Advanced Power Reactor 1400 (APR1400) Design Certification, 23439-23456 [2019-10715]

Download as PDF 23439 Rules and Regulations Federal Register Vol. 84, No. 99 Wednesday, May 22, 2019 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 52 [NRC–2015–0224] RIN 3150–AJ67 Advanced Power Reactor 1400 (APR1400) Design Certification Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Direct final rule. AGENCY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its regulations to certify the Advanced Power Reactor 1400 (APR1400) standard design. Applicants or licensees intending to construct and operate an APR1400 standard design may do so by referencing this design certification (DC) rule. The applicant for the certification of the APR1400 standard design is Korea Electric Power Corporation and Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Co., Ltd. (KEPCO/KHNP). DATES: The final rule is effective September 19, 2019, unless significant adverse comments are received by June 21, 2019. If the direct final rule is withdrawn as a result of such comments, timely notice of the withdrawal will be published in the Federal Register. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this regulation is approved by the Director of the Office of the Federal Register as of September 19, 2019. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods (unless this document describes a different method for submitting comments on a specific subject): • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/ and search for Docket ID NRC–2015–0224. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For technical questions contact the individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 section of this document. • Email comments to: Rulemaking.Comments@nrc.gov. If you do not receive an automatic email reply confirming receipt, then contact us at 301–415–1677. • Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at 301– 415–1101. • Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. • Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (Eastern Time) Federal workdays; telephone: 301–415–1677. 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: Yanely Malave-Velez, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, telephone: 301–415–1519, email: Yanely.Malave@nrc.gov, or William Ward, Office of New Reactors, telephone: 301–415–7038, email: William.Ward@nrc.gov. Both are staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 0001. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: INFORMATION CONTACT Table of Contents I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments II. Rulemaking Procedure III. Background IV. Discussion V. APR1400 Standard Design Approval VI. Section-by-Section Analysis VII. Regulatory Flexibility Certification VIII. Regulatory Analysis IX. Backfitting and Issue Finality X. Voluntary Consensus Standards XI. Plain Writing XII. Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact XII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement XIII. Congressional Review Act XIV. Agreement State Compatibility XV. Availability of Documents XVI. Procedures for Access to Proprietary and Safeguards Information for Preparation of Comments on the APR1400 Design Certification Rule XVII. Incorporation by Reference— Reasonable Availability to Interested Parties PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2015– 0224 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–2015–0224. • 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. For the convenience of the reader, instructions about obtaining materials referenced in this document are provided in the Availability of Documents section. • 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–2015– 0224 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 as well as 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 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 E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1 23440 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations entering the comment into ADAMS. Comments received after June 21, 2019 will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is able to ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date. Comments received on this direct final rule will also be considered to be comments on a companion proposed rule published in the Proposed Rules section of this issue of the Federal Register. jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES II. Rulemaking Procedure Because the NRC considers this action to be non-controversial, the NRC is using the ‘‘direct final rule procedure’’ for this rule. The rule will become effective on September 19, 2019. However, if the NRC receives significant adverse comments by June 21, 2019, then the NRC will publish a document that withdraws this direct final rule and would subsequently address the comments received in any final rule as a response to the companion proposed rule published in the Proposed Rules section of this issue of the Federal Register. Absent significant modifications to the proposed revisions requiring republication, the NRC does not intend to initiate a second comment period on this action. A significant adverse comment is a comment in which the commenter explains why the rule would be inappropriate. A comment is adverse and significant if it meets the following criteria: (1) The comment opposes the rule and provides a reason sufficient to require a substantive response in a notice-andcomment process. For example, a substantive response is required when: (a) The comment causes the NRC to reevaluate (or reconsider) its position or conduct additional analysis; (b) The comment raises an issue serious enough to warrant a substantive response to clarify or complete the record; or (c) The comment raises a relevant issue that was not previously addressed or considered by the NRC. (2) The comment proposes a change or an addition to the rule, and it is apparent that the rule would be ineffective or unacceptable without incorporation of the change or addition. (3) The comment causes the NRC to make a change (other than editorial) to the rule. For detailed instructions on filing comments, please see the ADDRESSES section in the companion proposed rule published in the Proposed Rules section of this issue of the Federal Register. VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 III. Background Part 52 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), ‘‘Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants,’’ subpart B, ‘‘Standard Design Certifications,’’ presents the process for obtaining standard design certifications. On December 23, 2014, KEPCO/KHNP submitted its application for certification of the APR1400 standard design (ADAMS Accession No. ML15006A098) to the NRC under subpart B of 10 CFR part 52. The NRC published a notice of receipt of the application in the Federal Register (80 FR 5792; February 3, 2015). On March 12, 2015, the NRC formally accepted the application as a docketed application for design certification (80 FR 13035; March 12, 2015). The pre-application information submitted before the NRC formally accepted the application can be found in ADAMS under Docket No. PROJ0782. IV. Discussion Final Safety Evaluation Report The NRC issued the final safety evaluation report for the APR1400 design on September 28, 2018. The final safety evaluation report is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18087A364. The NRC will publish the final safety evaluation report as a NUREG titled, ‘‘Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Certification of the Advanced Power Reactor 1400 Standard Design.’’ The final safety evaluation report is based on the NRC’s review of revision 3 of the APR1400 design control document. APR1400 DC Rule The following discussion describes the purpose and key aspects of each section of the APR1400 DC rule. All section and paragraph references are to the provisions being added as appendix F to the regulations in 10 CFR part 52, unless otherwise noted. The NRC has modeled the APR1400 DC rule on existing DC rules, with certain modifications where necessary to account for differences in the APR1400 design documentation, design features, and environmental assessment (including severe accident mitigation design alternatives). As a result, DC rules are standardized to the extent practical. A. Introduction (Section I) The purpose of Section I of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to identify the standard design approved by this DC rule and the applicant for certification of the standard design. Identification of PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 the design certification applicant is necessary to implement appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 for two reasons. First, § 52.63(c) identifies the design certification applicant as a potential source for an applicant for a combined license (COL) to obtain the generic design control document and supporting design information. If the COL applicant does not obtain the design information from the design certification applicant, but instead uses a different entity, then the COL applicant must meet the requirements in § 52.73. Second, paragraph X.A.1 of the rule requires that the identified design certification applicant maintain the generic design control document throughout the time that appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 may be referenced. B. Definitions (Section II) The purpose of Section II of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to define specific terminology with respect to this DC rule. During development of the first two DC rules, the NRC decided that there would be both generic (master) design control documents maintained by the NRC and the design certification applicant, as well as individual plantspecific design control documents maintained by each applicant or licensee that references a certified standard design. This distinction is necessary in order to specify the relevant plant-specific requirements to applicants and licensees referencing appendix F to 10 CFR part 52. In order to facilitate the maintenance of the master design control documents, the NRC requires that each application for a standard design certification be updated to include an electronic copy of the final version of the design control document. The final version is required to incorporate all amendments to the design control document submitted since the original application, as well as any changes directed by the NRC as a result of its review of the original design control document or as a result of public comments. This final version is the master design control document incorporated by reference in the DC rule. The master design control document will be revised as needed to include generic changes to the version of the design control document that is approved in this design certification rulemaking. These changes would occur as the result of generic rulemaking by the NRC, under the change criteria in Section VIII. The NRC also requires each applicant and licensee referencing appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 to submit and maintain a plant-specific design control document as part of the COL final safety E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations analysis report. This plant-specific design control document must either include or incorporate by reference the information in the generic design control document. The plant-specific design control document would be updated as necessary to reflect the generic changes to the design control document that the NRC may adopt through rulemaking, plant-specific departures from the generic design control document that the NRC imposed on the licensee by order, and any plantspecific departures that the licensee chooses to make in accordance with the relevant processes in Section VIII. Therefore, the plant-specific design control document functions similar to an updated final safety analysis report because it provides the most complete and accurate information on a plant’s design basis for that part of the plant that would be within the scope of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52. The NRC is treating the technical specifications in Chapter 16 of the generic design control document as a special category of information and designating them as generic technical specifications in order to facilitate the special treatment of this information under appendix F to 10 CFR part 52. A COL applicant must submit plantspecific technical specifications that consist of the generic technical specifications, which may be modified as specified in paragraph VIII.C, and the remaining site-specific information needed to complete the technical specifications. The final safety analysis report that is required by § 52.79 will consist of the plant-specific design control document, the site-specific final safety analysis report, and the plantspecific technical specifications. The terms Tier 1, Tier 2, and COL items (license information) are defined in appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 because these concepts were not envisioned when 10 CFR part 52 was developed. The design certification applicants and the NRC use these terms in implementing the two-tiered rule structure (the DCD is divided into Tiers 1 and 2 to support the rule structure) that was proposed by representatives of the nuclear industry after publication of 10 CFR part 52. The Commission approved the use of a two-tiered rule structure in its staff requirements memorandum, dated February 15, 1991, on SECY–90–377, ‘‘Requirements for Design Certification under 10 CFR part 52,’’ dated November 8, 1990 (ADAMS Accession No. ML003707892). Tier 1 information means the portion of the design-related information contained in the generic DCD that is approved and certified by this VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 appendix. Tier 2 information means the portion of the design-related information contained in the generic DCD that is approved but not certified by this appendix. The change process for Tier 2 information is similar to, but not identical to, the change process set forth in 10 CFR 50.59. The regulations in § 50.59 describe when a licensee may make changes to a plant as described in its final safety analysis report without a license amendment. Because the change process for Tier 2 information provided in Section VIII of this DC rule provides more specific criteria than § 50.59, as described in § 50.59(c)(4), the definitions and criteria of § 50.59 are not applicable to this process. The NRC is including a definition for a ‘‘Departure from a method of evaluation described in the plant-specific DCD used in establishing the design bases or in the safety analyses’’ (paragraph II.F), which is appropriate to include in this direct final rule, so that the eight criteria in paragraph VIII.B.5.b will be implemented for new reactors as intended. C. Scope and Contents (Section III) The purpose of Section III of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to describe and define the scope and content of this design certification, how to obtain a copy of the generic design control document, requirements for incorporation by reference of the DC rule, and how documentation discrepancies or inconsistencies are to be resolved. Paragraph III.A is the required statement of the Office of the Federal Register for approval of the incorporation by reference of the APR1400 design control document, revision 3. In addition, this paragraph provides the information on how to obtain a copy of the design control document. Paragraph III.B is the requirement for COL applicants and licensees referencing the APR1400 design control document to comply with the requirements of this appendix in order to benefit from the issue finality afforded the certified design. The legal effect of incorporation by reference is that the incorporated material has the same legal status as if it were published in the Code of Federal Regulations. This material, like any other properly-issued regulation, has the force and effect of law. Tier 1 and Tier 2 information (including the technical and topical reports referenced in Chapter 1), and generic technical specifications have been combined into a single document called the generic design control document, in order to effectively control PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 23441 this information and facilitate its incorporation by reference into the rule. In addition, paragraph III.B clarifies that the conceptual design information and KEPCO/KHNP’s evaluation of severe accident mitigation design alternatives are not considered to be part of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52. As provided by § 52.47(a)(24), these conceptual designs are not part of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 and, therefore, are not applicable to an application that references appendix F to 10 CFR part 52. Therefore, an applicant referencing appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 would not be required to conform to the conceptual design information that was provided by the design certification applicant. The conceptual design information, which consists of site-specific design features, was required to facilitate the design certification review. Similarly, the severe accident mitigation design alternatives were required to facilitate the environmental assessment. Paragraphs III.C and III.D set forth the manner by which potential conflicts are to be resolved and identify the controlling document. Paragraph III.C establishes the Tier 1 description in the design control document as controlling in the event of an inconsistency between the Tier 1 and Tier 2 information in the design control document. Paragraph III.D establishes the generic design control document as the controlling document in the event of an inconsistency between the design control document and the final safety evaluation report for the certified standard design. Paragraph III.E makes it clear that design activities outside the scope of the design certification may be performed using actual site characteristics. This provision applies to site-specific portions of the plant, such as the administration building. D. Additional Requirements and Restrictions (Section IV) Section IV of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 sets forth additional requirements and restrictions imposed upon an applicant who references appendix F to 10 CFR part 52. Paragraph IV.A sets forth the information requirements for COL applicants and distinguishes between information and documents that must be included in the application or the design control document and those which may be incorporated by reference. Any incorporation by reference in the application should be clear and should specify the title, date, edition, or version of a document and the page number(s) and table(s) E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1 23442 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations containing the relevant information to be incorporated. The legal effect of such an incorporation by reference into the application is that appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 would be legally binding on the applicant or licensee. In paragraph IV.B the NRC reserves the right to determine how appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 may be referenced under 10 CFR part 50. This determination may occur in the context of a subsequent rulemaking modifying 10 CFR part 52 or this DC rule, or on a case-by-case basis in the context of a specific application for a 10 CFR part 50 construction permit or operating license. This provision is necessary because the previous DC rules were not implemented in the manner that was originally envisioned at the time that 10 CFR part 52 was issued. The NRC’s concern is with the manner by which the inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria (ITAAC) were developed and the lack of experience with design certifications in a licensing proceeding. Therefore, it is appropriate that the NRC retain some discretion regarding the manner by which appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 could be referenced in a 10 CFR part 50 licensing proceeding. jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES E. Applicable Regulations (Section V) The purpose of Section V of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to specify the regulations that were applicable and in effect at the time this design certification was approved. These regulations consist of the technically relevant regulations identified in paragraph V.A, except for the regulations in paragraph V.B that would not be applicable to this certified design. F. Issue Resolution (Section VI) The purpose of Section VI of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to identify the scope of issues that are resolved by the NRC through this rulemaking and, therefore, are ‘‘matters resolved’’ within the meaning and intent of § 52.63(a)(5). The section is divided into five parts: Paragraph VI.A identifies the NRC’s safety findings in adopting appendix F to 10 CFR part 52, paragraph VI.B identifies the scope and nature of issues that are resolved by this rulemaking, paragraph VI.C identifies issues, that are not resolved by this rulemaking, and paragraph VI.D identifies the issue finality restrictions applicable to the NRC with respect to appendix F to 10 CFR part 52, and paragraph VI.E identifies the availability of secondary resources. Paragraph VI.A describes the nature of the NRC’s findings in general terms and VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 makes the findings required by § 52.54 for the NRC’s approval of this DC rule. Paragraph VI.B sets forth the scope of issues that may not be challenged as a matter of right in subsequent proceedings. The introductory phrase of paragraph VI.B clarifies that issue resolution, as described in the remainder of the paragraph, extends to the delineated NRC proceedings for plants referencing appendix F to 10 CFR part 52. The remainder of paragraph VI.B describes the categories of information for which there is issue resolution. Paragraph VI.C reserves the right of the NRC to impose operational requirements on applicants that reference appendix F to 10 CFR part 52. This provision reflects the fact that only some operational requirements, including portions of the generic technical specifications in Chapter 16 of the design control document, and no operational programs (e.g., operational quality assurance), were completely reviewed by the NRC in this design certification rulemaking proceeding. Therefore, the issue finality provisions of § 52.63 apply only to those operational requirements that either the NRC completely reviewed and approved or formed the basis of an NRC safety finding of the adequacy of the APR1400, as documented in the NRC’s final safety evaluation report. The NRC notes that operational requirements may be imposed on licensees referencing this design certification through the inclusion of license conditions in the license, or inclusion of a description of the operational requirement in the plant-specific final safety analysis report.1 The NRC’s choice of the regulatory vehicle for imposing the operational requirements will depend upon the following, among other things: (1) Whether the development and/or implementation of these requirements must occur prior to either the issuance of the COL or the Commission finding under § 52.103(g) and (2) the nature of the change controls that are appropriate given the regulatory, safety, and security significance of each operational requirement. Also, paragraph VI.C allows the NRC to impose future operational requirements (distinct from design matters) on applicants who reference this design certification. License conditions for portions of the plant 1 Certain activities, ordinarily conducted following fuel load and therefore considered ‘‘operational requirements,’’ but which may be relied upon to support a Commission finding under § 52.103(g), may themselves be the subject of ITAAC to ensure their implementation prior to the § 52.103(g) finding. PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 within the scope of this design certification (e.g., start-up and power ascension testing), are not restricted by § 52.63. The requirement to perform these testing programs is contained in the Tier 1 information. However, ITAAC cannot be specified for these subjects because the matters to be addressed in these license conditions cannot be verified prior to fuel load and operation, when the ITAAC are satisfied. In the absence of detailed design information to evaluate the need for and develop specific post-fuel load verifications for these matters, the NRC is reserving the right to impose, at the time of COL issuance, license conditions addressing post-fuel load verification activities for portions of the plant within the scope of this design certification. Paragraph VI.D requires the NRC to follow the restrictions contained in Section VIII when requiring generic or plant-specific modifications, changes, or additions to structures, systems, and components; design features; design criteria; and ITAAC within the scope of the certified design. Paragraph VI.E ensures that the NRC will specify at an appropriate time the procedures on how to obtain access to sensitive unclassified and nonsafeguards information (SUNSI) and safeguards information (SGI) for the APR1400 DC rule. Access to such information would be for the sole purpose of requesting or participating in certain specified hearings, such as hearings required by § 52.85 or an adjudicatory hearing. For proceedings where the notice of hearing was published before the effective date of the final rule, the Commission’s order governing access to SUNSI and SGI shall be used to govern access to such information within the scope of the rulemaking. For proceedings in which the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing is published after the effective date of the final rule, paragraph VI.E applies and governs access to SUNSI and SGI. G. Duration of This Appendix (Section VII) The purpose of Section VII of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is, in part, to specify the period during which this design certification may be referenced by an applicant for a COL, under § 52.55, and the period it will remain valid when the design certification is referenced. For example, if an application references this design certification during the 15-year period, then the design certification would be effective for that application until it is withdrawn or the license issued on that application expires, including periods E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations of operation under a renewed license. The NRC intends for appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 to remain valid for the life of the plants that reference the design certification to achieve the benefits of standardization and licensing stability. This means that changes to, or plantspecific departures from, information in the plant-specific design control document must be made under the change processes in Section VIII for the life of a plant that references this DC rule. jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES H. Processes for Changes and Departures (Section VIII) The purpose of Section VIII of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to set forth the processes for generic changes to, or plant-specific departures (including exemptions) from, the design control document. The NRC adopted this restrictive change process in order to achieve a more stable licensing process for applicants and licensees that reference DC rules. Section VIII is divided into three paragraphs, which correspond to Tier 1, Tier 2, and operational requirements. Generic changes (called ‘‘modifications’’ in § 52.63(a)(3)) must be accomplished by rulemaking because the intended subject of the change is this DC rule itself, as is contemplated by § 52.63(a)(1). Consistent with § 52.63(a)(3), any generic rulemaking changes are applicable to all plants referencing this DC rule, absent circumstances which render the change technically irrelevant. By contrast, plant-specific departures could be either an order to one or more applicants or licensees; or an applicant or licenseeinitiated departure applicable only to that applicant’s or licensee’s plant(s), similar to a § 50.59 departure or an exemption. Because these plant-specific departures will result in a design control document that is unique for that plant, Section X would require an applicant or licensee to maintain a plant-specific design control document. For purposes of brevity, the following discussion refers to the processes for both generic changes and plant-specific departures as ‘‘change processes.’’ Section VIII refers to an exemption from one or more requirements of this appendix and addresses the criteria for granting an exemption. The NRC cautions that when the exemption involves an underlying substantive requirement (i.e., a requirement outside this appendix), then the applicant or licensee requesting the exemption must demonstrate that an exemption from the underlying applicable requirement meets the criteria of § 52.7 or § 50.12. VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 For the APR1400 DC review, the staff followed the approach described in SECY–17–0075, ‘‘Planned Improvements in Design Certification Tiered Information Designations,’’ (ADAMS Accession No. ML16196A321), to evaluate the applicant’s designation of information as Tier 1 or Tier 2 information. Unlike prior design certification applications, this application did not contain any Tier 2* information. As described in SECY–17– 0075, in each of the prior design certification rules in appendices A through D to 10 CFR part 52, information contained in the DCD was divided into three designations: Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 2*. Tier 1 information is the portion of design-related information in the generic DCD that the Commission approves in the part 52 design certification rule appendices. To change Tier 1 information, NRC approval by rulemaking or approval of an exemption from the certified design rule is required. Tier 2 information is also approved by the Commission in the Part 52 design certification rule appendices, but it is not certified and licensees who reference the design can change this information using the process outlined in Section VIII of the appendices. This change process is similar to that in 10 CFR 50.59 and is generally referred to as the ‘‘50.59-like’’ process. If the criteria in Section VIII are met, a licensee can change Tier 2 information without prior NRC approval. The NRC created a third category, Tier 2*, to address industry requests to minimize the scope of Tier 1 information and provide greater flexibility for making changes. Tier 2* information is included in Tier 2 and has the same safety significance as Tier 1 information, but the NRC decided to provide more flexibility for licensees to change this type of information. In prior design certification rules, Tier 2* is significant information included only in Tier 2 that cannot be changed without prior NRC approval of a license amendment requesting the change. The applicant included Tier 1 and Tier 2 information in the APR1400 DC application and did not designate or categorize any information as Tier 2* information. Generally, where an applicant includes only Tier 1 and Tier 2 information in an application, the staff will evaluate the Tier 2 information to determine whether any of that information requires NRC approval before it is changed. If the staff identifies any such information in Tier 2, then the staff will request that the applicant revise the application to categorize that information as Tier 1 or PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 23443 Tier 2*, depending on whether the change must be made by approval of a license amendment and an exemption requesting the change (Tier 1), or a license amendment alone (Tier 2*). Because the applicant did not designate any information as Tier 2* information, the staff also considered whether the applicant had included information in Tier 2 that prior DC applicants had identified as Tier 2* but that the NRC staff determined should be categorized as Tier 1. Using requests for additional information, the staff questioned KEPCO/KHNP’s categorization of certain information as Tier 2 that past DC applicants had identified as Tier 2* and, in some instances, the staff requested that the applicant revise the application to add that information to Tier 1. This approach required staff and KEPCO/KHNP to identify for each request for additional information the verifiable, important to safety parameters that must be included in Tier 1 to be certified in the rule and verified by ITAAC. After several public meetings, some information was added to or updated in Tier 1 (including modifications to some ITAAC) and the requests for additional information were resolved and closed without the designation of any Tier 2* information. Of these updates in Tier 1, the most significant concerned the design parameters for the critical structural sections 2 for seismic Category I structures. Past DC applications identified dimensions of length to define critical structural sections as Tier 2* information. During recent construction activities for another design, actual dimensional lengths were found to be outside of their design tolerances. This variance required additional license amendments to resolve the issue associated with the design tolerances, resulting in increased burden to the licensee without a 2 When evaluating the acceptability of the information for seismic Category I structures, the staff’s review focuses on a subset of structural information that includes seismic analysis methods, key parameters of seismic Category I structures, and the design of ‘‘critical sections.’’ The use of critical sections in the design of safety-related structures is a risk-informed graded approach to achieve the reasonable assurance of safety. In lieu of the safety review of a large number of structural component designs, the staff performs a detailed review of a limited number of critical sections described in the design control document Section 3.8 that contribute to the overall risk significance of the structures. This approach provides the staff with reasonable assurance of the overall safety performance of the structures based on the successful performance of these limited, but critical, risk-significant locations. However, even minor changes to these critical sections could, when applied to the entire safetyrelated structure, result in significant changes to the overall performance of the structure and, therefore, invalidate the basis for the staff’s approval. E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1 23444 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES commensurate safety benefit. For the APR1400 design, the Tier 1 information and the ITAAC for these critical structural sections used the design load and design load capacity in lieu of dimensions of length, as specific dimensions are not necessarily as important to safety. By focusing on important to safety parameters and including them in ITAAC, the staff expects that the need for license amendments to address changes during construction will be greatly reduced while still maintaining reasonable assurance of adequate protection of public health and safety. Tier 1 Information Paragraph A describes the change process for changes to Tier 1 information that are accomplished by rulemakings that amend the generic design control document and are governed by the standards in § 52.63(a)(1). A generic change under § 52.63(a)(1) will not be made to a certified design while it is in effect unless the change: (1) Is necessary for compliance with NRC regulations applicable and in effect at the time the certification was issued; (2) is necessary to provide adequate protection of the public health and safety or the common defense and security; (3) reduces unnecessary regulatory burden and maintains protection to public health and safety and common defense and security; (4) provides the detailed design information necessary to resolve select design acceptance criteria; (5) is necessary to correct material errors in the certification information; (6) substantially increases overall safety, reliability, or security of a facility and the costs of the change are justified; or (7) contributes to increased standardization of the certification information. The rulemakings must provide for notice and opportunity for public comment on the proposed change, as required by § 52.63(a)(2). The NRC will give consideration as to whether the benefits justify the costs for plants that are already licensed or for which an application for a permit or license is under consideration except for those changes that are necessary to provide adequate protection of the public health and safety or the common defense and security. Departures from Tier 1 may occur in two ways: (1) The NRC may order a licensee to depart from Tier 1, as provided in paragraph A.3 or (2) an applicant or licensee may request an exemption from Tier 1, as addressed in paragraph A.4. If the NRC seeks to order a licensee to depart from Tier 1, paragraph A.3 would require that the VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 NRC find both that the departure is necessary either to assure adequate protection of the public health and safety or the common defense and security or to secure compliance with the NRC’s regulations applicable and in effect at the time of approval of the design certification and that special circumstances are present. Paragraph A.4 provides that exemptions from Tier 1 requested by an applicant or licensee are governed by the requirements of §§ 52.63(b)(1) and 52.98(f), which provide an opportunity for a hearing. In addition, the NRC would not grant requests for exemptions that will result in a significant decrease in the level of safety otherwise provided by the design. Tier 2 Information Paragraph B describes the change processes for the Tier 2 information; which have the same elements as the Tier 1 change process, but some of the standards for plant-specific orders and exemptions would be different. Generic Tier 2 changes would be accomplished by rulemaking that would amend the generic design control document and would be governed by the standards in § 52.63(a)(1). A generic change under § 52.63(a)(1) would not be made to a certified design while it is in effect unless the change: (1) Is necessary for compliance with NRC regulations that were applicable and in effect at the time the certification was issued; (2) is necessary to provide adequate protection of the public health and safety or the common defense and security; (3) reduces unnecessary regulatory burden and maintains protection to public health and safety and the common defense and security; (4) provides the detailed design information necessary to resolve select design acceptance criteria; (5) is necessary to correct material errors in the certification information; (6) substantially increases overall safety, reliability, or security of a facility and the costs of the change are justified; or (7) contributes to increased standardization of the certification information. Departures from Tier 2 would occur in four ways: (1) The NRC may order a plant-specific departure, as set forth in paragraph B.3; (2) an applicant or licensee may request an exemption from a Tier 2 requirement as set forth in paragraph B.4; (3) a licensee may make a departure without prior NRC approval under paragraph B.5; or (4) the licensee may request NRC approval for proposed departures which do not meet the requirements in paragraph B.5 as provided in paragraph B.5.e. PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Similar to ordered Tier 1 departures and generic Tier 2 changes, ordered Tier 2 departures cannot be imposed except when necessary, either to bring the certification into compliance with the NRC’s regulations applicable and in effect at the time of approval of the design certification or to ensure adequate protection of the public health and safety or the common defense and security, provided that special circumstances are present as set forth in paragraph B.3. However, unlike Tier 1 changes, the special circumstances for the ordered Tier 2 departures would not have to outweigh any decrease in safety that may result from the reduction in standardization caused by the plantspecific order, as required by § 52.63(a)(4). The NRC has determined that it is not necessary to impose an additional limitation similar to that imposed on Tier 1 departures by § 52.63(a)(4) and (b)(1). This type of additional limitation for standardization would unnecessarily restrict the flexibility of applicants and licensees with respect to Tier 2 information. An applicant or licensee referencing this DC rule is permitted to request an exemption from Tier 2 information as set forth in paragraph B.4. The applicant or licensee would have to demonstrate that the exemption complies with one of the special circumstances in regulations governing specific exemptions in § 50.12(a). In addition, the NRC would not grant requests for exemptions that will result in a significant decrease in the level of safety otherwise provided by the design. However, unlike Tier 1 changes, the special circumstances for the exemption do not have to outweigh any decrease in safety that may result from the reduction in standardization caused by the exemption. If the exemption is requested by an applicant for a license, the exemption would be subject to litigation in the same manner as other issues in the licensing hearing, consistent with § 52.63(b)(1). If the exemption is requested by a licensee, then the exemption would be subject to an opportunity for hearing in the same manner as license amendments. Paragraph B.5 would allow an applicant or licensee to depart from Tier 2 information, without prior NRC approval, if the departure does not involve a change to or departure from Tier 1 information or the technical specifications, and the departure does not require a license amendment under paragraphs B.5.b or c. The technical specifications referred to in B.5.a of this paragraph are the technical specifications in Chapter 16 of the generic design control document, including bases, for departures made E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES prior to the issuance of the COL. After the issuance of the COL, the plantspecific technical specifications would be controlling under paragraph B.5. The requirement for a license amendment in paragraph B.5.b would be similar to the requirement in § 50.59 and would apply to all of the information in Tier 2 except for the information that resolves the severe accident issues. Paragraph B.5.b addresses information described in the design control document to address aircraft impacts, in accordance with § 52.47(a)(28). Under § 52.47(a)(28), applicants are required to include the information required by § 50.150(b) in their design control document. An applicant or licensee who changes this information is required to consider the effect of the changed design feature or functional capability on the original aircraft impact assessment required by § 50.150(a). The applicant or licensee is also required to describe in the plant-specific design control document how the modified design features and functional capabilities continue to meet the assessment requirements in § 50.150(a)(1). Submittal of this updated information is governed by the reporting requirements in Section X.B. During an ongoing adjudicatory proceeding (e.g., for issuance of a COL) a party who believes that an applicant or licensee has not complied with paragraph B.5 when departing from Tier 2 information may petition to admit such a contention into the proceeding under paragraph B.5.g. As set forth in paragraph B.5.g, the petition would have to comply with the requirements of § 2.309 and show that the departure does not comply with paragraph B.5. If on the basis of the petition and any responses thereto, the presiding officer in the proceeding determines that the required showing has been made, the matter would be certified to the Commission for its final determination. In the absence of a proceeding, assertions of noncompliance with paragraph B.5 requirements applicable to Tier 2 departures would be treated as petitions for enforcement action under § 2.206. Operational Requirements The change process for technical specifications and other operational requirements in the design control document is set forth in Section VIII, paragraph C. The key to using the change processes described in Section VIII is to determine if the proposed change or departure would require a change to a design feature described in the generic design control document. If a design change is required, then the VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 appropriate change process in paragraph A or B would apply. However, if a proposed change to the technical specifications or other operational requirements does not require a change to a design feature in the generic design control document, then paragraph C would apply. This change process has elements similar to the Tier 1 and Tier 2 change processes in paragraphs A and B, but with significantly different change standards. Because of the different finality status for technical specifications and other operational requirements, the NRC designated a special category of information, consisting of the technical specifications and other operational requirements, with its own change process in paragraph C. The language in paragraph C also distinguishes between generic (Chapter 16 of the design control document) and plant-specific technical specifications to account for the different treatment and finality consistent with technical specifications before and after a license is issued. The process in paragraph C.1 for making generic changes to the generic technical specifications in Chapter 16 of the design control document or other operational requirements in the generic design control document is accomplished by rulemaking and governed by the backfit standards in § 50.109. The determination of whether the generic technical specifications and other operational requirements were completely reviewed and approved in the design certification rulemaking is based upon the extent to which the NRC reached a safety conclusion in the final safety evaluation report on this matter. If a technical specification or operational requirement was completely reviewed and finalized in the design certification rulemaking, then the requirement of § 50.109 would apply because a position was taken on that safety matter. Generic changes made under paragraph VIII.C.1 would be applicable to all applicants or licensees referencing this DC rule as described in paragraph C.2, unless the change is made technically irrelevant by a plantspecific departure. Some generic technical specifications contain values in brackets [ ]. The brackets are placeholders indicating that the NRC’s review is not complete and represent a requirement that the applicant for a COL referencing the APR1400 DC rule must replace the values in brackets with final plantspecific values (refer to guidance provided in Regulatory Guide 1.206, Revision 1, ‘‘Applications for Nuclear Power Plants’’). The values in brackets are neither part of the DC rule nor are PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 23445 they binding. Therefore, the replacement of bracketed values with final plant-specific values does not require an exemption from the generic technical specifications. Plant-specific departures may occur by either an order under paragraph C.3 or an applicant’s exemption request under paragraph C.4. The basis for determining if the technical specification or operational requirement was completely reviewed and approved for these processes would be the same as for paragraph C.1 previously discussed. If the technical specification or operational requirement is completely reviewed and finalized in the design certification rulemaking, then the NRC must demonstrate that special circumstances are present before ordering a plant-specific departure. If not, there would be no restriction on plant-specific changes to the technical specifications or operational requirements, prior to the issuance of a license, provided a design change is not required. Although the generic technical specifications were reviewed and approved by the NRC in support of the design certification review, the NRC intends to consider the lessons learned from subsequent operating experience during its licensing review of the plantspecific technical specifications. The process for petitioning to intervene on a technical specification or operational requirement contained in paragraph VIII.C.5 would be similar to other issues in a licensing hearing, except that the petitioner must also demonstrate why special circumstances are present pursuant to § 2.335. Paragraph C.6 states that the generic technical specifications would have no further effect on the plant-specific technical specifications after the issuance of a license that references this appendix. After a license is issued, the bases for the plant-specific technical specifications would be controlled by the bases change provision set forth in the administrative controls section of the plant-specific technical specifications. I. [Reserved] (Section IX) This section is reserved for future use. The matters discussed in this section of earlier design certification rules— inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria—are now addressed in the substantive provisions of 10 CFR part 52. Accordingly, there is no need to repeat these regulatory provisions in the APR1400 design certification rule. However, this section is being reserved to maintain consistent section numbering with other design certification rules. E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES 23446 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations J. Records and Reporting (Section X) The purpose of Section X of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to set forth the requirements that will apply to maintaining records of changes to and departures from the generic design control document, which are to be reflected in the plant-specific design control document. Section X also sets forth the requirements for submitting reports (including updates to the plantspecific design control document) to the NRC. This section of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is similar to the requirements for records and reports in 10 CFR part 50, except for minor differences in information collection and reporting requirements. Paragraph X.A.1 requires that a generic design control document including SUNSI and SGI referenced in the generic design control document be maintained by the applicant for this rule. The generic design control document concept was developed, in part, to meet the requirements for incorporation by reference, including public availability of documents incorporated by reference. However, the SUNSI and SGI could not be included in the generic design control document because they are not publicly available. Nonetheless, the SUNSI and SGI were reviewed by the NRC and, as stated in paragraph VI.B.2, the NRC would consider the information to be resolved within the meaning of § 52.63(a)(5). Because this information is not in the generic design control document, this information, or its equivalent, is required to be provided by an applicant for a license referencing this DC rule. Only the generic design control document is identified and incorporated by reference into this rule. The generic design control document and the NRCapproved version of the SUNSI and SGI must be maintained by the applicant (KEPCO/KHNP) for the period of time that appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 may be referenced. Paragraphs X.A.2 and X.A.3 place recordkeeping requirements on an applicant or licensee that references this design certification so that its plantspecific design control document accurately reflects both generic changes to the generic design control document and plant-specific departures made under Section VIII. The term ‘‘plantspecific’’ is used in paragraph X.A.2 and other sections of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 to distinguish between the generic design control document that is being incorporated by reference into appendix F to 10 CFR part 52, and the plant-specific design control document that the COL applicant is required to VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 submit under paragraph IV.A. The requirement to maintain changes to the generic design control document is explicitly stated to ensure that these changes are not only reflected in the generic design control document, which will be maintained by the applicant for the design certification, but also in the plant-specific design control document. Therefore, records of generic changes to the design control document will be required to be maintained by both entities to ensure that both entities have up-to-date design control documents. Paragraph X.A.4.a requires the DC rule applicant to maintain a copy of the aircraft impact assessment analysis for the term of the certification and any renewal. This provision, which is consistent with § 50.150(c)(3), would facilitate any NRC inspections of the assessment that the NRC decides to conduct. Similarly, paragraph X.A.4.b requires an applicant or licensee who references appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 to maintain a copy of the aircraft impact assessment performed to comply with the requirements of § 50.150(a) throughout the pendency of the application and for the term of the license and any renewal. This provision is consistent with § 50.150(c)(4). For all applicants and licensees, the supporting documentation retained should describe the methodology used in performing the assessment, including the identification of potential design features and functional capabilities to show that the acceptance criteria in § 50.150(a)(1) will be met. Paragraph X.A does not place recordkeeping requirements on sitespecific information that is outside the scope of this rule. As discussed in paragraph V.D of this document, the final safety analysis report required by § 52.79 will contain the plant-specific design control document and the sitespecific information for a facility that references this rule. The phrase ‘‘sitespecific portion of the final safety analysis report’’ in paragraph X.B.3.c refers to the information that is contained in the final safety analysis report for a facility (required by § 52.79) but is not part of the plant-specific design control document (required by paragraph IV.A). Therefore, this rule does not require that duplicate documentation be maintained by an applicant or licensee that references this rule because the plant-specific design control document is part of the final safety analysis report for the facility. Paragraph X.B.1 requires applicants or licensees that reference this rule to submit reports that describe departures from the design control document and include a summary of the written PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 evaluations. The requirement for the written evaluations is set forth in paragraph X.A.3. The frequency of the report submittals is set forth in paragraph X.B.3. The requirement for submitting a summary of the evaluations is similar to the requirement in § 50.59(d)(2). Paragraph X.B.2 requires applicants or licensees that reference this rule to submit updates to the design control document, which include both generic changes and plant-specific departures, as set forth in paragraph X.B.3. The requirements in paragraph X.B.3 for submitting reports will vary according to certain time periods during a facility’s lifetime. If a potential applicant for a COL that references this rule decides to depart from the generic design control document prior to submission of the application, then paragraph X.B.3.a will require that the updated design control document be submitted as part of the initial application for a license. Under paragraph X.B.3.b, the applicant may submit any subsequent updates to its plant-specific design control document along with its amendments to the application provided that the submittals are made at least once per year. Because amendments to an application are typically made more frequently than once a year, this should not be an excessive burden on the applicant. Paragraph X.B.3.b also requires semiannual submission of the reports required by paragraph X.B.1 throughout the period of application review and construction. The NRC will use the information in the reports to support planning for the NRC’s inspection and oversight during this phase, when the licensee is conducting detailed design, procurement of components and equipment, construction, and preoperational testing. In addition, the NRC will use the information in making its finding on ITAAC under § 52.103(g), as well as any finding on interim operation under Section 189.a(1)(B)(iii) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. Once a facility begins operation (for a COL under 10 CFR part 52, after the Commission has made a finding under § 52.103(g)), the frequency of reporting will be governed by the requirements in paragraph X.B.3.c. V. APR1400 Standard Design Approval On March 8, 2018, as part of the submission of revision 2 of the design control document (ADAMS Accession No. ML18079A146), KEPCO/KHNP requested the NRC provide a final design approval for the APR1400 design. On August 13, 2018, as part of E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations the submission of revision 3 of the design control document (ADAMS Accession No. ML18228A680), KEPCO/ KHNP corrected their request for a final design approval to a request for a standard design approval. A standard design approval for the APR1400, revision 3, was issued on September 28, 2018 (ADAMS Accession No. ML18261A187) following the NRC’s issuance of the APR1400 final safety evaluation report. The finality of standard design approvals is discussed in § 52.145. The standard design approval is valid for 15 years from the date of issuance, as described in § 52.147. VI. Section-by-Section Analysis The following paragraphs describe the specific changes in this direct final rule: Section 52.11, Information collection requirements: OMB approval. In § 52.11, this direct final rule adds new appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 to the list of information collection requirements in paragraph (b) of this section. Appendix F to Part 52—Design Certification Rule for the APR1400 Design This direct final rule adds appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 to incorporate the APR1400 standard design into the NRC’s regulations. Applicants or licensees intending to construct and operate a plant using an APR1400 design may do so by referencing the DC rule. jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES VII. Regulatory Flexibility Certification Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the NRC certifies that this direct final rule does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This direct final rule affects only the licensing and operation of nuclear power plants. The companies that own these plants do not fall within the scope of the definition of ‘‘small entities’’ set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act or the size standards established by the NRC (10 CFR 2.810). VIII. Regulatory Analysis The NRC has not prepared a regulatory analysis for this direct final rule. The NRC prepares regulatory analyses for rulemakings that establish generic regulatory requirements applicable to all licensees. Design certifications are not generic rulemakings in the sense that design certifications do not establish standards or requirements with which all licensees must comply. Rather, design certifications are NRC approvals of VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 specific nuclear power plant designs by rulemaking, which then may be voluntarily referenced by applicants for COLs. Furthermore, an applicant for a design certification, rather than the NRC, initiates design certification rulemakings. Preparation of a regulatory analysis in this circumstance would not be useful because the design to be certified is proposed by the applicant, rather than the NRC. For these reasons, the NRC concludes that preparation of a regulatory analysis is neither required nor appropriate. IX. Backfitting and Issue Finality The NRC has determined that this direct final rule does not constitute a backfit as defined in the backfit rule (10 CFR 50.109), and it is not inconsistent with any applicable issue finality provision in 10 CFR part 52. This initial DC rule does not constitute backfitting as defined in the backfit rule (10 CFR 50.109) because there are no existing operating licenses under 10 CFR part 50, COLs or manufacturing licenses under 10 CFR part 52 referencing this DC rule and because this DC rule does not modify the standard design approval for the APR1400. This initial DC rule is not inconsistent with any applicable issue finality provision in 10 CFR part 52 because it does not impose new or changed requirements on existing DC rules in appendices A through E to 10 CFR part 52 or the standard design approval for APR1400, and no COLs or manufacturing licenses issued by the NRC at this time reference a final APR1400 DC rule. For these reasons, neither a backfit analysis nor a discussion addressing the issue finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52 was prepared for this rule. X. Voluntary Consensus Standards The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995, Public Law 104–113, requires that Federal agencies use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies unless the use of such a standard is inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. In this direct final rule, the NRC certifies the APR1400 standard design for use in nuclear power plant licensing under 10 CFR parts 50 or 52. Design certifications are not generic rulemakings establishing a generally applicable standard with which all 10 CFR parts 50 and 52 nuclear power plant licensees must comply. Design certifications are Commission approvals of specific nuclear power plant designs by rulemaking. Furthermore, design PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 23447 certifications are initiated by an applicant for rulemaking, rather than by the NRC. This action does not constitute the establishment of a standard that contains generally applicable requirements. XI. Plain Writing The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111–274) requires Federal agencies to write documents in a clear, concise, and well-organized manner. The NRC has written this document to be consistent with the Plain Writing Act as well as the Presidential Memorandum, ‘‘Plain Language in Government Writing,’’ published June 10, 1998 (63 FR 31883). XII. Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact The NRC has determined under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA), and the NRC’s regulations in subpart A of 10 CFR part 51, that this direct final rule, if confirmed, would not be a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment and, therefore, an environmental impact statement is not required. The NRC’s generic determination in this regard is reflected in 10 CFR 51.32(b)(1). The basis for the NRC’s categorical exclusion in this regard, as discussed in the 2007 final rule amending 10 CFR parts 51 and 52 (August 28, 2007; 72 FR 49352– 49566), is based upon the following considerations. A DC rule does not authorize the siting, construction, or operation of a facility referencing any particular design; it only codifies the APR1400 design in a rule. The NRC will evaluate the environmental impacts and issue an environmental impact statement as appropriate under NEPA as part of the application for the construction and operation of a facility referencing any particular DC rule. In addition, consistent with 10 CFR 51.30(d) and 10 CFR 51.32(b), the NRC has prepared a final environmental assessment (ADAMS Accession No. ML18306A607) for the APR1400 design addressing various design alternatives to prevent and mitigate severe accidents. The environmental assessment is based, in part, upon the NRC’s review of KEPCO/KHNP’s evaluation of various design alternatives to prevent and mitigate severe accidents in APR1400– E–P–NR–14006, Revision 2, ‘‘Severe Accident Mitigation Design Alternatives (SAMDAs) for the APR1400’’ (ML18235A158). Based upon review of KEPCO/KHNP’s evaluation, the Commission concludes that: (1) KEPCO/ KHNP identified a reasonably complete set of potential design alternatives to E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1 23448 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations prevent and mitigate severe accidents for the APR1400 design; (2) none of the potential design alternatives are justified on the basis of cost-benefit considerations; and (3) it is unlikely that other design changes would be identified and justified during the term of the design certification on the basis of cost-benefit considerations because the estimated core damage frequencies for the APR1400 are very low on an absolute scale. These issues are considered resolved for the APR1400 design. Based on its own independent evaluation, the NRC reached the same conclusion as KEPCO/KHNP that none of the possible candidate design alternatives are potentially cost beneficial for the APR1400 design. This independent evaluation was based on reasonable treatment of costs, benefits, and sensitivities. The NRC concludes that KEPCO/KHNP has adequately identified areas where risk potentially could be reduced in a cost-beneficial manner and adequately assessed whether the implementation of the identified potential severe accident mitigation design alternatives or candidate design alternatives would be cost-beneficial for the given site parameters. Therefore, the NRC finds that the evaluation performed by KEPCO/KHNP is reasonable and sufficient. The determination of this environmental assessment is that there will be no significant offsite impact to the public from this action. The environmental assessment is available as indicated under Section XVI, ‘‘Availability of Documents.’’ XIII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement The burden to the public for the information collection(s) is estimated to average 37 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the information collection. Further information about information collection requirements associated with this direct final rule can be found in the companion proposed rule published in the Proposed Rule section in this issue of the Federal Register. This direct final rule is being issued prior to approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) of these information collection requirements, which were submitted under OMB control number 3150–XXXX. When OMB notifies the NRC of its decision, the NRC will publish a document in the Federal Register providing notice of the effective date of the information collections or, if approval is denied, providing notice of what action we plan to take. Send comments on any aspect of these information collections, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Information Services Branch, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, District of Columbia 20555–0001, or by email to INFOCOLLECTS.RESOURCE@ NRC.GOV; and to OMB Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150–XXXX), Attn: Desk Officer for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, District of Columbia 20503; email: oira_ submission@omb.eop.gov. Public Protection Notification The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the document requesting or requiring the collection displays a currently valid OMB control number. XIV. Congressional Review Act This final rule is a rule as defined in the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801–808). However, the Office of Management and Budget has not found it to be a major rule as defined in the Congressional Review Act. XV. Agreement State Compatibility Under the ‘‘Policy Statement on Adequacy and Compatibility of Agreement States Programs,’’ approved by the Commission on June 20, 1997, and published in the Federal Register (62 FR 46517; September 3, 1997), this rule is classified as compatibility ‘‘NRC.’’ Compatibility is not required for Category ‘‘NRC’’ regulations. The NRC program elements in this category are those that relate directly to areas of regulation reserved to the NRC by the Atomic Energy Act or the provisions of 10 CFR, and although an Agreement State may not adopt program elements reserved to the NRC, it may wish to inform its licensees of certain requirements by a mechanism that is consistent with a particular State’s administrative procedure laws, but does not confer regulatory authority on the State. XVI. Availability of Documents The documents identified in the following table are available to interested persons through one or more of the following methods, as indicated. DOCUMENTS RELATED TO APR1400 DESIGN CERTIFICATION RULE ADAMS Accession No./web link/ Federal Register citation jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES Document SECY–19–0020, ‘‘Direct Final Rule—Advanced Power Reactor 1400 Design Certification (RIN 3150–AJ67; NRC–2015– 0224)’’ ......................................................................................................................................................................................... KEPCO/KHNP Application for Design Certification of the APR1400 Design ............................................................................... APR1400 Design Control Document, Revision 3 .......................................................................................................................... APR1400 Final Safety Evaluation Report ..................................................................................................................................... APR1400 Environmental Assessment ........................................................................................................................................... APR1400 Standard Design Approval ............................................................................................................................................ Regulatory History of Design Certification 3 .................................................................................................................................. KEPCO/KHNP Topical and Technical Reports: APR1400–E–B–NR–16001–NP, Evaluation of Main Steam and Feedwater Piping Applied to the Graded Approach for the APR1400, Rev. 0 (July 2017) ....................................................................................................................................... APR1400–E–B–NR–16002–NP, Evaluation of Safety Injection and Shutdown Cooling Piping Applied to the Graded Approach for the APR1400, Rev. 1 (May 2018) ..................................................................................................................... APR1400–E–I–NR–14001–NP, Human Factors Engineering Program Plan, Rev. 4 (July 2018) ........................................ APR1400–E–I–NR–14002–NP, Operating Experience Review Implementation Plan, Rev. 2 (January 2018) .................... APR1400–E–I–NR–14003–NP, Functional Requirements Analysis and Function Allocation Implementation Plan, Rev. 2 (January 2018) .................................................................................................................................................................... VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1 ML18302A069 ML15006A037 ML18228A667 ML18087A364 ML18306A607 ML18261A187 ML003761550 ML18178A215 ML18178A217 ML18212A345 ML18081A101 ML18081A091 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 23449 DOCUMENTS RELATED TO APR1400 DESIGN CERTIFICATION RULE—Continued ADAMS Accession No./web link/ Federal Register citation Document jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES APR1400–E–I–NR–14004–NP, Task Analysis Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018) .................................................... APR1400–E–I–NR–14006–NP, Treatment of Important Human Actions Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018) ........... APR1400–E–I–NR–14007–NP, Human-System Interface Design Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018) ...................... APR1400–E–I–NR–14008–NP, Human Factors Verification and Validation Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018) ...... APR1400–E–I–NR–14010–NP, Human Factors Verification and Validation Scenarios, Rev. 2 (January 2018) ................. APR1400–E–I–NR–14011–NP, Basic Human-System Interface, Rev. 3 (May 2018) .......................................................... APR1400–E–I–NR–14012–NP, Style Guide, Rev. 2 (January 2018) ................................................................................... APR1400–E–J–NR–14001–NP, Component Interface Module, Rev. 1 (March 2017) ......................................................... APR1400–E–J–NR–17001–NP, Secure Development and Operational Environment for APR1400 Computer-Based I&C Safety Systems, Rev. 0 (September 2017) ........................................................................................................................ APR1400–E–N–NR–14001–NP, Design Features To Address GSI–191, Rev. 3 (February 2018) ..................................... APR1400–E–P–NR–14005–NP, Evaluations and Design Enhancements To Incorporate Lessons Learned from Fukushima Dai-Ichi Nuclear Accident, Rev. 2 (July 2017) ................................................................................................. APR1400–E–S–NR–14004–NP, Evaluation of Effects of HRHF Response Spectra on SSCs, Rev. 3 (December 2017) .. APR1400–E–S–NR–14005–NP, Evaluation of Structure-Soil-Structure Interaction (SSSI) Effects, Rev. 2 (December 2017) ................................................................................................................................................................................... APR1400–E–S–NR–14006–NP, Stability Check for NI Common Basemat, Rev. 5 (May 2018) ......................................... APR1400–E–X–NR–14001–NP, Equipment Qualification Program, Rev. 4 (July 2018) ...................................................... APR1400–F–A–NR–14001–NP, Small Break LOCA Evaluation Model, Rev. 1 (March 2017) ............................................ APR1400–F–A–NR–14003–NP, Post-LOCA Long Term Cooling Evaluation Model, Rev. 1 (March 2017) ........................ APR1400–F–A–TR–12004–NP–A, Realistic Evaluation Methodology for Large-Break LOCA of the APR1400 (August 2018) ................................................................................................................................................................................... APR1400–F–C–NR–14001–NP, CPC Setpoint Analysis Methodology for APR1400, Rev. 3 (June 2018) ......................... APR1400–F–C–NR–14002–NP, Functional Design Requirements for a Core Operating Limit Supervisory System for APR1400, Rev. 1 (February 2017) ..................................................................................................................................... APR1400–F–C–NR–14003–NP, Functional Design Requirements for a Core Protection Calculator System for APR1400, Rev. 1 (March 2017) ......................................................................................................................................... APR1400–F–C–TR–12002–NP–A, KCE–1 Critical Heat Flux Correlation for PLUS7 Thermal Design (April 2017) ........... APR1400–F–M–TR–13001–NP–A, PLUS7 Fuel Design for the APR1400 (August 2018) ................................................... APR1400–H–N–NR–14005–NP, Summary Stress Report for Primary Piping, Rev. 2 (September 2016) ........................... APR1400–H–N–NR–14012–NP, Mechanical Analysis for New and Spent Fuel Storage Racks, Rev. 3 (August 2018) .... APR1400–K–I–NR–14005–NP, Staffing and Qualifications Implementation Plan, Rev. 1 (February 2017) ........................ APR1400–K–I–NR–14009–NP, Design Implementation Plan, Rev. 1 (February 2017) ....................................................... APR1400–K–Q–TR–11005–NP–A, KHNP Quality Assurance Program Description (QAPD) for the APR1400 Design Certification Rev. 2 (October 2016) .................................................................................................................................... APR1400–Z–A–NR–14006–NP, Non-LOCA Safety Analysis Methodology, Rev. 1 (February 2017) .................................. APR1400–Z–A–NR–14007–NP, Mass and Energy Release Methodologies for LOCA and MSLB, Rev. 2 (May 2018) ..... APR1400–Z–A–NR–14011–NP, Criticality Analysis of New and Spent Fuel Storage Racks, Rev. 3 (May 2018) .............. APR1400–Z–A–NR–14019–NP, CCF Coping Analysis, Rev. 3 (July 2018) ......................................................................... APR1400–Z–J–NR–14001–NP, Safety I&C System, Rev. 3 (May 2018) ............................................................................. APR1400–Z–J–NR–14002–NP, Diversity and Defense-in-Depth, Rev. 3 (May 2018) ......................................................... APR1400–Z–J–NR–14003–NP, Software Program Manual, Rev. 3 (May 2018) ................................................................. APR1400–Z–J–NR–14004–NP, Uncertainty Methodology and Application for Instrumentation, Rev. 2 (January 2018) .... APR1400–Z–J–NR–14005–NP, Setpoint Methodology for Safety-Related Instrumentation, Rev. 2 (January 2018) .......... APR1400–Z–J–NR–14012–NP, Control System CCF Analysis, Rev. 3 (May 2018) ............................................................ APR1400–Z–J–NR–14013–NP, Response Time Analysis of Safety I&C System, Rev. 2 (January 2018) .......................... APR1400–Z–M–NR–14008–NP, Pressure-Temperature Limits Methodology for RCS Heatup and Cooldown, Rev. 1 (January 2018) .................................................................................................................................................................... APR1400–Z–M–TR–12003–NP–A, Fluidic Device Design for the APR1400 (April 2017) .................................................... Westinghouse Topical and Technical Report: WCAP–10697–NP–A, Common Qualified Platform Topical Report, Rev. 3 (February 2013) .............................................. WCAP–17889–NP (APR1400–A–N–NR–17001–NP), Validation of SCALE 6.1.2 with 238-Group ENDF/B–VII.0 Cross Section Library for APR1400 Design Certification, Rev. 0 (June 2014) ............................................................................ Combustion Engineering, Inc. Technical Reports: CEN–312–NP, Overview Description of the Core Operating Limit Supervisory System (COLSS), Rev. 01–NP (November 1986) ............................................................................................................................................................................. CEN–310–NP–A, CPC and Methodology Changes for the CPC Improvement Program (April 1986) ................................. The NRC may post materials related to this document, including public 3 The regulatory history of the NRC’s design certification reviews is a package of documents that is available in the NRC’s PDR and NRC Library. This history spans the period during which the NRC simultaneously developed the regulatory VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 comments, on the Federal Rulemaking website at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC–2015–0224. The Federal Rulemaking website allows you standards for reviewing these designs and the form and content of the rules that certified the designs. PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 ML18178A223 ML18178A224 ML18178A212 ML18178A213 ML18081A088 ML18178A214 ML18081A096 ML17094A131 ML18108A470 ML18057B532 ML18044B042 ML18078A709 ML18078A699 ML18178A221 ML18214A563 ML17114A524 ML17114A526 ML18233A431 ML18199A563 ML17094A132 ML17114A522 ML17115A559 ML18232A140 ML18178A218 ML17244A015 ML17094A152 ML17094A153 ML18085B044 ML17094A139 ML18212A338 ML18214A561 ML18225A340 ML18212A341 ML18214A557 ML18214A559 ML18086B757 ML18087A106 ML18212A343 ML18087A110 ML18087A112 ML17129A597 ML13112A108 ML18044B051 ML19066A067 ML19066A085 to receive alerts when changes or additions occur in a docket folder. To subscribe: (1) Navigate to the docket folder (NRC–2015–0224); (2) click the ‘‘Sign up for Email Alerts’’ link; and (3) enter your email address and select how E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1 23450 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations frequently you would like to receive emails (daily, weekly, or monthly). jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES XVII. Procedures for Access to Proprietary and Safeguards Information for Preparation of Comments on the APR1400 Design Certification Rule This section contains instructions regarding how the non-publicly available documents related to this rule, and specifically those listed in Table 1.6–1 and 1.6–2 beginning on page 1.6– 2 of Tier 2 of the DCD, may be accessed by interested persons who wish to comment on the design certification. These documents contain proprietary information and safeguards information (SGI). Requirements for access to SGI are primarily set forth in 10 CFR parts 2 and 73. This section provides information specific to this rule; however, nothing in this section is intended to conflict with the SGI regulations. Interested persons who desire access to proprietary information on the APR1400 design should first request access to that information from KEPCO/ KHNP, the design certification applicant. A request for access should be submitted to the NRC if the applicant does not either grant or deny access by the 10-day deadline described in the following section. One of the non-publicly available documents, APR1400–E–A–NR–14002– P–SGI, contains both proprietary information and SGI. If you need access to proprietary information in that document in order to develop comments within the scope of this rule, then your request for access should first be submitted to KEPCO/KHNP in accordance with the previous paragraph. By contrast, if you need access to the SGI in order to provide comments, then your request for access to the SGI must be submitted to the NRC as described further in this section. Therefore, if you need access to both proprietary information and SGI in that document then you should request access to the information in separate requests submitted to both KEPCO/ KHNP and the NRC. Submitting a Request to the NRC for Access Within 10 days after publication of this rule, any individual or entity who believes access to proprietary information or SGI is necessary in order to submit comments on this APR1400 design certification rule may request access to such information. Requests for access to proprietary information or SGI submitted more than 10 days after publication of this document will not be VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 considered absent a showing of good cause for the late filing explaining why the request could not have been filed earlier. The requestor shall submit a letter requesting permission to access proprietary information and/or SGI to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, Washington, DC 20555–0001. The expedited delivery or courier mail address is: Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The email address for the Office of the Secretary is rulemaking.comments@ nrc.gov. The requester must send a copy of the request to the design certification applicant at the same time as the original transmission to the NRC using the same method of transmission. Requests to the applicant must be sent to Yun-Ho Kim, President, KHNP Central Research Institute, 70, 1312-gil, Yuseong-daero, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 34101, Korea. The request must include the following information: 1. The name of this design certification, APR1400 design certification; the rulemaking identification number, RIN 3150–AJ67; the rulemaking docket number, NRC– 2015–0224; and the Federal Register citation for this rule. 2. The name, address, and email or FAX number of the requester. 3. If the requester is an entity, the name of the individual(s) to whom access is to be provided, including the identity of any expert, consultant, or assistant who will aid the requestor in evaluating the information. 4. If the request is for proprietary information, the requester’s need for the information in order to prepare meaningful comments on the design certification must be demonstrated. Each of the following areas must be addressed with specificity: a. The specific issue or subject matter on which the requester wishes to comment; b. An explanation why information that is publicly available is insufficient to provide the basis for developing meaningful comment on the APR1400 design certification rule with respect to the issue or subject matter described in paragraph 4.a. of this section; and c. The technical competence (demonstrable knowledge, skill, training or education) of the requestor to effectively utilize the requested proprietary information to provide the basis for meaningful comment. PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Technical competence may be shown by reliance on a qualified expert, consultant, or assistant who satisfies these criteria. d. A chronology and discussion of the requester’s attempts to obtain the information from the design certification applicant, and the final communication from the requester to the applicant and the applicant’s response, if any was provided, with respect to the request for access to proprietary information must be submitted. 5. If the request is for SGI, a statement that explains each individual’s ‘‘need to know’’ the SGI, as required by 10 CFR 73.2 and 10 CFR 73.22(b)(1). Consistent with the definition of ‘‘need to know’’ as stated in 10 CFR 73.2, the statement must explain: a. The specific issue or subject matter on which the requester wishes to comment; b. An explanation of why publicly available information is insufficient to provide the basis for developing meaningful comment on the design certification with respect to the issue or subject matter described in paragraph 5.a. of this section and why the SGI requested is indispensable in order to develop meaningful comments; 4 and c. The technical competence (demonstrable knowledge, skill, training or education) of the requestor to effectively utilize the requested SGI to provide the basis and specificity for meaningful comment. Technical competence may be shown by reliance on a qualified expert, consultant, or assistant who satisfies these criteria. d. A completed Form SF–85, ‘‘Questionnaire for Non-Sensitive Positions,’’ for each individual who would have access to SGI. The completed Form SF–85 will be used by the Office of Administration to conduct the background check required for access to SGI, as required by 10 CFR part 2, subpart C, and 10 CFR 73.22(b)(2), to determine the requestor’s trustworthiness and reliability. For security reasons, Form SF–85 can only be submitted electronically through the electronic questionnaire for investigations processing (e-QIP) website, a secure website that is owned and operated by the Office of Personnel Management. To obtain online access to 4 Broad SGI requests under these procedures are unlikely to meet the standard for need to know. Furthermore, NRC staff redaction of information from requested documents before their release may be appropriate to comport with this requirement. The procedures in this document do not authorize unrestricted disclosure or less scrutiny of a requester’s need to know than ordinarily would be applied in connection with either adjudicatory or non-adjudicatory access to SGI. E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES the form, the requestor should contact the NRC’s Office of Administration at 301–415–3710.5 e. A completed Form FD–258 (fingerprint card), signed in original ink, and submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 73.57(d). Copies of Form FD–258 may be obtained by writing the Office of Administrative Services, Mail Services Center, Mail Stop P1–37, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001, or by email to MAILSVC.Resource@nrc.gov. The fingerprint card will be used to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR part 2, subpart C, 10 CFR 73.22(b)(1), and Section 149 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, which mandates that all persons with access to SGI must be fingerprinted for an FBI identification and criminal history records check. f. A check or money order in the amount of $357.00 6 payable to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for each individual for whom the request for access has been submitted; and g. If the requester or any individual who will have access to SGI believes they belong to one or more of the categories of individuals relieved from the criminal history records check and background check requirements, as stated in 10 CFR 73.59, the requester should also provide a statement specifically stating which relief the requester is invoking, and explaining the requester’s basis (including supporting documentation) for believing that the relief is applicable. While processing the request, the NRC’s Office of Administration, Personnel Security Branch, will make a final determination whether the stated relief applies. Alternatively, the requester may contact the Office of Administration for an evaluation of their status prior to submitting the request. Persons who are not subject to the background check are not required to complete the SF–85 or Form FD–258; however, all other requirements for access to SGI, including the need to know, are still applicable. Copies of documents and materials required by paragraphs 5.d.–g., as applicable, of this section must be sent to the following address: Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Personnel Security Branch, Mail Stop TWF–07D04M, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. These documents and materials should not be included with the request letter 5 The requester will be asked to provide his or her full name, social security number, date and place of birth, telephone number, and email address. 6 This fee is subject to change pursuant to the Office of Personnel Management’s adjustable billing rates. VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 to the Office of the Secretary, but the request letter should state that the forms and fees have been submitted as required. To avoid delays in processing requests for access to SGI, all forms should be reviewed for completeness and accuracy (including legibility) before submitting them to the NRC. The NRC will return incomplete or illegible packages to the sender without processing. Based on an evaluation of the information submitted under paragraphs 4.a.–4.d. or 5.a.–g. of this section, as applicable, the NRC staff will determine within 10 days of receipt of the written access request whether the requester has established a legitimate need for access to proprietary information or need to know the SGI requested. Determination of Legitimate Need for Access For proprietary information access requests, if the NRC staff determines that the requester has established a legitimate need for access to proprietary information, the NRC staff will notify the requester in writing that access to proprietary information has been granted. The NRC staff must first notify the design certification applicant of the staff’s determination to grant access to the requester not less than 10 days before informing the requester of the staff’s decision. If the applicant wishes to challenge the NRC staff’s determination, it must follow the procedures in Predisclosure Procedures for Proprietary Information Constituting Trade Secrets or Confidential Commercial or Financial Information of this section. The NRC staff will not provide access to disputed proprietary information to the requester until the procedures are completed as described in Predisclosure Procedures for Proprietary Information Constituting Trade Secrets or Confidential Commercial or Financial Information of this section. The written notification will contain instructions on how the requestor may obtain copies of the requested documents, and any other conditions that may apply to access to those documents. These conditions may include, but are not limited to, the signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit setting forth terms and conditions to prevent the unauthorized or inadvertent disclosure of proprietary information by each individual who will be granted access. For requests for access to SGI, if the NRC staff determines that the requester has established a need to know the SGI, the NRC’s Office of Administration will then determine, based upon completion PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 23451 of the background check, whether the proposed recipient is trustworthy and reliable, as required for access to SGI by 10 CFR 73.22(b). If the NRC’s Office of Administration determines that the individual or individuals are trustworthy and reliable, the NRC will promptly notify the requester in writing. The notification will provide the names of approved individuals as well as the conditions under which the SGI will be provided. Those conditions may include, but are not limited to, the signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit by each individual who will be granted access to SGI. Release and Storage of SGI Prior to providing SGI to the requester, the NRC staff will conduct (as necessary) an inspection to confirm that the recipient’s information protection system is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 73.22. Alternatively, recipients may opt to view SGI at an approved SGI storage location rather than establish their own SGI protection program to meet SGI protection requirements. Filing of Comments on the APR1400 Design Certification Rule Based on NonPublic Information Any comments in this rulemaking proceeding that are based upon the disclosed proprietary information or SGI must be filed by the requester no later than 25 days after receipt of (or access to) that information, or the close of the public comment period, whichever is later. The commenter must comply with all NRC requirements regarding the submission of proprietary information and SGI to the NRC when submitting comments to the NRC (including marking and transmission requirements). Review of Denials of Access If the request for access to proprietary information or SGI is denied by the NRC staff, the NRC staff shall promptly notify the requester in writing, briefly stating the reason or reasons for the denial. Before the Office of Administration makes a final adverse determination regarding the trustworthiness and reliability of the proposed recipient(s) for access to SGI, the Office of Administration, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.336(f)(1)(iii), must provide the proposed recipient(s) any records that were considered in the trustworthiness and reliability determination, including those required to be provided under 10 CFR 73.57(e)(1), so that the proposed recipient(s) have an opportunity to correct or explain the record. E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1 23452 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations Appeals from a denial of access must be made to the NRC’s Executive Director for Operations (EDO) under 10 CFR 9.29. The decision of the EDO constitutes final agency action under 10 CFR 9.29(d). jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES Predisclosure Procedures for Proprietary Information Constituting Trade Secrets or Confidential Commercial or Financial Information The NRC will follow the procedures in 10 CFR 9.28 if the NRC staff determines, under the Determination of Legitimate Need for Access of this section, that access to proprietary information constituting trade secrets or confidential commercial or financial information will be provided to the requester. However, any objection filed by the applicant under 10 CFR 9.28(b) must be filed within 15 days of the NRC staff notice in the Determination of Legitimate Need for Access of this section rather than the 30-day period provided for under 10 CFR 9.28(b). In applying the provisions of 10 CFR 9.28, the applicant for the design certification rule will be treated as the ‘‘submitter.’’ XVIII. Incorporation by Reference— Reasonable Availability to Interested Parties The NRC is incorporating by reference the APR1400 design control document, revision 3. As described in the ‘‘Discussion’’ section of this document, the generic design control document combined into a single document Tier 1 and Tier 2 information (including the technical and topical reports referenced in Chapter 1) and generic technical specifications in order to effectively control this information and facilitate its incorporation by reference into the rule. The NRC is required by law to obtain approval for incorporation by reference from the Office of the Federal Register (OFR). The OFR’s requirements for incorporation by reference are set forth in 1 CFR part 51. The OFR regulations require an agency to include in a direct final rule a discussion of the ways that the materials the agency incorporates by reference are reasonably available to interested parties or how it worked to make those materials reasonably available to interested parties. The discussion in this section complies with the requirement for direct final rules as set forth in 1 CFR 51.5(b)(2). The NRC considers ‘‘interested parties’’ to include all potential NRC stakeholders, not only the individuals and entities regulated or otherwise subject to the NRC’s regulatory oversight. These NRC stakeholders are not a homogenous group but vary with respect to the considerations for VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 determining reasonable availability. Therefore, the NRC distinguishes between different classes of interested parties for the purposes of determining whether the material is ‘‘reasonably available.’’ The NRC considers the following to be classes of interested parties in NRC rulemakings with regard to the material to be incorporated by reference: • Individuals and small entities regulated or otherwise subject to the NRC’s regulatory oversight (this class also includes applicants and potential applicants or licenses and other NRC regulatory approvals) and who are subject to the material to be incorporated by reference by rulemaking. In this context, ‘‘small entities’’ has the same meaning as a ‘‘small entity’’ under 10 CFR 2.810. • Large entities otherwise subject to the NRC’s regulatory oversight (this class also includes applicants and potential applicants for licenses and other NRC regulatory approvals) and who are subject to the material to be incorporated by reference by rulemaking. In this context, ‘‘large entities’’ are those that do not qualify as a ‘‘small entity’’ under 10 CFR 2.810. • Non-governmental organizations with institutional interests in the matters regulated by the NRC. • Other Federal agencies, states, local governmental bodies (within the meaning of 10 CFR 2.315(c)). • Federally-recognized and Staterecognized 7 Indian tribes. • Members of the general public (i.e., individual, unaffiliated members of the public who are not regulated or otherwise subject to the NRC’s regulatory oversight) who may wish to gain access to the materials which the NRC incorporates by reference by rulemaking in order to participate in the rulemaking process. The NRC makes the materials incorporated by reference available for inspection to all interested parties, by appointment, at the NRC Technical Library, which is located at Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852; telephone: 301–415–7000; email: Library.Resource@nrc.gov. In addition, as described in Section XVI of this notice, documents related to this rule are available online in the NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Documents collection at https:// www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. 7 State-recognized Indian tribes are not within the scope of 10 CFR 2.315(c). However, for purposes of the NRC’s compliance with 1 CFR 51.5, ‘‘interested parties’’ includes a broad set of stakeholders, including State-recognized Indian tribes. PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 The NRC concludes that the materials the NRC is incorporating by reference in this rule are reasonably available to all interested parties because the materials are available to all interested parties in multiple ways and in a manner consistent with their interest in the materials. List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 52 Administrative practice and procedure, Antitrust, Combined license, Early site permit, Emergency planning, Fees, Incorporation by reference, Inspection, Issue finality, Limited work authorization, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Probabilistic risk assessment, Prototype, Reactor siting criteria, Redress of site, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Standard design, Standard design certification. For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended; the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553, the NRC is amending 10 CFR part 52 as follows: PART 52—LICENSES, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: Atomic Energy Act of 1954, secs. 103, 104, 147, 149, 161, 181, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189, 223, 234 (42 U.S.C. 2133, 2134, 2167, 2169, 2201, 2231, 2232, 2233, 2235, 2236, 2239, 2273, 2282); Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, secs. 201, 202, 206, 211 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846, 5851); 44 U.S.C. 3504 note. § 52.11 [Amended] 2. In § 52.11, paragraph (b), add ‘‘F,’’ after ‘‘E,’’. ■ 3. Add appendix F to part 52 to read as follows: ■ Appendix F to Part 52—Design Certification Rule for the APR1400 Design I. Introduction Appendix F constitutes the standard design certification for the Advanced Power Reactor 1400 (APR1400) design, in accordance with 10 CFR part 52, subpart B. The applicant for certification of the APR1400 design is Korea Electric Power Corporation and Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Co., Ltd. (KEPCO/KHNP). II. Definitions A. Generic design control document (generic DCD) means the document containing the Tier 1 and Tier 2 information (including the technical and topical reports referenced in Chapter 1) and generic E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations technical specifications that is incorporated by reference into this appendix. B. Generic technical specifications (generic TS) means the information required by 10 CFR 50.36 and 50.36a for the portion of the plant that is within the scope of this appendix. C. Plant-specific DCD means that portion of the combined license (COL) final safety analysis report that sets forth both the generic DCD information and any plant-specific changes to generic DCD information. D. Tier 1 means the portion of the designrelated information contained in the generic DCD that is approved and certified by this appendix (Tier 1 information). The design descriptions, interface requirements, and site parameters are derived from Tier 2 information. Tier 1 information includes: 1. Definitions and general provisions; 2. Design descriptions; 3. Inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria (ITAAC); 4. Significant site parameters; and 5. Significant interface requirements. E. Tier 2 means the portion of the designrelated information contained in the generic DCD that is approved but not certified by this appendix (Tier 2 information). Compliance with Tier 2 is required, but generic changes to and plant-specific departures from Tier 2 are governed by Section VIII of this appendix. Compliance with Tier 2 provides a sufficient, but not the only acceptable, method for complying with Tier 1. Compliance methods differing from Tier 2 must satisfy the change process in Section VIII of this appendix. Regardless of these differences, an applicant or licensee must meet the requirement in paragraph III.B of this appendix to reference Tier 2 when referencing Tier 1. Tier 2 information includes: 1. Information required by § 52.47(a) and (c), with the exception of generic TS and conceptual design information; 2. Supporting information on the inspections, tests, and analyses that will be performed to demonstrate that the acceptance criteria in the ITAAC have been met; and 3. COL Items (COL license information), which identify certain matters that must be addressed in the site-specific portion of the final safety analysis report by an applicant who references this appendix. These items constitute information requirements but are not the only acceptable set of information in the final safety analysis report. An applicant may depart from or omit these items, provided that the departure or omission is identified and justified in the final safety analysis report. After issuance of a construction permit or COL, these items are not requirements for the licensee unless such items are restated in the final safety analysis report. F. Departure from a method of evaluation described in the plant-specific DCD used in establishing the design bases or in the safety analyses means: 1. Changing any of the elements of the method described in the plant-specific DCD unless the results of the analysis are conservative or essentially the same; or 2. Changing from a method described in the plant-specific DCD to another method VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 unless that method has been approved by the NRC for the intended application. G. All other terms in this appendix have the meaning set out in 10 CFR 50.2, 10 CFR 52.1, or Section 11 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, as applicable. III. Scope and Contents A. Incorporation by reference approval. The APR1400 material is approved for incorporation by reference by the Director of the Office of the Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may obtain copies of the generic DCD from YunHo Kim, President, KHNP Central Research Institute, 70, 1312-gil, Yuseong-daero, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 34101, Korea. You can view the generic DCD online in the NRC Library at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ adams.html. In ADAMS, search under ADAMS Accession No. ML18228A667. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if you have problems accessing documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1–800–397– 4209, at 301–415–3747, or by email at PDR.Resource@nrc.gov. Copies of this document are available for examination and copying at the NRC’s PDR located at Room O1–F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. Copies are also available for examination at the NRC Library located at Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, telephone: 301–415–5610, email: Library.Resource@nrc.gov. All approved material is available for inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202–741–6030 or go to https:// www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ ibrlocations.html. 1. Korea Electric Power Corporation and Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Co, Ltd a. APR1400 Design Control Document Tier 1 (APR1400–K–X–IT–14001–NP), Revision 3 (August 2018). b. APR1400 Design Control Document Tier 2 (APR1400–K–X–FS–14002–NP), Revision 3 (August 2018), including: i. Chapter 1, Introduction and General Description of the Plant. ii. Chapter 2, Site Characteristics. iii. Chapter 3, Design of Structures, Systems, Components, and Equipment. iv. Chapter 4, Reactor. v. Chapter 5, Reactor Coolant System and Connecting Systems. vi. Chapter 6, Engineered Safety Features. vii. Chapter 7, Instrumentation and Controls. viii. Chapter 8, Electric Power. ix. Chapter 9, Auxiliary Systems. x. Chapter 10, Steam and Power Conversion System. xi. Chapter 11, Radioactive Waste Management. xii. Chapter 12, Radiation Protection. xiii. Chapter 13, Conduct of Operations. xiv. Chapter 14, Verification Programs. xv. Chapter 15, Transient and Accident Analyses. xvi. Chapter 16, Technical Specifications. xvii. Chapter 17, Quality Assurance and Reliability Assurance. PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 23453 xviii. Chapter 18, Human Factors Engineering. xix. Chapter 19, Probabilistic Risk Assessment and Severe Accident Evaluation. c. APR1400–E–B–NR–16001–NP, Evaluation of Main Steam and Feedwater Piping Applied to the Graded Approach for the APR1400, Rev. 0 (July 2017). d. APR1400–E–B–NR–16002–NP, Evaluation of Safety Injection and Shutdown Cooling Piping Applied to the Graded Approach for the APR1400, Rev. 1 (May 2018). e. APR1400–E–I–NR–14001–NP, Human Factors Engineering Program Plan, Rev. 4 (July 2018). f. APR1400–E–I–NR–14002–NP, Operating Experience Review Implementation Plan, Rev. 2 (January 2018). g. APR1400–E–I–NR–14003–NP, Functional Requirements Analysis and Function Allocation Implementation Plan, Rev. 2 (January 2018). h. APR1400–E–I–NR–14004–NP, Task Analysis Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018). i. APR1400–E–I–NR–14006–NP, Treatment of Important Human Actions Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018). j. APR1400–E–I–NR–14007–NP, HumanSystem Interface Design Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018). k. APR1400–E–I–NR–14008–NP, Human Factors Verification and Validation Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018). l. APR1400–E–I–NR–14010–NP, Human Factors Verification and Validation Scenarios, Rev. 2 (January 2018). m. APR1400–E–I–NR–14011–NP, Basic Human-System Interface, Rev. 3 (May 2018). n. APR1400–E–I–NR–14012–NP, Style Guide, Rev. 2 (January 2018). o. APR1400–E–J–NR–14001–NP, Component Interface Module, Rev. 1 (March 2017). p. APR1400–E–J–NR–17001–NP, Secure Development and Operational Environment for APR1400 Computer-Based I&C Safety Systems, Rev. 0 (September 2017). q. APR1400–E–N–NR–14001–NP, Design Features To Address GSI–191, Rev. 3 (February 2018). r. APR1400–E–P–NR–14005–NP, Evaluations and Design Enhancements To Incorporate Lessons Learned from Fukushima Dai-Ichi Nuclear Accident, Rev. 2 (July 2017). s. APR1400–E–S–NR–14004–NP, Evaluation of Effects of HRHF Response Spectra on SSCs, Rev. 3 (December 2017). t. APR1400–E–S–NR–14005–NP, Evaluation of Structure-Soil-Structure Interaction (SSSI) Effects, Rev. 2 (December 2017). u. APR1400–E–S–NR–14006–NP, Stability Check for NI Common Basemat, Rev. 5 (May 2018). v. APR1400–E–X–NR–14001–NP, Equipment Qualification Program, Rev. 4 (July 2018). w. APR1400–F–A–NR–14001–NP, Small Break LOCA Evaluation Model, Rev. 1 (March 2017). x. APR1400–F–A–NR–14003–NP, PostLOCA Long Term Cooling Evaluation Model, Rev. 1 (March 2017). E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES 23454 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations y. APR1400–F–A–TR–12004–NP–A, Realistic Evaluation Methodology for LargeBreak LOCA of the APR1400 (August 2018). z. APR1400–F–C–NR–14001–NP, CPC Setpoint Analysis Methodology for APR1400, Rev. 3 (June 2018). aa. APR1400–F–C–NR–14002–NP, Functional Design Requirements for a Core Operating Limit Supervisory System for APR1400, Rev. 1 (February 2017). ab. APR1400–F–C–NR–14003–NP, Functional Design Requirements for a Core Protection Calculator System for APR1400, Rev. 1 (March 2017). ac. APR1400–F–C–TR–12002–NP–A, KCE– 1 Critical Heat Flux Correlation for PLUS7 Thermal Design (April 2017). ad. APR1400–F–M–TR–13001–NP–A, PLUS7 Fuel Design for the APR1400 (August 2018). ae. APR1400–H–N–NR–14005–NP, Summary Stress Report for Primary Piping, Rev. 2 (September 2016). af. APR1400–H–N–NR–14012–NP, Mechanical Analysis for New and Spent Fuel Storage Racks, Rev. 3 (August 2017). ag. APR1400–K–I–NR–14005–NP, Staffing and Qualifications Implementation Plan, Rev. 1 (February 2017). ah. APR1400–K–I–NR–14009–NP, Design Implementation Plan, Rev. 1 (February 2017). ai. APR1400–K–Q–TR–11005–NP–A, KHNP Quality Assurance Program Description (QAPD) for the APR1400 Design Certification, Rev. 2 (October 2016). aj. APR1400–Z–A–NR–14006–NP, NonLOCA Safety Analysis Methodology, Rev. 1 (February 2017). ak. APR1400–Z–A–NR–14007–NP, Mass and Energy Release Methodologies for LOCA and MSLB, Rev. 2 (May 2018). al. APR1400–Z–A–NR–14011–NP, Criticality Analysis of New and Spent Fuel Storage Racks, Rev. 3 (May 2018). am. APR1400–Z–A–NR–14019–NP, CCF Coping Analysis, Rev. 3 (July 2018). an. APR1400–Z–J–NR–14001–NP, Safety I&C System, Rev. 3 (May 2018). ao. APR1400–Z–J–NR–14002–NP, Diversity and Defense-in-Depth, Rev. 3 (May 2018). ap. APR1400–Z–J–NR–14003–NP, Software Program Manual, Rev. 3 (May 2018). aq. APR1400–Z–J–NR–14004–NP, Uncertainty Methodology and Application for Instrumentation, Rev. 2 (January 2018). ar. APR1400–Z–J–NR–14005–NP, Setpoint Methodology for Safety-Related Instrumentation, Rev. 2 (January 2018). as. APR1400–Z–J–NR–14012–NP, Control System CCF Analysis, Rev. 3 (May 2018). at. APR1400–Z–J–NR–14013–NP, Response Time Analysis of Safety I&C System, Rev. 2 (January 2018). au. APR1400–Z–M–NR–14008–NP, Pressure-Temperature Limits Methodology for RCS Heatup and Cooldown, Rev. 1 (January 2018). av. APR1400–Z–M–TR–12003–NP–A, Fluidic Device Design for the APR1400 (April 2017). 2. Combustion Engineering, Inc. a. CEN–310–NP–A, CPC and Methodology Changes for the CPC Improvement Program (April 1986). b. CEN–312–NP, Overview Description of the Core Operating Limit Supervisory System (COLSS), Rev. 01–NP (November 1986). VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 3. Westinghouse a. WCAP–10697–NP–A, Common Qualified Platform Topical Report, Rev. 3 (February 2013). b. WCAP–17889–NP (APR1400–A–N–NR– 17001–NP), Validation of SCALE 6.1.2 with 238-Group ENDF/B–VII.0 Cross Section Library for APR1400 Design Certification, Rev. 0 (June 2014). B. An applicant or licensee referencing this appendix, in accordance with Section IV of this appendix, shall incorporate by reference and comply with the requirements of this appendix except as otherwise provided in this appendix. C. If there is a conflict between Tier 1 and Tier 2 of the DCD, then Tier 1 controls. D. If there is a conflict between the generic DCD and either the application for the design certification of the APR1400 design or the NUREG, ‘‘Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to Certification of the APR1400 Standard Design,’’ then the generic DCD controls. E. Design activities for structures, systems, and components that are entirely outside the scope of this appendix may be performed using site characteristics, provided the design activities do not affect the DCD or conflict with the interface requirements. IV. Additional Requirements and Restrictions A. An applicant for a COL that wishes to reference this appendix shall, in addition to complying with the requirements of §§ 52.77, 52.79, and 52.80, comply with the following requirements: 1. Incorporate by reference, as part of its application, this appendix. 2. Include, as part of its application: a. A plant-specific DCD containing the same type of information and using the same organization and numbering as the generic DCD for the APR1400 design, either by including or incorporating by reference the generic DCD information, and as modified and supplemented by the applicant’s exemptions and departures; b. The reports on departures from and updates to the plant-specific DCD required by paragraph X.B of this appendix; c. Plant-specific TS, consisting of the generic and site-specific TS that are required by 10 CFR 50.36 and 50.36a; d. Information demonstrating that the site characteristics fall within the site parameters and that the interface requirements have been met; e. Information that addresses the COL items; and f. Information required by § 52.47(a) that is not within the scope of this appendix. 3. Include, in the plant-specific DCD, the sensitive, unclassified, non-safeguards information (including proprietary information and security-related information) and safeguards information referenced in the APR1400 generic DCD. 4. Include, as part of its application, a demonstration that an entity other than KEPCO/KHNP is qualified to supply the APR1400 design, unless KEPCO/KHNP supplies the design for the applicant’s use. B. The Commission reserves the right to determine in what manner this appendix PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 may be referenced by an applicant for a construction permit or operating license under 10 CFR part 50. V. Applicable Regulations A. Except as indicated in paragraph B of this section, the regulations that apply to the APR1400 design are in 10 CFR parts 20, 50, 52, 73, and 100, codified as of September 19, 2019, that are applicable and technically relevant, as described in the final safety evaluation report. B. The APR1400 design is exempt from portions of the following regulations: 1. Paragraph (f)(2)(iv) of 10 CFR 50.34— Contents of Applications: Technical Information—codified as of September 19, 2019. VI. Issue Resolution A. The Commission has determined that the structures, systems, and components and design features of the APR1400 design comply with the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the applicable regulations identified in Section V of this appendix; and therefore, provide adequate protection to the health and safety of the public. A conclusion that a matter is resolved includes the finding that additional or alternative structures, systems, and components, design features, design criteria, testing, analyses, acceptance criteria, or justifications are not necessary for the APR1400 design. B. The Commission considers the following matters resolved within the meaning of § 52.63(a)(5) in subsequent proceedings for issuance of a COL, amendment of a COL, or renewal of a COL, proceedings held under § 52.103, and enforcement proceedings involving plants referencing this appendix: 1. All nuclear safety issues associated with the information in the final safety evaluation report, Tier 1, Tier 2, and the rulemaking record for certification of the APR1400 design, with the exception of generic TS and other operational requirements; 2. All nuclear safety and safeguards issues associated with the referenced information in the 53 non-public documents in Tables 1.6– 1 and 1.6–2 of Tier 2 of the DCD, which contain sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (including proprietary information and security-related information) and safeguards information and which, in context, are intended as requirements in the generic DCD for the APR1400 design; 3. All generic changes to the DCD under and in compliance with the change processes in paragraphs VIII.A.1 and VIII.B.1 of this appendix; 4. All exemptions from the DCD under and in compliance with the change processes in paragraphs VIII.A.4 and VIII.B.4 of this appendix, but only for that plant; 5. All departures from the DCD that are approved by license amendment, but only for that plant; 6. Except as provided in paragraph VIII.B.5.f of this appendix, all departures from Tier 2 under and in compliance with the change processes in paragraph VIII.B.5 of this appendix that do not require prior NRC approval, but only for that plant; and E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations 7. All environmental issues concerning severe accident mitigation design alternatives associated with the information in the NRC’s environmental assessment for the APR1400 design (ADAMS Accession No. ML18306A607) and APR1400–E–P–NR– 14006, Revision 2, ‘‘Severe Accident Mitigation Design Alternatives (SAMDAs) for the APR1400’’ (ML18235A158) for plants referencing this appendix whose site characteristics fall within those site parameters specified in APR1400–E–P–NR– 14006. C. The Commission does not consider operational requirements for an applicant or licensee who references this appendix to be matters resolved within the meaning of § 52.63(a)(5). The Commission reserves the right to require operational requirements for an applicant or licensee who references this appendix by rule, regulation, order, or license condition. D. Except under the change processes in Section VIII of this appendix, the Commission may not require an applicant or licensee who references this appendix to: 1. Modify structures, systems, components, or design features as described in the generic DCD; 2. Provide additional or alternative structures, systems, components, or design features not discussed in the generic DCD; or 3. Provide additional or alternative design criteria, testing, analyses, acceptance criteria, or justification for structures, systems, components, or design features discussed in the generic DCD. E. The NRC will specify, at an appropriate time, the procedures to be used by an interested person who wishes to review portions of the design certification or references containing safeguards information or sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (including proprietary information, such as trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person that are privileged or confidential (10 CFR 2.390 and 10 CFR part 9), and security-related information), for the purpose of participating in the hearing required by § 52.85, the hearing provided under § 52.103, or in any other proceeding relating to this appendix, in which interested persons have a right to request an adjudicatory hearing. VII. Duration of This Appendix This appendix may be referenced for a period of 15 years from September 19, 2019, except as provided for in §§ 52.55(b) and 52.57(b). This appendix remains valid for an applicant or licensee who references this appendix until the application is withdrawn or the license expires, including any period of extended operation under a renewed license. jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES VIII. Processes for Changes and Departures A. Tier 1 Information 1. Generic changes to Tier 1 information are governed by the requirements in § 52.63(a)(1). 2. Generic changes to Tier 1 information are applicable to all applicants or licensees who reference this appendix, except those for which the change has been rendered VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 technically irrelevant by action taken under paragraphs A.3 or A.4 of this section. 3. Departures from Tier 1 information that are required by the Commission through plant-specific orders are governed by the requirements in § 52.63(a)(4). 4. Exemptions from Tier 1 information are governed by the requirements in §§ 52.63(b)(1) and 52.98(f). The Commission will deny a request for an exemption from Tier 1, if it finds that the design change will result in a significant decrease in the level of safety otherwise provided by the design. B. Tier 2 Information 1. Generic changes to Tier 2 information are governed by the requirements in § 52.63(a)(1). 2. Generic changes to Tier 2 information are applicable to all applicants or licensees who reference this appendix, except those for which the change has been rendered technically irrelevant by action taken under paragraphs B.3, B.4, or B.5, of this section. 3. The Commission may not require new requirements on Tier 2 information by plantspecific order, while this appendix is in effect under § 52.55 or § 52.61, unless: a. A modification is necessary to secure compliance with the Commission’s regulations applicable and in effect at the time this appendix was approved, as set forth in Section V of this appendix, or to ensure adequate protection of the public health and safety or the common defense and security; and b. Special circumstances as defined in 10 CFR 50.12(a) are present. 4. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix may request an exemption from Tier 2 information. The Commission may grant such a request only if it determines that the exemption will comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.12(a). The Commission will deny a request for an exemption from Tier 2, if it finds that the design change will result in a significant decrease in the level of safety otherwise provided by the design. The granting of an exemption to an applicant must be subject to litigation in the same manner as other issues material to the license hearing. The granting of an exemption to a licensee must be subject to an opportunity for a hearing in the same manner as license amendments. 5.a. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix may depart from Tier 2 information, without prior NRC approval, unless the proposed departure involves a change to or departure from Tier 1 information, or the TS, or requires a license amendment under paragraph B.5.b or B.5.c of this section. When evaluating the proposed departure, an applicant or licensee shall consider all matters described in the plantspecific DCD. b. A proposed departure from Tier 2, other than one affecting resolution of a severe accident issue identified in the plant-specific DCD or one affecting information required by § 52.47(a)(28) to address aircraft impacts, requires a license amendment if it would: (1) Result in more than a minimal increase in the frequency of occurrence of an accident previously evaluated in the plant-specific DCD; PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 23455 (2) Result in more than a minimal increase in the likelihood of occurrence of a malfunction of a structure, system, or component important to safety and previously evaluated in the plant-specific DCD; (3) Result in more than a minimal increase in the consequences of an accident previously evaluated in the plant-specific DCD; (4) Result in more than a minimal increase in the consequences of a malfunction of a structure, system, or component important to safety previously evaluated in the plantspecific DCD; (5) Create a possibility for an accident of a different type than any evaluated previously in the plant-specific DCD; (6) Create a possibility for a malfunction of a structure, system, or component important to safety with a different result than any evaluated previously in the plant-specific DCD; (7) Result in a design-basis limit for a fission product barrier as described in the plant-specific DCD being exceeded or altered; or (8) Result in a departure from a method of evaluation described in the plant-specific DCD used in establishing the design bases or in the safety analyses. c. A proposed departure from Tier 2, affecting resolution of an ex-vessel severe accident design feature identified in the plant-specific DCD, requires a license amendment if: (1) There is a substantial increase in the probability of an ex-vessel severe accident such that a particular ex-vessel severe accident previously reviewed and determined to be not credible could become credible; or (2) There is a substantial increase in the consequences to the public of a particular exvessel severe accident previously reviewed. d. A proposed departure from Tier 2 information required by § 52.47(a)(28) to address aircraft impacts shall consider the effect of the changed design feature or functional capability on the original aircraft impact assessment required by 10 CFR 50.150(a). The applicant or licensee shall describe, in the plant-specific DCD, how the modified design features and functional capabilities continue to meet the aircraft impact assessment requirements in 10 CFR 50.150(a)(1). e. If a departure requires a license amendment under paragraph B.5.b or B.5.c of this section, it is governed by 10 CFR 50.90. f. A departure from Tier 2 information that is made under paragraph B.5 of this section does not require an exemption from this appendix. g. A party to an adjudicatory proceeding for either the issuance, amendment, or renewal of a license or for operation under § 52.103(a), who believes that an applicant or licensee who references this appendix has not complied with paragraph VIII.B.5 of this appendix when departing from Tier 2 information, may petition to admit into the proceeding such a contention. In addition to complying with the general requirements of 10 CFR 2.309, the petition must demonstrate that the departure does not comply with E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1 jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with RULES 23456 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules and Regulations paragraph VIII.B.5 of this appendix. Further, the petition must demonstrate that the change bears on an asserted noncompliance with an ITAAC acceptance criterion in the case of a § 52.103 preoperational hearing, or that the change bears directly on the amendment request in the case of a hearing on a license amendment. Any other party may file a response. If, on the basis of the petition and any response, the presiding officer determines that a sufficient showing has been made, the presiding officer shall certify the matter directly to the Commission for determination of the admissibility of the contention. The Commission may admit such a contention if it determines the petition raises a genuine issue of material fact regarding compliance with paragraph VIII.B.5 of this appendix. this appendix was approved, as set forth in Section V of this appendix. Any other party may file a response to the petition. If, on the basis of the petition and any response, the presiding officer determines that a sufficient showing has been made, the presiding officer shall certify the matter directly to the Commission for determination of the admissibility of the contention. All other issues with respect to the plant-specific TS or other operational requirements are subject to a hearing as part of the licensing proceeding. 6. After issuance of a license, the generic TS have no further effect on the plantspecific TS. Changes to the plant-specific TS will be treated as license amendments under 10 CFR 50.90. C. Operational Requirements 1. Changes to APR1400 DC generic TS and other operational requirements that were completely reviewed and approved in the design certification rulemaking and do not require a change to a design feature in the generic DCD are governed by the requirements in 10 CFR 50.109. Changes that require a change to a design feature in the generic DCD are governed by the requirements in paragraphs A or B of this section. 2. Changes to APR1400 DC generic TS and other operational requirements are applicable to all applicants who reference this appendix, except those for which the change has been rendered technically irrelevant by action taken under paragraphs C.3 or C.4 of this section. 3. The Commission may require plantspecific departures on generic TS and other operational requirements that were completely reviewed and approved, provided a change to a design feature in the generic DCD is not required and special circumstances, as defined in 10 CFR 2.335 are present. The Commission may modify or supplement generic TS and other operational requirements that were not completely reviewed and approved or require additional TS and other operational requirements on a plant-specific basis, provided a change to a design feature in the generic DCD is not required. 4. An applicant who references this appendix may request an exemption from the generic TS or other operational requirements. The Commission may grant such a request only if it determines that the exemption will comply with the requirements of § 52.7. The granting of an exemption must be subject to litigation in the same manner as other issues material to the license hearing. 5. A party to an adjudicatory proceeding for the issuance, amendment, or renewal of a license, or for operation under § 52.103(a), who believes that an operational requirement approved in the DCD or a TS derived from the generic TS must be changed, may petition to admit such a contention into the proceeding. The petition must comply with the general requirements of 10 CFR 2.309 and must demonstrate why special circumstances as defined in 10 CFR 2.335 are present, or demonstrate compliance with the Commission’s regulations in effect at the time X. Records and Reporting VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 May 21, 2019 Jkt 247001 IX. [Reserved] A. Records 1. The applicant for this appendix shall maintain a copy of the generic DCD that includes all generic changes that are made to Tier 1 and Tier 2, and the generic TS and other operational requirements. The applicant shall maintain the sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (including proprietary information and security-related information) and safeguards information referenced in the generic DCD for the period that this appendix may be referenced, as specified in Section VII of this appendix. 2. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix shall maintain the plantspecific DCD to accurately reflect both generic changes to the generic DCD and plant-specific departures made under Section VIII of this appendix throughout the period of application and for the term of the license (including any periods of renewal). 3. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix shall prepare and maintain written evaluations which provide the bases for the determinations required by Section VIII of this appendix. These evaluations must be retained throughout the period of application and for the term of the license (including any periods of renewal). 4.a. The applicant for the APR1400 design shall maintain a copy of the aircraft impact assessment performed to comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.150(a) for the term of the certification (including any period of renewal). b. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix shall maintain a copy of the aircraft impact assessment performed to comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.150(a) throughout the pendency of the application and for the term of the license (including any periods of renewal). B. Reporting 1. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix shall submit a report to the NRC containing a brief description of any plant-specific departures from the DCD, including a summary of the evaluation of each departure. This report must be filed in accordance with the filing requirements applicable to reports in § 52.3. 2. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix shall submit updates to its PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 plant-specific DCD, which reflect the generic changes to and plant-specific departures from the generic DCD made under Section VIII of this appendix. These updates shall be filed under the filing requirements applicable to final safety analysis report updates in 10 CFR 50.71(e) and 52.3. 3. The reports and updates required by paragraphs X.B.1 and X.B.2 of this appendix must be submitted as follows: a. On the date that an application for a license referencing this appendix is submitted, the application must include the report and any updates to the generic DCD. b. During the interval from the date of application for a license to the date the Commission makes its finding required by § 52.103(g), the report must be submitted semi-annually. Updates to the plant-specific DCD must be submitted annually and may be submitted along with amendments to the application. c. After the Commission makes the finding required by § 52.103(g), the reports and updates to the plant-specific DCD must be submitted, along with updates to the sitespecific portion of the final safety analysis report for the facility, at the intervals required by 10 CFR 50.59(d)(2) and 50.71(e)(4), respectively, or at shorter intervals as specified in the license. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of May 2019. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. 2019–10715 Filed 5–21–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 25 [Docket No. FAA–2018–1015; Special Conditions No. 25–746–SC] Special Conditions: Boeing Model 777– 9 Airplane; Tire Debris Penetration of Fuel Tank Structure Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments. AGENCY: These special conditions are issued for The Boeing Company (Boeing) Model 777–9 airplane. This airplane will have a novel or unusual design feature when compared to the state of technology envisioned in the airworthiness standards for transport category airplanes. This design feature is composite fuel tanks that may be subject to tire-debris penetration of the fuel tanks. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design feature. These special conditions SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\22MYR1.SGM 22MYR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 99 (Wednesday, May 22, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23439-23456]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10715]



========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 

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


Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules 
and Regulations

[[Page 23439]]



NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 52

[NRC-2015-0224]
RIN 3150-AJ67


Advanced Power Reactor 1400 (APR1400) Design Certification

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its 
regulations to certify the Advanced Power Reactor 1400 (APR1400) 
standard design. Applicants or licensees intending to construct and 
operate an APR1400 standard design may do so by referencing this design 
certification (DC) rule. The applicant for the certification of the 
APR1400 standard design is Korea Electric Power Corporation and Korea 
Hydro & Nuclear Power Co., Ltd. (KEPCO/KHNP).

DATES: The final rule is effective September 19, 2019, unless 
significant adverse comments are received by June 21, 2019. If the 
direct final rule is withdrawn as a result of such comments, timely 
notice of the withdrawal will be published in the Federal Register. The 
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this 
regulation is approved by the Director of the Office of the Federal 
Register as of September 19, 2019.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods 
(unless this document describes a different method for submitting 
comments on a specific subject):
     Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/ and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0224. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-
3463; email: [email protected]. For technical questions contact 
the individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section 
of this document.
     Email comments to: [email protected]. If you do 
not receive an automatic email reply confirming receipt, then contact 
us at 301-415-1677.
     Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission at 301-415-1101.
     Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and 
Adjudications Staff.
     Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (Eastern Time) Federal 
workdays; telephone: 301-415-1677.
    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: Yanely Malave-Velez, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards, telephone: 301-415-1519, email: 
[email protected], or William Ward, Office of New Reactors, 
telephone: 301-415-7038, email: [email protected].gov. Both are staff of 
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
II. Rulemaking Procedure
III. Background
IV. Discussion
V. APR1400 Standard Design Approval
VI. Section-by-Section Analysis
VII. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
VIII. Regulatory Analysis
IX. Backfitting and Issue Finality
X. Voluntary Consensus Standards
XI. Plain Writing
XII. Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant 
Environmental Impact
XII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
XIII. Congressional Review Act
XIV. Agreement State Compatibility
XV. Availability of Documents
XVI. Procedures for Access to Proprietary and Safeguards Information 
for Preparation of Comments on the APR1400 Design Certification Rule
XVII. Incorporation by Reference--Reasonable Availability to 
Interested Parties

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments

A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2015-0224 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-2015-0224.
     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]. For 
the convenience of the reader, instructions about obtaining materials 
referenced in this document are provided in the Availability of 
Documents section.
     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-2015-0224 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 as well as 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 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

[[Page 23440]]

entering the comment into ADAMS. Comments received after June 21, 2019 
will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is able to 
ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date. 
Comments received on this direct final rule will also be considered to 
be comments on a companion proposed rule published in the Proposed 
Rules section of this issue of the Federal Register.

II. Rulemaking Procedure

    Because the NRC considers this action to be non-controversial, the 
NRC is using the ``direct final rule procedure'' for this rule. The 
rule will become effective on September 19, 2019. However, if the NRC 
receives significant adverse comments by June 21, 2019, then the NRC 
will publish a document that withdraws this direct final rule and would 
subsequently address the comments received in any final rule as a 
response to the companion proposed rule published in the Proposed Rules 
section of this issue of the Federal Register. Absent significant 
modifications to the proposed revisions requiring republication, the 
NRC does not intend to initiate a second comment period on this action.
    A significant adverse comment is a comment in which the commenter 
explains why the rule would be inappropriate. A comment is adverse and 
significant if it meets the following criteria:
    (1) The comment opposes the rule and provides a reason sufficient 
to require a substantive response in a notice-and-comment process. For 
example, a substantive response is required when:
    (a) The comment causes the NRC to reevaluate (or reconsider) its 
position or conduct additional analysis;
    (b) The comment raises an issue serious enough to warrant a 
substantive response to clarify or complete the record; or
    (c) The comment raises a relevant issue that was not previously 
addressed or considered by the NRC.
    (2) The comment proposes a change or an addition to the rule, and 
it is apparent that the rule would be ineffective or unacceptable 
without incorporation of the change or addition.
    (3) The comment causes the NRC to make a change (other than 
editorial) to the rule.
    For detailed instructions on filing comments, please see the 
ADDRESSES section in the companion proposed rule published in the 
Proposed Rules section of this issue of the Federal Register.

III. Background

    Part 52 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), 
``Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants,'' 
subpart B, ``Standard Design Certifications,'' presents the process for 
obtaining standard design certifications. On December 23, 2014, KEPCO/
KHNP submitted its application for certification of the APR1400 
standard design (ADAMS Accession No. ML15006A098) to the NRC under 
subpart B of 10 CFR part 52. The NRC published a notice of receipt of 
the application in the Federal Register (80 FR 5792; February 3, 2015). 
On March 12, 2015, the NRC formally accepted the application as a 
docketed application for design certification (80 FR 13035; March 12, 
2015). The pre-application information submitted before the NRC 
formally accepted the application can be found in ADAMS under Docket 
No. PROJ0782.

IV. Discussion

Final Safety Evaluation Report

    The NRC issued the final safety evaluation report for the APR1400 
design on September 28, 2018. The final safety evaluation report is 
available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18087A364. The NRC will 
publish the final safety evaluation report as a NUREG titled, ``Final 
Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Certification of the Advanced 
Power Reactor 1400 Standard Design.'' The final safety evaluation 
report is based on the NRC's review of revision 3 of the APR1400 design 
control document.

APR1400 DC Rule

    The following discussion describes the purpose and key aspects of 
each section of the APR1400 DC rule. All section and paragraph 
references are to the provisions being added as appendix F to the 
regulations in 10 CFR part 52, unless otherwise noted. The NRC has 
modeled the APR1400 DC rule on existing DC rules, with certain 
modifications where necessary to account for differences in the APR1400 
design documentation, design features, and environmental assessment 
(including severe accident mitigation design alternatives). As a 
result, DC rules are standardized to the extent practical.
A. Introduction (Section I)
    The purpose of Section I of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to 
identify the standard design approved by this DC rule and the applicant 
for certification of the standard design. Identification of the design 
certification applicant is necessary to implement appendix F to 10 CFR 
part 52 for two reasons. First, Sec.  52.63(c) identifies the design 
certification applicant as a potential source for an applicant for a 
combined license (COL) to obtain the generic design control document 
and supporting design information. If the COL applicant does not obtain 
the design information from the design certification applicant, but 
instead uses a different entity, then the COL applicant must meet the 
requirements in Sec.  52.73. Second, paragraph X.A.1 of the rule 
requires that the identified design certification applicant maintain 
the generic design control document throughout the time that appendix F 
to 10 CFR part 52 may be referenced.
B. Definitions (Section II)
    The purpose of Section II of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to 
define specific terminology with respect to this DC rule. During 
development of the first two DC rules, the NRC decided that there would 
be both generic (master) design control documents maintained by the NRC 
and the design certification applicant, as well as individual plant-
specific design control documents maintained by each applicant or 
licensee that references a certified standard design. This distinction 
is necessary in order to specify the relevant plant-specific 
requirements to applicants and licensees referencing appendix F to 10 
CFR part 52. In order to facilitate the maintenance of the master 
design control documents, the NRC requires that each application for a 
standard design certification be updated to include an electronic copy 
of the final version of the design control document. The final version 
is required to incorporate all amendments to the design control 
document submitted since the original application, as well as any 
changes directed by the NRC as a result of its review of the original 
design control document or as a result of public comments. This final 
version is the master design control document incorporated by reference 
in the DC rule. The master design control document will be revised as 
needed to include generic changes to the version of the design control 
document that is approved in this design certification rulemaking. 
These changes would occur as the result of generic rulemaking by the 
NRC, under the change criteria in Section VIII.
    The NRC also requires each applicant and licensee referencing 
appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 to submit and maintain a plant-specific 
design control document as part of the COL final safety

[[Page 23441]]

analysis report. This plant-specific design control document must 
either include or incorporate by reference the information in the 
generic design control document. The plant-specific design control 
document would be updated as necessary to reflect the generic changes 
to the design control document that the NRC may adopt through 
rulemaking, plant-specific departures from the generic design control 
document that the NRC imposed on the licensee by order, and any plant-
specific departures that the licensee chooses to make in accordance 
with the relevant processes in Section VIII. Therefore, the plant-
specific design control document functions similar to an updated final 
safety analysis report because it provides the most complete and 
accurate information on a plant's design basis for that part of the 
plant that would be within the scope of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52.
    The NRC is treating the technical specifications in Chapter 16 of 
the generic design control document as a special category of 
information and designating them as generic technical specifications in 
order to facilitate the special treatment of this information under 
appendix F to 10 CFR part 52. A COL applicant must submit plant-
specific technical specifications that consist of the generic technical 
specifications, which may be modified as specified in paragraph VIII.C, 
and the remaining site-specific information needed to complete the 
technical specifications. The final safety analysis report that is 
required by Sec.  52.79 will consist of the plant-specific design 
control document, the site-specific final safety analysis report, and 
the plant-specific technical specifications.
    The terms Tier 1, Tier 2, and COL items (license information) are 
defined in appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 because these concepts were not 
envisioned when 10 CFR part 52 was developed. The design certification 
applicants and the NRC use these terms in implementing the two-tiered 
rule structure (the DCD is divided into Tiers 1 and 2 to support the 
rule structure) that was proposed by representatives of the nuclear 
industry after publication of 10 CFR part 52. The Commission approved 
the use of a two-tiered rule structure in its staff requirements 
memorandum, dated February 15, 1991, on SECY-90-377, ``Requirements for 
Design Certification under 10 CFR part 52,'' dated November 8, 1990 
(ADAMS Accession No. ML003707892).
    Tier 1 information means the portion of the design-related 
information contained in the generic DCD that is approved and certified 
by this appendix. Tier 2 information means the portion of the design-
related information contained in the generic DCD that is approved but 
not certified by this appendix. The change process for Tier 2 
information is similar to, but not identical to, the change process set 
forth in 10 CFR 50.59. The regulations in Sec.  50.59 describe when a 
licensee may make changes to a plant as described in its final safety 
analysis report without a license amendment. Because the change process 
for Tier 2 information provided in Section VIII of this DC rule 
provides more specific criteria than Sec.  50.59, as described in Sec.  
50.59(c)(4), the definitions and criteria of Sec.  50.59 are not 
applicable to this process. The NRC is including a definition for a 
``Departure from a method of evaluation described in the plant-specific 
DCD used in establishing the design bases or in the safety analyses'' 
(paragraph II.F), which is appropriate to include in this direct final 
rule, so that the eight criteria in paragraph VIII.B.5.b will be 
implemented for new reactors as intended.
C. Scope and Contents (Section III)
    The purpose of Section III of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to 
describe and define the scope and content of this design certification, 
how to obtain a copy of the generic design control document, 
requirements for incorporation by reference of the DC rule, and how 
documentation discrepancies or inconsistencies are to be resolved.
    Paragraph III.A is the required statement of the Office of the 
Federal Register for approval of the incorporation by reference of the 
APR1400 design control document, revision 3. In addition, this 
paragraph provides the information on how to obtain a copy of the 
design control document.
    Paragraph III.B is the requirement for COL applicants and licensees 
referencing the APR1400 design control document to comply with the 
requirements of this appendix in order to benefit from the issue 
finality afforded the certified design. The legal effect of 
incorporation by reference is that the incorporated material has the 
same legal status as if it were published in the Code of Federal 
Regulations. This material, like any other properly-issued regulation, 
has the force and effect of law. Tier 1 and Tier 2 information 
(including the technical and topical reports referenced in Chapter 1), 
and generic technical specifications have been combined into a single 
document called the generic design control document, in order to 
effectively control this information and facilitate its incorporation 
by reference into the rule. In addition, paragraph III.B clarifies that 
the conceptual design information and KEPCO/KHNP's evaluation of severe 
accident mitigation design alternatives are not considered to be part 
of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52. As provided by Sec.  52.47(a)(24), 
these conceptual designs are not part of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 
and, therefore, are not applicable to an application that references 
appendix F to 10 CFR part 52. Therefore, an applicant referencing 
appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 would not be required to conform to the 
conceptual design information that was provided by the design 
certification applicant. The conceptual design information, which 
consists of site-specific design features, was required to facilitate 
the design certification review. Similarly, the severe accident 
mitigation design alternatives were required to facilitate the 
environmental assessment.
    Paragraphs III.C and III.D set forth the manner by which potential 
conflicts are to be resolved and identify the controlling document. 
Paragraph III.C establishes the Tier 1 description in the design 
control document as controlling in the event of an inconsistency 
between the Tier 1 and Tier 2 information in the design control 
document. Paragraph III.D establishes the generic design control 
document as the controlling document in the event of an inconsistency 
between the design control document and the final safety evaluation 
report for the certified standard design.
    Paragraph III.E makes it clear that design activities outside the 
scope of the design certification may be performed using actual site 
characteristics. This provision applies to site-specific portions of 
the plant, such as the administration building.
D. Additional Requirements and Restrictions (Section IV)
    Section IV of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 sets forth additional 
requirements and restrictions imposed upon an applicant who references 
appendix F to 10 CFR part 52.
    Paragraph IV.A sets forth the information requirements for COL 
applicants and distinguishes between information and documents that 
must be included in the application or the design control document and 
those which may be incorporated by reference. Any incorporation by 
reference in the application should be clear and should specify the 
title, date, edition, or version of a document and the page number(s) 
and table(s)

[[Page 23442]]

containing the relevant information to be incorporated. The legal 
effect of such an incorporation by reference into the application is 
that appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 would be legally binding on the 
applicant or licensee.
    In paragraph IV.B the NRC reserves the right to determine how 
appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 may be referenced under 10 CFR part 50. 
This determination may occur in the context of a subsequent rulemaking 
modifying 10 CFR part 52 or this DC rule, or on a case-by-case basis in 
the context of a specific application for a 10 CFR part 50 construction 
permit or operating license. This provision is necessary because the 
previous DC rules were not implemented in the manner that was 
originally envisioned at the time that 10 CFR part 52 was issued. The 
NRC's concern is with the manner by which the inspections, tests, 
analyses, and acceptance criteria (ITAAC) were developed and the lack 
of experience with design certifications in a licensing proceeding. 
Therefore, it is appropriate that the NRC retain some discretion 
regarding the manner by which appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 could be 
referenced in a 10 CFR part 50 licensing proceeding.
E. Applicable Regulations (Section V)
    The purpose of Section V of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to 
specify the regulations that were applicable and in effect at the time 
this design certification was approved. These regulations consist of 
the technically relevant regulations identified in paragraph V.A, 
except for the regulations in paragraph V.B that would not be 
applicable to this certified design.
F. Issue Resolution (Section VI)
    The purpose of Section VI of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to 
identify the scope of issues that are resolved by the NRC through this 
rulemaking and, therefore, are ``matters resolved'' within the meaning 
and intent of Sec.  52.63(a)(5). The section is divided into five 
parts: Paragraph VI.A identifies the NRC's safety findings in adopting 
appendix F to 10 CFR part 52, paragraph VI.B identifies the scope and 
nature of issues that are resolved by this rulemaking, paragraph VI.C 
identifies issues, that are not resolved by this rulemaking, and 
paragraph VI.D identifies the issue finality restrictions applicable to 
the NRC with respect to appendix F to 10 CFR part 52, and paragraph 
VI.E identifies the availability of secondary resources.
    Paragraph VI.A describes the nature of the NRC's findings in 
general terms and makes the findings required by Sec.  52.54 for the 
NRC's approval of this DC rule.
    Paragraph VI.B sets forth the scope of issues that may not be 
challenged as a matter of right in subsequent proceedings. The 
introductory phrase of paragraph VI.B clarifies that issue resolution, 
as described in the remainder of the paragraph, extends to the 
delineated NRC proceedings for plants referencing appendix F to 10 CFR 
part 52. The remainder of paragraph VI.B describes the categories of 
information for which there is issue resolution.
    Paragraph VI.C reserves the right of the NRC to impose operational 
requirements on applicants that reference appendix F to 10 CFR part 52. 
This provision reflects the fact that only some operational 
requirements, including portions of the generic technical 
specifications in Chapter 16 of the design control document, and no 
operational programs (e.g., operational quality assurance), were 
completely reviewed by the NRC in this design certification rulemaking 
proceeding. Therefore, the issue finality provisions of Sec.  52.63 
apply only to those operational requirements that either the NRC 
completely reviewed and approved or formed the basis of an NRC safety 
finding of the adequacy of the APR1400, as documented in the NRC's 
final safety evaluation report. The NRC notes that operational 
requirements may be imposed on licensees referencing this design 
certification through the inclusion of license conditions in the 
license, or inclusion of a description of the operational requirement 
in the plant-specific final safety analysis report.\1\ The NRC's choice 
of the regulatory vehicle for imposing the operational requirements 
will depend upon the following, among other things: (1) Whether the 
development and/or implementation of these requirements must occur 
prior to either the issuance of the COL or the Commission finding under 
Sec.  52.103(g) and (2) the nature of the change controls that are 
appropriate given the regulatory, safety, and security significance of 
each operational requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Certain activities, ordinarily conducted following fuel load 
and therefore considered ``operational requirements,'' but which may 
be relied upon to support a Commission finding under Sec.  
52.103(g), may themselves be the subject of ITAAC to ensure their 
implementation prior to the Sec.  52.103(g) finding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Also, paragraph VI.C allows the NRC to impose future operational 
requirements (distinct from design matters) on applicants who reference 
this design certification. License conditions for portions of the plant 
within the scope of this design certification (e.g., start-up and power 
ascension testing), are not restricted by Sec.  52.63. The requirement 
to perform these testing programs is contained in the Tier 1 
information. However, ITAAC cannot be specified for these subjects 
because the matters to be addressed in these license conditions cannot 
be verified prior to fuel load and operation, when the ITAAC are 
satisfied. In the absence of detailed design information to evaluate 
the need for and develop specific post-fuel load verifications for 
these matters, the NRC is reserving the right to impose, at the time of 
COL issuance, license conditions addressing post-fuel load verification 
activities for portions of the plant within the scope of this design 
certification.
    Paragraph VI.D requires the NRC to follow the restrictions 
contained in Section VIII when requiring generic or plant-specific 
modifications, changes, or additions to structures, systems, and 
components; design features; design criteria; and ITAAC within the 
scope of the certified design.
    Paragraph VI.E ensures that the NRC will specify at an appropriate 
time the procedures on how to obtain access to sensitive unclassified 
and non-safeguards information (SUNSI) and safeguards information (SGI) 
for the APR1400 DC rule. Access to such information would be for the 
sole purpose of requesting or participating in certain specified 
hearings, such as hearings required by Sec.  52.85 or an adjudicatory 
hearing. For proceedings where the notice of hearing was published 
before the effective date of the final rule, the Commission's order 
governing access to SUNSI and SGI shall be used to govern access to 
such information within the scope of the rulemaking. For proceedings in 
which the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing is published 
after the effective date of the final rule, paragraph VI.E applies and 
governs access to SUNSI and SGI.
G. Duration of This Appendix (Section VII)
    The purpose of Section VII of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is, in 
part, to specify the period during which this design certification may 
be referenced by an applicant for a COL, under Sec.  52.55, and the 
period it will remain valid when the design certification is 
referenced. For example, if an application references this design 
certification during the 15-year period, then the design certification 
would be effective for that application until it is withdrawn or the 
license issued on that application expires, including periods

[[Page 23443]]

of operation under a renewed license. The NRC intends for appendix F to 
10 CFR part 52 to remain valid for the life of the plants that 
reference the design certification to achieve the benefits of 
standardization and licensing stability. This means that changes to, or 
plant-specific departures from, information in the plant-specific 
design control document must be made under the change processes in 
Section VIII for the life of a plant that references this DC rule.
H. Processes for Changes and Departures (Section VIII)
    The purpose of Section VIII of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to 
set forth the processes for generic changes to, or plant-specific 
departures (including exemptions) from, the design control document. 
The NRC adopted this restrictive change process in order to achieve a 
more stable licensing process for applicants and licensees that 
reference DC rules. Section VIII is divided into three paragraphs, 
which correspond to Tier 1, Tier 2, and operational requirements.
    Generic changes (called ``modifications'' in Sec.  52.63(a)(3)) 
must be accomplished by rulemaking because the intended subject of the 
change is this DC rule itself, as is contemplated by Sec.  52.63(a)(1). 
Consistent with Sec.  52.63(a)(3), any generic rulemaking changes are 
applicable to all plants referencing this DC rule, absent circumstances 
which render the change technically irrelevant. By contrast, plant-
specific departures could be either an order to one or more applicants 
or licensees; or an applicant or licensee-initiated departure 
applicable only to that applicant's or licensee's plant(s), similar to 
a Sec.  50.59 departure or an exemption. Because these plant-specific 
departures will result in a design control document that is unique for 
that plant, Section X would require an applicant or licensee to 
maintain a plant-specific design control document. For purposes of 
brevity, the following discussion refers to the processes for both 
generic changes and plant-specific departures as ``change processes.'' 
Section VIII refers to an exemption from one or more requirements of 
this appendix and addresses the criteria for granting an exemption. The 
NRC cautions that when the exemption involves an underlying substantive 
requirement (i.e., a requirement outside this appendix), then the 
applicant or licensee requesting the exemption must demonstrate that an 
exemption from the underlying applicable requirement meets the criteria 
of Sec.  52.7 or Sec.  50.12.
    For the APR1400 DC review, the staff followed the approach 
described in SECY-17-0075, ``Planned Improvements in Design 
Certification Tiered Information Designations,'' (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML16196A321), to evaluate the applicant's designation of information as 
Tier 1 or Tier 2 information. Unlike prior design certification 
applications, this application did not contain any Tier 2* information. 
As described in SECY-17-0075, in each of the prior design certification 
rules in appendices A through D to 10 CFR part 52, information 
contained in the DCD was divided into three designations: Tier 1, Tier 
2, and Tier 2*. Tier 1 information is the portion of design-related 
information in the generic DCD that the Commission approves in the part 
52 design certification rule appendices. To change Tier 1 information, 
NRC approval by rulemaking or approval of an exemption from the 
certified design rule is required. Tier 2 information is also approved 
by the Commission in the Part 52 design certification rule appendices, 
but it is not certified and licensees who reference the design can 
change this information using the process outlined in Section VIII of 
the appendices. This change process is similar to that in 10 CFR 50.59 
and is generally referred to as the ``50.59-like'' process. If the 
criteria in Section VIII are met, a licensee can change Tier 2 
information without prior NRC approval. The NRC created a third 
category, Tier 2*, to address industry requests to minimize the scope 
of Tier 1 information and provide greater flexibility for making 
changes. Tier 2* information is included in Tier 2 and has the same 
safety significance as Tier 1 information, but the NRC decided to 
provide more flexibility for licensees to change this type of 
information. In prior design certification rules, Tier 2* is 
significant information included only in Tier 2 that cannot be changed 
without prior NRC approval of a license amendment requesting the 
change.
    The applicant included Tier 1 and Tier 2 information in the APR1400 
DC application and did not designate or categorize any information as 
Tier 2* information. Generally, where an applicant includes only Tier 1 
and Tier 2 information in an application, the staff will evaluate the 
Tier 2 information to determine whether any of that information 
requires NRC approval before it is changed. If the staff identifies any 
such information in Tier 2, then the staff will request that the 
applicant revise the application to categorize that information as Tier 
1 or Tier 2*, depending on whether the change must be made by approval 
of a license amendment and an exemption requesting the change (Tier 1), 
or a license amendment alone (Tier 2*). Because the applicant did not 
designate any information as Tier 2* information, the staff also 
considered whether the applicant had included information in Tier 2 
that prior DC applicants had identified as Tier 2* but that the NRC 
staff determined should be categorized as Tier 1. Using requests for 
additional information, the staff questioned KEPCO/KHNP's 
categorization of certain information as Tier 2 that past DC applicants 
had identified as Tier 2* and, in some instances, the staff requested 
that the applicant revise the application to add that information to 
Tier 1. This approach required staff and KEPCO/KHNP to identify for 
each request for additional information the verifiable, important to 
safety parameters that must be included in Tier 1 to be certified in 
the rule and verified by ITAAC. After several public meetings, some 
information was added to or updated in Tier 1 (including modifications 
to some ITAAC) and the requests for additional information were 
resolved and closed without the designation of any Tier 2* information.
    Of these updates in Tier 1, the most significant concerned the 
design parameters for the critical structural sections \2\ for seismic 
Category I structures. Past DC applications identified dimensions of 
length to define critical structural sections as Tier 2* information. 
During recent construction activities for another design, actual 
dimensional lengths were found to be outside of their design 
tolerances. This variance required additional license amendments to 
resolve the issue associated with the design tolerances, resulting in 
increased burden to the licensee without a

[[Page 23444]]

commensurate safety benefit. For the APR1400 design, the Tier 1 
information and the ITAAC for these critical structural sections used 
the design load and design load capacity in lieu of dimensions of 
length, as specific dimensions are not necessarily as important to 
safety. By focusing on important to safety parameters and including 
them in ITAAC, the staff expects that the need for license amendments 
to address changes during construction will be greatly reduced while 
still maintaining reasonable assurance of adequate protection of public 
health and safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ When evaluating the acceptability of the information for 
seismic Category I structures, the staff's review focuses on a 
subset of structural information that includes seismic analysis 
methods, key parameters of seismic Category I structures, and the 
design of ``critical sections.'' The use of critical sections in the 
design of safety-related structures is a risk-informed graded 
approach to achieve the reasonable assurance of safety. In lieu of 
the safety review of a large number of structural component designs, 
the staff performs a detailed review of a limited number of critical 
sections described in the design control document Section 3.8 that 
contribute to the overall risk significance of the structures. This 
approach provides the staff with reasonable assurance of the overall 
safety performance of the structures based on the successful 
performance of these limited, but critical, risk-significant 
locations. However, even minor changes to these critical sections 
could, when applied to the entire safety-related structure, result 
in significant changes to the overall performance of the structure 
and, therefore, invalidate the basis for the staff's approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tier 1 Information
    Paragraph A describes the change process for changes to Tier 1 
information that are accomplished by rulemakings that amend the generic 
design control document and are governed by the standards in Sec.  
52.63(a)(1). A generic change under Sec.  52.63(a)(1) will not be made 
to a certified design while it is in effect unless the change: (1) Is 
necessary for compliance with NRC regulations applicable and in effect 
at the time the certification was issued; (2) is necessary to provide 
adequate protection of the public health and safety or the common 
defense and security; (3) reduces unnecessary regulatory burden and 
maintains protection to public health and safety and common defense and 
security; (4) provides the detailed design information necessary to 
resolve select design acceptance criteria; (5) is necessary to correct 
material errors in the certification information; (6) substantially 
increases overall safety, reliability, or security of a facility and 
the costs of the change are justified; or (7) contributes to increased 
standardization of the certification information. The rulemakings must 
provide for notice and opportunity for public comment on the proposed 
change, as required by Sec.  52.63(a)(2). The NRC will give 
consideration as to whether the benefits justify the costs for plants 
that are already licensed or for which an application for a permit or 
license is under consideration except for those changes that are 
necessary to provide adequate protection of the public health and 
safety or the common defense and security.
    Departures from Tier 1 may occur in two ways: (1) The NRC may order 
a licensee to depart from Tier 1, as provided in paragraph A.3 or (2) 
an applicant or licensee may request an exemption from Tier 1, as 
addressed in paragraph A.4. If the NRC seeks to order a licensee to 
depart from Tier 1, paragraph A.3 would require that the NRC find both 
that the departure is necessary either to assure adequate protection of 
the public health and safety or the common defense and security or to 
secure compliance with the NRC's regulations applicable and in effect 
at the time of approval of the design certification and that special 
circumstances are present. Paragraph A.4 provides that exemptions from 
Tier 1 requested by an applicant or licensee are governed by the 
requirements of Sec. Sec.  52.63(b)(1) and 52.98(f), which provide an 
opportunity for a hearing. In addition, the NRC would not grant 
requests for exemptions that will result in a significant decrease in 
the level of safety otherwise provided by the design.
Tier 2 Information
    Paragraph B describes the change processes for the Tier 2 
information; which have the same elements as the Tier 1 change process, 
but some of the standards for plant-specific orders and exemptions 
would be different. Generic Tier 2 changes would be accomplished by 
rulemaking that would amend the generic design control document and 
would be governed by the standards in Sec.  52.63(a)(1). A generic 
change under Sec.  52.63(a)(1) would not be made to a certified design 
while it is in effect unless the change: (1) Is necessary for 
compliance with NRC regulations that were applicable and in effect at 
the time the certification was issued; (2) is necessary to provide 
adequate protection of the public health and safety or the common 
defense and security; (3) reduces unnecessary regulatory burden and 
maintains protection to public health and safety and the common defense 
and security; (4) provides the detailed design information necessary to 
resolve select design acceptance criteria; (5) is necessary to correct 
material errors in the certification information; (6) substantially 
increases overall safety, reliability, or security of a facility and 
the costs of the change are justified; or (7) contributes to increased 
standardization of the certification information.
    Departures from Tier 2 would occur in four ways: (1) The NRC may 
order a plant-specific departure, as set forth in paragraph B.3; (2) an 
applicant or licensee may request an exemption from a Tier 2 
requirement as set forth in paragraph B.4; (3) a licensee may make a 
departure without prior NRC approval under paragraph B.5; or (4) the 
licensee may request NRC approval for proposed departures which do not 
meet the requirements in paragraph B.5 as provided in paragraph B.5.e.
    Similar to ordered Tier 1 departures and generic Tier 2 changes, 
ordered Tier 2 departures cannot be imposed except when necessary, 
either to bring the certification into compliance with the NRC's 
regulations applicable and in effect at the time of approval of the 
design certification or to ensure adequate protection of the public 
health and safety or the common defense and security, provided that 
special circumstances are present as set forth in paragraph B.3. 
However, unlike Tier 1 changes, the special circumstances for the 
ordered Tier 2 departures would not have to outweigh any decrease in 
safety that may result from the reduction in standardization caused by 
the plant-specific order, as required by Sec.  52.63(a)(4). The NRC has 
determined that it is not necessary to impose an additional limitation 
similar to that imposed on Tier 1 departures by Sec.  52.63(a)(4) and 
(b)(1). This type of additional limitation for standardization would 
unnecessarily restrict the flexibility of applicants and licensees with 
respect to Tier 2 information.
    An applicant or licensee referencing this DC rule is permitted to 
request an exemption from Tier 2 information as set forth in paragraph 
B.4. The applicant or licensee would have to demonstrate that the 
exemption complies with one of the special circumstances in regulations 
governing specific exemptions in Sec.  50.12(a). In addition, the NRC 
would not grant requests for exemptions that will result in a 
significant decrease in the level of safety otherwise provided by the 
design. However, unlike Tier 1 changes, the special circumstances for 
the exemption do not have to outweigh any decrease in safety that may 
result from the reduction in standardization caused by the exemption. 
If the exemption is requested by an applicant for a license, the 
exemption would be subject to litigation in the same manner as other 
issues in the licensing hearing, consistent with Sec.  52.63(b)(1). If 
the exemption is requested by a licensee, then the exemption would be 
subject to an opportunity for hearing in the same manner as license 
amendments.
    Paragraph B.5 would allow an applicant or licensee to depart from 
Tier 2 information, without prior NRC approval, if the departure does 
not involve a change to or departure from Tier 1 information or the 
technical specifications, and the departure does not require a license 
amendment under paragraphs B.5.b or c. The technical specifications 
referred to in B.5.a of this paragraph are the technical specifications 
in Chapter 16 of the generic design control document, including bases, 
for departures made

[[Page 23445]]

prior to the issuance of the COL. After the issuance of the COL, the 
plant-specific technical specifications would be controlling under 
paragraph B.5. The requirement for a license amendment in paragraph 
B.5.b would be similar to the requirement in Sec.  50.59 and would 
apply to all of the information in Tier 2 except for the information 
that resolves the severe accident issues.
    Paragraph B.5.b addresses information described in the design 
control document to address aircraft impacts, in accordance with Sec.  
52.47(a)(28). Under Sec.  52.47(a)(28), applicants are required to 
include the information required by Sec.  50.150(b) in their design 
control document. An applicant or licensee who changes this information 
is required to consider the effect of the changed design feature or 
functional capability on the original aircraft impact assessment 
required by Sec.  50.150(a). The applicant or licensee is also required 
to describe in the plant-specific design control document how the 
modified design features and functional capabilities continue to meet 
the assessment requirements in Sec.  50.150(a)(1). Submittal of this 
updated information is governed by the reporting requirements in 
Section X.B.
    During an ongoing adjudicatory proceeding (e.g., for issuance of a 
COL) a party who believes that an applicant or licensee has not 
complied with paragraph B.5 when departing from Tier 2 information may 
petition to admit such a contention into the proceeding under paragraph 
B.5.g. As set forth in paragraph B.5.g, the petition would have to 
comply with the requirements of Sec.  2.309 and show that the departure 
does not comply with paragraph B.5. If on the basis of the petition and 
any responses thereto, the presiding officer in the proceeding 
determines that the required showing has been made, the matter would be 
certified to the Commission for its final determination. In the absence 
of a proceeding, assertions of noncompliance with paragraph B.5 
requirements applicable to Tier 2 departures would be treated as 
petitions for enforcement action under Sec.  2.206.
Operational Requirements
    The change process for technical specifications and other 
operational requirements in the design control document is set forth in 
Section VIII, paragraph C. The key to using the change processes 
described in Section VIII is to determine if the proposed change or 
departure would require a change to a design feature described in the 
generic design control document. If a design change is required, then 
the appropriate change process in paragraph A or B would apply. 
However, if a proposed change to the technical specifications or other 
operational requirements does not require a change to a design feature 
in the generic design control document, then paragraph C would apply. 
This change process has elements similar to the Tier 1 and Tier 2 
change processes in paragraphs A and B, but with significantly 
different change standards. Because of the different finality status 
for technical specifications and other operational requirements, the 
NRC designated a special category of information, consisting of the 
technical specifications and other operational requirements, with its 
own change process in paragraph C. The language in paragraph C also 
distinguishes between generic (Chapter 16 of the design control 
document) and plant-specific technical specifications to account for 
the different treatment and finality consistent with technical 
specifications before and after a license is issued.
    The process in paragraph C.1 for making generic changes to the 
generic technical specifications in Chapter 16 of the design control 
document or other operational requirements in the generic design 
control document is accomplished by rulemaking and governed by the 
backfit standards in Sec.  50.109. The determination of whether the 
generic technical specifications and other operational requirements 
were completely reviewed and approved in the design certification 
rulemaking is based upon the extent to which the NRC reached a safety 
conclusion in the final safety evaluation report on this matter. If a 
technical specification or operational requirement was completely 
reviewed and finalized in the design certification rulemaking, then the 
requirement of Sec.  50.109 would apply because a position was taken on 
that safety matter. Generic changes made under paragraph VIII.C.1 would 
be applicable to all applicants or licensees referencing this DC rule 
as described in paragraph C.2, unless the change is made technically 
irrelevant by a plant-specific departure.
    Some generic technical specifications contain values in brackets [ 
]. The brackets are placeholders indicating that the NRC's review is 
not complete and represent a requirement that the applicant for a COL 
referencing the APR1400 DC rule must replace the values in brackets 
with final plant-specific values (refer to guidance provided in 
Regulatory Guide 1.206, Revision 1, ``Applications for Nuclear Power 
Plants''). The values in brackets are neither part of the DC rule nor 
are they binding. Therefore, the replacement of bracketed values with 
final plant-specific values does not require an exemption from the 
generic technical specifications.
    Plant-specific departures may occur by either an order under 
paragraph C.3 or an applicant's exemption request under paragraph C.4. 
The basis for determining if the technical specification or operational 
requirement was completely reviewed and approved for these processes 
would be the same as for paragraph C.1 previously discussed. If the 
technical specification or operational requirement is completely 
reviewed and finalized in the design certification rulemaking, then the 
NRC must demonstrate that special circumstances are present before 
ordering a plant-specific departure. If not, there would be no 
restriction on plant-specific changes to the technical specifications 
or operational requirements, prior to the issuance of a license, 
provided a design change is not required. Although the generic 
technical specifications were reviewed and approved by the NRC in 
support of the design certification review, the NRC intends to consider 
the lessons learned from subsequent operating experience during its 
licensing review of the plant-specific technical specifications. The 
process for petitioning to intervene on a technical specification or 
operational requirement contained in paragraph VIII.C.5 would be 
similar to other issues in a licensing hearing, except that the 
petitioner must also demonstrate why special circumstances are present 
pursuant to Sec.  2.335.
    Paragraph C.6 states that the generic technical specifications 
would have no further effect on the plant-specific technical 
specifications after the issuance of a license that references this 
appendix. After a license is issued, the bases for the plant-specific 
technical specifications would be controlled by the bases change 
provision set forth in the administrative controls section of the 
plant-specific technical specifications.
I. [Reserved] (Section IX)
    This section is reserved for future use. The matters discussed in 
this section of earlier design certification rules--inspections, tests, 
analyses, and acceptance criteria--are now addressed in the substantive 
provisions of 10 CFR part 52. Accordingly, there is no need to repeat 
these regulatory provisions in the APR1400 design certification rule. 
However, this section is being reserved to maintain consistent section 
numbering with other design certification rules.

[[Page 23446]]

J. Records and Reporting (Section X)
    The purpose of Section X of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to set 
forth the requirements that will apply to maintaining records of 
changes to and departures from the generic design control document, 
which are to be reflected in the plant-specific design control 
document. Section X also sets forth the requirements for submitting 
reports (including updates to the plant-specific design control 
document) to the NRC. This section of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is 
similar to the requirements for records and reports in 10 CFR part 50, 
except for minor differences in information collection and reporting 
requirements.
    Paragraph X.A.1 requires that a generic design control document 
including SUNSI and SGI referenced in the generic design control 
document be maintained by the applicant for this rule. The generic 
design control document concept was developed, in part, to meet the 
requirements for incorporation by reference, including public 
availability of documents incorporated by reference. However, the SUNSI 
and SGI could not be included in the generic design control document 
because they are not publicly available. Nonetheless, the SUNSI and SGI 
were reviewed by the NRC and, as stated in paragraph VI.B.2, the NRC 
would consider the information to be resolved within the meaning of 
Sec.  52.63(a)(5). Because this information is not in the generic 
design control document, this information, or its equivalent, is 
required to be provided by an applicant for a license referencing this 
DC rule. Only the generic design control document is identified and 
incorporated by reference into this rule. The generic design control 
document and the NRC-approved version of the SUNSI and SGI must be 
maintained by the applicant (KEPCO/KHNP) for the period of time that 
appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 may be referenced.
    Paragraphs X.A.2 and X.A.3 place recordkeeping requirements on an 
applicant or licensee that references this design certification so that 
its plant-specific design control document accurately reflects both 
generic changes to the generic design control document and plant-
specific departures made under Section VIII. The term ``plant-
specific'' is used in paragraph X.A.2 and other sections of appendix F 
to 10 CFR part 52 to distinguish between the generic design control 
document that is being incorporated by reference into appendix F to 10 
CFR part 52, and the plant-specific design control document that the 
COL applicant is required to submit under paragraph IV.A. The 
requirement to maintain changes to the generic design control document 
is explicitly stated to ensure that these changes are not only 
reflected in the generic design control document, which will be 
maintained by the applicant for the design certification, but also in 
the plant-specific design control document. Therefore, records of 
generic changes to the design control document will be required to be 
maintained by both entities to ensure that both entities have up-to-
date design control documents.
    Paragraph X.A.4.a requires the DC rule applicant to maintain a copy 
of the aircraft impact assessment analysis for the term of the 
certification and any renewal. This provision, which is consistent with 
Sec.  50.150(c)(3), would facilitate any NRC inspections of the 
assessment that the NRC decides to conduct. Similarly, paragraph 
X.A.4.b requires an applicant or licensee who references appendix F to 
10 CFR part 52 to maintain a copy of the aircraft impact assessment 
performed to comply with the requirements of Sec.  50.150(a) throughout 
the pendency of the application and for the term of the license and any 
renewal. This provision is consistent with Sec.  50.150(c)(4). For all 
applicants and licensees, the supporting documentation retained should 
describe the methodology used in performing the assessment, including 
the identification of potential design features and functional 
capabilities to show that the acceptance criteria in Sec.  50.150(a)(1) 
will be met.
    Paragraph X.A does not place recordkeeping requirements on site-
specific information that is outside the scope of this rule. As 
discussed in paragraph V.D of this document, the final safety analysis 
report required by Sec.  52.79 will contain the plant-specific design 
control document and the site-specific information for a facility that 
references this rule. The phrase ``site-specific portion of the final 
safety analysis report'' in paragraph X.B.3.c refers to the information 
that is contained in the final safety analysis report for a facility 
(required by Sec.  52.79) but is not part of the plant-specific design 
control document (required by paragraph IV.A). Therefore, this rule 
does not require that duplicate documentation be maintained by an 
applicant or licensee that references this rule because the plant-
specific design control document is part of the final safety analysis 
report for the facility.
    Paragraph X.B.1 requires applicants or licensees that reference 
this rule to submit reports that describe departures from the design 
control document and include a summary of the written evaluations. The 
requirement for the written evaluations is set forth in paragraph 
X.A.3. The frequency of the report submittals is set forth in paragraph 
X.B.3. The requirement for submitting a summary of the evaluations is 
similar to the requirement in Sec.  50.59(d)(2).
    Paragraph X.B.2 requires applicants or licensees that reference 
this rule to submit updates to the design control document, which 
include both generic changes and plant-specific departures, as set 
forth in paragraph X.B.3. The requirements in paragraph X.B.3 for 
submitting reports will vary according to certain time periods during a 
facility's lifetime. If a potential applicant for a COL that references 
this rule decides to depart from the generic design control document 
prior to submission of the application, then paragraph X.B.3.a will 
require that the updated design control document be submitted as part 
of the initial application for a license. Under paragraph X.B.3.b, the 
applicant may submit any subsequent updates to its plant-specific 
design control document along with its amendments to the application 
provided that the submittals are made at least once per year. Because 
amendments to an application are typically made more frequently than 
once a year, this should not be an excessive burden on the applicant.
    Paragraph X.B.3.b also requires semi-annual submission of the 
reports required by paragraph X.B.1 throughout the period of 
application review and construction. The NRC will use the information 
in the reports to support planning for the NRC's inspection and 
oversight during this phase, when the licensee is conducting detailed 
design, procurement of components and equipment, construction, and 
preoperational testing. In addition, the NRC will use the information 
in making its finding on ITAAC under Sec.  52.103(g), as well as any 
finding on interim operation under Section 189.a(1)(B)(iii) of the 
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. Once a facility begins operation 
(for a COL under 10 CFR part 52, after the Commission has made a 
finding under Sec.  52.103(g)), the frequency of reporting will be 
governed by the requirements in paragraph X.B.3.c.

V. APR1400 Standard Design Approval

    On March 8, 2018, as part of the submission of revision 2 of the 
design control document (ADAMS Accession No. ML18079A146), KEPCO/KHNP 
requested the NRC provide a final design approval for the APR1400 
design. On August 13, 2018, as part of

[[Page 23447]]

the submission of revision 3 of the design control document (ADAMS 
Accession No. ML18228A680), KEPCO/KHNP corrected their request for a 
final design approval to a request for a standard design approval. A 
standard design approval for the APR1400, revision 3, was issued on 
September 28, 2018 (ADAMS Accession No. ML18261A187) following the 
NRC's issuance of the APR1400 final safety evaluation report.
    The finality of standard design approvals is discussed in Sec.  
52.145. The standard design approval is valid for 15 years from the 
date of issuance, as described in Sec.  52.147.

VI. Section-by-Section Analysis

    The following paragraphs describe the specific changes in this 
direct final rule: Section 52.11, Information collection requirements: 
OMB approval.
    In Sec.  52.11, this direct final rule adds new appendix F to 10 
CFR part 52 to the list of information collection requirements in 
paragraph (b) of this section.

Appendix F to Part 52--Design Certification Rule for the APR1400 Design

    This direct final rule adds appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 to 
incorporate the APR1400 standard design into the NRC's regulations. 
Applicants or licensees intending to construct and operate a plant 
using an APR1400 design may do so by referencing the DC rule.

VII. Regulatory Flexibility Certification

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the NRC 
certifies that this direct final rule does not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This direct 
final rule affects only the licensing and operation of nuclear power 
plants. The companies that own these plants do not fall within the 
scope of the definition of ``small entities'' set forth in the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act or the size standards established by the NRC 
(10 CFR 2.810).

VIII. Regulatory Analysis

    The NRC has not prepared a regulatory analysis for this direct 
final rule. The NRC prepares regulatory analyses for rulemakings that 
establish generic regulatory requirements applicable to all licensees. 
Design certifications are not generic rulemakings in the sense that 
design certifications do not establish standards or requirements with 
which all licensees must comply. Rather, design certifications are NRC 
approvals of specific nuclear power plant designs by rulemaking, which 
then may be voluntarily referenced by applicants for COLs. Furthermore, 
an applicant for a design certification, rather than the NRC, initiates 
design certification rulemakings. Preparation of a regulatory analysis 
in this circumstance would not be useful because the design to be 
certified is proposed by the applicant, rather than the NRC. For these 
reasons, the NRC concludes that preparation of a regulatory analysis is 
neither required nor appropriate.

IX. Backfitting and Issue Finality

    The NRC has determined that this direct final rule does not 
constitute a backfit as defined in the backfit rule (10 CFR 50.109), 
and it is not inconsistent with any applicable issue finality provision 
in 10 CFR part 52.
    This initial DC rule does not constitute backfitting as defined in 
the backfit rule (10 CFR 50.109) because there are no existing 
operating licenses under 10 CFR part 50, COLs or manufacturing licenses 
under 10 CFR part 52 referencing this DC rule and because this DC rule 
does not modify the standard design approval for the APR1400.
    This initial DC rule is not inconsistent with any applicable issue 
finality provision in 10 CFR part 52 because it does not impose new or 
changed requirements on existing DC rules in appendices A through E to 
10 CFR part 52 or the standard design approval for APR1400, and no COLs 
or manufacturing licenses issued by the NRC at this time reference a 
final APR1400 DC rule.
    For these reasons, neither a backfit analysis nor a discussion 
addressing the issue finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52 was prepared 
for this rule.

X. Voluntary Consensus Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995, 
Public Law 104-113, requires that Federal agencies use technical 
standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies unless the use of such a standard is inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. In this direct final rule, the 
NRC certifies the APR1400 standard design for use in nuclear power 
plant licensing under 10 CFR parts 50 or 52. Design certifications are 
not generic rulemakings establishing a generally applicable standard 
with which all 10 CFR parts 50 and 52 nuclear power plant licensees 
must comply. Design certifications are Commission approvals of specific 
nuclear power plant designs by rulemaking. Furthermore, design 
certifications are initiated by an applicant for rulemaking, rather 
than by the NRC. This action does not constitute the establishment of a 
standard that contains generally applicable requirements.

XI. Plain Writing

    The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-274) requires Federal 
agencies to write documents in a clear, concise, and well-organized 
manner. The NRC has written this document to be consistent with the 
Plain Writing Act as well as the Presidential Memorandum, ``Plain 
Language in Government Writing,'' published June 10, 1998 (63 FR 
31883).

XII. Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant 
Environmental Impact

    The NRC has determined under the National Environmental Policy Act 
of 1969, as amended (NEPA), and the NRC's regulations in subpart A of 
10 CFR part 51, that this direct final rule, if confirmed, would not be 
a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human 
environment and, therefore, an environmental impact statement is not 
required. The NRC's generic determination in this regard is reflected 
in 10 CFR 51.32(b)(1). The basis for the NRC's categorical exclusion in 
this regard, as discussed in the 2007 final rule amending 10 CFR parts 
51 and 52 (August 28, 2007; 72 FR 49352-49566), is based upon the 
following considerations. A DC rule does not authorize the siting, 
construction, or operation of a facility referencing any particular 
design; it only codifies the APR1400 design in a rule. The NRC will 
evaluate the environmental impacts and issue an environmental impact 
statement as appropriate under NEPA as part of the application for the 
construction and operation of a facility referencing any particular DC 
rule.
    In addition, consistent with 10 CFR 51.30(d) and 10 CFR 51.32(b), 
the NRC has prepared a final environmental assessment (ADAMS Accession 
No. ML18306A607) for the APR1400 design addressing various design 
alternatives to prevent and mitigate severe accidents. The 
environmental assessment is based, in part, upon the NRC's review of 
KEPCO/KHNP's evaluation of various design alternatives to prevent and 
mitigate severe accidents in APR1400-E-P-NR-14006, Revision 2, ``Severe 
Accident Mitigation Design Alternatives (SAMDAs) for the APR1400'' 
(ML18235A158). Based upon review of KEPCO/KHNP's evaluation, the 
Commission concludes that: (1) KEPCO/KHNP identified a reasonably 
complete set of potential design alternatives to

[[Page 23448]]

prevent and mitigate severe accidents for the APR1400 design; (2) none 
of the potential design alternatives are justified on the basis of 
cost-benefit considerations; and (3) it is unlikely that other design 
changes would be identified and justified during the term of the design 
certification on the basis of cost-benefit considerations because the 
estimated core damage frequencies for the APR1400 are very low on an 
absolute scale. These issues are considered resolved for the APR1400 
design. Based on its own independent evaluation, the NRC reached the 
same conclusion as KEPCO/KHNP that none of the possible candidate 
design alternatives are potentially cost beneficial for the APR1400 
design. This independent evaluation was based on reasonable treatment 
of costs, benefits, and sensitivities. The NRC concludes that KEPCO/
KHNP has adequately identified areas where risk potentially could be 
reduced in a cost-beneficial manner and adequately assessed whether the 
implementation of the identified potential severe accident mitigation 
design alternatives or candidate design alternatives would be cost-
beneficial for the given site parameters. Therefore, the NRC finds that 
the evaluation performed by KEPCO/KHNP is reasonable and sufficient.
    The determination of this environmental assessment is that there 
will be no significant offsite impact to the public from this action. 
The environmental assessment is available as indicated under Section 
XVI, ``Availability of Documents.''

XIII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

    The burden to the public for the information collection(s) is 
estimated to average 37 hours per response, including the time for 
reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and 
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the 
information collection. Further information about information 
collection requirements associated with this direct final rule can be 
found in the companion proposed rule published in the Proposed Rule 
section in this issue of the Federal Register.
    This direct final rule is being issued prior to approval by the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) of these information collection 
requirements, which were submitted under OMB control number 3150-XXXX. 
When OMB notifies the NRC of its decision, the NRC will publish a 
document in the Federal Register providing notice of the effective date 
of the information collections or, if approval is denied, providing 
notice of what action we plan to take.
    Send comments on any aspect of these information collections, 
including suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Information 
Services Branch, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 
District of Columbia 20555-0001, or by email to 
[email protected]; and to OMB Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs (3150-XXXX), Attn: Desk Officer for the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, District of 
Columbia 20503; email: [email protected].

Public Protection Notification

    The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to 
respond to, a collection of information unless the document requesting 
or requiring the collection displays a currently valid OMB control 
number.

XIV. Congressional Review Act

    This final rule is a rule as defined in the Congressional Review 
Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808). However, the Office of Management and Budget 
has not found it to be a major rule as defined in the Congressional 
Review Act.

XV. Agreement State Compatibility

    Under the ``Policy Statement on Adequacy and Compatibility of 
Agreement States Programs,'' approved by the Commission on June 20, 
1997, and published in the Federal Register (62 FR 46517; September 3, 
1997), this rule is classified as compatibility ``NRC.'' Compatibility 
is not required for Category ``NRC'' regulations. The NRC program 
elements in this category are those that relate directly to areas of 
regulation reserved to the NRC by the Atomic Energy Act or the 
provisions of 10 CFR, and although an Agreement State may not adopt 
program elements reserved to the NRC, it may wish to inform its 
licensees of certain requirements by a mechanism that is consistent 
with a particular State's administrative procedure laws, but does not 
confer regulatory authority on the State.

XVI. Availability of Documents

    The documents identified in the following table are available to 
interested persons through one or more of the following methods, as 
indicated.

         Documents Related to APR1400 Design Certification Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        ADAMS Accession
                                                         No./web link/
                       Document                         Federal Register
                                                            citation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECY-19-0020, ``Direct Final Rule--Advanced Power            ML18302A069
 Reactor 1400 Design Certification (RIN 3150-AJ67;
 NRC-2015-0224)''....................................
KEPCO/KHNP Application for Design Certification of           ML15006A037
 the APR1400 Design..................................
APR1400 Design Control Document, Revision 3..........        ML18228A667
APR1400 Final Safety Evaluation Report...............        ML18087A364
APR1400 Environmental Assessment.....................        ML18306A607
APR1400 Standard Design Approval.....................        ML18261A187
Regulatory History of Design Certification \3\.......        ML003761550
KEPCO/KHNP Topical and Technical Reports:
    APR1400-E-B-NR-16001-NP, Evaluation of Main Steam        ML18178A215
     and Feedwater Piping Applied to the Graded
     Approach for the APR1400, Rev. 0 (July 2017)....
    APR1400-E-B-NR-16002-NP, Evaluation of Safety            ML18178A217
     Injection and Shutdown Cooling Piping Applied to
     the Graded Approach for the APR1400, Rev. 1 (May
     2018)...........................................
    APR1400-E-I-NR-14001-NP, Human Factors                   ML18212A345
     Engineering Program Plan, Rev. 4 (July 2018)....
    APR1400-E-I-NR-14002-NP, Operating Experience            ML18081A101
     Review Implementation Plan, Rev. 2 (January
     2018)...........................................
    APR1400-E-I-NR-14003-NP, Functional Requirements         ML18081A091
     Analysis and Function Allocation Implementation
     Plan, Rev. 2 (January 2018).....................

[[Page 23449]]

 
    APR1400-E-I-NR-14004-NP, Task Analysis                   ML18178A223
     Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018)..........
    APR1400-E-I-NR-14006-NP, Treatment of Important          ML18178A224
     Human Actions Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May
     2018)...........................................
    APR1400-E-I-NR-14007-NP, Human-System Interface          ML18178A212
     Design Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018)...
    APR1400-E-I-NR-14008-NP, Human Factors                   ML18178A213
     Verification and Validation Implementation Plan,
     Rev. 3 (May 2018)...............................
    APR1400-E-I-NR-14010-NP, Human Factors                   ML18081A088
     Verification and Validation Scenarios, Rev. 2
     (January 2018)..................................
    APR1400-E-I-NR-14011-NP, Basic Human-System              ML18178A214
     Interface, Rev. 3 (May 2018)....................
    APR1400-E-I-NR-14012-NP, Style Guide, Rev. 2             ML18081A096
     (January 2018)..................................
    APR1400-E-J-NR-14001-NP, Component Interface             ML17094A131
     Module, Rev. 1 (March 2017).....................
    APR1400-E-J-NR-17001-NP, Secure Development and          ML18108A470
     Operational Environment for APR1400 Computer-
     Based I&C Safety Systems, Rev. 0 (September
     2017)...........................................
    APR1400-E-N-NR-14001-NP, Design Features To              ML18057B532
     Address GSI-191, Rev. 3 (February 2018).........
    APR1400-E-P-NR-14005-NP, Evaluations and Design          ML18044B042
     Enhancements To Incorporate Lessons Learned from
     Fukushima Dai-Ichi Nuclear Accident, Rev. 2
     (July 2017).....................................
    APR1400-E-S-NR-14004-NP, Evaluation of Effects of        ML18078A709
     HRHF Response Spectra on SSCs, Rev. 3 (December
     2017)...........................................
    APR1400-E-S-NR-14005-NP, Evaluation of Structure-        ML18078A699
     Soil-Structure Interaction (SSSI) Effects, Rev.
     2 (December 2017)...............................
    APR1400-E-S-NR-14006-NP, Stability Check for NI          ML18178A221
     Common Basemat, Rev. 5 (May 2018)...............
    APR1400-E-X-NR-14001-NP, Equipment Qualification         ML18214A563
     Program, Rev. 4 (July 2018).....................
    APR1400-F-A-NR-14001-NP, Small Break LOCA                ML17114A524
     Evaluation Model, Rev. 1 (March 2017)...........
    APR1400-F-A-NR-14003-NP, Post-LOCA Long Term             ML17114A526
     Cooling Evaluation Model, Rev. 1 (March 2017)...
    APR1400-F-A-TR-12004-NP-A, Realistic Evaluation          ML18233A431
     Methodology for Large-Break LOCA of the APR1400
     (August 2018)...................................
    APR1400-F-C-NR-14001-NP, CPC Setpoint Analysis           ML18199A563
     Methodology for APR1400, Rev. 3 (June 2018).....
    APR1400-F-C-NR-14002-NP, Functional Design               ML17094A132
     Requirements for a Core Operating Limit
     Supervisory System for APR1400, Rev. 1 (February
     2017)...........................................
    APR1400-F-C-NR-14003-NP, Functional Design               ML17114A522
     Requirements for a Core Protection Calculator
     System for APR1400, Rev. 1 (March 2017).........
    APR1400-F-C-TR-12002-NP-A, KCE-1 Critical Heat           ML17115A559
     Flux Correlation for PLUS7 Thermal Design (April
     2017)...........................................
    APR1400-F-M-TR-13001-NP-A, PLUS7 Fuel Design for         ML18232A140
     the APR1400 (August 2018).......................
    APR1400-H-N-NR-14005-NP, Summary Stress Report           ML18178A218
     for Primary Piping, Rev. 2 (September 2016).....
    APR1400-H-N-NR-14012-NP, Mechanical Analysis for         ML17244A015
     New and Spent Fuel Storage Racks, Rev. 3 (August
     2018)...........................................
    APR1400-K-I-NR-14005-NP, Staffing and                    ML17094A152
     Qualifications Implementation Plan, Rev. 1
     (February 2017).................................
    APR1400-K-I-NR-14009-NP, Design Implementation           ML17094A153
     Plan, Rev. 1 (February 2017)....................
    APR1400-K-Q-TR-11005-NP-A, KHNP Quality Assurance        ML18085B044
     Program Description (QAPD) for the APR1400
     Design Certification Rev. 2 (October 2016)......
    APR1400-Z-A-NR-14006-NP, Non-LOCA Safety Analysis        ML17094A139
     Methodology, Rev. 1 (February 2017).............
    APR1400-Z-A-NR-14007-NP, Mass and Energy Release         ML18212A338
     Methodologies for LOCA and MSLB, Rev. 2 (May
     2018)...........................................
    APR1400-Z-A-NR-14011-NP, Criticality Analysis of         ML18214A561
     New and Spent Fuel Storage Racks, Rev. 3 (May
     2018)...........................................
    APR1400-Z-A-NR-14019-NP, CCF Coping Analysis,            ML18225A340
     Rev. 3 (July 2018)..............................
    APR1400-Z-J-NR-14001-NP, Safety I&C System, Rev.         ML18212A341
     3 (May 2018)....................................
    APR1400-Z-J-NR-14002-NP, Diversity and Defense-in-       ML18214A557
     Depth, Rev. 3 (May 2018)........................
    APR1400-Z-J-NR-14003-NP, Software Program Manual,        ML18214A559
     Rev. 3 (May 2018)...............................
    APR1400-Z-J-NR-14004-NP, Uncertainty Methodology         ML18086B757
     and Application for Instrumentation, Rev. 2
     (January 2018)..................................
    APR1400-Z-J-NR-14005-NP, Setpoint Methodology for        ML18087A106
     Safety-Related Instrumentation, Rev. 2 (January
     2018)...........................................
    APR1400-Z-J-NR-14012-NP, Control System CCF              ML18212A343
     Analysis, Rev. 3 (May 2018).....................
    APR1400-Z-J-NR-14013-NP, Response Time Analysis          ML18087A110
     of Safety I&C System, Rev. 2 (January 2018).....
    APR1400-Z-M-NR-14008-NP, Pressure-Temperature            ML18087A112
     Limits Methodology for RCS Heatup and Cooldown,
     Rev. 1 (January 2018)...........................
    APR1400-Z-M-TR-12003-NP-A, Fluidic Device Design         ML17129A597
     for the APR1400 (April 2017)....................
Westinghouse Topical and Technical Report:
    WCAP-10697-NP-A, Common Qualified Platform               ML13112A108
     Topical Report, Rev. 3 (February 2013)..........
    WCAP-17889-NP (APR1400-A-N-NR-17001-NP),                 ML18044B051
     Validation of SCALE 6.1.2 with 238-Group ENDF/B-
     VII.0 Cross Section Library for APR1400 Design
     Certification, Rev. 0 (June 2014)...............
Combustion Engineering, Inc. Technical Reports:
    CEN-312-NP, Overview Description of the Core             ML19066A067
     Operating Limit Supervisory System (COLSS), Rev.
     01-NP (November 1986)...........................
    CEN-310-NP-A, CPC and Methodology Changes for the        ML19066A085
     CPC Improvement Program (April 1986)............
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NRC may post materials related to this document, including 
public comments, on the Federal Rulemaking website at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-2015-0224. The Federal 
Rulemaking website allows you to receive alerts when changes or 
additions occur in a docket folder. To subscribe: (1) Navigate to the 
docket folder (NRC-2015-0224); (2) click the ``Sign up for Email 
Alerts'' link; and (3) enter your email address and select how

[[Page 23450]]

frequently you would like to receive emails (daily, weekly, or 
monthly).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The regulatory history of the NRC's design certification 
reviews is a package of documents that is available in the NRC's PDR 
and NRC Library. This history spans the period during which the NRC 
simultaneously developed the regulatory standards for reviewing 
these designs and the form and content of the rules that certified 
the designs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

XVII. Procedures for Access to Proprietary and Safeguards Information 
for Preparation of Comments on the APR1400 Design Certification Rule

    This section contains instructions regarding how the non-publicly 
available documents related to this rule, and specifically those listed 
in Table 1.6-1 and 1.6-2 beginning on page 1.6-2 of Tier 2 of the DCD, 
may be accessed by interested persons who wish to comment on the design 
certification. These documents contain proprietary information and 
safeguards information (SGI). Requirements for access to SGI are 
primarily set forth in 10 CFR parts 2 and 73. This section provides 
information specific to this rule; however, nothing in this section is 
intended to conflict with the SGI regulations.
    Interested persons who desire access to proprietary information on 
the APR1400 design should first request access to that information from 
KEPCO/KHNP, the design certification applicant. A request for access 
should be submitted to the NRC if the applicant does not either grant 
or deny access by the 10-day deadline described in the following 
section.
    One of the non-publicly available documents, APR1400-E-A-NR-14002-
P-SGI, contains both proprietary information and SGI. If you need 
access to proprietary information in that document in order to develop 
comments within the scope of this rule, then your request for access 
should first be submitted to KEPCO/KHNP in accordance with the previous 
paragraph. By contrast, if you need access to the SGI in order to 
provide comments, then your request for access to the SGI must be 
submitted to the NRC as described further in this section. Therefore, 
if you need access to both proprietary information and SGI in that 
document then you should request access to the information in separate 
requests submitted to both KEPCO/KHNP and the NRC.

Submitting a Request to the NRC for Access

    Within 10 days after publication of this rule, any individual or 
entity who believes access to proprietary information or SGI is 
necessary in order to submit comments on this APR1400 design 
certification rule may request access to such information. Requests for 
access to proprietary information or SGI submitted more than 10 days 
after publication of this document will not be considered absent a 
showing of good cause for the late filing explaining why the request 
could not have been filed earlier.
    The requestor shall submit a letter requesting permission to access 
proprietary information and/or SGI to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications 
Staff, Washington, DC 20555-0001. The expedited delivery or courier 
mail address is: Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The email address for the 
Office of the Secretary is [email protected] The requester 
must send a copy of the request to the design certification applicant 
at the same time as the original transmission to the NRC using the same 
method of transmission. Requests to the applicant must be sent to Yun-
Ho Kim, President, KHNP Central Research Institute, 70, 1312-gil, 
Yuseong-daero, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 34101, Korea.
    The request must include the following information:
    1. The name of this design certification, APR1400 design 
certification; the rulemaking identification number, RIN 3150-AJ67; the 
rulemaking docket number, NRC-2015-0224; and the Federal Register 
citation for this rule.
    2. The name, address, and email or FAX number of the requester.
    3. If the requester is an entity, the name of the individual(s) to 
whom access is to be provided, including the identity of any expert, 
consultant, or assistant who will aid the requestor in evaluating the 
information.
    4. If the request is for proprietary information, the requester's 
need for the information in order to prepare meaningful comments on the 
design certification must be demonstrated. Each of the following areas 
must be addressed with specificity:
    a. The specific issue or subject matter on which the requester 
wishes to comment;
    b. An explanation why information that is publicly available is 
insufficient to provide the basis for developing meaningful comment on 
the APR1400 design certification rule with respect to the issue or 
subject matter described in paragraph 4.a. of this section; and
    c. The technical competence (demonstrable knowledge, skill, 
training or education) of the requestor to effectively utilize the 
requested proprietary information to provide the basis for meaningful 
comment. Technical competence may be shown by reliance on a qualified 
expert, consultant, or assistant who satisfies these criteria.
    d. A chronology and discussion of the requester's attempts to 
obtain the information from the design certification applicant, and the 
final communication from the requester to the applicant and the 
applicant's response, if any was provided, with respect to the request 
for access to proprietary information must be submitted.
    5. If the request is for SGI, a statement that explains each 
individual's ``need to know'' the SGI, as required by 10 CFR 73.2 and 
10 CFR 73.22(b)(1). Consistent with the definition of ``need to know'' 
as stated in 10 CFR 73.2, the statement must explain:
    a. The specific issue or subject matter on which the requester 
wishes to comment;
    b. An explanation of why publicly available information is 
insufficient to provide the basis for developing meaningful comment on 
the design certification with respect to the issue or subject matter 
described in paragraph 5.a. of this section and why the SGI requested 
is indispensable in order to develop meaningful comments; \4\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Broad SGI requests under these procedures are unlikely to 
meet the standard for need to know. Furthermore, NRC staff redaction 
of information from requested documents before their release may be 
appropriate to comport with this requirement. The procedures in this 
document do not authorize unrestricted disclosure or less scrutiny 
of a requester's need to know than ordinarily would be applied in 
connection with either adjudicatory or non-adjudicatory access to 
SGI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    c. The technical competence (demonstrable knowledge, skill, 
training or education) of the requestor to effectively utilize the 
requested SGI to provide the basis and specificity for meaningful 
comment. Technical competence may be shown by reliance on a qualified 
expert, consultant, or assistant who satisfies these criteria.
    d. A completed Form SF-85, ``Questionnaire for Non-Sensitive 
Positions,'' for each individual who would have access to SGI. The 
completed Form SF-85 will be used by the Office of Administration to 
conduct the background check required for access to SGI, as required by 
10 CFR part 2, subpart C, and 10 CFR 73.22(b)(2), to determine the 
requestor's trustworthiness and reliability. For security reasons, Form 
SF-85 can only be submitted electronically through the electronic 
questionnaire for investigations processing (e-QIP) website, a secure 
website that is owned and operated by the Office of Personnel 
Management. To obtain online access to

[[Page 23451]]

the form, the requestor should contact the NRC's Office of 
Administration at 301-415-3710.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The requester will be asked to provide his or her full name, 
social security number, date and place of birth, telephone number, 
and email address.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    e. A completed Form FD-258 (fingerprint card), signed in original 
ink, and submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 73.57(d). Copies of Form 
FD-258 may be obtained by writing the Office of Administrative 
Services, Mail Services Center, Mail Stop P1-37, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, or by email to 
[email protected]. The fingerprint card will be used to satisfy 
the requirements of 10 CFR part 2, subpart C, 10 CFR 73.22(b)(1), and 
Section 149 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, which 
mandates that all persons with access to SGI must be fingerprinted for 
an FBI identification and criminal history records check.
    f. A check or money order in the amount of $357.00 \6\ payable to 
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for each individual for whom the 
request for access has been submitted; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ This fee is subject to change pursuant to the Office of 
Personnel Management's adjustable billing rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    g. If the requester or any individual who will have access to SGI 
believes they belong to one or more of the categories of individuals 
relieved from the criminal history records check and background check 
requirements, as stated in 10 CFR 73.59, the requester should also 
provide a statement specifically stating which relief the requester is 
invoking, and explaining the requester's basis (including supporting 
documentation) for believing that the relief is applicable. While 
processing the request, the NRC's Office of Administration, Personnel 
Security Branch, will make a final determination whether the stated 
relief applies. Alternatively, the requester may contact the Office of 
Administration for an evaluation of their status prior to submitting 
the request. Persons who are not subject to the background check are 
not required to complete the SF-85 or Form FD-258; however, all other 
requirements for access to SGI, including the need to know, are still 
applicable.
    Copies of documents and materials required by paragraphs 5.d.-g., 
as applicable, of this section must be sent to the following address: 
Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Personnel 
Security Branch, Mail Stop TWF-07D04M, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
MD 20852. These documents and materials should not be included with the 
request letter to the Office of the Secretary, but the request letter 
should state that the forms and fees have been submitted as required.
    To avoid delays in processing requests for access to SGI, all forms 
should be reviewed for completeness and accuracy (including legibility) 
before submitting them to the NRC. The NRC will return incomplete or 
illegible packages to the sender without processing.
    Based on an evaluation of the information submitted under 
paragraphs 4.a.-4.d. or 5.a.-g. of this section, as applicable, the NRC 
staff will determine within 10 days of receipt of the written access 
request whether the requester has established a legitimate need for 
access to proprietary information or need to know the SGI requested.

Determination of Legitimate Need for Access

    For proprietary information access requests, if the NRC staff 
determines that the requester has established a legitimate need for 
access to proprietary information, the NRC staff will notify the 
requester in writing that access to proprietary information has been 
granted. The NRC staff must first notify the design certification 
applicant of the staff's determination to grant access to the requester 
not less than 10 days before informing the requester of the staff's 
decision. If the applicant wishes to challenge the NRC staff's 
determination, it must follow the procedures in Predisclosure 
Procedures for Proprietary Information Constituting Trade Secrets or 
Confidential Commercial or Financial Information of this section. The 
NRC staff will not provide access to disputed proprietary information 
to the requester until the procedures are completed as described in 
Predisclosure Procedures for Proprietary Information Constituting Trade 
Secrets or Confidential Commercial or Financial Information of this 
section. The written notification will contain instructions on how the 
requestor may obtain copies of the requested documents, and any other 
conditions that may apply to access to those documents. These 
conditions may include, but are not limited to, the signing of a Non-
Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit setting forth terms and conditions to 
prevent the unauthorized or inadvertent disclosure of proprietary 
information by each individual who will be granted access.
    For requests for access to SGI, if the NRC staff determines that 
the requester has established a need to know the SGI, the NRC's Office 
of Administration will then determine, based upon completion of the 
background check, whether the proposed recipient is trustworthy and 
reliable, as required for access to SGI by 10 CFR 73.22(b). If the 
NRC's Office of Administration determines that the individual or 
individuals are trustworthy and reliable, the NRC will promptly notify 
the requester in writing. The notification will provide the names of 
approved individuals as well as the conditions under which the SGI will 
be provided. Those conditions may include, but are not limited to, the 
signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit by each individual 
who will be granted access to SGI.

Release and Storage of SGI

    Prior to providing SGI to the requester, the NRC staff will conduct 
(as necessary) an inspection to confirm that the recipient's 
information protection system is sufficient to satisfy the requirements 
of 10 CFR 73.22. Alternatively, recipients may opt to view SGI at an 
approved SGI storage location rather than establish their own SGI 
protection program to meet SGI protection requirements.

Filing of Comments on the APR1400 Design Certification Rule Based on 
Non-Public Information

    Any comments in this rulemaking proceeding that are based upon the 
disclosed proprietary information or SGI must be filed by the requester 
no later than 25 days after receipt of (or access to) that information, 
or the close of the public comment period, whichever is later. The 
commenter must comply with all NRC requirements regarding the 
submission of proprietary information and SGI to the NRC when 
submitting comments to the NRC (including marking and transmission 
requirements).

Review of Denials of Access

    If the request for access to proprietary information or SGI is 
denied by the NRC staff, the NRC staff shall promptly notify the 
requester in writing, briefly stating the reason or reasons for the 
denial.
    Before the Office of Administration makes a final adverse 
determination regarding the trustworthiness and reliability of the 
proposed recipient(s) for access to SGI, the Office of Administration, 
in accordance with 10 CFR 2.336(f)(1)(iii), must provide the proposed 
recipient(s) any records that were considered in the trustworthiness 
and reliability determination, including those required to be provided 
under 10 CFR 73.57(e)(1), so that the proposed recipient(s) have an 
opportunity to correct or explain the record.

[[Page 23452]]

    Appeals from a denial of access must be made to the NRC's Executive 
Director for Operations (EDO) under 10 CFR 9.29. The decision of the 
EDO constitutes final agency action under 10 CFR 9.29(d).

Predisclosure Procedures for Proprietary Information Constituting Trade 
Secrets or Confidential Commercial or Financial Information

    The NRC will follow the procedures in 10 CFR 9.28 if the NRC staff 
determines, under the Determination of Legitimate Need for Access of 
this section, that access to proprietary information constituting trade 
secrets or confidential commercial or financial information will be 
provided to the requester. However, any objection filed by the 
applicant under 10 CFR 9.28(b) must be filed within 15 days of the NRC 
staff notice in the Determination of Legitimate Need for Access of this 
section rather than the 30-day period provided for under 10 CFR 
9.28(b). In applying the provisions of 10 CFR 9.28, the applicant for 
the design certification rule will be treated as the ``submitter.''

XVIII. Incorporation by Reference--Reasonable Availability to 
Interested Parties

    The NRC is incorporating by reference the APR1400 design control 
document, revision 3. As described in the ``Discussion'' section of 
this document, the generic design control document combined into a 
single document Tier 1 and Tier 2 information (including the technical 
and topical reports referenced in Chapter 1) and generic technical 
specifications in order to effectively control this information and 
facilitate its incorporation by reference into the rule.
    The NRC is required by law to obtain approval for incorporation by 
reference from the Office of the Federal Register (OFR). The OFR's 
requirements for incorporation by reference are set forth in 1 CFR part 
51. The OFR regulations require an agency to include in a direct final 
rule a discussion of the ways that the materials the agency 
incorporates by reference are reasonably available to interested 
parties or how it worked to make those materials reasonably available 
to interested parties. The discussion in this section complies with the 
requirement for direct final rules as set forth in 1 CFR 51.5(b)(2).
    The NRC considers ``interested parties'' to include all potential 
NRC stakeholders, not only the individuals and entities regulated or 
otherwise subject to the NRC's regulatory oversight. These NRC 
stakeholders are not a homogenous group but vary with respect to the 
considerations for determining reasonable availability. Therefore, the 
NRC distinguishes between different classes of interested parties for 
the purposes of determining whether the material is ``reasonably 
available.'' The NRC considers the following to be classes of 
interested parties in NRC rulemakings with regard to the material to be 
incorporated by reference:
     Individuals and small entities regulated or otherwise 
subject to the NRC's regulatory oversight (this class also includes 
applicants and potential applicants or licenses and other NRC 
regulatory approvals) and who are subject to the material to be 
incorporated by reference by rulemaking. In this context, ``small 
entities'' has the same meaning as a ``small entity'' under 10 CFR 
2.810.
     Large entities otherwise subject to the NRC's regulatory 
oversight (this class also includes applicants and potential applicants 
for licenses and other NRC regulatory approvals) and who are subject to 
the material to be incorporated by reference by rulemaking. In this 
context, ``large entities'' are those that do not qualify as a ``small 
entity'' under 10 CFR 2.810.
     Non-governmental organizations with institutional 
interests in the matters regulated by the NRC.
     Other Federal agencies, states, local governmental bodies 
(within the meaning of 10 CFR 2.315(c)).
     Federally-recognized and State-recognized \7\ Indian 
tribes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ State-recognized Indian tribes are not within the scope of 
10 CFR 2.315(c). However, for purposes of the NRC's compliance with 
1 CFR 51.5, ``interested parties'' includes a broad set of 
stakeholders, including State-recognized Indian tribes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Members of the general public (i.e., individual, 
unaffiliated members of the public who are not regulated or otherwise 
subject to the NRC's regulatory oversight) who may wish to gain access 
to the materials which the NRC incorporates by reference by rulemaking 
in order to participate in the rulemaking process.
    The NRC makes the materials incorporated by reference available for 
inspection to all interested parties, by appointment, at the NRC 
Technical Library, which is located at Two White Flint North, 11545 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852; telephone: 301-415-7000; 
email: [email protected]. In addition, as described in Section 
XVI of this notice, documents related to this rule are available online 
in the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) 
Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
    The NRC concludes that the materials the NRC is incorporating by 
reference in this rule are reasonably available to all interested 
parties because the materials are available to all interested parties 
in multiple ways and in a manner consistent with their interest in the 
materials.

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 52

    Administrative practice and procedure, Antitrust, Combined license, 
Early site permit, Emergency planning, Fees, Incorporation by 
reference, Inspection, Issue finality, Limited work authorization, 
Nuclear power plants and reactors, Probabilistic risk assessment, 
Prototype, Reactor siting criteria, Redress of site, Penalties, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Standard design, Standard 
design certification.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of 
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization 
Act of 1974, as amended; the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as 
amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553, the NRC is amending 10 CFR part 52 
as follows:

PART 52--LICENSES, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS FOR NUCLEAR POWER 
PLANTS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Atomic Energy Act of 1954, secs. 103, 104, 147, 149, 
161, 181, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189, 223, 234 (42 U.S.C. 2133, 2134, 
2167, 2169, 2201, 2231, 2232, 2233, 2235, 2236, 2239, 2273, 2282); 
Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, secs. 201, 202, 206, 211 (42 
U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846, 5851); 44 U.S.C. 3504 note.


Sec.  52.11   [Amended]

0
2. In Sec.  52.11, paragraph (b), add ``F,'' after ``E,''.

0
3. Add appendix F to part 52 to read as follows:

Appendix F to Part 52--Design Certification Rule for the APR1400 Design

I. Introduction

    Appendix F constitutes the standard design certification for the 
Advanced Power Reactor 1400 (APR1400) design, in accordance with 10 
CFR part 52, subpart B. The applicant for certification of the 
APR1400 design is Korea Electric Power Corporation and Korea Hydro & 
Nuclear Power Co., Ltd. (KEPCO/KHNP).

II. Definitions

    A. Generic design control document (generic DCD) means the 
document containing the Tier 1 and Tier 2 information (including the 
technical and topical reports referenced in Chapter 1) and generic

[[Page 23453]]

technical specifications that is incorporated by reference into this 
appendix.
    B. Generic technical specifications (generic TS) means the 
information required by 10 CFR 50.36 and 50.36a for the portion of 
the plant that is within the scope of this appendix.
    C. Plant-specific DCD means that portion of the combined license 
(COL) final safety analysis report that sets forth both the generic 
DCD information and any plant-specific changes to generic DCD 
information.
    D. Tier 1 means the portion of the design-related information 
contained in the generic DCD that is approved and certified by this 
appendix (Tier 1 information). The design descriptions, interface 
requirements, and site parameters are derived from Tier 2 
information. Tier 1 information includes:
    1. Definitions and general provisions;
    2. Design descriptions;
    3. Inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria 
(ITAAC);
    4. Significant site parameters; and
    5. Significant interface requirements.
    E. Tier 2 means the portion of the design-related information 
contained in the generic DCD that is approved but not certified by 
this appendix (Tier 2 information). Compliance with Tier 2 is 
required, but generic changes to and plant-specific departures from 
Tier 2 are governed by Section VIII of this appendix. Compliance 
with Tier 2 provides a sufficient, but not the only acceptable, 
method for complying with Tier 1. Compliance methods differing from 
Tier 2 must satisfy the change process in Section VIII of this 
appendix. Regardless of these differences, an applicant or licensee 
must meet the requirement in paragraph III.B of this appendix to 
reference Tier 2 when referencing Tier 1. Tier 2 information 
includes:
    1. Information required by Sec.  52.47(a) and (c), with the 
exception of generic TS and conceptual design information;
    2. Supporting information on the inspections, tests, and 
analyses that will be performed to demonstrate that the acceptance 
criteria in the ITAAC have been met; and
    3. COL Items (COL license information), which identify certain 
matters that must be addressed in the site-specific portion of the 
final safety analysis report by an applicant who references this 
appendix. These items constitute information requirements but are 
not the only acceptable set of information in the final safety 
analysis report. An applicant may depart from or omit these items, 
provided that the departure or omission is identified and justified 
in the final safety analysis report. After issuance of a 
construction permit or COL, these items are not requirements for the 
licensee unless such items are restated in the final safety analysis 
report.
    F. Departure from a method of evaluation described in the plant-
specific DCD used in establishing the design bases or in the safety 
analyses means:
    1. Changing any of the elements of the method described in the 
plant-specific DCD unless the results of the analysis are 
conservative or essentially the same; or
    2. Changing from a method described in the plant-specific DCD to 
another method unless that method has been approved by the NRC for 
the intended application.
    G. All other terms in this appendix have the meaning set out in 
10 CFR 50.2, 10 CFR 52.1, or Section 11 of the Atomic Energy Act of 
1954, as amended, as applicable.

III. Scope and Contents

    A. Incorporation by reference approval. The APR1400 material is 
approved for incorporation by reference by the Director of the 
Office of the Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 
51. You may obtain copies of the generic DCD from Yun-Ho Kim, 
President, KHNP Central Research Institute, 70, 1312-gil, Yuseong-
daero, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 34101, Korea. You can view the generic 
DCD online in the NRC Library at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. In ADAMS, search under ADAMS Accession No. ML18228A667. 
If you do not have access to ADAMS or if you have problems accessing 
documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC's Public Document Room 
(PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, at 301-415-3747, or by 
email at [email protected] Copies of this document are available 
for examination and copying at the NRC's PDR located at Room O1-F21, 
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 
20852. Copies are also available for examination at the NRC Library 
located at Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 
Maryland 20852, telephone: 301-415-5610, email: 
[email protected]. All approved material is available for 
inspection at the National Archives and Records Administration 
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at 
NARA, call 202-741-6030 or go to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html.
    1. Korea Electric Power Corporation and Korea Hydro & Nuclear 
Power Co, Ltd
    a. APR1400 Design Control Document Tier 1 (APR1400-K-X-IT-14001-
NP), Revision 3 (August 2018).
    b. APR1400 Design Control Document Tier 2 (APR1400-K-X-FS-14002-
NP), Revision 3 (August 2018), including:
    i. Chapter 1, Introduction and General Description of the Plant.
    ii. Chapter 2, Site Characteristics.
    iii. Chapter 3, Design of Structures, Systems, Components, and 
Equipment.
    iv. Chapter 4, Reactor.
    v. Chapter 5, Reactor Coolant System and Connecting Systems.
    vi. Chapter 6, Engineered Safety Features.
    vii. Chapter 7, Instrumentation and Controls.
    viii. Chapter 8, Electric Power.
    ix. Chapter 9, Auxiliary Systems.
    x. Chapter 10, Steam and Power Conversion System.
    xi. Chapter 11, Radioactive Waste Management.
    xii. Chapter 12, Radiation Protection.
    xiii. Chapter 13, Conduct of Operations.
    xiv. Chapter 14, Verification Programs.
    xv. Chapter 15, Transient and Accident Analyses.
    xvi. Chapter 16, Technical Specifications.
    xvii. Chapter 17, Quality Assurance and Reliability Assurance.
    xviii. Chapter 18, Human Factors Engineering.
    xix. Chapter 19, Probabilistic Risk Assessment and Severe 
Accident Evaluation.
    c. APR1400-E-B-NR-16001-NP, Evaluation of Main Steam and 
Feedwater Piping Applied to the Graded Approach for the APR1400, 
Rev. 0 (July 2017).
    d. APR1400-E-B-NR-16002-NP, Evaluation of Safety Injection and 
Shutdown Cooling Piping Applied to the Graded Approach for the 
APR1400, Rev. 1 (May 2018).
    e. APR1400-E-I-NR-14001-NP, Human Factors Engineering Program 
Plan, Rev. 4 (July 2018).
    f. APR1400-E-I-NR-14002-NP, Operating Experience Review 
Implementation Plan, Rev. 2 (January 2018).
    g. APR1400-E-I-NR-14003-NP, Functional Requirements Analysis and 
Function Allocation Implementation Plan, Rev. 2 (January 2018).
    h. APR1400-E-I-NR-14004-NP, Task Analysis Implementation Plan, 
Rev. 3 (May 2018).
    i. APR1400-E-I-NR-14006-NP, Treatment of Important Human Actions 
Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018).
    j. APR1400-E-I-NR-14007-NP, Human-System Interface Design 
Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018).
    k. APR1400-E-I-NR-14008-NP, Human Factors Verification and 
Validation Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018).
    l. APR1400-E-I-NR-14010-NP, Human Factors Verification and 
Validation Scenarios, Rev. 2 (January 2018).
    m. APR1400-E-I-NR-14011-NP, Basic Human-System Interface, Rev. 3 
(May 2018).
    n. APR1400-E-I-NR-14012-NP, Style Guide, Rev. 2 (January 2018).
    o. APR1400-E-J-NR-14001-NP, Component Interface Module, Rev. 1 
(March 2017).
    p. APR1400-E-J-NR-17001-NP, Secure Development and Operational 
Environment for APR1400 Computer-Based I&C Safety Systems, Rev. 0 
(September 2017).
    q. APR1400-E-N-NR-14001-NP, Design Features To Address GSI-191, 
Rev. 3 (February 2018).
    r. APR1400-E-P-NR-14005-NP, Evaluations and Design Enhancements 
To Incorporate Lessons Learned from Fukushima Dai-Ichi Nuclear 
Accident, Rev. 2 (July 2017).
    s. APR1400-E-S-NR-14004-NP, Evaluation of Effects of HRHF 
Response Spectra on SSCs, Rev. 3 (December 2017).
    t. APR1400-E-S-NR-14005-NP, Evaluation of Structure-Soil-
Structure Interaction (SSSI) Effects, Rev. 2 (December 2017).
    u. APR1400-E-S-NR-14006-NP, Stability Check for NI Common 
Basemat, Rev. 5 (May 2018).
    v. APR1400-E-X-NR-14001-NP, Equipment Qualification Program, 
Rev. 4 (July 2018).
    w. APR1400-F-A-NR-14001-NP, Small Break LOCA Evaluation Model, 
Rev. 1 (March 2017).
    x. APR1400-F-A-NR-14003-NP, Post-LOCA Long Term Cooling 
Evaluation Model, Rev. 1 (March 2017).

[[Page 23454]]

    y. APR1400-F-A-TR-12004-NP-A, Realistic Evaluation Methodology 
for Large-Break LOCA of the APR1400 (August 2018).
    z. APR1400-F-C-NR-14001-NP, CPC Setpoint Analysis Methodology 
for APR1400, Rev. 3 (June 2018).
    aa. APR1400-F-C-NR-14002-NP, Functional Design Requirements for 
a Core Operating Limit Supervisory System for APR1400, Rev. 1 
(February 2017).
    ab. APR1400-F-C-NR-14003-NP, Functional Design Requirements for 
a Core Protection Calculator System for APR1400, Rev. 1 (March 
2017).
    ac. APR1400-F-C-TR-12002-NP-A, KCE-1 Critical Heat Flux 
Correlation for PLUS7 Thermal Design (April 2017).
    ad. APR1400-F-M-TR-13001-NP-A, PLUS7 Fuel Design for the APR1400 
(August 2018).
    ae. APR1400-H-N-NR-14005-NP, Summary Stress Report for Primary 
Piping, Rev. 2 (September 2016).
    af. APR1400-H-N-NR-14012-NP, Mechanical Analysis for New and 
Spent Fuel Storage Racks, Rev. 3 (August 2017).
    ag. APR1400-K-I-NR-14005-NP, Staffing and Qualifications 
Implementation Plan, Rev. 1 (February 2017).
    ah. APR1400-K-I-NR-14009-NP, Design Implementation Plan, Rev. 1 
(February 2017).
    ai. APR1400-K-Q-TR-11005-NP-A, KHNP Quality Assurance Program 
Description (QAPD) for the APR1400 Design Certification, Rev. 2 
(October 2016).
    aj. APR1400-Z-A-NR-14006-NP, Non-LOCA Safety Analysis 
Methodology, Rev. 1 (February 2017).
    ak. APR1400-Z-A-NR-14007-NP, Mass and Energy Release 
Methodologies for LOCA and MSLB, Rev. 2 (May 2018).
    al. APR1400-Z-A-NR-14011-NP, Criticality Analysis of New and 
Spent Fuel Storage Racks, Rev. 3 (May 2018).
    am. APR1400-Z-A-NR-14019-NP, CCF Coping Analysis, Rev. 3 (July 
2018).
    an. APR1400-Z-J-NR-14001-NP, Safety I&C System, Rev. 3 (May 
2018).
    ao. APR1400-Z-J-NR-14002-NP, Diversity and Defense-in-Depth, 
Rev. 3 (May 2018).
    ap. APR1400-Z-J-NR-14003-NP, Software Program Manual, Rev. 3 
(May 2018).
    aq. APR1400-Z-J-NR-14004-NP, Uncertainty Methodology and 
Application for Instrumentation, Rev. 2 (January 2018).
    ar. APR1400-Z-J-NR-14005-NP, Setpoint Methodology for Safety-
Related Instrumentation, Rev. 2 (January 2018).
    as. APR1400-Z-J-NR-14012-NP, Control System CCF Analysis, Rev. 3 
(May 2018).
    at. APR1400-Z-J-NR-14013-NP, Response Time Analysis of Safety 
I&C System, Rev. 2 (January 2018).
    au. APR1400-Z-M-NR-14008-NP, Pressure-Temperature Limits 
Methodology for RCS Heatup and Cooldown, Rev. 1 (January 2018).
    av. APR1400-Z-M-TR-12003-NP-A, Fluidic Device Design for the 
APR1400 (April 2017).
    2. Combustion Engineering, Inc.
    a. CEN-310-NP-A, CPC and Methodology Changes for the CPC 
Improvement Program (April 1986).
    b. CEN-312-NP, Overview Description of the Core Operating Limit 
Supervisory System (COLSS), Rev. 01-NP (November 1986).
    3. Westinghouse
    a. WCAP-10697-NP-A, Common Qualified Platform Topical Report, 
Rev. 3 (February 2013).
    b. WCAP-17889-NP (APR1400-A-N-NR-17001-NP), Validation of SCALE 
6.1.2 with 238-Group ENDF/B-VII.0 Cross Section Library for APR1400 
Design Certification, Rev. 0 (June 2014).
    B. An applicant or licensee referencing this appendix, in 
accordance with Section IV of this appendix, shall incorporate by 
reference and comply with the requirements of this appendix except 
as otherwise provided in this appendix.
    C. If there is a conflict between Tier 1 and Tier 2 of the DCD, 
then Tier 1 controls.
    D. If there is a conflict between the generic DCD and either the 
application for the design certification of the APR1400 design or 
the NUREG, ``Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to Certification 
of the APR1400 Standard Design,'' then the generic DCD controls.
    E. Design activities for structures, systems, and components 
that are entirely outside the scope of this appendix may be 
performed using site characteristics, provided the design activities 
do not affect the DCD or conflict with the interface requirements.

IV. Additional Requirements and Restrictions

    A. An applicant for a COL that wishes to reference this appendix 
shall, in addition to complying with the requirements of Sec. Sec.  
52.77, 52.79, and 52.80, comply with the following requirements:
    1. Incorporate by reference, as part of its application, this 
appendix.
    2. Include, as part of its application:
    a. A plant-specific DCD containing the same type of information 
and using the same organization and numbering as the generic DCD for 
the APR1400 design, either by including or incorporating by 
reference the generic DCD information, and as modified and 
supplemented by the applicant's exemptions and departures;
    b. The reports on departures from and updates to the plant-
specific DCD required by paragraph X.B of this appendix;
    c. Plant-specific TS, consisting of the generic and site-
specific TS that are required by 10 CFR 50.36 and 50.36a;
    d. Information demonstrating that the site characteristics fall 
within the site parameters and that the interface requirements have 
been met;
    e. Information that addresses the COL items; and
    f. Information required by Sec.  52.47(a) that is not within the 
scope of this appendix.
    3. Include, in the plant-specific DCD, the sensitive, 
unclassified, non-safeguards information (including proprietary 
information and security-related information) and safeguards 
information referenced in the APR1400 generic DCD.
    4. Include, as part of its application, a demonstration that an 
entity other than KEPCO/KHNP is qualified to supply the APR1400 
design, unless KEPCO/KHNP supplies the design for the applicant's 
use.
    B. The Commission reserves the right to determine in what manner 
this appendix may be referenced by an applicant for a construction 
permit or operating license under 10 CFR part 50.

V. Applicable Regulations

    A. Except as indicated in paragraph B of this section, the 
regulations that apply to the APR1400 design are in 10 CFR parts 20, 
50, 52, 73, and 100, codified as of September 19, 2019, that are 
applicable and technically relevant, as described in the final 
safety evaluation report.
    B. The APR1400 design is exempt from portions of the following 
regulations:
    1. Paragraph (f)(2)(iv) of 10 CFR 50.34--Contents of 
Applications: Technical Information--codified as of September 19, 
2019.

VI. Issue Resolution

    A. The Commission has determined that the structures, systems, 
and components and design features of the APR1400 design comply with 
the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the 
applicable regulations identified in Section V of this appendix; and 
therefore, provide adequate protection to the health and safety of 
the public. A conclusion that a matter is resolved includes the 
finding that additional or alternative structures, systems, and 
components, design features, design criteria, testing, analyses, 
acceptance criteria, or justifications are not necessary for the 
APR1400 design.
    B. The Commission considers the following matters resolved 
within the meaning of Sec.  52.63(a)(5) in subsequent proceedings 
for issuance of a COL, amendment of a COL, or renewal of a COL, 
proceedings held under Sec.  52.103, and enforcement proceedings 
involving plants referencing this appendix:
    1. All nuclear safety issues associated with the information in 
the final safety evaluation report, Tier 1, Tier 2, and the 
rulemaking record for certification of the APR1400 design, with the 
exception of generic TS and other operational requirements;
    2. All nuclear safety and safeguards issues associated with the 
referenced information in the 53 non-public documents in Tables 1.6-
1 and 1.6-2 of Tier 2 of the DCD, which contain sensitive 
unclassified non-safeguards information (including proprietary 
information and security-related information) and safeguards 
information and which, in context, are intended as requirements in 
the generic DCD for the APR1400 design;
    3. All generic changes to the DCD under and in compliance with 
the change processes in paragraphs VIII.A.1 and VIII.B.1 of this 
appendix;
    4. All exemptions from the DCD under and in compliance with the 
change processes in paragraphs VIII.A.4 and VIII.B.4 of this 
appendix, but only for that plant;
    5. All departures from the DCD that are approved by license 
amendment, but only for that plant;
    6. Except as provided in paragraph VIII.B.5.f of this appendix, 
all departures from Tier 2 under and in compliance with the change 
processes in paragraph VIII.B.5 of this appendix that do not require 
prior NRC approval, but only for that plant; and

[[Page 23455]]

    7. All environmental issues concerning severe accident 
mitigation design alternatives associated with the information in 
the NRC's environmental assessment for the APR1400 design (ADAMS 
Accession No. ML18306A607) and APR1400-E-P-NR-14006, Revision 2, 
``Severe Accident Mitigation Design Alternatives (SAMDAs) for the 
APR1400'' (ML18235A158) for plants referencing this appendix whose 
site characteristics fall within those site parameters specified in 
APR1400-E-P-NR-14006.
    C. The Commission does not consider operational requirements for 
an applicant or licensee who references this appendix to be matters 
resolved within the meaning of Sec.  52.63(a)(5). The Commission 
reserves the right to require operational requirements for an 
applicant or licensee who references this appendix by rule, 
regulation, order, or license condition.
    D. Except under the change processes in Section VIII of this 
appendix, the Commission may not require an applicant or licensee 
who references this appendix to:
    1. Modify structures, systems, components, or design features as 
described in the generic DCD;
    2. Provide additional or alternative structures, systems, 
components, or design features not discussed in the generic DCD; or
    3. Provide additional or alternative design criteria, testing, 
analyses, acceptance criteria, or justification for structures, 
systems, components, or design features discussed in the generic 
DCD.
    E. The NRC will specify, at an appropriate time, the procedures 
to be used by an interested person who wishes to review portions of 
the design certification or references containing safeguards 
information or sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information 
(including proprietary information, such as trade secrets and 
commercial or financial information obtained from a person that are 
privileged or confidential (10 CFR 2.390 and 10 CFR part 9), and 
security-related information), for the purpose of participating in 
the hearing required by Sec.  52.85, the hearing provided under 
Sec.  52.103, or in any other proceeding relating to this appendix, 
in which interested persons have a right to request an adjudicatory 
hearing.

VII. Duration of This Appendix

    This appendix may be referenced for a period of 15 years from 
September 19, 2019, except as provided for in Sec. Sec.  52.55(b) 
and 52.57(b). This appendix remains valid for an applicant or 
licensee who references this appendix until the application is 
withdrawn or the license expires, including any period of extended 
operation under a renewed license.

VIII. Processes for Changes and Departures

A. Tier 1 Information

    1. Generic changes to Tier 1 information are governed by the 
requirements in Sec.  52.63(a)(1).
    2. Generic changes to Tier 1 information are applicable to all 
applicants or licensees who reference this appendix, except those 
for which the change has been rendered technically irrelevant by 
action taken under paragraphs A.3 or A.4 of this section.
    3. Departures from Tier 1 information that are required by the 
Commission through plant-specific orders are governed by the 
requirements in Sec.  52.63(a)(4).
    4. Exemptions from Tier 1 information are governed by the 
requirements in Sec. Sec.  52.63(b)(1) and 52.98(f). The Commission 
will deny a request for an exemption from Tier 1, if it finds that 
the design change will result in a significant decrease in the level 
of safety otherwise provided by the design.

B. Tier 2 Information

    1. Generic changes to Tier 2 information are governed by the 
requirements in Sec.  52.63(a)(1).
    2. Generic changes to Tier 2 information are applicable to all 
applicants or licensees who reference this appendix, except those 
for which the change has been rendered technically irrelevant by 
action taken under paragraphs B.3, B.4, or B.5, of this section.
    3. The Commission may not require new requirements on Tier 2 
information by plant-specific order, while this appendix is in 
effect under Sec.  52.55 or Sec.  52.61, unless:
    a. A modification is necessary to secure compliance with the 
Commission's regulations applicable and in effect at the time this 
appendix was approved, as set forth in Section V of this appendix, 
or to ensure adequate protection of the public health and safety or 
the common defense and security; and
    b. Special circumstances as defined in 10 CFR 50.12(a) are 
present.
    4. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix may 
request an exemption from Tier 2 information. The Commission may 
grant such a request only if it determines that the exemption will 
comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.12(a). The Commission will 
deny a request for an exemption from Tier 2, if it finds that the 
design change will result in a significant decrease in the level of 
safety otherwise provided by the design. The granting of an 
exemption to an applicant must be subject to litigation in the same 
manner as other issues material to the license hearing. The granting 
of an exemption to a licensee must be subject to an opportunity for 
a hearing in the same manner as license amendments.
    5.a. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix may 
depart from Tier 2 information, without prior NRC approval, unless 
the proposed departure involves a change to or departure from Tier 1 
information, or the TS, or requires a license amendment under 
paragraph B.5.b or B.5.c of this section. When evaluating the 
proposed departure, an applicant or licensee shall consider all 
matters described in the plant-specific DCD.
    b. A proposed departure from Tier 2, other than one affecting 
resolution of a severe accident issue identified in the plant-
specific DCD or one affecting information required by Sec.  
52.47(a)(28) to address aircraft impacts, requires a license 
amendment if it would:
    (1) Result in more than a minimal increase in the frequency of 
occurrence of an accident previously evaluated in the plant-specific 
DCD;
    (2) Result in more than a minimal increase in the likelihood of 
occurrence of a malfunction of a structure, system, or component 
important to safety and previously evaluated in the plant-specific 
DCD;
    (3) Result in more than a minimal increase in the consequences 
of an accident previously evaluated in the plant-specific DCD;
    (4) Result in more than a minimal increase in the consequences 
of a malfunction of a structure, system, or component important to 
safety previously evaluated in the plant-specific DCD;
    (5) Create a possibility for an accident of a different type 
than any evaluated previously in the plant-specific DCD;
    (6) Create a possibility for a malfunction of a structure, 
system, or component important to safety with a different result 
than any evaluated previously in the plant-specific DCD;
    (7) Result in a design-basis limit for a fission product barrier 
as described in the plant-specific DCD being exceeded or altered; or
    (8) Result in a departure from a method of evaluation described 
in the plant-specific DCD used in establishing the design bases or 
in the safety analyses.
    c. A proposed departure from Tier 2, affecting resolution of an 
ex-vessel severe accident design feature identified in the plant-
specific DCD, requires a license amendment if:
    (1) There is a substantial increase in the probability of an ex-
vessel severe accident such that a particular ex-vessel severe 
accident previously reviewed and determined to be not credible could 
become credible; or
    (2) There is a substantial increase in the consequences to the 
public of a particular ex-vessel severe accident previously 
reviewed.
    d. A proposed departure from Tier 2 information required by 
Sec.  52.47(a)(28) to address aircraft impacts shall consider the 
effect of the changed design feature or functional capability on the 
original aircraft impact assessment required by 10 CFR 50.150(a). 
The applicant or licensee shall describe, in the plant-specific DCD, 
how the modified design features and functional capabilities 
continue to meet the aircraft impact assessment requirements in 10 
CFR 50.150(a)(1).
    e. If a departure requires a license amendment under paragraph 
B.5.b or B.5.c of this section, it is governed by 10 CFR 50.90.
    f. A departure from Tier 2 information that is made under 
paragraph B.5 of this section does not require an exemption from 
this appendix.
    g. A party to an adjudicatory proceeding for either the 
issuance, amendment, or renewal of a license or for operation under 
Sec.  52.103(a), who believes that an applicant or licensee who 
references this appendix has not complied with paragraph VIII.B.5 of 
this appendix when departing from Tier 2 information, may petition 
to admit into the proceeding such a contention. In addition to 
complying with the general requirements of 10 CFR 2.309, the 
petition must demonstrate that the departure does not comply with

[[Page 23456]]

paragraph VIII.B.5 of this appendix. Further, the petition must 
demonstrate that the change bears on an asserted noncompliance with 
an ITAAC acceptance criterion in the case of a Sec.  52.103 
preoperational hearing, or that the change bears directly on the 
amendment request in the case of a hearing on a license amendment. 
Any other party may file a response. If, on the basis of the 
petition and any response, the presiding officer determines that a 
sufficient showing has been made, the presiding officer shall 
certify the matter directly to the Commission for determination of 
the admissibility of the contention. The Commission may admit such a 
contention if it determines the petition raises a genuine issue of 
material fact regarding compliance with paragraph VIII.B.5 of this 
appendix.

C. Operational Requirements

    1. Changes to APR1400 DC generic TS and other operational 
requirements that were completely reviewed and approved in the 
design certification rulemaking and do not require a change to a 
design feature in the generic DCD are governed by the requirements 
in 10 CFR 50.109. Changes that require a change to a design feature 
in the generic DCD are governed by the requirements in paragraphs A 
or B of this section.
    2. Changes to APR1400 DC generic TS and other operational 
requirements are applicable to all applicants who reference this 
appendix, except those for which the change has been rendered 
technically irrelevant by action taken under paragraphs C.3 or C.4 
of this section.
    3. The Commission may require plant-specific departures on 
generic TS and other operational requirements that were completely 
reviewed and approved, provided a change to a design feature in the 
generic DCD is not required and special circumstances, as defined in 
10 CFR 2.335 are present. The Commission may modify or supplement 
generic TS and other operational requirements that were not 
completely reviewed and approved or require additional TS and other 
operational requirements on a plant-specific basis, provided a 
change to a design feature in the generic DCD is not required.
    4. An applicant who references this appendix may request an 
exemption from the generic TS or other operational requirements. The 
Commission may grant such a request only if it determines that the 
exemption will comply with the requirements of Sec.  52.7. The 
granting of an exemption must be subject to litigation in the same 
manner as other issues material to the license hearing.
    5. A party to an adjudicatory proceeding for the issuance, 
amendment, or renewal of a license, or for operation under Sec.  
52.103(a), who believes that an operational requirement approved in 
the DCD or a TS derived from the generic TS must be changed, may 
petition to admit such a contention into the proceeding. The 
petition must comply with the general requirements of 10 CFR 2.309 
and must demonstrate why special circumstances as defined in 10 CFR 
2.335 are present, or demonstrate compliance with the Commission's 
regulations in effect at the time this appendix was approved, as set 
forth in Section V of this appendix. Any other party may file a 
response to the petition. If, on the basis of the petition and any 
response, the presiding officer determines that a sufficient showing 
has been made, the presiding officer shall certify the matter 
directly to the Commission for determination of the admissibility of 
the contention. All other issues with respect to the plant-specific 
TS or other operational requirements are subject to a hearing as 
part of the licensing proceeding.
    6. After issuance of a license, the generic TS have no further 
effect on the plant-specific TS. Changes to the plant-specific TS 
will be treated as license amendments under 10 CFR 50.90.

IX. [Reserved]

X. Records and Reporting

A. Records

    1. The applicant for this appendix shall maintain a copy of the 
generic DCD that includes all generic changes that are made to Tier 
1 and Tier 2, and the generic TS and other operational requirements. 
The applicant shall maintain the sensitive unclassified non-
safeguards information (including proprietary information and 
security-related information) and safeguards information referenced 
in the generic DCD for the period that this appendix may be 
referenced, as specified in Section VII of this appendix.
    2. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix shall 
maintain the plant-specific DCD to accurately reflect both generic 
changes to the generic DCD and plant-specific departures made under 
Section VIII of this appendix throughout the period of application 
and for the term of the license (including any periods of renewal).
    3. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix shall 
prepare and maintain written evaluations which provide the bases for 
the determinations required by Section VIII of this appendix. These 
evaluations must be retained throughout the period of application 
and for the term of the license (including any periods of renewal).
    4.a. The applicant for the APR1400 design shall maintain a copy 
of the aircraft impact assessment performed to comply with the 
requirements of 10 CFR 50.150(a) for the term of the certification 
(including any period of renewal).
    b. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix shall 
maintain a copy of the aircraft impact assessment performed to 
comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.150(a) throughout the 
pendency of the application and for the term of the license 
(including any periods of renewal).

B. Reporting

    1. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix shall 
submit a report to the NRC containing a brief description of any 
plant-specific departures from the DCD, including a summary of the 
evaluation of each departure. This report must be filed in 
accordance with the filing requirements applicable to reports in 
Sec.  52.3.
    2. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix shall 
submit updates to its plant-specific DCD, which reflect the generic 
changes to and plant-specific departures from the generic DCD made 
under Section VIII of this appendix. These updates shall be filed 
under the filing requirements applicable to final safety analysis 
report updates in 10 CFR 50.71(e) and 52.3.
    3. The reports and updates required by paragraphs X.B.1 and 
X.B.2 of this appendix must be submitted as follows:
    a. On the date that an application for a license referencing 
this appendix is submitted, the application must include the report 
and any updates to the generic DCD.
    b. During the interval from the date of application for a 
license to the date the Commission makes its finding required by 
Sec.  52.103(g), the report must be submitted semi-annually. Updates 
to the plant-specific DCD must be submitted annually and may be 
submitted along with amendments to the application.
    c. After the Commission makes the finding required by Sec.  
52.103(g), the reports and updates to the plant-specific DCD must be 
submitted, along with updates to the site-specific portion of the 
final safety analysis report for the facility, at the intervals 
required by 10 CFR 50.59(d)(2) and 50.71(e)(4), respectively, or at 
shorter intervals as specified in the license.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of May 2019.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2019-10715 Filed 5-21-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P