[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 132 (Wednesday, July 10, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41436-41438]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-16586]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2013-0150]


Proposed Revision to Treatment of Non-Safety Systems for Passive 
Advanced Light Water Reactors

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Standard review plan-draft section revision; request for 
comment and use; re-notice.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is re-noticing 
the solicitation for public comment published in the Federal Register 
on October 12, 2012 (77 FR 62270), on the NUREG-0800, ``Standard Review 
Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power 
Plants: LWR Edition,'' on a proposed new section to its Standard Review 
Plan (SRP), Section 19.3, ``Regulatory Treatment of Non-Safety Systems 
(RTNSS) for Passive Advanced Light Water Reactors.'' The NRC seeks 
public comment on a narrow area of focus related to a revised position 
on the treatment of the high winds external hazard for certain RTNSS 
structures, systems, and components.

DATES: Submit comments by August 9, 2013. Comments received after this 
date will be considered, if it is practical to do so, but the 
Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received 
on or before this date.

ADDRESSES: You may access information and comment submissions related 
to this document, which the NRC possesses and are publicly available, 
by searching on http://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-2013-
0150. You may submit comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-0150. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-492-
3668; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
     Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules, 
Announcements, and Directives Branch (RADB), Office of Administration, 
Mail Stop: 3WFN 6-A56 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 
DC 20555-0001.
     For additional direction on accessing information and 
submitting comments, see ``Accessing Information and Submitting 
Comments'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jonathan DeGange, Office of New 
Reactors, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001; telephone: 301-415-6992, email: mailto:Jonathan.DeGange@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Accessing Information and Submitting Comments

A. Accessing Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2013-0150 when contacting the NRC 
about the availability of information regarding this document. You may 
access information related to this document, which the NRC possesses 
and are publicly available, by any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-XXX.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may access publicly available documents online in the NRC 
Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the 
search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and then select ``Begin Web-
based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's 
Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-
4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number 
for each document referenced in this notice (if that document is 
available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that a document is 
referenced. The SRP Section 19.3 is re-noticed in its entirety under 
ADAMS Accession ML13081A756.
     NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public 
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852.

B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2013-0150 in the subject line of your 
comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make 
your comment submission available to the public in this docket.
    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact 
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your 
comment submission. The will NRC posts all comment submissions at 
http://

[[Page 41437]]

www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into 
ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove 
identifying or contact information.
    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons 
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to 
include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be 
publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should 
state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to 
remove such information before making the comment submissions available 
to the public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.

II. Further Information

    This re-notice includes a revised position on treatment of the high 
winds external hazard for certain RTNSS structures, systems and 
components (SSCs). This position differs from the one described in the 
previously issued draft Section 19.3 of NUREG-0800 (ADAMS Accession No: 
ML12128A405) and from the alternative proposed from public comments 
(ML12319A465) on the previously issued draft Section 19.3 of NUREG-
0800, which, during a public meeting held on January 22, 2013, the 
staff agreed to consider. Consequently, public stakeholders have not 
had an opportunity to comment on this approach to treatment of the high 
winds hazard for certain RTNSS SSCs.
    The staff's original position on treatment of the high winds 
external hazard is documented in a memorandum from L. Joseph Callan, US 
NRC Executive Director for Operations to Chairman Jackson, US NRC dated 
June 23, 1997 (ML003708229) and entitled: ``Implementation of Staff 
Position in SECY-96-128, `Policy and Key Technical Issues Pertaining to 
the Westinghouse AP600 Standard Pressurized Reactor Design', Related to 
Post-72 Hour Actions''. At that time, the NRC was concerned with the 
ability of a severe hurricane to cause an extended loss of reliable 
offsite AC power for a period longer than 72 hours. Consequently, the 
NRC took the position that it was reasonable and practical to design 
post-72 hour SSCs (most notably non-safety related diesel generators 
and their enclosure) to withstand a Category 5 hurricane and associated 
wind-borne missiles; but, these SSCs should not be required to 
withstand tornado loads and tornado missiles. Also at the time, tornado 
loads and missiles were considered generally to lead to more 
restrictive design requirements.
    Since this position was established in the mid-1990s, Regulatory 
Guide 1.76 has been revised using the Enhanced Fujita Scale, resulting 
in a significant decrease to the maximum design basis tornado wind 
speeds, and new guidance (Regulatory Guide 1.221) has been issued for 
addressing hurricanes and associated hurricane missiles. In addition, 
recent operating experience shows that tornado wind events can also 
cause an extended loss of reliable offsite AC power for more than 72 
hours. Lastly, application of the guidance described in the memorandum 
referenced above could, in some cases, result in a level of treatment 
for non-safety related SSCs which meet Criterion B for RTNSS that is 
higher than the level for safety-related SSCs. Therefore, the RTNSS 
missile protection guidance described in the memorandum is no longer 
appropriate. The NRC's position now is that RTNSS ``B'' SSCs should be 
protected from both tornadoes and hurricanes and the missiles they 
might create, and that applicants should choose the design basis wind 
speeds for RTNSS ``B'' SSCs using the guidance in Regulatory Guides 
1.76 and 1.221. Standard Review Plan 19.3 has been revised to reflect 
this position.
    The NRC seeks public comment on a narrow area of focus in the 
reissuance of the SRP Section 19.3, ``Regulatory Treatment of Non-
Safety Systems (RTNSS) for Passive Advanced Light Water Reactors.'' 
This area includes a revised position on treatment of the high winds 
external hazard for certain RTNSS SSCs that is described above and 
elsewhere (ML13081A756) under section ``SRP Acceptance Criteria'' and 
in ``Area of Review--Augmented Design Standards'' shown as item 4 in 
the guidance document page 19.3-8.
    Following NRC staff evaluation of public comments, the NRC intends 
to incorporate the final approved guidance into the next revision of 
NUREG-0800.

Backfitting and Issue Finality

    This draft SRP, if finalized, would provide guidance to the staff 
for reviewing applications for a construction permit and an operating 
license under part 50 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
(10 CFR) with respect to the regulatory treatment of non-safety 
systems. The draft SRP would also provide guidance for reviewing an 
application for a standard design approval, a standard design 
certification, a combined license, and a manufacturing license under 
part 52 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) with 
respect to these same subject matters.
    Issuance of this draft SRP, if finalized, would not constitute 
backfitting as defined in 10 CFR 50.109, or otherwise be inconsistent 
with the issue finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52. The staff's 
position is based upon the following considerations.
    1. The draft SRP positions, if finalized, do not constitute 
backfitting, inasmuch as the SRP is internal guidance to NRC staff.
    The SRP provides interim guidance to the staff on how to review an 
application for NRC regulatory approval in the form of licensing. 
Changes in internal staff guidance are not matters for which applicants 
or licensees are protected under 10 CFR 50.109 or issue finality 
provisions in 10 CFR Part 52.
    2. Backfitting and issue finality--with certain exceptions 
discussed below--do not protect current or future applicants.
    Applicants and potential applicants are not, with certain 
exceptions, protected by either the Backfit Rule or any issue finality 
provisions under 10 CFR part 52. This is because neither the Backfit 
Rule nor the issue finality provisions under 10 CFR part 52--with 
certain exclusions discussed below--were intended to apply to every NRC 
action which substantially changes the expectations of current and 
future applicants.
    The exceptions to this general principle are applicable whenever an 
applicant references a 10 CFR Part 52 license (e.g., an early site 
permit) and/or NRC regulatory approval (e.g., a design certification 
rule) with specified issue finality provisions. The staff does not, at 
this time, intend to impose the positions represented in the draft SRP 
section (if finalized) in a manner that is inconsistent with any issue 
finality provisions. If, in the future, the staff seeks to impose a 
position in the draft SRP section (if finalized) in a manner which does 
not provide issue finality as described in the applicable issue 
finality provision, then the staff must address the criteria for 
avoiding issue finality as described in the applicable issue finality 
provision.
    3. The staff has no intention to impose the draft SRP positions on 
existing nuclear power plant licenses or regulatory approvals either 
now or in the future (absent a voluntary request for change from the 
licensee, holder of a regulatory approval, or a design certification 
applicant).
    The staff does not intend to impose or apply the positions 
described in the draft SRP section to existing (already issued) 
licenses (e.g., operating licenses and combined licenses) and 
regulatory approvals--in this case, design certifications. Hence, the 
draft SRP--

[[Page 41438]]

even if considered guidance which is within the purview of the issue 
finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52--need not be evaluated as if it 
were a backfit or as being inconsistent with issue finality provisions. 
If, in the future, the staff seeks to impose a position in the draft 
SRP (if finalized) on holders of already issued licenses in a manner 
which does not provide issue finality as described in the applicable 
issue finality provision, then the staff must make the showing as set 
forth in the Backfit Rule, or address the criteria for avoiding issue 
finality as described applicable issue finality provision, as 
applicable.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of June 2013.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Joseph Colaccino,
Chief, Policy Branch, Division of Advanced Reactors and Rulemaking, 
Office of New Reactors.
[FR Doc. 2013-16586 Filed 7-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P