Regulation of Advanced Nuclear Power Plants; Draft Statement of Policy, 26349-26351 [E8-10443]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 91 / Friday, May 9, 2008 / Proposed Rules Accordingly, we propose to amend 9 CFR part 2 as follows: PART 2—REGULATIONS 1. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows: Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2131–2159; 7 CFR 2.22, 2.80, and 371.7. 2. Section 2.130 is revised to read as follows: rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS § 2.130 Minimum age requirements. (a) Unless being transported in the same enclosure as its mother or documented surrogate mother, no animal, other than birds, except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, shall be delivered by any person to any carrier or intermediate handler for transportation in commerce, or be transported in commerce by any person unless such animal has been weaned and is at least 8 weeks of age. (b)(1) Persons wishing to transport an animal that has not been weaned and that is not at least 8 weeks of age without its mother or documented surrogate mother to a registered research facility for a specific protocol approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUC) must obtain prior written approval by the appropriate Animal Care regional office by submitting, in writing, a transportation plan signed by the attending veterinarian and head of the animal caregiving staff outlining the reason for the transport (including the IACUC-approved protocol involved, if applicable), transportation specifics (including, but not limited to, dates, destination, intermediate carrier or handler to be used, mode of transportation, and enclosure size and design), food and water arrangements, attendants and/or monitoring plan, contact provisions in case of medical or other care needs, and, for nonhuman primates, how the special needs of the infant will be met during transportation (in support of the requirements of § 3.81). (2) One transportation plan may be submitted for multiple animals being transported from one facility if the plan can show that the needs of all of the animals have been accommodated as determined by Animal Care. (3) Transportation plans submitted via e-mail or facsimile must also include the names, mailing addresses, and phone numbers of the attending veterinarian and head of the animal caregiving staff. Those submitting plans via e-mail or facsimile must also keep on file a copy of the transportation plan that is signed by the attending veterinarian and head of the animal VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:15 May 08, 2008 Jkt 214001 caregiving staff and make the plan available to Animal Care upon request. (c)(1) Persons may transport an animal that has not been weaned and that is not at least 8 weeks of age without its mother or documented surrogate mother to a licensed veterinarian for routine medical care, provided the animal is returned to the licensed or registered facility from which it originated upon the completion of the medical care for which it was transported and no change of ownership is involved. If those conditions are not met, then persons wishing to transport animals that have not been weaned and that are not at least 8 weeks of age for routine medical care must obtain approval from the appropriate Animal Care regional office by submitting a transportation plan in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section. (2) One transportation plan may be submitted for multiple animals being transported from one facility if the plan can show that the needs of all of the animals have been accommodated as determined by Animal Care. (3) Persons may transport animals that have not been weaned and that are not at least 8 weeks of age to a licensed veterinarian for emergency medical care without a transportation plan. Done in Washington, DC, this 5th day of May 2008. Bruce Knight, Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs. [FR Doc. E8–10400 Filed 5–8–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410–34–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 50 [NRC–2008–0237] Regulation of Advanced Nuclear Power Plants; Draft Statement of Policy U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Issuance of draft policy statement and notice of opportunity for public comment. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering adopting a statement of policy to improve the licensing environment for advanced nuclear power reactors to minimize complexity and uncertainty in the regulatory process. This statement would provide the Commission’s policy regarding the review of, and desired characteristics associated with, advanced reactors. This policy PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 26349 statement would be the second revision of the policy statement titled ‘‘Regulation of Advanced Nuclear Power Plants; Statement of Policy.’’ The purpose of this revision is to update the Commission’s policy statement on advanced reactors to integrate the Commission’s expectations for security and preparedness with the current expectations for safety. This draft policy statement is being issued for public comment. Comments on this document should be submitted by July 8, 2008. Comments received after that date will be considered to the extent practical. 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, if possible. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following methods. Comments submitted in writing or in electronic form will be made available for public inspection. Because your comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information, the NRC cautions you against including any information in your submission that you do not want to be publicly disclosed. Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for documents filed under Docket ID [NRC–2008–0237]. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher 301–415–5905, e-mail Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. E-mail comments to: Rulemaking.Comments@nrc.gov. If you do not receive a reply e-mail confirming that we have received your comments, contact us directly at 301–415–1966. Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. (Telephone 301–415– 1966.) Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at 301– 415–1101. You can access publicly available documents related to this document using the following methods: NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR): The public may examine and have copied for a fee publicly available documents at the NRC’s PDR, Public File Area O F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): DATES: E:\FR\FM\09MYP1.SGM 09MYP1 26350 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 91 / Friday, May 9, 2008 / Proposed Rules rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS Publicy available documents created or received at the NRC are available electronically at the NRC’s electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/ reading-rm/adams.html. From this page, the public can gain entry into ADAMS, which provides text and image files of NRC’s public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC’s PDR reference staff at 1–899–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by e-mail to pdr.resources@nrc.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wesley H. Held, Office of New Reactors, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001, Telephone: 301–415–1583, e-mail: Wesley.Held@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On July 8, 1986 (51 FR 24643), the Commission published a policy statement on regulation of advanced reactors in the Federal Register. The Commission’s primary objectives in issuing the advanced reactor policy statement were as follows: • To maintain the earliest possible interaction of applicants, vendors, and government agencies with the NRC. • To provide all interested parties, including the public, with the Commission’s views concerning the desired characteristics of advanced reactor designs. • To express the Commission’s intent to issue timely comment on the implications of such designs for safety and the regulatory process. On July 12, 1994 (59 FR 35461), the Commission revised the 1986 advanced reactor policy statement by addressing the Commission’s policy on metrication (57 FR 46202; October 7, 1992; as revised June 19, 1996 (61 FR 31169)). Since the events of September 11, 2001, the NRC has assessed potential threats and their possible impacts on the Nation’s fleet of operating nuclear power reactors and has required upgrades of physical security measures and mitigative strategies through the issuance of a series of security orders and license conditions. For new nuclear power reactors, the Commission considers it prudent to provide expectations and guidance on security matters to prospective applicants so that they can use this information early in the design stage to identify potential mitigative measures and/or design features that provide a more robust and effective security posture. Therefore, the Commission decided to revise the advanced reactor policy statement to VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:15 May 08, 2008 Jkt 214001 integrate these expectations for security and preparedness with the current expectations for safety. The NRC is seeking public comment in order to receive feedback from the widest range of interested parties and to ensure that all information relevant to developing this document is available to the NRC staff. This document is issued for comment only. The NRC will review public comments received on the document, incorporate suggested changes as necessary, and issue the final revision. Commission Policy Consistent with its legislative mandate, the Commission’s policy with respect to regulating nuclear power reactors is to ensure adequate protection of the environment and public health and safety and common defense and security. Regarding advanced reactors, the Commission expects, as a minimum, at least the same degree of protection of the environment and public health and safety and the common defense and security, that is required for currentgeneration light-water reactors. Furthermore, the Commission expects that advanced reactors will provide enhanced margins of safety and/or use simplified, inherent, passive, or other innovative means to accomplish their safety and security functions. The Commission’s expectation for advanced reactor designs that consider the effects of a large, commercial airplane impact is currently being addressed through rulemaking (Consideration of Aircraft Impacts for New Nuclear Power Reactor Designs— RIN AI19—ID Docket NRC–2007–0009). The Commission believes that reactors designed with potential aircraft impact considerations resulting from this rule would be more robust than if they were designed in the absence of this rule. Among the attributes that could assist in establishing the acceptability or licensability of a proposed advanced reactor design, and therefore should be considered in advanced designs, are: • Highly reliable and less complex shutdown and decay heat removal systems. The use of inherent or passive means to accomplish this objective is encouraged (negative temperature coefficient, natural circulation, etc.). • Longer time constants and sufficient instrumentation to allow for more diagnosis and management before reaching safety systems challenge and/ or exposure of vital equipment to adverse conditions. • Simplified safety systems that, where possible, reduce required operator actions, equipment subjected to severe environmental conditions, and PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 components needed for maintaining safe shutdown conditions. Such simplified systems should facilitate operator comprehension, reliable system function, and more straightforward engineering analysis. • Designs that minimize the potential for severe accidents and their consequences by providing sufficient inherent safety, reliability, redundancy, diversity, and independence in safety systems. • Designs that provide reliable equipment in the balance of plant (BOP) (or safety-system independence from BOP) to reduce the number of challenges to safety systems. • Designs that provide easily maintainable equipment and components. • Designs that reduce potential radiation exposures to plant personnel. • Designs that incorporate the defense-in-depth philosophy by maintaining multiple barriers against radiation release, and by reducing the potential for, and consequences of, severe accidents. • Design features that can be proven by citation of existing technology, or that can be satisfactorily established by commitment to a suitable technology development program. • Designs that include considerations for safety and security requirements together in the design process such that security issues (e.g., newly identified threats of terrorist attacks) can be effectively resolved through facility design and engineered security features, and formulation of mitigation measures, with reduced reliance on human actions. • Designs with features to prevent a simultaneous loss of containment integrity (including situations where the containment is by-passed), and the ability to maintain core cooling as a result of an aircraft impact, or identification of system designs that would provide inherent delay in radiological releases (if prevention of release is not possible). • Designs with features to prevent loss of spent fuel pool integrity as a result of an aircraft impact. If specific advanced reactor designs with some or all of the previously mentioned attributes are brought to the NRC for comment and/or evaluation, the Commission can develop preliminary design safety evaluation and licensing criteria for their safety-related and security-related aspects. Incorporating the above attributes may promote more efficient and effective design reviews. However, the listing of a particular attribute does not necessarily mean that specific licensing criteria will attach to E:\FR\FM\09MYP1.SGM 09MYP1 rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 91 / Friday, May 9, 2008 / Proposed Rules that attribute. Designs with some or all of these attributes are also likely to be more readily understood by the general public. Indeed, the number and nature of the regulatory requirements may depend on the extent to which an individual advanced reactor design incorporates general attributes such as those listed previously. In addition, the Commission expects that the safety features of these advanced reactor designs will be complemented by the operational program for Emergency Planning (EP). This EP operational program, in turn, must be demonstrated by inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria to ensure effective implementation of established measures. The Commission also expects that advanced reactor designs will comply with the Commission’s safety goal policy statement (51 FR 28044; August 4, 1986 as corrected and republished at 51 FR 30028; August 21, 1986), and the policy statement on conversion to the metric measurement system (61 FR 31169; June 19, 1996). To provide for more timely and effective regulation of advanced reactors, the Commission encourages the earliest possible interaction of applicants, vendors, other government agencies, and the NRC to provide for early identification of regulatory requirements for advanced reactors and to provide all interested parties, including the public, with a timely, independent assessment of the safety and security characteristics of advanced reactor designs. Such licensing interaction and guidance early in the design process will contribute towards minimizing complexity and adding stability and predictability in the licensing and regulation of advanced reactors. While the NRC does not develop new designs, the Commission intends to develop the capability, when appropriate, for timely assessment and response to innovative and advanced designs that might be presented for NRC review. Prior experience has shown that new reactor designs—even variations of established designs—may involve technical problems that must be solved to ensure adequate protection of the public health and safety. The earlier these design problems are identified, the earlier satisfactory resolution can be achieved. Prospective applicants are reminded that, while the NRC will undertake to review and comment on new design concepts, the applicants are responsible for documentation and research necessary to support a specific application. Research activities would include testing of new safety or security VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:15 May 08, 2008 Jkt 214001 features that differ from existing designs for operating reactors, or that use simplified, inherent, passive means to accomplish their safety or security function. The testing shall ensure that these new features will perform as predicted, provide collection of sufficient data to validate computer codes, and show that the effects of system interactions are acceptable. During the initial phase of advanced reactor development, the Commission particularly encourages design innovations that enhance safety, reliability, and security (such as those described previously) and that generally depend on technology that is either proven or can be demonstrated by a straightforward technology development program. In the absence of a significant history of operating experience on an advanced concept reactor, plans for innovative use of proven technology and/or new technology development programs should be presented to the NRC for review as early as possible, so that the NRC can assess how the proposed program might influence regulatory requirements. Finally, the NRC also believes that it will be in the interest of the public as well as the design vendors’ and the prospective license applicants to address security issues early in the design stage to achieve a more robust and effective security posture for future nuclear power reactors. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day of May 2008. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Annette L. Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. E8–10443 Filed 5–8–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2008–0536; Directorate Identifier 2008–CE–030–AD] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; APEX Aircraft Model CAP 10 B Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). AGENCY: SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the products listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 26351 airworthiness information (MCAI) originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as: It has been determined that the currently used values for Arms of front and rear fuel tanks, and luggage compartment from the CAP 10B Airplane Flight Manuals (AFM), must be rectified. If left uncorrected, these weight and balance data could lead to erroneous determination of the location of the Center of Gravity (CG) and possibly cause operation with the CG outside the approved limits which may result in control difficulty. The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the unsafe condition described in the MCAI. DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by June 9, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Fax: (202) 493–2251. • Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. • Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Examining the AD Docket You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http:// www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street address for the Docket Office (telephone (800) 647–5527) is in the ADDRESSES section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after receipt. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816) 329– 4145; fax: (816) 329–4090. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments Invited We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or arguments about this proposed AD. Send your comments E:\FR\FM\09MYP1.SGM 09MYP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 91 (Friday, May 9, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26349-26351]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-10443]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 50

[NRC-2008-0237]


Regulation of Advanced Nuclear Power Plants; Draft Statement of 
Policy

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Issuance of draft policy statement and notice of opportunity 
for public comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
adopting a statement of policy to improve the licensing environment for 
advanced nuclear power reactors to minimize complexity and uncertainty 
in the regulatory process. This statement would provide the 
Commission's policy regarding the review of, and desired 
characteristics associated with, advanced reactors. This policy 
statement would be the second revision of the policy statement titled 
``Regulation of Advanced Nuclear Power Plants; Statement of Policy.'' 
The purpose of this revision is to update the Commission's policy 
statement on advanced reactors to integrate the Commission's 
expectations for security and preparedness with the current 
expectations for safety. This draft policy statement is being issued 
for public comment.

DATES: Comments on this document should be submitted by July 8, 2008. 
Comments received after that date will be considered to the extent 
practical. 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, if possible.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any one of the following methods. 
Comments submitted in writing or in electronic form will be made 
available for public inspection. Because your comments will not be 
edited to remove any identifying or contact information, the NRC 
cautions you against including any information in your submission that 
you do not want to be publicly disclosed.
    Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and 
search for documents filed under Docket ID [NRC-2008-0237]. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher 301-415-5905, e-mail 
Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
    Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff.
    E-mail comments to: Rulemaking.Comments@nrc.gov. If you do not 
receive a reply e-mail confirming that we have received your comments, 
contact us directly at 301-415-1966.
    Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 
20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. (Telephone 
301-415-1966.)
    Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at 
301-415-1101.
    You can access publicly available documents related to this 
document using the following methods:
    NRC's Public Document Room (PDR): The public may examine and have 
copied for a fee publicly available documents at the NRC's PDR, Public 
File Area O F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, 
Rockville, Maryland.
    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS):

[[Page 26350]]

Publicy available documents created or received at the NRC are 
available electronically at the NRC's electronic Reading Room at http:/
/www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this page, the public can gain 
entry into ADAMS, which provides text and image files of NRC's public 
documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems 
in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC's PDR 
reference staff at 1-899-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to 
pdr.resources@nrc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wesley H. Held, Office of New 
Reactors, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001, Telephone: 301-415-1583, e-mail: Wesley.Held@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On July 8, 1986 (51 FR 24643), the Commission published a policy 
statement on regulation of advanced reactors in the Federal Register. 
The Commission's primary objectives in issuing the advanced reactor 
policy statement were as follows:
     To maintain the earliest possible interaction of 
applicants, vendors, and government agencies with the NRC.
     To provide all interested parties, including the public, 
with the Commission's views concerning the desired characteristics of 
advanced reactor designs.
     To express the Commission's intent to issue timely comment 
on the implications of such designs for safety and the regulatory 
process.
    On July 12, 1994 (59 FR 35461), the Commission revised the 1986 
advanced reactor policy statement by addressing the Commission's policy 
on metrication (57 FR 46202; October 7, 1992; as revised June 19, 1996 
(61 FR 31169)).
    Since the events of September 11, 2001, the NRC has assessed 
potential threats and their possible impacts on the Nation's fleet of 
operating nuclear power reactors and has required upgrades of physical 
security measures and mitigative strategies through the issuance of a 
series of security orders and license conditions. For new nuclear power 
reactors, the Commission considers it prudent to provide expectations 
and guidance on security matters to prospective applicants so that they 
can use this information early in the design stage to identify 
potential mitigative measures and/or design features that provide a 
more robust and effective security posture. Therefore, the Commission 
decided to revise the advanced reactor policy statement to integrate 
these expectations for security and preparedness with the current 
expectations for safety.
    The NRC is seeking public comment in order to receive feedback from 
the widest range of interested parties and to ensure that all 
information relevant to developing this document is available to the 
NRC staff. This document is issued for comment only. The NRC will 
review public comments received on the document, incorporate suggested 
changes as necessary, and issue the final revision.

Commission Policy

    Consistent with its legislative mandate, the Commission's policy 
with respect to regulating nuclear power reactors is to ensure adequate 
protection of the environment and public health and safety and common 
defense and security. Regarding advanced reactors, the Commission 
expects, as a minimum, at least the same degree of protection of the 
environment and public health and safety and the common defense and 
security, that is required for current-generation light-water reactors. 
Furthermore, the Commission expects that advanced reactors will provide 
enhanced margins of safety and/or use simplified, inherent, passive, or 
other innovative means to accomplish their safety and security 
functions.
    The Commission's expectation for advanced reactor designs that 
consider the effects of a large, commercial airplane impact is 
currently being addressed through rulemaking (Consideration of Aircraft 
Impacts for New Nuclear Power Reactor Designs--RIN AI19--ID Docket NRC-
2007-0009). The Commission believes that reactors designed with 
potential aircraft impact considerations resulting from this rule would 
be more robust than if they were designed in the absence of this rule.
    Among the attributes that could assist in establishing the 
acceptability or licensability of a proposed advanced reactor design, 
and therefore should be considered in advanced designs, are:
     Highly reliable and less complex shutdown and decay heat 
removal systems. The use of inherent or passive means to accomplish 
this objective is encouraged (negative temperature coefficient, natural 
circulation, etc.).
     Longer time constants and sufficient instrumentation to 
allow for more diagnosis and management before reaching safety systems 
challenge and/or exposure of vital equipment to adverse conditions.
     Simplified safety systems that, where possible, reduce 
required operator actions, equipment subjected to severe environmental 
conditions, and components needed for maintaining safe shutdown 
conditions. Such simplified systems should facilitate operator 
comprehension, reliable system function, and more straightforward 
engineering analysis.
     Designs that minimize the potential for severe accidents 
and their consequences by providing sufficient inherent safety, 
reliability, redundancy, diversity, and independence in safety systems.
     Designs that provide reliable equipment in the balance of 
plant (BOP) (or safety-system independence from BOP) to reduce the 
number of challenges to safety systems.
     Designs that provide easily maintainable equipment and 
components.
     Designs that reduce potential radiation exposures to plant 
personnel.
     Designs that incorporate the defense-in-depth philosophy 
by maintaining multiple barriers against radiation release, and by 
reducing the potential for, and consequences of, severe accidents.
     Design features that can be proven by citation of existing 
technology, or that can be satisfactorily established by commitment to 
a suitable technology development program.
     Designs that include considerations for safety and 
security requirements together in the design process such that security 
issues (e.g., newly identified threats of terrorist attacks) can be 
effectively resolved through facility design and engineered security 
features, and formulation of mitigation measures, with reduced reliance 
on human actions.
     Designs with features to prevent a simultaneous loss of 
containment integrity (including situations where the containment is 
by-passed), and the ability to maintain core cooling as a result of an 
aircraft impact, or identification of system designs that would provide 
inherent delay in radiological releases (if prevention of release is 
not possible).
     Designs with features to prevent loss of spent fuel pool 
integrity as a result of an aircraft impact.
    If specific advanced reactor designs with some or all of the 
previously mentioned attributes are brought to the NRC for comment and/
or evaluation, the Commission can develop preliminary design safety 
evaluation and licensing criteria for their safety-related and 
security-related aspects. Incorporating the above attributes may 
promote more efficient and effective design reviews. However, the 
listing of a particular attribute does not necessarily mean that 
specific licensing criteria will attach to

[[Page 26351]]

that attribute. Designs with some or all of these attributes are also 
likely to be more readily understood by the general public. Indeed, the 
number and nature of the regulatory requirements may depend on the 
extent to which an individual advanced reactor design incorporates 
general attributes such as those listed previously.
    In addition, the Commission expects that the safety features of 
these advanced reactor designs will be complemented by the operational 
program for Emergency Planning (EP). This EP operational program, in 
turn, must be demonstrated by inspections, tests, analyses, and 
acceptance criteria to ensure effective implementation of established 
measures. The Commission also expects that advanced reactor designs 
will comply with the Commission's safety goal policy statement (51 FR 
28044; August 4, 1986 as corrected and republished at 51 FR 30028; 
August 21, 1986), and the policy statement on conversion to the metric 
measurement system (61 FR 31169; June 19, 1996).
    To provide for more timely and effective regulation of advanced 
reactors, the Commission encourages the earliest possible interaction 
of applicants, vendors, other government agencies, and the NRC to 
provide for early identification of regulatory requirements for 
advanced reactors and to provide all interested parties, including the 
public, with a timely, independent assessment of the safety and 
security characteristics of advanced reactor designs. Such licensing 
interaction and guidance early in the design process will contribute 
towards minimizing complexity and adding stability and predictability 
in the licensing and regulation of advanced reactors.
    While the NRC does not develop new designs, the Commission intends 
to develop the capability, when appropriate, for timely assessment and 
response to innovative and advanced designs that might be presented for 
NRC review. Prior experience has shown that new reactor designs--even 
variations of established designs--may involve technical problems that 
must be solved to ensure adequate protection of the public health and 
safety. The earlier these design problems are identified, the earlier 
satisfactory resolution can be achieved. Prospective applicants are 
reminded that, while the NRC will undertake to review and comment on 
new design concepts, the applicants are responsible for documentation 
and research necessary to support a specific application. Research 
activities would include testing of new safety or security features 
that differ from existing designs for operating reactors, or that use 
simplified, inherent, passive means to accomplish their safety or 
security function. The testing shall ensure that these new features 
will perform as predicted, provide collection of sufficient data to 
validate computer codes, and show that the effects of system 
interactions are acceptable.
    During the initial phase of advanced reactor development, the 
Commission particularly encourages design innovations that enhance 
safety, reliability, and security (such as those described previously) 
and that generally depend on technology that is either proven or can be 
demonstrated by a straightforward technology development program. In 
the absence of a significant history of operating experience on an 
advanced concept reactor, plans for innovative use of proven technology 
and/or new technology development programs should be presented to the 
NRC for review as early as possible, so that the NRC can assess how the 
proposed program might influence regulatory requirements.
    Finally, the NRC also believes that it will be in the interest of 
the public as well as the design vendors' and the prospective license 
applicants to address security issues early in the design stage to 
achieve a more robust and effective security posture for future nuclear 
power reactors.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day of May 2008.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
 [FR Doc. E8-10443 Filed 5-8-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P