Draft Regulatory Guide: Issuance, Availability, 5695-5697 [E6-1386]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
hsrobinson on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 22 / Thursday, February 2, 2006 / Notices
considered if it is practical to do so, but
the NRC staff is able to assure
consideration only for comments
received on or before this date. Written
comments on the draft supplement to
the GEIS should be sent to: Chief, Rules
and Directives Branch, Division of
Administrative Services, Office of
Administration, Mailstop T–6D59, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001.
Comments may be hand-delivered to
the NRC at 11545 Rockville Pike, Room
T–6D59, Rockville, Maryland, between
7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal
workdays. Electronic comments may be
submitted to the NRC by e-mail at
MonticelloEIS@nrc.gov. All comments
received by the Commission, including
those made by Federal, State, and local
agencies, Native American Tribes, or
other interested persons, will be made
available electronically at the
Commission’s PDR in Rockville,
Maryland, and in ADAMS.
The NRC staff will hold two public
meetings to present an overview of the
draft plant-specific supplement to the
GEIS and to accept public comments on
the document. The public meetings will
be held on March 22, 2006, at the
Monticello Community Center, 505
Walnut Street in Monticello, Minnesota.
The first meeting will convene at 1:30
p.m. and will continue until 4:30 p.m.,
as necessary. The second meeting will
convene at 7 p.m. and will continue
until 10 p.m., as necessary. Both
meetings will be transcribed and will
include: (1) A presentation of the
contents of the draft plant-specific
supplement to the GEIS, and (2) the
opportunity for interested government
agencies, organizations, and individuals
to provide comments on the draft report.
Additionally, the NRC staff will host
informal discussions one hour before
the start of each meeting at the
Monticello Community Center. No
comments on the draft supplement to
the GEIS will be accepted during the
informal discussions. To be considered,
comments must be provided either at
the transcribed public meetings or in
writing, as discussed below.
Persons may register to attend or
present oral comments at the meetings
by contacting Ms. Jennifer A. Davis, by
telephone at 1–800–368–5642,
extension 3835, or by e-mail at
MonticelloEIS@nrc.gov no later than
March 17, 2006. Members of the public
may also register to speak at the meeting
within 15 minutes of the start of each
session. Individual oral comments may
be limited by the time available,
depending on the number of persons
who register. Members of the public
who have not registered may also have
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:26 Feb 01, 2006
Jkt 208001
an opportunity to speak, if time permits.
Ms. Davis will need to be contacted no
later than March 17, 2006, if special
equipment or accommodations are
needed to attend or present information
at the public meeting, so that the NRC
staff can determine whether the request
can be accommodated.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Jennifer A. Davis, Division of License
Renewal, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001. Ms. Davis may also be contacted
at the aforementioned telephone
number or e-mail address.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day
of January, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Pao-Tsin Kuo,
Deputy Director, Division of License Renewal,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6–1387 Filed 2–1–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Draft Regulatory Guide: Issuance,
Availability
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) has issued for public
comment a draft revision to an existing
guide in the agency’s Regulatory Guide
Series. This series has been developed
to describe and make available to the
public such information as methods that
are acceptable to the NRC staff for
implementing specific parts of the
NRC’s regulations, techniques that the
staff uses in evaluating specific
problems or postulated accidents, and
data that the staff needs in its review of
applications for permits and licenses.
Draft Revision 1 of Regulatory Guide
1.76, entitled ‘‘Design-Basis Tornado
and Tornado Missiles for Nuclear Power
Plants,’’ is temporarily identified by its
task number, DG–1143, which should be
mentioned in all related
correspondence. This proposed revision
provides licensees and applicants with
new guidance that the NRC staff
considers acceptable for use in selecting
the design-basis tornado and designbasis tornado-generated missiles that a
nuclear power plant should be designed
to withstand in each of the three regions
within the contiguous United States to
prevent undue risk to the health and
safety of the public.
By contrast, the predecessor to this
revision, entitled ‘‘Design-Basis
Tornadoes for Nuclear Power Plants,’’
did not include guidance on the
selection of design-basis tornadogenerated missiles. Such missiles were
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5695
previously addressed in Section 3.5.1.4,
‘‘Missiles Generated by Natural
Phenomena,’’ of NUREG–0800,
‘‘Standard Review Plan for the Review
of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear
Power Plants’’ (SRP). With this draft
Revision 1 of Regulatory Guide 1.76, the
staff added related guidance for
licensees and applicants because the
Standard Review Plan (SRP) is intended
to provide guidance to NRC reviewers,
rather than licensees and applicants.
In particular, General Design Criterion
(GDC) 2, ‘‘Design Bases for Protection
Against Natural Phenomena,’’ of
Appendix A, ‘‘General Design Criteria
for Nuclear Power Plants,’’ to Title 10,
Part 50, of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR part 50), requires
that structures, systems, and
components that are important to safety
must be designed to withstand the
effects of natural phenomena such as
tornadoes without loss of capability to
perform their safety functions. GDC 2
also requires that the design bases for
these structures, systems, and
components shall reflect (1) appropriate
consideration of the most severe of the
natural phenomena that have been
historically reported for the site and
surrounding area, with sufficient margin
for the limited accuracy, quantity, and
period of time in which the historical
data have been accumulated, (2)
appropriate combinations of the effects
of normal and accident conditions with
the effects of the natural phenomena,
and (3) the importance of the safety
functions to be performed.
Additionally, GDC 4, ‘‘Environmental
and Dynamic Effects Design Bases,’’ of
Appendix A to 10 CFR part 50 requires,
in part, that structures, systems, and
components that are important to safety
must be protected against the effects of
missiles from events and conditions
outside the plant.
In addition, for stationary power
reactor site applications submitted
before January 10, 1997, Paragraph
100.10c(2) of 10 CFR part 100, ‘‘Reactor
Site Criteria,’’ states that meteorological
conditions at the site and in the
surrounding area should be considered
in determining the acceptability of a site
for a power reactor.
By contrast, for stationary power
reactor site applications submitted on or
after January 10, 1997, Paragraph
100.20c(2) of 10 CFR part 100 requires
that meteorological characteristics of the
site that are necessary for safety analysis
or may have an impact upon plant
design (such as maximum probable
wind speed) must be considered in
determining the acceptability of a site
for a nuclear power plant. In addition,
Paragraph 100.21(d) of 10 CFR part 100
E:\FR\FM\02FEN1.SGM
02FEN1
hsrobinson on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
5696
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 22 / Thursday, February 2, 2006 / Notices
requires that the physical characteristics
of the site, including meteorology, must
be evaluated and site parameters
established such that potential threats
from such physical characteristics will
pose no undue risk to the type of facility
proposed to be located at the site.
The essence of these requirements is
that nuclear power plants must be
designed so that the plants remain in a
safe condition in the event of the most
severe tornado that can reasonably be
predicted to occur at a site as a result
of severe meteorological conditions. The
original version of Regulatory Guide
1.76, published in April 1974, was
based on WASH–1300, ‘‘Technical Basis
for Interim Regional Tornado Criteria,’’
which the NRC (then the Atomic Energy
Commission) published in May 1974.
WASH–1300 chose the design-basis
tornado wind speeds so that the
probability of occurrence of a tornado
that exceeded the design-basis was on
the order of 10¥7 per year per nuclear
power plant. WASH–1300 used 2 years
of observed tornado intensity data (1971
and 1972) to derive design-basis tornado
characteristics for three regions within
the continental United States.
By contrast, the design-basis tornado
wind speeds presented in this draft
regulatory guide are based on Revision
1 to NUREG/CR–4461, ‘‘Tornado
Climatology of the Contiguous United
States,’’ which the NRC published in
April 2005. The tornado database used
in the revised NUREG/CR–4461
includes information recorded for more
than 46,800 tornado segments occurring
from January 1, 1950, through August
31, 2003. More than 39,600 of those
segments had sufficient information on
location, intensity, length, and width to
be used in the analysis of tornado strike
probabilities and maximum wind
speeds. The methods used in this
analysis are similar to those used in the
analysis of the initial tornado
climatology leading to initial
publication of NUREG/CR–4461 in
1986, with the addition of a term to
account for finite dimensions of
structures (sometimes called the
‘‘lifeline’’ term), as well as consideration
of the variation of wind speeds along
and across the tornado footprint. The
basic idea is that, for finite structures, a
tornado striking any point on the
structure can cause damage. (The
original NUREG/CR–4461 used a point
model, where the nuclear power plant
was assumed to be a point structure.
Therefore, including the finite
dimensions of structures increases the
tornado strike probability.)
Draft Regulatory Guide DG–1143 does
not address the determination of the
design-basis tornado and tornado
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:26 Feb 01, 2006
Jkt 208001
missiles for sites located in Alaska,
Hawaii, or Puerto Rico; such
determinations will be evaluated on a
case-by-case basis. This guide also does
not identify the specific structures,
systems, and components that should be
designed to withstand the effects of the
design-basis tornado or should be
protected from tornado-generated
missiles and remain functional. In
addition, this guide does not address the
missiles attributable to extreme winds,
such as hurricanes, which the NRC staff
will consider on a case-by-case basis
when identified.
To accompany Draft Regulatory Guide
DG–1143, the NRC is issuing updates to
proposed Revision 3 of Section 2.3.1,
‘‘Regional Climatology,’’ and Section
3.5.1.4, ‘‘Missiles Generated by
Tornadoes and Extreme Winds,’’ of the
SRP, which the staff previously issued
for public comment in April 1996.
These sections of the SRP relate to Draft
Regulatory Guide DG–1143, in that all
three documents concern the
compliance of nuclear power plant
designs with GDCs 2 and 4 for severe
weather phenomena. However, Draft
Regulatory Guide DG–1143 provides
practices and principles for the benefit
of licensees and applicants, while SRP
Sections 2.3.1 and 3.5.1.4 provide
guidance to NRC reviewers. The latest
updates to SRP Section 2.3.1 (1) modify
the scope of the severe weather
phenomena that should be addressed by
applicants for construction permits,
operating licenses, early site permits,
and combined licenses; (2) include new
data sources that should be used in
reviewing the information provided by
the license applicants; and (3) clarify
the review guidance. By contrast, the
changes to SRP Section 3.5.1.4 include
deleting the specifications for designbasis tornado missiles, since that
information is now provided in Draft
Regulatory Guide DG–1143.
The NRC staff is soliciting comments
on Draft Regulatory Guide DG–1143, as
well as SRP Sections 2.3.1 and 3.5.1.4.
Please mention the relevant document
identifiers (DG–1143, SRP 2.3.1, and/or
SRP 3.5.1.4) in the subject line of your
comments; comments may be
accompanied by relevant information or
supporting data. Comments submitted
in writing or in electronic form will be
made available to the public in their
entirety through the NRC’s Agencywide
Documents Access and Management
System (ADAMS). Personal information
will not be removed from your
comments. You may submit comments
by any of the following methods.
Mail comments to: Rules and
Directives Branch, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001.
E-mail comments to:
NRCREP@nrc.gov. You may also submit
comments via the NRC’s rulemaking
Web site at https://
www.ruleforum.llnl.gov. Address
questions about our rulemaking Web
site to Carol A. Gallagher (301) 415–
5905; e-mail CAG@nrc.gov.
Hand-deliver comments to: Rules and
Directives Branch, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland 20852, between
7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal
workdays.
Fax comments to: Rules and
Directives Branch, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission at (301) 415–5144.
Requests for technical information
about Draft Regulatory Guide DG–1143
and/or SRP Sections 2.3.1 and 3.5.1.4
may be directed to Dr. Arthur J. Buslik
at (301) 415–6184 or by e-mail to
AJB@nrc.gov, or Jin-Sien Guo at (301)
415–1816 or by e-mail to JSG@nrc.gov.
Comments would be most helpful if
received by March 27, 2006. Comments
received after that date will be
considered if it is practical to do so, but
the NRC is able to ensure consideration
only for comments received on or before
this date. Although a time limit is given,
comments and suggestions in
connection with items for inclusion in
guides currently being developed or
improvements in all published guides
are encouraged at any time.
Electronic copies of Draft Regulatory
Guide DG–1143 are available through
the NRC’s public Web site under Draft
Regulatory Guides in the Regulatory
Guides document collection of the
NRC’s Electronic Reading Room at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/. Similarly, electronic copies
of SRP Sections 2.3.1 and 3.5.1.4 are
available at https://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr0800/
#c2 and https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr0800/#c3,
respectively. In addition, electronic
copies of the three draft documents are
available in the NRC’s Agencywide
Documents Access and Management
System (ADAMS) at https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html,
under Accession #ML053140225 (DG–
1143), #ML053570372 (SRP Section
2.3.1), and #ML053570376 (SRP Section
3.5.1.4).
Regulatory guides are also available
for inspection at the NRC’s Public
Document Room (PDR), which is
located at 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland; the PDR’s mailing
address is USNRC PDR, Washington, DC
E:\FR\FM\02FEN1.SGM
02FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 22 / Thursday, February 2, 2006 / Notices
20555–0001. The PDR can also be
reached by telephone at (301) 415–4737
or (800) 397–4205, by fax at (301) 415–
3548, and by e-mail to PDR@nrc.gov.
Requests for single copies of draft or
final guides (which may be reproduced)
or for placement on an automatic
distribution list for single copies of
future draft guides in specific divisions
should be made in writing to the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention:
Reproduction and Distribution Services
Section; by e-mail to
DISTRIBUTION@nrc.gov; or by fax to
(301) 415–2289. Telephone requests
cannot be accommodated.
Regulatory guides are not
copyrighted, and Commission approval
is not required to reproduce them.
(5 U.S.C. 552(a))
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day
of January, 2006.
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
Richard J. Barrett,
Deputy Director, Division of Risk Analysis
and Applications, Office of Nuclear
Regulatory Research.
[FR Doc. E6–1386 Filed 2–1–06; 8:45 am]
The subject matter of the Closed
Meeting scheduled for Thursday,
February 2, 2006 will be:
Formal orders of investigations;
Institution and settlement of injunctive
actions;
Institution and settlement of
administrative proceedings of an
enforcement nature; and
Amicus consideration.
At times, changes in Commission
priorities require alterations in the
scheduling of meeting items. For further
information and to ascertain what, if
any, matters have been added, deleted
or postponed, please contact:
The Office of the Secretary at (202)
551–5400.
Dated: January 31, 2006.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06–1007 Filed 1–31–06; 12:09 pm]
BILLING CODE 8010–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
[Public Notice 5293]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
Bureau of Educational and Cultural
Affairs (ECA) Request for Grant
Proposals: Summer Institute for
German Student Leaders in Education
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Sunshine Act Meeting
FEDERAL REGISTER CITATION OF PREVIOUS
ANNOUNCEMENT: 71 FR 4624, January 27,
2006.
Closed Meeting.
100 F Street, NE., Washington,
STATUS:
PLACE:
DC.
hsrobinson on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
ANNOUNCEMENT OF ADDITIONAL MEETING:
Additional Meeting.
A Closed Meeting has been scheduled
for Thursday, February 2, 2006 at 2 p.m.
Commissioners, Counsel to the
Commissioners, the Secretary to the
Commission, and recording secretaries
will attend the Closed Meeting. Certain
staff members who have an interest in
the matters may also be present.
The General Counsel of the
Commission, or his designee, has
certified that, in his opinion, one or
more of the exemptions set forth in 5
U.S.C. 552b(c)(3), (5), (7), (9)(B) and (10)
and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(3), (5), (7), 9(ii)
and (10) permit consideration of the
scheduled matter at the Closed Meeting.
Commissioner Nazareth, as duty
officer, voted to consider the items
listed for the closed meeting in closed
session, and determined that no earlier
notice thereof was possible.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:26 Feb 01, 2006
Jkt 208001
Announcement Type: New
Cooperative Agreement.
Funding Opportunity Number: ECA/
A/E/EUR–06–05.
Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance Number:
Key Dates: July 17, 2006–March 16,
2007.
Application Deadline: March 17,
2006.
Summary: The Office of Academic
Exchange Programs, European and
Eurasian Programs Branch (ECA/A/E/
EUR), announces an open competition
for a Summer Institute for German
Student Leaders in Education.
Accredited U.S. post-secondary
educational institutions may submit
proposals to provide a six-week
integrated and uniquely designed
program that offers intensive English
and focuses on pedagogy and U.S. and
cultural studies for one group of up to
ten (10) German advanced
undergraduate students in education,
representing diverse sectors,
particularly immigrant populations,
from multiple German universities. The
Bureau of Educational and Cultural
Affairs (the Bureau) anticipates
providing one assistance award to
support this program.
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5697
I. Funding Opportunity Description
Authority: Overall grant making
authority for this program is contained
in the Mutual Educational and Cultural
Exchange Act of 1961, Public Law 87–
256, as amended, also known as the
Fulbright-Hays Act. The purpose of the
Act is ‘‘to enable the Government of the
United States to increase mutual
understanding between the people of
the United States and the people of
other countries * * * to strengthen the
ties which unite us with other nations
by demonstrating the educational and
cultural interests, developments, and
achievements of the people of the
United States and other nations * * *
and thus to assist in the development of
friendly, sympathetic and peaceful
relations between the United States and
the other countries of the world.’’ The
funding authority for the program above
is provided through legislation.
Purpose: The goal of the Summer
Institute for German Student Leaders in
Education is to provide young Germans
from diverse backgrounds, especially
immigrant communities in Germany,
and multiple German universities, who
are underrepresented in the Fulbright
Program and other traditional
exchanges, with the opportunity to learn
about the United States, and to become
familiar with American pedagogical
philosophy and techniques. During the
program, the students, who are expected
to become teachers in Germany
following their graduation from
university, will become familiar with
U.S. campus life, meet a variety of U.S.
citizens and have a valuable cultural
experience. U.S. institutions of higher
education having experience in teacher
training/assessment may apply to
develop, administer, and provide
follow-up to the six-week summer
program.
Guidelines: The program should be
designed to support the following
specific activities/components:
(a) A two-week intensive English
program to strengthen the participants’
language abilities before undertaking the
academic program.
(b) A four-week academic program
that will enhance teaching skills and
methodology in various subject fields as
its main objective. The program should
emphasize American pedagogical
practices, the U.S. higher educational
system, and the role of teaching in U.S.
history and civil society.
(c) Structured cultural activities
planned within the six-week program to
facilitate interaction among the German
participants, U.S. students, faculty,
administrators, and the local
community, including through hands-
E:\FR\FM\02FEN1.SGM
02FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 22 (Thursday, February 2, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5695-5697]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-1386]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Draft Regulatory Guide: Issuance, Availability
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has issued for public
comment a draft revision to an existing guide in the agency's
Regulatory Guide Series. This series has been developed to describe and
make available to the public such information as methods that are
acceptable to the NRC staff for implementing specific parts of the
NRC's regulations, techniques that the staff uses in evaluating
specific problems or postulated accidents, and data that the staff
needs in its review of applications for permits and licenses.
Draft Revision 1 of Regulatory Guide 1.76, entitled ``Design-Basis
Tornado and Tornado Missiles for Nuclear Power Plants,'' is temporarily
identified by its task number, DG-1143, which should be mentioned in
all related correspondence. This proposed revision provides licensees
and applicants with new guidance that the NRC staff considers
acceptable for use in selecting the design-basis tornado and design-
basis tornado-generated missiles that a nuclear power plant should be
designed to withstand in each of the three regions within the
contiguous United States to prevent undue risk to the health and safety
of the public.
By contrast, the predecessor to this revision, entitled ``Design-
Basis Tornadoes for Nuclear Power Plants,'' did not include guidance on
the selection of design-basis tornado-generated missiles. Such missiles
were previously addressed in Section 3.5.1.4, ``Missiles Generated by
Natural Phenomena,'' of NUREG-0800, ``Standard Review Plan for the
Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants'' (SRP).
With this draft Revision 1 of Regulatory Guide 1.76, the staff added
related guidance for licensees and applicants because the Standard
Review Plan (SRP) is intended to provide guidance to NRC reviewers,
rather than licensees and applicants.
In particular, General Design Criterion (GDC) 2, ``Design Bases for
Protection Against Natural Phenomena,'' of Appendix A, ``General Design
Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants,'' to Title 10, Part 50, of the Code
of Federal Regulations (10 CFR part 50), requires that structures,
systems, and components that are important to safety must be designed
to withstand the effects of natural phenomena such as tornadoes without
loss of capability to perform their safety functions. GDC 2 also
requires that the design bases for these structures, systems, and
components shall reflect (1) appropriate consideration of the most
severe of the natural phenomena that have been historically reported
for the site and surrounding area, with sufficient margin for the
limited accuracy, quantity, and period of time in which the historical
data have been accumulated, (2) appropriate combinations of the effects
of normal and accident conditions with the effects of the natural
phenomena, and (3) the importance of the safety functions to be
performed.
Additionally, GDC 4, ``Environmental and Dynamic Effects Design
Bases,'' of Appendix A to 10 CFR part 50 requires, in part, that
structures, systems, and components that are important to safety must
be protected against the effects of missiles from events and conditions
outside the plant.
In addition, for stationary power reactor site applications
submitted before January 10, 1997, Paragraph 100.10c(2) of 10 CFR part
100, ``Reactor Site Criteria,'' states that meteorological conditions
at the site and in the surrounding area should be considered in
determining the acceptability of a site for a power reactor.
By contrast, for stationary power reactor site applications
submitted on or after January 10, 1997, Paragraph 100.20c(2) of 10 CFR
part 100 requires that meteorological characteristics of the site that
are necessary for safety analysis or may have an impact upon plant
design (such as maximum probable wind speed) must be considered in
determining the acceptability of a site for a nuclear power plant. In
addition, Paragraph 100.21(d) of 10 CFR part 100
[[Page 5696]]
requires that the physical characteristics of the site, including
meteorology, must be evaluated and site parameters established such
that potential threats from such physical characteristics will pose no
undue risk to the type of facility proposed to be located at the site.
The essence of these requirements is that nuclear power plants must
be designed so that the plants remain in a safe condition in the event
of the most severe tornado that can reasonably be predicted to occur at
a site as a result of severe meteorological conditions. The original
version of Regulatory Guide 1.76, published in April 1974, was based on
WASH-1300, ``Technical Basis for Interim Regional Tornado Criteria,''
which the NRC (then the Atomic Energy Commission) published in May
1974. WASH-1300 chose the design-basis tornado wind speeds so that the
probability of occurrence of a tornado that exceeded the design-basis
was on the order of 10-7 per year per nuclear power plant.
WASH-1300 used 2 years of observed tornado intensity data (1971 and
1972) to derive design-basis tornado characteristics for three regions
within the continental United States.
By contrast, the design-basis tornado wind speeds presented in this
draft regulatory guide are based on Revision 1 to NUREG/CR-4461,
``Tornado Climatology of the Contiguous United States,'' which the NRC
published in April 2005. The tornado database used in the revised
NUREG/CR-4461 includes information recorded for more than 46,800
tornado segments occurring from January 1, 1950, through August 31,
2003. More than 39,600 of those segments had sufficient information on
location, intensity, length, and width to be used in the analysis of
tornado strike probabilities and maximum wind speeds. The methods used
in this analysis are similar to those used in the analysis of the
initial tornado climatology leading to initial publication of NUREG/CR-
4461 in 1986, with the addition of a term to account for finite
dimensions of structures (sometimes called the ``lifeline'' term), as
well as consideration of the variation of wind speeds along and across
the tornado footprint. The basic idea is that, for finite structures, a
tornado striking any point on the structure can cause damage. (The
original NUREG/CR-4461 used a point model, where the nuclear power
plant was assumed to be a point structure. Therefore, including the
finite dimensions of structures increases the tornado strike
probability.)
Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1143 does not address the determination
of the design-basis tornado and tornado missiles for sites located in
Alaska, Hawaii, or Puerto Rico; such determinations will be evaluated
on a case-by-case basis. This guide also does not identify the specific
structures, systems, and components that should be designed to
withstand the effects of the design-basis tornado or should be
protected from tornado-generated missiles and remain functional. In
addition, this guide does not address the missiles attributable to
extreme winds, such as hurricanes, which the NRC staff will consider on
a case-by-case basis when identified.
To accompany Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1143, the NRC is issuing
updates to proposed Revision 3 of Section 2.3.1, ``Regional
Climatology,'' and Section 3.5.1.4, ``Missiles Generated by Tornadoes
and Extreme Winds,'' of the SRP, which the staff previously issued for
public comment in April 1996. These sections of the SRP relate to Draft
Regulatory Guide DG-1143, in that all three documents concern the
compliance of nuclear power plant designs with GDCs 2 and 4 for severe
weather phenomena. However, Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1143 provides
practices and principles for the benefit of licensees and applicants,
while SRP Sections 2.3.1 and 3.5.1.4 provide guidance to NRC reviewers.
The latest updates to SRP Section 2.3.1 (1) modify the scope of the
severe weather phenomena that should be addressed by applicants for
construction permits, operating licenses, early site permits, and
combined licenses; (2) include new data sources that should be used in
reviewing the information provided by the license applicants; and (3)
clarify the review guidance. By contrast, the changes to SRP Section
3.5.1.4 include deleting the specifications for design-basis tornado
missiles, since that information is now provided in Draft Regulatory
Guide DG-1143.
The NRC staff is soliciting comments on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-
1143, as well as SRP Sections 2.3.1 and 3.5.1.4. Please mention the
relevant document identifiers (DG-1143, SRP 2.3.1, and/or SRP 3.5.1.4)
in the subject line of your comments; comments may be accompanied by
relevant information or supporting data. Comments submitted in writing
or in electronic form will be made available to the public in their
entirety through the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management
System (ADAMS). Personal information will not be removed from your
comments. You may submit comments by any of the following methods.
Mail comments to: Rules and Directives Branch, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001.
E-mail comments to: NRCREP@nrc.gov. You may also submit comments
via the NRC's rulemaking Web site at https://www.ruleforum.llnl.gov.
Address questions about our rulemaking Web site to Carol A. Gallagher
(301) 415-5905; e-mail CAG@nrc.gov.
Hand-deliver comments to: Rules and Directives Branch, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on
Federal workdays.
Fax comments to: Rules and Directives Branch, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at (301) 415-5144.
Requests for technical information about Draft Regulatory Guide DG-
1143 and/or SRP Sections 2.3.1 and 3.5.1.4 may be directed to Dr.
Arthur J. Buslik at (301) 415-6184 or by e-mail to AJB@nrc.gov, or Jin-
Sien Guo at (301) 415-1816 or by e-mail to JSG@nrc.gov.
Comments would be most helpful if received by March 27, 2006.
Comments received after that date will be considered if it is practical
to do so, but the NRC is able to ensure consideration only for comments
received on or before this date. Although a time limit is given,
comments and suggestions in connection with items for inclusion in
guides currently being developed or improvements in all published
guides are encouraged at any time.
Electronic copies of Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1143 are available
through the NRC's public Web site under Draft Regulatory Guides in the
Regulatory Guides document collection of the NRC's Electronic Reading
Room at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/. Similarly,
electronic copies of SRP Sections 2.3.1 and 3.5.1.4 are available at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr0800/#c2
and https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr0800/
#c3, respectively. In addition, electronic copies of the three draft
documents are available in the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS) at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html,
under Accession ML053140225 (DG-1143), ML053570372
(SRP Section 2.3.1), and ML053570376 (SRP Section 3.5.1.4).
Regulatory guides are also available for inspection at the NRC's
Public Document Room (PDR), which is located at 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, Maryland; the PDR's mailing address is USNRC PDR,
Washington, DC
[[Page 5697]]
20555-0001. The PDR can also be reached by telephone at (301) 415-4737
or (800) 397-4205, by fax at (301) 415-3548, and by e-mail to
PDR@nrc.gov. Requests for single copies of draft or final guides (which
may be reproduced) or for placement on an automatic distribution list
for single copies of future draft guides in specific divisions should
be made in writing to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention: Reproduction and Distribution
Services Section; by e-mail to DISTRIBUTION@nrc.gov; or by fax to (301)
415-2289. Telephone requests cannot be accommodated.
Regulatory guides are not copyrighted, and Commission approval is
not required to reproduce them.
(5 U.S.C. 552(a))
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of January, 2006.
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Richard J. Barrett,
Deputy Director, Division of Risk Analysis and Applications, Office of
Nuclear Regulatory Research.
[FR Doc. E6-1386 Filed 2-1-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
