Non-Power Production or Utilization Facility License Renewal, 106234-106253 [2024-30721]

Agencies

• NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 249 (Monday, December 30, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 106234-106253]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-30721]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Parts 2, 20, 26, 50, 51, 55, 73, 140, 170, and 171

[NRC-2011-0087]
RIN 3150-AI96


Non-Power Production or Utilization Facility License Renewal

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Final rule and guidance; issuance.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its 
regulations that govern the license renewal process for certain 
production or utilization facilities. In this final rule, the NRC 
collectively refers to these facilities as non-power production or 
utilization facilities (NPUFs). This final

[[Page 106235]]

rule revises the definitions of ``non-power reactor,'' ``research 
reactor,'' and ``testing facility.'' This final rule also eliminates 
license terms for licenses for facilities used for medical therapy or 
research and development, other than testing facilities; these licenses 
are issued under the authority of Sections 104a or 104c of the Atomic 
Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA). This final rule defines the 
license renewal process for licenses issued to testing facilities under 
the authority of Section 104c of the AEA or commercial or industrial 
NPUFs (including testing facilities) under the authority of Section 103 
of the AEA. This final rule requires all NPUF licensees to submit to 
the NRC final safety analysis report (FSAR) updates at intervals not to 
exceed 5 years. In addition, this final rule provides an accident dose 
criterion of 1 Roentgen equivalent man (rem) (0.01 sievert [Sv]) total 
effective dose equivalent (TEDE) for NPUFs other than testing 
facilities. The NRC is also issuing final implementation guidance for 
this final rule.

DATES: This final rule is effective on January 29, 2025.

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2011-0087 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-2011-0087. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Helen Chang; telephone: 301-415-3228; 
email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact the 
individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 
this document.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly available documents online in the 
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``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.
     NRC's PDR: The PDR, where you may examine and order copies 
of publicly available documents, is open by appointment. To make an 
appointment to visit the PDR, please send an email to 
[email protected] or call 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, between 8 
a.m. and 4 p.m. eastern time, Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Beall, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards, telephone: 301-415-3874, email: 
[email protected] and Duane Hardesty, Office of Nuclear Reactor 
Regulation, telephone: 301-415-3724, email: [email protected]. 
Both are staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 
DC 20555-0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Summary

A. Need for the Regulatory Action

    In April 2008, the Commission issued staff requirements memorandum 
(SRM) M080317B, ``Briefing on State of NRC Technical Programs,'' which 
directed the staff to ``examine the license renewal process for non-
power reactors and identify and implement efficiencies to streamline 
this process while ensuring that adequate protection of public health 
and safety are maintained.'' The need for improvement in the 
reliability and efficiency of the license renewal process was primarily 
driven by four issues: (1) historic NRC priorities and emergent issues; 
(2) limited licensee resources; (3) inconsistent existing license 
infrastructure; and (4) regulatory requirements and the broad scope of 
the renewal process.

B. Major Provisions

    The major provisions of this final rule include changes that:
     Revise the definitions for Non-power reactor, Testing 
facility, and Research reactor;
     Eliminate license terms for medical therapy or research 
and development facilities, other than testing facilities, licensed 
under paragraphs (a) or (c) of Sec.  50.21 of title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (10 CFR);
     Define the license renewal process for all commercial or 
industrial NPUFs (including testing facilities) licensed under Sec.  
50.22 and testing facilities licensed under Sec.  50.21(c);
     Require all NPUF licensees to submit an updated FSAR and 
subsequent FSAR updates to the NRC at intervals not to exceed 5 years;
     Amend the current timely renewal provision under Sec.  
2.109, allowing NPUFs subject to license renewal to continue operating 
under an existing license past its expiration date if the licensee 
submits a license renewal application at least 2 years (rather than 30 
days) before the current license expiration date;
     Provide an accident dose criterion of 1 rem (0.01 Sv) TEDE 
for NPUFs other than testing facilities;
     Extend the applicability of Sec.  50.59 to NPUF licensees 
regardless of their decommissioning status;
     Clarify an NPUF applicant's requirements for meeting the 
existing provisions of Sec.  51.45 for submitting an environmental 
report; and
     Eliminate the requirement for NPUF licensees to submit 
financial qualification information with license renewal applications 
under Sec.  50.33(f)(2).
    Concurrent with this final rule, the NRC is issuing Regulatory 
Guide (RG) 2.7, Revision 0, ``Preparation of Updated Final Safety 
Analysis Reports for Non-Power Production or Utilization Facilities.''

C. Costs and Benefits

    The NRC prepared a regulatory analysis to determine the expected 
quantitative costs and benefits of this final rule and the final 
implementing guidance, as well as qualitative factors to be considered 
in the NRC's rulemaking decision. Based on the analysis, the NRC 
concluded that this final rule will result in net savings to licensees 
and the NRC. The analysis examined the benefits and costs of the final 
rule requirements and the final implementing guidance compared to the 
baseline for the current license renewal process (i.e., the no-action 
alternative). Compared to the no-action baseline, the NRC estimates 
that total net benefits to NPUFs (i.e., cost savings minus costs) will 
be $5.5 million ($3.9 million using a 3-percent discount rate or $2.6 
million using a 7-percent discount rate) over a 20-year period. The 
average NPUF will receive net benefits ranging from approximately 
$78,000 to $166,000 over a 20-year period. The NRC will receive total 
net benefits of $12 million ($8.6 million using a 3-percent discount 
rate or $5.9 million using a 7-percent discount rate) over a 20-year 
period.
    The regulatory analysis also considered, in a qualitative fashion, 
additional benefits of this final rule and the final implementing 
guidance associated with regulatory efficiency, protection of public 
health and safety, promotion of the common defense and security, and 
protection of the environment.
    The regulatory analysis concluded that this final rule and the 
final implementing guidance are justified because of the cost savings 
received by both licensees and the NRC while public health and safety 
are maintained. A detailed discussion of the

[[Page 106236]]

methodology and complete results is presented in the ``Regulatory 
Analysis'' section of this document.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Discussion
III. Opportunity for Public Participation
IV. Public Comment Analysis
V. Section-by-Section Analysis
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
VII. Regulatory Analysis
VIII. Backfitting
IX. Cumulative Effects of Regulation
X. Plain Writing
XI. Voluntary Consensus Standards
XII. Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant 
Environmental Impact
XIII. Paperwork Reduction Act
XIV. Congressional Review Act
XV. Criminal Penalties
XVI. Availability of Guidance
XVII. Availability of Documents

I. Background

    The NRC licenses NPUFs under the authority granted in Sections 103 
and 104 of the AEA. Section 103 of the AEA applies to commercial and 
industrial facilities, and Sections 104a and 104c of the AEA apply to 
facilities used for medical therapy or research and development 
activities, respectively. The section of the AEA that provides 
licensing authority for the NRC corresponds directly to the class of 
license issued to a facility (e.g., Section 104a of the AEA authorizes 
the issuance of a ``class 104a'' license). Furthermore, Sections 104a 
and 104c of the AEA require that the Commission impose the minimum 
amount of regulation needed to promote the common defense and security; 
protect the health and safety of the public; and permit, under Section 
104a, the widest amount of effective medical therapy possible and, 
under Section 104c, the conduct of widespread and diverse research and 
development.
    The NRC regulates 34 NPUFs, of which 29 are research reactors or 
testing facilities currently licensed to operate. The NRC has issued 
construction permits for two of the five remaining NPUFs (SHINE Medical 
Technologies, Inc. (SHINE) and the Hermes-Kairos Testing facility),\1\ 
and the other three licensees are in the process of decommissioning 
their facilities (i.e., removing a facility or site safely from service 
and reducing residual radioactivity to a level that permits release of 
the site for unrestricted use or use under restricted conditions). Most 
NPUFs are located at universities or colleges throughout the United 
States. The NRC regulates one operating testing facility at the 
National Institute of Standards and Technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On May 18, 2018, the NRC issued a construction permit for 
Northwest Medical Isotopes, LLC. That construction permit was 
terminated on July 11, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. License Terms

    The AEA dictates an initial license term of no more than 40 years 
for class 103 facilities, which the NRC licenses under Sec.  50.22, but 
the AEA does not specify license terms for class 104a or 104c 
facilities, which are licensed under Sec.  50.21(a) or (c). The 
regulation that implements this statutory authority, Sec.  50.51(a), 
currently specifies that the NRC may grant an initial license for NPUFs 
for no longer than a 40-year license term. If the NRC initially issues 
a license for a shorter period, then it may renew the license by 
amendment for a maximum aggregate period not to exceed 40 years. An 
NPUF license is usually renewed for a term of 20 years. If the 
requested renewal would extend the license beyond 40 years from the 
date of issuance, the original license may not be renewed by amendment. 
Rather, the NRC must issue a renewed license that supersedes the 
initial license.
    Any application for license renewal must include an FSAR 
describing: (1) changes to the facility or facility operations 
resulting from new or amended regulatory requirements, and (2) changes 
and effects of changes to the facility or procedures and new 
experiments. The FSAR must include the elements specified in Sec.  
50.34. The NRC has guidance for preparing the FSAR in NUREG-1537, Part 
1, ``Guidelines for Preparing and Reviewing Applications for the 
Licensing of Non-Power Reactors: Format and Content.'' The NRC reviews 
NPUF initial and renewal license applications using NUREG-1537, Part 2, 
``Guidelines for Preparing and Reviewing Applications for the Licensing 
of Non-Power Reactors: Standard Review Plan and Acceptance Criteria.''
    As a license term nears its end, a licensee must submit a license 
renewal application to continue operations. A ``timely renewal'' 
provision exists in Sec.  2.109(a) to enable operations to continue 
beyond the license term during the NRC's review of a license renewal 
application. If the licensee files an application for a renewal or for 
a new license for the authorized activity at least 30 days before the 
expiration of an existing license, the existing license will not be 
deemed to have expired until the application has been finally 
determined.

B. Need for Improvement in the License Renewal Process

    In 2008, the NRC recognized a need to identify and implement 
efficiencies in the NPUF license renewal process while ensuring that 
adequate protection of public health and safety is maintained. Four 
issues primarily drove this effort to improve the reliability and 
efficiency of the process.
1. Historic NRC Priorities and Emergent Issues
    Under the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), the NRC's predecessor 
agency, NPUFs were some of the first reactors licensed and the first 
reactors to undergo license renewal. Most of these reactors were 
initially licensed in the late 1950s and 1960s for terms that varied 
from 10 to 40 years. The AEC started renewing these licenses in the 
1960s. License renewal was primarily an administrative activity until 
1976, when the NRC decided to also conduct a technical review 
equivalent to the initial licensing of the facility. The licenses that 
had been issued with initial 20-year terms were due for renewal during 
this timeframe. As the NRC started developing methods for conducting 
these technical reviews, an accident occurred at Unit 2 of the Three 
Mile Island (TMI) nuclear power plant.
    The NRC's focus on post-TMI activities resulted in a suspension of 
NPUF license renewal activities for several years. After license 
renewal activities were reinitiated, the NRC issued numerous renewals 
in a short period of time, primarily by relying on generic evaluations. 
These 20-year renewals expired starting in the late 1990s. The original 
licenses issued with 40-year terms also started expiring in the late 
1990s, creating a new surge of license renewal applications.
    As a result of the NRC's response to the events of September 11, 
2001, the NRC deferred work on a number of NPUF license renewal 
applications. In addition, the NRC's NPUF licensing activities focused 
on implementing Sec.  50.64, ``Limitations on the use of highly 
enriched uranium (HEU) in domestic non-power reactors,'' to convert 
non-power reactors to the use of low-enriched uranium. Therefore, 
reviews of these license renewal applications extended for many years. 
In all cases, the timely renewal provision enabled these NPUFs to 
continue operating during the NRC's review period.
2. Limited Licensee Resources
    Many NPUF licensees have limited staff resources available for 
licensing

[[Page 106237]]

support. The number of NPUF staff can range from one part-time employee 
for some low-power facilities to four or five full-time employees for 
higher-power facilities. The NPUF staff that perform the licensing 
function typically do so in addition to their normal organizational 
responsibilities, which often results in delays in the license renewal 
process, particularly in responding to the NRC's requests for 
additional information.
3. Inconsistent Existing License Infrastructure
    The NPUFs licensed under Sec.  50.21(a) or (c) are primarily at 
college and university sites. Staff turnover and limited staffing 
resources at an NPUF often contribute to a lack of historical knowledge 
of the development of the licensee's FSAR and changes to the FSAR. 
During the most recent round of license renewals, the NRC found that 
some of the submitted FSARs did not adequately reflect the current 
licensing bases for the respective licensees. Because the only required 
FSAR submission comes at license renewal, which can be at 20-year or 
greater intervals, submitted FSARs often contain varying levels of 
completeness and accuracy. Consequently, the NRC has issued requests 
for additional information to obtain missing information, seek 
clarifications and corrections, and document the current licensing 
basis.
4. Regulatory Requirements and Broad Scope of the Renewal Process
    For power reactors, license renewal reviews have a defined scope, 
primarily focused on aging management, as described in 10 CFR part 54. 
For NPUFs, there are no explicit requirements on the scope of issues to 
be addressed during license renewal. Therefore, the scope of review for 
license renewal was initially treated the same as that for an original 
license.
    In response to Commission direction in SRM-SECY-91-061, 
``Separation of Non-Reactor and Non-Power Reactor Licensing Activities 
from Power Reactor Licensing Activities in 10 CFR part 50,'' the NRC 
developed licensing guidance for the first time since many NPUF 
applicants were originally licensed. In that guidance (NUREG-1537, 
Parts 1 and 2), the NRC provides detailed descriptions of the scope, 
content, and format of FSARs and the NRC's process for reviewing 
initial license applications and license renewal applications. However, 
the first license renewals using NUREG-1537 had varying levels of 
consistency and did not propose an acceptable alternative to the 
guidance. This resulted in the NRC sending requests for additional 
information and some of the issues already described in Section I.B. of 
this document.

C. NRC Response to These Issues

    As a result of these issues, a backlog of NPUF license renewal 
applications developed and persisted. The Commission and other 
stakeholders voiced concerns not only about the backlog, but also about 
the burdensome nature of the license renewal process itself. The 
Commission issued SRM-M080317B, ``Briefing on State of NRC Technical 
Programs,'' in April 2008, directing the staff to ``examine the license 
renewal process for non-power reactors to identify and implement 
efficiencies to streamline this process while ensuring that adequate 
protection of public health and safety are maintained.''
    In October 2008, the staff provided the Commission with plans to 
improve the review process for NPUF license renewal applications in 
SECY-08-0161, ``Review of Research and Test Reactor License Renewal 
Applications.'' In SECY-08-0161, the staff summarized a public meeting 
held with stakeholders to gather feedback on the current process, ways 
the process could be improved, and options for improving the review 
process. The staff provided a detailed description of five options for 
streamlining the NPUF license renewal process:
     An ``alternate safety review approach'' that would limit 
the review of license renewal applications to changes to the facility 
since the previous license review occurred. Safe operation of the 
facility would be assured by the review of changes to the facility, 
compliance with the current regulations, the previous NRC analysis, and 
the NRC's inspection process.
     A ``graded approach'' that would base the areas of review 
on the relative risk associated with the facility applying for a 
renewed license. The graded approach would ensure safe operation by 
properly identifying the inherent risk associated with the facility and 
ensuring those risks are minimized.
     A ``generic analysis approach'' that would require the NRC 
to review and approve a generic reactor design similar to the NRC 
topical report process. The NRC would rely on the previously approved 
generic analysis and would not reanalyze those items.
     A ``generic siting analysis approach'' that would require 
the NRC to develop a generic communication that contains information 
related to each of the licensee sites. The licensees could then 
reference this generic communication in their license renewal 
submittals.
     An ``extended license term approach'' would permit 
extended or indefinite terms for NPUF licenses. The staff described 
this approach in SECY-08-0161:

    In order to permit an extended term (including possibly an 
indefinite term), the staff would have to explain why it is 
appropriate and, more importantly, demonstrate that there are no 
aging concerns.
    Environmental conditions such as temperature, pressure and 
radiation levels in most [research and test reactors] are not 
significant. With surveillance, maintenance and repair, [research 
and test reactors] can have indefinite lives.
    For a facility to be eligible for an extended license term, the 
staff would complete a detailed renewal with a licensing basis 
reviewed against NUREG-1537. To maintain the licensing basis over 
time, the staff would propose a license condition or regulation that 
requires licensees to revise their [safety analysis reports] on a 
periodic basis such as every 2 years. The inspection program would 
be enhanced to place additional focus on surveillance, maintenance 
and repair, and changes to the facility made under 10 CFR 50.59. The 
licensee would still be required to adhere to changes in the 
regulations.

    The Commission issued SRM-SECY-08-0161, ``Review of Research and 
Test Reactor License Renewal Applications,'' in March 2009. The 
Commission directed the staff to: (1) immediately implement short-term 
program initiatives to address the backlog of license renewal 
applications; (2) work with the regulated community and other 
stakeholders to develop an interim streamlining process to focus the 
review on the most safety-significant aspects of the license renewal 
application; and (3) streamline the review process to ensure that it 
becomes more efficient and consistent, thereby reducing uncertainties 
in the process while ensuring compliance with regulatory requirements.
    As part of its direction to develop the program initiatives, the 
Commission instructed the staff to implement a graded approach 
commensurate with the risk posed by each facility, incorporate elements 
of the alternate safety review approach, and use risk insights from 
security assessments to inform the dose threshold. In addition, the 
Commission told the staff to develop an interim staff guidance (ISG) 
document that employs the graded approach to streamline the license 
renewal application process.
    Lastly, the Commission instructed the staff to submit a long-term 
plan for an enhanced NPUF license renewal process. The Commission 
directed that the plan include development of a basis

[[Page 106238]]

for redefining the scope of the process as well as a recommendation 
regarding the need for rulemaking and guidance development.
    The staff responded to the Commission's direction by implementing 
short-term actions to address the license renewal application backlog 
and developing ISG-2009-001, ``Interim Staff Guidance on the 
Streamlined Review Process for License Renewal for Research Reactors,'' 
hereafter referred to as the ISG. The ISG called for employing a graded 
approach to streamline the license renewal application process. Since 
October 2009, the NRC has reviewed license renewal applications 
according to the streamlined review process presented in the ISG. The 
ISG identified the three most safety-significant sections of an FSAR: 
reactor design and operation, accident analysis, and technical 
specifications. The NRC also has reviewed licensees' radiation 
protection and waste management programs and compliance with financial 
requirements. The ISG divided facilities into two groups: (1) those 
facilities with licensed power of less than 2 megawatts thermal 
(MW(t)), which would undergo a limited review focusing on the safety-
significant aspects, considering the decisions and precedents set by 
past NRC reviews; and (2) those facilities with licensed power of 2 
MW(t) and greater, which would undergo a full review using NUREG-1537, 
Part 2. The process outlined in the ISG facilitated the NRC's review of 
license renewal applications and enabled the NRC to review applications 
in a timelier manner.
    In addition, the staff issued SECY-09-0095, ``Long-Term Plan for 
Enhancing the Research and Test Reactor License Renewal Process and 
Status of the Development and Use of the Interim Staff Guidance,'' in 
June 2009, to provide the Commission with a long-term plan for 
enhancing the NPUF license renewal process. In the long-term plan, the 
staff proposed to develop a regulatory basis to support rulemaking to 
streamline and enhance the NPUF license renewal process. The Commission 
issued SRM-M090811, ``Briefing on Research and Test Reactor (RTR) 
Challenges,'' in August 2009, which directed the staff to accelerate 
the rulemaking to establish a more efficient, effective, and focused 
regulatory framework.

D. 2012 Regulatory Basis

    In August 2012, the staff completed the ``Non-Power Reactor (NPR) 
License Renewal Rulemaking: Regulatory Basis Document,'' hereafter 
referred to as the regulatory basis.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ At the time of publication of the regulatory basis, the 
rulemaking title was ``Non-Power Reactor (NPR) License Renewal 
Rulemaking.'' During the development of the proposed rule, the scope 
of the rulemaking expanded to include licenses for certain 
facilities that are not reactors, based upon recent license 
applicants (e.g., for medical radioisotope irradiation and 
processing facilities). In order to encompass all affected entities, 
the NRC has changed the title of the rulemaking to ``Non-power 
Production or Utilization Facility License Renewal.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NRC, in the regulatory basis, analyzed the NPUF license renewal 
process's technical, legal, and policy issues; effects on public 
health, safety, and security; effects on licensees; effects on the NRC; 
and stakeholder feedback. The NRC also considered lessons learned from 
implementation of the streamlined review process outlined in the ISG. 
The NRC concluded that a rulemaking was warranted. A public meeting was 
held on August 7, 2014, to discuss the regulatory basis and rulemaking 
options. The NRC held another public meeting on October 7, 2015, to 
afford stakeholders the opportunity to provide feedback and comment on 
preliminary proposed rule concepts. Participant comments and questions 
focused on the potential effects of eliminating license terms, the 
scope of review under the new process, and how the amended regulation 
would work compared to the existing license renewal process. The NRC 
considered the comments when developing the proposed rule.

E. 2017 Proposed Rule

    On March 30, 2017, the NRC published the proposed rule, ``Non-Power 
Production or Utilization Facility License Renewal'' in the Federal 
Register (82 FR 15643). The NRC proposed to eliminate license terms for 
facilities used for medical therapy or research and development 
licensed under the authority of Sections 104a or 104c of the AEA, other 
than for testing facilities. Other proposed amendments addressed the 
license renewal process for licenses issued to testing facilities under 
the authority of Section 104c of the AEA and licenses issued to non-
power commercial facilities under the authority of Section 103 of the 
AEA (including testing facilities). The proposed rule also included a 
provision to require all NPUF licensees to submit FSAR updates to the 
NRC every 5 years. The NRC also proposed an accident dose criterion of 
1 rem (0.01 Sv) TEDE for NPUFs other than testing facilities. The NRC 
requested public feedback on specific questions, including the 
criteria, other than power level, to use when determining the 
applicability of requirements for low-risk commercial production or 
utilization facilities and low-risk testing facilities. The proposed 
rule provided a public comment period of 75 days. The NRC received 16 
comment submissions on the proposed rule and draft implementation 
guidance, as discussed further in Section IV of this document. The NRC 
considered those comments in developing this final rule.

II. Discussion

    This final rule: (1) revises the definitions for Non-power reactor, 
Research reactor, and Testing facility; (2) eliminates license terms 
for NPUFs licensed under Sec.  50.21(a) or (c), other than testing 
facilities; (3) defines the license renewal process for NPUFs 
(including testing facilities) licensed under Sec.  50.22 and testing 
facilities licensed under Sec.  50.21(c); (4) requires all NPUF 
licensees to submit to the NRC an updated FSAR and subsequent FSAR 
updates at intervals not to exceed 5 years; (5) amends the current 
timely renewal provision under Sec.  2.109, allowing an NPUF subject to 
license renewal to continue operating under an existing license past 
its expiration date if the licensee submits a license renewal 
application at least 2 years before the current license expiration 
date; (6) provides an accident dose criterion of 1 rem (0.01 Sv) TEDE 
for NPUFs other than testing facilities; (7) extends the applicability 
of Sec.  50.59 to NPUFs regardless of their decommissioning status; (8) 
clarifies the requirements for NPUF license applicants to meet the 
existing provisions of Sec.  51.45; and (9) eliminates the requirement 
to submit financial qualification information with license renewal 
applications under Sec.  50.33(f)(2).
    This final rule enhances the effectiveness and efficiency of the 
NPUF license renewal process, consistent with the AEA's criterion for 
imposing minimum regulation on facilities of these types that is needed 
to promote the common defense and security and protect the health and 
safety of the public. Each of the nine main objectives of this final 
rule are discussed in detail in this section.
    1. Revises the definitions for Non-power reactor, Research reactor, 
and Testing facility.
    This final rule addresses inconsistencies in definitions and 
terminology throughout 10 CFR chapter I to improve clarity in 
determining the applicability of the regulations associated with NPUFs 
as defined in Sec.  50.2.
    The NRC received public comments on the proposed definition of Non-

[[Page 106239]]

power production or utilization facility. In reviewing the comments, 
the NRC identified that the proposed definition for Non-power 
production or utilization facility was too broad for defining 
production facilities that are NPUFs. Previously, the definition 
excluded fuel reprocessing plants, but did not exclude production 
facilities designed or used primarily for the formation of plutonium or 
uranium-233 or designed or used for the separation of the isotopes of 
plutonium. Ultimately, the NRC did not revise the definition for Non-
power production or utilization facility because an appropriate 
definition to exclude all production facilities as defined under 
paragraphs (1) and (2) of the definition of Production facility in 
Sec.  50.2 was added by the rule on Emergency Preparedness for Small 
Modular Reactors and Other New Technologies (88 FR 80050; November 16, 
2023). Production facilities of the type defined under paragraph (1) of 
the definition of Production facility in Sec.  50.2 have been owned by 
the U.S. Department of Energy to produce plutonium or uranium-233 and 
have not been NRC licensees. If such a facility were to be licensed by 
the NRC, the facility's particular use of special nuclear material 
would require the Commission to determine the licensing path for the 
facility. Production facilities, as defined under paragraph (2) of the 
definition of Production facility in Sec.  50.2, are not NPUFs because 
these facilities have a higher potential of radiological risk to the 
environment and the public than NPUFs (e.g., an inventory of high-level 
liquid radioactive wastes). This higher risk is evidenced by the 
applicability to these facilities of NRC regulations in appendix B to 
10 CFR part 50, ``Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants 
and Fuel Reprocessing Plants'' and appendix F to 10 CFR part 50, 
``Policy Relating to the Siting of Fuel Reprocessing Plants and Related 
Waste Management Facilities.'' The definition of Non-power production 
or utilization facility in Sec.  50.2 excludes production facilities 
designed or used primarily for the formation of plutonium or uranium-
233 or the separation of the isotopes of plutonium.
    The NRC also received a comment from the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology on the definition of Testing facility in Sec.  
50.2 and Research reactor in Sec.  171.11(b)(2). The commenter 
recommended that the NRC revise the definitions of Testing facility and 
Research reactor to ``remove the arbitrary 10 MW(t) threshold, and 
apply instead a risk-based approach to its regulation of a testing 
facility.'' Further, the commenter stated that the risk ``is best 
quantified by accident analyses performed under a licensing safety 
analysis'' and linked the recommended definition to the NRC's accident 
dose criterion of 1 rem (0.01 Sv) in the proposed rule.
    The technical basis associated with the 10 MW(t) threshold under 
the current definition for Testing facility, while generally based on 
safety significance, is not explicitly documented. Similarly, the 
technical basis for the 1 MW(t) threshold (coupled with specific design 
features) under the current definition for Testing facility is not 
explicitly documented. These prescriptive power thresholds do not 
account for the safety features that are engineered into the facility 
design and those barriers that must be breached during an accident 
before a release of radioactive material to the environment can occur. 
Therefore, these thresholds do not accurately represent the risk 
associated with a particular facility. For these reasons, the use of a 
postulated accident dose is a more risk-informed, performance-based 
approach, compared to using the power level of the reactor for 
distinguishing between types of NPUFs, such as research reactors and 
testing facilities. As a result of this public comment, the NRC revised 
the definitions of Testing facility and Research reactor to reflect 
this risk-informed approach by incorporating an accident dose criterion 
of 1 rem (0.01 Sv) TEDE, the basis for which is discussed in section 
II.6 of this document.
    Additionally, the NRC is making conforming changes to the 
definitions of Testing facility, Research reactor, and Non-power 
reactor wherever these definitions appear throughout 10 CFR chapter I. 
The regulations currently refer to many types of facilities that are 
categorized as NPUFs, such as non-power reactors, research reactors, 
training reactors, testing reactors, testing facilities, and critical 
assemblies. The NRC reviewed each instance of these various terms in 10 
CFR chapter I. Where appropriate in this final rule, the NRC added, 
corrected, or standardized the terminology and definitions.
    While this final rule revises the definition of Research reactor in 
Sec. Sec.  170.3 and 171.5 to conform to other definitions in 10 CFR 
chapter I, the NRC did not change the definition of Research reactor in 
the specific exemption for Federally owned and State-owned research 
reactors in Sec.  170.11(a)(9) or Sec.  171.11(b)(2). The current 
definition in Sec.  171.11(b)(2) is based on the language of the 
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, as amended (Pub. L. 101-508) 
(OBRA-90), a statutory requirement imposed by Congress. Further, a 
substantively similar definition of Research reactor was included in 
the provisions of the Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act 
(Pub. L. 115-439) (NEIMA) that relate to the NRC's fee recovery 
structure. Changing the definition of Research reactor in Sec.  
171.11(b)(2) would therefore be inconsistent with OBRA-90 and NEIMA. 
The definition of Research reactor in Sec.  170.11(a)(9) is not based 
on OBRA-90, but the basis for that exemption from fees parallels the 
basis for the exemption from annual fees in Sec.  171.11(b)(2). 
Changing the definition of Research reactor in Sec.  170.11(a)(9) would 
be a substantive change beyond the scope of this final rule.
    Where appropriate, this final rule standardizes the terminology in 
other parts of the regulations to modify the intended scope of 
regulations citing Research and test reactors to be either Non-power 
reactors or Non-power production or utilization facilities. For 
example, this final rule changes Research and test reactors to Non-
power production or utilization facilities in appendix E to 10 CFR part 
50, ``Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Production and 
Utilization Facilities,'' while in Sec.  55.40, this final rule changes 
Test and research reactors to Non-power reactors. Also, where 
appropriate, the final rule changes the uses in other parts of the 
regulations for Testing facility, Research reactor, and Non-power 
reactor to reference only one definition in the part where that 
definition is used most, unless the specific meaning is needed and 
different for a given part. In addition, the final rule adds the 
definition of Non-power reactor, as it is defined in Sec.  50.2, to the 
definitions section in 10 CFR part 73 because the term is used many 
times throughout that part. These changes increase clarity by defining 
all NPUF-related terms consistently where they are most used in the 
regulations.
    This final rule also revises the definition of Non-power reactor to 
distinguish between non-power reactors used for research and 
development activities and non-power reactors used for commercial or 
industrial purposes. Before this final rule, all non-power reactors 
were defined in Sec.  50.2 as ``a research or test reactor licensed 
under Sec. Sec.  50.21(c) or 50.22 of this part for research and 
development.'' This final rule defines non-power reactors more 
precisely as one of three mutually exclusive categories of facilities: 
(1) testing facilities, (2) research reactors

[[Page 106240]]

that are NPUFs licensed under Sec.  50.21(c), or (3) commercial or 
industrial reactors that are NPUFs licensed under Sec.  50.22. The 
second and third categories exclude testing facilities, and the 
facilities in those categories must meet the accident dose criterion in 
Sec.  50.34(a)(1)(i). If they do not meet this criterion, then they 
will be considered testing facilities.
    2. Eliminates license terms for NPUFs, other than testing 
facilities, licensed under Sec.  50.21(a) or (c).
    The final rule language in Sec.  50.51(c) eliminates license terms 
for NPUFs, other than testing facilities, licensed under Sec.  50.21(a) 
or (c). Before this final rule, Sec.  50.51(a) stated, ``Each license 
will be issued for a fixed period of time to be specified in the 
license but in no case to exceed 40 years from date of issuance.'' This 
included all facility licenses issued under 10 CFR part 50, including 
licenses for facilities issued under Sec.  50.21(a) or (c). However, 
the AEA does not establish specific license terms nor the need for 
license terms for class 104 facilities.
    Historically, license renewal afforded both the NRC and the public 
the opportunity to re-evaluate the licensing basis of the NPUF. The 
purpose of license renewal was to assess the likelihood of continued 
safe operation of the facility, such that radioactive materials can be 
used for beneficial civilian purposes in a safe and secure manner. For 
several reasons that are unique to NPUFs, this objective can be 
achieved through existing oversight activities and review of FSAR 
updates submitted pursuant to the new requirements in Sec.  50.71(e) of 
the final rule (see Section II.4. of this document). This approach is 
consistent with the NRC's goal of efficient and effective licensing and 
will implement and reflect lessons learned from decades of processing 
license renewal applications. The NRC reached this conclusion based on 
three considerations: (1) low overall radiological risk, (2) limited 
aging-related issues, and (3) slow evolution of the design basis.
    First, compared to power reactors, the NPUFs licensed under Sec.  
50.21(a) or (c), other than testing facilities, operate at low power 
levels, temperatures, and pressures, and have a small inventory of 
fission products in the fuel. Therefore, these NPUFs present a lower 
potential radiological risk to the environment and the public. 
Additionally, the consequences of the maximum hypothetical accidents 
(MHAs) for these facilities fall below the standards in 10 CFR part 20 
for protecting the health and safety of the public.
    Of the 30 NPUFs that are currently licensed to operate and are 
eligible for non-expiring licenses (excluding the one testing 
facility), 26 have cores that are submerged in tanks or pools of water 
that provide sufficient passive decay heat removal to prevent 
overheating of the fuel.\3\ Of these 26 licensed facilities, 24 are not 
required to have emergency core cooling systems (ECCSs) because 
conservative accident analyses have shown that these NPUFs do not 
generate enough decay heat, even after extended operation at maximum 
licensed power, to be at risk of overheating, failure of a fission 
product barrier, or posing a threat to public health and safety. 
Additionally, many of the licensees monitor for leaks by routinely 
inspecting the facility, tracking and trending water inventory, and 
performing surveillance on installed pool-level instrumentation and 
sensors. Licensees sample the water periodically and analyze the 
radioisotopes in the primary and, if applicable, secondary coolant. 
Many licensees sample weekly for gross radioactive material content. 
This data also is used to establish trends to quickly identify fuel or 
heat exchanger failure. Most of these licensees analyze, in their 
FSARs, pool and heat exchanger failures and the potential consequences 
for the safety of the reactor, workers, and public. In general, the 
radioisotope concentrations in pool or tank water at NPUFs are within 
the effluent concentration limits specified in appendix B to 10 CFR 
part 20, and therefore are not radiologically significant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The three Aerojet-General Nucleonics reactors (University of 
New Mexico (Docket No. 50-252), Idaho State University (Docket No. 
50-284), and Texas A&M University (Docket No. 50-59)), each rated at 
5 watts, and the University of Florida Argonaut reactor (Docket No. 
50-83), rated at 100 kilowatts, are not considered tank or pool 
reactors but have similarly low risk profiles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Only two of the NPUFs eligible for non-expiring licenses are 
required by their safety analyses to have an ECCS to maintain core 
cooling in the highly unlikely case that a loss-of-coolant accident 
uncovers the core.\4\ For these NPUFs, the ECCS is needed only to 
direct flow into the top of the tank or pool to provide cooling for a 
limited time after reactor shutdown. This period of time depends on the 
recent operational history of the reactor, which determines the decay 
heat present at reactor shutdown. After this relatively brief time, air 
cooling is adequate to remove decay heat without the ECCS. 
Additionally, required surveillance and testing of the ECCS at these 
facilities help ensure the performance of the system. Operation of the 
facility is not permitted if the ECCS has not been verified to be 
operable before reactor startup or if the system is deemed inoperable 
during reactor operation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The two facilities are Massachusetts Institute of Technology 
(MIT) (Docket No. 50-20) and the University of California/Davis 
(Docket No. 50-607).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, the NRC has found that the simple design and operation of 
these facilities yield a limited scope of aging-related concerns. There 
have been no significant aging issues identified at the time of license 
renewal because the NRC currently imposes aging-related surveillance 
requirements on NPUFs via technical specifications, as needed. Aging of 
components is specifically addressed in the standard review plan and 
acceptance criteria used for evaluating license renewal applications 
(i.e., NUREG-1537, Part 2). Parts 1 and 2 of NUREG-1537 document 
lessons learned and known aging issues from prior reviews. Since NUREG-
1537 was published in 1996, NRC reviews and assessments have not 
revealed any additional issues or need to update the NUREG. 
Specifically, based on operating experience over the past 60 years and 
review of license renewal applications over the past 40 years, and as 
documented in NUREG-1537, Parts 1 and 2, the NRC has determined that 
for NPUFs, the two main areas related to aging that could need 
surveillance because of potential safety concerns are 1) fuel cladding 
and 2) instrumentation and control features.
    Regarding fuel cladding, the NRC currently requires NPUFs to 
perform periodic fuel inspections. Through years of experience, the NRC 
has found that aging-related fuel failures either do not occur, or 
failures that do occur do not release significant amounts of fission 
products and are quickly detected by existing monitoring systems and 
surveillances. If fuel failures are detected, licensees are able to 
take the facility out of service and remove any failed assemblies from 
service.
    With regard to instrumentation and control, the NRC has found that 
failures in this area result in automatic facility shutdown. Failures 
reveal themselves to the licensee and do not prevent safe shutdown. 
Over the past 60 years of operation of these facilities, the potential 
occurrence of age-related degradation has been successfully mitigated 
through inspection, surveillance, monitoring, trending, recordkeeping, 
replacement, and refurbishment. In addition, licensees are required to 
report preventive and corrective maintenance activities in their annual 
reports, which are reviewed by the NRC. This allows the NRC to identify 
new aging issues if they occur. Therefore, the NRC has

[[Page 106241]]

concluded that existing requirements and facility design and 
operational features will address concerns over aging-related issues 
during a non-expiring license term.
    Third, the design bases of these facilities evolve slowly over 
time, with approximately five license amendment requests from all NPUF 
licensees combined each year and, on average, only five Sec.  50.59 
evaluations per facility per year for changes that do not require prior 
NRC approval.
    Given these considerations, the elimination of license terms for 
medical therapy or research and development facilities, other than 
testing facilities, licensed under Sec.  50.21(a) or (c), combined with 
the addition of requirements for periodic FSAR submittals, will provide 
a new framework for enabling licensees to continue to operate safely 
while reducing burden on licensees and the NRC. The final rule at Sec.  
50.71(e) requires licensees to submit updated FSARs and subsequent FSAR 
updates to ensure that a facility's licensing basis is kept up-to-date, 
a major function previously provided by the license renewal process, 
while imposing significantly less burden on licensees. Eliminating 
license terms for these licensees will allow the NRC to focus its 
resources on oversight of these facilities, such as conducting routine 
inspection activities and reviewing annual reports and FSAR updates. 
Recurring FSAR updates by licensees and reviews by the NRC will 
increase licensees' focus on maintaining their facilities' licensing 
bases. Should the NRC identify potential issues with the facility's 
continued safe operation in its reviews of FSAR updates, the Commission 
can undertake regulatory actions specified in Sec.  2.202 to modify, 
suspend, or revoke a license. In addition, the public will remain 
informed about facility operations through the publicly available FSAR 
submittals and will continue to have opportunities to participate in 
the regulatory process through licensing actions and the Sec.  2.206 
petition process. By eliminating license terms and requiring periodic 
FSAR update submittals, coupled with existing oversight processes, the 
NRC will reduce the burden on the affected licensees and the NRC, which 
is consistent with the AEA and supports the NRC's goal of efficient and 
effective licensing.
    Most licenses of existing NPUFs licensed under Sec.  50.21(a) or 
(c), other than testing facilities, will be modified by order to remove 
the license terms after the effective date of this final rule (see 
Section II.4. of this document). Facilities licensed under Sec.  
50.21(a) or (c), other than testing facilities, that have undergone 
relicensing using the guidance in NUREG-1537, Part 2 will be eligible 
to receive a non-expiring license without again renewing the current 
license. The current NPUF licensees that have not undergone the license 
renewal process using the guidance in NUREG-1537, Part 2, will each 
need to submit an application for license renewal if they wish to 
continue facility operation beyond the current license term. The NRC 
will review the application using NUREG-1537, Part 2, and the ISG. If 
the NRC concludes that a licensee's application meets the standard for 
issuing a renewed license, then the NRC would issue a non-expiring 
renewed license. If, in the future, the NRC issues an operating license 
to a new facility, other than a testing facility, under Sec.  50.21(a) 
or (c), the license would be non-expiring and would be subject to 
periodic FSAR submittal requirements applicable to all NPUF licensees.
    This final rule makes conforming changes to requirements for 
facilities that are decommissioning by revising Sec.  50.82(b) and (c). 
These provisions currently use the expiration of the operating license 
as a reference point to address license termination applications and 
collection periods for shortfalls in decommissioning funding for NPUFs. 
This final rule clarifies that NPUFs (including testing facilities) 
licensed under Sec.  50.22 and testing facilities licensed under Sec.  
50.21(c) are the only NPUFs with license expiration dates. The 
reference point for NPUFs licensed under Sec.  50.21(a) or (c), other 
than testing facilities, is the NPUF's permanent cessation of 
operations.
    3. Defines the license renewal process for NPUFs (including testing 
facilities) licensed under Sec.  50.22 and testing facilities licensed 
under Sec.  50.21(c).
    For NPUFs (including testing facilities) licensed under Sec.  50.22 
and testing facilities licensed under Sec.  50.21(c), this final rule 
defines the license renewal process in Sec.  50.135. This one section 
consolidates existing regulatory requirements (e.g., requirements 
regarding written communications, application filing, application 
contents, and the issuance of renewed licenses) for current and future 
licensees. This final rule does not impose new regulations on these 
facilities. The NRC also is making a conforming change to Sec.  50.8 to 
reflect the approved information collection requirement of Sec.  
50.135.
    Section 103 of the AEA establishes a license term of no more than 
40 years for commercial or industrial facilities licensed under Sec.  
50.22. Although the AEA does not establish a fixed license term for 
testing facilities, licensees for these facilities are currently 
subject to additional license renewal requirements (e.g., siting 
subject to 10 CFR part 100, Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards 
review, and environmental impact statements) because of the potential 
for higher radiological risks associated with their facilities' design, 
operation, or use as compared to other class 104a or 104c licensees. 
Therefore, all commercial or industrial NPUFs (including testing 
facilities) licensed under Sec.  50.22 and testing facilities licensed 
under Sec.  50.21(c) will continue to have fixed license terms and 
undergo license renewal. As described in Sec.  50.135(c)(2), these 
NPUFs will be able to submit a license renewal application to the 
Commission no more than 10 years in advance of the expiration of the 
operating license currently in effect. The requirement in Sec.  
50.135(c)(2) is not intended to affect the term of operating licenses 
granted to NPUFs.
    The NRC is making renewed operating licenses for these facilities 
effective, and thereby replacing the previous operating license, 
immediately upon the date of issuance. The applicant for the renewed 
license can propose a schedule for implementation of the renewed 
licensee. This implementation schedule would ensure that the licensee 
can make any necessary and conforming changes to the facility processes 
and procedures required by the applicable conditions of the renewed 
license. The NRC will review and make the schedule, if approved, a 
condition of the renewed license. The immediate effectiveness of the 
renewed license is a change from the proposed rule, which would have 
made the renewed license effective 30 days after issuance. This final 
rule provides a substantively similar result as the proposed rule and 
provides licensees additional flexibility in the timing of their 
implementation of the renewed license.
    If administrative or judicial appeal affects the renewed license, 
then the previous operating license will be reinstated unless its term 
has expired and the facility has failed to submit a license renewal 
application in a timely manner.
    During the development of this final rule, the NRC recognized that 
Sec.  50.135(e)(2) in the proposed rule could have unnecessarily 
restricted the license term for a renewed NPUF license to less than 40 
years. Section 103 of the AEA allows for license terms of up to 40 
years. To address this issue, this final rule clarifies that renewed 
licenses are

[[Page 106242]]

issued for a fixed period of time, not to exceed 40 years.
    4. Requires all NPUF licensees to submit to the NRC updated FSARs 
and subsequent FSAR updates at intervals not to exceed 5 years.
    Maintaining up-to-date FSARs facilitates safe management of a 
facility, including current understanding of the licensing bases and 
effective training of personnel, and enables the NRC to fulfill its 
statutory obligations and regulatory responsibilities effectively. 
Section 50.71(e) of the final rule requires all NPUF licensees to 
submit to the NRC updated FSARs and subsequent FSAR updates at 
intervals not to exceed 5 years. The updated FSAR will incorporate the 
various supplements and amendments that may have been submitted, either 
in response to NRC questions or on the licensee's own initiative, 
following the original submittal to create a single and complete 
updated document that can then serve as the baseline for future 
changes. Given the requirement to submit subsequent FSAR updates, the 
NRC anticipates that licensees will document changes to the licensing 
bases as they occur, which will aid in maintaining continuity of 
knowledge and the understanding of changes and effects of changes on 
the facility both for the licensee and the NRC. The NRC anticipates 
that these changes will result in minimal additional burden on 
licensees and the NRC because only a small number of changes have 
occurred per facility each year. In addition, licensees should have 
already documented these changes under Sec.  50.59 or through a license 
amendment request under Sec.  50.90.
    This final rule requires licensees to submit, in accordance with 
Sec.  50.4, a complete updated FSAR within 5 years of receipt of a 
facility operating license (Sec.  50.71(e)(3)(iv)) and subsequent FSAR 
updates at successive intervals not to exceed 5 years (Sec.  
50.71(e)(4)(ii)). The NRC will issue orders to existing facilities 
licensed under Sec.  50.21(c) that have undergone the license renewal 
process using the guidance in NUREG-1537, Part 2. These licensee-
specific orders will direct these licensees to submit their updated 
FSARs, after which they will be subject to the new requirement in Sec.  
50.71(e)(4)(ii) to submit subsequent FSAR updates.
    To issue the licensee-specific orders, the NRC will group the 
facilities based upon when they have undergone license renewal using 
NUREG-1537. The orders will dictate when a licensee's initial updated 
FSAR will be due to the NRC. The NRC plans to stagger the dates over a 
5-year period following the effective date of this final rule. The NRC 
will place existing operating and decommissioning NPUF licensees in 
three groups as follows:
    (1) Group 1 consists of licensees that completed the license 
renewal process most recently using NUREG-1537. The NRC will establish 
a due date for the updated FSAR that will be at least 1 year and no 
later than 3 years from the effective date of this final rule. The NRC 
will require these licensees to submit an updated FSAR first because, 
with a recent license renewal, the FSARs should require minimal 
updates.
    (2) Group 2 generally consists of licensees for which the NRC 
reviewed the license renewal application before Group 1 using NUREG-
1537, and includes the three facilities currently in decommissioning. 
The NRC will establish a due date for the updated FSAR that will be at 
least 2 years and no later than 5 years from the effective date of this 
final rule. The NRC will allow these licensees more time to submit an 
updated FSAR than Group 1 licensees because more time has passed since 
license renewal, so additional time may be needed to update their 
FSARs.
    (3) Group 3 consists of the remaining NPUF licensees that have not 
undergone license renewal using NUREG-1537. The licenses for these 
facilities are all due to expire in less than 5 years from the 
effective date of this final rule. If these licensees choose to renew 
their facility operating licenses, they will be subject to the 
requirements in Sec.  50.71(e) after issuance of the renewed license.
    The general approach will be to stagger the submittal dates within 
Groups 1 and 2 such that licensees that most recently completed license 
renewal will be the first to submit their updated FSAR. However, the 
licensee-specific orders will also consider facility-specific 
circumstances and NRC discretion.
    This final rule also corrects a grammatical error in footnote 1 to 
Sec.  50.71(e). The footnote previously stated, ``Effects of changes 
includes appropriate revisions of descriptions in the FSAR such that 
the FSAR (as updated) is complete and accurate.'' This final rule 
changes ``includes'' to ``include'' so that the plural subject is 
followed by a plural verb.
    5. Amends the current timely renewal provision under Sec.  2.109, 
allowing an NPUF subject to license renewal to continue operating under 
an existing license past its expiration date if the licensee submits a 
license renewal application at least 2 years before the current license 
expiration date.
    The requirements in Sec.  2.101(a) allow the NRC to determine the 
acceptability of an application for review by the NRC. However, before 
this final rule, Sec.  2.109 allowed an NPUF licensee to submit its 
license renewal application as late as 30 days before the expiration of 
the existing license. Historical precedent indicates that 30 days is 
not a sufficient period of time for the NRC to adequately assess the 
sufficiency of a license renewal application for review. As a result, 
the NRC accepted license renewal applications and addressed their 
deficiencies in the license renewal process by issuing requests for 
additional information. This approach increased the duration of the 
license renewal process and resulted in multiple facilities operating 
many years into a ``timely renewal'' period without renewed licenses.
    To address this issue, the NRC is revising the timely renewal 
provision for NPUFs (including testing facilities) licensed under Sec.  
50.22 and testing facilities licensed under Sec.  50.21(c) to establish 
a length of time adequate for the NRC to review the sufficiency of a 
license renewal application. Specifically, this final rule amends Sec.  
2.109, allowing a facility to continue operating under an existing 
license past its expiration date if the licensee submits a sufficient 
license renewal application at least 2 years before the current license 
expiration date. In such cases, the existing license will not be deemed 
to have expired until the application has been finally determined by 
the NRC. This final rule ensures that the NRC has adequate time prior 
to the expiration of the current license to review the sufficiency of 
license renewal applications while the facility continues to operate 
under the terms of its current license.
    The proposed rule would have eliminated this provision for medical 
therapy or research and development facilities, other than testing 
facilities, licensed under Sec.  50.21(a) or (c), because these 
facilities would no longer have license expiration dates.
    The NRC reinstates the provision in this final rule to enable its 
use for the remaining license renewal applications that may be 
submitted after this final rule is published. The NRC anticipates that 
there is one research reactor licensee that would use this provision.
    6. Provides an accident dose criterion of 1 rem (0.01 Sv) TEDE for 
NPUFs other than testing facilities.
    The standards in 10 CFR part 20 for protection against ionizing 
radiation provide a limit on the maximum yearly radiation dose a member 
of the public can receive from the operation of any

[[Page 106243]]

NRC-licensed facility. Licensees are required to maintain programs and 
facility design features to ensure that these limits are met. In 
addition to the dose limits in 10 CFR part 20, accident dose criteria 
are also applied during licensing to determine the acceptability of the 
licensed facility. The accident dose criteria are not dose limits; they 
inform a licensee's accident analyses and the development of successive 
safety measures (i.e., defense in depth) so that in the unlikely event 
of an accident, the NRC has reasonable assurance that no acute 
radiation-related harm will result to any member of the public. Before 
this final rule, the accident dose criterion for NPUFs, other than 
testing facilities, was the 10 CFR part 20 dose limit to a member of 
the public. For testing facilities, accident dose criteria are found in 
10 CFR part 100: 25 rem (0.25 Sv) to the whole body and 300 rem (3 Sv) 
to the thyroid.
    Before January 1, 1994, the NRC had generally found acceptable 
accident doses for applicants applying for an initial or renewed NPUF 
license, other than for testing facilities, that were less than 0.5 rem 
(0.005 Sv) to the whole body and 3 rem (0.03 Sv) to the thyroid for 
members of the public. On May 21, 1991,\5\ the NRC amended 10 CFR part 
20 to reduce the dose limit to a member of the public to 0.1 rem (0.001 
Sv) TEDE (56 FR 23360) with an implementation date of January 1, 1994. 
Since January 1, 1994, for applicants applying for an initial or 
renewed NPUF license, other than for testing facilities, the NRC has 
compared the results from the accident analyses submitted in initial or 
renewed license applications with the standards in 10 CFR part 20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In the proposed rule, the NRC misidentified the part 20 
rulemaking date as January 1, 1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NRC has determined that the public dose limit of 0.1 rem (0.001 
Sv) TEDE in 10 CFR part 20 is unduly restrictive to be applied as 
accident dose criteria for NPUFs except for testing facilities, which 
are subject to 10 CFR part 100. The NRC bases this determination on the 
NRC Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board's decision that the 
standards in 10 CFR part 20 are unduly restrictive as accident dose 
criteria for research reactors (Trustees of Columbia University in the 
City of New York, ALAB-50, 4 AEC 849, 854-855 (May 18, 1972)). At the 
time of this decision, the 10 CFR part 20 public dose limit was 0.5 rem 
(0.005 Sv) whole body.
    However, the NRC considers the accident dose criteria in 10 CFR 
part 100 to be too high for NPUFs other than testing facilities, 
because those NPUFs have lower risk profiles than testing facilities. 
For these reasons, this final rule modifies Sec.  50.34 to add an 
accident dose criterion of 1 rem (0.01 Sv) TEDE for NPUFs not subject 
to 10 CFR part 100. The accident dose criterion of 1 rem (0.01 Sv) TEDE 
is based on the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Protection 
Action Guides (PAGs). The EPA PAGs are dose guidelines that support 
decisions during a radiological incident to take protective actions 
such as staying indoors or evacuating. The proposed rule stated that 
the 1 rem (0.01 Sv) TEDE accident dose criterion was based on the EPA 
PAGs published in EPA 400-R-92-001, ``Manual of Protective Action 
Guides and Protective Actions for Nuclear Incidents.'' In January 2017, 
the EPA published an update to its PAGs in EPA-400/R-17/001, ``PAG 
Manual: Protective Action Guides and Planning Guidance for Radiological 
Incidents.'' This update to the EPA PAGs does not change the basis for 
the 1 rem (0.01 Sv) TEDE accident dose criterion.
    The PAG is defined as the projected dose to an individual from a 
release of radioactive material at which a specific protective action 
to reduce or avoid that dose is recommended. Three principles 
considered in the development of the EPA PAGs include: (1) prevent 
acute effects; (2) balance protection with other important factors and 
ensure that actions result in more benefit than harm; and (3) reduce 
risk of chronic effects. In the early phase (i.e., the beginning of the 
radiological incident, which may last hours to days), if the sum of the 
projected dose from external radiation exposure and the inhalation of 
radioactive material is 1 rem (0.01 Sv) to 5 rem (0.05 Sv), the EPA PAG 
recommends the protective action of sheltering-in-place or evacuation 
of the public to avoid inhalation of gases or particulates in an 
atmospheric plume and to minimize external radiation exposures. The EPA 
PAG Manual does not provide a protective action recommendation for the 
public when the projected dose to an individual from an incident is 
less than 1 rem (0.01 Sv). In light of this understanding of the early 
phase EPA PAG, the NRC's accident dose criterion of 1 rem (0.01 Sv) 
TEDE for NPUFs, other than testing facilities, provides reasonable 
assurance of adequate protection of the public from unnecessary 
exposure to radiation.
    The NRC revised Sec.  50.34(a)(1)(ii)(D)(2) of the proposed rule to 
replace ``postulated accidental release of licensed material'' with 
``postulated accident.'' This final rule requires applicants and 
licensees to evaluate the potential dose from postulated accidents to 
include the potential exposure from all radiological sources, such as 
direct or scattered radiation from an unshielded source inside the 
facility, in addition to potential exposure from a release of 
radioactive materials. This requirement is consistent with the 
evaluation methodology described in NUREG-1537, Part 1. Under this 
final rule, these evaluations need to demonstrate that the dose to any 
individual located in the unrestricted area will not be in excess of 1 
rem (0.01 Sv) TEDE for the duration of the accident. Although the EPA 
PAGs were developed for radiological incidents that lead to the release 
or potential release of radioactive materials into the environment, the 
three principles considered in their development are not dependent on 
whether the dose received is due to exposure from a release of 
radioactive materials or from direct or scattered radiation.
    To provide further clarification on the NRC's intent of the 1 rem 
(0.01 Sv) TEDE accident dose criterion for NPUFs, other than testing 
facilities, a footnote has been incorporated into the final rule text. 
The footnote clarifies that this 1 rem (0.01 Sv) TEDE accident dose 
criterion is not a dose limit, as explained in the preceding 
paragraphs.
    In this final rule, the NRC moves proposed Sec.  
50.34(a)(1)(ii)(D)(2) to Sec.  50.34(a)(1)(i) and leaves the rule 
language in Sec.  50.34(a)(1)(ii)(D) unchanged. During the development 
of this final rule, the NRC recognized that the accident dose criterion 
more appropriately belongs in Sec.  50.34(a)(1)(i) because the 
requirements in Sec.  50.34(a)(1)(ii) apply to power reactor 
construction permit applicants, while the requirements in Sec.  
50.34(a)(1)(i) apply to all other construction permit applicants, such 
as NPUF applicants. Similarly, proposed Sec.  50.34(a)(1)(ii)(D)(2) 
would have imposed a requirement on applications for renewed NPUF 
operating licenses, which more appropriately belongs in Sec.  50.34(b). 
Therefore, the NRC moved the requirement to new Sec.  50.34(b)(13) in 
this final rule to clarify that an application for an operating license 
or a renewed operating license for an NPUF must include in the FSAR a 
final evaluation of the applicable radiological consequences consistent 
with Sec.  50.34(a)(1)(i).
    7. Extends the applicability of Sec.  50.59 to NPUFs regardless of 
their decommissioning status.
    Before this final rule, Sec.  50.59(b) of the Commission's 
regulations did not apply Sec.  50.59 to NPUFs whose licenses were 
amended to reflect permanent cessation of operations and that no longer 
had

[[Page 106244]]

fuel on site (e.g., they returned all of their fuel to the U.S. 
Department of Energy). The former language stated that Sec.  50.59 
applied to licensees ``whose license has been amended to allow 
possession of nuclear fuel, but not operation of the facility.'' 
Therefore, Sec.  50.59 did not apply to NPUF licensees that no longer 
possessed nuclear fuel. For these licensees, the NRC has typically 
added license conditions identical to the provisions of Sec.  50.59 to 
allow the licensee to make changes to its facility or changes in its 
procedures that would not otherwise require obtaining a license 
amendment pursuant to Sec.  50.90. Because most NPUFs promptly return 
their fuel to the U.S. Department of Energy after permanent shutdown, 
in contrast to decommissioning power reactors, these licensees had to 
request the addition of the license conditions, which imposed an 
administrative burden on the licensees and the NRC. This final rule 
eliminates this burden by revising Sec.  50.59(b) to extend the 
applicability of Sec.  50.59 to NPUFs regardless of their 
decommissioning status.
    8. Clarifies an applicant's requirements for meeting the existing 
provisions of Sec.  51.45.
    The NRC is required to prepare either an environmental impact 
statement or environmental assessment, as appropriate, for all 
licensing actions pursuant to 10 CFR part 51, unless a categorical 
exclusion applies as provided in Sec.  51.22. For most types of 
licenses, 10 CFR part 51 specifies that an applicant must submit 
environmental documentation in the form of an environmental report, or 
a supplement to a previously submitted environmental report, to assist 
the NRC's review and its compliance with the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969, as amended. However, before this final rule, the 
NRC did not have explicit requirements under 10 CFR part 51 with 
respect to the nature of the environmental documentation that must 
accompany applications for construction permits, initial licenses, and 
renewed licenses for NPUFs.
    This final rule adds a new section to 10 CFR part 51 to clarify 
NPUF environmental reporting requirements. Section 51.56 clarifies an 
applicant's existing requirements for meeting the provisions of Sec.  
51.45. This change improves consistency throughout 10 CFR part 51 with 
respect to environmental report submissions required from applicants. 
The NRC also is making a conforming change to Sec.  51.17 to reflect 
the approved information collection requirement of Sec.  51.56.
    9. Eliminates the requirement for NPUF licensees to submit 
financial qualification information with license renewal applications 
under Sec.  50.33(f)(2).
    This final rule eliminates license renewal financial qualification 
requirements for NPUFs. Before this final rule, Sec.  50.33(f) required 
NPUF license applicants to provide information sufficient to 
demonstrate their financial qualifications to carry out the activities 
for which the license is sought. Because the regulatory requirements 
for the content of an application for a renewed NPUF license were the 
same as those for an original license, NPUF licensees that requested 
license renewal were required to submit an update to the same financial 
information that was required in an application for an initial license. 
In addition, the NRC found that the financial qualification information 
did not meaningfully contribute to the NRC's safety determination on 
the license renewal application. The elimination of NPUF license 
renewal financial qualification requirements reduces the burden 
associated with license renewal applications while still enabling the 
NRC to conduct its review of these applications.
    This change is consistent with the current license renewal process 
for power reactors. On January 30, 2004, the NRC published in the 
Federal Register the final rule, ``Financial Information Requirements 
for Applications to Renew or Extend the Term of an Operating License 
for a Power Reactor'' (69 FR 4439). This final rule discontinued 
financial qualification reviews for power reactors at the license 
renewal stage except in very limited circumstances. The Commission 
stated that ``[t]he NRC believes that its primary tool for evaluating 
and ensuring safe operations at nuclear power reactors is through its 
inspection and enforcement programs . . . .'' Further, the Commission 
stated that ``[t]he NRC has not found a consistent correlation between 
licensees' poor financial health and poor safety performance. If a 
licensee postpones inspections and repairs that are subject to NRC 
oversight, the NRC has the authority to shut down the reactor or take 
other appropriate action if there is a safety issue.''
    At NPUF sites, the NRC's inspection and enforcement programs serve 
as important tools for evaluating licensee performance and ensuring 
safe operations. The NRC periodically inspects each operating NPUF 
using a graded approach that prioritizes higher-power facilities. The 
NRC completes an annual inspection of NPUFs licensed to operate at 
power levels of 2 MW(t) or greater. For NPUFs operating under 2 MW(t), 
the inspection program is designed to be completed every two years, 
although inspector availability and licensee availability sometimes 
dictate that an inspection cycle is carried out in multiple inspections 
over the 2-year cycle. Inspections can include reviews of 
organizational structure, operator training and qualification, design 
and design control, radiation and environmental protection, maintenance 
and surveillance activities, transportation, material control and 
accounting, operational activities, review and audit functions, 
experiments, fuel handling, procedural controls, emergency 
preparedness, and security. The NRC also performs special and reactive 
inspections. In addition, the NRC manages the NPUF operator license 
examination program. The NRC also manages the review of NPUF emergency 
and security plans and develops and implements policy and guidance 
concerning the NPUF licensing program.
    The same basis for the NRC's elimination of financial qualification 
requirements for power reactor licensees at the time of license renewal 
supports the NRC's elimination of NPUF financial qualification 
requirements at the time of license renewal. The NRC is not aware of 
any connection between an NPUF's financial qualifications at license 
renewal and safe operation of the facility. The NRC retains broad 
authority under the AEA and Sec.  50.54(cc), Sec.  50.54(f), and Sec.  
2.102 to request additional financial information from its licensees 
and applicants, as necessary, to protect public health and safety.

III. Opportunity for Public Participation

    The NRC hosted two public meetings to engage with external 
stakeholders on the proposed rule and associated draft guidance 
document during the public comment period. A public meeting was held on 
May 24, 2017, to discuss the proposed rule. A public meeting on the 
implementation schedule of the final requirements was held on April 25, 
2019. Summaries of both public meetings are available in ADAMS, as 
provided in the ``Availability of Documents'' section. The feedback 
from these public meetings informed the development of this final rule.

IV. Public Comment Analysis

    The NRC prepared a summary and analysis of public comments received 
on the 2017 proposed rule and draft regulatory guide, as referenced in 
the

[[Page 106245]]

``Availability of Documents'' section. In response to the proposed rule 
and draft regulatory guide, the NRC received 16 comment submissions.
    The public comment submittals are available from the Federal e-
Rulemaking website at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-
2011-0087. Responses to the public comments, including a summary of how 
the final rule text or guidance changed as a result of the public 
comments, can be found in the public comment analysis document.
    For more information about the associated guidance document, see 
the ``Availability of Guidance'' section of this document.

V. Section-by-Section Analysis

    The following paragraphs describe the specific changes within this 
final rule.

Section 2.109 Effect of timely renewal application.

    In Sec.  2.109, this final rule revises paragraph (a) to exclude 
NPUFs (including testing facilities) licensed under Sec.  50.22 and 
testing facilities licensed under Sec.  50.21(c) from the 30-day timely 
renewal provision by adding paragraph (f) to require these same 
licensees to submit a license renewal application at least 2 years 
before license expiration to be considered timely.

Section 20.1905 Exemptions to labeling requirements.

    In Sec.  20.1905, this final rule revises paragraph (g) to 
standardize terminology by replacing the term ``reactors'' with the 
phrase ``production or utilization facilities.''

Section 26.3 Scope.

    In Sec.  26.3, this final rule revises paragraph (e) to standardize 
terminology by replacing the term ``reactor'' with the phrase 
``production or utilization facility.''

Section 50.2 Definitions.

    In Sec.  50.2, this final rule revises the definitions for Non-
power reactor and Testing facility.

Section 50.8 Information collection requirements: OMB approval.

    In Sec.  50.8, this final rule revises paragraph (b) to include new 
Sec.  50.135 as an approved information collection requirement in 10 
CFR part 50.

Section 50.33 Contents of applications; general information.

    In Sec.  50.33, this final rule revises paragraph (f)(2) to remove 
the phrase ``for a power reactor'' from the fourth sentence and to 
remove the fifth sentence, which required a non-power reactor applicant 
to submit with license renewal applications the same financial 
information that is required for initial license applications. It also 
redesignates the footnote to conform to the Office of the Federal 
Register's requirements.

Section 50.34 Contents of applications; technical information.

    In Sec.  50.34, this final rule revises paragraph (a)(1)(i) to 
include an accident dose criterion for applicants for construction 
permits for NPUFs not subject to 10 CFR part 100 and a new footnote 2. 
It also redesignates the footnotes to conform to the Office of the 
Federal Register's requirements. This final rule also adds paragraph 
(b)(13) to require an applicant for an operating or a renewed operating 
license for an NPUF to include in the FSAR a final evaluation of the 
applicable radiological consequences in Sec.  50.34(a)(1)(i).

Section 50.36 Technical specifications.

    In Sec.  50.36, this final rule revises paragraph (c)(6) to 
standardize terminology by replacing the term ``non-power reactor'' 
with the phrase ``non-power production or utilization.''

Section 50.51 Continuation of license.

    In Sec.  50.51, this final rule revises paragraph (a) to add the 
conditional phrase ``except as noted under Sec.  50.51(c).'' This final 
rule also adds new paragraph (c) to clarify that NPUFs licensed under 
Sec.  50.21(a) or (c), other than testing facilities, after the 
effective date of this final rule, will have non-expiring license 
terms.

Section 50.59 Changes, tests, and experiments.

    In Sec.  50.59, this final rule revises paragraph (b) to extend 
applicability to NPUFs that have permanently ceased operations and that 
no longer have fuel on site.

Section 50.71 Maintenance of records, making of reports.

    In Sec.  50.71, this final rule revises paragraph (e) to include 
NPUFs in the requirement and makes a tense correction to footnote 1. 
This final rule also revises paragraph (e)(3)(i) and redesignates 
paragraph (4) as paragraph (4)(i) to clarify that these paragraphs only 
apply to nuclear power reactors. New paragraphs (e)(3)(iv) and 
(e)(4)(ii) are added to include the requirements for NPUFs. This final 
rule also revises paragraph (g) to standardize terminology by replacing 
the phrase ``non-power reactor'' with the phrase ``non-power production 
or utilization facility.''

Section 50.75 Reporting and recordkeeping for decommissioning planning.

    In Sec.  50.75, this final rule also revises paragraphs (d)(1), 
(e)(1)(iv), and (f)(4) to standardize terminology by replacing the 
phrase ``non-power reactor'' with the phrase ``non-power production or 
utilization facility.'' This final rule also revises paragraph (f)(5) 
by replacing the phrase ``non-power reactors'' with the phrase ``non-
power production or utilization facilities.''

Section 50.82 Termination of license.

    In Sec.  50.82, this final rule revises paragraph (b) to 
standardize terminology by replacing the term ``reactor'' with the 
phrase ``production or utilization facility'' and revises paragraph 
(b)(1) to include testing facilities licensed under Sec.  50.21(c) and 
holders of a license issued under Sec.  50.22. Paragraph (c) is revised 
by moving the phrase ``that has permanently ceased operation before the 
expiration of its license'' to new paragraph (c)(2) to clarify when the 
collection period for shortfalls in funding will be determined for 
NPUFs and holders of licenses issued under Sec.  50.21(b) or Sec.  
50.22, or testing facilities.

Section 50.135 Renewal of non-power production or utilization facility 
licenses issued under Sec.  50.22 and testing facility licenses.

    This final rule adds new Sec.  50.135 to clearly define the license 
renewal process for NPUFs (including testing facilities) licensed under 
Sec.  50.22 and testing facilities licensed under Sec.  50.21(c).

Appendix C to Part 50--A Guide for the Financial Data and Related 
Information Required To Establish Financial Qualifications for 
Construction Permits and Combined Licenses

    In appendix C to part 50, this final rule revises paragraph III by 
replacing the reference to ``medical and research reactors'' with a 
reference to ``non-power production or utilization facilities of a type 
described in Sec.  50.21(a) or (c), other than testing facilities.''

Appendix E to Part 50--Emergency Planning and Preparedness for 
Production and Utilization Facilities

    In appendix E to part 50, this final rule revises footnote 2 in 
paragraph I.3 to include the title of Regulatory Guide 2.6 and to 
replace the phrase ``research and test reactor'' with the phrase ``non-
power production or utilization facility.''

[[Page 106246]]

Section 51.17 Information collection requirements; OMB approval.

    In Sec.  51.17, this final rule revises paragraph (b) to add new 
Sec.  51.56 as an approved information collection requirement in 10 CFR 
part 51.

Section 51.45 Environmental report.

    In Sec.  51.45, this final rule revises paragraph (a) to add a 
cross reference to new Sec.  51.56.

Section 51.56 Environmental report--non-power production or utilization 
facility.

    This final rule adds new Sec.  51.56 to clarify existing 
requirements for the submittal and content of environmental reports by 
applicants seeking a permit to construct, a license to operate, or a 
renewal of a license to operate a non-power production or utilization 
facility.

Section 55.5 Communications.

    In Sec.  55.5, this final rule revises paragraph (b)(1) to remove 
the conditional phrase ``except for test and research reactor 
facilities.'' It also revises paragraph (b)(3) to clarify the 
applicability of this paragraph to utilization facilities licensed 
under 10 CFR part 50 that are not power reactors.

Section 55.40 Implementation.

    In Sec.  55.40, this final rule revises paragraph (d) to replace 
the phrase ``test and research reactors'' with the phrase ``non-power 
reactors.''

Section 55.53 Conditions of licenses.

    In Sec.  55.53, this final rule revises paragraphs (e) and (f)(2) 
to replace the phrase ``test and research reactors'' with the phrase 
``non-power reactors.'' It also revises paragraphs (j) and (k) to 
clarify that these paragraphs apply to utilization facilities licensed 
under 10 CFR part 50 that are not power reactors.

Section 55.59 Requalification.

    In Sec.  55.59, this final rule revises paragraph (c)(7) to clarify 
that this paragraph applies to utilization facilities licensed under 10 
CFR part 50 that are not power reactors.

Section 55.61 Modification and revocation of licenses.

    In Sec.  55.61, this final rule revises paragraph (b)(5) to clarify 
that this paragraph applies to utilization facilities licensed under 10 
CFR part 50 that are not power reactors.

Section 73.2 Definitions.

    In Sec.  73.2, this final rule adds the definition of Non-power 
reactor as it is defined in Sec.  50.2.

Section 73.21 Protection of safeguards information: performance 
requirements.

    In Sec.  73.21, this final rule revises paragraph (a)(1)(ii) to 
replace the phrase ``research and test reactors'' with the phrase 
``non-power reactors.''

Section 73.23 Protection of safeguards information--modified handling: 
specific requirements.

    In Sec.  73.23, this final rule replaces the phrase ``research and 
test reactors'' with the phrase ``non-power reactors.''

Section 73.60 Additional requirements for physical protection at non-
power reactors.

    In Sec.  73.60, this final rule revises all instances of 
``nonpower'' to read ``non-power.''

Section 140.3 Definitions.

    In Sec.  140.3, this final rule removes the definition of Testing 
reactor and adds the definition of Testing facility as it is defined in 
Sec.  50.2.

Section 140.11 Amounts of financial protection for certain reactors.

    In Sec.  140.11, this final rule revises paragraph (a)(3) to 
standardize terminology by replacing the term ``reactor'' with the term 
``facility.''

Section 170.3 Definitions.

    In Sec.  170.3, this final rule revises the definition of Research 
reactor and revises the definition of Testing facility to align with 
the definition in Sec.  50.2.

Section 171.5 Definitions.

    In Sec.  171.5, this final rule revises the definitions of Research 
reactor and Testing facility to align with the definitions in Sec.  
170.3 and Sec.  50.2, respectively.

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Certification

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the NRC 
certifies that this rule does not have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities. This final rule affects only 
the licensing and operation of NPUFs. In general, the companies, 
universities, and government agencies that own and operate these 
facilities do not fall within the scope of the definition of ``small 
entities'' set forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act or the size 
standards established by the NRC (10 CFR 2.810). Additional information 
is provided in Section 4 of the regulatory analysis, which is available 
as indicated in the ``Availability of Documents'' section of this 
document.

VII. Regulatory Analysis

    The NRC has prepared a final regulatory analysis on this regulation 
and the implementation guidance. The analysis examines the costs and 
benefits of the alternatives considered by the NRC. The regulatory 
analysis is available as indicated in the ``Availability of Documents'' 
section of this document.

VIII. Backfitting

    The NRC's backfitting regulations for entities that are licensed 
under 10 CFR part 50 and within the scope of the NRC's backfitting 
policy appear in Sec.  50.109, ``Backfitting.'' ``Backfitting'' is 
defined in Sec.  50.109(a)(1), in relevant part, as a modification of 
or addition to the systems, structures, components, or design of a 
facility, or the procedures or organization required to design, 
construct, or operate a facility, which results from a new or amended 
provision in the Commission's regulations.
    The amendments in this final rule include the following:
     revising the definitions for Non-power reactor, Testing 
facility, and Research reactor; eliminating license terms for medical 
therapy or research and development facilities, other than testing 
facilities, licensed under 10 CFR 50.21(a) or (c);
     defining the license renewal process for all commercial or 
industrial NPUFs (including testing facilities) licensed under Sec.  
50.22 and testing facilities licensed under Sec.  50.21(c) by 
consolidating existing regulatory requirements in one section of the 
NRC's regulations; requiring all NPUF licensees to submit an updated 
FSAR and subsequent FSAR updates to ensure that a facility's licensing 
basis is kept up-to-date;
     amending the current timely renewal provision under Sec.  
2.109, allowing NPUFs subject to license renewal to continue operating 
under an existing license past its expiration date if the licensee 
submits a license renewal application at least 2 years (rather than 30 
days) before the current license expiration date; providing an accident 
dose criterion of 1 rem (0.01 Sv) TEDE for NPUFs other than testing 
facilities, for use in applicants' accident analyses; extending the 
applicability of Sec.  50.59 to NPUF licensees regardless of their 
decommissioning status;
     clarifying an NPUF applicant's environmental report 
requirements in Sec.  51.45; and eliminating the requirement for NPUF 
licensees to submit financial qualification information with license 
renewal applications under Sec.  50.33(f)(2).

[[Page 106247]]

    These amendments do not result in a modification of or addition to 
the systems, structures, components, or design of a facility, or the 
procedures or organization required to design, construct, or operate a 
facility. The final rule changes do not meet the Sec.  50.109(a)(1) 
definition of ``backfitting'' and, thus, do not constitute backfitting 
for any NPUF that may be within the scope of backfitting.
    The NRC will clarify whether commercial NPUFs (i.e., NPUFs licensed 
under Section 103 of the AEA) are within the scope of the NRC's 
backfitting policy as a general matter through an interpretive rule 
process. An interpretive rule is an agency's interpretation of a 
statute or its regulations that does not revise the agency's 
regulations. Examples of NRC interpretive rules include regulatory 
guides and notices of interpretation.
    As described in the ``Availability of Guidance'' section of this 
document, the NRC is issuing Regulatory Guide (RG) 2.7, ``Preparation 
of Updated Final Safety Analysis Reports for Non-Power Production or 
Utilization Facilities,'' which provides guidance on methods acceptable 
to the NRC for complying with the requirements in Sec.  50.71(e) of 
this final rule. Issuance of this RG does not constitute backfitting 
under Sec.  50.109. As discussed in the ``Implementation'' section of 
RG 2.7, licensees generally are not required to comply with the 
guidance in that RG. If, in the future, the NRC seeks to impose 
positions stated in the RG in a manner that would constitute 
backfitting or forward fitting, the NRC would need to make the showing 
as required in Sec.  50.109 for backfitting or Management Directive 
8.4, ``Management of Backfitting, Forward Fitting, Issue Finality, and 
Information Requests,'' for forward fitting, that would allow the NRC 
to impose the positions.

IX. Cumulative Effects of Regulation

    Cumulative Effects of Regulation (CER) consists of the challenges 
licensees may face in addressing the implementation of new regulatory 
positions, programs, and requirements (e.g., rulemaking, guidance, 
generic letters, backfits, inspections). The CER may manifest in 
several ways, including the total burden imposed on licensees by the 
NRC from simultaneous or consecutive regulatory actions that can 
adversely affect the licensee's capability to implement those 
requirements, while continuing to operate or construct its facility in 
a safe and secure manner.
    The goals of the NRC's CER effort were met throughout the 
development of this final rule. The NRC engaged external stakeholders 
at public meetings and by soliciting public comments on the proposed 
rule and associated draft guidance document. A public meeting was held 
on May 24, 2017, to discuss the proposed rule. A public meeting on 
implementation was held on April 25, 2019. Summaries of both public 
meetings are available in ADAMS, as provided in the ``Availability of 
Documents'' section of this document. The feedback from the April 25, 
2019, public meeting informed the NRC's final rule implementation 
schedule.
    Based upon input from the public and affected licensees, the NRC 
has specified that this final rule will take effect 30 days from the 
date of publication of this document. For the purposes of implementing 
the requirements of Sec.  50.71(e), the NRC will be issuing orders to 
certain holders of operating licenses, as described in Section II.4 of 
this document.

X. 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 
31885).

XI. Voluntary Consensus Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995, 
Public Law 104-113, requires agencies to use technical standards 
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies unless the 
use of such standards is inconsistent with applicable law or is 
otherwise impractical. The NRC is amending its requirements for the 
license renewal process for certain production or utilization 
facilities. This action does not constitute the establishment of a 
standard that contains generally applicable requirements.

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

    The Commission has determined under the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the Commission's regulations in 
subpart A of 10 CFR part 51, that this final rule will not be a major 
Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human 
environment and, therefore, an environmental impact statement is not 
required. The provision to eliminate license terms for NPUFs, other 
than testing facilities, licensed under Sec.  50.21(a) or (c) will 
result in no additional radiological or non-radiological impacts 
because of the minimal accident consequences of these facilities, 
existing surveillance and reporting by licensees, and NRC oversight. In 
addition, the implementation of this final rule will not affect the 
environmental review requirements for new facilities and facilities 
applying for license renewal. The NRC concludes that this final rule 
will not cause any additional radiological or non-radiological impacts 
on the human environment.
    The NRC requested the views of the States on the environmental 
assessment for this rule. No States filed comments regarding the 
environmental assessment for this rule.
    The determination of this environmental assessment is that there 
will be no significant offsite impact to the public from this action. 
The environmental assessment is available as indicated under the 
``Availability of Documents'' section.

XIII. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This final rule contains new or amended collections of information 
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501, et 
seq.). The collections of information were approved by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB), approval number 3150-0268.
    The burden to the public for the information collections is 
estimated to average 51 hours per response for information collection 
requirements contained in 10 CFR part 50 and 0 hours per response for 
information collection requirements contained in 10 CFR part 51, 
including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data 
sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and 
reviewing the information collections.
    The information collections are being conducted to create a more 
efficient licensing process that continues to protect public health, 
safety, and the environment. Information will be used by the NRC to 
ensure that licensing bases remain up-to-date and that adequate 
protection of public health and safety is maintained. Responses to 
these collections of information are mandatory under Sec.  50.71(e) and 
Sec.  51.56. Confidential and proprietary information submitted to the 
NRC is protected in accordance with NRC regulations at Sec.  9.17(a) 
and Sec.  2.390(b).
    You may submit comments on any aspect of the information 
collections, including suggestions for reducing the burden, by the 
following methods:

[[Page 106248]]

     Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2011-0087.
     Mail comments to: FOIA, Library, and Information 
Collections Branch, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Mail Stop: 
T-6 A10M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001; [email protected]; or to the OMB reviewer at: OMB Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs (3150-0268), Attn: Desk Officer for 
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 
20503.

Public Protection Notification

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

XIV. Congressional Review Act

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

XV. Criminal Penalties

    For the purposes of Section 223 of the AEA, the NRC is issuing this 
final rule that amends 10 CFR 50.34, 50.36, 50.59, 50.71, 50.75, 50.82, 
55.40, 55.53, 55.59, 73.21, 73.23, 73.60, and 140.11 and creates Sec.  
50.135 under one or more of Sections 161b, 161i, or 161o of the AEA. 
Willful violations of these provisions would be subject to criminal 
enforcement.

XVI. Availability of Guidance

    The NRC is issuing RG 2.7, Revision 0, ``Preparation of Updated 
Final Safety Analysis Reports for Non-Power Production or Utilization 
Facilities,'' for the implementation of the requirements in Sec.  
50.71(e) of this final rule. The guidance is available in ADAMS under 
Accession No. ML18031A007. You can access information and public 
comment submissions related to the guidance at the federal rulemaking 
website, www.regulations.gov, by searching on Docket ID NRC-2011-0087.

XVII. 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.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               ADAMS accession No./web
                  Document                      link/Federal Register
                                                       citation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NUREG-1537, Part 1, ``Guidelines for         ML042430055.
 Preparing and Reviewing Applications for
 the Licensing of Non-Power Reactors,
 Format and Content''.
NUREG-1537, Part 2, ``Guidelines for         ML042430048.
 Preparing and Reviewing Applications for
 the Licensing of Non-Power Reactors,
 Standard Review Plan and Acceptance
 Criteria''.
Interim Staff Guidance-2009-001, ``Interim   ML092240244.
 Staff Guidance on the Streamlined Review
 Process for License Renewal for Research
 Reactors''.
Non-Power Reactor License Renewal:           77 FR 38742; June 29, 2012.
 Preliminary Draft Regulatory Basis;
 Request for Comment.
Non-Power Reactor (NPR) License Renewal      ML12240A677.
 Rulemaking: Regulatory Basis Document.
Federal Register Notice: Final Regulatory    ML12250A658.
 Basis for Rulemaking to Streamline Non-
 Power Reactor License Renewal; Notice of
 Availability of Documents.
SECY-08-0161, ``Review of Research and Test  ML082550140.
 Reactor License Renewal Applications''.
SRM-SECY-08-0161, ``Review of Research and   ML090850159.
 Test Reactor License Renewal
 Applications''.
SRM-M080317B, ``Briefing on State of NRC     ML080940439.
 Technical Programs''.
SECY-09-0095, ``Long-Term Plan for           ML092150717.
 Enhancing the Research and Test Reactor
 License Renewal Process and Status of the
 Development and Use of the Interim Staff
 Guidance''.
SRM-SECY-91-061, ``Separation of Non-        ML010050021.
 Reactor and Non-Power Reactor Licensing
 Activities from Power Reactor Licensing
 Activities in 10 CFR Part 50''.
SRM-M090811, ``Briefing on Research and      ML092380046.
 Test Reactor (RTR) Challenges''.
Draft Regulatory Guide DG-2006,              ML17068A041.
 ``Preparation of Updated Final Safety
 Analysis Reports for Non-Power Production
 or Utilization Facilities''.
Proposed Rule: Draft Regulatory and Backfit  ML17068A038.
 Analysis.
Proposed Rule: Draft OMB Supporting          ML17068A077.
 Statement.
Proposed Rule: Draft Environmental           ML17068A035.
 Assessment.
SECY-16-0048, ``Proposed Rulemaking: Non-    ML16019A048.
 Power Production or Utilization Facility
 License Renewal (RIN 3150-AI96)''.
EPA 400-R-92-001, ``Manual of Protective     https://www.epa.gov/sites/
 Action Guides and Protective Actions for     production/files/2016-03/
 Nuclear Incidents''.                         documents/pags.pdf.
EPA-400/R-17/001, ``PAG Manual: Protective   https://www.epa.gov/sites/
 Action Guides and Planning Guidance for      production/files/2017-01/
 Radiological Incidents''.                    documents/
                                              epa_pag_manual_final_revis
                                              ions_01-11-
                                              2017_cover_disclaimer_8.pd
                                              f.
Summary of August 7, 2014, Public Meeting    ML15322A400.
 to Discuss the Rulemaking for Streamlining
 Non[dash]power Reactor License Renewal.
Summary of October 7, 2015, Public Meeting   ML15307A002.
 to Discuss the Rulemaking for Streamlining
 Non-Power Reactor License Renewal.
Federal Register Notice: Final Rule;         56 FR 23360; May 21, 1991.
 Standards for Protection Against Radiation.
Federal Register Notice: Proposed Rule;      82 FR 15643; March 30,
 Non[dash]Power Production or Utilization     2017.
 Facility License Renewal.
SRM-SECY-16-0048, ``Staff Requirements--     ML17045A543.
 Proposed Rulemaking: Non-Power Production
 or Utilization Facility License Renewal
 (RIN 3150-AI96)''.
``Supporting Statement For Information       ML18031A006.
 Collections Contained In 10 CFR Part 50
 Non-Power Production Or Utilization
 Facility License Renewal Final Rule,''
 dated December 2024.
``Supporting Statement For Information       ML19113A007.
 Collections Contained In 10 CFR Part 51
 Non-Power Production Or Utilization
 Facility License Renewal Final Rule,''
 dated December 2024.

[[Page 106249]]

 
``Environmental Assessment and Finding of    ML24241A112.
 No Significant Impact Supporting Final
 Rule: Non-Power Production or Utilization
 Facility License Renewal,'' dated December
 2024.
Final Rule: ``Regulatory Analysis--          ML24241A114.
 Non[dash]power Production or Utilization
 Facility License Renewal,'' dated December
 2024.
``NRC Response to Public Comments; Non-      ML18031A005.
 Power Production or Utilization Facility
 License Renewal,'' dated December 2024.
Regulatory Guide 2.7, ``Preparation of       ML18031A007.
 Updated Final Safety Analysis Reports for
 Non-Power Production or Utilization
 Facilities,'' dated December 2024.
Federal Register Notice: Final Rule;         69 FR 4439; January 30,
 Financial Information Requirements for       2004.
 Applications to Renew or Extend the Term
 of an Operating License for a Power
 Reactor.
Summary of May 24, 2017, Public Meeting to   ML17170A066.
 Discuss the Proposed Non-Power Production
 or Utilization Facility License Renewal
 Rule.
Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization  https://www.congress.gov/
 Act (Pub. L. 115-439), enacted January 14,   115/bills/s512/BILLS-
 2019.                                        115s512enr.pdf.
Summary of April 25, 2019, Public Meeting    ML19133A080.
 to Discuss the Implementation Schedule for
 the Non-Power Production or Utilization
 Facility License Renewal Final Rule.
NRC Response to Public Comment               ML18031A005.
 Non[dash]Power Production or Utilization
 Facility License Renewal.
SECY-19-0062, ``Final Rule: Non-Power        ML18031A000 (package).
 Production or Utilization Facility License
 Renewal (RIN 3150-AI96, NRC-2011-0087)''.
SRM-M240904: Affirmation Session--SECY-19-   ML24248A208 (package).
 0062, ``Final Rule: Non-Power Production
 or Utilization Facility License Renewal
 (RIN 3150-AI96, NRC-2011-0087)'', dated
 September 4, 2024.
Federal Register Notice: Final Rule; 10 CFR  33 FR 9704; July 4, 1968.
 Part 50--Licensing of Production and
 Utilization Facilities.
Federal Register Notice: Final Rule;         47 FR 13750; March 31,
 Elimination of Review of Financial           1982.
 Qualifications of Electric Utilities in
 Licensing Hearings for Nuclear Power
 Plants.
Federal Register Notice: Final Rule;         49 FR 35747; September 12,
 Elimination of Review of Financial           1984.
 Qualifications of Electric Utilities in
 Operating License Reviews and Hearings for
 Nuclear Power Plants.
Federal Register Notice: Final Rule;         43 FR 55978; November 29,
 National Environmental Policy Act--          1978.
 Regulations.
Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking;      48 FR 44217; September 28,
 Revision of Backfitting Process for Power    1983.
 Reactors.
Policy Statement; Revision of Backfitting    48 FR 44173; September 28,
 Process for Power Reactors.                  1983.
Federal Register Notice: Proposed Rule;      49 FR 47034; November 30,
 Revision of Backfitting Process for Power    1984.
 Reactors.
Federal Register Notice: Final Rule;         50 FR 38097; September 20,
 Revision of Backfitting Process for Power    1985.
 Reactors.
Federal Register Notice: Final Rule;         69 FR 4439; January 30,
 Financial Information Requirements for       2004.
 Applications to Renew or Extend the Term
 of an Operating License for a Power
 Reactor.
Federal Register Notice: Proposed Rule;      52 FR 34223; September 10,
 Revision of Backfitting Process for Power    1987.
 Reactors.
Federal Register Notice: Final Rule;         53 FR 20603; June 6, 1988.
 Revision of Backfitting Process for Power
 Reactors.
Federal Register Notice: Final Rule;         51 FR 6514; February 25,
 Limiting the Use of Highly Enriched          1986.
 Uranium in Domestically Licensed Research
 and Test Reactors.
Federal Register Notice: Final Rule;         58 FR 13699; March 15,
 Clarification of Physical Protection         1993.
 Requirements at Fixed Sites.
Federal Register Notice: Final Rule;         77 FR 27561, 27572; May 11,
 Requirements for Fingerprint-Based           2012.
 Criminal History Record Checks for
 Individuals Seeking Unescorted Access to
 Non-Power Reactors.
Plain Language in Government Writing.......  63 FR 31885; June 10, 1998.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects

10 CFR Part 2

    Administrative practice and procedure, Antitrust, Byproduct 
material, Classified information, Confidential business information; 
Freedom of information, Environmental protection, Hazardous waste, 
Nuclear energy, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, 
Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sex 
discrimination, Source material, Special nuclear material, Waste 
treatment and disposal.

10 CFR Part 20

    Byproduct material, Criminal penalties, Hazardous waste, Licensed 
material, Nuclear energy, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and 
reactors, Occupational safety and health, Packaging and containers, 
Penalties, Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Source material, Special nuclear material, Waste 
treatment and disposal.

10 CFR Part 26

    Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Alcohol 
testing, Appeals, Chemical testing, Drug abuse, Drug testing, Employee 
assistance programs, Fitness for duty, Management actions, Nuclear 
power plants and reactors, Privacy, Protection of information, 
Radiation protection, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

10 CFR Part 50

    Administrative practice and procedure, Antitrust, Classified 
information, Criminal penalties, Education, Fire prevention, Fire 
protection, Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear power plants and 
reactors, Penalties, Radiation protection, Reactor siting criteria, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Whistleblowing.

10 CFR Part 51

    Administrative practice and procedure, Environmental impact 
statements, Hazardous waste, Nuclear

[[Page 106250]]

energy, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements.

10 CFR Part 55

    Criminal penalties, Manpower training programs, Nuclear power 
plants and reactors, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

10 CFR Part 73

    Criminal penalties, Exports, Hazardous materials transportation, 
Imports, Nuclear energy, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and 
reactors, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security 
measures.

10 CFR Part 140

    Criminal penalties, Extraordinary nuclear occurrence, Insurance, 
Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants 
and reactors, Penalties, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

10 CFR Part 170

    Byproduct material, Import and export licenses, Intergovernmental 
relations, Non-payment penalties, Nuclear energy, Nuclear materials, 
Nuclear power plants and reactors, Source material, Special nuclear 
material.

10 CFR Part 171

    Annual charges, Byproduct material, Holders of certificates, 
registrations, approvals, Intergovernmental relations, Nonpayment 
penalties, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Source 
material, Special nuclear material.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of 
the AEA, as amended; the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended; 
and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553, the NRC is adopting the following amendments 
to 10 CFR parts 2, 20, 26, 50, 51, 55, 73, 140, 170, and 171:

PART 2--AGENCY RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

0
1. The authority citation for part 2 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Atomic Energy Act of 1954, secs. 29, 53, 62, 63, 81, 
102, 103, 104, 105, 161, 181, 182, 183, 184, 186, 189, 191, 234 (42 
U.S.C. 2039, 2073, 2092, 2093, 2111, 2132, 2133, 2134, 2135, 2201, 
2231, 2232, 2233, 2234, 2236, 2239, 2241, 2282); Energy 
Reorganization Act of 1974, secs. 201, 206 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5846); 
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, secs. 114(f), 134, 135, 141 (42 
U.S.C. 10134(f), 10154, 10155, 10161); Administrative Procedure Act 
(5 U.S.C. 552, 553, 554, 557, 558); National Environmental Policy 
Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332); 44 U.S.C. 3504 note.
    Section 2.205(j) also issued under Sec. 31001(s), Pub. L. 104-
134. 110 Stat. 1321-373 (28 U.S.C. 2461 note).


0
2. In Sec.  2.109, revise paragraph (a) and add paragraph (f) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  2.109  Effect of timely renewal application.

    (a) Except for the renewal of licenses identified in paragraphs (b) 
through (f) of this section, if at least 30 days before the expiration 
of an existing license authorizing any activity of a continuing nature, 
the licensee files an application for a renewal or for a new license 
for the activity so authorized, the existing license will not be deemed 
to have expired until the application has been finally determined.
* * * * *
    (f) If the licensee of a non-power production or utilization 
facility licensed under 10 CFR 50.22, or a testing facility, files a 
sufficient application for renewal at least 2 years before the 
expiration of the existing license, the existing license will not be 
deemed to have expired until the application has been finally 
determined.

PART 20--STANDARDS FOR PROTECTION AGAINST RADIATION

0
3. The authority citation for part 20 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Atomic Energy Act of 1954, secs. 11, 53, 63, 65, 81, 
103, 104, 161, 170H, 182, 186, 223, 234, 274, 1701 (42 U.S.C. 2014, 
2073, 2093, 2095, 2111, 2133, 2134, 2201, 2210h, 2232, 2236, 2273, 
2282, 2021, 2297f); Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, secs. 201, 
202 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842); Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy 
Amendments Act of 1985, sec. 2 (42 U.S.C. 2021b); 44 U.S.C. 3504 
note.


Sec.  20.1905  [Amended]

0
4. In Sec.  20.1905, amend paragraph (g) by removing the word 
``reactors'' and adding in its place the phrase ``production or 
utilization facilities''.

PART 26--FITNESS FOR DUTY PROGRAMS

0
5. The authority citation for part 26 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Atomic Energy Act of 1954, secs. 53, 103, 104, 107, 
161, 223, 234, 1701 (42 U.S.C. 2073, 2133, 2134, 2137, 2201, 2273, 
2282, 2297f); Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, secs. 201, 202 (42 
U.S.C. 5841, 5842); 44 U.S.C. 3504 note.


Sec.  26.3  [Amended]

0
6. In Sec.  26.3, amend paragraph (e) by removing the word ``reactor'' 
and adding in its place the phrase ``production or utilization 
facility''.

PART 50--DOMESTIC LICENSING OF PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION 
FACILITIES

0
7. The authority citation for part 50 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Atomic Energy Act of 1954, secs. 11, 101, 102, 103, 
104, 105, 108, 122, 147, 149, 161, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 
187, 189, 223, 234 (42 U.S.C. 2014, 2131, 2132, 2133, 2134, 2135, 
2138, 2152, 2167, 2169, 2201, 2231, 2232, 2233, 2234, 2235, 2236, 
2237, 2239, 2273, 2282); Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, secs. 
201, 202, 206, 211 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846, 5851); Nuclear Waste 
Policy Act of 1982, sec. 306 (42 U.S.C. 10226); National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332); 44 U.S.C. 3504 
note; Sec. 109, Pub. L. 96-295, 94 Stat. 783.


0
8. In Sec.  50.2, revise the definitions for ``Non-power reactor'' and 
``Testing facility'' to read as follows:


Sec.  50.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Non-power reactor means:
    (1) A testing facility; or
    (2) A research reactor, which is a non-power production or 
utilization facility that is a nuclear reactor licensed under Sec.  
50.21(c):
    (i) For which a safety assessment demonstrates accident radiation 
doses consistent with Sec.  50.34(a)(1)(i); and
    (ii) That is not a testing facility; or
    (3) A commercial or industrial reactor, which is a non-power 
production or utilization facility that is a nuclear reactor licensed 
under Sec.  50.22:
    (i) For which a safety assessment demonstrates accident radiation 
doses consistent with Sec.  50.34(a)(1)(i); and
    (ii) That is not a testing facility.
* * * * *
    Testing facility means a non-power production or utilization 
facility that is a nuclear reactor licensed under Sec.  50.21(c) or 
Sec.  50.22 for which:
    (1) Analyzed accident radiation doses are in excess of the dose 
criterion for facilities not subject to 10 CFR part 100 set forth in 
Sec.  50.34(a)(1)(i); or
    (2) The Commission determines that the design, operation, or use 
and the associated risk warrant classification as a testing facility.
* * * * *


Sec.  50.8  [Amended]

0
9. In Sec.  50.8, amend paragraph (b) by adding the number ``50.135,'' 
in numerical order.


Sec.  50.33  [Amended]

0
10. Amend Sec.  50.33 by:
0
a. Removing the phrase ``for a power reactor'' from the fourth sentence 
and removing the last sentence in paragraph (f)(2); and

[[Page 106251]]

0
b. Redesignating footnotes 4 and 5 as footnotes 1 and 2.

0
11. In Sec.  50.34:
0
a. Revise paragraph (a)(1)(i);
0
b. Add paragraph (b)(13);
0
c. Redesignate footnote 5 as footnote 1;
0
d. Add footnote 2;
0
e. Redesignate footnotes 6 and 7 as footnotes 3 and 4;
0
f. Remove footnotes 8 and 9; and
0
g. Redesignate footnotes 10 and 11 as footnotes 5 and 6.
    The revision and addition read as follows:


Sec.  50.34  Contents of applications; technical information.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) A description and safety assessment of the site on which the 
facility is to be located, with appropriate attention to features 
affecting facility design. Special attention should be directed to the 
site evaluation factors identified in part 100 of this chapter. The 
assessment must contain an analysis and evaluation of the major 
structures, systems and components of the facility which bear 
significantly on the acceptability of the site under the site 
evaluation factors identified in part 100 of this chapter, assuming 
that the facility will be operated at the ultimate power level which is 
contemplated by the applicant. For non-power production or utilization 
facilities not subject to 10 CFR part 100, the assessment must provide 
an evaluation of the applicable radiological consequences that 
demonstrates with reasonable assurance that any individual located in 
the unrestricted area following the onset of a postulated accident, 
including consideration of experiments, would not receive a radiation 
dose in excess of 1 rem (0.01 Sv)\2\ TEDE for the duration of the 
accident. With respect to operation at the projected initial power 
level, the applicant is required to submit information prescribed in 
paragraphs (a)(2) through (a)(8) of this section, as well as the 
information required by this paragraph, in support of the application 
for a construction permit, or a design approval.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (13) Non-power production or utilization facility applicants who 
apply for an initial or renewed operating license shall provide a final 
evaluation of the applicable radiological consequences in Sec.  
50.34(a)(1)(i).
* * * * *
    \2\ The 1 rem accident dose criterion for non-power production 
or utilization facilities is not a dose limit; it informs the 
analysis of postulated accidents and the development of safety 
measures so that in the unlikely event of an accident, the NRC has 
reasonable assurance that no acute radiation-related harm will 
result to any member of the public.


Sec.  50.36  [Amended]

0
12. In Sec.  50.36, amend paragraph (c)(6) by removing the phrase 
``non-power reactor'' and adding in its place the phrase ``non-power 
production or utilization''.

0
13. In Sec.  50.51, in the first sentence of paragraph (a) remove the 
word ``Each'' and add in its place the phrase ``Except as noted in 
Sec.  50.51(c), each'' and add paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  50.51  Continuation of license.

* * * * *
    (c) Each non-power production or utilization facility license 
issued under Sec.  50.21(a) or (c), other than a testing facility 
license, after January 29, 2025, will be issued with no fixed license 
term.

0
14. In Sec.  50.59, revise paragraph (b) to read as follows:


Sec.  50.59  Changes, tests, and experiments.

* * * * *
    (b) This section applies to each holder of an operating license 
issued under this part or a combined license issued under part 52 of 
this chapter, including the holder of a license authorizing the 
operation of a nuclear power reactor that has submitted the 
certification of permanent cessation of operations required under Sec.  
50.82(a)(1) or Sec.  50.110, a reactor licensee whose license has been 
amended to allow possession of nuclear fuel but not operation of the 
facility, or a non-power production or utilization facility that has 
permanently ceased operations.
* * * * *

0
15. In Sec.  50.71:
0
a. In the first sentence of paragraph (e), add the phrase ``, or non-
power production or utilization facility,'' after the word ``reactor'';
0
b. In paragraph (e)(3)(i), remove the letter ``A'' at the beginning and 
add in its place the phrase ``For nuclear power reactor licensees, a'';
0
c. Add paragraph (e)(3)(iv);
0
d. Redesignate paragraph (e)(4) as paragraph (e)(4)(i);
0
e. In newly redesignated paragraph (e)(4)(i), remove the word 
``Subsequent'' and add in its place the phrase ``For nuclear power 
licensees, subsequent'';
0
f. Add paragraph (e)(4)(ii);
0
g. In paragraph (g), remove the phrase ``non-power reactor'' and add in 
its place the phrase ``non-power production or utilization facility''; 
and
0
h. In footnote 1, remove the word ``includes'' and add in its place the 
word ``include''.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  50.71  Maintenance of records, making of reports.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (iv) Holders of non-power production or utilization facility 
licenses issued after January 29, 2025, shall file a revision of the 
original FSAR containing those original pages that are still applicable 
plus new replacement pages within 5 years of the date of issuance of 
the operating license. The revision must bring the FSAR up to date as 
of a maximum of 6 months prior to the date of filing the revision.
* * * * *
    (4) * * *
    (ii) Non-power production or utilization facility licensees shall 
file an FSAR update no more than 5 years from the date of the submittal 
of the updated FSAR required by Sec.  50.71(e)(3)(iv) or by order and 
shall file subsequent updates no more than 5 years from the date of the 
previous submittal. Each submittal must reflect all changes made to the 
FSAR up to a maximum of 6 months prior to the date of filing the 
submittal.
* * * * *

0
16. In Sec.  50.75:
0
a. Revise paragraph (d)(1);
0
b. In paragraphs (e)(1)(iv) and (f)(4), remove the phrase ``non-power 
reactor'' and add in its place the phrase ``non-power production or 
utilization facility''; and
0
c. In paragraph (f)(5), remove the phrase ``power and non-power 
reactors'' and add in its place the phrase ``power reactors and non-
power production or utilization facilities''.
    The revision reads as follows:


Sec.  50.75  Reporting and recordkeeping for decommissioning planning.

* * * * *
    (d)(1) Each applicant for or holder of an operating license for a 
non-power production or utilization facility shall submit a 
decommissioning report as required by Sec.  50.33(k) of this part.
* * * * *

0
17. In Sec.  50.82, revise paragraphs (b) introductory text, (b)(1), 
and (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  50.82  Termination of license.

* * * * *
    (b) For non-power production or utilization facility licensees--
    (1) A licensee that permanently ceases operations must make 
application for

[[Page 106252]]

license termination within 2 years following permanent cessation of 
operations, and for testing facilities licensed under Sec.  50.21(c) or 
facilities licensed under Sec.  50.22, in no case later than 1 year 
prior to expiration of the operating license. Each application for 
termination of a license must be accompanied or preceded by a proposed 
decommissioning plan. The contents of the decommissioning plan are 
specified in paragraph (b)(4) of this section.
* * * * *
    (c) The collection period for any shortfall of funds will be 
determined, upon application by the licensee, on a case-by-case basis 
taking into account the specific financial situation of each holder of 
the following licenses:
    (1) A non-power production or utilization facility licensed under 
Sec.  50.21(a) or (c), other than a testing facility, that has 
permanently ceased operations.
    (2) A facility licensed under Sec.  50.21(b) or Sec.  50.22, or a 
testing facility, that has permanently ceased operation before the 
expiration of its license.

0
18. Add Sec.  50.135 to read as follows:


Sec.  50.135  Renewal of non-power production or utilization facility 
licenses issued under Sec.  50.22 and testing facility licenses.

    (a) Applicability. The requirements in this section apply to 
applicants for renewed non-power production or utilization facility 
operating licenses issued under Sec.  50.22 and to applicants for 
renewed testing facility operating licenses issued under Sec.  
50.21(c).
    (b) Written communications. All applications, correspondence, 
reports, and other written communications must be filed in accordance 
with applicable portions of Sec.  50.4.
    (c) Filing of application. (1) The filing of an application for a 
renewed license must be in accordance with subpart A of 10 CFR part 2 
and all applicable sections of this part.
    (2) An application for a renewed license may not be submitted to 
the Commission earlier than 10 years before the expiration of the 
operating license currently in effect.
    (d) Contents of application. (1) Each application must include the 
information specified in Sec. Sec.  50.33, 50.34, and 50.36, as 
applicable.
    (2) Each application must include conforming changes to the 
standard indemnity agreement, under 10 CFR part 140 to account for the 
expiration term of the proposed renewed license.
    (3) Each application must include a supplement to the environmental 
report that complies with the requirements of 10 CFR 51.56.
    (e) Issuance of a renewed license. (1) A renewed license will be of 
the class for which the operating license currently in effect was 
issued.
    (2) A renewed license will be issued for a fixed period of time. 
The term of any renewed license may not exceed 40 years.
    (3) A renewed license will become effective immediately upon its 
issuance, thereby superseding the operating license previously in 
effect. If a renewed license is subsequently set aside upon further 
administrative or judicial appeal, the operating license previously in 
effect will be reinstated unless its term has expired and the renewal 
application was not filed in a timely manner in accordance with 10 CFR 
2.109.
    (4) A renewed license may be subsequently renewed in accordance 
with all applicable requirements.

Appendix C to Part 50 [Amended]

0
19. In appendix C to part 50, amend paragraph III by removing the 
phrase ``for medical and research reactors'' and adding in its place 
the phrase ``for non-power production or utilization facilities of a 
type described in Sec.  50.21(a) or (c), other than testing 
facilities''.

0
20. In appendix E to part 50, revise footnote 2 to read as follows:

Appendix E to Part 50--Emergency Planning and Preparedness for 
Production and Utilization Facilities

* * * * *
\2\ Regulatory Guide 2.6, ``Emergency Planning for Research and Test 
Reactors and Other Non-Power Production and Utilization 
Facilities,'' may be used as guidance for the acceptability of non-
power production or utilization facility emergency response plans.
* * * * *

PART 51--ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION REGULATIONS FOR DOMESTIC 
LICENSING AND RELATED REGULATORY FUNCTIONS

0
21. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Atomic Energy Act of 1954, secs. 161, 193 (42 U.S.C. 
2201, 2243); Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, secs. 201, 202 (42 
U.S.C. 5841, 5842); National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 
U.S.C. 4332, 4334, 4335); Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, secs. 
144(f), 121, 135, 141, 148 (42 U.S.C. 10134(f), 10141, 10155, 10161, 
10168); 44 U.S.C. 3504 note.


Sec.  51.17  [Amended]

0
22. In Sec.  51.17, amend paragraph (b) by adding the number ``51.56,'' 
in numerical order.


Sec.  51.45  [Amended]

0
23. In Sec.  51.45, amend paragraph (a) by adding the number ``51.56,'' 
in numerical order.

0
24. Add Sec.  51.56 to read as follows:


Sec.  51.56  Environmental report--non-power production or utilization 
facility.

    Each applicant for a non-power production or utilization 
construction permit or facility license, or renewal of a non-power 
production or utilization facility license issued pursuant to Sec.  
50.21(a) or (c) or Sec.  50.22 of this chapter shall submit a separate 
document, entitled ``Applicant's Environmental Report'' or ``Supplement 
to Applicant's Environmental Report,'' as appropriate, with its 
application to: ATTN: Document Control Desk, Director, Office of 
Nuclear Reactor Regulation. The environmental report or supplement 
shall contain the information specified in Sec.  51.45. If the 
application is for a renewal of a license for which the applicant has 
previously submitted an environmental report, the supplement, to the 
extent applicable, shall include an analysis of any environmental 
impacts resulting from operational experience or a change in 
operations, and an analysis of any environmental impacts that may 
result from proposed decommissioning activities.

PART 55--OPERATORS' LICENSES

0
25. The authority citation for part 55 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Atomic Energy Act of 1954, secs. 107, 161, 181, 182, 
183, 186, 187, 223, 234 (42 U.S.C. 2137, 2201, 2231, 2232, 2233, 
2236, 2237, 2273, 2282); Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, secs. 
201, 202 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842); Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, 
sec. 306 (42 U.S.C. 10226); 44 U.S.C. 3504 note.


Sec.  55.5  [Amended]

0
26. Amend Sec.  55.5 by:
0
a. In paragraph (b)(1), removing the phrase ``Except for test and 
research reactor facilities, the'' and adding in its place the word 
``The''; and
0
b. In paragraph (b)(3), removing the phrase ``a test and research 
reactor or non-power reactor facility licensed under 10 CFR part 50'' 
and adding in its place ``a utilization facility licensed under part 50 
of this chapter that is not a power reactor''.



Sec.  55.40  [Amended]

0
27. In Sec.  55.40, amend paragraph (d) by removing the phrase ``all 
test and research reactors'' and adding in its place the phrase ``all 
non-power reactors''.

[[Page 106253]]

Sec.  55.53  [Amended]

0
28. Amend Sec.  55.53 by:
0
a. In paragraphs (e) and (f)(2), removing the phrase ``test and 
research reactors'' and adding in its place the phrase ``non-power 
reactors''; and
0
b. In paragraph (j), removing the phrase ``non-power reactors'' and 
adding in its place the phrase ``utilization facilities licensed under 
10 CFR part 50 that are not power reactors''; and
0
c. In paragraph (k):
0
i. Removing the phrase ``non-power reactors'' and adding in its place 
the phrase ``utilization facilities licensed under 10 CFR part 50 that 
are not power reactors''; and
0
ii. Removing the term ``non-power'' at the end of the paragraph.


Sec.  55.59  [Amended]

0
29. In Sec.  55.59, amend paragraph (c)(7) by:
0
a. Removing in the paragraph heading, the phrase ``research and test 
reactor facilities'' and adding in its place the phrase ``utilization 
facilities licensed under 10 CFR part 50 that are not power reactors''; 
and
0
b. Removing the phrase ``research reactor or test reactor facility'' 
and adding in its place ``utilization facility licensed under 10 CFR 
part 50 that is not a power reactor''.


Sec.  55.61  [Amended]

0
30. In Sec.  55.61, amend paragraph (b)(5) by removing the phrase 
``non-power reactors'' and adding in its place the phrase ``utilization 
facilities licensed under 10 CFR part 50 that are not power reactors''.

PART 73--PHYSICAL PROTECTION OF PLANTS AND MATERIALS

0
31. The authority citation for part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Atomic Energy Act of 1954, secs. 53, 147, 149, 161, 
161A, 170D, 170E, 170H, 170I, 223, 229, 234, 1701 (42 U.S.C. 2073, 
2167, 2169, 2201, 2201a, 2210d, 2210e, 2210h, 2210i, 2273, 2278a, 
2282, 2297f); Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, secs. 201, 202 (42 
U.S.C. 5841, 5842); Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, secs. 135, 141 
(42 U.S.C. 10155, 10161); 44 U.S.C. 3504 note.
    Section 73.37(b)(2) also issued under Sec. 301, Public Law 96-
295, 94 Stat. 789 (42 U.S.C. 5841 note).


0
32. In Sec.  73.2, add in alphabetical order the definition for Non-
power reactor.


Sec.  73.2  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Non-power reactor is defined at 10 CFR 50.2.
* * * * *


Sec.  73.21  [Amended]

0
33. In Sec.  73.21, amend paragraph (a)(1)(ii) by removing the phrase 
``Research and test reactors'' and adding in its place the phrase 
``non-power reactors''.


Sec.  73.23  [Amended]

0
34. Amend Sec.  73.23 by removing the phrase ``research and test 
reactors'' and adding in its place the phrase ``non-power reactors''.


Sec.  73.60  [Amended]

0
35. Amend Sec.  73.60 by removing wherever it may appear, the word 
``nonpower'' and adding in its place the word ``non-power''.

PART 140--FINANCIAL PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS AND INDEMNITY 
AGREEMENTS

0
36. The authority citation for part 140 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Atomic Energy Act of 1954, secs. 161, 170, 223, 234 
(42 U.S.C. 2201, 2210, 2273, 2282); Energy Reorganization Act of 
1974, secs. 201, 202 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842); 44 U.S.C. 3504 note.

0
37. Amend Sec.  140.3 by removing the definition for ``Testing 
reactor'' and adding the definition for ``Testing facility'' to read as 
follows:


Sec.  140.3  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Testing facility is defined at 10 CFR 50.2.
* * * * *


Sec.  140.11  [Amended]

0
38. In Sec.  140.11, amend paragraph (a)(3) by removing the phrase 
``testing reactor'' and adding in its place the phrase ``testing 
facility''.

PART 170--FEES FOR FACILITIES, MATERIALS, IMPORT AND EXPORT 
LICENSES, AND OTHER REGULATORY SERVICES UNDER THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT 
OF 1954, AS AMENDED

0
39. The authority citation for part 170 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Atomic Energy Act of 1954, secs. 11, 161(w) (42 
U.S.C. 2014, 2201(w)); Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, sec. 201 
(42 U.S.C. 5841); 42 U.S.C. 2215; 31 U.S.C. 901, 902, 9701; 44 
U.S.C. 3504 note.

0
40. Amend Sec.  170.3 by revising the definitions for ``Research 
reactor'' and ``Testing facility'' to read as follows:


Sec.  170.3  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Research reactor means a non-power production or utilization 
facility, as defined in 10 CFR 50.2, that is a nuclear reactor licensed 
under 10 CFR 50.21(c):
    (i) For which a safety assessment demonstrates accident radiation 
doses consistent with 10 CFR 50.34(a)(1)(i); and
    (ii) That is not a testing facility.
* * * * *
    Testing facility is defined at 10 CFR 50.2.
* * * * *

PART 171--ANNUAL FEES FOR REACTOR LICENSES AND FUEL CYCLE LICENSES 
AND MATERIALS LICENSES, INCLUDING HOLDERS OF CERTIFICATES OF 
COMPLIANCE, REGISTRATIONS, AND QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM APPROVALS 
AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIES LICENSED BY THE NRC

0
41. The authority citation for part 171 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  Atomic Energy Act of 1954, secs. 11, 161(w), 223, 
234 (42 U.S.C. 2014, 2201(w), 2273, 2282); Energy Reorganization Act 
of 1974, sec. 201 (42 U.S.C. 5841); 42 U.S.C. 2215; 44 U.S.C. 3504 
note.

0
42. Amend Sec.  171.5 by revising the definitions for ``Research 
reactor'' and ``Testing facility'' to read as follows:


Sec.  171.5  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Research reactor is defined at 10 CFR 170.3.
* * * * *
    Testing facility is defined at 10 CFR 50.2.
* * * * *

    Dated: December 19, 2024.
    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Carrie Safford,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2024-30721 Filed 12-27-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P