[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 13 (Thursday, January 20, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3540-3561]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-993]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 52
RIN 3150-AI84
[NRC-2010-0134]
U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Aircraft Impact Design
Certification Amendment
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission)
proposes to amend its regulations to certify an amendment to the U.S.
Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) standard plant design to comply
with the NRC's aircraft impact assessment (AIA) regulations. This
action would allow applicants or licensees intending to construct and
operate a U.S. ABWR to comply with the NRC's AIA regulations by
referencing the amended design certification rule (DCR). The applicant
for certification of the amendment to the U.S. ABWR design is STP
Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC). The public is invited to submit
comments on this proposed DCR, the STPNOC design control document (DCD)
that would be incorporated by reference into the DCR, and the
environmental assessment (EA) for the amendment to the U.S. ABWR
design. The public is also invited to submit comments on the NRC's
proposed approach for treating multiple suppliers of a single certified
design.
DATES: Submit comments on the DCR, DCD, and/or EA by April 5, 2011.
[[Page 3541]]
Submit comments on the information collection aspects of this rule by
February 22, 2011. Comments received after the above dates will be
considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of consideration
cannot be given to comments received after these dates.
ADDRESSES: Please include Docket ID NRC-2010-0134 in the subject line
of your comments. For instructions on submitting comments and accessing
documents related to this action, see Section I, ``Submitting Comments
and Accessing Information'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document. You may submit comments by any one of the following
methods.
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for documents filed under Docket ID NRC-
2010-0134. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher,
telephone 301-492-3668; e-mail [email protected].
Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff.
E-mail comments to: [email protected]. If you do
not receive a reply e-mail confirming that we have received your
comments, contact us directly at 301-415-1677.
Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays;
telephone 301-415-1677.
Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission at 301-415-1101.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Nanette V. Gilles, Office of New
Reactors, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001; telephone at 301-415-1180; e-mail: [email protected]; or
Stacy Joseph, Office of New Reactors, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone 301-415-2849; e-mail:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Submitting Comments and Accessing Information
II. Background
III. Discussion
A. Technical Evaluation of STPNOC Amendment to U.S. ABWR Design
B. Regulatory and Policy Issues
C. Changes to Appendix A to Part 52--Design Certification Rule
for the U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis
A. Introduction (Section I)
B. Definitions (Section II)
C. Scope and Contents (Section III)
D. Additional Requirements and Restrictions (Section IV)
E. Applicable Regulations (Section V)
F. Issue Resolution (Section VI)
G. Processes for Changes and Departures (Section VIII)
H. Records and Reporting (Section X)
V. Agreement State Compatibility
VI. Availability of Documents
VII. Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information for Preparation of Comments on the Proposed Amendment to
the U.S. ABWR Design Certification
VIII. Plain Language
IX. Voluntary Consensus Standards
X. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability
XI. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
XII. Regulatory Analysis
XIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
XIV. Backfitting
I. Submitting Comments and Accessing Information
Comments submitted in writing or in electronic form will be posted
on the NRC Web site and on the Federal rulemaking Web site http://www.regulations.gov. Because your comments will not be edited to remove
any identifying or contact information, the NRC cautions you against
including any information in your submission that you do not want to be
publicly disclosed. The NRC requests that any party soliciting or
aggregating comments received from other persons for submission to the
NRC inform those persons that the NRC will not edit their comments to
remove any identifying or contact information, and therefore, they
should not include any information in their comments that they do not
want publicly disclosed.
You can access publicly available documents related to this
document using the following methods:
NRC's Public Document Room (PDR): The public may examine and have
copied for a fee publicly available documents at the NRC's PDR, Room
O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland 20852.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS)
Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC are
available electronically at the NRC's Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this page, the public can gain
entry into ADAMS, which provides text and image files of NRC's public
documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems
in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC's PDR
reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to
[email protected].
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Public comments and supporting
materials related to this proposed rule can be found at http://www.regulations.gov by searching on Docket ID: NRC-2010-0134.
Documents that are not publicly available because they are
considered to be either Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information (SUNSI) (including SUNSI constituting proprietary
information), or Safeguards Information (SGI) may be available to
interested persons who may wish to comment on the proposed design
certification amendment. Interested persons shall follow the procedures
described in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document,
Section VII, ``Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information and Safeguards Information for Preparation of
Comments on the Proposed Amendment to the U.S. ABWR Design
Certification.''
II. Background
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, (10 CFR) Part 52
``Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants,''
Subpart B, presents the process for obtaining standard design
certifications. Section 52.63, ``Finality of standard design
certifications,'' provides criteria for determining when the Commission
may amend the certification information for a previously certified
standard design in response to a request for amendment from any person.
On June 30, 2009, STPNOC tendered its application with the NRC for
amendment of the U.S. ABWR standard plant design certification to
comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.150, ``Aircraft impact
assessment'' (ADAMS Accession Number ML092040048). STPNOC submitted
this application in accordance with 10 CFR 52.63. STPNOC proposed
several changes to the certified U.S. ABWR design to comply with 10 CFR
50.150, including the addition of an alternate feedwater injection
system, the addition and upgrading of fire barriers and doors, and the
strengthening of certain structural barriers. The NRC formally accepted
the application as a docketed application for amendment to the U.S.
ABWR design certification (Docket No. 52-001) on December 1, 2009 (74
FR 62829).
On June 12, 2009 (74 FR 28112), the NRC amended its regulations to
require applicants for new nuclear power reactor designs to perform a
design-specific assessment of the effects of the impact of a large,
commercial aircraft (the AIA rule). These new provisions in 10 CFR
50.150 require applicants to use
[[Page 3542]]
realistic analyses to identify and incorporate design features and
functional capabilities to ensure, with reduced use of operator
actions, that (1) the reactor core remains cooled or the containment
remains intact, and (2) spent fuel cooling or spent fuel pool integrity
is maintained. When it issued the AIA rule, the Commission stated that
the requirements in existence at that time, in conjunction with the
March 2009 revisions to 10 CFR 50.54 to address loss of large areas of
the plant due to explosions or fires, would continue to provide
adequate protection of the public health and safety and the common
defense and security. Nevertheless, the Commission decided to also
require applicants for new nuclear power reactors to incorporate into
their design additional features to show that the facility can
withstand the effects of an aircraft impact. The Commission stated that
the AIA rule to address the capability of new nuclear power reactors
relative to an aircraft impact is based both on enhanced public health
and safety and enhanced common defense and security, but is not
necessary for adequate protection. Rather, the AIA rule's goal is to
enhance the facility's inherent robustness at the design stage.
The AIA rule requirements apply to various categories of
applicants, including applicants for combined licenses (COLs) that
reference a standard design certification issued before the effective
date of the AIA rule, which have not been amended to comply with the
rule. These COL applicants have two methods by which they can comply
with 10 CFR 50.150. They can request an amendment to the certified
design or they can address the requirements of 10 CFR 50.150 directly
in their COL application. STPNOC submitted an application for a COL on
September 20, 2007. STPNOC has requested this amendment to the U.S.
ABWR certified design to address the requirements of the AIA rule.
III. Discussion
A. Technical Evaluation of STPNOC Amendment to U.S. ABWR Design
The NRC's review of the applicant's proposed amendment to the U.S.
ABWR design certification confirmed that the applicant has complied
with 10 CFR 50.150. Specifically, the staff confirmed that the
applicant adequately described key AIA design features and functional
capabilities in accordance with the AIA rule and conducted an
assessment reasonably formulated to identify design features and
functional capabilities to show, with reduced use of operator action,
that the facility can withstand the effects of an aircraft impact. In
addition, the staff determined that there will be no adverse impacts
from complying with the requirements for consideration of aircraft
impacts on conclusions reached by the NRC in its review of the original
U.S. ABWR design certification. Finally, the staff determined that
STPNOC and its contractors are technically qualified to perform the
design work associated with the amended portion of the U.S. ABWR design
represented by STPNOC's application and to supply the amended portion
of the U.S. ABWR design. STPNOC's amendment to the U.S. ABWR design has
achieved the Commission's objectives of enhanced public health and
safety and enhanced common defense and security through improvement of
the facility's inherent robustness at the design stage.
B. Regulatory and Policy Issues
Multiple Suppliers for a Single Certified Design
In the 1989 10 CFR part 52 rulemaking, the Commission decided to
approve standard reactor designs by rulemaking, as opposed to
licensing, and stated that a design certification rule ``does not,
strictly speaking, belong to the designer'' (54 FR 15327; April 18,
1989, at 15375, third column). Nonetheless, the Commission implicitly
recognized the need to protect the commercial and proprietary interests
of the original applicant who intends to supply the certified design,
should there be another entity who intends to use the design in some
fashion without approval or compensation to the original design
certification applicant. Id. The protection was provided, in part,
through the decision of the Commission to protect ``proprietary
information''\1\ developed by the original design certification
applicant, as well as by several other regulatory provisions in both 10
CFR part 52 and 10 CFR part 170.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The term, ``proprietary information,'' means trade secrets
or commercial or financial information that are privileged or
confidential, as those terms are used under the Freedom of
Information Act and the NRC's implementing regulation at 10 CFR part
9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based upon the licensing experience with operating nuclear power
plants, the Commission understood that portions of proposed design
certifications, primarily in the area of fuel design, would likely be
regarded as proprietary information (trade secrets) by future design
certification applicants. To ensure that design certification
applicants would not be adversely affected in their capability to
protect this proprietary information as a result of the NRC's decision
to approve designs by rulemaking rather than licensing, the Commission
adopted 10 CFR 52.51(c), which states, in relevant part:
Notwithstanding anything in 10 CFR 2.390 to the contrary,
proprietary information will be protected in the same manner and to
the same extent as proprietary information submitted in connection
with applications for licenses, provided that the design
certification shall be published in Chapter I of this title.
10 CFR 52.51(c) (1990, as originally promulgated in the 1989 Part 52
rulemaking, see 54 FR 15372; April 18, 1989, at 15390).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ As originally adopted in 1989, 10 CFR 52.51(c) consisted of
two sentences. The first sentence limited the bases for a decision
in a hearing on a design certification to information on which all
parties had an opportunity to comment; the second sentence is the
language of the current regulation. The first sentence was removed
in 2004 as a conforming change when the Commission removed the
hearing requirements for design certification (69 FR 2182; January
14, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Having protected proprietary information developed by the design
certification applicant, the Commission then adopted several additional
rulemaking provisions in 10 CFR part 52 providing additional regulatory
protection to the original design certification applicant against
unfair use of the design certification by other suppliers. The
Commission required the (original) design certification applicant, as
well as the applicant for renewal of the design certification, to
include in the application:
a level of design information sufficient to enable the Commission to
judge the applicant's proposed means of assuring that construction
conforms to the design and to reach a final conclusion on all safety
questions associated with the design before the certification is
granted. The information submitted for a design certification must
include performance requirements and design information sufficiently
detailed to permit the preparation of acceptance and inspection
requirements by the NRC, and procurement specifications and
construction and installation specifications by an applicant.
10 CFR 52.47(a)(2) (1990, as originally promulgated in the 1989 Part 52
rulemaking, see 54 FR 15372; April 18, 1989; at 15390);\3\ 10 CFR
52.57(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ This language was moved to the introductory paragraph of the
current 10 CFR 52.47 in the 2007 revision of 10 CFR part 52.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission also adopted 10 CFR 52.63(c), requiring the
applicant referencing the design certification to provide the
information required to be developed by 10 CFR 52.47(a)(2) or its
equivalent:
[[Page 3543]]
The Commission will require, before granting a construction
permit, combined license, operating license, or manufacturing
license which references a design certification rule, that
information normally contained in certain procurement specifications
and construction and installation specifications be completed and
available for audit if the information is necessary for the
Commission to make its safety determinations, including the
determination that the application is consistent with the
certification information. This information may be acquired by
appropriate arrangements with the design certification applicant.
10 CFR 52.63(c) (1990). By requiring a level of detailed information
supporting the certified design to be developed and available for NRC
audit at renewal and when the design was referenced for use, the
Commission ensured (among other things) that entities who were not the
original design certification applicant would not have an inordinate
financial advantage when either supplying the certified design to a
referencing user, or referencing the certified design in an
application.
The Commission also relied on its statutory authority to make a
technical qualifications finding under Section 182 of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954 (AEA) as amended, to adopt 10 CFR 52.73, which effectively
prohibits a COL applicant from referencing a certified design unless
the entity that actually supplies the design to the referencing
applicant is technically qualified to supply the certified design:
In the absence of a demonstration that an entity other than the
one originally sponsoring and obtaining a design certification is
qualified to supply such design, the Commission will entertain an
application for a combined license which references a standard
design certification issued under Subpart B only if the entity that
sponsored and obtained the certification supplies the certified
design for the applicant's use.
10 CFR 52.73 (1990, as originally promulgated in the 1989 Part 52
rulemaking, see 54 FR 15372; April 18, 1989, at 15393).\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ This provision was slightly reworded in the 2007 rulemaking
amending 10 CFR part 52 in a newly-designated paragraph (b) to 10
CFR 52.73 (72 FR 49352; August 28, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apart from the provisions discussed previously, the Commission also
indicated in the statements of consideration for the 1989 10 CFR part
52 rulemaking that the finality provisions in 10 CFR 52.63 provided
some protection against arbitrary amendment or rescission of the design
certification. Any proposed rescission or amendment of the design
certification must be accomplished under notice and comment rulemaking
procedures, as required by 10 CFR 52.63(a)(1). The original applicant
would, accordingly, have the opportunity to comment on any proposed
change to the design, including those changes initiated by other
entities.
Finally, the Commission adopted, as part of the 1989 rulemaking,
conforming amendments to 10 CFR 170.12(d) and (e). Under these
provisions, entities other than the original design certification
applicant who provide either the renewed or original certified design
to a referencing applicant for a construction permit, operating license
or COL must pay the applicable installment of the deferred NRC fee \5\
for review of the original or renewed design certification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ In the 1989 final 10 CFR part 52 rulemaking, the Commission
decided that the payment of the fee imposed upon the design
certification applicant to recover the NRC's costs for review and
approval of the certified design via rulemaking, and renewal of the
design certification rule, should be deferred and recovered in equal
increments the first five times the DCR was referenced in an
application. See 10 CFR 107.12(d)(2) (renewal of DCR); 10 CFR
170.12(e)(2)(i) (initial certification) (1990), as originally
promulgated in the 1989 10 CFR part 52 rulemaking (see 54 FR 15372;
April 18, 1989, at 15399).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After the 1989 rulemaking, in each of the four existing DCRs in 10
CFR part 52, Appendices A through D, the Commission adopted an
additional provision serving to protect the proprietary information and
SGI developed by the original design certification applicant. Paragraph
IV.A.3 of each rule required an applicant referencing the DCR to
``physically include in the plant-specific DCD proprietary information
and safeguards information referenced in the DCD.'' The Commission's
view was that by ``physically'' including the proprietary information
and SGI developed by the original DCR applicant in the application,
this would be demonstrative of the referencing applicant's rights to
use that information; otherwise, the referencing applicant could
provide the equivalent information (62 FR 25800; May 12, 1997, at
25818, third column). In 2007, at the request of NEI and other industry
commenters, the word, ``physically'' was removed from Paragraph IV of
each of the four DCRs, to allow the DCR applicant more flexibility in
how the proprietary information and SGI are included in the application
referencing the DCR (72 FR 49352; August 28, 2007, at 49363-49365).
This change was not intended to represent a retreat from the
Commission's position that the referencing applicant has the
appropriate commercial rights to reference the proprietary and SGI
information or its equivalent. However, the NRC acknowledges that under
the current language of paragraph IV.A.3., the NRC must do more to
verify that the referencing applicant has the appropriate commercial
rights to the proprietary and SGI information developed by the
originating applicant (unless, of course, the referencing applicant
indicates that it is supplying ``equivalent'' information).
The Commission did not describe in the 1989 rulemaking the
particular regulatory approach and structure to be used for a design
certification rule with two or more suppliers of the certified design.
In the years after the 1989 Part 52 rulemaking, the Commission did not
need to address the circumstance of multiple suppliers of the same
certified design (multiple suppliers) to an end user.\6\ However, with
the filing of the U.S. ABWR design certification amendment request by
STPNOC, as well as Toshiba's March 3, 2010, letter to the NRC stating
that it intends to seek renewal of the U.S. ABWR design certification
(ADAMS Accession No. ML100710026), the NRC must now determine the
regulatory approach and structure for the amendment (and, for
completeness, the renewal) of a certified design where there will be
multiple suppliers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The term, ``user,'' means an entity which references the
standard design certification rule in its application, and the
holder of a permit or license which incorporates the standard design
certification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When the NRC was advised of STPNOC's intent to submit an amendment
of the U.S. ABWR design certification, it began a process of
identifying and considering possible regulatory alternatives, with the
goal of identifying a single regulatory approach and structure to be
used for all design certifications with multiple suppliers. The NRC
considered three alternatives which it could reasonably select:
1. Separate rules: Develop separate design certification rules for
each supplier.
2. Branches: Develop one design certification rule with multiple
branches, with each branch describing a complete design to be supplied
by each supplier.
3. Options: Develop one design certification rule with options,
with each option describing a portion of the certified design which may
be selected by the user as an option to the original ``reference''
certified design.
Table 1 presents the NRC's current views with respect to the
differences between these three alternatives.
[[Page 3544]]
In light of the Commission's past practice of protecting the
proprietary information and legitimate commercial interests of the
original design certification applicant wherever consistent with other
applicable law, the NRC believes that it should consider that practice
when evaluating possible alternatives for the approach and structure of
a design certification rule with multiple suppliers. Upon
consideration, the NRC concludes that the ``branches'' alternative
should be adopted as the general approach for all renewals of design
certifications and for major design certification amendments. The
``branches'' alternative: (1) Is consistent with all applicable law;
(2) protects the proprietary information and legitimate commercial
interests of the original design certification applicant (as well as
the additional suppliers); and (3) meets the NRC's regulatory concerns.
Each of these considerations is discussed separately below.
No Statutory or Other Legal Prohibition to the ``Branches'' Alternative
There is no statutory or other legal prohibition, explicit or
otherwise, against use of the ``branches'' alternative in the AEA, the
Administrative Procedure Act, the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act, or other statutes applicable to the NRC. Design
certification rulemaking is not specifically addressed in the AEA. The
AEA provisions do not appear to circumscribe or prohibit the NRC's use
of a regulatory approach of approving multiple suppliers of a set of
closely related certified designs in a single codified rule. Moreover,
nothing in Part 52 compels the use of a particular alternative for
addressing multiple suppliers. As discussed previously, the Commission
contemplated that multiple suppliers could supply the same certified
design from the time it first adopted the concept of design
certification by rulemaking. However, the Commission did not mandate
any specific regulatory approach for accommodating multiple suppliers
of a certified design. Those provisions intended to protect proprietary
information and the commercial interests of each supplier do not
mandate any specific approach for accommodating multiple suppliers, and
do not foreclose the use of the ``branches'' alternative.
Protection of Proprietary Information and Legitimate Commercial
Interests of All Suppliers
The ``branches'' alternative fully protects the proprietary
information and legitimate commercial interests of all suppliers. Under
the ``branches'' alternative, each supplier is responsible for creating
and maintaining its own DCD (including the non-public version of the
DCD containing SUNSI (including proprietary information) and SGI
developed by the supplier). Because each DCD is self-contained, the NRC
does not foresee any circumstance that would require the NRC to provide
the non-public DCD (or information supporting its DCD) prepared and
supported by the original design certification applicant to the new
supplier, or to provide the non-public DCD prepared and supported by
the new supplier to the original applicant. Nor does the use of the
``branches'' alternative affect the legal issues associated with
providing access to SUNSI (including proprietary information) and SGI
to members of the public to facilitate public comment on a proposed
design certification rulemaking adding a new supplier and branch.
The ``branches'' alternative has no effect on the legal
applicability, or on the NRC's implementation of the 10 CFR part 52 and
part 170 provisions discussed previously, which are directed at
protecting the proprietary information and commercial interests of the
original design applicant. These provisions, properly applied, should
also protect the proprietary information and interests of all other
suppliers of a subsequently-approved ``branch.'' Thus, the ``branches''
alternative affords all suppliers all of the protection of their
proprietary information and commercial interests, which the Commission
intended to be provided to these suppliers.
A rulemaking adopting a new ``branch'' (a `` `branch' rulemaking'')
would not disturb the issue resolution and finality accorded to the
original certified design (as amended in any subsequent rulemakings),
or to the certified design of any other suppliers in any previously
approved branches. Nor would a ``branch'' rulemaking necessarily
require the Commission to consider and address, in the final rulemaking
adding the new ``branch,'' comments on the existing certified design.
The NRC believes that each ``branch'' rulemaking is limited to adding
the new ``branch'' together with requirements and conditions specific
to the new ``branch.'' Therefore, the NRC asserts that: (1) The nuclear
safety and other associated matters (severe accident mitigation design
alternatives (SAMDAs)) resolved in the preceding design certification
rulemaking(s) continue to be effective and are not being re-examined in
the ``branch'' rulemaking; and (2) comments on the existing certified
design(s) are out-of-scope and should not be considered in the
``branch'' rulemaking.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ If the out-of-scope comment seeking to modify the existing
certified design was submitted by the original sponsor of that
design, then the NRC believes that the original sponsor should seek
an amendment of its certified design in accordance with the design
certification amendment process as addressed in 10 CFR 52.57 and
52.59, and 10 CFR 2.800(c) and 10 CFR 2.811 through 2.819 (as well
as the procedures common to all petitions for rulemaking in 10 CFR
2.804 through 2.810, as prescribed in 10 CFR 2.800(b)). By contrast,
if the out-of-scope comment seeking to modify the existing certified
design was submitted by any other entity (e.g., an entity that is
not the supplier of that certified design branch), then the staff
believes that these comments should be regarded as petitions for
rulemaking and processed in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR
2.800(c) and 10 CFR 2.802 through 2.803 (as well as the procedures
common to all petitions for rulemaking in 10 CFR 2.804 through
2.810, as prescribed in 10 CFR 2.800(b)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ``branches'' alternative would not require the original
supplier (or indeed any previously-approved supplier) of the certified
design to modify their DCD, or incur other costs as part of the
``branch'' rulemaking. Hence, there is no financial impact upon the
pre-existing suppliers. The NRC has not identified any credible
argument that could be raised by the original design certification
applicant that an NRC decision allowing a new supplier to supply the
certified design could be the proximate cause of any diminution in the
commercial value of the original applicant's certified design. The
concept of multiple suppliers of a single certified design is inherent
in the concept of design certification by rulemaking. The Commission
anticipated multiple suppliers of a single design certification when it
was considering the regulatory approach for certification (rulemaking
versus licensing), and afforded protection to the original applicant by
various provisions of 10 CFR part 52. This protection was embodied in
provisions included in each of the design certification rules issued to
date, and these provisions would continue to be included in future
design certification rules. Hence, no supplier--including the original
design certification applicant--may reasonably claim that the approval
of a new ``branch'' constitutes an unwarranted diminution in the
commercial value of the certified design which it sponsored.
NRC's Regulatory Concerns Are Met
The NRC believes that any alternative and structure for a design
certification rule with multiple suppliers must meet the following
regulatory concerns. Any rule amendment (or renewal) which introduces a
new supplier must
[[Page 3545]]
minimize the possibility of re-opening the safety and regulatory
conclusions reached by the NRC with respect to previously approved
aspects of the design and supplier(s). In addition, if the new supplier
is proposing changes to the actual certified design, then the
substitute or new portions of the design \8\ must, to the maximum
extent practical, be attributable solely to the ``sponsoring''
supplier, and therefore distinguishable from the ``common'' portions of
the design which each supplier must support (the ``branches''
alternative adopting the premise that the supplier must be technically
qualified to supply all of the certified design, including the
``common'' portions).\9\ The regulatory approach and structure must
reflect a sound basis for allowing the NRC to make a technical
qualifications finding with respect to the supplier. Finally, the
approach and structure must allow for imposition of applicable NRC
requirements on each supplier, and the legal ability of the NRC to
undertake enforcement and regulatory action on each supplier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ A ``substitute'' portion of the certified design sponsored
by the new supplier serves to replace a discrete portion of a design
as sponsored by the original design certification applicant (in
other words, the basis for comparison of a new branch must always be
the original certified design), but without augmenting or adding a
completely new functional capability. By contrast, a ``new'' portion
of the certified design sponsored by the new supplier serves to
either: (1) Augment a discrete portion of the design as sponsored by
the original design certification applicant; or (2) add a completely
new functional capability not previously considered and addressed in
the original certified design. As an example, the amendment of the
ABWR DCR sought by STPNOC would add new functional capabilities--the
ability to withstand aircraft impacts of the kind described in the
AIA rule, 10 CFR 50.150. Hence, the ``changes'' sought by STPNOC
would be considered ``new'' portions of the certified design.
\9\ The NRC believes a broad finding of technical qualifications
is necessary because the original design certification applicant is
under no legal or NRC regulatory obligation (consistent with the
concept of providing protection to the proprietary information and
legitimate commercial interests of the original supplier) to provide
technical support on the ``common'' portions of the certified design
to either the new supplier or a user.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ``branches'' alternative meets all of these regulatory
concerns. By creating a separate branch for the design to be supplied
by the new supplier in the rule and requiring the new certified design
to be described in a separate DCD created and supported by the new
supplier, there is a strong basis for arguing that the certified
design(s) already approved by the NRC are not affected and that the
issue finality accorded to those certified designs (as controlled by 10
CFR 52.63) continues. Hence, in any rulemaking approving a new branch,
the NRC need not consider any comments seeking changes to the existing
certified design.
The use of a separate DCD to describe the new certified design, by
its very nature, serves to distinguish any substitute or new portions
of the certified design sponsored only by the new supplier, and make
clear that the substitute or new portions are being sponsored solely by
the new supplier (because the other branches do not contain any
reference to or mention of the substitute or new portions of the design
sponsored by the new supplier). The use of a separate DCD describing
the entire design is also consistent with the NRC's position that it
must conduct a technical qualifications review of the new supplier, and
make a finding that the new supplier is technically qualified to
provide the entire certified design. The NRC's recommendation to use a
separate DCD, coupled with a structure of the design certification rule
language (as codified in one of the appendices to 10 CFR part 52) that
applies common regulatory requirements to all suppliers, allows for the
NRC to take regulatory action against any supplier without regard to
whether the supplier was the original design certification applicant.
For these reasons, the NRC concluded that its regulatory concerns
are met under the ``branches'' alternative. However, during discussions
with STPNOC about the processing of its request to amend the U.S. ABWR
design certification, STPNOC proposed that the NRC adopt a process
similar to the ``options'' approach for the STPNOC U.S. ABWR amendment.
The STPNOC request was based upon a number of factors which the NRC
considered to be unique to STPNOC's situation. First, under the
``branches'' approach, STPNOC would have to supply the U.S. ABWR
proprietary information (or its equivalent) which was originally
developed by GE Nuclear Energy (GE) and approved by the NRC in the
original U.S. ABWR design certification rulemaking. While STPNOC has
contractual rights from GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) to use the GE-
developed U.S. ABWR proprietary information for South Texas Project
(STP) Units 3 & 4, it does not have the right to supply the GE-
developed U.S. ABWR proprietary information to other companies in
connection with any other application for a COL that references the
certified U.S. ABWR. In addition, neither STPNOC nor its contractors
would be in a position to provide complete information to substitute
for the GE-developed U.S. ABWR proprietary information in time to
support the schedule for issuance of the COLs for STP Units 3 & 4,
should they be approved by the NRC. Second, STPNOC indicated that some
portion of the GE-developed U.S. ABWR proprietary information relates
to fuel design, and STPNOC does not intend to use the GE fuel design
for initial operation of STP Units 3 & 4. Rather, STPNOC intends to use
another fuel design and obtain NRC approval via an application for a
COL amendment (i.e., after the issuance of the COLs). The GE-developed
fuel design also would not be used to operate any of the possible six
U.S. ABWRs that could be developed under the agreement between Toshiba
and Nuclear Innovation North America LLC, which has the right to
develop four U.S. ABWRs in addition to STP Units 3 & 4. Finally, STPNOC
indicated that the ``options'' approach would not be used at renewal;
the renewal application Toshiba was developing would reflect the use of
the ``branches'' alternative (i.e., Toshiba would be seeking approval
of and supplying the entire U.S. ABWR design at renewal, including
replacement proprietary information). Based on these factors, STPNOC
requested that it be considered the supplier for only that portion of
the U.S. ABWR design certification necessary to comply with the AIA,
and which is the subject of its amendment request.
Upon consideration, the NRC is proposing to use the ``options''
approach for the STPNOC amendment of the U.S. ABWR design
certification, based on the following considerations. As with the
``branches'' alternative, there is no statute or NRC regulation
prohibiting the use of the ``options'' approach. Nor is there any
provision which prohibits the concurrent use of both alternatives--so
long as the NRC is able to articulate a basis for doing so. Moreover,
all of the NRC's safety and regulatory objectives are met. STPNOC is
providing sufficient information to determine its technical
qualifications\10\ to supply the STPNOC-sponsored amendments addressing
the AIA rule to third party users (i.e., users other than STPNOC
itself). In addition, the NRC believes that there are no
[[Page 3546]]
insurmountable issues in requiring the user (in most cases, the COL
applicant referencing the U.S. ABWR and the STPNOC option) to prepare a
single DCD integrating information from both the DCD developed by GE
and the DCD developed by STPNOC. The ``options'' approach also avoids
or addresses all of STPNOC's concerns with the use of the ``branches''
alternative for its request to amend the U.S. ABWR. STPNOC would not
have to develop and submit to the NRC information equivalent to the
proprietary information developed by GE to support the STPNOC amendment
application. Nor does STPNOC have to demonstrate its technical
qualifications to supply the entire U.S. ABWR certified design; it
would only have to demonstrate its technical qualifications to supply
the STPNOC option. Toshiba will prepare an application for renewal of
the U.S. ABWR design certification (with Toshiba being the renewal
applicant) that reflects the ``branches'' approach, and that
application is likely to be submitted within the next year. Thus, the
STPNOC option would have a limited period of effectiveness, that is,
until the renewal of the U.S. ABWR design certification. Finally, the
``options'' approach fully protects the legitimate proprietary and
commercial interests of GE in the original U.S. ABWR design
certification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The NRC staff determined that STPNOC and its contractors
are technically qualified to perform the design work associated with
the amended portion of the ABWR design represented by STPNOC's
application and to supply the amended portion of the ABWR design.
However, the NRC staff determined that STPNOC, by itself, is not
technically qualified to supply the amended portion of the ABWR
design certification represented in STPNOC's DCD, Revision 1. The
NRC is proposing a provision in the amended ABWR DCR to specify that
if a COL applicant references the STPNOC option but does not show
they are obtaining the design from STPNOC and Toshiba American
Nuclear Energy (TANE), acting together, then the COL applicant must
demonstrate that the entity supplying the STPNOC option to the
applicant possesses the technical qualifications to do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on these considerations, the NRC is proposing to adopt the
``options'' alternative for the STPNOC amendment of the U.S. ABWR
design certification, but will regard the ``branches'' alternative as
the default for all renewals of design certifications and for major
design certification amendments. Under the ``options'' approach,
applicants seeking amendments to already certified designs must be
found to be qualified to supply the limited scope of the revisions they
seek. If the NRC receives other limited-scope design certification
amendments (similar in scope to the STPNOC amendment request), it will
consider whether the ``branches'' approach or the ``options'' approach
offers the most effective and efficient regulatory option at that time
based on the scope of the amendment and the specific circumstances
associated with the particular application.
By implementing the ``options'' approach for the STPNOC U.S. ABWR
amendment, a COL applicant that references the U.S. ABWR standard
design certification can meet the requirements of the AIA rule by
referencing both the GE DCD and the STPNOC DCD or by referencing only
the GE DCD and addressing the requirements of the AIA rule separately
in its COL application.
Table 1--Differences in Regulatory Treatment of Alternatives for Addressing Multiple Design Certification
Suppliers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative 1: separate Alternative 2: one rule Alternative 3: one rule
Regulatory feature rules with multiple branches with options
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary Description of Alternative... Each supplier's Each supplier`s The original
certified design would certified design would applicant's certified
be contained in a be contained in a design would be
separate design single design contained in a single
certification rule certification rule (a design certification
(separate appendices single appendix to 10 rule (a single
to 10 CFR part 52). CFR part 52).. appendix to 10 CFR
Thus, there would be Each supplier's design part 52). An
multiple rules for the is a complete design, ``option'' represents
same general design.. and presented as an an alternative to the
Single DCD (see below). alternative or specified portion(s)
``branch'' within the of the original
rule. applicant's certified
design. The supplier
of the option would be
providing only the
portion(s) of the
certified design
contained within the
option.
A COL referencing a
design with options
would obtain the total
design from two (or
more) suppliers: (i)
the main portion of
the design from the
original applicant
(unless the COL
applicant demonstrated
that another entity
was qualified to
supply the design);
and (ii) the selected
design option from the
applicable supplier of
the option.
Two choices for the
DCDs (see below).
DCD.................................. One complete DCD for Two separate DCDs (one Choice 1(NRC preferred)
each rule. Rule for each supplier), Two separate DCDs: (i)
language would each DCD describing original applicant's
incorporate by design for that DCD (no change to
reference a single DCD. supplier. Rule document); and (ii) a
language would limited-scope DCD
incorporate by describing only the
reference two DCDs. information in the
option.
Choice 2
Two separate DCDs: (i)
original applicant's
DCD (no change to
document); and (ii)
new DCD, prepared by
supplier of option,
integrating the
original certified
design with the
substitute design
description of the
option in the
appropriate locations.
[[Page 3547]]
Identification of Applicant in Rule.. Each supplier The original applicant Original applicant and
identified as original and the applicant for applicant for each
applicant in its rule. each branch (each ``option'' (each
entity constituting a entity constituting a
supplier) are supplier) are
identified. identified.
NOTE: Original
applicant would always
be the first branch..
Technical Content of Application for Design information for Design information for Original supplier
Amendment. amended portion of amended portion of Design information for
design. design branch. amended portion of
design.
Supplier of option-
initial application
for option
Design information for
amended portion of
design.
Supplier of option-
application for
amendment to option
Design information for
amended portion of
option.
Technical Content of Application for Design information for Design information for Original supplier
Renewal. entire design, entire design branch, Design information for
necessary to comply necessary to comply entire design
with renewal updating with renewal updating necessary to comply
in accordance with in accordance with with renewal updating
Sec. 52.57. Sec. 52.57. in accordance with
Sec. 52.57.
Supplier of option
NA (supplier of option
may not renew the DCR
option. If both the
original applicant and
the applicant for the
option seek renewal,
then renewal will be
implemented as
``branches'' under
Alternative 2 with two
named applicants/
suppliers. If the
original applicant or
the applicant for the
option, alone, seeks
renewal, then renewal
will be implemented as
a single rule with one
named applicant/
supplier.)
Submission of SUNSI (including Amendment.............. Amendment.............. Amendment
proprietary information), and SGI Original supplier Original supplier Original supplier
(if applicable). Submit publicly Submit publicly Submit publicly
available DCD without available DCD without available DCD without
new SUNSI (including new SUNSI (including new SUNSI (including
proprietary proprietary proprietary
information) and SGI information) and SGI, information) and SGI,
and separate DCD with and separate DCD with and separate DCD with
any new SUNSI any new SUNSI any new SUNSI
(including proprietary (including proprietary (including proprietary
information) and SGI. information) and SGI. information) and SGI.
Additional supplier.... Supplier of branch..... Supplier of option
Submit publicly Submit publicly Submit publicly
available DCD without available DCD without available DCD without
SUNSI (including SUNSI (including SUNSI (including
proprietary proprietary proprietary
information) and SGI, information) and SGI, information) and SGI,
and separate DCD with and separate DCD with and separate DCD with
SUNSI (including SUNSI (including SUNSI (including
proprietary proprietary proprietary
information) and SGI information) and SGI information) and SGI
that is equivalent to that is equivalent to that is equivalent to
all SUNSI (including all SUNSI (including that SUNSI (including
proprietary proprietary proprietary
information) and SGI information) and SGI information) and SGI
provided by original provided by original provided by original
applicant. applicant. applicant which is
Renewal................ Renewal................ within the scope of
Original supplier...... the amendment, plus
Submit publicly any new SUNSI
available DCD without (including proprietary
new SUNSI (including information) and SGI
proprietary necessary to support
information) and SGI, the amendment.
and separate DCD with Renewal
any new SUNSI
(including proprietary
information) and SGI.
[[Page 3548]]
Original supplier...... Supplier of branch..... Original supplier
Submit publicly Submit publicly Submit publicly
available DCD without available DCD without available DCD without
new SUNSI (including SUNSI (including new SUNSI (including
proprietary proprietary proprietary
information) and SGI, information) and SGI, information) and SGI,
and separate DCD with and separate DCD with and separate DCD with
any new SUNSI SUNSI (including any new SUNSI
(including proprietary proprietary (including proprietary
information) and SGI. information) and SGI information) and SGI.
Additional supplier.... that is equivalent to
Submit publicly all SUNSI (including
available DCD without proprietary
SUNSI (including information) and SGI
proprietary provided by original
information) and SGI, applicant (unless
and separate DCD with previously provided by
SUNSI (including the non-original
proprietary applicant in an
information) and SGI earlier amendment
that is equivalent to proceeding)..
all SUNSI (including
proprietary
information) and SGI
provided by original
applicant (unless
previously provided by
the non-original
applicant in an
earlier amendment
proceeding)..
Nature and Scope of NRC Safety Findings that: (i) Findings that: (i) Original supplier
Review--Amendment. portion of design portion of design Findings that: (i)
being amended meets being amended meets portion of design
current applicable NRC current applicable NRC being amended meets
requirements; and (ii) requirements; and (ii) current applicable NRC
proposed change does proposed change does requirements; and (ii)
not affect previous not affect previous proposed change does
conclusions in other conclusions in other not affect previous
design areas. design areas. conclusions in other
design areas.
Supplier of option
Findings that: (i)
design proposed to be
added as an option, or
portion of existing
design being amended
(as applicable), meets
current applicable NRC
requirements; (ii) (if
applicable) proposed
change to an option
does not affect
previous conclusions
in other design areas
of the option; and
(iii) design proposed
to be added as an
option, or proposed
change to existing
option (as applicable)
does not affect safety
of design areas in the
portion of the design
supplied by the
original supplier.
Nature and Scope of NRC Safety Findings that: (i) Findings that: (i) Original supplier
Review--Renewal. design complies with design complies with Findings that: (i)
AIA Rule, 10 CFR AIA Rule, 10 CFR design complies with
50.150 (if not already 50.150 (if not already AIA Rule, 10 CFR
amended); (ii) design amended); (ii) design 50.150 (if not already
complies with all complies with all amended); (ii) design
regulations applicable regulations applicable complies with all
and in effect at time and in effect at time regulations applicable
or original or original and in effect at time
certification; (iii) certification; (iii) or original
relevant findings for relevant findings for certification; (iii)
any changes to the any changes to the relevant findings for
design requested by design requested by any changes to the
the supplier, per 10 the supplier, per 10 design requested by
CFR 52.59(c); and (iv) CFR 52.59(c); and the supplier, per 10
the findings required relevant findings for CFR 52.59(c); and (iv)
by 10 CFR 52.59(b) for changes imposed by the the findings required
those changes imposed NRC per 10 CFR by 10 CFR 52.59(b) for
by the NRC under that 52.59(b); and (iv) the those changes imposed
section. findings required by by the NRC under that
10 CFR 52.59(b) for section.
those changes imposed Supplier of option
by the NRC under that NA (supplier of option
section. would not be allowed
to renew the option)
[[Page 3549]]
Nature and Scope of NRC Technical Supplier is technically Original supplier...... Original supplier
Qualifications Review--Initial qualified to provide Supplier is technically Supplier is technically
Supplier Approval. entire design, qualified to provide qualified to provide
including detailed entire design, entire design,
design information. including detailed including detailed
design information.. design information.
Supplier of branch..... Supplier of option
Supplier is technically Supplier is technically
qualified to provide qualified to provide
entire design, detailed design
including detailed information and the
design information and equivalent SUNSI
the equivalent SUNSI (including proprietary
(including proprietary information) and SGI,
information) and SGI. if any, which is
within the scope of
the amendment.
Nature and Scope of NRC Technical NA..................... NA..................... NA (if amendment is in
Qualifications Review--Amendment. same area as original
option)
Nature and Scope of NRC Technical None, unless None, unless None, unless
Qualifications Review--Renewal. significant change in significant change in significant change in
organization or organization or organization or
corporate structure/ corporate structure/ corporate structure/
ownership or ownership, or ownership, or
information showing a information showing a information showing a
change in change in change in
circumstances so a circumstances so a circumstances so a
supplier no longer has supplier no longer has supplier no longer has
technical technical technical
qualifications.. qualifications.. qualifications.
(supplier of option
would not be allowed
to renew the option
unless it was
incorporated into a
wholesale renewal of
the design
certification).
Scope of Comments in Proposed Rule Comments on design for Original supplier NA... Original supplier
FRN--New Rule or Initial Approval of new rule. (comments on the NA (comments on the
Branch or Option. (no comment on original original supplier's original supplier's
DCR). design would be out-of- design would be out-of-
scope of a rulemaking scope of a rulemaking
proposing to add a proposing to add an
branch). option)
Supplier of branch..... Supplier of option
Same as scope of (i) Proposed option
comments on initial meets applicable NRC
approval of a new DCR. requirements; (ii)
proposed option does
not affect safety of
design areas in the
portion of the design
supplied by the
original supplier.
Scope of Comments in Proposed Rule Whether: (i) changed Whether: (i) changed Original supplier
FRN--Amendment. portion of design portion of design Whether: (i) changed
meets current branch meets current portion of design
applicable NRC applicable NRC meets current
requirements; and (ii) requirements; and (ii) applicable NRC
changes adversely changes adversely requirements; (ii)
affect previous affect previous changes adversely
conclusions in other conclusions in other affect previous
design areas. design areas. conclusions in other
design areas; and
(iii) changed portion
of design requires the
NRC to implement
conforming changes in
the design option.
Supplier of option
Whether: (i) proposed
change to the option
meets applicable NRC
requirements; (ii)
proposed change to the
option affects
previous conclusions
in unchanged portions
of the option; and
(iii) proposed change
to the option affects
safety of design areas
in the portion of the
design supplied by the
original supplier.
Scope of Comments in Proposed Rule Consistent with finding Consistent with finding NA (Supplier of option
FRN--Renewal. that NRC must make at that NRC must make at would not be allowed
renewal. renewal. to renew the option).
[[Page 3550]]
Part 21--Applicability............... Each supplier is Each supplier is Original supplier
responsible for Part responsible for Part Responsible for Part 21
21 compliance with 21 compliance with compliance with
respect to its design. respect to its design respect to the entire
branch.. design with the
Note: NRC is exception of the
responsible for option(s).
advising suppliers of Supplier of option
branches of any Responsible for Part 21
defects in the portion compliance with
of the design which respect to its option.
was sponsored by Note: NRC is
another supplier. responsible for
advising: (i)
suppliers of options
of any defects in the
design of the original
supplier; and (ii)
original supplier of
any defects in any of
the options, for the
purpose of
facilitating the
original supplier's
consideration of the
option's defect on the
original supplier's
design.
Supplier Recordkeeping Each supplier required Each supplier required Original supplier
Responsibilities. to maintain its DCD.. to maintain the DCD Maintain the DCD for
representing the the entire design.
branch it sponsored.. Supplier of option
Maintain the DCD for
its option.
Mode of Referencing by COL applicant. Reference the selected Reference one branch of Reference the rule with
rule.. the rule.. identification of
option selected.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
1. If there is only a single description in a table cell, then that means that the description applies to all
suppliers.
2. For purposes of this table, ``supplier'' means an entity that: (1) Submits an application for a new design
certification, an amendment to an existing design certification, or a renewal for a design certification; and
(2) intends to, has offered, or is providing design and engineering services related to the certified design
to a license applicant. The information in this table does not apply to petitions for rulemaking under 10 CFR
2.802 submitted by entities who are not acting, do not intend to act, or the NRC believes are not reasonably
capable of acting as a ``supplier.'' ``Original supplier'' means the supplier who was the original applicant
for the design certification.
C. Changes to Appendix A to Part 52--Design Certification Rule for the
U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor
1. Introduction (Section I)
The NRC proposes to amend Section I, ``Introduction,'' to identify
STPNOC as the applicant for the amendment of the U.S. ABWR design
certification rule to address the AIA rule, 10 CFR 50.150. The portion
of the certified design sponsored by STPNOC in this amendment, and
which this rulemaking finds STPNOC (acting together with TANE) is
technically qualified to supply, is termed the ``STPNOC certified
design option'' or ``STPNOC option.'' As discussed in greater detail in
the section-by-section analysis for Section III, ``Scope and
Contents,'' an applicant or licensee referencing this appendix may use
the GE certified design (which was first certified by the NRC in a 1997
rulemaking (62 FR 25800; May 12, 1997)), or both the GE certified
design together with the STPNOC option (the GE/STPNOC composite
certified design).
The overall purpose of paragraph I of this appendix is to identify
the standard plant design that was approved and the applicant for
certification of the standard design. Identification of both the
original design certification applicant and the applicant for any
amendment to the design is necessary to implement this appendix, for
two reasons. First, the implementation of 10 CFR 52.63(c) depends on
whether an applicant for a COL contracts with the design certification
applicant to provide the generic DCD and supporting design information.
If the COL applicant does not use the design certification applicant to
provide the design information and instead uses an alternate nuclear
plant supplier, then the COL applicant must meet the requirements in
paragraph IV.A.4 of this appendix and 10 CFR 52.73. The COL applicant
must demonstrate that the alternate supplier is qualified to provide
the standard plant design information.
By identifying STPNOC as the applicant for the amendment of the
U.S. ABWR design certification rule, the provisions of 10 CFR 52.63
will be given effect whenever a COL applicant references the certified
design option sponsored by STPNOC, but does not use STPNOC to supply
the design information for this option and instead uses an alternate
supplier. In this circumstance, the COL applicant must meet the
requirements in paragraph IV.A.4 of this appendix and 10 CFR 52.73 with
respect to the STPNOC option (i.e., the COL applicant must demonstrate
that the alternate supplier is qualified to provide the certified
design information constituting the STPNOC option).
In addition, by identifying STPNOC as the applicant, STPNOC must
maintain the generic DCD for the STPNOC option throughout the time this
appendix may be referenced by a COL, as required by paragraph X.A.1 of
this appendix.
2. Definitions (Section II)
The NRC is proposing to revise the definition of ``generic design
control document (generic DCD)'' in paragraph A in Section II,
``Definitions,'' to indicate that there will now be two generic DCDs
incorporated by reference into this appendix--the DCD for the original
U.S. ABWR design certification submitted by GE Nuclear Energy (GE DCD)
and the DCD for the amendment to the U.S. ABWR design submitted by
STPNOC (STPNOC DCD). The NRC is proposing this change to the definition
of ``generic DCD'' to make it clear that all requirements in this
appendix related to
[[Page 3551]]
the ``generic DCD'' apply to both the GE DCD and the STPNOC DCD, unless
otherwise specified.
During development of the first two DCRs, the Commission decided
that there would be both generic (master) DCDs maintained by the NRC
and the design certification applicant, as well as individual plant-
specific DCDs maintained by each applicant and licensee that reference
this appendix. This distinction is necessary to specify the relevant
plant-specific requirements to applicants and licensees referencing the
appendix. To facilitate the maintenance of the master DCDs, the NRC
proposes that each application for a standard design certification or
amendment to a standard design certification be updated to include an
electronic copy of the final version of the DCD. The final version
would be required to incorporate all amendments to the DCD submitted
since the original application as well as any changes directed by the
NRC as a result of its review of the original DCD or as a result of
public comments. This final version would become the master DCD
incorporated by reference in the DCR. The master DCD would be revised
as needed to include generic changes to the version of the DCD approved
in this design certification rulemaking. These changes would occur as
the result of generic rulemaking by the Commission, under the change
criteria in Section VIII.
The NRC proposes to incorporate by reference a second DCD into
Appendix A of 10 CFR part 52, i.e., the DCD for the STPNOC option
(STPNOC DCD). Under the proposed rule, a reference to a ``generic DCD''
means, in context, either or both: (i) The DCD for the original U.S.
ABWR design certification submitted by GE (GE DCD); and (ii) the STPNOC
DCD submitted by STPNOC.
3. Scope and Contents (Section III)
The purpose of Section III is to describe and define the scope and
contents of this design certification and to present how documentation
discrepancies or inconsistencies are to be resolved. Paragraph III.A is
the required statement of the Office of the Federal Register (OFR) for
approval of the incorporation by reference of Tier 1, Tier 2, and the
generic technical specifications into this appendix. The NRC is
proposing to redesignate the existing paragraph A regarding the GE DCD
as paragraph A.1 and to add a new paragraph A.2 indicating that the
STPNOC DCD is also approved for incorporation by reference.
The legal effect of incorporation by reference is that the
incorporated material has the same legal status as if it were published
in the Code of Federal Regulations. This material, like any other
properly issued regulation, has the force and effect of law. The STPNOC
DCD was prepared to meet the technical information contents of
application requirements for design certifications under 10 CFR
52.47(a) and the requirements of the OFR for incorporation by reference
under 1 CFR part 51. One of the requirements of the OFR for
incorporation by reference is that the applicant for the design
certification (or amendment to the design certification) must make the
generic DCD available upon request after the final rule becomes
effective. Therefore, paragraph III.A.2 would identify a STPNOC
representative to be contacted to obtain a copy of the STPNOC DCD.
The generic DCD (master copy) for the STPNOC DCD is electronically
accessible in ADAMS (Accession No. ML102870017); at the OFR; and at
www.regulations.gov by searching under Docket ID NRC-2010-0134. Copies
of the generic DCD would also be available at the NRC's PDR. Questions
concerning the accuracy of information in an application that
references this appendix will be resolved by checking the master copy
of the generic DCD in ADAMS. If the design certification amendment
applicant makes a generic change (through NRC rulemaking) to the DCD
under 10 CFR 52.63 and the change process provided in Section VIII,
then at the completion of the rulemaking the NRC would request approval
of the Director, OFR, for the revised master DCD. The NRC would require
that the design certification amendment applicant maintain an up-to-
date copy of the master DCD under paragraph X.A.1 that includes any
generic changes it has made because it is likely that most applicants
intending to reference the standard design would obtain the generic DCD
from the design certification amendment applicant.
In addition, the NRC is proposing to revise paragraph III.B to add
text indicating that an applicant or licensee referencing this appendix
may reference either the GE DCD, or both the GE DCD and the STPNOC DCD.
An applicant referencing this appendix would be required to indicate in
its application and in all necessary supporting documentation which of
these two alternatives it is implementing. This information is
necessary to support the NRC's review and processing of the license
application. A COL applicant that does not reference both the GE DCD
and the STPNOC DCD will be required, in accordance with 10 CFR
50.150(a)(3)(v)(B) to comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.150 as
part of its COL application.
Paragraphs III.C and III.D set forth the way potential conflicts
are to be resolved. Paragraph III.C would establish the Tier 1
description in the DCD as controlling in the event of an inconsistency
between the Tier 1 and Tier 2 information in the DCD. The NRC is
proposing a minor change to paragraph III.C, which currently states
that, if there is a conflict between Tier 1 and Tier 2 of the DCD, then
Tier 1 controls. The revised paragraph would state that, if there is a
conflict between Tier 1 and Tier 2 of a DCD, then Tier 1 controls. This
change is necessary to indicate that this requirement applies to both
the GE DCD and the STPNOC DCD.
The NRC is also proposing a change to paragraph III.D. Paragraph
III.D establishes the generic DCD as the controlling document in the
event of an inconsistency between the DCD and the Final Safety
Evaluation Report (FSER) for the certified standard design. The
proposed revision would indicate that this is also the case for an
inconsistency between the STPNOC DCD and the NRC's associated FSER,
referred to as the ``AIA FSER.''
The NRC is proposing to redesignate current paragraph III.E as
proposed paragraph III.F and to add a new paragraph, III.E. Proposed
paragraph III.E would state that, if there is a conflict between the
design as described in the GE DCD and a design matter which implements
the STPNOC certified design option but is not specifically described in
the STPNOC DCD, then the GE DCD controls. This paragraph, which would
be effective only with respect to the GE/STPNOC composite certified
design, addresses the situation when, despite the best efforts of
STPNOC and the NRC, there are unintended consequences or unaddressed
issues resulting from STPNOC's amendment to the U.S. ABWR design. The
NRC would expect the applicant or licensee discovering such issues to
notify the NRC and STPNOC so that the issue could be addressed
generically (if not reportable under existing NRC requirements such as
10 CFR part 21, 10 CFR 52.6, 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73).
4. Additional Requirements and Restrictions (Section IV)
Section IV presents additional requirements and restrictions
imposed upon an applicant who references this appendix. Paragraph IV.A
presents the information requirements for these applicants. Paragraph
IV.A.3 currently requires the applicant to include, not
[[Page 3552]]
simply reference, the proprietary and SGI referenced in the U.S. ABWR
DCD, or its equivalent, to ensure that the applicant has actual notice
of these requirements. The NRC is proposing to revise paragraph IV.A.3
to indicate that a COL applicant must include, in the plant-specific
DCD, the proprietary information and SGI referenced in both the GE DCD
and the STPNOC DCD, as applicable.
The NRC is also proposing to add a new paragraph IV.A.4 to indicate
requirements that must be met in cases where the COL applicant is not
using the entity that was the original applicant for the design
certification (or amendment) to supply the design for the applicant's
use. Proposed paragraph IV.A.4.a would require that a COL applicant
referencing this appendix include, as part of its application, a
demonstration that an entity other than GE Nuclear Energy is qualified
to supply the U.S. ABWR certified design unless GE Nuclear Energy
supplies the design for the applicant's use. Proposed paragraph
IV.A.4.b would require that a COL applicant referencing the STPNOC
certified design option include, as part of its application, a
demonstration that an entity other than STPNOC and TANE acting together
is qualified to supply the STPNOC certified design option, unless
STPNOC and TANE acting together supply the design option for the
applicant's use. In cases where a COL applicant is not using GE Nuclear
Energy to supply the U.S. ABWR certified design, or is not using STPNOC
and TANE acting together to supply the STPNOC certified design option,
this information is necessary to support any NRC finding under 10 CFR
52.73(a) that an entity other than the one originally sponsoring the
design certification or design certification amendment is qualified to
supply the certified design or certified design option.
Under 10 CFR 52.47(a)(7), a design certification applicant is
required to include information in its application to demonstrate that
it is technically qualified to engage in the proposed activities (e.g.,
supplying the certified design to license applicants). Based on the
NRC's review of the STPNOC application to amend to the U.S. ABWR
certified design, the NRC determined that STPNOC and its contractors
are technically qualified to perform the design work associated with
the amended portion of the U.S. ABWR design represented by STPNOC's
application and to supply the amended portion of the U.S. ABWR design.
However, the staff determined that STPNOC, by itself, is not
technically qualified to supply the amended portion of the U.S. ABWR
design certification represented in STPNOC's DCD. Rather, the staff
determined that STPNOC and TANE acting together are qualified to supply
the amended portion of the U.S. ABWR design certification represented
in STPNOC's DCD. Therefore, the NRC is including paragraph IV.A.4.b to
ensure that the basis for the NRC finding of technical qualifications
in support of this design certification amendment remains valid.
5. Applicable Regulations (Section V)
The purpose of Section V is to specify the regulations applicable
and in effect when the design certification is approved (i.e., as of
the date specified in paragraph V.A, which is the date that Appendix A
was originally approved by the Commission and signed by the Secretary
of the Commission). The NRC is proposing to revise paragraph V.A to
indicate that the current text in this paragraph applies to the GE DCD
and to add a new paragraph indicating the regulations that apply to the
STPNOC DCD (10 CFR Parts 50 and 52), as would be approved by the
Commission and signed by the Secretary of the Commission should this
amendment to Appendix A be approved. All of the requirements related to
the NRC's AIA requirements can be found in 10 CFR Parts 50 and 52.
6. Issue Resolution (Section VI)
The purpose of Section VI is to identify the scope of issues that
were resolved by the Commission in the original certification
rulemaking and, therefore, are ``matters resolved'' within the meaning
and intent of 10 CFR 52.63(a)(5). Paragraph VI.B presents the scope of
issues that may not be challenged as a matter of right in subsequent
proceedings and describes the categories of information for which there
is issue resolution. Paragraph VI.B.1 provides that all nuclear safety
issues arising from the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, that are
associated with the information in the NRC staff's FSER (ADAMS
Accession No. ML102710198), the Tier 1 and Tier 2 information and the
rulemaking record for this appendix are resolved within the meaning of
10 CFR 52.63(a)(5). These issues include the information referenced in
the DCD that are requirements (i.e., ``secondary references''), as well
as all issues arising from proprietary information and SGI which are
intended to be requirements. Paragraph VI.B.2 provides for issue
preclusion of proprietary and SGI.
The NRC is proposing to revise paragraphs VI.B.1 and VI.B.2 to
redesignate references to the ``FSER'' as references to the ``ABWR
FSER,'' and references to the ``generic DCD'' as references to the ``GE
DCD'' to distinguish the FSER and DCD for the original certified design
from the FSER and DCD that would be issued to support the STPNOC
amendment to the U.S. ABWR design. In addition, this proposed revision
would add additional text to paragraph VI.B.1 to identify the
information that would be resolved by the Commission in the rulemaking
to certify the STPNOC amendment to the U.S. ABWR design.
The NRC is also proposing to revise paragraph VI.B.7, which
identifies as resolved all environmental issues concerning severe
accident mitigation design alternatives arising under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) associated with the information
in the NRC's final environmental assessment for the U.S. ABWR design
and Revision 1 of the technical support document for the U.S. ABWR,
dated December 1994, for plants referencing this appendix whose site
parameters are within those specified in the technical support
document. The NRC is proposing to revise this paragraph to also
identify as resolved all environmental issues concerning severe
accident mitigation design alternatives associated with the information
in the NRC's final environmental assessment and Revision 0 of ABWR-LIC-
09-621, ``Applicant's Supplemental Environmental Report-Amendment to
ABWR Standard Design Certification,'' for the AIA amendment to the U.S.
ABWR design for plants referencing this appendix whose site parameters
are within those specified in the technical support document.
Finally, the NRC is proposing to revise paragraph VI.E, which
provides the procedure for an interested member of the public to obtain
access to proprietary information and SGI for the U.S. ABWR design, and
to request and participate in proceedings identified in paragraph VI.B
of this appendix, that is, proceedings involving licenses and
applications which reference this appendix. The NRC is proposing to
replace the current information in this paragraph with a statement that
the NRC will specify, at an appropriate time, the procedure for
interested persons to review SGI or SUNSI (including proprietary
information), for the purpose of participating in the hearing required
by 10 CFR 52.85, the hearing provided under 10 CFR 52.103, or in any
other proceeding relating to this appendix in which interested persons
have a right to request an adjudicatory hearing.
[[Page 3553]]
Access to such information would be for the sole purpose of
requesting or participating in certain specified hearings, viz., (i)
the hearing required by 10 CFR 52.85 where the underlying application
references this appendix; (ii) any hearing provided under 10 CFR 52.103
where the underlying COL references this appendix; and (iii) any other
hearing relating to this appendix in which interested persons have the
right to request an adjudicatory hearing.
For proceedings where the notice of hearing was published before
[effective date of final rule], the Commission's order governing access
to SUNSI and SGI shall be used to govern access to SUNSI (including
proprietary information) and SGI on the STPNOC option. For proceedings
in which the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing is published
after [effective date of final rule], paragraph VI.E. applies and
governs access to SUNSI (including proprietary information) and SGI for
both the original GE certified design, and the STPNOC option; as stated
in paragraph VI.E, the NRC will specify the access procedures at an
appropriate time.
The NRC expects to follow its current practice of establishing the
procedures by order when the notice of hearing is published in the
Federal Register. (See, e.g., Florida Power and Light Co, Combined
License Application for the Turkey Point Units 6 & 7, Notice of
Hearing, Opportunity To Petition for Leave To Intervene and Associated
Order Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-
Safeguards Information and Safeguards Information for Contention
Preparation (75 FR 34777; June 18, 2010); Notice of Receipt of
Application for License; Notice of Consideration of Issuance of
License; Notice of Hearing and Commission Order and Order Imposing
Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information and Safeguards Information for Contention Preparation; In
the Matter of AREVA Enrichment Services, LLC (Eagle Rock Enrichment
Facility) (74 FR 38052; July 30, 2009).
In the four currently approved design certifications (10 CFR part
52, Appendices A through D), paragraph VI.E presents specific
directions on how to obtain access to proprietary information and SGI
on the design certification in connection with a license application
proceeding referencing that design certification rule. The NRC is
proposing this change because these provisions were developed before
the terrorist events of September 11, 2001. After September 11, 2001,
the Congress changed the statutory requirements governing access to
SGI, and the NRC revised its rules, procedures, and practices governing
control and access to SUNSI and SGI. The NRC now believes that generic
direction on obtaining access to SUNSI and SGI is no longer appropriate
for newly approved DCRs. Accordingly, the specific requirements
governing access to SUNSI and SGI contained in paragraph VI.E of the
four currently approved DCRs should not be included in the design
certification rule for the U.S. ABWR. Instead, the NRC should specify
the procedures to be used for obtaining access at an appropriate time
in the COL proceeding referencing the U.S. ABWR DCR. The NRC intends to
include this change in any future amendment or renewal of the other
existing DCRs. However, the NRC is not planning to initiate rulemaking
to change paragraph VI.E of the existing DCRs, to minimize unnecessary
resource expenditures by both the original DCR applicant and the NRC.
7. Processes for Changes and Departures (Section VIII)
The purpose of Section VIII is to present the processes for generic
changes to, or plant-specific departures (including exemptions) from,
the DCD. The Commission adopted this restrictive change process to
achieve a more stable licensing process for applicants and licensees
that reference this DCR. The change processes for the three different
categories of Tier 2 information, namely, Tier 2, Tier 2*, and Tier 2*
with a time of expiration, are presented in paragraph VIII.B.
Departures from Tier 2 that a licensee may make without prior NRC
approval are addressed under paragraph VIII.B.5 (similar to the process
in 10 CFR 50.59). The NRC is proposing changes to Section VIII to
address the change control process specific to departures from the
information required by 10 CFR 52.47(a)(28) to address the NRC's AIA
requirements in 10 CFR 50.150. Specifically, the NRC is proposing to
revise paragraph VIII.B.5.b to indicate that the criteria in this
paragraph for determining if a proposed departure from Tier 2 requires
a license amendment do not apply to a proposed departure affecting
information required by 10 CFR 52.47(a)(28) to address 10 CFR 50.150.
In addition, the NRC is proposing to redesignate paragraphs VIII.B.5.d,
B.5.e, and B.5.f as paragraphs VIII.B.5.e, B.5.f, and B.5.g,
respectively, and to add a new paragraph VIII.B.5.d. Proposed paragraph
VIII.B.5.d would require an applicant or licensee who proposed to
depart from the information required by 10 CFR 52.47(a)(28) to be
included in the final safety analysis report (FSAR) for the standard
design certification to consider the effect of the changed feature or
capability on the original assessment required by 10 CFR 50.150(a). The
FSAR information required by the aircraft impact rule which is subject
to this change control requirement are the descriptions of the design
features and functional capabilities incorporated into the final design
of the nuclear power facility and the description of how the identified
design features and functional capabilities meet the assessment
requirements in 10 CFR 50.150(a)(1). The objective of the change
controls is to determine whether the design of the facility, as changed
or modified, is shown to withstand the effects of the aircraft impact
with reduced use of operator actions. In other words, the applicant or
licensee must continue to show, with the modified design, that the
acceptance criteria in 10 CFR 50.150(a)(1) are met with reduced use of
operator actions. The rule does not require an applicant or a licensee
implementing a design change to redo the complete aircraft impact
assessment (AIA) to evaluate the effects of the change. The NRC
believes it may be possible to demonstrate that a design change is
bound by the original design or that the change provides an equivalent
level of protection, without redoing the original assessment.
Consistent with the NRC's intent when it issued the AIA rule, under
the proposed revision to this section, plant-specific departures from
the AIA information in the FSAR would not require a license amendment,
but may be made by the licensee upon compliance with the substantive
requirements of the AIA rule (i.e., the AIA rule acceptance criteria).
The applicant or licensee would also be required to document, in the
plant-specific departure, how the modified design features and
functional capabilities continue to meet the assessment requirements in
10 CFR 50.150(a)(1) in accordance with Section X of this appendix.
Applicants and licensees making changes to design features or
capabilities included in the certified design may also need to develop
alternate means to cope with the loss of large areas of the plant from
explosions or fires to comply with the requirements in 10 CFR
50.54(hh). The proposed addition of these provisions to this appendix
is consistent with the NRC's intent when it issued the AIA rule in
2009, as noted in the statements of consideration for that rule (74 FR
[[Page 3554]]
28112; June 12, 2009, at 28122, third column).
8. Records and Reporting (Section X)
The purpose of Section X is to present the requirements that apply
to maintaining records of changes to and departures from the generic
DCD, which would be reflected in the plant-specific DCD. Section X also
presents the requirements for submitting reports (including updates to
the plant-specific DCD) to the NRC. Paragraph X.A.1 requires that a
generic DCD and the proprietary information and SGI referenced in the
generic DCD be maintained by the applicant for this rule. The NRC is
proposing to revise paragraph X.A.1 to indicate that there are two
applicants for this appendix and that the requirements to maintain a
copy of the applicable generic DCD would apply to both the applicant
for the original U.S. ABWR certification (GE) and the applicant for the
AIA amendment to the U.S. ABWR design (STPNOC). Paragraph X.A.1 would
also require the design certification applicant to maintain the
proprietary information and SGI referenced in the generic DCD. The NRC
is proposing to replace the term ``proprietary information'' with the
broader term ``sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information
(including proprietary information).'' Information categorized as SUNSI
is information that is generally not publicly available and encompasses
a wide variety of categories, including information about a licensee's
or applicant's physical protection or material control and accounting
program for special nuclear material not otherwise designated as SGI or
classified as National Security Information or Restricted Data
(security-related information), which is required by 10 CFR 2.390 to be
protected in the same manner as commercial or financial information
(i.e., they are exempt from public disclosure). This change is
necessary because, although the NRC is not approving any proprietary
information or SGI as part of this amendment rulemaking, it is
approving some security-related information that is categorized as
SUNSI.
This change would ensure that both GE and STPNOC (as well as any
future applicants for amendments to the U.S. ABWR DCR who intend to
supply the certified design) are required to maintain a copy of the
applicable generic DCD, and maintain the applicable SUNSI (including
proprietary information) and SGI--developed by that applicant--that
were approved as part of the relevant design certification rulemakings.
In the certification of the original U.S. ABWR design, the NRC approved
both proprietary information and SGI as part of the design
certification rulemaking. In this amendment to the U.S. ABWR design,
the NRC would only be approving non-proprietary SUNSI as part of the
amendment rulemaking.
The NRC notes that the generic DCD concept was developed, in part,
to meet OFR requirements for incorporation by reference, including
public availability of documents incorporated by reference. However,
the proprietary information and SGI were not included in the public
version of the DCD prepared by GE, and the SUNSI was not included in
the public version of the DCD prepared by STPNOC. Only the public
version of the generic STPNOC DCD would be identified and incorporated
by reference into this rule. Nonetheless, the SUNSI for the STPNOC
option was reviewed by the NRC and, as stated in paragraph VI.B.2, the
NRC would consider the information to be resolved within the meaning of
10 CFR 52.63(a)(5). Because this information is in the non-public
versions of the GE and STPNOC DCDs, this SUNSI (including proprietary
information) and SGI, or its equivalent, is required to be provided by
an applicant for a license referencing this DCR.
In addition, the NRC is proposing to add a new paragraph X.A.4.a
that would require the applicant for the amendment to the U.S. ABWR
design to address the AIA requirements to maintain a copy of the AIA
performed to comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.150(a) for the
term of the certification (including any period of renewal). The NRC is
also proposing a new paragraph X.A.4.b that would require an applicant
or licensee who references this appendix to include both the GE DCD and
the STPNOC DCD to maintain a copy of the AIA performed to comply with
the requirements of 10 CFR 50.150(a) throughout the pendency of the
application and for the term of the license (including any period of
renewal). The addition of paragraphs X.A.4.a and X.A.4.b is consistent
with the NRC's intent when it issued the AIA rule in 2009 (74 FR 28112;
June 12, 2009, at 28121, second column).
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis
A. Introduction (Section I)
The NRC is proposing to amend Section I, ``Introduction,'' to
identify STPNOC as the applicant for the amendment of the U.S. ABWR
design certification rule to address the AIA rule, 10 CFR 50.150.
B. Definitions (Section II)
The NRC is proposing to revise the definition of ``generic design
control document (generic DCD)'' to indicate that there will be two
generic DCDs incorporated by reference into this appendix--the DCD for
the original U.S. ABWR design certification submitted by GE Nuclear
Energy (GE DCD) and the DCD for the amendment to the U.S. ABWR design
submitted by STPNOC (STPNOC DCD). This will make it clear that all
requirements in this appendix related to the ``generic DCD'' apply to
both the GE DCD and the STPNOC DCD, unless otherwise specified.
C. Scope and Contents (Section III)
The NRC is proposing to redesignate existing paragraph A regarding
the GE DCD as paragraph A.1 and to add a new paragraph A.2 indicating
that the STPNOC DCD is also approved for incorporation by reference
into 10 CFR part 52, Appendix A by OFR.
The NRC is proposing to revise paragraph III.B to add text
indicating that an applicant or licensee referencing this appendix may
use either the GE DCD, or both the GE DCD and the STPNOC DCD. By doing
so, the applicant or licensee effectively indicates which generic
design it is using (i.e., the GE certified design, or the GE/STPNOC
composite certified design). An applicant referencing this appendix
would be required to indicate in its application and in all necessary
supporting documentation which of these two alternatives it is
implementing.
The NRC is proposing a minor change to paragraph III.C, which
currently states that, if there is a conflict between Tier 1 and Tier 2
of the DCD, then Tier 1 controls. The revised paragraph would state
that, if there is a conflict between Tier 1 and Tier 2 of a DCD, then
Tier 1 controls, because the requirement would also apply to the STPNOC
DCD.
Paragraph III.D establishes the generic DCD as the controlling
document in the event of an inconsistency between the DCD and the FSER
for the certified standard design. The NRC is proposing a change to
paragraph III.D which would indicate that in the event of an
inconsistency between the STPNOC DCD and the AIA FSER, the STPNOC DCD
controls.
The NRC is proposing to redesignate current paragraph III.E as
proposed paragraph III.F and to add a new paragraph III.E. Proposed
paragraph III.E would state that, if there is a conflict between the
design as described in the GE DCD and a design matter which implements
the STPNOC certified
[[Page 3555]]
design option but is not specifically described in the STPNOC DCD, then
the GE DCD controls.
D. Additional Requirements and Restrictions (Section IV)
The NRC is proposing to revise paragraph IV.A.3 to indicate that a
COL applicant must include, in the plant-specific DCD, the proprietary
information and SGI referenced in both the GE DCD and the STPNOC DCD,
as applicable, or its equivalent.
Section IV presents additional requirements and restrictions
imposed upon an applicant who references this appendix. Paragraph IV.A
presents the information requirements for these applicants. Paragraph
IV.A.3 requires the applicant to include the proprietary information
and SGI referenced in the DCD, or its equivalent, to ensure that the
applicant has actual notice of these requirements. The NRC is proposing
to revise paragraph IV.A.3 to indicate that a COL applicant must
include, in the plant-specific DCD, the proprietary information and SGI
referenced in both the GE DCD and the STPNOC DCD, as applicable, or the
equivalent of this information. If the COL applicant is referencing
only the GE DC, then the applicant must include the proprietary
information and SGI developed by GE (as presented in the non-public
version of the GE DCD), or the equivalent of this information. If the
COL applicant is referencing both the GE DCD and the STPNOC DCD, then
the applicant must include: (1) The proprietary information and SGI
developed by GE (as presented in the non-public version of the GE DCD),
or the equivalent of this information; and (2) the proprietary
information and SGI developed by STPNOC (as presented in the non public
version of the STPNOC DCD), or the equivalent of this information.
The NRC is also proposing to add a new paragraph IV.A.4 to indicate
requirements that must be met in cases where the COL applicant is not
using the entity that was the original applicant for the design
certification (or amendment) to supply the design for the applicant's
use. Proposed paragraph IV.A.4.a would require that a COL applicant
referencing this appendix include, as part of its application, a
demonstration that an entity other than GE is qualified to supply the
U.S. ABWR certified design unless GE supplies the design for the
applicant's use. Proposed paragraph IV.A.4.b would require that a COL
applicant referencing the STPNOC certified design option include, as
part of its application, a demonstration that an entity other than
STPNOC and TANE acting together is qualified to supply the STPNOC
certified design option, unless STPNOC and TANE acting together supply
the design option for the applicant's use. In cases where a COL
applicant is not using GE to supply the U.S. ABWR certified design, or
is not using STPNOC and TANE acting together to supply the STPNOC
certified design option, the required information would be used to
support any NRC finding under 10 CFR 52.73(a) that an entity other than
the one originally sponsoring the design certification or design
certification amendment is qualified to supply the certified design or
certified design option.
E. Applicable Regulations (Section V)
Paragraph V.A would be revised so that the first sentence of
paragraph V.A identifies the applicable regulations for the GE
certified design, and the second sentence presents the applicable
regulations for the STPNOC Option.
F. Issue Resolution (Section VI)
The NRC is proposing to revise paragraphs VI.B.1 and VI.B.2 to
redesignate references to the ``FSER'' as references to the ``ABWR
FSER'' and references to the ``generic DCD'' as references to the ``GE
DCD'' to distinguish the FSER and DCD for the original certified design
from the FSER and DCD that would be issued to support the STPNOC
amendment to the U.S. ABWR design. In addition, this proposed revision
would add text to paragraph VI.B.1 to identify the information that
would be resolved by the Commission in the rulemaking to certify the
STPNOC AIA amendment to the U.S. ABWR design.
The NRC is proposing to revise paragraph VI.B.7 to identify as
resolved all environmental issues concerning severe accident mitigation
design alternatives associated with the information in the NRC's final
environmental assessment and Revision 0 of ABWR-LIC-09-621,
``Applicant's Supplemental Environmental Report-Amendment to ABWR
Standard Design Certification,'' for the AIA amendment to the U.S. ABWR
design for plants referencing this appendix whose site parameters are
within those specified in the technical support document. The existing
site parameters specified in the technical support document are not
affected by this design certification amendment.
G. Processes for Changes and Departures (Section VIII)
The NRC is proposing changes to Section VIII to address the change
control process specific to departures from the information required by
10 CFR 52.47(a)(28) to address the NRC's AIA requirements in 10 CFR
50.150. Specifically, the NRC is proposing to revise paragraph
VIII.B.5.b to indicate that the criteria in this paragraph for
determining if a proposed departure from Tier 2 requires a license
amendment do not apply to a proposed departure affecting information
required by 10 CFR 52.47(a)(28) to address aircraft impacts.
In addition, the NRC is proposing to redesignate paragraphs
VIII.B.5.d, B.5.e, and B.5.f as paragraphs VIII.B.5.e, B.5.f, and
B.5.g, respectively, and to add a new paragraph VIII.B.5.d. Proposed
paragraph VIII.B.5.d would require an applicant referencing the U.S.
ABWR DCR, who proposed to depart from the information required by 10
CFR 52.47(a)(28) to be included in the FSAR for the standard design
certification, to consider the effect of the changed feature or
capability on the original 10 CFR 50.150(a) assessment.
H. Records and Reporting (Section X)
The NRC is proposing to revise paragraph X.A.1 to refer to
``applicants'' for this appendix and to replace the term ``proprietary
information'' with the broader term ``sensitive unclassified non-
safeguards information.'' Paragraph X.A.1 would be revised to require
the design certification amendment applicant to maintain the SUNSI
which it developed and used to support its design certification
amendment application. This would ensure that the referencing applicant
has direct access to this information from the design certification
amendment applicant, if it has contracted with the applicant to provide
the SUNSI to support its license application. The STPNOC generic DCD
and the NRC-approved version of the SUNSI would be required to be
maintained for the period that this appendix may be referenced.
The NRC is also proposing to add a new paragraph X.A.4.a that would
require STPNOC to maintain a copy of the AIA performed to comply with
the requirements of 10 CFR 50.150(a) for the term of the certification
(including any period of renewal). This proposed provision, which is
consistent with 10 CFR 50.150(c)(3), would facilitate any NRC
inspections of the assessment that the NRC decides to conduct.
Similarly, the NRC is proposing new paragraph X.A.4.b that would
require an applicant or licensee who references this appendix, to
include both the GE DCD and the STPNOC DCD, to maintain a copy of the
AIA performed to comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.150(a)
throughout the pendency of
[[Page 3556]]
the application and for the term of the license (including any period
of renewal). This provision is consistent with 10 CFR 50.150(c)(4). For
all applicants and licensees, the supporting documentation retained
onsite should describe the methodology used in performing the
assessment, including the identification of potential design features
and functional capabilities to show that the acceptance criteria in 10
CFR 50.150(a)(1) would be met.
V. Agreement State Compatibility
Under the ``Policy Statement on Adequacy and Compatibility of
Agreement States Programs,'' approved by the Commission on June 20,
1997, and published in the Federal Register (62 FR 46517; September 3,
1997), this rule is classified as compatibility ``NRC.'' Compatibility
is not required for Category ``NRC'' regulations. The NRC program
elements in this category are those that relate directly to areas of
regulation reserved to the NRC by the AEA or the provisions of this
chapter. Although an Agreement State may not adopt program elements
reserved to the NRC, it may wish to inform its licensees of certain
requirements by a mechanism that is consistent with the particular
State's administrative procedure laws. Category ``NRC'' regulations do
not confer regulatory authority on the State.
VI. Availability of Documents
The NRC is making the documents identified below available to
interested persons through one or more of the following methods, as
indicated. To access documents related to this action, see Section I,
``Submitting Comments and Accessing Information'' of this document.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Document PDR Web ADAMS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECY-10-0142, ``Proposed Rule--U.S. Advanced X x ML102100129
Boiling Water Reactor Aircraft Impact Design
Certification Amendment''.
STPNOC Application to Amend the Design X x ML092040048
Certification Rule for the U.S. ABWR.
South Texas Project, Units 3 and 4, Combined X x ML072850066
License Application.
March 3, 2010, letter from Toshiba to NRC X ............ ML100710026
stating that Toshiba intends to seek renewal of
the U.S. ABWR design certification.
General Electric ABWR Design Control Document... X x Official version is hard copy
ABWR STP AIA Amendment Design Control Document, X x ML102870017
Revision 3 (public version).
Applicant's Supplemental Environmental Report-- X x ML093170455
Amendment to the ABWR Standard Design
Certification.
Final Safety Evaluation Report for the STPNOC x x ML102710198
Amendment to the ABWR Design Certification.
NRC's Final Environmental Assessment Relating to x x ML003708129
the Certification of the U.S. ABWR (Attachment
2 of SECY 96-077).
Revision 1 of the Technical Support Document for x ............ ML100210563
the U.S. ABWR, December 1994.
Environmental Assessment by the U.S. NRC x ............ ML103470203
Relating to the Certification of the STPNOC
Amendment to the U.S. ABWR Standard Plant
Design.
NUREG-1503, ``Final Safety Evaluation Report x x ML080670592
Related to the Certification of the Advanced
Boiling Water Reactor Design''.
NUREG-1503, Supplement 1, ``Final Safety x x ML080710134
Evaluation Report Related to the Certification
of the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design''.
Regulatory History of Design Certification\11\.. x ............ ML003761550
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The regulatory history of the NRC's design certification reviews is a package of documents that is
available in NRC's PDR and ADAMS. This history spans the period during which the NRC simultaneously developed
the regulatory standards for reviewing these designs and the form and content of the rules that certified the
designs.
VII. Procedures for Access to Sensitive Unclassified Non-Safeguards
Information for Preparation of Comments on the Proposed Amendment to
the U.S. ABWR Design Certification
This section contains instructions regarding how interested persons
who wish to comment on the proposed design certification amendment may
request access to documents containing SUNSI to prepare their comments.
Submitting a Request to the NRC
Within 10 days after publication of this document, an individual or
entity (thereinafter, the ``requester'') may request access to such
information. Requests for access to SUNSI submitted more than 10 days
after publication of this document will not be considered absent a
showing of good cause for the late filing explaining why the request
could not have been filed earlier.
The requester shall submit a letter requesting permission to access
SUNSI to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, Washington,
DC 20555-0001. The expedited delivery or courier mail address is:
Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Attention:
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland 20852. The e-mail address for the Office of the Secretary is
[email protected]. The requester must send a copy of the
request to the design certification applicant at the same time as the
original transmission to the NRC using the same method of transmission.
Copies of the request to the applicant must be sent to Mr. Scott M.
Head, Regulatory Affairs Manager, South Texas Project Nuclear Operating
Company, P.O. Box 289, Wadsworth, TX 77483, or to [email protected].
For purposes of complying with this requirement, a ``request'' includes
all the information required to be submitted to the NRC as presented in
this section.
The request must include the following information:
1. The name of this design certification amendment at the top of
the first page of the request, and a citation to this document.
2. The name, address, and e-mail or FAX number of the requester. If
the requester is an entity, the name of the individual(s) to whom
access is to be provided, then the address and e-mail or FAX number for
each individual, and a
[[Page 3557]]
statement of the authority granted by the entity to each individual to
review the information and to prepare comments on behalf of the entity
must be provided. If the requester is relying upon another individual
to evaluate the requested SUNSI and prepare comments, then the name,
affiliation, address, and e-mail or FAX number for that individual must
be provided.
3. The requester's need for the information to prepare meaningful
comments on the proposed design certification must be demonstrated.
Each of the following areas must be addressed with specificity.
(a) The specific issue or subject matter on which the requester
wishes to comment;
(b) An explanation why information which is publicly available,
including the publicly available versions of the application and design
control document, and information on the NRC's docket for the design
certification application is insufficient to provide the basis for
developing meaningful comment on the proposed design certification with
respect to the issue or subject matter described previously in
paragraph 3(a); and
(c) Information demonstrating that the individual to whom access is
to be provided has the technical competence (demonstrable knowledge,
skill, experience, education, training or certification) to understand
and use (or evaluate) the requested information in order to develop
meaningful comments on the proposed design certification with respect
to the issue or subject matter described in paragraph 3(a) above.
4. Based on an evaluation of the information submitted under
paragraph 3 of this section, the NRC staff will determine within 10
days of receipt of the written access request whether the requester has
established a legitimate need for the SUNSI access requested.
5. If the NRC staff determines that the requester has established a
legitimate need for access to SUNSI, the NRC staff will notify the
requester in writing that access to SUNSI has been granted.
The written notification to the requester will contain instructions
on how the requester may obtain copies of the requested documents, and
any other conditions that may apply to access to those documents. These
conditions will include, but are not necessarily limited to, the
signing of a protective order presenting terms and conditions to
prevent the unauthorized or inadvertent disclosure of SUNSI by each
individual who will be granted access to SUNSI. Claims that the
provisions of such a protective order have not been complied with may
be filed by calling NRC's toll-free safety hotline at 1-800-695-7403.
Please note that calls to this number are not recorded between the
hours of 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern Time. However, calls received outside
these hours are answered by the Incident Response Operations Center on
a recorded line. Claims may also be filed via e-mail to [email protected], or may be sent in writing to the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Attention: N. Rivera-Feliciano, Mail Stop T7-
D24, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
6. Any comments in this rulemaking proceeding that are based upon
the disclosed SUNSI must be filed by the requester no later than 25
days after receipt of (or access to) that information, or the close of
the public comment period, whichever is later. The commenter must
comply with the NRC requirements regarding the submission of SUNSI to
the NRC when submitting comments to the NRC (including marking and
transmission requirements).
7. Review of Denials of Access.
(a) If the request for access to SUNSI is denied by the NRC staff,
the staff shall promptly notify the requester in writing, briefly
stating the reason or reasons for the denial.
(b) Appeals from a denial of access must be made to the Executive
Director for Operations (EDO) in accordance with 10 CFR 9.29. The
decision of the EDO constitutes final agency action, as provided in 10
CFR 9.29(d).
VIII. Plain Language
The Presidential memorandum `Plain Language in Government Writing''
published on June 10, 1998 (63 FR 31883), directed that the
Government's documents be in clear and accessible language. The NRC
requests comments on the proposed rule specifically with respect to the
clarity and effectiveness of the language used. Comments should be sent
to the NRC as explained in the ADDRESSES heading of this document.
IX. Voluntary Consensus Standards
The National Technology and Transfer Act of 1995 (Act), Public Law
104-113, requires that Federal agencies use technical standards that
are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies unless
using such a standard is inconsistent with applicable law or is
otherwise impractical. The NRC proposes to approve the AIA amendment to
the U.S. ABWR standard plant design for use in nuclear power plant
licensing under 10 CFR part 50 or 52. Design certifications (and
amendments thereto) are not generic rulemakings establishing a
generally applicable standard with which all 10 CFR Parts 50 and 52
nuclear power plant licensees must comply. Design certifications (and
amendments thereto) are Commission approvals of specific nuclear power
plant designs by rulemaking. Furthermore, design certifications (and
amendments thereto) are initiated by an applicant for rulemaking,
rather than by the NRC. For these reasons, the NRC concludes that the
Act does not apply to this proposed rule.
X. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability
The Commission has determined under NEPA, and the Commission's
regulations in Subpart A, ``National Environmental Policy Act;
Regulations Implementing Section 102(2),'' of 10 CFR part 51,
``Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and
Related Regulatory Functions,'' that this proposed design certification
rule, if adopted, would not be a major Federal action significantly
affecting the quality of the human environment and, therefore, an
environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required. The basis for
this determination, as documented in the draft environmental assessment
(EA), is that that the Commission has made a generic determination
under 10 CFR 51.32(b)(2) that there is no significant environmental
impact associated with the issuance of an amendment to a design
certification.
This amendment to 10 CFR part 52 would not authorize the siting,
construction, or operation of a facility using the AIA amendment to the
U.S. ABWR design; it would only codify the AIA amendment to the U.S.
ABWR design in a rule. The NRC will evaluate the environmental impacts
and issue an EIS as appropriate under NEPA as part of the application
for the construction and operation of a facility referencing the AIA
amendment to the U.S. ABWR design certification rule.
In addition, as part of the draft EA for the AIA amendment to the
U.S. ABWR design, the NRC reviewed STPNOC's evaluation of various
design alternatives to prevent and mitigate severe accidents in
Revision 0 of ABWR-LIC-09-621, ``Applicant's Supplemental Environmental
Report-Amendment to ABWR Standard Design Certification.'' According to
10 CFR 51.30(d), an EA for a design certification amendment is limited
to the consideration of whether the design change which is the subject
of the proposed amendment renders a severe accident mitigation design
alternative (SAMDA) previously rejected in the earlier EA to become
cost
[[Page 3558]]
beneficial, or results in the identification of new SAMDAs, in which
case the costs and benefits of new SAMDAs and the bases for not
incorporating new SAMDAs in the design certification must be addressed.
Based upon review of STPNOC's evaluation, the Commission concludes that
the proposed design changes (1) do not cause a SAMDA previously
rejected in the environmental assessment for the original U.S. ABWR
design certification to become cost-beneficial; and (2) do not result
in the identification of any new SAMDAs that could become cost
beneficial.
The Commission is requesting comment on the draft EA. As provided
in 10 CFR 51.31(b), comments on the draft EA will be limited to the
consideration of SAMDAs as required by 10 CFR 51.30(d). The Commission
will prepare a final EA following the close of the comment period for
the proposed standard design certification. If a final rule is issued,
all environmental issues concerning SAMDAs associated with the
information in the final EA and Revision 0 of ABWR-LIC-09-621,
``Applicant's Supplemental Environmental Report-Amendment to ABWR
Standard Design Certification,'' will be considered resolved for plants
referencing the AIA amendment to the U.S. ABWR design whose site
parameters are within those specified in Revision 1 of the technical
support document for the U.S. ABWR, dated December 1994. The existing
site parameters specified in the technical support document are not
affected by this design certification amendment.
The draft EA, upon which the Commission's finding of no significant
impact is based, and the STPNOC DCD are available for examination and
copying at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), One White Flint North,
11555 Rockville Pike, Room O1-F21, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
XI. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
This proposed rule contains new or amended information collection
requirements that are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This rule has been submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval of the information
collection requirements.
Type of submission, new or revision: Revision.
The title of the information collection: 10 CFR part 52, Advanced
Boiling Water Reactor Aircraft Impact Design Certification Amendment.
The form number if applicable: N/A.
How often the collection is required: On occasion. Reports required
under 10 CFR part 52, Appendix A, paragraph IV.A.4, are collected and
evaluated once, when licensing action is sought on a combined license
application referencing the U.S. ABWR design and the combined license
applicant is not using the entity that was the original applicant for
the design certification, or amendment, to supply the design for the
license applicant's use.
Who will be required or asked to report: Combined license
applicants.
An estimate of the number of annual responses: 2 (0 annual
responses plus 2 recordkeepers).
The estimated number of annual respondents: 2.
An estimate of the total number of hours needed annually to
complete the requirement or request: 6 hours (0 hours reporting and 6
hours recordkeeping).
Abstract: The NRC proposes to amend its regulations to certify an
amendment to the U.S. ABWR standard plant design to comply with 10 CFR
50.150, ``Aircraft Impact Assessment.'' This action will allow
applicants or licensees intending to construct and operate a U.S. ABWR
to comply with 10 CFR 50.150 by referencing the amended DCR.
The NRC is seeking public comment on the potential impact of the
information collections contained in this proposed rule (or proposed
policy statement) and on the following issues:
1. Is the proposed information collection necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the NRC, including whether the
information will have practical utility?
2. Is the estimate of burden accurate?
3. Is there a way to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of
the information to be collected?
4. How can the burden of the information collection be minimized,
including the use of automated collection techniques?
A copy of the OMB clearance package may be viewed free of charge at
the NRC's PDR, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Room O1-
F21, Rockville, Maryland 20852. The OMB clearance package and rule are
available at the NRC worldwide Web site: http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/doc-comment/omb/index.html for 60 days after the signature date
of this notice.
Send comments on any aspect of these proposed information
collections, including suggestions for reducing the burden and on the
above issues, by February 22, 2011 to the Information Services Branch
(T5-F52), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001, or by Internet electronic mail to [email protected]
and to the Desk Officer, Christine Kymn, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, NEOB-10202, (3150-0151), Office of Management and
Budget, Washington, DC 20503. Comments on the proposed information
collection may also be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal
http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID NRC-2010-0134. Comments received
after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but
assurance of consideration cannot be given to comments received after
this date. You may also e-mail comments to [email protected] or comment by telephone at 202-395-4638
Public Protection Notification
The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a request for information or an information collection
requirement unless the requesting document displays a currently valid
OMB control number.
XII. Regulatory Analysis
The NRC has not prepared a regulatory analysis for this proposed
rule. The NRC prepares regulatory analyses for rulemakings that
establish generic regulatory requirements applicable to all licensees.
Design certifications (and amendments thereto) are not generic
rulemakings in the sense that design certifications (and amendments
thereto) do not establish standards or requirements with which all
licensees must comply. Rather, design certifications (and amendments
thereto) are Commission approvals of specific nuclear power plant
designs by rulemaking, which then may be voluntarily referenced by
applicants for COLs. Furthermore, design certification rulemakings are
initiated by an applicant for a design certification (or amendments
thereto), rather than the NRC. Preparation of a regulatory analysis in
this circumstance would not be useful because the design to be
certified is proposed by the applicant rather than the NRC. For these
reasons, the Commission concludes that preparation of a regulatory
analysis is neither required nor appropriate.
XIII. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the
Commission certifies that this rule would not, if promulgated, have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This proposed rule provides for certification of an
[[Page 3559]]
amendment to a nuclear power plant design. Neither the design
certification amendment applicant, nor prospective nuclear power plant
licensees who reference this design certification rule, fall within the
scope of the definition of ``small entities'' presented in the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, or the size standards established by the
NRC (10 CFR 2.810). Thus, this rule does not fall within the purview of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
XIV. Backfitting
The Commission has determined that this proposed rule does not
constitute a backfit as defined in the backfit rule (10 CFR 50.109)
because this design certification amendment does not impose new or
changed requirements on existing 10 CFR part 50 licensees, nor does it
impose new or changed requirements on existing DCRs in Appendices A
through D of 10 CFR part 52. Therefore, a backfit analysis was not
prepared for this rule.
The proposed rule does not constitute backfitting as defined in the
backfit rule (10 CFR 50.109) with respect to either operating licenses
under 10 CFR part 50 because there are no operating licenses
referencing this design certification rule. The proposed rule does not
constitute backfitting as defined in the backfit rule or otherwise
impose requirements inconsistent with the applicable finality
requirements under 10 CFR part 52 (10 CFR 52.63, 52.83 and 52.98)
because: (i) There are no COLs issued by the NRC referencing this rule,
and (ii) neither the backfit rule nor the finality provisions in 10 CFR
part 52 protect COL applicants from changes in NRC requirements which
may occur during the pendency of their application before the NRC.
The proposed rule is not inconsistent with the finality
requirements in 10 CFR 52.63 as applied to COLs. The proposed rule
would establish an option to the existing design certification rule
which addresses the requirements of the AIA rule. A COL referencing the
U.S. ABWR design certification rule may voluntarily choose to select
the STPNOC option, or may choose to reference the U.S. ABWR design
without selecting the STPNOC option.
The AIA rule itself mandated that the U.S. ABWR DCR be revised
(either during the DCR's current term or no later than its renewal) to
address the requirements of the AIA rule. The AIA rule may therefore be
regarded as inconsistent with applicable finality provisions in 10 CFR
part 52 and Section VI of the U.S. ABWR DCR. However, the NRC provided
an administrative exemption from these finality requirements when the
final AIA rule was issued. See 74 FR 28112; June 12, 2009, at 28143-45.
Accordingly, the NRC has already addressed the backfitting implications
of applying the AIA rule to the U.S. ABWR.
Because the proposed rule does not constitute backfitting and is
not otherwise inconsistent with finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52,
the NRC has not prepared a backfit analysis or documented evaluation
for this rule.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 52
Administrative practice and procedure, Antitrust, Backfitting,
Combined license, Early site permit, Emergency planning, Fees,
Incorporation by reference, Inspection, Limited work authorization,
Nuclear power plants and reactors, Probabilistic risk assessment,
Prototype, Reactor siting criteria, Redress of site, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Standard design, Standard design
certification.
For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; the Energy Reorganization
Act of 1974, as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 553; the NRC is proposing to
adopt the following amendments to 10 CFR part 52.
PART 52--LICENSES, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS FOR NUCLEAR POWER
PLANTS
1. The authority citation for 10 CFR part 52 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Secs. 103, 104, 161, 182, 183, 186, 189, 68 Stat.
936, 948, 953, 954, 955, 956, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 2133, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2236, 2239, 2282); secs.
201, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, 1244, 1246, as amended (42 U.S.C.
5841, 5842, 5846); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note);
Energy Policy Act of 2005, Pub. L. 109-58, 119 Stat. 594 (2005),
secs. 147 and 149 of the Atomic Energy Act.
2. In Appendix A to 10 CFR part 52:
a. Section I is revised;
b. Section II, paragraph A is revised;
c. Section III is revised;
d. Section IV, paragraph A.3, is revised and paragraph A.4 is
added;
e. Section V, paragraph A is revised;
f. Section VI, paragraphs B and E are revised;
g. Section VIII, paragraph B.5.b is revised, paragraphs B.5.d, e,
and f, are redesignated as paragraphs B.5.e, f, and g, respectively,
and new paragraph B.5.d is added; and
h. Section X, paragraph A.1 is revised and paragraph A.4 is added.
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Appendix A to Part 52--Design Certification Rule for the U.S. Advanced
Boiling Water Reactor
I. Introduction
Appendix A constitutes the standard design certification for the
U.S. Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) design, in accordance
with 10 CFR part 52, subpart B. The applicant for the original
certification of the U.S. ABWR design was GE Nuclear Energy (GE).
The applicant for the amendment to the U.S. ABWR design to address
the requirements in 10 CFR 50.150, ``Aircraft impact assessment,''
(AIA rule) is the South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company
(STPNOC).
II. Definitions
A. Generic design control document (generic DCD) means either or
both of the documents containing the Tier 1 and Tier 2 information
and generic technical specifications that are incorporated by
reference into this appendix.
* * * * *
III. Scope and Contents
A.1. Tier 1, Tier 2, and the generic technical specifications in
the U.S. ABWR Design Control Document, GE Nuclear Energy, Revision 4
dated March 1997 (GE DCD), are approved for incorporation by
reference by the Director of the Office of the Federal Register in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of the
generic DCD may be obtained from the National Technical Information
Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161. A copy
is available for examination and copying at the NRC Public Document
Room (PDR) located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Room O-1 F21, Rockville, Maryland. Copies are also available for
examination at the NRC Library located at Two White Flint North,
11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, and the Office of the
Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700,
Washington, DC.
2. Tier 1 and Tier 2 information in the ABWR STP Aircraft Impact
Assessment Amendment Design Control Document (Revision 3, dated
September 23, 2010) (STPNOC DCD), is approved for incorporation by
reference by the Director of the Office of the Federal Register
under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of the generic DCD
may be obtained from the Regulatory Affairs Manager, South Texas
Project Nuclear Operating Company, P.O. Box 289, Wadsworth, Texas
77483. A copy of the generic DCD is also available for examination
and copying at the NRC PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North,
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852. Copies are
available for examination at the NRC Library, Two White Flint North,
11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, telephone (301)
415-5610, e-mail [email protected]. The generic DCD can also
be viewed on the Federal Rulemaking Web site http://www.regulations.gov by searching for documents filed under Docket ID
NRC-2010-0134 or in the NRC's Electronic Reading
[[Page 3560]]
Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html by searching under
ADAMS Accession No. ML102870017. All approved material is also
available for inspection at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
B. An applicant or licensee referencing this appendix, in
accordance with Section IV of this appendix, shall incorporate by
reference and comply with the requirements of this appendix,
including Tier 1, Tier 2, and the generic technical specifications
except as otherwise provided in this appendix. An applicant or
licensee referencing this appendix may reference either the GE DCD,
or both the GE DCD and the STPNOC DCD. An applicant referencing this
appendix shall indicate in its application and in all necessary
supporting documentation which of these two options it is
implementing.
Conceptual design information, as set forth in the generic DCD,
and the ``Technical Support Document for the ABWR'' are not part of
this appendix. Tier 2 references to the probabilistic risk
assessment (PRA) in the ABWR standard safety analysis report do not
incorporate the PRA into Tier 2.
C. If there is a conflict between Tier 1 and Tier 2 of a DCD,
then Tier 1 controls.
D. If there is a conflict between the generic DCD and the
application for design certification of the U.S. ABWR design, NUREG-
1503, ``Final Safety Evaluation Report related to the Certification
of the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Design'' (ABWR FSER), and
Supplement No. 1, or NUREG-XXXX ``Final Safety Evaluation Report
related to the Certification of the AIA Amendment to the ABWR
Design'' (AIA FSER), then the generic DCD controls.
E. If there is a conflict between the design as described in the
GE DCD and a design matter which implements the STPNOC certified
design option but is not specifically described in the STPNOC DCD,
then the GE DCD controls.
F. Design activities for structures, systems, and components
that are wholly outside the scope of this appendix may be performed
using site characteristics, provided the design activities do not
affect the DCD or conflict with the interface requirements.
IV. Additional Requirements and Restrictions
A. * * *
3. Include, in the plant-specific DCD, the sensitive
unclassified non-safeguards information (including proprietary
information) and safeguards information referenced in the GE DCD and
the STPNOC DCD, as applicable.
4.a. Include, as part of its application, a demonstration that
an entity other than GE Nuclear Energy is qualified to supply the
U.S. ABWR certified design unless GE Nuclear Energy supplies the
design for the applicant's use.
b. For an applicant referencing the STPNOC certified design
option, include, as part of its application, a demonstration that an
entity other than STPNOC and TANE acting together is qualified to
supply the STPNOC certified design option, unless STPNOC and TANE
acting together supply the design option for the applicant's use.
* * * * *
V. Applicable Regulations
A.1. Except as indicated in paragraph B of this section, the
regulations that apply to the U.S. ABWR design as contained in the
GE DCD are in 10 CFR Parts 20, 50, 73, and 100, codified as of May
2, 1997, that are applicable and technically relevant, as described
in the FSER (NUREG-1503) and Supplement No. 1.
2. Except as indicated in paragraph B of this section, the
regulations that apply to the U.S. ABWR design as contained in the
STPNOC DCD are in 10 CFR Parts 50, and 52, codified as of [date
final rule published in the Federal Register], that are applicable
and technically relevant, as described in the FSER on the STPNOC
amendment addressing the AIA rule (NUREG-XXXX).
* * * * *
VI. Issue Resolution
* * * * *
B. The Commission considers the following matters resolved
within the meaning of 10 CFR 52.63(a)(5) in subsequent proceedings
for issuance of a combined license, amendment of a combined license,
or renewal of a combined license, proceedings held under 10 CFR
52.103, and enforcement proceedings involving plants referencing
this appendix:
1. All nuclear safety issues, except for the generic technical
specifications and other operational requirements, associated with
the information in the ABWR FSER and Supplement No. 1, Tier 1, Tier
2 (including referenced information which the context indicates is
intended as requirements), and the rulemaking record for the
original certification of the U.S. ABWR design and all nuclear
safety issues, except for other operational requirements associated
with the information in the AIA FSER, Tier 1, Tier 2 (including
referenced information which the context indicates is intended as
requirements), and the rulemaking record for certification of the
AIA amendment to the U.S. ABWR design;
2. All nuclear safety and safeguards issues associated with the
referenced sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information
(including proprietary information) and safeguards information
which, in context, are intended as requirements in the GE DCD and
the STPNOC DCD;
3. All generic changes to the DCD under and in compliance with
the change processes in Sections VIII.A.1 and VIII.B.1 of this
appendix;
4. All exemptions from the DCD under and in compliance with the
change processes in Sections VIII.A.4 and VIII.B.4 of this appendix,
but only for that plant;
5. All departures from the DCD that are approved by license
amendment, but only for that plant;
6. Except as provided in paragraph VIII.B.5.f of this appendix,
all departures from Tier 2 pursuant to and in compliance with the
change processes in paragraph VIII.B.5 of this appendix that do not
require prior NRC approval, but only for that plant;
7. All environmental issues concerning severe accident
mitigation design alternatives associated with the information in
the NRC's final environmental assessment for the U.S. ABWR design
and Revision 1 of the technical support document for the U.S. ABWR,
dated December 1994, and for the NRC's final environmental
assessment and Revision 0 of ABWR-LIC-09-621, ``Applicant's
Supplemental Environmental Report--Amendment to ABWR Standard Design
Certification,'' for the AIA amendment to the U.S. ABWR design for
plants referencing this appendix whose site parameters are within
those specified in the technical support document.
* * * * *
E. The NRC will specify at an appropriate time the procedures to
be used by an interested person who wishes to review sensitive,
unclassified non-safeguards information (SUNSI) (including
proprietary information\1\), or Safeguards Information (SGI) for the
U.S. ABWR certified design (including the STPNOC option), for the
purpose of participating in the hearing required by 10 CFR 52.85,
the hearing provided under 10 CFR 52.103, or in any other proceeding
relating to this appendix in which interested persons have a right
to request an adjudicatory hearing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Proprietary information includes trade secrets and
commercial or financial information obtained from a person that are
privileged or confidential (10 CFR 2.390 and 10 CFR part 9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
VIII. Processes for Changes and Departures
* * * * *
B. * * *
5. * * *
b. A proposed departure from Tier 2, other than one affecting
resolution of a severe accident issue identified in the plant-
specific DCD or one affecting information required by 10 CFR
52.47(a)(28) to address 10 CFR 50.150, requires a license amendment
if it would:
* * * * *
d. If an applicant or licensee proposes to depart from the
information required by 10 CFR 52.47(a)(28) to be included in the
FSAR for the standard design certification, then the applicant or
licensee shall consider the effect of the changed feature or
capability on the original assessment required by 10 CFR 50.150(a).
The applicant or licensee must also document how the modified design
features and functional capabilities continue to meet the assessment
requirements in 10 CFR 50.150(a)(1) in accordance with Section X of
this appendix.
* * * * *
X. Records and Reporting
A. * * *
1. The applicants for this appendix shall maintain a copy of the
applicable generic DCD that includes all generic changes to Tier 1,
Tier 2, and the generic technical specifications and other
operational requirements. The applicants shall maintain
[[Page 3561]]
the sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information (including
proprietary information) and safeguards information referenced in
the applicable generic DCD for the period that this appendix may be
referenced, as specified in Section VII of this appendix.
* * * * *
4.a. The applicant for the amendment to the U.S. ABWR design to
address the requirements in 10 CFR 50.150, ``Aircraft impact
assessment,'' shall maintain a copy of the aircraft impact
assessment performed to comply with the requirements of 10 CFR
50.150(a) for the term of the certification (including any period of
renewal).
b. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix to
include both the GE DCD and the STPNOC DCD shall maintain a copy of
the aircraft impact assessment performed to comply with the
requirements of 10 CFR 50.150(a) throughout the pendency of the
application and for the term of the license (including any period of
renewal).
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 11th day of January 2011.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2011-993 Filed 1-19-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P