Proposed Revisions to Standard Review Plan Section 2.5.3, Surface Deformation, 49139-49141 [2018-21165]

Download as PDF amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 189 / Friday, September 28, 2018 / Notices Components).’’ The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with the NRC staff and other interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate. This briefing is independent of the ACRS Research Quality Review. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official (DFO), Girija Shukla (Telephone 301–415–5844 or Email: Girija.Shukla@nrc.gov) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Thirty-five hard copies of each presentation or handout should be provided to the DFO thirty minutes before the meeting. In addition, one electronic copy of each presentation should be emailed to the DFO one day before the meeting. If an electronic copy cannot be provided within this timeframe, presenters should provide the DFO with a CD containing each presentation at least thirty minutes before the meeting. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public. The public bridgeline number for the meeting is 866–822–3032, passcode 8272423. Detailed procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings were published in the Federal Register on October 4, 2017 (82 FR 46312). Detailed meeting agendas and meeting transcripts are available on the NRC website at https://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/doc-collections/acrs. Information regarding topics to be discussed, changes to the agenda, whether the meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, and the time allotted to present oral statements can be obtained from the website cited above or by contacting the identified DFO. Moreover, in view of the possibility that the schedule for ACRS meetings may be adjusted by the Chairman as necessary to facilitate the conduct of the meeting, persons planning to attend should check with these references if such rescheduling would result in a major inconvenience. If attending this meeting, please enter through the One White Flint North building, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. After registering with Security, please contact Mr. Theron Brown (Telephone 301–415– 6702 or 301–415–8066) to be escorted to the meeting room. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:22 Sep 27, 2018 Jkt 244001 Dated: September 21, 2018. Mark L. Banks, Chief, Technical Support Branch, Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards. [FR Doc. 2018–21120 Filed 9–27–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 49139 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark D. Notich, Office of New Reactors, telephone: 301–415–3053; email: Mark.Notich@nrc.gov; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION A. Obtaining Information [NRC–2018–0178] Proposed Revisions to Standard Review Plan Section 2.5.3, Surface Deformation Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Standard review plan-draft section revision; request for comment. AGENCY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is soliciting public comment on draft NUREG–0800, ‘‘Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants: LWR Edition,’’ Section 2.5.3, ‘‘Surface Deformation.’’ SRP Section 2.5.3, Surface Deformation, was last updated in 2014. This proposed update to the SRP focuses on riskinforming the staff’s review in this area on the potential for tectonic or nontectonic surface deformation that could adversely affect the safe operation of a nuclear power plant at the proposed site. SUMMARY: Comments must be filed no later than October 29, 2018. Comments received after this date will be considered, if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2018–0178. Address questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301–287–9127; email: Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. • Mail comments to: May Ma, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN–7– A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 0001. For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see ‘‘Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments’’ in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. DATES: PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2018– 0178 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publiclyavailable information related to this action by any of the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2018–0178. • 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 draft revision and current revision to NUREG–0800, Section 2.5.3, ‘‘Surface Deformation’’ are available in ADAMS under Accession Nos. ML18183A044 and ML13316C064, respectively. The redline-strikeout version comparing the draft Revision 6 and the current version of Revision 5 is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18267A203. • 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. B. Submitting Comments Please include Docket ID NRC–2018– 0178 in your comment submission. The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at https:// www.regulations.gov and enter the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information. If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that E:\FR\FM\28SEN1.SGM 28SEN1 49140 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 189 / Friday, September 28, 2018 / Notices they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS. II. Background In the area of geology, seismology, and geotechnical engineering, section 100.23(c) of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) requires, in part, that applicants for a construction permit, operating license, early site permit, or combined license evaluate the potential for tectonic and non-tectonic surface deformation at a site. Therefore, the consideration of information related to the potential for tectonic and non-tectonic surface deformation is important to the staff review guidance in SRP Section 2.5.3. Since the last update to SRP Section 2.5.3 in 2014, the staff completed review of licensee submittals of reevaluated seismic hazards in response to 10 CFR 50.54(f) information requests that were sent to licensees after the near-term task force review of the Fukushima Dai-ichi accident (ADAMS Accession No. ML12056A046). In addition to reviewing the hazard reevaluations for the operating reactor fleet submitted in response to the 10 CFR 50.54(f) information requests, the NRC staff remained actively engaged in several ESP and COL application reviews for new power reactors. In connection with those reviews, ESP and COL applicants evaluated the potential for tectonic and non-tectonic surface deformation consistent with the guidance found in the SRP. One of the lessons-learned from the 10 CFR 50.54(f) information reviews and the reviews for new power reactors was that a risk-informed focus on hazards most likely to affect a site would be appropriate for the consideration of the potential for tectonic and non-tectonic surface deformation at a site. III. Discussion of Update Rationale amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 Staff’s 2018 Update Philosophy Consistent with the Commission’s approach to risk-informed regulation, the staff proposes that SRP Section 2.5.3 be simplified to focus the review on the potential for tectonic and non-tectonic surface deformation that could adversely affect the safe operation of a nuclear power plant at the proposed site. Since the 2014 update to SRP Section 2.5.3, the staff completed the review of licensee submittals of reevaluated VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:22 Sep 27, 2018 Jkt 244001 seismic hazards in response to the 10 CFR 50.54(f) information request regarding the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant accident in 2011. A risk-informed focus was successfully used for the 10 CFR 50.54(f) flooding reviews and allowed licensees to focus the reevaluation on those hazards that are most likely to impact the site and adversely affect SSCs important to safety. Using this approach, licensees provided a brief explanation of why a particular hazard does not affect the site and a more detailed evaluation for those hazards that could adversely affect the safe operation of the plant. Due to its success, this risk-informed approach is being incorporated into various sections of the SRP. Upon review of the various causes of surface deformation described in SRP Section 2.5.3, the staff proposes that only the mechanisms that could adversely affect the functionality of the SSCs important to safety need to be described in detail in future license applications. Applicants would still be expected to perform their due diligence and consider the potential for tectonic and non-tectonic surface deformation identified in SRP Section 2.5.3 against the applicable siting criteria in 10 CFR part 100, but the staff proposes that the applicant’s level of detail be focused on the potential for tectonic and nontectonic surface deformation most likely to impact the site and adversely affect SSCs important to safety. Specific Changes to SRP Section 2.5.3 Changes to SRP Section 2.5.3 include technical editing, as appropriate, to improve the readability of the various SRP subsections as well as to better convey lessons-learned from the recent 10 CFR 50.54(f) reviews. The term ‘‘safety-related SSCs’’ is replaced with the term ‘‘SSCs important to safety’’ to better align with the regulatory terminology in 10 CFR parts 50 and 54. The references in SRP Section 2.5.3 were also updated, deleted or added, as appropriate. Technical changes to SRP Section 2.5.3 include the addition of anthropogenic activities as a possible cause of non-tectonic surface deformation and the aforementioned focused review of those causes of surface deformation that could adversely affect the safe operation of a nuclear power plant at the proposed site. Similar to the 2014 update to SRP 2.5.3, the risk-informed approach to the 2018 update focuses on the distinction between the different types of surface deformation, primarily tectonic and non-tectonic deformation. Surface deformation includes non-tectonic PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 deformation due to dissolution, salt diapirism, and anthropogenic activities, such as mine collapse. The addition of anthropogenic activities as a potential source of non-tectonic surface deformation is in keeping with recognized mechanisms of non-tectonic deformation that could potentially affect a proposed nuclear power plant site. The acceptance review section was also revised to reflect the changes made to the Office of New Reactors’ (NRO) office instruction related to acceptance reviews. IV. Further Information The NRC seeks public comment on the proposed draft section revision of SRP Section 2.5.3. The changes to SRP Chapter 2 reflect the current staff reviews, methods, and practices based on lessons learned from the NRC’s reviews of design certification and combined license applications completed since the last revision of this chapter. The draft SRP section would also provide guidance for reviewing an application for a combined license under 10 CFR part 52. Following NRC staff evaluation of public comments, the NRC intends to finalize SRP Section 2.5.3 in ADAMS and post it on the NRC’s public website at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/nuregs/staff/sr0800/. The SRP is guidance for the NRC staff. The SRP is not a substitute for the NRC regulations, and compliance with the SRP is not required. V. Backfitting and Issue Finality Issuance of this draft SRP section, if finalized, would not constitute backfitting as defined in 10 CFR 50.109, (the Backfit Rule) or otherwise be inconsistent with the issue finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52. The NRC’s position is based upon the following considerations. 1. The SRP positions do not constitute backfitting, inasmuch as the SRP is guidance directed to the NRC staff with respect to its regulatory responsibilities. The SRP provides guidance to the NRC staff on how to review an application for NRC regulatory approval in the form of licensing. Changes in guidance intended for use by only the staff are not matters that constitute backfitting as that term is defined in 10 CFR 50.109(a)(1) or involve the issue finality provisions of 10 CFR part 52. 2. Backfitting and issue finality—with certain exceptions discussed below—do not apply to current or future applicants. Applicants and potential applicants are not, with certain exceptions, the subject of either the Backfit Rule or any E:\FR\FM\28SEN1.SGM 28SEN1 amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 189 / Friday, September 28, 2018 / Notices issue finality provisions under 10 CFR part 52. This is because neither the Backfit Rule nor the issue finality provisions of 10 CFR part 52 were intended to apply to every NRC action that substantially changes the expectations of current and future applicants. The exceptions to the general principle are applicable whenever a 10 CFR part 50 operating license applicant references a construction permit or a 10 CFR part 52 combined license applicant references a license (e.g., an early site permit) and/or an NRC regulatory approval (e.g., a design certification rule) for which specified issue finality provisions apply. The NRC staff does not currently intend to impose the positions represented in this draft SRP section in a manner that constitutes backfitting or is inconsistent with any issue finality provision of 10 CFR part 52. If in the future the NRC staff seeks to impose positions stated in this draft SRP section in a manner that would constitute backfitting or be inconsistent with these issue finality provisions, the NRC staff must make the showing as set forth in the Backfit Rule or address the regulatory criteria set forth in the applicable issue finality provision, as applicable, that would allow the staff to impose the position. 3. The NRC staff has no intention to impose the SRP positions on existing nuclear power plant licensees either now or in the future (absent a voluntary request for a change from the licensee, holder of a regulatory approval or a design certification applicant). The NRC staff does not intend to impose or apply the positions described in this draft SRP section to existing (already issued) licenses (e.g., operating licenses and combined licenses) and regulatory approvals. Hence, the issuance of this SRP guidance—even if considered guidance subject to the Backfit Rule or the issue finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52—would not need to be evaluated as if it were a backfit or as being inconsistent with these issue finality provisions. If, in the future, the NRC staff seeks to impose a position in the SRP on holders of already issued licenses in a manner that would constitute backfitting or does not provide issue finality as described in the applicable issue finality provision, then the staff must make a showing as set forth in the Backfit Rule or address the criteria set forth in the applicable issue finality provision, as applicable, that would allow the staff to impose the position. VerDate Sep<11>2014 19:22 Sep 27, 2018 Jkt 244001 Dated at Rockville, Maryland, on September 25, 2018. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Jennivine K. Rankin, Acting Chief, Licensing Branch 3, Division of Licensing, Siting and Environmental Analysis, Office of New Reactors. [FR Doc. 2018–21165 Filed 9–27–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. PI2018–2; Order No. 4828] Public Inquiry on Service Performance Measurement Systems Postal Regulatory Commission. Notice. AGENCY: ACTION: The Commission is noticing a recently filed Postal Service request proposing modifications to its market dominant service performance measurement systems. This document informs the public of this proceeding and the technical conference, invites public comment, and takes other administrative steps. DATES: Comments are due: October 12, 2018. ADDRESSES: Submit comments electronically via the Commission’s Filing Online system at https:// www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit comments electronically should contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by telephone for advice on filing alternatives. SUMMARY: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at 202–789–6820. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 20, 2018, the Postal Service filed a notice, pursuant to 39 CFR 3055.5, proposing modifications to its market dominant service performance measurement systems.1 The systems that are the subject of this proceeding were recently approved for implementation on July 5, 2018, in Docket No. PI2015–1.2 Accompanying the Notice is a library reference, which contains a copy of the United States Postal Service, Service Performance Measurement plan, revised September 20, 2018 (both redline and clean versions), a chart outlining the proposed 1 United States Postal Service Notice of Service Performance Measurement System Modification, September 20, 2018 (Notice). 2 Docket No. PI2015–1, Order Approving Use of Internal Measurement Systems, July 5, 2018; Docket No. PI2015–1, Docket No. PI2015–1, Errata to Order No. 4697, August 21, 2018. PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 49141 modifications, and other associated materials.3 The Postal Service’s proposed modifications focus on accurately describing procedures in regard to ‘‘Non-Airlift Days.’’ These are typically days before a non-Monday holiday where air transportation is limited on the day of mail induction (the day before the holiday) or the following day (the day of the holiday). Notice at 1. The Postal Service proposes to modify its service performance measurement plan for mailpieces that are dropped at a collection box, business mail chute, or Post Office location on a Non-Airlift Day to start-the-clock on measurement on the date of the following applicable acceptance day. Id. at 2. Other proposed modifications focus on correcting areas of the service performance measurement plan to reflect current operations. These include removing references to certain parcels products that were recently moved from the market dominant to the competitive category, a product name change, and other applicable updates. Interested persons are invited to comment on any or all aspects of the Postal Service’s proposed modifications concerning the service performance measurement systems. Comments are due October 12, 2018. The Commission does not anticipate the need for reply comments at this time. The Commission intends to evaluate the comments received and use those suggestions to help carry out its service performance measurement responsibilities under the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act. Material filed in this docket will be available for review on the Commission’s website, https:// www.prc.gov. It is ordered: 1. Docket No. PI2018–2 is established for the purpose of considering the Postal Service’s proposed modifications to its market dominant service performance measurement systems. 2. Interested persons may submit written comments on any or all aspects of the Postal Service’s proposals no later than October 12, 2018. 3. Lyudmila Y. Bzhilyanskaya is designated to represent the interests of the general public in this docket. 4. The Secretary shall arrange for publication of this Notice in the Federal Register. By the Commission. Stacy L. Ruble, Secretary. [FR Doc. 2018–21136 Filed 9–27–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P 3 Library Reference USPS–LR–PI2018–2/1, September 20, 2018. E:\FR\FM\28SEN1.SGM 28SEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 189 (Friday, September 28, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49139-49141]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-21165]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2018-0178]


Proposed Revisions to Standard Review Plan Section 2.5.3, Surface 
Deformation

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Standard review plan-draft section revision; request for 
comment.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is soliciting 
public comment on draft NUREG-0800, ``Standard Review Plan for the 
Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants: LWR 
Edition,'' Section 2.5.3, ``Surface Deformation.'' SRP Section 2.5.3, 
Surface Deformation, was last updated in 2014. This proposed update to 
the SRP focuses on risk-informing the staff's review in this area on 
the potential for tectonic or non-tectonic surface deformation that 
could adversely affect the safe operation of a nuclear power plant at 
the proposed site.

DATES: Comments must be filed no later than October 29, 2018. Comments 
received after this date will be considered, if it is practical to do 
so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only for 
comments received on or before this date.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0178. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-
9127; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact 
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 
this document.
     Mail comments to: May Ma, Office of Administration, Mail 
Stop: TWFN-7-A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
20555-0001.
    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting 
comments, see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark D. Notich, Office of New 
Reactors, telephone: 301-415-3053; email: [email protected]; U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments

A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0178 when contacting the NRC 
about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain 
publicly-available information related to this action by any of the 
following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0178.
     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 [email protected]. The 
draft revision and current revision to NUREG-0800, Section 2.5.3, 
``Surface Deformation'' are available in ADAMS under Accession Nos. 
ML18183A044 and ML13316C064, respectively. The redline-strikeout 
version comparing the draft Revision 6 and the current version of 
Revision 5 is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18267A203.
     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.

B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2018-0178 in your comment submission.
    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact 
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your 
comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at https://www.regulations.gov and enter the comment submissions into ADAMS. The 
NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying 
or contact information.
    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons 
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to 
include identifying or contact information that

[[Page 49140]]

they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. 
Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment 
submissions to remove such information before making the comment 
submissions available to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS.

II. Background

    In the area of geology, seismology, and geotechnical engineering, 
section 100.23(c) of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 
CFR) requires, in part, that applicants for a construction permit, 
operating license, early site permit, or combined license evaluate the 
potential for tectonic and non-tectonic surface deformation at a site. 
Therefore, the consideration of information related to the potential 
for tectonic and non-tectonic surface deformation is important to the 
staff review guidance in SRP Section 2.5.3.
    Since the last update to SRP Section 2.5.3 in 2014, the staff 
completed review of licensee submittals of reevaluated seismic hazards 
in response to 10 CFR 50.54(f) information requests that were sent to 
licensees after the near-term task force review of the Fukushima Dai-
ichi accident (ADAMS Accession No. ML12056A046). In addition to 
reviewing the hazard reevaluations for the operating reactor fleet 
submitted in response to the 10 CFR 50.54(f) information requests, the 
NRC staff remained actively engaged in several ESP and COL application 
reviews for new power reactors. In connection with those reviews, ESP 
and COL applicants evaluated the potential for tectonic and non-
tectonic surface deformation consistent with the guidance found in the 
SRP. One of the lessons-learned from the 10 CFR 50.54(f) information 
reviews and the reviews for new power reactors was that a risk-informed 
focus on hazards most likely to affect a site would be appropriate for 
the consideration of the potential for tectonic and non-tectonic 
surface deformation at a site.

III. Discussion of Update Rationale

Staff's 2018 Update Philosophy

    Consistent with the Commission's approach to risk-informed 
regulation, the staff proposes that SRP Section 2.5.3 be simplified to 
focus the review on the potential for tectonic and non-tectonic surface 
deformation that could adversely affect the safe operation of a nuclear 
power plant at the proposed site.
    Since the 2014 update to SRP Section 2.5.3, the staff completed the 
review of licensee submittals of reevaluated seismic hazards in 
response to the 10 CFR 50.54(f) information request regarding the 
Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant accident in 2011. A risk-
informed focus was successfully used for the 10 CFR 50.54(f) flooding 
reviews and allowed licensees to focus the reevaluation on those 
hazards that are most likely to impact the site and adversely affect 
SSCs important to safety. Using this approach, licensees provided a 
brief explanation of why a particular hazard does not affect the site 
and a more detailed evaluation for those hazards that could adversely 
affect the safe operation of the plant. Due to its success, this risk-
informed approach is being incorporated into various sections of the 
SRP.
    Upon review of the various causes of surface deformation described 
in SRP Section 2.5.3, the staff proposes that only the mechanisms that 
could adversely affect the functionality of the SSCs important to 
safety need to be described in detail in future license applications. 
Applicants would still be expected to perform their due diligence and 
consider the potential for tectonic and non-tectonic surface 
deformation identified in SRP Section 2.5.3 against the applicable 
siting criteria in 10 CFR part 100, but the staff proposes that the 
applicant's level of detail be focused on the potential for tectonic 
and non-tectonic surface deformation most likely to impact the site and 
adversely affect SSCs important to safety.

Specific Changes to SRP Section 2.5.3

    Changes to SRP Section 2.5.3 include technical editing, as 
appropriate, to improve the readability of the various SRP subsections 
as well as to better convey lessons-learned from the recent 10 CFR 
50.54(f) reviews. The term ``safety-related SSCs'' is replaced with the 
term ``SSCs important to safety'' to better align with the regulatory 
terminology in 10 CFR parts 50 and 54. The references in SRP Section 
2.5.3 were also updated, deleted or added, as appropriate.
    Technical changes to SRP Section 2.5.3 include the addition of 
anthropogenic activities as a possible cause of non-tectonic surface 
deformation and the aforementioned focused review of those causes of 
surface deformation that could adversely affect the safe operation of a 
nuclear power plant at the proposed site. Similar to the 2014 update to 
SRP 2.5.3, the risk-informed approach to the 2018 update focuses on the 
distinction between the different types of surface deformation, 
primarily tectonic and non-tectonic deformation. Surface deformation 
includes non-tectonic deformation due to dissolution, salt diapirism, 
and anthropogenic activities, such as mine collapse. The addition of 
anthropogenic activities as a potential source of non-tectonic surface 
deformation is in keeping with recognized mechanisms of non-tectonic 
deformation that could potentially affect a proposed nuclear power 
plant site. The acceptance review section was also revised to reflect 
the changes made to the Office of New Reactors' (NRO) office 
instruction related to acceptance reviews.

IV. Further Information

    The NRC seeks public comment on the proposed draft section revision 
of SRP Section 2.5.3. The changes to SRP Chapter 2 reflect the current 
staff reviews, methods, and practices based on lessons learned from the 
NRC's reviews of design certification and combined license applications 
completed since the last revision of this chapter. The draft SRP 
section would also provide guidance for reviewing an application for a 
combined license under 10 CFR part 52.
    Following NRC staff evaluation of public comments, the NRC intends 
to finalize SRP Section 2.5.3 in ADAMS and post it on the NRC's public 
website at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr0800/. The SRP is guidance for the NRC staff. The SRP is not a 
substitute for the NRC regulations, and compliance with the SRP is not 
required.

V. Backfitting and Issue Finality

    Issuance of this draft SRP section, if finalized, would not 
constitute backfitting as defined in 10 CFR 50.109, (the Backfit Rule) 
or otherwise be inconsistent with the issue finality provisions in 10 
CFR part 52. The NRC's position is based upon the following 
considerations.
    1. The SRP positions do not constitute backfitting, inasmuch as the 
SRP is guidance directed to the NRC staff with respect to its 
regulatory responsibilities.
    The SRP provides guidance to the NRC staff on how to review an 
application for NRC regulatory approval in the form of licensing. 
Changes in guidance intended for use by only the staff are not matters 
that constitute backfitting as that term is defined in 10 CFR 
50.109(a)(1) or involve the issue finality provisions of 10 CFR part 
52.
    2. Backfitting and issue finality--with certain exceptions 
discussed below--do not apply to current or future applicants.
    Applicants and potential applicants are not, with certain 
exceptions, the subject of either the Backfit Rule or any

[[Page 49141]]

issue finality provisions under 10 CFR part 52. This is because neither 
the Backfit Rule nor the issue finality provisions of 10 CFR part 52 
were intended to apply to every NRC action that substantially changes 
the expectations of current and future applicants.
    The exceptions to the general principle are applicable whenever a 
10 CFR part 50 operating license applicant references a construction 
permit or a 10 CFR part 52 combined license applicant references a 
license (e.g., an early site permit) and/or an NRC regulatory approval 
(e.g., a design certification rule) for which specified issue finality 
provisions apply.
    The NRC staff does not currently intend to impose the positions 
represented in this draft SRP section in a manner that constitutes 
backfitting or is inconsistent with any issue finality provision of 10 
CFR part 52. If in the future the NRC staff seeks to impose positions 
stated in this draft SRP section in a manner that would constitute 
backfitting or be inconsistent with these issue finality provisions, 
the NRC staff must make the showing as set forth in the Backfit Rule or 
address the regulatory criteria set forth in the applicable issue 
finality provision, as applicable, that would allow the staff to impose 
the position.
    3. The NRC staff has no intention to impose the SRP positions on 
existing nuclear power plant licensees either now or in the future 
(absent a voluntary request for a change from the licensee, holder of a 
regulatory approval or a design certification applicant).
    The NRC staff does not intend to impose or apply the positions 
described in this draft SRP section to existing (already issued) 
licenses (e.g., operating licenses and combined licenses) and 
regulatory approvals. Hence, the issuance of this SRP guidance--even if 
considered guidance subject to the Backfit Rule or the issue finality 
provisions in 10 CFR part 52--would not need to be evaluated as if it 
were a backfit or as being inconsistent with these issue finality 
provisions. If, in the future, the NRC staff seeks to impose a position 
in the SRP on holders of already issued licenses in a manner that would 
constitute backfitting or does not provide issue finality as described 
in the applicable issue finality provision, then the staff must make a 
showing as set forth in the Backfit Rule or address the criteria set 
forth in the applicable issue finality provision, as applicable, that 
would allow the staff to impose the position.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, on September 25, 2018.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jennivine K. Rankin,
Acting Chief, Licensing Branch 3, Division of Licensing, Siting and 
Environmental Analysis, Office of New Reactors.
[FR Doc. 2018-21165 Filed 9-27-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.