Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) Design Certification Renewal, 35023-35027 [2021-13802]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 124 / Thursday, July 1, 2021 / Proposed Rules 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 semiannually. 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: June 25, 2021. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. 2021–13940 Filed 6–30–21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 52 [NRC–2017–0090] RIN 3150–AK04 Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) Design Certification Renewal Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Proposed rule and environmental assessment. AGENCY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend its regulations to renew the U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor standard design certification. Applicants or licensees intending to construct and operate a U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor standard design may do so by referencing this design certification rule. The applicant for the renewal of the U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor standard design certification is General Electric-Hitachi Nuclear Energy Americas, LLC. The NRC invites public comment on this proposed rule and environmental assessment. SUMMARY: Submit comments by August 2, 2021. 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 (unless this document describes a different method for submitting comments on a specific subject): khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS DATES: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:17 Jun 30, 2021 Jkt 253001 • Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2017–0090. Address questions about NRC dockets to Dawn Forder; telephone: 301–415–3407; email: Dawn.Forder@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. 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: Dennis Andrukat, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, telephone: 301–415–3561, email: Dennis.Andrukat@nrc.gov, or James Shea, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, telephone: 301–415–1388, email: James.Shea@nrc.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. Voluntary Consensus Standards V. Plain Writing VI. Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant Impact VII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement VIII. Availability of Documents I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2017– 0090 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–2017–0090. • 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, at PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 35023 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. • Attention: The Public Document Room (PDR), where you may examine and order copies of public documents is currently closed. You may submit your request to the PDR via email at PDR.Resource@nrc.gov or call 1–800– 397–4209 between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. (EST), Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. • Attention: The Technical Library, which is located at Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, is open by appointment only. Interested parties may make appointments to examine documents by contacting the NRC Technical Library by email at Library.Resource@nrc.gov between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. (EST), Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. B. Submitting Comments The NRC encourages electronic comment submission through the Federal Rulemaking Website (https:// www.regulations.gov). Please include Docket ID NRC–2017–0090 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. II. Rulemaking Procedure Because the NRC anticipates that this action will be non-controversial, the NRC is publishing this proposed rule concurrently with a direct final rule in the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of the Federal Register. The direct final rule will become effective on September 29, 2021. However, if the NRC receives significant adverse E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 35024 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 124 / Thursday, July 1, 2021 / Proposed Rules khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS comments on this proposed rule or environment assessment by August 2, 2021, then the NRC will publish a document that withdraws the direct final rule. If the direct final rule is withdrawn, the NRC would address the comments received in response to these proposed revisions in any subsequent final rule. Absent significant modifications to the proposed revisions requiring republication, the NRC does not intend to initiate a second comment period on this action in the event the direct final rule is withdrawn. A significant adverse comment is a comment in which the commenter explains why the rule (including the environmental assessment) would be inappropriate, including challenges to the rule’s underlying premise or approach, or would be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. 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 additional information, including procedural information, see the direct final rule published in the Rules and Regulations section of this issue of the Federal Register. III. Background The General Electric Company (GE) submitted the U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (U.S. ABWR) standard design certification initial application on September 29, 1987. The NRC initially docketed the application (Docket No. STN 50–605) on February 22, 1988, but later changed the docket number to 52–001 on March 20, 1992 (57 FR 9749) to reflect GE’s request [or the applicant’s request] to review the application under part 52, ‘‘Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants,’’ of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR). VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:17 Jun 30, 2021 Jkt 253001 The NRC documented its review in NUREG–1503, ‘‘Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Certification of the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design,’’ in July 1994 (ADAMS Accession No. ML080670592), and NUREG–1503, Supplement 1, ‘‘Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Certification of the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design,’’ in May 1997 (ADAMS Accession No. ML080710134). The NRC issued the agency’s first design certification (DC) rule, for the U.S. ABWR, in the Federal Register (62 FR 25800), effective June 11, 1997. In 2007, GE and Hitachi Nuclear Energy formed an alliance, and General Electric-Hitachi Nuclear Energy Americas, LLC, (GEH) became the entity retaining the U.S. ABWR design from GE. On December 7, 2010, GEH submitted its application to renew the certification of the U.S. ABWR standard design to the NRC under subpart B, ‘‘Standard design certifications,’’ to 10 CFR part 52. The NRC published a notice of receipt of the application in the Federal Register on January 27, 2011 (76 FR 4948). On February 18, 2011, the NRC formally accepted the design certification renewal application for docketing (76 FR 9612). The preapplication information submitted before the NRC formally accepted the application for docketing can be found in ADAMS under Docket No. PROJ0774. Subpart B to 10 CFR part 52 presents the process for obtaining standard design certifications. Under § 52.57(a), an application for DC renewal must contain all information necessary to bring the information and data contained in the previous application up to date. Updates under § 52.57(a) include clarifications consistent with the original understanding of the design information, and changes to correct known errors, typographical errors, or defects, as defined in § 21.3. For the NRC to issue a rule granting the DC renewal under § 52.59(a), the design, either as originally certified or as modified during the rulemaking on renewal, must comply with (1) the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA), (2) the NRC regulations applicable and in effect at the time the certification was issued, and (3) the applicable requirements of § 50.150, ‘‘Aircraft impact assessment.’’ 1 1 The requirement for modifications in DC renewals to address § 50.150 was added to § 52.59(a) by a rule published June 12, 2009, requiring applicants for new nuclear power reactors to perform a design-specific assessment of the effects of the impact of a large, commercial aircraft (74 FR 28111). This requirement is applicable to the U.S. ABWR DC renewal because this is its first renewal and the U.S. ABWR DC was in effect on July 13, 2009. PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 A DC renewal applicant may propose to amend the design under § 52.59(c). An amendment is an applicantproposed change that is not an update under § 52.57(a) or a change to meet the renewal standards in § 52.59(a). Amendments must comply with the AEA and the NRC’s regulations applicable and in effect at the time of renewal rather than the § 52.29(a) standards. If the amendment request entails such an extensive change to the certified design that an essentially new standard design is being proposed, a new DC application must be submitted. In addition, NRC regulations at § 52.59(b) state that the Commission may impose other requirements if it determines any of the following: 1. They are necessary for adequate protection to public health and safety or common defense and security; 2. They are necessary for compliance with the NRC’s regulations and orders applicable and in effect at the time the certification was issued; or 3. There is a substantial increase in overall protection of the public health and safety or the common defense and security to be derived from the new requirements, and the direct and indirect costs of implementing those requirements are justified in view of this increased protection. The final U.S. ABWR DC rule for the original certification, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, Section II.A.1, ‘‘Finality,’’ stated that the NRC ‘‘does not plan or expect to be able to conduct a de novo review of the entire design if a certification renewal application is filed under § 52.59[,]’’ ‘‘Criteria for renewal’’ (62 FR 25800, 25805). Instead, the NRC stated that it expects that the focus of the review would be on changes to the design that are proposed by the applicant and insights from relevant operating experience with the certified design or other designs, or other material new information arising after the NRC staff’s review of the design certification. Furthermore, the standards in § 52.59(b) control the imposition of new requirements during the review of applications for renewal. When GEH applied to renew the U.S. ABWR DC, the NRC affirmed this position, reviewed only those aspects of the design that were amended or modified, and determined whether operating experience or other material new information indicated that additional changes to the design were necessary. The staff reviewed GEH’s proposed amendments and modifications to the design; the staff did not impose changes under 10 CFR 52.59(b). On June 12, 2009, the NRC published a rule requiring applicants for new E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 124 / Thursday, July 1, 2021 / Proposed Rules khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS nuclear power reactors to perform a design-specific assessment of the effects of the impact of a large, commercial aircraft (74 FR 28111). By letter dated December 7, 2010, GEH submitted its application to renew the U.S. ABWR DC to the NRC, which included Revision 5 to the design control document. This revision includes a containment reanalysis amendment and the necessary changes to meet the requirements of § 50.150, ‘‘Aircraft impact assessment.’’ Revision 5 of the DCD also describes the aircraft impact assessment results and identifies and incorporates design features and functional capabilities to show, with reduced use of operator actions, that the reactor core remains cooled and spent fuel pool integrity is maintained. In a letter dated July 20, 2012, the NRC identified proposed changes that were regulatory improvements or that could meet the criteria in § 52.59(b). The NRC suggested that GEH consider the recommendations contained in SECY– 12–0025, ‘‘Proposed Orders and Requests for Information in Response to Lessons Learned from Japan’s March 11, 2011, Great Tohoku Earthquake and Tsunami,’’ dated February 17, 2012, addressing Recommendations 4.2, 7.1, and 9.3 from SECY–11–0093, ‘‘NearTerm Report and Recommendations for Agency Actions Following the Events in Japan,’’ enclosure, ‘‘Recommendations for Enhancing Reactor Safety in the 21st Century; The Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-Ichi Accident report,’’ dated July 12, 2011. Subsequently, during the Mitigation of Beyond-Design-Basis Events rulemaking that resulted in § 50.155, ‘‘Mitigation of beyond-designbasis events,’’ the Commission determined that it would be inappropriate to impose mitigation strategies requirements on DCs.2 After the NRC’s July 20, 2012, letter to GEH, the NRC issued several requests for additional information to identity additional items or clarify the items 2 In the Mitigation of Beyond-Design-Basis Events proposed rule regulatory analysis, dated October 2015, the Commission explained that its proposal to make the Mitigation of Beyond-Design-Basis Events rule inapplicable to existing DCs, which included the U.S. ABWR, was based on concluding that ‘‘[t]he issues that may be resolved in a DC and accorded issue finality may not include operational matters, such as the elements of the [Mitigation of Beyond-Design-Basis Events] proposed rule.’’ However, as discussed in SECY–19–0066, ‘‘Staff Review of NuScale Power’s Mitigation Strategy for Beyond-Design-Basis External Events,’’ the design certification can provide for finality under 10 CFR 52.63 and Section VI of appendix A to 10 CFR part 52 for the adequacy of the structures, systems, and components to perform their mitigation strategies functions, as analyzed in the final safety analysis report. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:17 Jun 30, 2021 Jkt 253001 communicated in the 2012 letter. By letter dated February 19, 2016, GEH submitted DCD, Revision 6, to incorporate changes to the U.S. ABWR DCD made in response to NRC’s 2012 letter and to the NRC’s requests for additional information. In addition, this revision transmitted corrections of typographical errors that were identified during document development, and other required formatting changes. These corrections represent nonsubstantive changes that are editorial in nature. The NRC reviewed these typographical changes and determined that the changes do not affect the NRC’s findings in the final safety evaluation report for original certification and are acceptable. On December 20, 2019, the applicant submitted DCD, Revision 7, that incorporated the remaining changes provided in earlier responses to requests for additional information. The NRC reviewed DCD, Revision 7, against the changes proposed in responses to requests for additional information and noted that two short paragraphs were missing from Chapter 5. On March 16, 2020, the applicant resubmitted DCD, Revision 7, Chapter 5, including the previously missing paragraphs. To ensure that the public can reference a single ADAMS package for this document, the NRC copied the original DCD, Revision 7, ADAMS package, and replaced Chapter 5 with the corrected file. This corrected ADAMS package is the collection of DCD, Revision 7, chapters that the NRC has reviewed (ADAMS Accession No. ML20093K254). The NRC’s review is documented in Supplement 2 to NUREG–1503, ‘‘Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Certification of the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design’’ (ADAMS Accession No. ML20301A886). This proposed rule would certify Revision 7 of the U.S. ABWR DCD as provided in ADAMS Accession No. ML20093K254. Separately, Toshiba Corporation Energy Systems and Solutions Company (Toshiba) sought renewal of the U.S. ABWR DC, incorporating the Toshibaspecific aircraft impact assessment amendment used in the STPNOC DCD. On June 9, 2016, Toshiba withdrew its renewal application for the U.S. ABWR DC. The Toshiba ABWR was to incorporate the Toshiba-specific aircraft impact assessment amendment of the U.S. ABWR design certification, identified in the current appendix A to 10 CFR part 52 as the South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC) DCD. The original U.S. ABWR design certification has expired, along with its STPNOC DCD aircraft impact assessment amendment, and PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 35025 Toshiba has withdrawn its renewal U.S. ABWR DC application; therefore, Toshiba’s STPNOC DCD with its Toshiba-specific aircraft impact assessment amendment is not considered to be in timely renewal as described in § 52.57(b). On June 22, 2018, the only U.S. ABWR combined license (COL) holder, Nuclear Innovation North America LLC, requested NRC approval to withdraw the COLs for South Texas Project, Units 3 and 4. The NRC approved the termination of these COLs on July 12, 2018. Since the only COLs that referenced the Toshiba STPNOC DCD has been terminated, and no other license or application referencing the U.S. ABWR DC exists, the Toshiba STPNOC DCD no longer meets the requirement for validity beyond the date of expiration under § 52.55(b). Finally, GEH has not requested to renew the STPNOC amendment. For all these reasons, the NRC is not retaining the original DCD or the STPNOC DCD option in Appendix A to 10 CFR part 52. Instead, the NRC is proposing to replace appendix A to 10 CFR part 52 with a rule certifying the renewed GEH U.S. ABWR design. IV. 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 proposed rule, the NRC intends to certify the renewal for the U.S. ABWR standard design for use in nuclear power plant licensing under 10 CFR part 50, ‘‘Domestic licensing of production and utilization facilities,’’ or part 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. 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 that also follows other best practices appropriate to the E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 35026 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 124 / Thursday, July 1, 2021 / Proposed Rules subject or field and the intended audience. 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 the proposed rule with respect to clarity and effectiveness of the language used. VI. Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant 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 proposed rule, if issued, 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 Commission has determined in § 51.32 that there is no significant environmental impact associated with the issuance of the standard design certification or its amendment, as applicable. This reflects the fact that a DC rule does not authorize the siting, construction, or operation of a facility referencing any particular design, but only codifies a standard design certification in a rule (the U.S. ABWR DC renewal in this case). 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 a DC rule. Comments on the environmental assessment will be limited to the consideration of severe accident mitigation design alternatives as required by § 51.30(d). VII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement This proposed rule does not contain any new or amended collections of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing collections of information were approved by the Office of Management and Budget, control number 3150–0151. 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. VIII. 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 U.S. ABWR DESIGN CERTIFICATION RENEWAL RULE ADAMS Accession No./ Federal Register Citation Document SECY–20–0112, ‘‘Direct Final Rule–Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design Certification Renewal (RIN 3150–AK04; NRC–2017–0090),’’ December 9, 2020. GE-Hitachi ABWR Design Control Document Tier 1 & 2, Revision 7, October 2019 (includes correction noted, as of March 2020). GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy, Transmittal of ABWR Standard Plant Design Certification Renewal Application Design Control Document, Revision 5, Tier 1 and Tier 2, December 7, 2010. GE-Hitachi ABWR Design Control Document Tier 1 & 2, Revision 5, December 7, 2010 ......................................................... Technical Report NEDO–33875, ABWR U.S. Certified Design—Aircraft Impact Assessment, Licensing Basis Information and Design Details for Key Design Features, Rev. 3 (M170049), February 2017. Licensing Technical Report NEDO–33878, ABWR ECCS Suction Strainer Evaluation of Long-Term Recirculation Capability, Rev. 3 (M180068), March 2018. ML20170A520 ML20093K254 ML110040176 ML110040323 ML17059C523 ML18092A306 Final Safety Evaluation Report and Supplements NUREG–1503, Supplement 2, ‘‘Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Certification of the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design,’’ October 2020. NUREG–1503, Supplement 1, ‘‘Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Certification of the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design,’’ May 1997. NUREG–1503, Vols. 1–2, ‘‘Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Certification of the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design,’’ July 1994. ML20301A886 ML080710134 ML080670592 khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS Environmental Review Environmental Assessment by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Relating to Renewal of the Certification of the ABWR Standard Design, June 2021. Staff Technical Analysis in Support of the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design Certification Renewal Environmental Assessment. MFN 16–062, ‘‘Applicant’s Supplemental Environmental Report—Amendment to Standard Design Certification (ABWR Renewal Docket 52–045),’’ August 2016. 25A5680AA, ‘‘Amendment to Technical Support Document for the ABWR,’’ Sheet 1, November 30, 2010 (Renewal Application). SECY–97–077, ‘‘Certification of Two Evolutionary Designs,’’ April 15, 1996 (Original ABWR Environmental Assessment) .... Letter from GE Nuclear Energy Submitting the Enclosed ........................................................................................................... ‘‘Technical Support Document for the ABWR,’’ December 21, 1994 (Original NEPA/SAMDA Submittal) ................................. ML21147A381 ML20024D602 ML16235A415 ML110040178 ML003708129 ML100210563 Commission Papers, Original Design Certification, Interim Rule Amendments, and Other Supporting Documents SECY–19–0066, ‘‘Staff Review of NuScale Power’s Mitigation Strategy for Beyond-Design-Basis External Events,’’ June 26, 2019. SECY–12–0025, ‘‘Proposed Orders and Requests for Information in Response to Lessons Learned from Japan’s March 11, 2011, Great Tohoku Earthquake and Tsunami,’’ February 17, 2012. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:17 Jun 30, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1 ML19148A443 ML12039A111 35027 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 124 / Thursday, July 1, 2021 / Proposed Rules DOCUMENTS RELATED TO U.S. ABWR DESIGN CERTIFICATION RENEWAL RULE—Continued ADAMS Accession No./ Federal Register Citation Document SECY–11–0093, ‘‘Near-Term Report and Recommendations for Agency Actions Following the Events in Japan,’’ July 12, 2011. The Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-Ichi Accident, July 12, 2011 ..................................... Staff Requirements Memorandum on SECY–90–377, ‘‘Requirements for Design Certification Under 10 CFR Part 52,’’ February 15, 1991. SECY–90–377, ‘‘Requirements for Design Certification under 10 CFR Part 52,’’ November 8, 1990 ....................................... NUREG-1948, ‘‘Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Aircraft Impact Amendment to the U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) Design Certification,’’ June 2011. U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Aircraft Impact Design Certification Amendment, December 16, 2011 ......................... LBP–11–07, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Memorandum and Order in the South Texas Project Electric Generating Station Units 3 and 4 Combined License Proceeding, February 28, 2011. GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy; Acceptance for Docketing of an Application for Renewal of the U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design Certification, February 18, 2011 (Acceptance Application). GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy; Notice of Receipt and Availability of an Application for Renewal of the U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design Certification, January 27, 2011 (Notice of Receipt of the Application). ABWR–LIC–09–621, Revision 0, ‘‘Applicant’s Supplemental Environmental Report-Amendment to ABWR Standard Design Certification,’’ November 2009. Consideration of Aircraft Impacts for New Nuclear Power Reactors, June 12, 2009 ................................................................. Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants, August 28, 2007 (Revision of 10 CFR Parts 50 and 52) .. Presidential Memorandum, ‘‘Plain Language in Government Writing,’’ June 10, 1998 .............................................................. Policy Statement on Adequacy and Compatibility of Agreement States Programs, September 3, 1997 ................................... Standard Design Certification for the U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design, May 12, 1997 ........................................ (Original U.S. ABWR Design Certification) .................................................................................................................................. GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy, Transmittal of ABWR Standard Plant Design Certification Renewal Application Design Control Document Revision 7, Chapter 5, March 16, 2020. GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy—ABWR Standard Plant Design Certification Renewal Application Design Control Document Revision 7, Tier 1 and Tier 2, December 20, 2019. GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy, Submittal of ABWR Standard Plant Design Certification Renewal Application Design Control, Document, Revision 6, Tier 1 and Tier 2, February 19, 2016. GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy—ABWR Standard Plant Design Certification Renewal Application Design Control Document Revision 6, Tier 1 and Tier 2, February 19, 2016. Mitigation of Beyond-Design-Basis Events (MBDBE)—Regulatory Analysis—Proposed Rule Post-SRM, October 2015 ......... Letter from Nuclear Innovation North America LLC, South Texas Project Units 3 and 4 Termination of Combined Licenses NPF–97 and NPF–98, July 12, 2018. South Texas Project, Units 3 and 4, Request for Withdrawal of Combined Licenses, June 22, 2018 ...................................... Withdrawal of Toshiba Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design Certification Rule Renewal Application, June 9, 2016 ......... GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy—U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Design Certification Renewal Application, July 20, 2012 ............. Reactor Regulatory History on Design Certification Rules, April 26, 2000 3 ............................................................................... Notice of Issuance of Revised Final Design Approval for U.S. ABWR Standard Design, December 1, 1994 .......................... Letter to GE Nuclear Energy Transmitting the Revised Final Design Approval for [the] U.S. ABWR Standard Design, November 23, 1994. Issuance of Final Design Approval Pursuant to 10 CFR Part 52, Appendix O; U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design; GE Nuclear Energy, July 20, 1994. Final Design Approval FDA–0 for GE Nuclear Energy U.S. ABWR Standard Design, July 13, 1994 (Docket No. 52–001) .... GE Nuclear Energy; Receipt of Application for Design Certification, March 20, 1992 (Initial Application) ................................ 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–2017–0090. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Annette Vietti-Cook, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. 2021–13802 Filed 6–30–21; 8:45 am] ML11186A950 ML111861807 ML003707892 ML003707889 ML11182A163 76 FR 78096 ML110591049 76 FR 9612 76 FR 4948 ML093170455 74 72 63 62 62 FR FR FR FR FR 28111 49351 31883 46517 25800 ML20076D961 ML20007E274 ML16081A268 ML16214A015 ML15266A133 ML18179A217 ML18184A338 ML16173A310 ML12125A385 ML003761550 59 FR 61647 ML20077A747 59 FR 37058 ML20070L506 57 FR 9749 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 BILLING CODE 7590–01–P [Docket No. FAA–2021–0212; Project Identifier 2018–CE–032–AD] Dated: June 23, 2021. khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS RIN 2120–AA64 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: Reactor Regulatory History on Design Certification Rules, April 26, 2000. 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. This document predates this rulemaking and therefore does not contain a regulatory history for this rulemaking. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:17 Jun 30, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Airworthiness Directives; DG Flugzeugbau GmbH Gliders Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). AGENCY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all SUMMARY: Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\01JYP1.SGM 01JYP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 124 (Thursday, July 1, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35023-35027]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-13802]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 52

[NRC-2017-0090]
RIN 3150-AK04


Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) Design Certification 
Renewal

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule and environmental assessment.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to 
amend its regulations to renew the U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor 
standard design certification. Applicants or licensees intending to 
construct and operate a U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor standard 
design may do so by referencing this design certification rule. The 
applicant for the renewal of the U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor 
standard design certification is General Electric-Hitachi Nuclear 
Energy Americas, LLC. The NRC invites public comment on this proposed 
rule and environmental assessment.

DATES: Submit comments by August 2, 2021. 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 
(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-2017-0090. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Dawn Forder; telephone: 301-415-3407; 
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.
    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: Dennis Andrukat, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards, telephone: 301-415-3561, email: 
[email protected], or James Shea, Office of Nuclear Reactor 
Regulation, telephone: 301-415-1388, 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. Rulemaking Procedure
III. Background
IV. Voluntary Consensus Standards
V. Plain Writing
VI. Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant 
Impact
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
VIII. Availability of Documents

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments

A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2017-0090 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-2017-0090.
     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, at 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.
     Attention: The Public Document Room (PDR), where you may 
examine and order copies of public documents is currently closed. You 
may submit your request to the PDR via email at [email protected] or 
call 1-800-397-4209 between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. (EST), Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
     Attention: The Technical Library, which is located at Two 
White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, is 
open by appointment only. Interested parties may make appointments to 
examine documents by contacting the NRC Technical Library by email at 
[email protected] between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. (EST), Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

B. Submitting Comments

    The NRC encourages electronic comment submission through the 
Federal Rulemaking Website (https://www.regulations.gov). Please 
include Docket ID NRC-2017-0090 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.

II. Rulemaking Procedure

    Because the NRC anticipates that this action will be non-
controversial, the NRC is publishing this proposed rule concurrently 
with a direct final rule in the Rules and Regulations section of this 
issue of the Federal Register. The direct final rule will become 
effective on September 29, 2021. However, if the NRC receives 
significant adverse

[[Page 35024]]

comments on this proposed rule or environment assessment by August 2, 
2021, then the NRC will publish a document that withdraws the direct 
final rule. If the direct final rule is withdrawn, the NRC would 
address the comments received in response to these proposed revisions 
in any subsequent final rule. Absent significant modifications to the 
proposed revisions requiring republication, the NRC does not intend to 
initiate a second comment period on this action in the event the direct 
final rule is withdrawn.
    A significant adverse comment is a comment in which the commenter 
explains why the rule (including the environmental assessment) would be 
inappropriate, including challenges to the rule's underlying premise or 
approach, or would be ineffective or unacceptable without a change. 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 additional information, including procedural information, see 
the direct final rule published in the Rules and Regulations section of 
this issue of the Federal Register.

III. Background

    The General Electric Company (GE) submitted the U.S. Advanced 
Boiling Water Reactor (U.S. ABWR) standard design certification initial 
application on September 29, 1987. The NRC initially docketed the 
application (Docket No. STN 50-605) on February 22, 1988, but later 
changed the docket number to 52-001 on March 20, 1992 (57 FR 9749) to 
reflect GE's request [or the applicant's request] to review the 
application under part 52, ``Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals 
for Nuclear Power Plants,'' of title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR). The NRC documented its review in NUREG-1503, 
``Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Certification of the 
Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design,'' in July 1994 (ADAMS Accession 
No. ML080670592), and NUREG-1503, Supplement 1, ``Final Safety 
Evaluation Report Related to the Certification of the Advanced Boiling 
Water Reactor Design,'' in May 1997 (ADAMS Accession No. ML080710134). 
The NRC issued the agency's first design certification (DC) rule, for 
the U.S. ABWR, in the Federal Register (62 FR 25800), effective June 
11, 1997. In 2007, GE and Hitachi Nuclear Energy formed an alliance, 
and General Electric-Hitachi Nuclear Energy Americas, LLC, (GEH) became 
the entity retaining the U.S. ABWR design from GE.
    On December 7, 2010, GEH submitted its application to renew the 
certification of the U.S. ABWR standard design to the NRC under subpart 
B, ``Standard design certifications,'' to 10 CFR part 52. The NRC 
published a notice of receipt of the application in the Federal 
Register on January 27, 2011 (76 FR 4948). On February 18, 2011, the 
NRC formally accepted the design certification renewal application for 
docketing (76 FR 9612). The preapplication information submitted before 
the NRC formally accepted the application for docketing can be found in 
ADAMS under Docket No. PROJ0774.
    Subpart B to 10 CFR part 52 presents the process for obtaining 
standard design certifications. Under Sec.  52.57(a), an application 
for DC renewal must contain all information necessary to bring the 
information and data contained in the previous application up to date. 
Updates under Sec.  52.57(a) include clarifications consistent with the 
original understanding of the design information, and changes to 
correct known errors, typographical errors, or defects, as defined in 
Sec.  21.3. For the NRC to issue a rule granting the DC renewal under 
Sec.  52.59(a), the design, either as originally certified or as 
modified during the rulemaking on renewal, must comply with (1) the 
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA), (2) the NRC regulations 
applicable and in effect at the time the certification was issued, and 
(3) the applicable requirements of Sec.  50.150, ``Aircraft impact 
assessment.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The requirement for modifications in DC renewals to address 
Sec.  50.150 was added to Sec.  52.59(a) by a rule published June 
12, 2009, requiring applicants for new nuclear power reactors to 
perform a design-specific assessment of the effects of the impact of 
a large, commercial aircraft (74 FR 28111). This requirement is 
applicable to the U.S. ABWR DC renewal because this is its first 
renewal and the U.S. ABWR DC was in effect on July 13, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A DC renewal applicant may propose to amend the design under Sec.  
52.59(c). An amendment is an applicant-proposed change that is not an 
update under Sec.  52.57(a) or a change to meet the renewal standards 
in Sec.  52.59(a). Amendments must comply with the AEA and the NRC's 
regulations applicable and in effect at the time of renewal rather than 
the Sec.  52.29(a) standards. If the amendment request entails such an 
extensive change to the certified design that an essentially new 
standard design is being proposed, a new DC application must be 
submitted.
    In addition, NRC regulations at Sec.  52.59(b) state that the 
Commission may impose other requirements if it determines any of the 
following:
    1. They are necessary for adequate protection to public health and 
safety or common defense and security;
    2. They are necessary for compliance with the NRC's regulations and 
orders applicable and in effect at the time the certification was 
issued; or
    3. There is a substantial increase in overall protection of the 
public health and safety or the common defense and security to be 
derived from the new requirements, and the direct and indirect costs of 
implementing those requirements are justified in view of this increased 
protection.
    The final U.S. ABWR DC rule for the original certification, 
Supplementary Information, Section II.A.1, ``Finality,'' stated that 
the NRC ``does not plan or expect to be able to conduct a de novo 
review of the entire design if a certification renewal application is 
filed under Sec.  52.59[,]'' ``Criteria for renewal'' (62 FR 25800, 
25805). Instead, the NRC stated that it expects that the focus of the 
review would be on changes to the design that are proposed by the 
applicant and insights from relevant operating experience with the 
certified design or other designs, or other material new information 
arising after the NRC staff's review of the design certification. 
Furthermore, the standards in Sec.  52.59(b) control the imposition of 
new requirements during the review of applications for renewal. When 
GEH applied to renew the U.S. ABWR DC, the NRC affirmed this position, 
reviewed only those aspects of the design that were amended or 
modified, and determined whether operating experience or other material 
new information indicated that additional changes to the design were 
necessary. The staff reviewed GEH's proposed amendments and 
modifications to the design; the staff did not impose changes under 10 
CFR 52.59(b).
    On June 12, 2009, the NRC published a rule requiring applicants for 
new

[[Page 35025]]

nuclear power reactors to perform a design-specific assessment of the 
effects of the impact of a large, commercial aircraft (74 FR 28111). By 
letter dated December 7, 2010, GEH submitted its application to renew 
the U.S. ABWR DC to the NRC, which included Revision 5 to the design 
control document. This revision includes a containment re-analysis 
amendment and the necessary changes to meet the requirements of Sec.  
50.150, ``Aircraft impact assessment.'' Revision 5 of the DCD also 
describes the aircraft impact assessment results and identifies and 
incorporates design features and functional capabilities to show, with 
reduced use of operator actions, that the reactor core remains cooled 
and spent fuel pool integrity is maintained.
    In a letter dated July 20, 2012, the NRC identified proposed 
changes that were regulatory improvements or that could meet the 
criteria in Sec.  52.59(b). The NRC suggested that GEH consider the 
recommendations contained in SECY-12-0025, ``Proposed Orders and 
Requests for Information in Response to Lessons Learned from Japan's 
March 11, 2011, Great Tohoku Earthquake and Tsunami,'' dated February 
17, 2012, addressing Recommendations 4.2, 7.1, and 9.3 from SECY-11-
0093, ``Near-Term Report and Recommendations for Agency Actions 
Following the Events in Japan,'' enclosure, ``Recommendations for 
Enhancing Reactor Safety in the 21st Century; The Near-Term Task Force 
Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-Ichi Accident report,'' dated 
July 12, 2011. Subsequently, during the Mitigation of Beyond-Design-
Basis Events rulemaking that resulted in Sec.  50.155, ``Mitigation of 
beyond-design-basis events,'' the Commission determined that it would 
be inappropriate to impose mitigation strategies requirements on 
DCs.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In the Mitigation of Beyond-Design-Basis Events proposed 
rule regulatory analysis, dated October 2015, the Commission 
explained that its proposal to make the Mitigation of Beyond-Design-
Basis Events rule inapplicable to existing DCs, which included the 
U.S. ABWR, was based on concluding that ``[t]he issues that may be 
resolved in a DC and accorded issue finality may not include 
operational matters, such as the elements of the [Mitigation of 
Beyond-Design-Basis Events] proposed rule.'' However, as discussed 
in SECY-19-0066, ``Staff Review of NuScale Power's Mitigation 
Strategy for Beyond-Design-Basis External Events,'' the design 
certification can provide for finality under 10 CFR 52.63 and 
Section VI of appendix A to 10 CFR part 52 for the adequacy of the 
structures, systems, and components to perform their mitigation 
strategies functions, as analyzed in the final safety analysis 
report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After the NRC's July 20, 2012, letter to GEH, the NRC issued 
several requests for additional information to identity additional 
items or clarify the items communicated in the 2012 letter. By letter 
dated February 19, 2016, GEH submitted DCD, Revision 6, to incorporate 
changes to the U.S. ABWR DCD made in response to NRC's 2012 letter and 
to the NRC's requests for additional information. In addition, this 
revision transmitted corrections of typographical errors that were 
identified during document development, and other required formatting 
changes. These corrections represent non-substantive changes that are 
editorial in nature. The NRC reviewed these typographical changes and 
determined that the changes do not affect the NRC's findings in the 
final safety evaluation report for original certification and are 
acceptable. On December 20, 2019, the applicant submitted DCD, Revision 
7, that incorporated the remaining changes provided in earlier 
responses to requests for additional information. The NRC reviewed DCD, 
Revision 7, against the changes proposed in responses to requests for 
additional information and noted that two short paragraphs were missing 
from Chapter 5. On March 16, 2020, the applicant resubmitted DCD, 
Revision 7, Chapter 5, including the previously missing paragraphs. To 
ensure that the public can reference a single ADAMS package for this 
document, the NRC copied the original DCD, Revision 7, ADAMS package, 
and replaced Chapter 5 with the corrected file. This corrected ADAMS 
package is the collection of DCD, Revision 7, chapters that the NRC has 
reviewed (ADAMS Accession No. ML20093K254). The NRC's review is 
documented in Supplement 2 to NUREG-1503, ``Final Safety Evaluation 
Report Related to the Certification of the Advanced Boiling Water 
Reactor Design'' (ADAMS Accession No. ML20301A886). This proposed rule 
would certify Revision 7 of the U.S. ABWR DCD as provided in ADAMS 
Accession No. ML20093K254.
    Separately, Toshiba Corporation Energy Systems and Solutions 
Company (Toshiba) sought renewal of the U.S. ABWR DC, incorporating the 
Toshiba-specific aircraft impact assessment amendment used in the 
STPNOC DCD. On June 9, 2016, Toshiba withdrew its renewal application 
for the U.S. ABWR DC. The Toshiba ABWR was to incorporate the Toshiba-
specific aircraft impact assessment amendment of the U.S. ABWR design 
certification, identified in the current appendix A to 10 CFR part 52 
as the South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC) DCD. The 
original U.S. ABWR design certification has expired, along with its 
STPNOC DCD aircraft impact assessment amendment, and Toshiba has 
withdrawn its renewal U.S. ABWR DC application; therefore, Toshiba's 
STPNOC DCD with its Toshiba-specific aircraft impact assessment 
amendment is not considered to be in timely renewal as described in 
Sec.  52.57(b).
    On June 22, 2018, the only U.S. ABWR combined license (COL) holder, 
Nuclear Innovation North America LLC, requested NRC approval to 
withdraw the COLs for South Texas Project, Units 3 and 4. The NRC 
approved the termination of these COLs on July 12, 2018. Since the only 
COLs that referenced the Toshiba STPNOC DCD has been terminated, and no 
other license or application referencing the U.S. ABWR DC exists, the 
Toshiba STPNOC DCD no longer meets the requirement for validity beyond 
the date of expiration under Sec.  52.55(b). Finally, GEH has not 
requested to renew the STPNOC amendment. For all these reasons, the NRC 
is not retaining the original DCD or the STPNOC DCD option in Appendix 
A to 10 CFR part 52. Instead, the NRC is proposing to replace appendix 
A to 10 CFR part 52 with a rule certifying the renewed GEH U.S. ABWR 
design.

IV. 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 proposed rule, the NRC 
intends to certify the renewal for the U.S. ABWR standard design for 
use in nuclear power plant licensing under 10 CFR part 50, ``Domestic 
licensing of production and utilization facilities,'' or part 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.

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 that also follows other best practices appropriate to the

[[Page 35026]]

subject or field and the intended audience. 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 the 
proposed rule with respect to clarity and effectiveness of the language 
used.

VI. Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant 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 proposed rule, if issued, 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 Commission has determined in Sec.  51.32 that there is no 
significant environmental impact associated with the issuance of the 
standard design certification or its amendment, as applicable. This 
reflects the fact that a DC rule does not authorize the siting, 
construction, or operation of a facility referencing any particular 
design, but only codifies a standard design certification in a rule 
(the U.S. ABWR DC renewal in this case). 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 a DC rule. Comments on the 
environmental assessment will be limited to the consideration of severe 
accident mitigation design alternatives as required by Sec.  51.30(d).

VII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

    This proposed rule does not contain any new or amended collections 
of information subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing collections of information were approved 
by the Office of Management and Budget, control number 3150-0151.

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.

VIII. 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 U.S. ABWR Design Certification Renewal Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 ADAMS Accession No./
                  Document                     Federal Register Citation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECY-20-0112, ``Direct Final Rule-Advanced    ML20170A520
 Boiling Water Reactor Design Certification
 Renewal (RIN 3150-AK04; NRC-2017-0090),''
 December 9, 2020.
GE-Hitachi ABWR Design Control Document Tier  ML20093K254
 1 & 2, Revision 7, October 2019 (includes
 correction noted, as of March 2020).
GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy, Transmittal of     ML110040176
 ABWR Standard Plant Design Certification
 Renewal Application Design Control
 Document, Revision 5, Tier 1 and Tier 2,
 December 7, 2010.
GE-Hitachi ABWR Design Control Document Tier  ML110040323
 1 & 2, Revision 5, December 7, 2010.
Technical Report NEDO-33875, ABWR U.S.        ML17059C523
 Certified Design--Aircraft Impact
 Assessment, Licensing Basis Information and
 Design Details for Key Design Features,
 Rev. 3 (M170049), February 2017.
Licensing Technical Report NEDO-33878, ABWR   ML18092A306
 ECCS Suction Strainer Evaluation of Long-
 Term Recirculation Capability, Rev. 3
 (M180068), March 2018.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Final Safety Evaluation Report and Supplements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NUREG-1503, Supplement 2, ``Final Safety      ML20301A886
 Evaluation Report Related to the
 Certification of the Advanced Boiling Water
 Reactor Design,'' October 2020.
NUREG-1503, Supplement 1, ``Final Safety      ML080710134
 Evaluation Report Related to the
 Certification of the Advanced Boiling Water
 Reactor Design,'' May 1997.
NUREG-1503, Vols. 1-2, ``Final Safety         ML080670592
 Evaluation Report Related to the
 Certification of the Advanced Boiling Water
 Reactor Design,'' July 1994.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Environmental Review
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Environmental Assessment by the U.S. Nuclear  ML21147A381
 Regulatory Commission Relating to Renewal
 of the Certification of the ABWR Standard
 Design, June 2021.
Staff Technical Analysis in Support of the    ML20024D602
 Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design
 Certification Renewal Environmental
 Assessment.
MFN 16-062, ``Applicant's Supplemental        ML16235A415
 Environmental Report--Amendment to Standard
 Design Certification (ABWR Renewal Docket
 52-045),'' August 2016.
25A5680AA, ``Amendment to Technical Support   ML110040178
 Document for the ABWR,'' Sheet 1, November
 30, 2010 (Renewal Application).
SECY-97-077, ``Certification of Two           ML003708129
 Evolutionary Designs,'' April 15, 1996
 (Original ABWR Environmental Assessment).
Letter from GE Nuclear Energy Submitting the  ML100210563
 Enclosed.
``Technical Support Document for the ABWR,''
 December 21, 1994 (Original NEPA/SAMDA
 Submittal).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Commission Papers, Original Design Certification, Interim Rule
               Amendments, and Other Supporting Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECY-19-0066, ``Staff Review of NuScale       ML19148A443
 Power's Mitigation Strategy for Beyond-
 Design-Basis External Events,'' June 26,
 2019.
SECY-12-0025, ``Proposed Orders and Requests  ML12039A111
 for Information in Response to Lessons
 Learned from Japan's March 11, 2011, Great
 Tohoku Earthquake and Tsunami,'' February
 17, 2012.

[[Page 35027]]

 
SECY-11-0093, ``Near-Term Report and          ML11186A950
 Recommendations for Agency Actions
 Following the Events in Japan,'' July 12,
 2011.
The Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights   ML111861807
 from the Fukushima Dai-Ichi Accident, July
 12, 2011.
Staff Requirements Memorandum on SECY-90-     ML003707892
 377, ``Requirements for Design
 Certification Under 10 CFR Part 52,''
 February 15, 1991.
SECY-90-377, ``Requirements for Design        ML003707889
 Certification under 10 CFR Part 52,''
 November 8, 1990.
NUREG[dash]1948, ``Final Safety Evaluation    ML11182A163
 Report Related to the Aircraft Impact
 Amendment to the U.S. Advanced Boiling
 Water Reactor (ABWR) Design
 Certification,'' June 2011.
U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Aircraft  76 FR 78096
 Impact Design Certification Amendment,
 December 16, 2011.
LBP-11-07, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board  ML110591049
 Memorandum and Order in the South Texas
 Project Electric Generating Station Units 3
 and 4 Combined License Proceeding, February
 28, 2011.
GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy; Acceptance for     76 FR 9612
 Docketing of an Application for Renewal of
 the U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor
 Design Certification, February 18, 2011
 (Acceptance Application).
GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy; Notice of Receipt  76 FR 4948
 and Availability of an Application for
 Renewal of the U.S. Advanced Boiling Water
 Reactor Design Certification, January 27,
 2011 (Notice of Receipt of the Application).
ABWR-LIC-09-621, Revision 0, ``Applicant's    ML093170455
 Supplemental Environmental Report-Amendment
 to ABWR Standard Design Certification,''
 November 2009.
Consideration of Aircraft Impacts for New     74 FR 28111
 Nuclear Power Reactors, June 12, 2009.
Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for   72 FR 49351
 Nuclear Power Plants, August 28, 2007
 (Revision of 10 CFR Parts 50 and 52).
Presidential Memorandum, ``Plain Language in  63 FR 31883
 Government Writing,'' June 10, 1998.
Policy Statement on Adequacy and              62 FR 46517
 Compatibility of Agreement States Programs,
 September 3, 1997.
Standard Design Certification for the U.S.    62 FR 25800
 Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design, May
 12, 1997.
(Original U.S. ABWR Design Certification)...
GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy, Transmittal of     ML20076D961
 ABWR Standard Plant Design Certification
 Renewal Application Design Control Document
 Revision 7, Chapter 5, March 16, 2020.
GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy--ABWR Standard      ML20007E274
 Plant Design Certification Renewal
 Application Design Control Document
 Revision 7, Tier 1 and Tier 2, December 20,
 2019.
GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy, Submittal of ABWR  ML16081A268
 Standard Plant Design Certification Renewal
 Application Design Control, Document,
 Revision 6, Tier 1 and Tier 2, February 19,
 2016.
GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy--ABWR Standard      ML16214A015
 Plant Design Certification Renewal
 Application Design Control Document
 Revision 6, Tier 1 and Tier 2, February 19,
 2016.
Mitigation of Beyond-Design-Basis Events      ML15266A133
 (MBDBE)--Regulatory Analysis--Proposed Rule
 Post-SRM, October 2015.
Letter from Nuclear Innovation North America  ML18179A217
 LLC, South Texas Project Units 3 and 4
 Termination of Combined Licenses NPF-97 and
 NPF-98, July 12, 2018.
South Texas Project, Units 3 and 4, Request   ML18184A338
 for Withdrawal of Combined Licenses, June
 22, 2018.
Withdrawal of Toshiba Advanced Boiling Water  ML16173A310
 Reactor Design Certification Rule Renewal
 Application, June 9, 2016.
GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy--U.S. Advanced      ML12125A385
 Boiling Water Design Certification Renewal
 Application, July 20, 2012.
Reactor Regulatory History on Design          ML003761550
 Certification Rules, April 26, 2000 \3\.
Notice of Issuance of Revised Final Design    59 FR 61647
 Approval for U.S. ABWR Standard Design,
 December 1, 1994.
Letter to GE Nuclear Energy Transmitting the  ML20077A747
 Revised Final Design Approval for [the]
 U.S. ABWR Standard Design, November 23,
 1994.
Issuance of Final Design Approval Pursuant    59 FR 37058
 to 10 CFR Part 52, Appendix O; U.S.
 Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design; GE
 Nuclear Energy, July 20, 1994.
Final Design Approval FDA-0 for GE Nuclear    ML20070L506
 Energy U.S. ABWR Standard Design, July 13,
 1994 (Docket No. 52-001).
GE Nuclear Energy; Receipt of Application     57 FR 9749
 for Design Certification, March 20, 1992
 (Initial Application).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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-2017-0090.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \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: Reactor Regulatory History on Design Certification 
Rules, April 26, 2000. 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. This document predates this rulemaking and 
therefore does not contain a regulatory history for this rulemaking.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Dated: June 23, 2021.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2021-13802 Filed 6-30-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P