Draft Report for Comment: Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Standard Review Plan, Section 13.3, “Emergency Planning”, 57578-57579 [E6-16013]
Download as PDF
57578
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 189 / Friday, September 29, 2006 / Notices
action and the alternative action are
similar.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Alternative Use of Resources
Draft Report for Comment: Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation Standard
Review Plan, Section 13.3,
‘‘Emergency Planning’’
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The NRC has completed its evaluation
of the proposed action and concludes
that the more conservative minimum
temperature requirements related to
footnote (2) to Table 1 of 10 CFR Part
50, Appendix G are not necessary to
meet the underlying intent of 10 CFR
Part 50 Appendix G, to protect the
Byron and Braidwood RPVs from brittle
fracture during normal operation under
both core critical and core non-critical
conditions and RPV hydrostatic and
leak test conditions.
The details of the NRC staff’s safety
evaluation will be provided in the
exemption that will be issued as part of
the letter to the licensee approving the
exemption to the regulation.
The proposed action will not
significantly increase the probability or
consequences of accidents. No changes
are being made in the types of effluents
that may be released off site. There is no
significant increase in the amount of
any effluent released off site. There is no
significant increase in occupational or
public radiation exposure. Therefore,
there are no significant radiological
environmental impacts associated with
the proposed action.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed
action does not have a potential to affect
any historic sites. It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no
other environmental impact. Therefore,
there are no significant non-radiological
environmental impacts associated with
the proposed action.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that
there are no significant environmental
impacts associated with the proposed
action.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
to the operator during heatup and
cooldown of the plant, especially when
considering requirements in the closure
head flange and the vessel flange
regions. Implementing the P–T curves
that use KIc material fracture toughness
without exempting the flange
requirement of 10 CFR Part 50,
Appendix G, would place a restricted
operating window in the temperature
range associated with the closure head
flange and reactor vessel flange, without
a commensurate increase in plant safety.
In accordance with its stated policy,
on June 19, 2006, the NRC staff
consulted with the Illinois State official,
Mr. Frank Niziolek of the Illinois
Emergency Management Agency,
regarding the environmental impact of
the proposed action. The State official
had no comments.
Environmental Impacts of the
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed
action, the NRC staff considered denial
of the proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘noaction’’ alternative). Denial of the
application would result in no change
in current environmental impacts. The
environmental impacts of the proposed
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:43 Sep 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
The action does not involve the use of
any different resources than those
previously considered in the Final
Environmental Statement for the Byron
and Braidwood stations, NUREG–0848
dated April 1982, and NUREG–1026
dated June 1984, respectively.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of the environmental
assessment, the NRC concludes that the
proposed action will not have a
significant effect on the quality of the
human environment. Accordingly, the
NRC has determined not to prepare an
environmental impact statement for the
proposed action.
For further details with respect to the
proposed action, see the licensee’s letter
dated October 3, 2005. Documents may
be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at
the NRC’s Public Document Room
(PDR), located at One White Flint North,
Public File Area O1 F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland. Publicly available records
will be accessible electronically from
the Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS) Public
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet
at the NRC Web site, https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
Persons who do not have access to
ADAMS or who encounter problems in
accessing the documents located in
ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR
Reference staff by telephone at 1–800–
397–4209 or 301–415–4737, or send an
e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd
day of September 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert F. Kuntz,
Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch III–
2, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6–16015 Filed 9–28–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00119
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability and
request for comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission’s (NRC) Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation (NRR) and Office of
Nuclear Security and Incident Response
(NSIR) has issued Section 13.3, Second
Draft Revision 3, ‘‘Emergency
Planning,’’ of NUREG–0800, ‘‘Standard
Review Plan for the Review of Safety
Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power
Plants, LWR Edition,’’ for public
comment.
DATES: Comments on this document
should be submitted by November 13,
2006. To ensure efficient and complete
comment resolution, comments should
include references to the section, page,
and line numbers of the document to
which the comment applies.
ADDRESSES: NUREG–0800, including
Section 13.3, Second Draft Revision 3, is
available for inspection and copying for
a fee at the Commission’s Public
Document Room, NRC’s Headquarters
Building, 11555 Rockville Pike (First
Floor), Rockville, Maryland. The Public
Document Room is open from 7:45 a.m.
to 4:15 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except on Federal holidays. NUREG–
0800, including Section 13.3, Second
Draft Revision 3, is also available
electronically on the NRC Web site at:
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/nuregs/staff/sr0800/, and
from the ADAMS Electronic Reading
Room on the NRC Web site at: https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html
(ADAMS Accession No. ML062550293).
Members of the public are invited and
encouraged to submit written
comments. Comments may be
accompanied by additional relevant
information or supporting data. A
number of methods may be used to
submit comments. Written comments
should be mailed to Chief, Rulemaking,
Directives, and Editing Branch, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail
Stop T6–D59, Washington, DC 20555–
0001. Hand-deliver comments to: 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD, between
7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m., Federal
workdays. Comments may be submitted
electronically to: nrcrep@nrc.gov.
Comments also may be submitted
electronically through the comment
form available on the NRC Web site at:
E:\FR\FM\29SEN1.SGM
29SEN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 189 / Friday, September 29, 2006 / Notices
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/nuregs/staff/sr0800/.
Please specify the report number
NUREG–0800, Section 13.3, Second
Draft Revision 3, in your comments, and
send your comments by November 13,
2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Bruce Musico, Mail Stop O–6H2, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001.
Telephone: (301) 415–2310; internet:
bjm2@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
Standard Review Plan, NUREG–0800,
has been prepared to establish criteria
that the NRR and NSIR staff responsible
for the review of applications to
construct and operate nuclear power
plants intends to use in evaluating
whether an applicant/licensee meets the
NRC’s regulations. The Standard Review
Plan is not a substitute for the NRC’s
regulations, and compliance with it is
not required. However, applicants are
required to identify differences in
design features, analytical techniques,
and procedural measures proposed for a
facility and corresponding SRP
acceptance criteria, and evaluate how
the proposed alternatives to the SRP
acceptance criteria provide an
acceptable method of complying with
the NRC’s regulations.
The standard review plan sections are
keyed to Regulatory Guide 1.70,
‘‘Standard Format and Content of Safety
Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power
Plants (LWR Edition).’’ Not all sections
of the standard format have a
corresponding review plan section. For
combined license applications
submitted under 10 CFR part 52, the
applicability of standard review plan
sections will be based on the Regulatory
Guide DG–1145, ‘‘Combined License
Applications for Nuclear Power Plants
(LWR Edition),’’ as superceded by the
final guide.
The proposed revision is a rewrite of
the July 1981 SRP Section 13.3,
Revision 2, and provides staff guidance
for the review of emergency planning
information submitted in license
applications under 10 CFR parts 50 and
52. In addition to updating the July 1981
SRP section, the proposed revision
includes some of the proposed changes
in the April 1996 draft Revision 3 to
SRP section 13.3. The proposed revision
consists mostly of changes that identify
specific regulations and guidance, and
provides SRP acceptance criteria for the
various applications submitted under
both 10 CFR parts 50 and 52. The most
significant changes reflect the new
application processes allowed by 10
CFR part 52. This also includes the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
20:43 Sep 28, 2006
Jkt 208001
incorporation of Commission policy on
the use of emergency planning
inspections, tests, analyses, and
acceptance criteria (EP–ITAAC), which
is addressed in the February 22, 2006,
SRM SECY–05–0197, ‘‘Review of
Operational Programs in a Combined
License Application and Generic
Emergency Planning Inspections, Tests,
Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria’’
(ML052770225). In addition, the
proposed revision incorporates
experience gained from the first three
early site permit (ESP) application
reviews, and the standard design
certification applications. The license
application review processes in both 10
CFR part 50 and part 52 utilize the same
existing emergency planning
requirements contained primarily in 10
CFR 50.47 and Appendix E to part 50.
While the proposed SRP Section 13.3
revision is a complete rewrite of Section
13.3, it does not contain new or
unreviewed staff positions. It does,
however, identify a new NUREG/CR
report on evacuation time estimates
(ETEs). Guidance on the development of
ETEs was provided in November 1980
in NUREG–0654/FEMA–REP–1,
Revision 1, ‘‘Criteria for Preparation and
Evaluation of Radiological Emergency
Response Plans and Preparedness in
Support of Nuclear Power Plants,’’ and
that guidance is still used today. The
staff will continue to use the established
guidance and criteria in Appendix 4,
‘‘Evacuation Time Estimates Within the
Plume Exposure Pathway Emergency
Planning Zone,’’ of NUREG–0654/
FEMA–REP–1, as the basis for
compliance with applicable regulations.
The new (January 2005) ETE report,
NUREG/CR–6863, ‘‘Development of
Evacuation Time Estimate Studies for
Nuclear Power Plants,’’ is identified in
the proposed SRP Section 13.3 revision
as providing information relating to
performing an ETE analysis. In March
1992, NUREG/CR–4831, ‘‘State of the
Art in Evacuation Time Estimate
Studies for Nuclear Power Plants,’’ was
written to provide updated information,
assumptions, and methods to be used in
performing ETE studies. NUREG/CR–
6863 updates NUREG/CR–4831 and
integrates new technologies in traffic
management, computer modeling, and
communication systems to identify
additional tools useful in the
development of new, or updates to
existing, ETEs.
Of note, the proposed revision does
introduce the option to use EP–ITAAC
in an ESP application, which is
consistent with the ongoing 10 CFR part
52 rulemaking (see proposed 10 CFR
52.17(b)(3)). Prior to the current 10 CFR
part 52 rulemaking, the rules only
PO 00000
Frm 00120
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
57579
addressed the use of EP–ITAAC with a
combined license (COL) application but
not at the ESP stage. The staff’s position,
which is supported by public
comments, is that the extension of EP–
ITAAC to ESP applications is not
precluded in the existing rules, and is
necessary in order to accommodate an
applicant’s submission of a ‘‘complete
and integrated emergency plan’’ at the
ESP stage, as well as provide an
additional level of flexibility for an ESP
applicant. Without allowing the use of
EP–ITAAC (or other such placeholders)
at the ESP stage, the staff would be
unable to reach a reasonable assurance
finding at the time of application. The
use of EP–ITAAC would allow the staff
to make its findings based on proposed,
and not yet implemented, emergency
plans. Table 13.3–1 provides a proposed
set of allowable EP–ITAAC (for use at
either the ESP or COL application
stage). The asterisked/bolded text in the
table represents the earlier set of COL
EP–ITAAC that was approved by the
Commission in SRM SECY–05–0197.
Table 13.3–1 reflects a process of review
allowed by 10 CFR part 52, and does not
contain new or unreviewed staff
positions relating to emergency
planning requirements.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day
of September, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert Tregoning,
Branch Chief, New Reactor Infrastructure
Guidance, Development Branch, Division of
New Reactor Licensing.
[FR Doc. E6–16013 Filed 9–28–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[HLWRS–ISG–01]
Review Methodology for Seismically
Initiated Event Sequences; Availability
of Final Interim Staff Guidance
Document
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is announcing the
availability of final interim staff
guidance (ISG) document, ‘‘HLWRS–
ISG–01, Review Methodology for
Seismically Initiated Event Sequences,’’
and NRC responses to the public
comments received on that document.
The ISG clarifies or refines the guidance
provided in the Yucca Mountain Review
Plan (YMRP) (NUREG–1804, Revision 2,
July 2003). The YMRP provides
E:\FR\FM\29SEN1.SGM
29SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 189 (Friday, September 29, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57578-57579]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-16013]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Draft Report for Comment: Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Standard Review Plan, Section 13.3, ``Emergency Planning''
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) Office of
Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) and Office of Nuclear Security and
Incident Response (NSIR) has issued Section 13.3, Second Draft Revision
3, ``Emergency Planning,'' of NUREG-0800, ``Standard Review Plan for
the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants, LWR
Edition,'' for public comment.
DATES: Comments on this document should be submitted by November 13,
2006. To ensure efficient and complete comment resolution, comments
should include references to the section, page, and line numbers of the
document to which the comment applies.
ADDRESSES: NUREG-0800, including Section 13.3, Second Draft Revision 3,
is available for inspection and copying for a fee at the Commission's
Public Document Room, NRC's Headquarters Building, 11555 Rockville Pike
(First Floor), Rockville, Maryland. The Public Document Room is open
from 7:45 a.m. to 4:15 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on Federal
holidays. NUREG-0800, including Section 13.3, Second Draft Revision 3,
is also available electronically on the NRC Web site at: https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr0800/, and from
the ADAMS Electronic Reading Room on the NRC Web site at: https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (ADAMS Accession No. ML062550293).
Members of the public are invited and encouraged to submit written
comments. Comments may be accompanied by additional relevant
information or supporting data. A number of methods may be used to
submit comments. Written comments should be mailed to Chief,
Rulemaking, Directives, and Editing Branch, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Mail Stop T6-D59, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Hand-deliver
comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD, between 7:30 a.m. and
4:15 p.m., Federal workdays. Comments may be submitted electronically
to: nrcrep@nrc.gov. Comments also may be submitted electronically
through the comment form available on the NRC Web site at:
[[Page 57579]]
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr0800/.
Please specify the report number NUREG-0800, Section 13.3, Second
Draft Revision 3, in your comments, and send your comments by November
13, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Bruce Musico, Mail Stop O-6H2, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Telephone:
(301) 415-2310; internet: bjm2@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Standard Review Plan, NUREG-0800, has
been prepared to establish criteria that the NRR and NSIR staff
responsible for the review of applications to construct and operate
nuclear power plants intends to use in evaluating whether an applicant/
licensee meets the NRC's regulations. The Standard Review Plan is not a
substitute for the NRC's regulations, and compliance with it is not
required. However, applicants are required to identify differences in
design features, analytical techniques, and procedural measures
proposed for a facility and corresponding SRP acceptance criteria, and
evaluate how the proposed alternatives to the SRP acceptance criteria
provide an acceptable method of complying with the NRC's regulations.
The standard review plan sections are keyed to Regulatory Guide
1.70, ``Standard Format and Content of Safety Analysis Reports for
Nuclear Power Plants (LWR Edition).'' Not all sections of the standard
format have a corresponding review plan section. For combined license
applications submitted under 10 CFR part 52, the applicability of
standard review plan sections will be based on the Regulatory Guide DG-
1145, ``Combined License Applications for Nuclear Power Plants (LWR
Edition),'' as superceded by the final guide.
The proposed revision is a rewrite of the July 1981 SRP Section
13.3, Revision 2, and provides staff guidance for the review of
emergency planning information submitted in license applications under
10 CFR parts 50 and 52. In addition to updating the July 1981 SRP
section, the proposed revision includes some of the proposed changes in
the April 1996 draft Revision 3 to SRP section 13.3. The proposed
revision consists mostly of changes that identify specific regulations
and guidance, and provides SRP acceptance criteria for the various
applications submitted under both 10 CFR parts 50 and 52. The most
significant changes reflect the new application processes allowed by 10
CFR part 52. This also includes the incorporation of Commission policy
on the use of emergency planning inspections, tests, analyses, and
acceptance criteria (EP-ITAAC), which is addressed in the February 22,
2006, SRM SECY-05-0197, ``Review of Operational Programs in a Combined
License Application and Generic Emergency Planning Inspections, Tests,
Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria'' (ML052770225). In addition, the
proposed revision incorporates experience gained from the first three
early site permit (ESP) application reviews, and the standard design
certification applications. The license application review processes in
both 10 CFR part 50 and part 52 utilize the same existing emergency
planning requirements contained primarily in 10 CFR 50.47 and Appendix
E to part 50.
While the proposed SRP Section 13.3 revision is a complete rewrite
of Section 13.3, it does not contain new or unreviewed staff positions.
It does, however, identify a new NUREG/CR report on evacuation time
estimates (ETEs). Guidance on the development of ETEs was provided in
November 1980 in NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1, Revision 1, ``Criteria for
Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and
Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants,'' and that guidance is
still used today. The staff will continue to use the established
guidance and criteria in Appendix 4, ``Evacuation Time Estimates Within
the Plume Exposure Pathway Emergency Planning Zone,'' of NUREG-0654/
FEMA-REP-1, as the basis for compliance with applicable regulations.
The new (January 2005) ETE report, NUREG/CR-6863, ``Development of
Evacuation Time Estimate Studies for Nuclear Power Plants,'' is
identified in the proposed SRP Section 13.3 revision as providing
information relating to performing an ETE analysis. In March 1992,
NUREG/CR-4831, ``State of the Art in Evacuation Time Estimate Studies
for Nuclear Power Plants,'' was written to provide updated information,
assumptions, and methods to be used in performing ETE studies. NUREG/
CR-6863 updates NUREG/CR-4831 and integrates new technologies in
traffic management, computer modeling, and communication systems to
identify additional tools useful in the development of new, or updates
to existing, ETEs.
Of note, the proposed revision does introduce the option to use EP-
ITAAC in an ESP application, which is consistent with the ongoing 10
CFR part 52 rulemaking (see proposed 10 CFR 52.17(b)(3)). Prior to the
current 10 CFR part 52 rulemaking, the rules only addressed the use of
EP-ITAAC with a combined license (COL) application but not at the ESP
stage. The staff's position, which is supported by public comments, is
that the extension of EP-ITAAC to ESP applications is not precluded in
the existing rules, and is necessary in order to accommodate an
applicant's submission of a ``complete and integrated emergency plan''
at the ESP stage, as well as provide an additional level of flexibility
for an ESP applicant. Without allowing the use of EP-ITAAC (or other
such placeholders) at the ESP stage, the staff would be unable to reach
a reasonable assurance finding at the time of application. The use of
EP-ITAAC would allow the staff to make its findings based on proposed,
and not yet implemented, emergency plans. Table 13.3-1 provides a
proposed set of allowable EP-ITAAC (for use at either the ESP or COL
application stage). The asterisked/bolded text in the table represents
the earlier set of COL EP-ITAAC that was approved by the Commission in
SRM SECY-05-0197. Table 13.3-1 reflects a process of review allowed by
10 CFR part 52, and does not contain new or unreviewed staff positions
relating to emergency planning requirements.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day of September, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert Tregoning,
Branch Chief, New Reactor Infrastructure Guidance, Development Branch,
Division of New Reactor Licensing.
[FR Doc. E6-16013 Filed 9-28-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P