Risk-Informed Changes to Loss-of-Coolant Accident Technical Requirements, 69446-69448 [2016-24189]

Download as PDF 69446 Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 81, No. 194 Thursday, October 6, 2016 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 50 [NRC–2004–0006, NRC–2002–0018] RIN 3150–AH29 Risk-Informed Changes to Loss-ofCoolant Accident Technical Requirements Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Rulemaking activity; discontinuation. AGENCY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is discontinuing a rulemaking activity titled, ‘‘RiskInformed Changes to Loss-Of-Coolant Accident Technical Requirements.’’ The purpose of this action is to inform members of the public of the discontinuation of this rulemaking and to provide a brief discussion of the NRC’s decision to discontinue it. This rulemaking activity will no longer be reported in the NRC’s portion of the Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions (the Unified Agenda). SUMMARY: Effective October 6, 2016, the rulemaking activity discussed in this document is discontinued. ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2004–0006 for the rulemaking and Docket ID NRC–2002–0018 for the petition for rulemaking (PRM), PRM– 50–75, when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available information related to this document using any of the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2004–0006 for the rulemaking and Docket ID NRC–2002– 0018 for PRM–50–75. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact the individual listed sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS DATES: VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:26 Oct 05, 2016 Jkt 241001 in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. • NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable documents online in the ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ adams.html. To begin the search, select ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number for each document referenced in this document (if that document is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that a document is referenced. • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public documents at the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Beall, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 0001; telephone: 301–415–3874; email: Robert.Beall@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Background II. Process for Discontinuing Rulemaking Activities III. Discussion IV. Petition for Rulemaking (PRM–50–75) V. Conclusion I. Background In SECY–16–0009, ‘‘Recommendations Resulting from the Integrated Prioritization and ReBaselining of Agency Activities,’’ dated January 31, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16028A189), the NRC staff requested Commission approval to implement recommendations on work to be shed, de-prioritized, or performed with fewer resources. One of the items listed to be shed (i.e., discontinued) was a rulemaking titled, ‘‘Risk-Informed Changes to Loss-Of-Coolant Accident Technical Requirements,’’ that would have amended § 50.46 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), ‘‘Acceptance criteria for emergency core cooling systems (ECCS) for light-water nuclear power reactors’’ (50.46a ECCS rulemaking). In the Staff Requirements PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Memorandum (SRM) for SECY–16– 0009, dated April 13, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16104A158), the Commission approved discontinuing the 50.46a ECCS rulemaking, and directed the NRC staff to publish a Federal Register notice to inform the public that the rule is being discontinued. A discussion of the NRC’s decision to discontinue the rulemaking on ‘‘RiskInformed Changes to Loss-Of-Coolant Accident Technical Requirements’’ is provided in Section III of this document. II. Process for Discontinuing Rulemaking Activities When the NRC staff identifies a rulemaking activity that can be discontinued, it will request, through a Commission paper, approval from the Commission to discontinue the rule. The Commission provides its decision by issuing an SRM. If the Commission approves discontinuing the rulemaking activity, the NRC staff will inform the public of the Commission’s decision. A rulemaking activity may be discontinued at any stage of the rulemaking process. For a rulemaking activity that has received public comments, the NRC staff will consider those comments before discontinuing it; however, the NRC staff will not provide individual comment responses. After Commission approval to discontinue the rulemaking activity, the NRC staff will update the next edition of the Unified Agenda to indicate that the rulemaking is discontinued. The rulemaking activity will appear in the completed section of that edition of the Unified Agenda, but will not appear in subsequent editions. III. Discussion In the SRM for SECY–02–0057,1 ‘‘Update to SECY–01–0133, ‘Fourth Status Report on Study of Risk-Informed Changes to the Technical Requirements of 10 CFR part 50 (Option 3) and Recommendations on Risk-Informed Changes to 10 CFR 50.46 (ECCS Acceptance Criteria),’ ’’ dated March 31, 2003 (ADAMS Accession No. 1 SECY–02–0057, ‘‘Update to SECY–01–0133, ‘Fourth Status Report on Study of Risk-Informed Changes to the Technical Requirements of 10 CFR part 50 (Option 3) and Recommendations on RiskInformed Changes to 10 CFR 50.46 (ECCS Acceptance Criteria),’ ’’ dated March 29, 2002 (ADAMS Accession No. ML020660607). E:\FR\FM\06OCP1.SGM 06OCP1 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2016 / Proposed Rules ML030910476), the Commission directed the NRC staff to prepare a proposed rule that would provide a riskinformed alternative maximum loss-ofcoolant accident (LOCA) break size. On June 9, 2003, and July 24, 2003, the NRC staff held two public meetings 2 to obtain stakeholder feedback on this proposed rule. As a result of these interactions, the NRC staff found differences between the stated Commission objectives and industry stakeholder interests. To reach a common understanding of the objectives of the rulemaking, the NRC staff requested additional Commission direction in SECY–04– 0037, ‘‘Issues Related to Proposed Rulemaking to Risk-Inform Requirements Related to Large Break Loss-of-Coolant Accident (LOCA) Break Size and Plans for Rulemaking on LOCA with Coincident Loss-of-Offsite Power,’’ dated March 3, 2004 (ADAMS Accession No. ML040490133). The Commission directed the NRC staff in the SRM for SECY–04–0037, dated July 1, 2004 (ADAMS Accession No. ML041830412), to determine an appropriate risk-informed alternative break size and remove breaks larger than this size from the design-basis event category. In SECY–05–0052, ‘‘Proposed Rulemaking for ‘Risk-Informed Changes to Loss-of-Coolant Accident Technical Requirements,’ ’’ dated March 29, 2005 (ADAMS Accession No. ML050480172), the NRC staff provided a proposed rule to the Commission for approval. In the SRM for SECY–05–0052, dated July 29, 2005 (ADAMS Accession No. ML052100416), the Commission approved publication of the proposed rule. On November 7, 2005, the NRC published the proposed rule in the Federal Register (70 FR 67597). After evaluating the public comments, the NRC staff completed the draft final rule language. On October 31 and November 1, 2006, the NRC staff met with the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) to discuss the draft final rule. In a letter dated November 16, 2006 (ADAMS Accession No. ML063190465), the ACRS recommended that the NRC staff not issue the rule in its current form and suggested numerous changes, primarily to strengthen the assurance of defense-in-depth provided for large pipe breaks. The NRC staff evaluated the ACRS recommendations and, in SECY–07– 2 Meeting Summaries: June 9, 2003 (ADAMS Accession No. ML031810178), and July 24, 2003 (ADAMS Accession No. ML032130059). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:26 Oct 05, 2016 Jkt 241001 0082, ‘‘Rulemaking to Make RiskInformed Changes to Loss-of-Coolant Accident Technical Requirements; 10 CFR 50.46a, ‘Alternative Acceptance Criteria for Emergency Core Cooling Systems for Light Water Nuclear Power Reactors,’ ’’ dated May 16, 2007 (ADAMS Accession No. ML070180692), sought additional Commission direction on both the priority of the rule and the issues raised by the ACRS. In the SRM for SECY–07–0082, dated August 10, 2007 (ADAMS Accession No. ML072220595), the Commission approved the NRC staff’s recommendations for a revised rule priority and an approach for addressing ACRS concerns and completing the final rule. The NRC staff modified the rule by making numerous substantive changes in the draft final rule. The NRC published a supplemental proposed rule for public comment on August 10, 2009 (74 FR 40006). The NRC staff evaluated the public comments received on the supplemental proposed rule and prepared a revised draft final rule. The draft final rule language was made publicly available on May 12, 2010, in the rulemaking docket on www.regulations.gov (NRC–2004–0006). The NRC staff prepared the final draft rule and discussed it in meetings with the ACRS subcommittee and full committee on September 22 and October 7, 2010. The ACRS provided its views on the rule to the Commission in a letter dated October 20, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML102850279). In SECY–10–0161, ‘‘Final Rule: RiskInformed Changes to Loss-of-Coolant Accident Technical Requirements (10 CFR 50.46(a)) (RIN 3150–AH29),’’ dated December 10, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML102210460), the NRC staff submitted a final rulemaking package to the Commission for approval. The Commission’s review of the final rule was suspended to address higherpriority issues associated with the March 2011 Fukushima Dai-ichi accident. On April 20, 2012, the NRC staff requested to withdraw the 50.46a ECCS final rule from Commission consideration so that the NRC staff could review the rule and ensure its compatibility with the ongoing regulatory framework activities under Recommendation 1 of the Fukushima Near-Term Task Force report (ADAMS Accession No. ML111861807). The Commission approved the NRC staff’s request in the SRM for SECY–10–0161, dated April 26, 2012 (ADAMS Accession No. ML12117A121). In SECY–16–0009, the NRC staff recommended that the 50.46a ECCS rulemaking be discontinued. Based on PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 69447 interactions with the nuclear industry, the NRC staff understood that there were concerns with the potential implementation burden of the rule. The NRC staff’s Regulatory Analysis for the 50.46a ECCS final rule (ADAMS Accession No. ML103230250) discussed the comments submitted by the Boiling Water Reactor Owners Group which conveyed that it would be extremely difficult to evaluate the cost-benefit due to uncertainties about the true cost of adopting the 50.46a ECCS rule. Furthermore, at a public meeting on the Risk Management Regulatory Framework paper, certain industry representatives indicated that the industry would not be interested in implementing the final rule. As explained in SECY–16–0009, this rule would be voluntary if issued, so licensees could choose to not implement the requirements. Therefore, the NRC staff believes that there is minimal adverse impact on the NRC’s mission, principles, or values by discontinuing this rulemaking. In the SRM for SECY–16–0009, the Commission approved the NRC staff’s recommendation to discontinue this rulemaking. In summary, the NRC has decided not to proceed with this rulemaking activity because there is minimal adverse impact on our mission, principles, or values and the industry has indicated that there may not be much interest in implementing the final rule. IV. Petition for Rulemaking (PRM–50– 75) On February 6, 2002, Anthony R. Pietrangelo, on behalf of the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), filed PRM–50–75 requesting that the NRC amend 10 CFR 50.46 to allow licensees to use an alternative to the double-ended guillotine break of the largest pipe in the reactor coolant system (ADAMS Accession No. ML020630082). On April 8, 2002 (67 FR 16654), the NRC published a notice of receipt and request for public comment for PRM– 50–75. The comment period closed on June 24, 2002, and the NRC received 18 comment letters (ADAMS Accession No. ML082460625). The NRC staff determined that the issues raised in PRM–50–75 were appropriate for consideration and, in fact, the issues were already being considered in the 50.46a ECCS rulemaking. On November 6, 2008, the NRC published a Federal Register document (73 FR 66000) stating that the NRC would address the substantive comments filed in PRM–50– 75 as part of the 50.46a ECCS rulemaking. In SECY–16–0009, the staff recommended discontinuing the 50.46a E:\FR\FM\06OCP1.SGM 06OCP1 69448 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2016 / Proposed Rules ECCS rulemaking and stated that PRM– 50–75 would be addressed by alternative means. The NRC will issue a separate Federal Register document to disposition PRM–50–75. The NRC is no longer pursuing the ‘‘Risk-Informed Changes to Loss-OfCoolant Accident Technical Requirements’’ rulemaking for the reasons discussed in this document. In the next edition of the Unified Agenda, the NRC will update the entry for this rulemaking and reference this document to indicate that the 50.46a ECCS rulemaking is no longer being pursued. This rulemaking activity will appear in the completed section of that edition of the Unified Agenda, but will not appear in subsequent editions. If the NRC decides to pursue a similar or related rulemaking in the future, it will inform the public through a new rulemaking entry in the Unified Agenda. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of September 2016. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Victor M. McCree, Executive Director for Operations. [FR Doc. 2016–24189 Filed 10–5–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0494; FRL–9953–65– Region 9] Findings of Failure To Attain the 1997 PM2.5 Standards; California; San Joaquin Valley Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to determine that the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area failed to attain the 1997 annual and 24-hour fine particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standards by the December 31, 2015 ‘‘Serious’’ area attainment date. This proposed determination is based upon monitored air quality data from 2013 through 2015. If the EPA finalizes this determination as proposed, the State of California will be required to submit a revision to the California State Implementation Plan that, among other elements, provides for expeditious attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 standards and for a five percent annual reduction in the emissions of sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS SUMMARY: 18:26 Oct 05, 2016 Any comments must arrive by November 7, 2016. DATES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– OAR–2016–0494 at https:// www.regulations.gov, or via email to Rory Mays at mays.rory@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. ADDRESSES: V. Conclusion VerDate Sep<11>2014 direct PM2.5 or a PM2.5 plan precursor pollutant. Jkt 241001 Rory Mays, Air Planning Office (AIR–2), EPA Region 9, (415) 972–3227, mays.rory@ epa.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. Table of Contents I. Background A. PM2.5 NAAQS B. San Joaquin Valley Designations, Classifications, and Attainment Dates for 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS II. Proposed Determination and Consequences A. Applicable Statutory and Regulatory Provisions B. Monitoring Network Considerations C. Data Considerations and Proposed Determination D. Consequences for Serious PM2.5 Nonattainment Area Failing To Attain Standards by Attainment Date III. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 I. Background A. PM2.5 NAAQS Under section 109 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’), the EPA has established national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or ‘‘standards’’) for certain pervasive air pollutants (referred to as ‘‘criteria pollutants’’) and conducts periodic reviews of the NAAQS to determine whether they should be revised or whether new NAAQS should be established. On July 1, 1987 (52 FR 24634), the EPA replaced the original standard for particulate matter, measured as total suspended particulate matter (TSP) (i.e., particles roughly 30 micrometers or less), with new standards that replaced TSP as the indicator for particulate matter with a new indicator that includes only those particles with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers (PM10). On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38652), the EPA revised the standards for particulate matter by establishing new standards for particles with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5). The EPA established primary and secondary annual and 24-hour standards for PM2.5.1 The annual primary and secondary standards were set at 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3), based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations, and the 24-hour primary and secondary standards were set at 65 mg/m3, based on the 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations at each monitoring site within an area. See 40 CFR 50.7. Collectively, we refer herein to the 1997 24-hour and annual PM2.5 NAAQS as the ‘‘1997 PM2.5 NAAQS’’ or ‘‘1997 PM2.5 standards.’’ 2 The EPA 1 For a given air pollutant, ‘‘primary’’ NAAQS are those determined by the EPA as requisite to protect the public health, allowing an adequate margin of safety, and ‘‘secondary’’ standards are those determined by the EPA as requisite to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects associated with the presence of such air pollutant in the ambient air. See CAA section 109(b). 2 On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), the EPA revised the level of the 24-hour PM2.5 standards to 35 mg/m3, and on January 15, 2013 (78 FR 3086), the EPA revised the primary annual PM2.5 standard to a level of 12.0 mg/m3. We recently published a final rule revoking the 1997 primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS for areas designated (or redesignated) attainment for that standard and revising the regulations governing implementation of the PM2.5 standards. See 81 FR 58010 (August 24, 2016). However, because the San Joaquin Valley remains designated nonattainment for the 1997 annual primary PM2.5 standard, the 1997 primary annual PM2.5 standard will remain in effect in the San Joaquin Valley under the EPA’s recent PM2.5 implementation rule until such time as the area is redesignated to attainment for that standard. Thus, even though the EPA has lowered the 24-hour and E:\FR\FM\06OCP1.SGM 06OCP1

Agencies

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 194 (Thursday, October 6, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69446-69448]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-24189]


========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 194 / Thursday, October 6, 2016 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 69446]]



NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 50

[NRC-2004-0006, NRC-2002-0018]
RIN 3150-AH29


Risk-Informed Changes to Loss-of-Coolant Accident Technical 
Requirements

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Rulemaking activity; discontinuation.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is discontinuing 
a rulemaking activity titled, ``Risk-Informed Changes to Loss-Of-
Coolant Accident Technical Requirements.'' The purpose of this action 
is to inform members of the public of the discontinuation of this 
rulemaking and to provide a brief discussion of the NRC's decision to 
discontinue it. This rulemaking activity will no longer be reported in 
the NRC's portion of the Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory 
Actions (the Unified Agenda).

DATES: Effective October 6, 2016, the rulemaking activity discussed in 
this document is discontinued.

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2004-0006 for the rulemaking 
and Docket ID NRC-2002-0018 for the petition for rulemaking (PRM), PRM-
50-75, when contacting the NRC about the availability of information 
regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available information 
related to this document using any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2004-0006 for the 
rulemaking and Docket ID NRC-2002-0018 for PRM-50-75. Address questions 
about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; email: 
Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact the 
individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 
this document.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the 
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and 
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, 
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The 
ADAMS accession number for each document referenced in this document 
(if that document is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time 
that a document is referenced.
     NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public 
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Beall, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulations, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3874; email: Robert.Beall@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Process for Discontinuing Rulemaking Activities
III. Discussion
IV. Petition for Rulemaking (PRM-50-75)
V. Conclusion

I. Background

    In SECY-16-0009, ``Recommendations Resulting from the Integrated 
Prioritization and Re-Baselining of Agency Activities,'' dated January 
31, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16028A189), the NRC staff requested 
Commission approval to implement recommendations on work to be shed, 
de-prioritized, or performed with fewer resources. One of the items 
listed to be shed (i.e., discontinued) was a rulemaking titled, ``Risk-
Informed Changes to Loss-Of-Coolant Accident Technical Requirements,'' 
that would have amended Sec.  50.46 of title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR), ``Acceptance criteria for emergency core cooling 
systems (ECCS) for light-water nuclear power reactors'' (50.46a ECCS 
rulemaking). In the Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) for SECY-16-
0009, dated April 13, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16104A158), the 
Commission approved discontinuing the 50.46a ECCS rulemaking, and 
directed the NRC staff to publish a Federal Register notice to inform 
the public that the rule is being discontinued.
    A discussion of the NRC's decision to discontinue the rulemaking on 
``Risk-Informed Changes to Loss-Of-Coolant Accident Technical 
Requirements'' is provided in Section III of this document.

II. Process for Discontinuing Rulemaking Activities

    When the NRC staff identifies a rulemaking activity that can be 
discontinued, it will request, through a Commission paper, approval 
from the Commission to discontinue the rule. The Commission provides 
its decision by issuing an SRM. If the Commission approves 
discontinuing the rulemaking activity, the NRC staff will inform the 
public of the Commission's decision.
    A rulemaking activity may be discontinued at any stage of the 
rulemaking process. For a rulemaking activity that has received public 
comments, the NRC staff will consider those comments before 
discontinuing it; however, the NRC staff will not provide individual 
comment responses.
    After Commission approval to discontinue the rulemaking activity, 
the NRC staff will update the next edition of the Unified Agenda to 
indicate that the rulemaking is discontinued. The rulemaking activity 
will appear in the completed section of that edition of the Unified 
Agenda, but will not appear in subsequent editions.

III. Discussion

    In the SRM for SECY-02-0057,\1\ ``Update to SECY-01-0133, `Fourth 
Status Report on Study of Risk-Informed Changes to the Technical 
Requirements of 10 CFR part 50 (Option 3) and Recommendations on Risk-
Informed Changes to 10 CFR 50.46 (ECCS Acceptance Criteria),' '' dated 
March 31, 2003 (ADAMS Accession No.

[[Page 69447]]

ML030910476), the Commission directed the NRC staff to prepare a 
proposed rule that would provide a risk-informed alternative maximum 
loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) break size. On June 9, 2003, and July 
24, 2003, the NRC staff held two public meetings \2\ to obtain 
stakeholder feedback on this proposed rule. As a result of these 
interactions, the NRC staff found differences between the stated 
Commission objectives and industry stakeholder interests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ SECY-02-0057, ``Update to SECY-01-0133, `Fourth Status 
Report on Study of Risk-Informed Changes to the Technical 
Requirements of 10 CFR part 50 (Option 3) and Recommendations on 
Risk-Informed Changes to 10 CFR 50.46 (ECCS Acceptance Criteria),' 
'' dated March 29, 2002 (ADAMS Accession No. ML020660607).
    \2\ Meeting Summaries: June 9, 2003 (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML031810178), and July 24, 2003 (ADAMS Accession No. ML032130059).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To reach a common understanding of the objectives of the 
rulemaking, the NRC staff requested additional Commission direction in 
SECY-04-0037, ``Issues Related to Proposed Rulemaking to Risk-Inform 
Requirements Related to Large Break Loss-of-Coolant Accident (LOCA) 
Break Size and Plans for Rulemaking on LOCA with Coincident Loss-of-
Offsite Power,'' dated March 3, 2004 (ADAMS Accession No. ML040490133). 
The Commission directed the NRC staff in the SRM for SECY-04-0037, 
dated July 1, 2004 (ADAMS Accession No. ML041830412), to determine an 
appropriate risk-informed alternative break size and remove breaks 
larger than this size from the design-basis event category.
    In SECY-05-0052, ``Proposed Rulemaking for `Risk-Informed Changes 
to Loss-of-Coolant Accident Technical Requirements,' '' dated March 29, 
2005 (ADAMS Accession No. ML050480172), the NRC staff provided a 
proposed rule to the Commission for approval. In the SRM for SECY-05-
0052, dated July 29, 2005 (ADAMS Accession No. ML052100416), the 
Commission approved publication of the proposed rule.
    On November 7, 2005, the NRC published the proposed rule in the 
Federal Register (70 FR 67597). After evaluating the public comments, 
the NRC staff completed the draft final rule language.
    On October 31 and November 1, 2006, the NRC staff met with the 
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) to discuss the draft 
final rule. In a letter dated November 16, 2006 (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML063190465), the ACRS recommended that the NRC staff not issue the 
rule in its current form and suggested numerous changes, primarily to 
strengthen the assurance of defense-in-depth provided for large pipe 
breaks.
    The NRC staff evaluated the ACRS recommendations and, in SECY-07-
0082, ``Rulemaking to Make Risk-Informed Changes to Loss-of-Coolant 
Accident Technical Requirements; 10 CFR 50.46a, `Alternative Acceptance 
Criteria for Emergency Core Cooling Systems for Light Water Nuclear 
Power Reactors,' '' dated May 16, 2007 (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML070180692), sought additional Commission direction on both the 
priority of the rule and the issues raised by the ACRS. In the SRM for 
SECY-07-0082, dated August 10, 2007 (ADAMS Accession No. ML072220595), 
the Commission approved the NRC staff's recommendations for a revised 
rule priority and an approach for addressing ACRS concerns and 
completing the final rule.
    The NRC staff modified the rule by making numerous substantive 
changes in the draft final rule. The NRC published a supplemental 
proposed rule for public comment on August 10, 2009 (74 FR 40006). The 
NRC staff evaluated the public comments received on the supplemental 
proposed rule and prepared a revised draft final rule. The draft final 
rule language was made publicly available on May 12, 2010, in the 
rulemaking docket on www.regulations.gov (NRC-2004-0006). The NRC staff 
prepared the final draft rule and discussed it in meetings with the 
ACRS subcommittee and full committee on September 22 and October 7, 
2010. The ACRS provided its views on the rule to the Commission in a 
letter dated October 20, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML102850279).
    In SECY-10-0161, ``Final Rule: Risk-Informed Changes to Loss-of-
Coolant Accident Technical Requirements (10 CFR 50.46(a)) (RIN 3150-
AH29),'' dated December 10, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML102210460), the 
NRC staff submitted a final rulemaking package to the Commission for 
approval. The Commission's review of the final rule was suspended to 
address higher-priority issues associated with the March 2011 Fukushima 
Dai-ichi accident. On April 20, 2012, the NRC staff requested to 
withdraw the 50.46a ECCS final rule from Commission consideration so 
that the NRC staff could review the rule and ensure its compatibility 
with the ongoing regulatory framework activities under Recommendation 1 
of the Fukushima Near-Term Task Force report (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML111861807). The Commission approved the NRC staff's request in the 
SRM for SECY-10-0161, dated April 26, 2012 (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML12117A121).
    In SECY-16-0009, the NRC staff recommended that the 50.46a ECCS 
rulemaking be discontinued. Based on interactions with the nuclear 
industry, the NRC staff understood that there were concerns with the 
potential implementation burden of the rule. The NRC staff's Regulatory 
Analysis for the 50.46a ECCS final rule (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML103230250) discussed the comments submitted by the Boiling Water 
Reactor Owners Group which conveyed that it would be extremely 
difficult to evaluate the cost-benefit due to uncertainties about the 
true cost of adopting the 50.46a ECCS rule. Furthermore, at a public 
meeting on the Risk Management Regulatory Framework paper, certain 
industry representatives indicated that the industry would not be 
interested in implementing the final rule.
    As explained in SECY-16-0009, this rule would be voluntary if 
issued, so licensees could choose to not implement the requirements. 
Therefore, the NRC staff believes that there is minimal adverse impact 
on the NRC's mission, principles, or values by discontinuing this 
rulemaking. In the SRM for SECY-16-0009, the Commission approved the 
NRC staff's recommendation to discontinue this rulemaking.
    In summary, the NRC has decided not to proceed with this rulemaking 
activity because there is minimal adverse impact on our mission, 
principles, or values and the industry has indicated that there may not 
be much interest in implementing the final rule.

IV. Petition for Rulemaking (PRM-50-75)

    On February 6, 2002, Anthony R. Pietrangelo, on behalf of the 
Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), filed PRM-50-75 requesting that the NRC 
amend 10 CFR 50.46 to allow licensees to use an alternative to the 
double-ended guillotine break of the largest pipe in the reactor 
coolant system (ADAMS Accession No. ML020630082). On April 8, 2002 (67 
FR 16654), the NRC published a notice of receipt and request for public 
comment for PRM-50-75. The comment period closed on June 24, 2002, and 
the NRC received 18 comment letters (ADAMS Accession No. ML082460625). 
The NRC staff determined that the issues raised in PRM-50-75 were 
appropriate for consideration and, in fact, the issues were already 
being considered in the 50.46a ECCS rulemaking. On November 6, 2008, 
the NRC published a Federal Register document (73 FR 66000) stating 
that the NRC would address the substantive comments filed in PRM-50-75 
as part of the 50.46a ECCS rulemaking. In SECY-16-0009, the staff 
recommended discontinuing the 50.46a

[[Page 69448]]

ECCS rulemaking and stated that PRM-50-75 would be addressed by 
alternative means. The NRC will issue a separate Federal Register 
document to disposition PRM-50-75.

V. Conclusion

    The NRC is no longer pursuing the ``Risk-Informed Changes to Loss-
Of-Coolant Accident Technical Requirements'' rulemaking for the reasons 
discussed in this document. In the next edition of the Unified Agenda, 
the NRC will update the entry for this rulemaking and reference this 
document to indicate that the 50.46a ECCS rulemaking is no longer being 
pursued. This rulemaking activity will appear in the completed section 
of that edition of the Unified Agenda, but will not appear in 
subsequent editions. If the NRC decides to pursue a similar or related 
rulemaking in the future, it will inform the public through a new 
rulemaking entry in the Unified Agenda.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of September 2016.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Victor M. McCree,
Executive Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. 2016-24189 Filed 10-5-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7590-01-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.