[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 49 (Wednesday, March 15, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13778-13781]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05141]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 49 / Wednesday, March 15, 2017 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 13778]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Parts 26, 50, 52, 73, and 140
[NRC-2015-0070]
RIN 3150-AJ59
Regulatory Improvements for Power Reactors Transitioning to
Decommissioning
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Draft regulatory basis; request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is requesting
comments on a draft regulatory basis to support a rulemaking that would
amend NRC's regulations for the decommissioning of nuclear power
reactors. The NRC's goals in amending these regulations would be to
provide for an efficient decommissioning process; reduce the need for
exemptions from existing regulations; address other decommissioning
issues deemed relevant by the NRC staff; and support the principles of
good regulation, including openness, clarity, and reliability. The NRC
plans to hold a public meeting to discuss the draft regulatory basis
and facilitate public comment.
DATES: Submit comments by June 13, 2017. Comments received after this
date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is
only able to ensure consideration of comments received on or before
this date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by the following method:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0070. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-
3463; email: [email protected]. For technical questions contact
the individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
of this document.
For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting
comments, see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alysia G. Bone, telephone: 301-415-
1034, email: [email protected]; or Jennifer C. Tobin, telephone: 301-
415-2328, email: [email protected]. Both are staff of the Office
of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
II. Discussion
III. Specific Requests for Comments
IV. Cumulative Effects of Regulation
V. Availability of Documents
VI. Plain Writing
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2015-0070 when contacting the NRC
about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain
publicly-available information related to this action by any of the
following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0070.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS,
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected]. The
draft regulatory basis document is available in ADAMS under Accession
No. ML17047A413.
NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
B. Submitting Comments
Please include Docket ID NRC-2015-0070 in your comment submission.
If you cannot submit your comments on the Federal rulemaking Web site,
www.regulations.gov, then contact one of the individuals listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your
comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions into
ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove
identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons to not
include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be
publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should
state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to
remove such information before making the comment submissions available
to the public or entering the comment into ADAMS. Please note that the
NRC will not provide formal written responses to each of the comments
received on the draft regulatory basis. However, the NRC staff will
consider all comments received in the development of the final
regulatory basis.
II. Discussion
On December 30, 2014, in the staff requirements memorandum (SRM)
for SECY-14-0118, ``Request by Duke Energy Florida, Inc., for
Exemptions from Certain Emergency Planning Requirements'' (ADAMS
Accession No. ML14364A111), the Commission directed the NRC staff to
proceed with a rulemaking on power reactor decommissioning. The
Commission also stated that the rulemaking should address: Issues
discussed in SECY-00-0145, ``Integrated Rulemaking Plan for Nuclear
Power Plant Decommissioning'' (ADAMS Accession No. ML003721626), such
as the graded approach to emergency preparedness (EP); lessons learned
from the plants that have already (or are currently) going through the
decommissioning process; the
[[Page 13779]]
advisability of requiring a licensee's Post-Shutdown Decommissioning
Activities Report (PSDAR) to be approved by the NRC; the
appropriateness of maintaining the three existing options for
decommissioning and the timeframes associated with those options; the
appropriate role of state and local governments and non-governmental
stakeholders in the decommissioning process; and any other issues
deemed relevant by the NRC.
The NRC issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) in
the Federal Register (80 FR 72358; November 19, 2015) to obtain
stakeholder feedback on the regulatory issues included in the SRM for
SECY-14-0118. The NRC received public comments related to each of the
regulatory issues outlined in the ANPR. Most public feedback pertained
to the level of public involvement in the decommissioning process, the
60-year limit for power reactor decommissioning, whether the NRC should
approve the PSDAR, EP considerations, and the use of the
decommissioning trust funds (DTFs). The NRC reviewed the comments and
used input received from the comments to develop the options presented
in the draft regulatory basis.
In the draft regulatory basis, the NRC staff concludes that it has
sufficient justification to proceed with rulemaking in the areas of EP,
physical security, DTFs, offsite and onsite financial protection
requirements and indemnity agreements, and application of the backfit
rule. As stated previously, the NRC staff included all of these areas
in the ANPR and received stakeholder feedback. Further, the NRC staff
is recommending rulemaking to: (1) Require that the PSDAR contain a
description of how the spent fuel stored under a general independent
spent fuel storage installation license will be removed from the
reactor site in accordance with the regulatory requirements in Sec.
50.82 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR),
``Termination of License,'' 10 CFR 50.54(bb), ``Conditions of
Licenses,'' 10 CFR 52.110, ``Termination of License,'' and/or 10 CFR
72.218, ``Termination of Licenses;'' and (2) amend 10 CFR 51.53,
``Postconstruction Environmental Reports,'' and 10 CFR 51.95,
``Postconstruction Environmental Impact Statements,'' to clarify that
the requirements for a license amendment before decommissioning
activities may commence applies only to non-power reactors, as
specified in 10 CFR 50.82(b), ``Termination of License,'' in accordance
with the 1996 final rule that amended the NRC's decommissioning
regulations (61 FR 39278).
At this time, the NRC staff has determined that additional
stakeholder input is needed prior to finalizing recommendations related
to cyber security, drug and alcohol testing, certified fuel handler
training and minimum staffing, aging management, and fatigue
management. The NRC received comments in these areas from the ANPR and
intends to seek specific public input on these topics as part of the
public comment request on the entire draft regulatory basis.
In the draft regulatory basis, the NRC staff concludes that
regulatory activities other than rulemaking--such as guidance
development--should be used to address concerns expressed in comments
received on the ANPR regarding the appropriate role of State and local
governments in the decommissioning process, the level of NRC review and
approval of the PSDAR, and the 60 year limit for power reactor
decommissioning. The NRC is requesting public comment on the draft
regulatory basis and its associated appendices. To supplement the draft
regulatory basis, the NRC is preparing a preliminary draft regulatory
analysis, which will be made available for public comment in the near
future.
III. Request for Comment
The NRC is requesting comment on the draft regulatory basis,
``Regulatory Improvements for Reactors Transitioning to
Decommissioning.'' As you prepare your comments, consider the following
general questions:
1. Is the NRC considering appropriate options for each regulatory
area described in the draft regulatory basis?
2. Are there additional factors that the NRC should consider in
each regulatory area? What are these factors?
3. Are there any additional options that the NRC should consider
during development of the proposed rule?
4. Is there additional information concerning regulatory impacts
that NRC should include in its regulatory basis for this rulemaking?
Specific Regulatory Issues
In addition to these general questions, the NRC has identified
additional areas of consideration that either could be included in the
scope of the power reactor decommissioning rulemaking or addressed
through other actions. The NRC may include additional discussion of
these issues in the final regulatory basis, and if included, will use
any public comments received regarding these issues to inform the
development of the final regulatory basis. The NRC requests that
members of the public answer the following specific questions regarding
these additional regulatory issues.
Foreign Ownership, Control, or Domination (FOCD) Exemptions for
Facilities in Decommissioning
A licensee in decommissioning may desire to transfer their license
under 10 CFR part 50, ``Domestic Licensing of Production and
Utilization Facilities,'' to another entity to perform the
decommissioning activities described in the licensee's PSDAR. However,
pursuant to Sec. 50.38, ``Ineligibility of Certain Applicants,'' the
receiving entity is ineligible to obtain the license if it is a
citizen, national, or agent of a foreign country or if it is any
corporation or other entity which the Commission knows or has reason to
believe is owned, controlled, or dominated by an alien, a foreign
corporation, or a foreign government. The NRC has granted exemptions
from this requirement for facilities that have been dismantled and
removed, such that only independent spent fuel storage installations
remained onsite (78 FR 58571; September 24, 2013).
5. Should the NRC address the exemption to Sec. 50.38 for
licensees of facilities in decommissioning on a generic basis as a part
of this rulemaking? If so, why, and how should the NRC address this
issue?
Potential Changes to 10 CFR Part 37
Both operating and decommissioning power reactor licensees are
subject to the physical protection programs contained in Sec. 73.55,
``Requirements for physical protection of licensed activities in
nuclear power reactors against radiological sabotage,'' of 10 CFR part
73, ``Physical Protection of Plants and Materials;'' appendix B,
``General Criteria for Security Personnel,'' to 10 CFR part 73; and
appendix C, ``Licensee Safeguards Contingency Plans,'' to 10 CFR part
73. These licensees are also subject to 10 CFR part 37, ``Physical
Protection of Category 1 and Category 2 Quantities of Radioactive
Material,'' if they possess category 1 and category 2 quantities of
radioactive material. Therefore, these licensees are potentially
subject to both 10 CFR part 73 and 10 CFR part 37 security regulations.
The NRC issued the regulations in 10 CFR part 37 to establish
security requirements for the use and transport of risk significant
quantities of category 1 and category 2 radioactive material. Category
1 and category 2 thresholds of radioactive materials in 10 CFR part 37
are consistent with similar categories of
[[Page 13780]]
radioactive materials established by the International Atomic Energy
Agency in its Code of Conduct on the Safety and Security of Radioactive
Sources (available at http://www-ns.iaea.org/tech-areas/radiation-safety/code-of-conduct.asp (last visited on February 10, 2017)).
The objective of 10 CFR part 37 is to provide reasonable assurance
that licensees can prevent the theft or diversion of category 1 and
category 2 quantities of radioactive material. The current 10 CFR part
37 regulation is applicable to any licensee that possesses an
aggregated category 1 or category 2 quantity of radioactive material,
any licensee that transports these materials using ground
transportation, and any licensee that transports small quantities of
irradiated reactor fuel.
To address the potential impact of redundant security regulations
during decommissioning, the NRC is considering revising security
regulations, including addressing the physical security requirements
for category 1 and category 2 materials at facilities undergoing
decommissioning.
6. Are the physical security protection programs in 10 CFR part 37
an area of regulation that the NRC should address in this rulemaking?
If so, why, and how should the NRC address this issue?
7. Should 10 CFR part 50 licensees transitioning from an operating
status to decommissioning status be provided specific physical security
requirements in 10 CFR part 37 for category 1 and category 2 materials,
based on their decommissioning status (i.e., in DECON, SAFSTOR, and
ENTOMB)?
8. Should the NRC establish specific security requirements for the
storage of category 1 and category 2 materials contained in large
components, robust structures, and in other equipment that are not
likely to be subject to theft and diversion due to their inherent self-
protecting features (i.e., large physical size and weight)?
9. Is a clarification of the exemption in Sec. 37.11(b) needed
with respect to facilities with 10 CFR part 73 security plans that are
undergoing decommissioning?
Specific Questions Regarding Appendix F, ``Decommissioning Trust
Funds,'' of the Draft Regulatory Basis
In addition to the options proposed in Appendix F of the draft
regulatory basis, the NRC is considering an option to amend the
regulations in Sec. 50.75, ``Reporting and Recordkeeping for
Decommissioning Planning,'' to require each power reactor licensee to
provide and assure to a site-specific cost estimate that is reviewed by
the NRC at initial licensing, throughout operations, and while in
decommissioning. A future licensee would provide at licensing site-
specific decommissioning plans, including an initial site-specific cost
estimate that captures the major assumptions, major decommissioning
activities, references, and any other bases used to develop this
estimate. Each plan would address how the cost estimate will be
adjusted for future cost escalation, the mechanism to be established
for funding, and a schedule for periodic contributions and assumptions
about future decommissioning trust fund growth (e.g., 2 percent real-
rate of return). During operations, each licensee would update the
initial site-specific cost estimate periodically to account for cost
escalation and any changes in assumptions that may result in increased
decommissioning costs (i.e., years 1-35 at 5 year intervals; annually
thereafter). Should this option be considered, the NRC would recommend
the following:
a. The Table of Minimum Amounts in Sec. 50.75(b) would continue to
require certification of a site-specific decommissioning cost estimate
that meets, or exceeds, the NRC minimum formula amount.
b. Implementation Period: The NRC would recommend that current
licensees be provided the biennial (2 year) status report period with
an additional year to provide and assure to the site-specific
decommissioning plan referenced herein.
10. Should this area of the regulations be addressed in this
rulemaking? If so, why, and how should the NRC address this issue?
Onsite and Offsite Liability Insurance During Decommissioning
The NRC staff is considering a proposal to adjust the amounts of
primary liability insurance that power reactor licensees in
decommissioning must maintain. The current practice is to exempt these
licensees from the Sec. 140.11 requirements (for offsite insurance)
and Sec. 50.54(w) (for onsite insurance) so that the amount of offsite
and onsite insurance corresponds to the risks of a decommissioning
plant. The NRC staff would use this rulemaking to establish regulations
for licensees in decommissioning to preclude the need for these
licensees to request exemptions. The NRC staff is considering using the
amounts approved in several previous exemption actions and adjusting
those amounts for inflation.
11. If the NRC takes this approach, should the NRC apply this
requirement to licensees who already have exemptions from insurance
requirements and whose levels of insurance have not been adjusted for
inflation?
Specific Question Regarding Security Plan Changes During
Decommissioning
Operating reactor licensees that are decommissioning may use the
Sec. 50.54(p)(2) process to implement changes to their site security
plans (e.g., removal of barriers, reduction of vital areas and armed
response team members) that do not decrease the safeguards
effectiveness of their plans. After the licensee has implemented the
changes to their security plans and submitted the required report of
the changes, the NRC staff practice is to review these reports to
ensure that the licensee has properly adhered to the requirements of
Sec. 50.54(p)(2) and not implemented a change that decreases the
safeguards effectiveness of its security plans. Although not
specifically required by regulation, licensees have typically included
in their submitted reports information demonstrating that these changes
do not constitute a decrease in safeguards effectiveness. However,
submission of this additional information currently is not a regulatory
requirement.
The NRC staff further notes that the change process in Sec.
50.54(p)(2) is complicated for both licensees and the NRC staff by the
fact that the term ``decrease in safeguards effectiveness'' is not
defined in our regulations. Accordingly, the NRC is considering adding
the following definition to Sec. 50.2, ``Definitions,'' or to Sec.
50.54(p)(2): A decrease in the safeguards effectiveness of a security
plan is a change or series of changes to the security plan that reduces
or eliminates the licensee's ability to perform or maintain the
security function that was previously performed or provided by the
changed element or component without compensating changes to other
security plan elements or components.
12. The NRC staff requests public comments on the following
options.
Option 1, no change. Decommissioning licensees continue to
implement security plan changes that do not decrease safeguards
effectiveness using the provisions of Sec. 50.54(p)(2), reporting
changes to the NRC within 2 months. If the NRC staff is unable to
verify the licensee's safeguards effectiveness determination through a
review of the submitted report, the NRC staff would continue to follow
up on the changes through the inspection process.
Option 2, develop regulatory guidance associated with
decommissioning
[[Page 13781]]
reactor security plan changes to provide licensees guidance for making
security plan changes that do and do not decrease the safeguards
effectiveness of the plan.
Option 3, revise the requirements in Sec. 50.54(p) to include the
aforementioned definition of safeguards effectiveness and revise the
specific requirements in Sec. 50.54(p)(2) to more closely reflect the
wording found in Sec. 50.54(q), ``Emergency Plans,'' specifically
within paragraphs 50.54(q)(3) and (5).
13. Which option should the NRC pursue to address this issue?
Specific Question Regarding the Community Advisory Board (CAB)
Although not a regulatory requirement, to date all decommissioning
licensees have created some form of a community advisory board, with
membership and activity levels commensurate with the overall level of
public interest in the decommissioning activities at the facility.
Currently, the staff doesn't have a compelling safety basis to
recommend an option for rulemaking regarding the licensee's
establishment of a community advisory board.
14. The staff is seeking public comment on how such a requirement
might constitute a cost-justified, substantial increase in protection
of the public health and safety or the common defense and security.
IV. Cumulative Effects of Regulation
The cumulative effects of regulation (CER) describe the challenges
that licensees or other impacted entities (such as State agency
partners) may face while implementing new regulatory positions,
programs, and requirements (e.g., rules, generic letters, backfits,
inspections). The CER is an organizational effectiveness challenge that
results from a licensee or impacted entity implementing a number of
complex positions, programs, or requirements within a limited
implementation period and with available resources (which may include
limited available expertise to address a specific issue). The NRC has
implemented CER enhancements to the rulemaking process to facilitate
public involvement throughout the rulemaking process. Therefore, the
NRC is specifically requesting comment on the cumulative effects that
may result from this proposed rulemaking. In developing comments on the
draft regulatory basis, consider the following questions:
(1) In light of any current or projected CER challenges, what
should be a reasonable effective date, compliance date, or submittal
date(s) from the time the final rule is published to the actual
implementation of any new proposed requirements, including changes to
programs, procedures, or the facility?
(2) If current or projected CER challenges exist, what should be
done to address this situation (e.g., if more time is required to
implement the new requirements, what period of time would be
sufficient, and why such a time frame is necessary)?
(3) Do other regulatory actions (e.g., orders, generic
communications, license amendment requests, and inspection findings of
a generic nature) by the NRC or other agencies influence the
implementation of the potential proposed requirements?
(4) Are there unintended consequences? Does the potential proposed
action create conditions that would be contrary to the potential
proposed action's purpose and objectives? If so, what are the
consequences and how should they be addressed?
(5) Please provide information on the costs and benefits of the
potential proposed action. This information will be used to support
additional regulatory analysis by the NRC.
V. Availability of Documents
The NRC may post additional materials related to this rulemaking
activity to the Federal rulemaking Web site at www.regulations.gov
under Docket ID NRC-2015-0070. These documents will inform the public
of the current status of this activity and/or provide additional
material for use at future public meetings.
The Federal rulemaking Web site allows you to receive alerts when
changes or additions occur in a docket folder. To subscribe: (1)
Navigate to the docket folder (NRC-2015-0070); (2) click the ``Sign up
for Email Alerts'' link; and (3) enter your email address and select
how frequently you would like to receive emails (daily, weekly, or
monthly).
The documents identified in the following table are available to
interested persons through one or more of the methods listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this document.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADAMS Accession No./web link/Federal
Document Register citation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECY-14-0118, ``Request by Duke ML14364A111.
Energy Florida, Inc., for
Exemptions from Certain
Emergency Planning
Requirements,'' December 30,
2014.
SECY-00-0145--``Integrated ML003721626.
Rulemaking Plan for Nuclear
Power Plant Decommissioning,''
June 28, 2000..
Federal Register notice, 80 FR 72358.
``Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking: Regulatory
Improvements for Decommissioning
Power Reactors,'' November 19,
2015.
Federal Register notice, ``Maine 78 FR 58571.
Yankee Atomic Power Company,
Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power
Company, and The Yankee Atomic
Electric Company,'' September
24, 2013.
Code of Conduct on the Safety and http://www-ns.iaea.org/tech-areas/
Security of Radioactive Sources, radiation-safety/code-of-
September 8, 2003. conduct.asp.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Plain Writing
The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-274) requires Federal
agencies to write documents in a clear, concise, well-organized manner.
The NRC has written this document to be consistent with the Plain
Writing Act as well as the Presidential Memorandum, ``Plain Language in
Government Writing,'' published in the Federal Register on June 10,
1998 (63 FR 31883). The NRC requests comment on this document with
respect to the clarity and effectiveness of the language used.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of March 2017.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Louise Lund,
Director, Division of Policy and Rulemaking, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2017-05141 Filed 3-14-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P