Physical Security for Advanced Reactors, 33861-33864 [2019-15008]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
33861
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 84, No. 136
Tuesday, July 16, 2019
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Agricultural Marketing Service
7 CFR Part 981
[Doc. No. AMS–SC–19–0041; SC19–981–3
CR]
Almonds Grown in California;
Continuance Referendum
AGENCY:
Agricultural Marketing Service,
USDA.
ACTION:
Referendum order.
This document directs that a
referendum be conducted among
eligible almond growers to determine
whether they favor continuance of the
marketing order regulating the handling
of almonds grown in California.
DATES: The referendum will be
conducted from August 5 through
August 16, 2019. Only current growers
of almonds within the production area
that grew almonds during the period
August 1, 2018, through July 31, 2019,
are eligible to vote in this referendum.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the marketing
order may be obtained from the
California Marketing Field Office,
Marketing Order and Agreement
Division, Specialty Crops Program,
AMS, USDA, 2202 Monterey Street,
Suite 102B, Fresno, California 93721–
3129; Telephone: (559) 538–1670; from
the Office of the Docket Clerk,
Marketing Order and Agreement
Division, Specialty Crops Program,
AMS, USDA, 1400 Independence
Avenue SW, STOP 0237, Washington,
DC 20250–0237; or on the internet:
https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Peter Sommers, Marketing Specialist, or
Terry Vawter, Regional Director,
California Marketing Field Office,
Marketing Order and Agreement
Division, Specialty Crops Program,
AMS, USDA, 2202 Monterey Street,
Suite 102B, Fresno, CA 93721–3129;
Telephone: (559) 538–1670, Fax: (559)
487–5906, or Email: Peterr.Sommers@
usda.gov or Terry.Vawter@usda.gov.
jspears on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Jul 15, 2019
Jkt 247001
Pursuant
to Marketing Agreement and Order No.
981, as amended (7 CFR part 981),
hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Order,’’
and the applicable provisions of the
Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act
of 1937, as amended (7 U.S.C. 601–674),
hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Act,’’ it is
hereby directed that a referendum be
conducted to ascertain whether
continuance of the Order is favored by
growers. The referendum will be
conducted from August 5 through
August 16, 2019, among almond
growers in the production area. Only
current almond growers that were also
engaged in the production of almonds
during the period of August 1, 2018,
through July 31, 2019, may participate
in the continuance referendum.
USDA has determined that
continuance referenda are an effective
means for determining whether growers
favor the continuation of marketing
order programs. USDA would consider
termination of the Order if less than
two-thirds of the growers voting in the
referendum and growers of less than
two-thirds of the volume of almonds
represented in the referendum favor
continuance of the program. In
evaluating the merits of continuance
versus termination, USDA will not
exclusively consider the results of the
continuance referendum. USDA will
also consider all other relevant
information regarding operation of the
Order and relative benefits and
disadvantages to growers, handlers, and
consumers to determine whether
continuing the Order would tend to
effectuate the declared policy of the Act.
In accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35), the ballot materials used in
the referendum have been submitted to
and approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) and
have been assigned OMB No. 0581–
0178, Vegetable Crops. It has been
estimated it will take an average of 10
minutes for each of the approximately
8,000 almond growers to cast a ballot.
Participation is voluntary. Ballots
postmarked after August 16, 2019, will
not be included in the vote tabulation.
Peter Sommers and Terry Vawter of
the California Marketing Field Office,
Specialty Crops Program, AMS, USDA,
are hereby designated as the referendum
agents of the Secretary of Agriculture to
conduct this referendum. The procedure
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
applicable to the referendum shall be
the ‘‘Procedure for the Conduct of
Referenda in Connection With
Marketing Orders for Fruits, Vegetables,
and Nuts Pursuant to the Agricultural
Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as
Amended’’ (7 CFR part 900.400 et seq.).
Ballots will be mailed to all growers
of record and may also be obtained from
the referendum agents or from their
appointees.
List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 981
Almonds, Marketing agreements,
Nuts, and Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 601–674.
Dated: July 11, 2019.
Bruce Summers,
Administrator, Agricultural Marketing
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019–15059 Filed 7–15–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–02–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
10 CFR Parts 50, 52, and 73
[Docket No. NRC–2017–0227]
RIN 3150–AK19
Physical Security for Advanced
Reactors
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Regulatory basis; public
meeting, and request for comment.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is requesting
comment on a regulatory basis to
support a rulemaking that would amend
the NRC’s regulations to develop
specific physical security requirements
for advanced reactors, which refers to
light-water small modular reactors and
non-light-water reactors. The NRC is
proposing a limited-scope rulemaking
that would provide a clear set of
alternative, performance-based
requirements and guidance for
advanced reactor physical security that
would reduce the need for exemptions
to current physical security
requirements when applicants request
permits and licenses. This rulemaking
would provide additional benefits for
advanced reactor applicants by
establishing greater regulatory stability,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\16JYP1.SGM
16JYP1
33862
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 16, 2019 / Proposed Rules
predictability, and clarity in the
licensing process. The NRC plans to
hold a public meeting to discuss the
regulatory basis and facilitate public
participation.
I. Obtaining Information and
Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Submit comments by August 15,
2019. Comments received after this date
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.
DATES:
You may submit comments
by any of the following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2017–0227. 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
INFORMATION CONTACT 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, MD 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.
ADDRESSES:
Ilka
T. Berrios, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards; telephone: 301–
415–2404; email: Ilka.Berrios@nrc.gov;
or William Reckley, Office of New
Reactors; telephone: 301–415–7490;
email: William.Reckley@nrc.gov. Both
are staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
jspears on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting
Comments
II. Discussion
III. Specific Requests for Comment
IV. Cumulative Effects of Regulation
V. Plain Writing
VI. Public Meeting
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Jul 15, 2019
Jkt 247001
Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2017–
0227 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–2017–0227.
• 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
‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For
problems with ADAMS, please contact
the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR)
reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–
415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@
nrc.gov. The regulatory basis document
is available in ADAMS under Accession
No. ML19099A017.
• 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–2017–
0227 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
entering the comment into ADAMS.
Please note that the NRC will not
provide formal written responses to
each of the comments received on the
regulatory basis. However, the NRC will
consider all comments received in the
development of the proposed rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
II. Discussion
In 2018, the staff submitted SECY–18–
0076, ‘‘Options and Recommendation
for Physical Security for Advanced
Reactors,’’ dated August 1, 2018,
(ADAMS Accession No. ML18170A051),
presenting alternatives and a
recommendation to the Commission on
possible changes to the regulations and
guidance related to physical security for
advanced reactors (light-water small
modular reactors and non-light-water
reactors). The staff evaluated the
advantages and disadvantages of each
alternative and recommended a limitedscope rulemaking to further assess and,
if appropriate, revise a limited set of
NRC regulations. The staff also
recommended developing necessary
guidance to address performance
criteria for which the alternative
requirements may be applied for
advanced reactor license applicants. In
the Staff Requirements Memorandum
(SRM)—SECY–18–0076, dated
November 19, 2018, (ADAMS Accession
No. ML18324A478), the Commission
approved the staff’s recommendation to
initiate a limited-scope rulemaking.
As a result, the NRC is considering
rulemaking for advanced reactors that
could be licensed under part 50 of title
10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(10 CFR), ‘‘Domestic Licensing of
Production and Utilization Facilities,’’
or 10 CFR part 52, ‘‘Licenses,
Certifications, and Approvals for
Nuclear Power Plants.’’ This limitedscope rulemaking would apply the
insights from advances in designs and
safety research; retain the NRC’s overall
security regulations framework; and
provide alternatives and guidance
related to specific physical security
requirements. For the purposes of this
limited-scope rulemaking, the term
advanced reactors will refer only to
light-water small modular reactors and
non-light-water reactors.
The NRC’s current physical security
regulations for nuclear power plants
were developed to address the risk of
radiological consequences from
radiological sabotage of a nuclear power
plant that uses special nuclear material
and the theft or diversion of special
nuclear material from these facilities.
This rulemaking will focus on the
threats from radiological sabotage.
Potential threats related to theft and
diversion of special nuclear material are
outside the scope of this limited-scope
rulemaking, but may be considered in
future projects.1 Given that the current
1 Many non-light-water reactor designs are
expected to use higher assay low-enriched uranium
(i.e., between 5- and 20-percent enrichments) and
fuel forms other than the traditional uranium
E:\FR\FM\16JYP1.SGM
16JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 16, 2019 / Proposed Rules
jspears on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
fleet of nuclear power plants consists of
large light-water reactors, NRC
regulations were developed in the
context of security challenges related to
large light-water reactors. These
regulations do not take into account
advances in designs and engineered
safety features, and their applications to
advanced reactors.
The regulatory basis summarizes the
current physical security framework for
large light-water reactors against
radiological sabotage, describes
regulatory issues that have motivated
the NRC to pursue rulemaking,
evaluates various alternatives to address
physical security for advanced reactors,
and identifies the background
documents related to these issues. In the
regulatory basis, the term advanced
reactors refers to light-water small
modular reactors and non-light-water
reactors. As defined in § 170.3, the term
Small modular reactors refers to a
nuclear reactor (or module) designed to
produce heat energy up to 1,000
megawatts thermal or electrical energy
up to approximately 300 megawatts
electric per module that the
Commission licensed under the
authority granted by Section 103 of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended,
and pursuant to the provisions of
§ 50.22, ‘‘Class 103 licenses; for
commercial and industrial facilities.’’
The NRC is requesting comment on
the regulatory basis to support
consideration of a rulemaking that
would provide alternatives and
guidance related to specific physical
security requirements for advanced
reactors. The NRC will consider the
comments received on the regulatory
basis as it develops this proposed rule.
This limited-scope rulemaking aims
to retain the current overall security
requirements framework in § 73.55,
‘‘Requirements for physical protection
of licensed activities in nuclear power
reactors against radiological sabotage,’’
to protect against radiological sabotage,
while providing alternatives for
advanced reactors to specific physical
security-related regulations.
The physical security measures
established under current NRC
regulations are technology-inclusive.
Under this limited-scope rulemaking,
the NRC would apply a similar,
technology-inclusive approach for
dioxide pellets used for light-water reactors.
Different fuel forms introduce the possible need to
develop new approaches to material control and
accounting practices and protections against theft
and diversion throughout the fuel cycle, including
at reactor facilities. Future interactions between the
staff and stakeholders will cover these and other
issues related to higher assay low-enriched uranium
and the nuclear fuel cycle.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Jul 15, 2019
Jkt 247001
advanced reactors to accommodate a
variety of facility designs, systems, and
purposes. The technical basis for
offering an alternative for the physical
security requirements for advanced
reactors is the combination of inherent
reactor characteristics and
demonstration of security incorporated
into the advanced reactor designs that
reduces reliance on human actions to
mitigate attempted acts of radiological
sabotage.
The limited-scope rulemaking would
target the identified requirements that
rely on human actions for interdiction
and post-attack command and control.
Specifically, the limited-scope
rulemaking would focus on establishing
a performance-based approach and
associated criteria to assess advanced
reactor attributes, as described in the
Policy Statement on the Regulation of
Advanced Reactors, published in the
Federal Register (FR) on October 14,
2008 (73 FR 60612), to determine
whether alternatives to the prescribed
minimum number of armed responders
currently defined in § 73.55(k)(5)(ii) and
the prescriptive requirements defined in
§ 73.55(i)(4)(iii) for an onsite secondary
alarm station are applicable. The NRC is
aware of the safety improvements
expected to be generally found in
advanced reactors due to their
incorporation of simplified, inherent,
and passive features. These features may
result in smaller and slower fission
product releases following a loss of
safety functions from malfunctions and
from many malicious acts.
The advantages of pursuing a limitedscope rulemaking related to advanced
reactor physical security include:
• Promote regulatory stability,
predictability, and clarity.
• Reduce the need for future
applicants to propose alternatives or
request exemptions from physical
security requirements.
• Recognize technology
advancements and design features
associated with the NRC-recommended
attributes of advanced reactors.
• Replace prescriptive regulations
with risk-informed, performance-based
requirements.
III. Specific Request for Comment
The NRC is seeking comments and
supporting rationale from the public on
the following questions:
(1) Is it feasible to define performance
criteria related to offsite consequences
for advanced reactors with attributes as
defined in the Policy Statement on the
Regulation of Advanced Reactors, that
could be used to determine the
applicability of alternative,
performance-based physical security
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
33863
requirements while maintaining
adequate protection of plant equipment
and personnel by the overall physical
security program?
(2) If feasible to define performance
criteria to determine the applicability of
alternative, performance-based
requirements for a limited scope of
physical security regulations, are the
possible criteria, as proposed in Section
4.5 of the regulatory basis, reasonable
and sufficient to ensure that the
resultant physical security programs
provide reasonable assurance of
adequate protection of public health and
safety or would other criteria be more
appropriate? (Respondents should
describe suggested alternatives.)
(3) It is anticipated that engineered
safety features may result in a slow
accident progression that could allow
for reliance on offsite licensee response
to support the prevention of offsite
consequences for advanced reactors
with attributes as defined in the Policy
Statement. The staff expects that future
discussions will involve evaluating the
feasibility of reliance on these resources
for security response and to help
recover facilities and mitigate events.
What types of engineering,
administrative, and programmatic
controls should be considered in any
future evaluations of this approach?
IV. Cumulative Effects of Regulation
The cumulative effects of regulation
(CER) describes the challenges that
licensees or other impacted entities
(such as State agency partners, Tribal
and local governments) may face while
implementing new regulatory positions,
programs, and requirements (e.g., rules,
generic letters, backfits, inspections).
The CER is an organizational challenge
that results from a licensee or impacted
entity implementing a number of
complex positions, programs, or
requirements within a limited
implementation period and with
available resources (which may include
limited available expertise to address a
specific issue). The NRC has
implemented CER enhancements to the
rulemaking process to facilitate public
involvement throughout the rulemaking
process. Therefore, the NRC is
specifically requesting comments on the
cumulative effects that may result from
this proposed rulemaking. In developing
comments on the regulatory basis,
consider and provide comments on the
following questions:
1. In light of any current or projected
CER challenges, what should be a
reasonable effective date, compliance
date, or submittal date(s) from the time
the final rule is published to the actual
implementation of any proposed
E:\FR\FM\16JYP1.SGM
16JYP1
jspears on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
33864
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 136 / Tuesday, July 16, 2019 / Proposed Rules
requirements, including changes to
programs, procedures, and the facility?
2. If CER challenges currently exist or
are expected, what should be done to
address them? For example, if more
time is required for subsequent
implementation of the new
requirements, what period of time is
sufficient?
3. Do other (NRC or other agency)
regulatory actions (e.g., orders, generic
communications, license amendment
requests, and inspection findings of a
generic nature) influence the subsequent
implementation of the proposed rule’s
requirements?
4. Are there unintended
consequences? Does the regulatory basis
create conditions that would be contrary
to the regulatory basis’ purpose and
objectives? If so, what are the
unintended consequences, and how
should they be addressed?
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Patricia K. Holahan,
Director, Division of Rulemaking, Office of
Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards.
V. 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).
The NRC requests comment on this
document with respect to the clarity and
effectiveness of the language used.
SUMMARY:
VI. Public Meeting
The NRC plans to hold a public
meeting during the public comment
period for this document. The public
meeting will provide a forum for the
NRC to discuss the issues and questions
with external stakeholders regarding the
regulatory basis to support a proposed
rulemaking that would provide
alternatives and guidance related to
specific physical security requirements
for advanced reactors. The NRC does
not intend to provide detailed responses
to comments or other information
submitted during the public meeting.
The public meeting will be noticed on
the NRC’s public meeting website at
least 10 calendar days before the
meeting. Stakeholders should monitor
the NRC’s Public Meeting Schedule web
page for additional information about
the public meeting at https://
meetings.nrc.gov/pmns/mtg.
The NRC will post a notice for the
public meeting and may post additional
material related to this action to the
Federal Rulemaking website at https://
www.regulations.gov under Docket ID
NRC–2017–0227.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day
of July 2019.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Jul 15, 2019
Jkt 247001
[FR Doc. 2019–15008 Filed 7–15–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 150
[NRC–2019–0114]
State of Vermont: NRC Staff
Assessment of a Proposed Agreement
Between the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission and the State of Vermont
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed state agreement;
request for comment.
AGENCY:
By letter dated April 11, 2019,
Governor Philip Scott of the State of
Vermont requested that the U. S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC
or Commission) enter into an Agreement
with the State of Vermont as authorized
by Section 274b. of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, as amended (AEA).
Under the proposed Agreement, the
Commission would discontinue, and the
State of Vermont would assume,
regulatory authority over certain types
of byproduct materials as defined in the
AEA, source material, and special
nuclear material in quantities not
sufficient to form a critical mass.
As required by Section 274e. of the
AEA, the NRC is publishing the
proposed Agreement for public
comment. The NRC is also publishing
the summary of a draft assessment by
the NRC staff of the State of Vermont’s
regulatory program. Comments are
requested on the proposed Agreement
and its effect on public health and
safety. Comments are also requested on
the draft staff assessment, the adequacy
of the State of Vermont’s program, and
the State’s program staff, as discussed in
this document.
DATES: Submit comments by July 25,
2019. Comments received after this date
will be considered if it is practical to do
so, but the Commission is able to ensure
consideration only for comments
received before this date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by the following method:
• Federal Rulemaking Web Site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2019–0114. Address
questions about NRC dockets in
Regulations.gov to Jennifer Borges;
telephone: 301–287–9127; e-mail:
Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov. For technical
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
questions, contact the individuals listed
in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this document.
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:
Duncan White, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards,
telephone: 301–415–2598, e-mail:
Duncan.White@nrc.gov of the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Obtaining Information and
Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2019–
0114 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 Web Site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2019–0114.
• 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, at 301–415–4737, or
by e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
final application for an AEA Section 274
Agreement from the State of Vermont,
the draft assessment of the proposed
Vermont program, and additional
related correspondence between the
NRC and the State for the regulation of
agreement materials are available in
ADAMS under Accession Nos.
ML19107A432, ML19114A092,
ML19115A214, ML19102A130 and
ML19113A279.
• 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–2019–
0114 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.
E:\FR\FM\16JYP1.SGM
16JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 136 (Tuesday, July 16, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 33861-33864]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-15008]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Parts 50, 52, and 73
[Docket No. NRC-2017-0227]
RIN 3150-AK19
Physical Security for Advanced Reactors
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Regulatory basis; public meeting, and request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is requesting
comment on a regulatory basis to support a rulemaking that would amend
the NRC's regulations to develop specific physical security
requirements for advanced reactors, which refers to light-water small
modular reactors and non-light-water reactors. The NRC is proposing a
limited-scope rulemaking that would provide a clear set of alternative,
performance-based requirements and guidance for advanced reactor
physical security that would reduce the need for exemptions to current
physical security requirements when applicants request permits and
licenses. This rulemaking would provide additional benefits for
advanced reactor applicants by establishing greater regulatory
stability,
[[Page 33862]]
predictability, and clarity in the licensing process. The NRC plans to
hold a public meeting to discuss the regulatory basis and facilitate
public participation.
DATES: Submit comments by August 15, 2019. Comments received after this
date 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.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2017-0227. 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,
MD 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: Ilka T. Berrios, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards; telephone: 301-415-2404; email:
[email protected]; or William Reckley, Office of New Reactors;
telephone: 301-415-7490; email: [email protected]. 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. Discussion
III. Specific Requests for Comment
IV. Cumulative Effects of Regulation
V. Plain Writing
VI. Public Meeting
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2017-0227 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-2017-0227.
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 ``Begin Web-based ADAMS
Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or
by email to [email protected]. The regulatory basis document is
available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML19099A017.
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-2017-0227 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 entering the comment into ADAMS.
Please note that the NRC will not provide formal written responses
to each of the comments received on the regulatory basis. However, the
NRC will consider all comments received in the development of the
proposed rule.
II. Discussion
In 2018, the staff submitted SECY-18-0076, ``Options and
Recommendation for Physical Security for Advanced Reactors,'' dated
August 1, 2018, (ADAMS Accession No. ML18170A051), presenting
alternatives and a recommendation to the Commission on possible changes
to the regulations and guidance related to physical security for
advanced reactors (light-water small modular reactors and non-light-
water reactors). The staff evaluated the advantages and disadvantages
of each alternative and recommended a limited-scope rulemaking to
further assess and, if appropriate, revise a limited set of NRC
regulations. The staff also recommended developing necessary guidance
to address performance criteria for which the alternative requirements
may be applied for advanced reactor license applicants. In the Staff
Requirements Memorandum (SRM)--SECY-18-0076, dated November 19, 2018,
(ADAMS Accession No. ML18324A478), the Commission approved the staff's
recommendation to initiate a limited-scope rulemaking.
As a result, the NRC is considering rulemaking for advanced
reactors that could be licensed under part 50 of title 10 of the Code
of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), ``Domestic Licensing of Production and
Utilization Facilities,'' or 10 CFR part 52, ``Licenses,
Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants.'' This limited-
scope rulemaking would apply the insights from advances in designs and
safety research; retain the NRC's overall security regulations
framework; and provide alternatives and guidance related to specific
physical security requirements. For the purposes of this limited-scope
rulemaking, the term advanced reactors will refer only to light-water
small modular reactors and non-light-water reactors.
The NRC's current physical security regulations for nuclear power
plants were developed to address the risk of radiological consequences
from radiological sabotage of a nuclear power plant that uses special
nuclear material and the theft or diversion of special nuclear material
from these facilities. This rulemaking will focus on the threats from
radiological sabotage. Potential threats related to theft and diversion
of special nuclear material are outside the scope of this limited-scope
rulemaking, but may be considered in future projects.\1\ Given that the
current
[[Page 33863]]
fleet of nuclear power plants consists of large light-water reactors,
NRC regulations were developed in the context of security challenges
related to large light-water reactors. These regulations do not take
into account advances in designs and engineered safety features, and
their applications to advanced reactors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Many non-light-water reactor designs are expected to use
higher assay low-enriched uranium (i.e., between 5- and 20-percent
enrichments) and fuel forms other than the traditional uranium
dioxide pellets used for light-water reactors. Different fuel forms
introduce the possible need to develop new approaches to material
control and accounting practices and protections against theft and
diversion throughout the fuel cycle, including at reactor
facilities. Future interactions between the staff and stakeholders
will cover these and other issues related to higher assay low-
enriched uranium and the nuclear fuel cycle.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The regulatory basis summarizes the current physical security
framework for large light-water reactors against radiological sabotage,
describes regulatory issues that have motivated the NRC to pursue
rulemaking, evaluates various alternatives to address physical security
for advanced reactors, and identifies the background documents related
to these issues. In the regulatory basis, the term advanced reactors
refers to light-water small modular reactors and non-light-water
reactors. As defined in Sec. 170.3, the term Small modular reactors
refers to a nuclear reactor (or module) designed to produce heat energy
up to 1,000 megawatts thermal or electrical energy up to approximately
300 megawatts electric per module that the Commission licensed under
the authority granted by Section 103 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,
as amended, and pursuant to the provisions of Sec. 50.22, ``Class 103
licenses; for commercial and industrial facilities.''
The NRC is requesting comment on the regulatory basis to support
consideration of a rulemaking that would provide alternatives and
guidance related to specific physical security requirements for
advanced reactors. The NRC will consider the comments received on the
regulatory basis as it develops this proposed rule.
This limited-scope rulemaking aims to retain the current overall
security requirements framework in Sec. 73.55, ``Requirements for
physical protection of licensed activities in nuclear power reactors
against radiological sabotage,'' to protect against radiological
sabotage, while providing alternatives for advanced reactors to
specific physical security-related regulations.
The physical security measures established under current NRC
regulations are technology-inclusive. Under this limited-scope
rulemaking, the NRC would apply a similar, technology-inclusive
approach for advanced reactors to accommodate a variety of facility
designs, systems, and purposes. The technical basis for offering an
alternative for the physical security requirements for advanced
reactors is the combination of inherent reactor characteristics and
demonstration of security incorporated into the advanced reactor
designs that reduces reliance on human actions to mitigate attempted
acts of radiological sabotage.
The limited-scope rulemaking would target the identified
requirements that rely on human actions for interdiction and post-
attack command and control. Specifically, the limited-scope rulemaking
would focus on establishing a performance-based approach and associated
criteria to assess advanced reactor attributes, as described in the
Policy Statement on the Regulation of Advanced Reactors, published in
the Federal Register (FR) on October 14, 2008 (73 FR 60612), to
determine whether alternatives to the prescribed minimum number of
armed responders currently defined in Sec. 73.55(k)(5)(ii) and the
prescriptive requirements defined in Sec. 73.55(i)(4)(iii) for an
onsite secondary alarm station are applicable. The NRC is aware of the
safety improvements expected to be generally found in advanced reactors
due to their incorporation of simplified, inherent, and passive
features. These features may result in smaller and slower fission
product releases following a loss of safety functions from malfunctions
and from many malicious acts.
The advantages of pursuing a limited-scope rulemaking related to
advanced reactor physical security include:
Promote regulatory stability, predictability, and clarity.
Reduce the need for future applicants to propose
alternatives or request exemptions from physical security requirements.
Recognize technology advancements and design features
associated with the NRC-recommended attributes of advanced reactors.
Replace prescriptive regulations with risk-informed,
performance-based requirements.
III. Specific Request for Comment
The NRC is seeking comments and supporting rationale from the
public on the following questions:
(1) Is it feasible to define performance criteria related to
offsite consequences for advanced reactors with attributes as defined
in the Policy Statement on the Regulation of Advanced Reactors, that
could be used to determine the applicability of alternative,
performance-based physical security requirements while maintaining
adequate protection of plant equipment and personnel by the overall
physical security program?
(2) If feasible to define performance criteria to determine the
applicability of alternative, performance-based requirements for a
limited scope of physical security regulations, are the possible
criteria, as proposed in Section 4.5 of the regulatory basis,
reasonable and sufficient to ensure that the resultant physical
security programs provide reasonable assurance of adequate protection
of public health and safety or would other criteria be more
appropriate? (Respondents should describe suggested alternatives.)
(3) It is anticipated that engineered safety features may result in
a slow accident progression that could allow for reliance on offsite
licensee response to support the prevention of offsite consequences for
advanced reactors with attributes as defined in the Policy Statement.
The staff expects that future discussions will involve evaluating the
feasibility of reliance on these resources for security response and to
help recover facilities and mitigate events. What types of engineering,
administrative, and programmatic controls should be considered in any
future evaluations of this approach?
IV. Cumulative Effects of Regulation
The cumulative effects of regulation (CER) describes the challenges
that licensees or other impacted entities (such as State agency
partners, Tribal and local governments) may face while implementing new
regulatory positions, programs, and requirements (e.g., rules, generic
letters, backfits, inspections). The CER is an organizational challenge
that results from a licensee or impacted entity implementing a number
of complex positions, programs, or requirements within a limited
implementation period and with available resources (which may include
limited available expertise to address a specific issue). The NRC has
implemented CER enhancements to the rulemaking process to facilitate
public involvement throughout the rulemaking process. Therefore, the
NRC is specifically requesting comments on the cumulative effects that
may result from this proposed rulemaking. In developing comments on the
regulatory basis, consider and provide comments on the following
questions:
1. In light of any current or projected CER challenges, what should
be a reasonable effective date, compliance date, or submittal date(s)
from the time the final rule is published to the actual implementation
of any proposed
[[Page 33864]]
requirements, including changes to programs, procedures, and the
facility?
2. If CER challenges currently exist or are expected, what should
be done to address them? For example, if more time is required for
subsequent implementation of the new requirements, what period of time
is sufficient?
3. Do other (NRC or other agency) regulatory actions (e.g., orders,
generic communications, license amendment requests, and inspection
findings of a generic nature) influence the subsequent implementation
of the proposed rule's requirements?
4. Are there unintended consequences? Does the regulatory basis
create conditions that would be contrary to the regulatory basis'
purpose and objectives? If so, what are the unintended consequences,
and how should they be addressed?
V. 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). The NRC requests comment on this document with respect to the
clarity and effectiveness of the language used.
VI. Public Meeting
The NRC plans to hold a public meeting during the public comment
period for this document. The public meeting will provide a forum for
the NRC to discuss the issues and questions with external stakeholders
regarding the regulatory basis to support a proposed rulemaking that
would provide alternatives and guidance related to specific physical
security requirements for advanced reactors. The NRC does not intend to
provide detailed responses to comments or other information submitted
during the public meeting.
The public meeting will be noticed on the NRC's public meeting
website at least 10 calendar days before the meeting. Stakeholders
should monitor the NRC's Public Meeting Schedule web page for
additional information about the public meeting at https://meetings.nrc.gov/pmns/mtg.
The NRC will post a notice for the public meeting and may post
additional material related to this action to the Federal Rulemaking
website at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-2017-0227.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of July 2019.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Patricia K. Holahan,
Director, Division of Rulemaking, Office of Nuclear Materials Safety
and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2019-15008 Filed 7-15-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
