, and 

April 1, 2008. 

Brief description of amendment: The 

amendment establishes more effective 

and appropriate action, surveillance, 

and administrative requirements related 

to ensuring the habitability of the 

control room envelope in accordance 

with the NRC-approved Technical 

Specification Task Force (TSTF) 

Standard Technical Specification 

change traveler TSTF–448, Revision 3, 

‘‘Control Room Habitability.’’ This 

technical specification improvement 

was initially made available in the 

Federal Register by the NRC on January 

17, 2007 (72 FR 2022). 

Date of issuance: July 23, 2008. 

Effective date: Effective as of the date 

of issuance and shall be implemented 

within 180 days. 

Amendment No: 219. 

Renewed Facility Operating License 

No. DPR–23: The amendment revises 

the Technical Specifications and 

Facility Operating License. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: August 28, 2007 (72 FR 

49570). The supplements dated 

November 9, 2007, and April 1, 2008, 

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 July 23, 2008. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

Entergy Operations, Inc., Docket No. 

50–368, Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 

No. 2, Pope County, Arkansas. 

Date of application for amendment: 

March 13, 2008, as supplemented by 

letter dated July 1, 2008. 

Brief description of amendment: The 

amendment relocates the Technical 

Specification (TS) 3.4.7, ‘‘Reactor 

Coolant System Chemistry,’’ to the 

Technical Requirements Manual (TRM). 

The change is consistent with the 

NUREG 1432, ‘‘Standard Technical 

Specifications for Combustion 

Engineering Plants.’’

Date of issuance: July 23, 2008. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance and shall be implemented 

within 90 days from the date of 

issuance. 

Amendment No.: 280. 

Renewed Facility Operating License 

No. NPF–6: Amendment revised the 

Technical Specifications/license. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: May 6, 2008 (73 FR 25039). 

The supplement dated July 1, 2008, 

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 July 23, 2008. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

Exelon Generation Company, LLC, 

Docket Nos. 50–237 and 50–249, 

Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 

and 3, Grundy County, Illinois. 

Docket Nos. 50–254 and 50–265, 

Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, 

Units 1 and 2, Rock Island County, 

Illinois. 

Date of application for amendments: 

August 1, 2007, as supplemented by 

letters dated February 26 and May 1, 

2008. 

Brief description of amendments: The 

amendments revise the technical 

specification allowable value (AV) for 

the Reactor Protection System (RPS) 

Instrumentation Function 10, ‘‘Turbine 

Condenser Vacuum—Low,’’ specified in 

TS Table 3.3.1.1–1, ‘‘Reactor Protection 

System Instrumentation,’’ for Dresden 

Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3 

(DNPS), and Quad Cities Nuclear Power 

Station, Units 1 and 2. The amendments 

also revise the Channel Functional Test 

and Channel Calibration Surveillance 

Test Interval (STI) for DNPS TS Table 

3.3.1.1–1, Function 10. As part of the 

DNPS STI revision, surveillance 

requirement 3.3.1.10, ‘‘Channel 

Calibration,’’ which is specific to the 

Turbine Condenser Vacuum—Low 

instrument function, is deleted since it 

is no longer applicable. 

Date of issuance: July 22, 2008. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance and shall be implemented 

within 120 days. 

Amendment Nos.: 227, 219, 239, 234. 

Renewed Facility Operating License 

Nos. DPR–19, DPR–25, DPR–29 and 

DPR–30. The amendments revise the 

Technical Specifications and Licenses. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: December 4, 2007 (72 FR 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
46932 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 12, 2008 / Notices 

68214) The February 26 and May 1, 

2008, supplements contained clarifying 

information and did not change the NRC 

staff’s initial proposed finding of no 

significant hazards consideration. The 

Commission’s related evaluation of the 

amendments is contained in a Safety 

Evaluation dated July 22, 2008. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

FPL Energy, Point Beach, LLC, Docket 

Nos. 50–266 and 50–301, Point Beach 

Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, Town of 

Two Creeks, Manitowoc County, 

Wisconsin. 

Date of application for amendments: 

March 31, 2008. 

Brief description of amendments: 

These amendments to the Technical 

Specification delete the definition of E 

Bar and replace the current limits on 

reactor coolant system (RCS) gross 

specific activity with a new limit on 

RCS noble gas activity. The noble gas 

activity is now based on dose equivalent 

Xenon-133 definition and replaces the E 

Bar definition. The changes are 

consistent with Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission-approved Industry/ 

Technical Specification Task Force 

(TSTF) Standard Technical 

Specification Change Traveler, TSTF–

490, Revision 0. 

Date of issuance: July 14, 2008. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance and shall be implemented 

within 30 days. 

Amendment Nos.: 233, 238. 

Renewed Facility Operating License 

Nos. DPR–24 and DPR–27: Amendments 

revised the Technical Specifications/ 

License. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: May 6, 2008 (73 FR 25041). 

The Commission’s related evaluation of 

the amendments is contained in a Safety 

Evaluation dated July 14, 2008. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC, 

Docket No. 50–410, Nine Mile Point 

Nuclear Station, Unit No. 2 (NMP–2), 

Oswego County, New York. 

Date of application for amendment: 

July 12, 2007, as supplemented on June 

19, 2008. 

Brief description of amendment: The 

amendment establishes more effective 

and appropriate action, surveillance, 

and administrative requirements related 

to ensuring the habitability of the 

control room envelope in accordance 

with the NRC-approved Technical 

Specification (TS) Task Force Traveler 

(TSTF)–448, Revision 3, and changes 

the NMP2 TSs related to control room 

envelope habitability in TS section 

3.7.2, ‘‘Control Room Envelope 

Filtration (CREF) System,’’ and TS 

section 5.5, ‘‘Programs and Manuals.’’

The amendment also adds a license 

condition to support implementation of 

the TS changes. 

Date of issuance: July 15, 2008. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance to be implemented within 120 

days. 

Amendment No.: 126 

Renewed Facility Operating License 

No. DPR–69: Amendment revised the 

License and TSs. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: September 11, 2007 (72 FR 

51864). The supplemental letter dated 

June 19, 2008, provided additional 

information that clarified the 

application, did not expand the scope of 

the application as originally noticed, 

and did not change the Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission staff’s initial 

proposed no significant hazards 

consideration determination. 

The Commission’s related evaluation 

of the amendment is contained in a 

Safety Evaluation dated July 15, 2008. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC, 

Docket No. 50–220, Nine Mile Point 

Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1 (NMP1), 

Oswego County, New York. 

Date of application for amendment: 

July 12, 2007, as supplemented on June 

19, 2008. 

Brief description of amendment: The 

amendment establishes more effective 

and appropriate action, surveillance, 

and administrative requirements related 

to ensuring the habitability of the 

control room envelope in accordance 

with the NRC-approved Technical 

Specification (TS) Task Force Traveler 

(TSTF)–448, Revision 3, and changes 

the NMP1 TSs related to control room 

envelope habitability in TS Section 

3.4.5, ‘‘Control Room Air Treatment 

System,’’ and TS Section 6.5, ‘‘Programs 

and Manuals.’’ The amendment also 

adds a license condition to support 

implementation of the TS changes. 

Date of issuance: July 15, 2008. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance to be implemented within 120 

days. 

Amendment No.: 195. 

Renewed Facility Operating License 

No. DPR–63: Amendment revised the 

License and TSs. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: September 11, 2007 (72 FR 

51863). The supplemental letter dated 

June 19, 2008, provided additional 

information that clarified the 

application, did not expand the scope of 

the application as originally noticed, 

and did not change the NRC staff’s 

initial proposed no significant hazards 

consideration determination. 

The Commission’s related evaluation 

of the amendment is contained in a 

Safety Evaluation dated July 15, 2008. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

Nuclear Management Company, LLC, 

Docket Nos. 50–282 and 50–306, Prairie 

Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 

1 and 2, Goodhue County, Minnesota. 

Date of application for amendments: 

July 19, 2007, as supplemented by letter 

dated June 25, 2008. 

Brief description of amendments: The 

amendments revise surveillance 

requirements for the duration of the 

heater tests for technical specification 

(TS) 3.6.9, ‘‘Shield Building Ventilation 

System (SBVS),’’ TS 3.7.12, ‘‘Auxiliary 

Building Special Ventilation System 

(ABSVS),’’ TS 3.7.13, ‘‘Spent Fuel Pool 

Special Ventilation System (SFPSVS),’’

and the frequency for performance of 

filter tests in TS 5.5.9, ‘‘Ventilation 

Filter Testing Program (VFTP). 

Date of issuance: July 18, 2008. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance and shall be implemented 

within 90 days. 

Amendment Nos.: 186, 176. 

Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–

42 and DPR–60: Amendments revised 

the Technical Specifications. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: October 9, 2007 (72 FR 57355). 

The Commission’s related evaluation of 

the amendments is contained in a Safety 

Evaluation dated July 18, 2008. The 

information contained in the June 25, 

2008, supplement is clarifying in nature 

and does not change either the scope of 

the amendment request or the no 

significant hazards consideration 

determination. 

No significant hazards consideration 

comments received: No. 

STP Nuclear Operating Company, 

Docket Nos. 50–498 and 50–499, South 

Texas Project, Units 1 and 2, Matagorda 

County, Texas. 

Date of amendment request: June 26, 

2007, as supplemented by letters dated 

April 29 and May 27, 2008. 

Brief description of amendments: The 

amendments added a new license 

condition (12) for Unit 1 and new 

license condition (10) for Unit 2 on the 

control room envelope (CRE) 

habitability program. In addition, the 

amendments revised the Technical 

Specification (TS) requirements related 

to the habitability of the CRE in TS 

3.7.7, ‘‘Control Room Makeup and 

Cleanup Filtration System (CRMCFS),’’

and added the new Control Room 

Envelope Habitability Program to TS 

Section 6.8, ‘‘Administrative Controls—

Procedures, Programs, and Manuals.’’

These changes are consistent with the 

NRC-approved TS Task Force (TSTF) 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 12, 2008 / Notices 46933 

Standard Technical Specification 

change traveler TSTF–448, Revision 3, 

‘‘Control Room Envelope Habitability.’’

The availability of the TS improvement 

was published in the Federal Register 

on January 17, 2007 (72 FR 2022), as 

part of the Consolidated Line Item 

Improvement Process. 

Date of issuance: July 29, 2008. 

Effective date: As of the date of 

issuance and shall be implemented 

within 60 days of issuance. 

Amendment Nos.: Unit 1—185; Unit 

2—172. 

Facility Operating License Nos. NPF–

76 and NPF–80: The amendments 

revised the Facility Operating Licenses 

and Technical Specifications. 

Date of initial notice in Federal 

Register: August 14, 2007 (72 FR 

45460). The supplemental letters dated 

April 29 and May 27, 2008, 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 July 29, 2008. 

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, 

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, person(s) may file a request 

for a hearing with respect to issuance of 

the amendment to the subject facility 

operating license and any person whose 

interest may be affected by this 

proceeding and who wishes to 

participate as a party in the proceeding 

must file a written request via electronic 

submission through the NRC E–Filing 

system for a hearing and a petition for 

leave to intervene. 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/readingrm/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 email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. If a 

request for a hearing or petition for 

leave to intervene is filed by the above 

date, the Commission or a presiding 

officer designated by the Commission or 

by the Chief Administrative Judge of the 

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 

Panel, will rule on the request and/or 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
46934 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 12, 2008 / Notices 

1To 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. 

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 petitioner/ 

requestor 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 petitioner/requestor 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 

petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy 

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 petitioner/requestor 

seeks to adopt the contention of another 

sponsoring petitioner/requestor, the 

petitioner/requestor who seeks to adopt 

the contention must either agree that the 

sponsoring petitioner/requestor shall act 

as the representative with respect to that 

contention, or jointly designate with the 

sponsoring petitioner/requestor 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. 

A request for hearing or a petition for 

leave to intervene must be filed in 

accordance with the NRC E–Filing rule, 

which the NRC promulgated in August 

28, 2007, (72 FR 49139). The E–Filing 

process requires participants to submit 

and serve 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 a waiver in 

accordance with the procedures 

described below. 

To comply with the procedural 

requirements of E–Filing, at least five (5) 

days prior to the filing deadline, the 

petitioner/ requestor must contact the 

Office of the Secretary by e-mail at 

HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV, or by 

calling (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/or (2) creation of an 

electronic docket for the proceeding 

(even in instances in which the 

petitioner/requestor (or its counsel or 

representative) already holds an NRCissued digital ID certificate). Each 

petitioner/ requestor will need to 

download the Workplace Forms 

ViewerTM to access the Electronic 

Information Exchange (EIE), a 

component of the E–Filing system. The 

Workplace Forms ViewerTM is free and 

is available at http://www.nrc.gov/sitehelp/e-submittals/install-viewer.html. 

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/applycertificates.html. 

Once a petitioner/requestor has 

obtained a digital ID certificate, had a 

docket created, and downloaded the EIE 

viewer, it can then submit a request for 

hearing or petition for leave to 

intervene. Submissions should be in 

Portable Document Format (PDF) in 

accordance with NRC guidance 

available on the NRC public Web site at 

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

complete at the time the filer submits its 

documents through EIE. To be timely, 

an electronic filing must be submitted to 

the EIE 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 

EIE 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 may 

seek assistance through the ‘‘Contact 

Us’’ link located on the NRC Web site 

at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html or by calling the NRC 

technical help line, which is available 

between 8:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., 

Eastern Time, Monday through Friday. 

The help line number is (800) 397–4209 

or locally, (301) 415–4737. 

Participants who believe that they 

have a good cause for not submitting 

documents electronically must file a 

motion, in accordance with 10 CFR 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 12, 2008 / Notices 46935 

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, 2085 Attention 2,: 

Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. 

Participants filing a document in this 

manner are responsible for serving the 

document on all other participants. 

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

the mail, or by courier, express mail, or 

expedited delivery service upon 

depositing the document with the 

provider of the service. 

Non-timely requests and/or petitions 

and contentions will not be entertained 

absent a determination by the 

Commission, the presiding officer, or 

the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 

that the petition and/or request should 

be granted and/or the contentions 

should be admitted, based on a 

balancing of the factors specified in 10 

CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)–(viii). To be timely, 

filings must be submitted no later than 

11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due 

date. 

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, an Atomic Safety and 

Licensing Board, or a 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. 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. 

Tennessee Valley Authority, Docket 

No. 50 390, Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, 

Unit 1, Rhea County, Tennessee. 

Date of amendment request: July 24, 

2008. 

Description of amendment request: 

This amendment allows the 

implementation of a temporary 

alteration that will be used to restore 

Train A of the Essential Raw Cooling 

Water (ERCW) to a functional condition 

and to provide additional time to restore 

the operability of at least one of the 

inoperable ERCW pumps. Additionally, 

this amendment adds a temporary 

CONDITION and a Note to Technical 

Specification 3.7.8, ‘‘Essential Raw 

Cooling Water,’’ reflecting the 

restoration of functionality of Train A 

ERCW by the temporary alteration. 

Date of issuance: July 24, 2008. 

Effective date: July 24, 2008, and shall 

be implemented as of the date of 

issuance. 

Amendment No.: 69. 

Facility Operating License No. NPF–

90: Amendment revises the Technical 

Specifications and License. 

Public comments requested as to 

proposed no significant hazards 

consideration (NSHC): 

No. The Commission’s related 

evaluation of the amendment, finding of 

emergency circumstances, state 

consultation, and final NSHC 

determination are contained in a safety 

evaluation dated July 24, 2008. 

Attorney for licensee: General 

Counsel, Tennessee Valley Authority, 

6A West Tower, ET 11H, 400 West 

Summit Hill Drive, Knoxville, TN 

37902. 

NRC Branch Chief: L. Raghavan. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day 

of July 2008. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Joseph G. Giitter, 

Director, Division of Operating Reactor 

Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. 

[FR Doc. E8–18185 Filed 8–11–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

Sunshine Federal Register Notice 

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETINGS: Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission. 

DATE: Weeks of August 11, 18, 25, 

September 1, 8, 15, 2008. 

PLACE: Commissioners’ Conference 

Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Maryland. 

STATUS: Public and Closed. 

Week of August 11, 2008 

Tuesday, August 12, 2008 

1:30 p.m. Meeting with FEMA and 

State and Local Representatives on 

Offsite Emergency Preparedness Issues 

(Public Meeting) (Contact: Lisa Gibney, 

301–415–8376). 

This meeting will be Webcast live at 

the Web address—http://www.nrc.gov. 

Thursday, August 14, 2008 

1:30 p.m. Meeting with Organization 

of Agreement States (OAS) and 

Conference of Radiation Control 

Program Directors (CRCPD) (Public 

Meeting) (Contact: Andrea Jones, 301–

415–2309). 

This meeting will be Webcast live at 

the Web address—http://www.nrc.gov. 

Week of August 18, 2008—Tentative 

There are no meetings scheduled for 

the week of August 18, 2008. 

Week of August 25, 2008—Tentative 

There are no meetings scheduled for 

the week of August 25, 2008. 

Week of September 1, 2008—Tentative 

There are no meetings scheduled for 

the week of September 1, 2008. 

Week of September 8, 2008—Tentative 

There are no meetings scheduled for 

the week of September 8, 2008. 

Week of September 15, 2008 

There are no meetings scheduled for 

the week of September 15, 2008. 

* The schedule for Commission 

meetings is subject to change on short 

notice. To verify the status of meetings, 

call (recording)—(301) 415–1292. 

Contact person for more information: 

Michelle Schroll, (301) 415–1662. 

The NRC Commission Meeting 

Schedule can be found on the Internet 

at: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/policymaking/schedule.html. 

The NRC provides reasonable 

accommodation to individuals with 

disabilities where appropriate. If you 

need a reasonable accommodation to 

participate in these public meetings, or 

need this meeting notice or the 

transcript or other information from the 

public meetings in another format (e.g. 

braille, large print), please notify the 

NRC’s Disability Program Coordinator, 

Rohn Brown, at 301–492–2279, TDD: 

301–415–2100, or by e-mail at 

REB3@nrc.gov. Determinations on 

requests for reasonable accommodation 

will be made on a case-by-case basis. 

This notice is distributed by mail to 

several hundred subscribers; if you no 

longer wish to receive it, or would like 

to be added to the distribution, please 

contact the Office of the Secretary, 

Washington, DC 20555 (301–415–1969). 

In addition, distribution of this meeting 

notice over the Internet system is 

available. If you are interested in 

receiving this Commission meeting 

schedule electronically, please send an 

electronic message to dkw@nrc.gov. 

Dated: August 7, 2008. 

R. Michelle Schroll, 

Office of the Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E8–18689 Filed 8–8–08; 12:00 pm] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES