[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 99 (Wednesday, May 22, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23439-23456]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10715]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 2019 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 23439]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 52
[NRC-2015-0224]
RIN 3150-AJ67
Advanced Power Reactor 1400 (APR1400) Design Certification
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its
regulations to certify the Advanced Power Reactor 1400 (APR1400)
standard design. Applicants or licensees intending to construct and
operate an APR1400 standard design may do so by referencing this design
certification (DC) rule. The applicant for the certification of the
APR1400 standard design is Korea Electric Power Corporation and Korea
Hydro & Nuclear Power Co., Ltd. (KEPCO/KHNP).
DATES: The final rule is effective September 19, 2019, unless
significant adverse comments are received by June 21, 2019. If the
direct final rule is withdrawn as a result of such comments, timely
notice of the withdrawal will be published in the Federal Register. The
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this
regulation is approved by the Director of the Office of the Federal
Register as of September 19, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods
(unless this document describes a different method for submitting
comments on a specific subject):
Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/ and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0224. 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.
Email comments to: [email protected]. If you do
not receive an automatic email reply confirming receipt, then contact
us at 301-415-1677.
Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission at 301-415-1101.
Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff.
Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (Eastern Time) Federal
workdays; telephone: 301-415-1677.
For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting
comments, see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Yanely Malave-Velez, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, telephone: 301-415-1519, email:
[email protected], or William Ward, Office of New Reactors,
telephone: 301-415-7038, email: [email protected]. Both are staff of
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
II. Rulemaking Procedure
III. Background
IV. Discussion
V. APR1400 Standard Design Approval
VI. Section-by-Section Analysis
VII. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
VIII. Regulatory Analysis
IX. Backfitting and Issue Finality
X. Voluntary Consensus Standards
XI. Plain Writing
XII. Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant
Environmental Impact
XII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
XIII. Congressional Review Act
XIV. Agreement State Compatibility
XV. Availability of Documents
XVI. Procedures for Access to Proprietary and Safeguards Information
for Preparation of Comments on the APR1400 Design Certification Rule
XVII. Incorporation by Reference--Reasonable Availability to
Interested Parties
I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments
A. Obtaining Information
Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2015-0224 when contacting the NRC
about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain
publicly-available information related to this action by any of the
following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0224.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``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]. For
the convenience of the reader, instructions about obtaining materials
referenced in this document are provided in the Availability of
Documents section.
NRC's PDR: 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-2015-0224 in your comment submission.
The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your
comment submission. The NRC will post all comment submissions at
https://www.regulations.gov as well as enter the comment submissions
into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to
remove identifying or contact information.
If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to
include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be
publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should
state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to
remove such information before making the comment submissions available
to the public or
[[Page 23440]]
entering the comment into ADAMS. Comments received after June 21, 2019
will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is able to
ensure consideration only for comments received on or before this date.
Comments received on this direct final rule will also be considered to
be comments on a companion proposed rule published in the Proposed
Rules section of this issue of the Federal Register.
II. Rulemaking Procedure
Because the NRC considers this action to be non-controversial, the
NRC is using the ``direct final rule procedure'' for this rule. The
rule will become effective on September 19, 2019. However, if the NRC
receives significant adverse comments by June 21, 2019, then the NRC
will publish a document that withdraws this direct final rule and would
subsequently address the comments received in any final rule as a
response to the companion proposed rule published in the Proposed Rules
section of this issue of the Federal Register. Absent significant
modifications to the proposed revisions requiring republication, the
NRC does not intend to initiate a second comment period on this action.
A significant adverse comment is a comment in which the commenter
explains why the rule would be inappropriate. A comment is adverse and
significant if it meets the following criteria:
(1) The comment opposes the rule and provides a reason sufficient
to require a substantive response in a notice-and-comment process. For
example, a substantive response is required when:
(a) The comment causes the NRC to reevaluate (or reconsider) its
position or conduct additional analysis;
(b) The comment raises an issue serious enough to warrant a
substantive response to clarify or complete the record; or
(c) The comment raises a relevant issue that was not previously
addressed or considered by the NRC.
(2) The comment proposes a change or an addition to the rule, and
it is apparent that the rule would be ineffective or unacceptable
without incorporation of the change or addition.
(3) The comment causes the NRC to make a change (other than
editorial) to the rule.
For detailed instructions on filing comments, please see the
ADDRESSES section in the companion proposed rule published in the
Proposed Rules section of this issue of the Federal Register.
III. Background
Part 52 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR),
``Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants,''
subpart B, ``Standard Design Certifications,'' presents the process for
obtaining standard design certifications. On December 23, 2014, KEPCO/
KHNP submitted its application for certification of the APR1400
standard design (ADAMS Accession No. ML15006A098) to the NRC under
subpart B of 10 CFR part 52. The NRC published a notice of receipt of
the application in the Federal Register (80 FR 5792; February 3, 2015).
On March 12, 2015, the NRC formally accepted the application as a
docketed application for design certification (80 FR 13035; March 12,
2015). The pre-application information submitted before the NRC
formally accepted the application can be found in ADAMS under Docket
No. PROJ0782.
IV. Discussion
Final Safety Evaluation Report
The NRC issued the final safety evaluation report for the APR1400
design on September 28, 2018. The final safety evaluation report is
available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML18087A364. The NRC will
publish the final safety evaluation report as a NUREG titled, ``Final
Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Certification of the Advanced
Power Reactor 1400 Standard Design.'' The final safety evaluation
report is based on the NRC's review of revision 3 of the APR1400 design
control document.
APR1400 DC Rule
The following discussion describes the purpose and key aspects of
each section of the APR1400 DC rule. All section and paragraph
references are to the provisions being added as appendix F to the
regulations in 10 CFR part 52, unless otherwise noted. The NRC has
modeled the APR1400 DC rule on existing DC rules, with certain
modifications where necessary to account for differences in the APR1400
design documentation, design features, and environmental assessment
(including severe accident mitigation design alternatives). As a
result, DC rules are standardized to the extent practical.
A. Introduction (Section I)
The purpose of Section I of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to
identify the standard design approved by this DC rule and the applicant
for certification of the standard design. Identification of the design
certification applicant is necessary to implement appendix F to 10 CFR
part 52 for two reasons. First, Sec. 52.63(c) identifies the design
certification applicant as a potential source for an applicant for a
combined license (COL) to obtain the generic design control document
and supporting design information. If the COL applicant does not obtain
the design information from the design certification applicant, but
instead uses a different entity, then the COL applicant must meet the
requirements in Sec. 52.73. Second, paragraph X.A.1 of the rule
requires that the identified design certification applicant maintain
the generic design control document throughout the time that appendix F
to 10 CFR part 52 may be referenced.
B. Definitions (Section II)
The purpose of Section II of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to
define specific terminology with respect to this DC rule. During
development of the first two DC rules, the NRC decided that there would
be both generic (master) design control documents maintained by the NRC
and the design certification applicant, as well as individual plant-
specific design control documents maintained by each applicant or
licensee that references a certified standard design. This distinction
is necessary in order to specify the relevant plant-specific
requirements to applicants and licensees referencing appendix F to 10
CFR part 52. In order to facilitate the maintenance of the master
design control documents, the NRC requires that each application for a
standard design certification be updated to include an electronic copy
of the final version of the design control document. The final version
is required to incorporate all amendments to the design control
document submitted since the original application, as well as any
changes directed by the NRC as a result of its review of the original
design control document or as a result of public comments. This final
version is the master design control document incorporated by reference
in the DC rule. The master design control document will be revised as
needed to include generic changes to the version of the design control
document that is approved in this design certification rulemaking.
These changes would occur as the result of generic rulemaking by the
NRC, under the change criteria in Section VIII.
The NRC also requires each applicant and licensee referencing
appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 to submit and maintain a plant-specific
design control document as part of the COL final safety
[[Page 23441]]
analysis report. This plant-specific design control document must
either include or incorporate by reference the information in the
generic design control document. The plant-specific design control
document would be updated as necessary to reflect the generic changes
to the design control document that the NRC may adopt through
rulemaking, plant-specific departures from the generic design control
document that the NRC imposed on the licensee by order, and any plant-
specific departures that the licensee chooses to make in accordance
with the relevant processes in Section VIII. Therefore, the plant-
specific design control document functions similar to an updated final
safety analysis report because it provides the most complete and
accurate information on a plant's design basis for that part of the
plant that would be within the scope of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52.
The NRC is treating the technical specifications in Chapter 16 of
the generic design control document as a special category of
information and designating them as generic technical specifications in
order to facilitate the special treatment of this information under
appendix F to 10 CFR part 52. A COL applicant must submit plant-
specific technical specifications that consist of the generic technical
specifications, which may be modified as specified in paragraph VIII.C,
and the remaining site-specific information needed to complete the
technical specifications. The final safety analysis report that is
required by Sec. 52.79 will consist of the plant-specific design
control document, the site-specific final safety analysis report, and
the plant-specific technical specifications.
The terms Tier 1, Tier 2, and COL items (license information) are
defined in appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 because these concepts were not
envisioned when 10 CFR part 52 was developed. The design certification
applicants and the NRC use these terms in implementing the two-tiered
rule structure (the DCD is divided into Tiers 1 and 2 to support the
rule structure) that was proposed by representatives of the nuclear
industry after publication of 10 CFR part 52. The Commission approved
the use of a two-tiered rule structure in its staff requirements
memorandum, dated February 15, 1991, on SECY-90-377, ``Requirements for
Design Certification under 10 CFR part 52,'' dated November 8, 1990
(ADAMS Accession No. ML003707892).
Tier 1 information means the portion of the design-related
information contained in the generic DCD that is approved and certified
by this appendix. Tier 2 information means the portion of the design-
related information contained in the generic DCD that is approved but
not certified by this appendix. The change process for Tier 2
information is similar to, but not identical to, the change process set
forth in 10 CFR 50.59. The regulations in Sec. 50.59 describe when a
licensee may make changes to a plant as described in its final safety
analysis report without a license amendment. Because the change process
for Tier 2 information provided in Section VIII of this DC rule
provides more specific criteria than Sec. 50.59, as described in Sec.
50.59(c)(4), the definitions and criteria of Sec. 50.59 are not
applicable to this process. The NRC is including a definition for a
``Departure from a method of evaluation described in the plant-specific
DCD used in establishing the design bases or in the safety analyses''
(paragraph II.F), which is appropriate to include in this direct final
rule, so that the eight criteria in paragraph VIII.B.5.b will be
implemented for new reactors as intended.
C. Scope and Contents (Section III)
The purpose of Section III of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to
describe and define the scope and content of this design certification,
how to obtain a copy of the generic design control document,
requirements for incorporation by reference of the DC rule, and how
documentation discrepancies or inconsistencies are to be resolved.
Paragraph III.A is the required statement of the Office of the
Federal Register for approval of the incorporation by reference of the
APR1400 design control document, revision 3. In addition, this
paragraph provides the information on how to obtain a copy of the
design control document.
Paragraph III.B is the requirement for COL applicants and licensees
referencing the APR1400 design control document to comply with the
requirements of this appendix in order to benefit from the issue
finality afforded the certified design. 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. Tier 1 and Tier 2 information
(including the technical and topical reports referenced in Chapter 1),
and generic technical specifications have been combined into a single
document called the generic design control document, in order to
effectively control this information and facilitate its incorporation
by reference into the rule. In addition, paragraph III.B clarifies that
the conceptual design information and KEPCO/KHNP's evaluation of severe
accident mitigation design alternatives are not considered to be part
of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52. As provided by Sec. 52.47(a)(24),
these conceptual designs are not part of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52
and, therefore, are not applicable to an application that references
appendix F to 10 CFR part 52. Therefore, an applicant referencing
appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 would not be required to conform to the
conceptual design information that was provided by the design
certification applicant. The conceptual design information, which
consists of site-specific design features, was required to facilitate
the design certification review. Similarly, the severe accident
mitigation design alternatives were required to facilitate the
environmental assessment.
Paragraphs III.C and III.D set forth the manner by which potential
conflicts are to be resolved and identify the controlling document.
Paragraph III.C establishes the Tier 1 description in the design
control document as controlling in the event of an inconsistency
between the Tier 1 and Tier 2 information in the design control
document. Paragraph III.D establishes the generic design control
document as the controlling document in the event of an inconsistency
between the design control document and the final safety evaluation
report for the certified standard design.
Paragraph III.E makes it clear that design activities outside the
scope of the design certification may be performed using actual site
characteristics. This provision applies to site-specific portions of
the plant, such as the administration building.
D. Additional Requirements and Restrictions (Section IV)
Section IV of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 sets forth additional
requirements and restrictions imposed upon an applicant who references
appendix F to 10 CFR part 52.
Paragraph IV.A sets forth the information requirements for COL
applicants and distinguishes between information and documents that
must be included in the application or the design control document and
those which may be incorporated by reference. Any incorporation by
reference in the application should be clear and should specify the
title, date, edition, or version of a document and the page number(s)
and table(s)
[[Page 23442]]
containing the relevant information to be incorporated. The legal
effect of such an incorporation by reference into the application is
that appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 would be legally binding on the
applicant or licensee.
In paragraph IV.B the NRC reserves the right to determine how
appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 may be referenced under 10 CFR part 50.
This determination may occur in the context of a subsequent rulemaking
modifying 10 CFR part 52 or this DC rule, or on a case-by-case basis in
the context of a specific application for a 10 CFR part 50 construction
permit or operating license. This provision is necessary because the
previous DC rules were not implemented in the manner that was
originally envisioned at the time that 10 CFR part 52 was issued. The
NRC's concern is with the manner by which the inspections, tests,
analyses, and acceptance criteria (ITAAC) were developed and the lack
of experience with design certifications in a licensing proceeding.
Therefore, it is appropriate that the NRC retain some discretion
regarding the manner by which appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 could be
referenced in a 10 CFR part 50 licensing proceeding.
E. Applicable Regulations (Section V)
The purpose of Section V of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to
specify the regulations that were applicable and in effect at the time
this design certification was approved. These regulations consist of
the technically relevant regulations identified in paragraph V.A,
except for the regulations in paragraph V.B that would not be
applicable to this certified design.
F. Issue Resolution (Section VI)
The purpose of Section VI of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to
identify the scope of issues that are resolved by the NRC through this
rulemaking and, therefore, are ``matters resolved'' within the meaning
and intent of Sec. 52.63(a)(5). The section is divided into five
parts: Paragraph VI.A identifies the NRC's safety findings in adopting
appendix F to 10 CFR part 52, paragraph VI.B identifies the scope and
nature of issues that are resolved by this rulemaking, paragraph VI.C
identifies issues, that are not resolved by this rulemaking, and
paragraph VI.D identifies the issue finality restrictions applicable to
the NRC with respect to appendix F to 10 CFR part 52, and paragraph
VI.E identifies the availability of secondary resources.
Paragraph VI.A describes the nature of the NRC's findings in
general terms and makes the findings required by Sec. 52.54 for the
NRC's approval of this DC rule.
Paragraph VI.B sets forth the scope of issues that may not be
challenged as a matter of right in subsequent proceedings. The
introductory phrase of paragraph VI.B clarifies that issue resolution,
as described in the remainder of the paragraph, extends to the
delineated NRC proceedings for plants referencing appendix F to 10 CFR
part 52. The remainder of paragraph VI.B describes the categories of
information for which there is issue resolution.
Paragraph VI.C reserves the right of the NRC to impose operational
requirements on applicants that reference appendix F to 10 CFR part 52.
This provision reflects the fact that only some operational
requirements, including portions of the generic technical
specifications in Chapter 16 of the design control document, and no
operational programs (e.g., operational quality assurance), were
completely reviewed by the NRC in this design certification rulemaking
proceeding. Therefore, the issue finality provisions of Sec. 52.63
apply only to those operational requirements that either the NRC
completely reviewed and approved or formed the basis of an NRC safety
finding of the adequacy of the APR1400, as documented in the NRC's
final safety evaluation report. The NRC notes that operational
requirements may be imposed on licensees referencing this design
certification through the inclusion of license conditions in the
license, or inclusion of a description of the operational requirement
in the plant-specific final safety analysis report.\1\ The NRC's choice
of the regulatory vehicle for imposing the operational requirements
will depend upon the following, among other things: (1) Whether the
development and/or implementation of these requirements must occur
prior to either the issuance of the COL or the Commission finding under
Sec. 52.103(g) and (2) the nature of the change controls that are
appropriate given the regulatory, safety, and security significance of
each operational requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Certain activities, ordinarily conducted following fuel load
and therefore considered ``operational requirements,'' but which may
be relied upon to support a Commission finding under Sec.
52.103(g), may themselves be the subject of ITAAC to ensure their
implementation prior to the Sec. 52.103(g) finding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, paragraph VI.C allows the NRC to impose future operational
requirements (distinct from design matters) on applicants who reference
this design certification. License conditions for portions of the plant
within the scope of this design certification (e.g., start-up and power
ascension testing), are not restricted by Sec. 52.63. The requirement
to perform these testing programs is contained in the Tier 1
information. However, ITAAC cannot be specified for these subjects
because the matters to be addressed in these license conditions cannot
be verified prior to fuel load and operation, when the ITAAC are
satisfied. In the absence of detailed design information to evaluate
the need for and develop specific post-fuel load verifications for
these matters, the NRC is reserving the right to impose, at the time of
COL issuance, license conditions addressing post-fuel load verification
activities for portions of the plant within the scope of this design
certification.
Paragraph VI.D requires the NRC to follow the restrictions
contained in Section VIII when requiring generic or plant-specific
modifications, changes, or additions to structures, systems, and
components; design features; design criteria; and ITAAC within the
scope of the certified design.
Paragraph VI.E ensures that the NRC will specify at an appropriate
time the procedures on how to obtain access to sensitive unclassified
and non-safeguards information (SUNSI) and safeguards information (SGI)
for the APR1400 DC rule. Access to such information would be for the
sole purpose of requesting or participating in certain specified
hearings, such as hearings required by Sec. 52.85 or an adjudicatory
hearing. For proceedings where the notice of hearing was published
before the effective date of the final rule, the Commission's order
governing access to SUNSI and SGI shall be used to govern access to
such information within the scope of the rulemaking. For proceedings in
which the notice of hearing or opportunity for hearing is published
after the effective date of the final rule, paragraph VI.E applies and
governs access to SUNSI and SGI.
G. Duration of This Appendix (Section VII)
The purpose of Section VII of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is, in
part, to specify the period during which this design certification may
be referenced by an applicant for a COL, under Sec. 52.55, and the
period it will remain valid when the design certification is
referenced. For example, if an application references this design
certification during the 15-year period, then the design certification
would be effective for that application until it is withdrawn or the
license issued on that application expires, including periods
[[Page 23443]]
of operation under a renewed license. The NRC intends for appendix F to
10 CFR part 52 to remain valid for the life of the plants that
reference the design certification to achieve the benefits of
standardization and licensing stability. This means that changes to, or
plant-specific departures from, information in the plant-specific
design control document must be made under the change processes in
Section VIII for the life of a plant that references this DC rule.
H. Processes for Changes and Departures (Section VIII)
The purpose of Section VIII of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to
set forth the processes for generic changes to, or plant-specific
departures (including exemptions) from, the design control document.
The NRC adopted this restrictive change process in order to achieve a
more stable licensing process for applicants and licensees that
reference DC rules. Section VIII is divided into three paragraphs,
which correspond to Tier 1, Tier 2, and operational requirements.
Generic changes (called ``modifications'' in Sec. 52.63(a)(3))
must be accomplished by rulemaking because the intended subject of the
change is this DC rule itself, as is contemplated by Sec. 52.63(a)(1).
Consistent with Sec. 52.63(a)(3), any generic rulemaking changes are
applicable to all plants referencing this DC rule, absent circumstances
which render the change technically irrelevant. By contrast, plant-
specific departures could be either an order to one or more applicants
or licensees; or an applicant or licensee-initiated departure
applicable only to that applicant's or licensee's plant(s), similar to
a Sec. 50.59 departure or an exemption. Because these plant-specific
departures will result in a design control document that is unique for
that plant, Section X would require an applicant or licensee to
maintain a plant-specific design control document. For purposes of
brevity, the following discussion refers to the processes for both
generic changes and plant-specific departures as ``change processes.''
Section VIII refers to an exemption from one or more requirements of
this appendix and addresses the criteria for granting an exemption. The
NRC cautions that when the exemption involves an underlying substantive
requirement (i.e., a requirement outside this appendix), then the
applicant or licensee requesting the exemption must demonstrate that an
exemption from the underlying applicable requirement meets the criteria
of Sec. 52.7 or Sec. 50.12.
For the APR1400 DC review, the staff followed the approach
described in SECY-17-0075, ``Planned Improvements in Design
Certification Tiered Information Designations,'' (ADAMS Accession No.
ML16196A321), to evaluate the applicant's designation of information as
Tier 1 or Tier 2 information. Unlike prior design certification
applications, this application did not contain any Tier 2* information.
As described in SECY-17-0075, in each of the prior design certification
rules in appendices A through D to 10 CFR part 52, information
contained in the DCD was divided into three designations: Tier 1, Tier
2, and Tier 2*. Tier 1 information is the portion of design-related
information in the generic DCD that the Commission approves in the part
52 design certification rule appendices. To change Tier 1 information,
NRC approval by rulemaking or approval of an exemption from the
certified design rule is required. Tier 2 information is also approved
by the Commission in the Part 52 design certification rule appendices,
but it is not certified and licensees who reference the design can
change this information using the process outlined in Section VIII of
the appendices. This change process is similar to that in 10 CFR 50.59
and is generally referred to as the ``50.59-like'' process. If the
criteria in Section VIII are met, a licensee can change Tier 2
information without prior NRC approval. The NRC created a third
category, Tier 2*, to address industry requests to minimize the scope
of Tier 1 information and provide greater flexibility for making
changes. Tier 2* information is included in Tier 2 and has the same
safety significance as Tier 1 information, but the NRC decided to
provide more flexibility for licensees to change this type of
information. In prior design certification rules, Tier 2* is
significant information included only in Tier 2 that cannot be changed
without prior NRC approval of a license amendment requesting the
change.
The applicant included Tier 1 and Tier 2 information in the APR1400
DC application and did not designate or categorize any information as
Tier 2* information. Generally, where an applicant includes only Tier 1
and Tier 2 information in an application, the staff will evaluate the
Tier 2 information to determine whether any of that information
requires NRC approval before it is changed. If the staff identifies any
such information in Tier 2, then the staff will request that the
applicant revise the application to categorize that information as Tier
1 or Tier 2*, depending on whether the change must be made by approval
of a license amendment and an exemption requesting the change (Tier 1),
or a license amendment alone (Tier 2*). Because the applicant did not
designate any information as Tier 2* information, the staff also
considered whether the applicant had included information in Tier 2
that prior DC applicants had identified as Tier 2* but that the NRC
staff determined should be categorized as Tier 1. Using requests for
additional information, the staff questioned KEPCO/KHNP's
categorization of certain information as Tier 2 that past DC applicants
had identified as Tier 2* and, in some instances, the staff requested
that the applicant revise the application to add that information to
Tier 1. This approach required staff and KEPCO/KHNP to identify for
each request for additional information the verifiable, important to
safety parameters that must be included in Tier 1 to be certified in
the rule and verified by ITAAC. After several public meetings, some
information was added to or updated in Tier 1 (including modifications
to some ITAAC) and the requests for additional information were
resolved and closed without the designation of any Tier 2* information.
Of these updates in Tier 1, the most significant concerned the
design parameters for the critical structural sections \2\ for seismic
Category I structures. Past DC applications identified dimensions of
length to define critical structural sections as Tier 2* information.
During recent construction activities for another design, actual
dimensional lengths were found to be outside of their design
tolerances. This variance required additional license amendments to
resolve the issue associated with the design tolerances, resulting in
increased burden to the licensee without a
[[Page 23444]]
commensurate safety benefit. For the APR1400 design, the Tier 1
information and the ITAAC for these critical structural sections used
the design load and design load capacity in lieu of dimensions of
length, as specific dimensions are not necessarily as important to
safety. By focusing on important to safety parameters and including
them in ITAAC, the staff expects that the need for license amendments
to address changes during construction will be greatly reduced while
still maintaining reasonable assurance of adequate protection of public
health and safety.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ When evaluating the acceptability of the information for
seismic Category I structures, the staff's review focuses on a
subset of structural information that includes seismic analysis
methods, key parameters of seismic Category I structures, and the
design of ``critical sections.'' The use of critical sections in the
design of safety-related structures is a risk-informed graded
approach to achieve the reasonable assurance of safety. In lieu of
the safety review of a large number of structural component designs,
the staff performs a detailed review of a limited number of critical
sections described in the design control document Section 3.8 that
contribute to the overall risk significance of the structures. This
approach provides the staff with reasonable assurance of the overall
safety performance of the structures based on the successful
performance of these limited, but critical, risk-significant
locations. However, even minor changes to these critical sections
could, when applied to the entire safety-related structure, result
in significant changes to the overall performance of the structure
and, therefore, invalidate the basis for the staff's approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tier 1 Information
Paragraph A describes the change process for changes to Tier 1
information that are accomplished by rulemakings that amend the generic
design control document and are governed by the standards in Sec.
52.63(a)(1). A generic change under Sec. 52.63(a)(1) will not be made
to a certified design while it is in effect unless the change: (1) Is
necessary for compliance with NRC regulations applicable and in effect
at the time the certification was issued; (2) is necessary to provide
adequate protection of the public health and safety or the common
defense and security; (3) reduces unnecessary regulatory burden and
maintains protection to public health and safety and common defense and
security; (4) provides the detailed design information necessary to
resolve select design acceptance criteria; (5) is necessary to correct
material errors in the certification information; (6) substantially
increases overall safety, reliability, or security of a facility and
the costs of the change are justified; or (7) contributes to increased
standardization of the certification information. The rulemakings must
provide for notice and opportunity for public comment on the proposed
change, as required by Sec. 52.63(a)(2). The NRC will give
consideration as to whether the benefits justify the costs for plants
that are already licensed or for which an application for a permit or
license is under consideration except for those changes that are
necessary to provide adequate protection of the public health and
safety or the common defense and security.
Departures from Tier 1 may occur in two ways: (1) The NRC may order
a licensee to depart from Tier 1, as provided in paragraph A.3 or (2)
an applicant or licensee may request an exemption from Tier 1, as
addressed in paragraph A.4. If the NRC seeks to order a licensee to
depart from Tier 1, paragraph A.3 would require that the NRC find both
that the departure is necessary either to assure adequate protection of
the public health and safety or the common defense and security or to
secure compliance with the NRC's regulations applicable and in effect
at the time of approval of the design certification and that special
circumstances are present. Paragraph A.4 provides that exemptions from
Tier 1 requested by an applicant or licensee are governed by the
requirements of Sec. Sec. 52.63(b)(1) and 52.98(f), which provide an
opportunity for a hearing. In addition, the NRC would not grant
requests for exemptions that will result in a significant decrease in
the level of safety otherwise provided by the design.
Tier 2 Information
Paragraph B describes the change processes for the Tier 2
information; which have the same elements as the Tier 1 change process,
but some of the standards for plant-specific orders and exemptions
would be different. Generic Tier 2 changes would be accomplished by
rulemaking that would amend the generic design control document and
would be governed by the standards in Sec. 52.63(a)(1). A generic
change under Sec. 52.63(a)(1) would not be made to a certified design
while it is in effect unless the change: (1) Is necessary for
compliance with NRC regulations that were applicable and in effect at
the time the certification was issued; (2) is necessary to provide
adequate protection of the public health and safety or the common
defense and security; (3) reduces unnecessary regulatory burden and
maintains protection to public health and safety and the common defense
and security; (4) provides the detailed design information necessary to
resolve select design acceptance criteria; (5) is necessary to correct
material errors in the certification information; (6) substantially
increases overall safety, reliability, or security of a facility and
the costs of the change are justified; or (7) contributes to increased
standardization of the certification information.
Departures from Tier 2 would occur in four ways: (1) The NRC may
order a plant-specific departure, as set forth in paragraph B.3; (2) an
applicant or licensee may request an exemption from a Tier 2
requirement as set forth in paragraph B.4; (3) a licensee may make a
departure without prior NRC approval under paragraph B.5; or (4) the
licensee may request NRC approval for proposed departures which do not
meet the requirements in paragraph B.5 as provided in paragraph B.5.e.
Similar to ordered Tier 1 departures and generic Tier 2 changes,
ordered Tier 2 departures cannot be imposed except when necessary,
either to bring the certification into compliance with the NRC's
regulations applicable and in effect at the time of approval of the
design certification or to ensure adequate protection of the public
health and safety or the common defense and security, provided that
special circumstances are present as set forth in paragraph B.3.
However, unlike Tier 1 changes, the special circumstances for the
ordered Tier 2 departures would not have to outweigh any decrease in
safety that may result from the reduction in standardization caused by
the plant-specific order, as required by Sec. 52.63(a)(4). The NRC has
determined that it is not necessary to impose an additional limitation
similar to that imposed on Tier 1 departures by Sec. 52.63(a)(4) and
(b)(1). This type of additional limitation for standardization would
unnecessarily restrict the flexibility of applicants and licensees with
respect to Tier 2 information.
An applicant or licensee referencing this DC rule is permitted to
request an exemption from Tier 2 information as set forth in paragraph
B.4. The applicant or licensee would have to demonstrate that the
exemption complies with one of the special circumstances in regulations
governing specific exemptions in Sec. 50.12(a). In addition, the NRC
would not grant requests for exemptions that will result in a
significant decrease in the level of safety otherwise provided by the
design. However, unlike Tier 1 changes, the special circumstances for
the exemption do not have to outweigh any decrease in safety that may
result from the reduction in standardization caused by the exemption.
If the exemption is requested by an applicant for a license, the
exemption would be subject to litigation in the same manner as other
issues in the licensing hearing, consistent with Sec. 52.63(b)(1). If
the exemption is requested by a licensee, then the exemption would be
subject to an opportunity for hearing in the same manner as license
amendments.
Paragraph B.5 would allow an applicant or licensee to depart from
Tier 2 information, without prior NRC approval, if the departure does
not involve a change to or departure from Tier 1 information or the
technical specifications, and the departure does not require a license
amendment under paragraphs B.5.b or c. The technical specifications
referred to in B.5.a of this paragraph are the technical specifications
in Chapter 16 of the generic design control document, including bases,
for departures made
[[Page 23445]]
prior to the issuance of the COL. After the issuance of the COL, the
plant-specific technical specifications would be controlling under
paragraph B.5. The requirement for a license amendment in paragraph
B.5.b would be similar to the requirement in Sec. 50.59 and would
apply to all of the information in Tier 2 except for the information
that resolves the severe accident issues.
Paragraph B.5.b addresses information described in the design
control document to address aircraft impacts, in accordance with Sec.
52.47(a)(28). Under Sec. 52.47(a)(28), applicants are required to
include the information required by Sec. 50.150(b) in their design
control document. An applicant or licensee who changes this information
is required to consider the effect of the changed design feature or
functional capability on the original aircraft impact assessment
required by Sec. 50.150(a). The applicant or licensee is also required
to describe in the plant-specific design control document how the
modified design features and functional capabilities continue to meet
the assessment requirements in Sec. 50.150(a)(1). Submittal of this
updated information is governed by the reporting requirements in
Section X.B.
During an ongoing adjudicatory proceeding (e.g., for issuance of a
COL) a party who believes that an applicant or licensee has not
complied with paragraph B.5 when departing from Tier 2 information may
petition to admit such a contention into the proceeding under paragraph
B.5.g. As set forth in paragraph B.5.g, the petition would have to
comply with the requirements of Sec. 2.309 and show that the departure
does not comply with paragraph B.5. If on the basis of the petition and
any responses thereto, the presiding officer in the proceeding
determines that the required showing has been made, the matter would be
certified to the Commission for its final determination. In the absence
of a proceeding, assertions of noncompliance with paragraph B.5
requirements applicable to Tier 2 departures would be treated as
petitions for enforcement action under Sec. 2.206.
Operational Requirements
The change process for technical specifications and other
operational requirements in the design control document is set forth in
Section VIII, paragraph C. The key to using the change processes
described in Section VIII is to determine if the proposed change or
departure would require a change to a design feature described in the
generic design control document. If a design change is required, then
the appropriate change process in paragraph A or B would apply.
However, if a proposed change to the technical specifications or other
operational requirements does not require a change to a design feature
in the generic design control document, then paragraph C would apply.
This change process has elements similar to the Tier 1 and Tier 2
change processes in paragraphs A and B, but with significantly
different change standards. Because of the different finality status
for technical specifications and other operational requirements, the
NRC designated a special category of information, consisting of the
technical specifications and other operational requirements, with its
own change process in paragraph C. The language in paragraph C also
distinguishes between generic (Chapter 16 of the design control
document) and plant-specific technical specifications to account for
the different treatment and finality consistent with technical
specifications before and after a license is issued.
The process in paragraph C.1 for making generic changes to the
generic technical specifications in Chapter 16 of the design control
document or other operational requirements in the generic design
control document is accomplished by rulemaking and governed by the
backfit standards in Sec. 50.109. The determination of whether the
generic technical specifications and other operational requirements
were completely reviewed and approved in the design certification
rulemaking is based upon the extent to which the NRC reached a safety
conclusion in the final safety evaluation report on this matter. If a
technical specification or operational requirement was completely
reviewed and finalized in the design certification rulemaking, then the
requirement of Sec. 50.109 would apply because a position was taken on
that safety matter. Generic changes made under paragraph VIII.C.1 would
be applicable to all applicants or licensees referencing this DC rule
as described in paragraph C.2, unless the change is made technically
irrelevant by a plant-specific departure.
Some generic technical specifications contain values in brackets [
]. The brackets are placeholders indicating that the NRC's review is
not complete and represent a requirement that the applicant for a COL
referencing the APR1400 DC rule must replace the values in brackets
with final plant-specific values (refer to guidance provided in
Regulatory Guide 1.206, Revision 1, ``Applications for Nuclear Power
Plants''). The values in brackets are neither part of the DC rule nor
are they binding. Therefore, the replacement of bracketed values with
final plant-specific values does not require an exemption from the
generic technical specifications.
Plant-specific departures may occur by either an order under
paragraph C.3 or an applicant's exemption request under paragraph C.4.
The basis for determining if the technical specification or operational
requirement was completely reviewed and approved for these processes
would be the same as for paragraph C.1 previously discussed. If the
technical specification or operational requirement is completely
reviewed and finalized in the design certification rulemaking, then the
NRC must demonstrate that special circumstances are present before
ordering a plant-specific departure. If not, there would be no
restriction on plant-specific changes to the technical specifications
or operational requirements, prior to the issuance of a license,
provided a design change is not required. Although the generic
technical specifications were reviewed and approved by the NRC in
support of the design certification review, the NRC intends to consider
the lessons learned from subsequent operating experience during its
licensing review of the plant-specific technical specifications. The
process for petitioning to intervene on a technical specification or
operational requirement contained in paragraph VIII.C.5 would be
similar to other issues in a licensing hearing, except that the
petitioner must also demonstrate why special circumstances are present
pursuant to Sec. 2.335.
Paragraph C.6 states that the generic technical specifications
would have no further effect on the plant-specific technical
specifications after the issuance of a license that references this
appendix. After a license is issued, the bases for the plant-specific
technical specifications would be controlled by the bases change
provision set forth in the administrative controls section of the
plant-specific technical specifications.
I. [Reserved] (Section IX)
This section is reserved for future use. The matters discussed in
this section of earlier design certification rules--inspections, tests,
analyses, and acceptance criteria--are now addressed in the substantive
provisions of 10 CFR part 52. Accordingly, there is no need to repeat
these regulatory provisions in the APR1400 design certification rule.
However, this section is being reserved to maintain consistent section
numbering with other design certification rules.
[[Page 23446]]
J. Records and Reporting (Section X)
The purpose of Section X of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is to set
forth the requirements that will apply to maintaining records of
changes to and departures from the generic design control document,
which are to be reflected in the plant-specific design control
document. Section X also sets forth the requirements for submitting
reports (including updates to the plant-specific design control
document) to the NRC. This section of appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 is
similar to the requirements for records and reports in 10 CFR part 50,
except for minor differences in information collection and reporting
requirements.
Paragraph X.A.1 requires that a generic design control document
including SUNSI and SGI referenced in the generic design control
document be maintained by the applicant for this rule. The generic
design control document concept was developed, in part, to meet the
requirements for incorporation by reference, including public
availability of documents incorporated by reference. However, the SUNSI
and SGI could not be included in the generic design control document
because they are not publicly available. Nonetheless, the SUNSI and SGI
were 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
Sec. 52.63(a)(5). Because this information is not in the generic
design control document, this information, or its equivalent, is
required to be provided by an applicant for a license referencing this
DC rule. Only the generic design control document is identified and
incorporated by reference into this rule. The generic design control
document and the NRC-approved version of the SUNSI and SGI must be
maintained by the applicant (KEPCO/KHNP) for the period of time that
appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 may be referenced.
Paragraphs X.A.2 and X.A.3 place recordkeeping requirements on an
applicant or licensee that references this design certification so that
its plant-specific design control document accurately reflects both
generic changes to the generic design control document and plant-
specific departures made under Section VIII. The term ``plant-
specific'' is used in paragraph X.A.2 and other sections of appendix F
to 10 CFR part 52 to distinguish between the generic design control
document that is being incorporated by reference into appendix F to 10
CFR part 52, and the plant-specific design control document that the
COL applicant is required to submit under paragraph IV.A. The
requirement to maintain changes to the generic design control document
is explicitly stated to ensure that these changes are not only
reflected in the generic design control document, which will be
maintained by the applicant for the design certification, but also in
the plant-specific design control document. Therefore, records of
generic changes to the design control document will be required to be
maintained by both entities to ensure that both entities have up-to-
date design control documents.
Paragraph X.A.4.a requires the DC rule applicant to maintain a copy
of the aircraft impact assessment analysis for the term of the
certification and any renewal. This provision, which is consistent with
Sec. 50.150(c)(3), would facilitate any NRC inspections of the
assessment that the NRC decides to conduct. Similarly, paragraph
X.A.4.b requires an applicant or licensee who references appendix F to
10 CFR part 52 to maintain a copy of the aircraft impact assessment
performed to comply with the requirements of Sec. 50.150(a) throughout
the pendency of the application and for the term of the license and any
renewal. This provision is consistent with Sec. 50.150(c)(4). For all
applicants and licensees, the supporting documentation retained 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 Sec. 50.150(a)(1)
will be met.
Paragraph X.A does not place recordkeeping requirements on site-
specific information that is outside the scope of this rule. As
discussed in paragraph V.D of this document, the final safety analysis
report required by Sec. 52.79 will contain the plant-specific design
control document and the site-specific information for a facility that
references this rule. The phrase ``site-specific portion of the final
safety analysis report'' in paragraph X.B.3.c refers to the information
that is contained in the final safety analysis report for a facility
(required by Sec. 52.79) but is not part of the plant-specific design
control document (required by paragraph IV.A). Therefore, this rule
does not require that duplicate documentation be maintained by an
applicant or licensee that references this rule because the plant-
specific design control document is part of the final safety analysis
report for the facility.
Paragraph X.B.1 requires applicants or licensees that reference
this rule to submit reports that describe departures from the design
control document and include a summary of the written evaluations. The
requirement for the written evaluations is set forth in paragraph
X.A.3. The frequency of the report submittals is set forth in paragraph
X.B.3. The requirement for submitting a summary of the evaluations is
similar to the requirement in Sec. 50.59(d)(2).
Paragraph X.B.2 requires applicants or licensees that reference
this rule to submit updates to the design control document, which
include both generic changes and plant-specific departures, as set
forth in paragraph X.B.3. The requirements in paragraph X.B.3 for
submitting reports will vary according to certain time periods during a
facility's lifetime. If a potential applicant for a COL that references
this rule decides to depart from the generic design control document
prior to submission of the application, then paragraph X.B.3.a will
require that the updated design control document be submitted as part
of the initial application for a license. Under paragraph X.B.3.b, the
applicant may submit any subsequent updates to its plant-specific
design control document along with its amendments to the application
provided that the submittals are made at least once per year. Because
amendments to an application are typically made more frequently than
once a year, this should not be an excessive burden on the applicant.
Paragraph X.B.3.b also requires semi-annual submission of the
reports required by paragraph X.B.1 throughout the period of
application review and construction. The NRC will use the information
in the reports to support planning for the NRC's inspection and
oversight during this phase, when the licensee is conducting detailed
design, procurement of components and equipment, construction, and
preoperational testing. In addition, the NRC will use the information
in making its finding on ITAAC under Sec. 52.103(g), as well as any
finding on interim operation under Section 189.a(1)(B)(iii) of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. Once a facility begins operation
(for a COL under 10 CFR part 52, after the Commission has made a
finding under Sec. 52.103(g)), the frequency of reporting will be
governed by the requirements in paragraph X.B.3.c.
V. APR1400 Standard Design Approval
On March 8, 2018, as part of the submission of revision 2 of the
design control document (ADAMS Accession No. ML18079A146), KEPCO/KHNP
requested the NRC provide a final design approval for the APR1400
design. On August 13, 2018, as part of
[[Page 23447]]
the submission of revision 3 of the design control document (ADAMS
Accession No. ML18228A680), KEPCO/KHNP corrected their request for a
final design approval to a request for a standard design approval. A
standard design approval for the APR1400, revision 3, was issued on
September 28, 2018 (ADAMS Accession No. ML18261A187) following the
NRC's issuance of the APR1400 final safety evaluation report.
The finality of standard design approvals is discussed in Sec.
52.145. The standard design approval is valid for 15 years from the
date of issuance, as described in Sec. 52.147.
VI. Section-by-Section Analysis
The following paragraphs describe the specific changes in this
direct final rule: Section 52.11, Information collection requirements:
OMB approval.
In Sec. 52.11, this direct final rule adds new appendix F to 10
CFR part 52 to the list of information collection requirements in
paragraph (b) of this section.
Appendix F to Part 52--Design Certification Rule for the APR1400 Design
This direct final rule adds appendix F to 10 CFR part 52 to
incorporate the APR1400 standard design into the NRC's regulations.
Applicants or licensees intending to construct and operate a plant
using an APR1400 design may do so by referencing the DC rule.
VII. Regulatory Flexibility Certification
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the NRC
certifies that this direct final rule does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This direct
final rule affects only the licensing and operation of nuclear power
plants. The companies that own these plants do not fall within the
scope of the definition of ``small entities'' set forth in the
Regulatory Flexibility Act or the size standards established by the NRC
(10 CFR 2.810).
VIII. Regulatory Analysis
The NRC has not prepared a regulatory analysis for this direct
final rule. The NRC prepares regulatory analyses for rulemakings that
establish generic regulatory requirements applicable to all licensees.
Design certifications are not generic rulemakings in the sense that
design certifications do not establish standards or requirements with
which all licensees must comply. Rather, design certifications are NRC
approvals of specific nuclear power plant designs by rulemaking, which
then may be voluntarily referenced by applicants for COLs. Furthermore,
an applicant for a design certification, rather than the NRC, initiates
design certification rulemakings. 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 NRC concludes that preparation of a regulatory analysis is
neither required nor appropriate.
IX. Backfitting and Issue Finality
The NRC has determined that this direct final rule does not
constitute a backfit as defined in the backfit rule (10 CFR 50.109),
and it is not inconsistent with any applicable issue finality provision
in 10 CFR part 52.
This initial DC rule does not constitute backfitting as defined in
the backfit rule (10 CFR 50.109) because there are no existing
operating licenses under 10 CFR part 50, COLs or manufacturing licenses
under 10 CFR part 52 referencing this DC rule and because this DC rule
does not modify the standard design approval for the APR1400.
This initial DC rule is not inconsistent with any applicable issue
finality provision in 10 CFR part 52 because it does not impose new or
changed requirements on existing DC rules in appendices A through E to
10 CFR part 52 or the standard design approval for APR1400, and no COLs
or manufacturing licenses issued by the NRC at this time reference a
final APR1400 DC rule.
For these reasons, neither a backfit analysis nor a discussion
addressing the issue finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52 was prepared
for this rule.
X. Voluntary Consensus Standards
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995,
Public Law 104-113, requires that Federal agencies use technical
standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies unless the use of such a standard is inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. In this direct final rule, the
NRC certifies the APR1400 standard design for use in nuclear power
plant licensing under 10 CFR parts 50 or 52. Design certifications are
not generic rulemakings establishing a generally applicable standard
with which all 10 CFR parts 50 and 52 nuclear power plant licensees
must comply. Design certifications are Commission approvals of specific
nuclear power plant designs by rulemaking. Furthermore, design
certifications are initiated by an applicant for rulemaking, rather
than by the NRC. This action does not constitute the establishment of a
standard that contains generally applicable requirements.
XI. Plain Writing
The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-274) requires Federal
agencies to write documents in a clear, concise, and well-organized
manner. The NRC has written this document to be consistent with the
Plain Writing Act as well as the Presidential Memorandum, ``Plain
Language in Government Writing,'' published June 10, 1998 (63 FR
31883).
XII. Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No Significant
Environmental Impact
The NRC has determined under the National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969, as amended (NEPA), and the NRC's regulations in subpart A of
10 CFR part 51, that this direct final rule, if confirmed, would not be
a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human
environment and, therefore, an environmental impact statement is not
required. The NRC's generic determination in this regard is reflected
in 10 CFR 51.32(b)(1). The basis for the NRC's categorical exclusion in
this regard, as discussed in the 2007 final rule amending 10 CFR parts
51 and 52 (August 28, 2007; 72 FR 49352-49566), is based upon the
following considerations. A DC rule does not authorize the siting,
construction, or operation of a facility referencing any particular
design; it only codifies the APR1400 design in a rule. The NRC will
evaluate the environmental impacts and issue an environmental impact
statement as appropriate under NEPA as part of the application for the
construction and operation of a facility referencing any particular DC
rule.
In addition, consistent with 10 CFR 51.30(d) and 10 CFR 51.32(b),
the NRC has prepared a final environmental assessment (ADAMS Accession
No. ML18306A607) for the APR1400 design addressing various design
alternatives to prevent and mitigate severe accidents. The
environmental assessment is based, in part, upon the NRC's review of
KEPCO/KHNP's evaluation of various design alternatives to prevent and
mitigate severe accidents in APR1400-E-P-NR-14006, Revision 2, ``Severe
Accident Mitigation Design Alternatives (SAMDAs) for the APR1400''
(ML18235A158). Based upon review of KEPCO/KHNP's evaluation, the
Commission concludes that: (1) KEPCO/KHNP identified a reasonably
complete set of potential design alternatives to
[[Page 23448]]
prevent and mitigate severe accidents for the APR1400 design; (2) none
of the potential design alternatives are justified on the basis of
cost-benefit considerations; and (3) it is unlikely that other design
changes would be identified and justified during the term of the design
certification on the basis of cost-benefit considerations because the
estimated core damage frequencies for the APR1400 are very low on an
absolute scale. These issues are considered resolved for the APR1400
design. Based on its own independent evaluation, the NRC reached the
same conclusion as KEPCO/KHNP that none of the possible candidate
design alternatives are potentially cost beneficial for the APR1400
design. This independent evaluation was based on reasonable treatment
of costs, benefits, and sensitivities. The NRC concludes that KEPCO/
KHNP has adequately identified areas where risk potentially could be
reduced in a cost-beneficial manner and adequately assessed whether the
implementation of the identified potential severe accident mitigation
design alternatives or candidate design alternatives would be cost-
beneficial for the given site parameters. Therefore, the NRC finds that
the evaluation performed by KEPCO/KHNP is reasonable and sufficient.
The determination of this environmental assessment is that there
will be no significant offsite impact to the public from this action.
The environmental assessment is available as indicated under Section
XVI, ``Availability of Documents.''
XIII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
The burden to the public for the information collection(s) is
estimated to average 37 hours per response, including the time for
reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the
information collection. Further information about information
collection requirements associated with this direct final rule can be
found in the companion proposed rule published in the Proposed Rule
section in this issue of the Federal Register.
This direct final rule is being issued prior to approval by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) of these information collection
requirements, which were submitted under OMB control number 3150-XXXX.
When OMB notifies the NRC of its decision, the NRC will publish a
document in the Federal Register providing notice of the effective date
of the information collections or, if approval is denied, providing
notice of what action we plan to take.
Send comments on any aspect of these information collections,
including suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Information
Services Branch, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
District of Columbia 20555-0001, or by email to
[email protected]; and to OMB Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (3150-XXXX), Attn: Desk Officer for the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, District of
Columbia 20503; email: [email protected].
Public Protection Notification
The NRC may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless the document requesting
or requiring the collection displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
XIV. Congressional Review Act
This final rule is a rule as defined in the Congressional Review
Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808). However, the Office of Management and Budget
has not found it to be a major rule as defined in the Congressional
Review Act.
XV. 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 Atomic Energy Act or the
provisions of 10 CFR, and 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 a particular State's administrative procedure laws, but does not
confer regulatory authority on the State.
XVI. Availability of Documents
The documents identified in the following table are available to
interested persons through one or more of the following methods, as
indicated.
Documents Related to APR1400 Design Certification Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADAMS Accession
No./web link/
Document Federal Register
citation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECY-19-0020, ``Direct Final Rule--Advanced Power ML18302A069
Reactor 1400 Design Certification (RIN 3150-AJ67;
NRC-2015-0224)''....................................
KEPCO/KHNP Application for Design Certification of ML15006A037
the APR1400 Design..................................
APR1400 Design Control Document, Revision 3.......... ML18228A667
APR1400 Final Safety Evaluation Report............... ML18087A364
APR1400 Environmental Assessment..................... ML18306A607
APR1400 Standard Design Approval..................... ML18261A187
Regulatory History of Design Certification \3\....... ML003761550
KEPCO/KHNP Topical and Technical Reports:
APR1400-E-B-NR-16001-NP, Evaluation of Main Steam ML18178A215
and Feedwater Piping Applied to the Graded
Approach for the APR1400, Rev. 0 (July 2017)....
APR1400-E-B-NR-16002-NP, Evaluation of Safety ML18178A217
Injection and Shutdown Cooling Piping Applied to
the Graded Approach for the APR1400, Rev. 1 (May
2018)...........................................
APR1400-E-I-NR-14001-NP, Human Factors ML18212A345
Engineering Program Plan, Rev. 4 (July 2018)....
APR1400-E-I-NR-14002-NP, Operating Experience ML18081A101
Review Implementation Plan, Rev. 2 (January
2018)...........................................
APR1400-E-I-NR-14003-NP, Functional Requirements ML18081A091
Analysis and Function Allocation Implementation
Plan, Rev. 2 (January 2018).....................
[[Page 23449]]
APR1400-E-I-NR-14004-NP, Task Analysis ML18178A223
Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018)..........
APR1400-E-I-NR-14006-NP, Treatment of Important ML18178A224
Human Actions Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May
2018)...........................................
APR1400-E-I-NR-14007-NP, Human-System Interface ML18178A212
Design Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018)...
APR1400-E-I-NR-14008-NP, Human Factors ML18178A213
Verification and Validation Implementation Plan,
Rev. 3 (May 2018)...............................
APR1400-E-I-NR-14010-NP, Human Factors ML18081A088
Verification and Validation Scenarios, Rev. 2
(January 2018)..................................
APR1400-E-I-NR-14011-NP, Basic Human-System ML18178A214
Interface, Rev. 3 (May 2018)....................
APR1400-E-I-NR-14012-NP, Style Guide, Rev. 2 ML18081A096
(January 2018)..................................
APR1400-E-J-NR-14001-NP, Component Interface ML17094A131
Module, Rev. 1 (March 2017).....................
APR1400-E-J-NR-17001-NP, Secure Development and ML18108A470
Operational Environment for APR1400 Computer-
Based I&C Safety Systems, Rev. 0 (September
2017)...........................................
APR1400-E-N-NR-14001-NP, Design Features To ML18057B532
Address GSI-191, Rev. 3 (February 2018).........
APR1400-E-P-NR-14005-NP, Evaluations and Design ML18044B042
Enhancements To Incorporate Lessons Learned from
Fukushima Dai-Ichi Nuclear Accident, Rev. 2
(July 2017).....................................
APR1400-E-S-NR-14004-NP, Evaluation of Effects of ML18078A709
HRHF Response Spectra on SSCs, Rev. 3 (December
2017)...........................................
APR1400-E-S-NR-14005-NP, Evaluation of Structure- ML18078A699
Soil-Structure Interaction (SSSI) Effects, Rev.
2 (December 2017)...............................
APR1400-E-S-NR-14006-NP, Stability Check for NI ML18178A221
Common Basemat, Rev. 5 (May 2018)...............
APR1400-E-X-NR-14001-NP, Equipment Qualification ML18214A563
Program, Rev. 4 (July 2018).....................
APR1400-F-A-NR-14001-NP, Small Break LOCA ML17114A524
Evaluation Model, Rev. 1 (March 2017)...........
APR1400-F-A-NR-14003-NP, Post-LOCA Long Term ML17114A526
Cooling Evaluation Model, Rev. 1 (March 2017)...
APR1400-F-A-TR-12004-NP-A, Realistic Evaluation ML18233A431
Methodology for Large-Break LOCA of the APR1400
(August 2018)...................................
APR1400-F-C-NR-14001-NP, CPC Setpoint Analysis ML18199A563
Methodology for APR1400, Rev. 3 (June 2018).....
APR1400-F-C-NR-14002-NP, Functional Design ML17094A132
Requirements for a Core Operating Limit
Supervisory System for APR1400, Rev. 1 (February
2017)...........................................
APR1400-F-C-NR-14003-NP, Functional Design ML17114A522
Requirements for a Core Protection Calculator
System for APR1400, Rev. 1 (March 2017).........
APR1400-F-C-TR-12002-NP-A, KCE-1 Critical Heat ML17115A559
Flux Correlation for PLUS7 Thermal Design (April
2017)...........................................
APR1400-F-M-TR-13001-NP-A, PLUS7 Fuel Design for ML18232A140
the APR1400 (August 2018).......................
APR1400-H-N-NR-14005-NP, Summary Stress Report ML18178A218
for Primary Piping, Rev. 2 (September 2016).....
APR1400-H-N-NR-14012-NP, Mechanical Analysis for ML17244A015
New and Spent Fuel Storage Racks, Rev. 3 (August
2018)...........................................
APR1400-K-I-NR-14005-NP, Staffing and ML17094A152
Qualifications Implementation Plan, Rev. 1
(February 2017).................................
APR1400-K-I-NR-14009-NP, Design Implementation ML17094A153
Plan, Rev. 1 (February 2017)....................
APR1400-K-Q-TR-11005-NP-A, KHNP Quality Assurance ML18085B044
Program Description (QAPD) for the APR1400
Design Certification Rev. 2 (October 2016)......
APR1400-Z-A-NR-14006-NP, Non-LOCA Safety Analysis ML17094A139
Methodology, Rev. 1 (February 2017).............
APR1400-Z-A-NR-14007-NP, Mass and Energy Release ML18212A338
Methodologies for LOCA and MSLB, Rev. 2 (May
2018)...........................................
APR1400-Z-A-NR-14011-NP, Criticality Analysis of ML18214A561
New and Spent Fuel Storage Racks, Rev. 3 (May
2018)...........................................
APR1400-Z-A-NR-14019-NP, CCF Coping Analysis, ML18225A340
Rev. 3 (July 2018)..............................
APR1400-Z-J-NR-14001-NP, Safety I&C System, Rev. ML18212A341
3 (May 2018)....................................
APR1400-Z-J-NR-14002-NP, Diversity and Defense-in- ML18214A557
Depth, Rev. 3 (May 2018)........................
APR1400-Z-J-NR-14003-NP, Software Program Manual, ML18214A559
Rev. 3 (May 2018)...............................
APR1400-Z-J-NR-14004-NP, Uncertainty Methodology ML18086B757
and Application for Instrumentation, Rev. 2
(January 2018)..................................
APR1400-Z-J-NR-14005-NP, Setpoint Methodology for ML18087A106
Safety-Related Instrumentation, Rev. 2 (January
2018)...........................................
APR1400-Z-J-NR-14012-NP, Control System CCF ML18212A343
Analysis, Rev. 3 (May 2018).....................
APR1400-Z-J-NR-14013-NP, Response Time Analysis ML18087A110
of Safety I&C System, Rev. 2 (January 2018).....
APR1400-Z-M-NR-14008-NP, Pressure-Temperature ML18087A112
Limits Methodology for RCS Heatup and Cooldown,
Rev. 1 (January 2018)...........................
APR1400-Z-M-TR-12003-NP-A, Fluidic Device Design ML17129A597
for the APR1400 (April 2017)....................
Westinghouse Topical and Technical Report:
WCAP-10697-NP-A, Common Qualified Platform ML13112A108
Topical Report, Rev. 3 (February 2013)..........
WCAP-17889-NP (APR1400-A-N-NR-17001-NP), ML18044B051
Validation of SCALE 6.1.2 with 238-Group ENDF/B-
VII.0 Cross Section Library for APR1400 Design
Certification, Rev. 0 (June 2014)...............
Combustion Engineering, Inc. Technical Reports:
CEN-312-NP, Overview Description of the Core ML19066A067
Operating Limit Supervisory System (COLSS), Rev.
01-NP (November 1986)...........................
CEN-310-NP-A, CPC and Methodology Changes for the ML19066A085
CPC Improvement Program (April 1986)............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NRC may post materials related to this document, including
public comments, on the Federal Rulemaking website at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket ID NRC-2015-0224. The Federal
Rulemaking website allows you to receive alerts when changes or
additions occur in a docket folder. To subscribe: (1) Navigate to the
docket folder (NRC-2015-0224); (2) click the ``Sign up for Email
Alerts'' link; and (3) enter your email address and select how
[[Page 23450]]
frequently you would like to receive emails (daily, weekly, or
monthly).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The regulatory history of the NRC's design certification
reviews is a package of documents that is available in the NRC's PDR
and NRC Library. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
XVII. Procedures for Access to Proprietary and Safeguards Information
for Preparation of Comments on the APR1400 Design Certification Rule
This section contains instructions regarding how the non-publicly
available documents related to this rule, and specifically those listed
in Table 1.6-1 and 1.6-2 beginning on page 1.6-2 of Tier 2 of the DCD,
may be accessed by interested persons who wish to comment on the design
certification. These documents contain proprietary information and
safeguards information (SGI). Requirements for access to SGI are
primarily set forth in 10 CFR parts 2 and 73. This section provides
information specific to this rule; however, nothing in this section is
intended to conflict with the SGI regulations.
Interested persons who desire access to proprietary information on
the APR1400 design should first request access to that information from
KEPCO/KHNP, the design certification applicant. A request for access
should be submitted to the NRC if the applicant does not either grant
or deny access by the 10-day deadline described in the following
section.
One of the non-publicly available documents, APR1400-E-A-NR-14002-
P-SGI, contains both proprietary information and SGI. If you need
access to proprietary information in that document in order to develop
comments within the scope of this rule, then your request for access
should first be submitted to KEPCO/KHNP in accordance with the previous
paragraph. By contrast, if you need access to the SGI in order to
provide comments, then your request for access to the SGI must be
submitted to the NRC as described further in this section. Therefore,
if you need access to both proprietary information and SGI in that
document then you should request access to the information in separate
requests submitted to both KEPCO/KHNP and the NRC.
Submitting a Request to the NRC for Access
Within 10 days after publication of this rule, any individual or
entity who believes access to proprietary information or SGI is
necessary in order to submit comments on this APR1400 design
certification rule may request access to such information. Requests for
access to proprietary information or SGI 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 requestor shall submit a letter requesting permission to access
proprietary information and/or SGI 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 email 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. Requests to the applicant must be sent to Yun-
Ho Kim, President, KHNP Central Research Institute, 70, 1312-gil,
Yuseong-daero, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 34101, Korea.
The request must include the following information:
1. The name of this design certification, APR1400 design
certification; the rulemaking identification number, RIN 3150-AJ67; the
rulemaking docket number, NRC-2015-0224; and the Federal Register
citation for this rule.
2. The name, address, and email or FAX number of the requester.
3. If the requester is an entity, the name of the individual(s) to
whom access is to be provided, including the identity of any expert,
consultant, or assistant who will aid the requestor in evaluating the
information.
4. If the request is for proprietary information, the requester's
need for the information in order to prepare meaningful comments on the
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 that is publicly available is
insufficient to provide the basis for developing meaningful comment on
the APR1400 design certification rule with respect to the issue or
subject matter described in paragraph 4.a. of this section; and
c. The technical competence (demonstrable knowledge, skill,
training or education) of the requestor to effectively utilize the
requested proprietary information to provide the basis for meaningful
comment. Technical competence may be shown by reliance on a qualified
expert, consultant, or assistant who satisfies these criteria.
d. A chronology and discussion of the requester's attempts to
obtain the information from the design certification applicant, and the
final communication from the requester to the applicant and the
applicant's response, if any was provided, with respect to the request
for access to proprietary information must be submitted.
5. If the request is for SGI, a statement that explains each
individual's ``need to know'' the SGI, as required by 10 CFR 73.2 and
10 CFR 73.22(b)(1). Consistent with the definition of ``need to know''
as stated in 10 CFR 73.2, the statement must explain:
a. The specific issue or subject matter on which the requester
wishes to comment;
b. An explanation of why publicly available information is
insufficient to provide the basis for developing meaningful comment on
the design certification with respect to the issue or subject matter
described in paragraph 5.a. of this section and why the SGI requested
is indispensable in order to develop meaningful comments; \4\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Broad SGI requests under these procedures are unlikely to
meet the standard for need to know. Furthermore, NRC staff redaction
of information from requested documents before their release may be
appropriate to comport with this requirement. The procedures in this
document do not authorize unrestricted disclosure or less scrutiny
of a requester's need to know than ordinarily would be applied in
connection with either adjudicatory or non-adjudicatory access to
SGI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. The technical competence (demonstrable knowledge, skill,
training or education) of the requestor to effectively utilize the
requested SGI to provide the basis and specificity for meaningful
comment. Technical competence may be shown by reliance on a qualified
expert, consultant, or assistant who satisfies these criteria.
d. A completed Form SF-85, ``Questionnaire for Non-Sensitive
Positions,'' for each individual who would have access to SGI. The
completed Form SF-85 will be used by the Office of Administration to
conduct the background check required for access to SGI, as required by
10 CFR part 2, subpart C, and 10 CFR 73.22(b)(2), to determine the
requestor's trustworthiness and reliability. For security reasons, Form
SF-85 can only be submitted electronically through the electronic
questionnaire for investigations processing (e-QIP) website, a secure
website that is owned and operated by the Office of Personnel
Management. To obtain online access to
[[Page 23451]]
the form, the requestor should contact the NRC's Office of
Administration at 301-415-3710.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The requester will be asked to provide his or her full name,
social security number, date and place of birth, telephone number,
and email address.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
e. A completed Form FD-258 (fingerprint card), signed in original
ink, and submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 73.57(d). Copies of Form
FD-258 may be obtained by writing the Office of Administrative
Services, Mail Services Center, Mail Stop P1-37, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, or by email to
[email protected]. The fingerprint card will be used to satisfy
the requirements of 10 CFR part 2, subpart C, 10 CFR 73.22(b)(1), and
Section 149 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, which
mandates that all persons with access to SGI must be fingerprinted for
an FBI identification and criminal history records check.
f. A check or money order in the amount of $357.00 \6\ payable to
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for each individual for whom the
request for access has been submitted; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ This fee is subject to change pursuant to the Office of
Personnel Management's adjustable billing rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
g. If the requester or any individual who will have access to SGI
believes they belong to one or more of the categories of individuals
relieved from the criminal history records check and background check
requirements, as stated in 10 CFR 73.59, the requester should also
provide a statement specifically stating which relief the requester is
invoking, and explaining the requester's basis (including supporting
documentation) for believing that the relief is applicable. While
processing the request, the NRC's Office of Administration, Personnel
Security Branch, will make a final determination whether the stated
relief applies. Alternatively, the requester may contact the Office of
Administration for an evaluation of their status prior to submitting
the request. Persons who are not subject to the background check are
not required to complete the SF-85 or Form FD-258; however, all other
requirements for access to SGI, including the need to know, are still
applicable.
Copies of documents and materials required by paragraphs 5.d.-g.,
as applicable, of this section must be sent to the following address:
Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Personnel
Security Branch, Mail Stop TWF-07D04M, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
MD 20852. These documents and materials should not be included with the
request letter to the Office of the Secretary, but the request letter
should state that the forms and fees have been submitted as required.
To avoid delays in processing requests for access to SGI, all forms
should be reviewed for completeness and accuracy (including legibility)
before submitting them to the NRC. The NRC will return incomplete or
illegible packages to the sender without processing.
Based on an evaluation of the information submitted under
paragraphs 4.a.-4.d. or 5.a.-g. of this section, as applicable, the NRC
staff will determine within 10 days of receipt of the written access
request whether the requester has established a legitimate need for
access to proprietary information or need to know the SGI requested.
Determination of Legitimate Need for Access
For proprietary information access requests, if the NRC staff
determines that the requester has established a legitimate need for
access to proprietary information, the NRC staff will notify the
requester in writing that access to proprietary information has been
granted. The NRC staff must first notify the design certification
applicant of the staff's determination to grant access to the requester
not less than 10 days before informing the requester of the staff's
decision. If the applicant wishes to challenge the NRC staff's
determination, it must follow the procedures in Predisclosure
Procedures for Proprietary Information Constituting Trade Secrets or
Confidential Commercial or Financial Information of this section. The
NRC staff will not provide access to disputed proprietary information
to the requester until the procedures are completed as described in
Predisclosure Procedures for Proprietary Information Constituting Trade
Secrets or Confidential Commercial or Financial Information of this
section. The written notification will contain instructions on how the
requestor may obtain copies of the requested documents, and any other
conditions that may apply to access to those documents. These
conditions may include, but are not limited to, the signing of a Non-
Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit setting forth terms and conditions to
prevent the unauthorized or inadvertent disclosure of proprietary
information by each individual who will be granted access.
For requests for access to SGI, if the NRC staff determines that
the requester has established a need to know the SGI, the NRC's Office
of Administration will then determine, based upon completion of the
background check, whether the proposed recipient is trustworthy and
reliable, as required for access to SGI by 10 CFR 73.22(b). If the
NRC's Office of Administration determines that the individual or
individuals are trustworthy and reliable, the NRC will promptly notify
the requester in writing. The notification will provide the names of
approved individuals as well as the conditions under which the SGI will
be provided. Those conditions may include, but are not limited to, the
signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement or Affidavit by each individual
who will be granted access to SGI.
Release and Storage of SGI
Prior to providing SGI to the requester, the NRC staff will conduct
(as necessary) an inspection to confirm that the recipient's
information protection system is sufficient to satisfy the requirements
of 10 CFR 73.22. Alternatively, recipients may opt to view SGI at an
approved SGI storage location rather than establish their own SGI
protection program to meet SGI protection requirements.
Filing of Comments on the APR1400 Design Certification Rule Based on
Non-Public Information
Any comments in this rulemaking proceeding that are based upon the
disclosed proprietary information or SGI 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 all NRC requirements regarding the
submission of proprietary information and SGI to the NRC when
submitting comments to the NRC (including marking and transmission
requirements).
Review of Denials of Access
If the request for access to proprietary information or SGI is
denied by the NRC staff, the NRC staff shall promptly notify the
requester in writing, briefly stating the reason or reasons for the
denial.
Before the Office of Administration makes a final adverse
determination regarding the trustworthiness and reliability of the
proposed recipient(s) for access to SGI, the Office of Administration,
in accordance with 10 CFR 2.336(f)(1)(iii), must provide the proposed
recipient(s) any records that were considered in the trustworthiness
and reliability determination, including those required to be provided
under 10 CFR 73.57(e)(1), so that the proposed recipient(s) have an
opportunity to correct or explain the record.
[[Page 23452]]
Appeals from a denial of access must be made to the NRC's Executive
Director for Operations (EDO) under 10 CFR 9.29. The decision of the
EDO constitutes final agency action under 10 CFR 9.29(d).
Predisclosure Procedures for Proprietary Information Constituting Trade
Secrets or Confidential Commercial or Financial Information
The NRC will follow the procedures in 10 CFR 9.28 if the NRC staff
determines, under the Determination of Legitimate Need for Access of
this section, that access to proprietary information constituting trade
secrets or confidential commercial or financial information will be
provided to the requester. However, any objection filed by the
applicant under 10 CFR 9.28(b) must be filed within 15 days of the NRC
staff notice in the Determination of Legitimate Need for Access of this
section rather than the 30-day period provided for under 10 CFR
9.28(b). In applying the provisions of 10 CFR 9.28, the applicant for
the design certification rule will be treated as the ``submitter.''
XVIII. Incorporation by Reference--Reasonable Availability to
Interested Parties
The NRC is incorporating by reference the APR1400 design control
document, revision 3. As described in the ``Discussion'' section of
this document, the generic design control document combined into a
single document Tier 1 and Tier 2 information (including the technical
and topical reports referenced in Chapter 1) and generic technical
specifications in order to effectively control this information and
facilitate its incorporation by reference into the rule.
The NRC is required by law to obtain approval for incorporation by
reference from the Office of the Federal Register (OFR). The OFR's
requirements for incorporation by reference are set forth in 1 CFR part
51. The OFR regulations require an agency to include in a direct final
rule a discussion of the ways that the materials the agency
incorporates by reference are reasonably available to interested
parties or how it worked to make those materials reasonably available
to interested parties. The discussion in this section complies with the
requirement for direct final rules as set forth in 1 CFR 51.5(b)(2).
The NRC considers ``interested parties'' to include all potential
NRC stakeholders, not only the individuals and entities regulated or
otherwise subject to the NRC's regulatory oversight. These NRC
stakeholders are not a homogenous group but vary with respect to the
considerations for determining reasonable availability. Therefore, the
NRC distinguishes between different classes of interested parties for
the purposes of determining whether the material is ``reasonably
available.'' The NRC considers the following to be classes of
interested parties in NRC rulemakings with regard to the material to be
incorporated by reference:
Individuals and small entities regulated or otherwise
subject to the NRC's regulatory oversight (this class also includes
applicants and potential applicants or licenses and other NRC
regulatory approvals) and who are subject to the material to be
incorporated by reference by rulemaking. In this context, ``small
entities'' has the same meaning as a ``small entity'' under 10 CFR
2.810.
Large entities otherwise subject to the NRC's regulatory
oversight (this class also includes applicants and potential applicants
for licenses and other NRC regulatory approvals) and who are subject to
the material to be incorporated by reference by rulemaking. In this
context, ``large entities'' are those that do not qualify as a ``small
entity'' under 10 CFR 2.810.
Non-governmental organizations with institutional
interests in the matters regulated by the NRC.
Other Federal agencies, states, local governmental bodies
(within the meaning of 10 CFR 2.315(c)).
Federally-recognized and State-recognized \7\ Indian
tribes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ State-recognized Indian tribes are not within the scope of
10 CFR 2.315(c). However, for purposes of the NRC's compliance with
1 CFR 51.5, ``interested parties'' includes a broad set of
stakeholders, including State-recognized Indian tribes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Members of the general public (i.e., individual,
unaffiliated members of the public who are not regulated or otherwise
subject to the NRC's regulatory oversight) who may wish to gain access
to the materials which the NRC incorporates by reference by rulemaking
in order to participate in the rulemaking process.
The NRC makes the materials incorporated by reference available for
inspection to all interested parties, by appointment, at the NRC
Technical Library, which is located at Two White Flint North, 11545
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852; telephone: 301-415-7000;
email: [email protected]. In addition, as described in Section
XVI of this notice, documents related to this rule are available online
in the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS)
Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
The NRC concludes that the materials the NRC is incorporating by
reference in this rule are reasonably available to all interested
parties because the materials are available to all interested parties
in multiple ways and in a manner consistent with their interest in the
materials.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 52
Administrative practice and procedure, Antitrust, Combined license,
Early site permit, Emergency planning, Fees, Incorporation by
reference, Inspection, Issue finality, Limited work authorization,
Nuclear power plants and reactors, Probabilistic risk assessment,
Prototype, Reactor siting criteria, Redress of site, Penalties,
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; the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as
amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553, the NRC is amending 10 CFR part 52
as follows:
PART 52--LICENSES, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS FOR NUCLEAR POWER
PLANTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Atomic Energy Act of 1954, secs. 103, 104, 147, 149,
161, 181, 182, 183, 185, 186, 189, 223, 234 (42 U.S.C. 2133, 2134,
2167, 2169, 2201, 2231, 2232, 2233, 2235, 2236, 2239, 2273, 2282);
Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, secs. 201, 202, 206, 211 (42
U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846, 5851); 44 U.S.C. 3504 note.
Sec. 52.11 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 52.11, paragraph (b), add ``F,'' after ``E,''.
0
3. Add appendix F to part 52 to read as follows:
Appendix F to Part 52--Design Certification Rule for the APR1400 Design
I. Introduction
Appendix F constitutes the standard design certification for the
Advanced Power Reactor 1400 (APR1400) design, in accordance with 10
CFR part 52, subpart B. The applicant for certification of the
APR1400 design is Korea Electric Power Corporation and Korea Hydro &
Nuclear Power Co., Ltd. (KEPCO/KHNP).
II. Definitions
A. Generic design control document (generic DCD) means the
document containing the Tier 1 and Tier 2 information (including the
technical and topical reports referenced in Chapter 1) and generic
[[Page 23453]]
technical specifications that is incorporated by reference into this
appendix.
B. Generic technical specifications (generic TS) means the
information required by 10 CFR 50.36 and 50.36a for the portion of
the plant that is within the scope of this appendix.
C. Plant-specific DCD means that portion of the combined license
(COL) final safety analysis report that sets forth both the generic
DCD information and any plant-specific changes to generic DCD
information.
D. Tier 1 means the portion of the design-related information
contained in the generic DCD that is approved and certified by this
appendix (Tier 1 information). The design descriptions, interface
requirements, and site parameters are derived from Tier 2
information. Tier 1 information includes:
1. Definitions and general provisions;
2. Design descriptions;
3. Inspections, tests, analyses, and acceptance criteria
(ITAAC);
4. Significant site parameters; and
5. Significant interface requirements.
E. Tier 2 means the portion of the design-related information
contained in the generic DCD that is approved but not certified by
this appendix (Tier 2 information). Compliance with Tier 2 is
required, but generic changes to and plant-specific departures from
Tier 2 are governed by Section VIII of this appendix. Compliance
with Tier 2 provides a sufficient, but not the only acceptable,
method for complying with Tier 1. Compliance methods differing from
Tier 2 must satisfy the change process in Section VIII of this
appendix. Regardless of these differences, an applicant or licensee
must meet the requirement in paragraph III.B of this appendix to
reference Tier 2 when referencing Tier 1. Tier 2 information
includes:
1. Information required by Sec. 52.47(a) and (c), with the
exception of generic TS and conceptual design information;
2. Supporting information on the inspections, tests, and
analyses that will be performed to demonstrate that the acceptance
criteria in the ITAAC have been met; and
3. COL Items (COL license information), which identify certain
matters that must be addressed in the site-specific portion of the
final safety analysis report by an applicant who references this
appendix. These items constitute information requirements but are
not the only acceptable set of information in the final safety
analysis report. An applicant may depart from or omit these items,
provided that the departure or omission is identified and justified
in the final safety analysis report. After issuance of a
construction permit or COL, these items are not requirements for the
licensee unless such items are restated in the final safety analysis
report.
F. Departure from a method of evaluation described in the plant-
specific DCD used in establishing the design bases or in the safety
analyses means:
1. Changing any of the elements of the method described in the
plant-specific DCD unless the results of the analysis are
conservative or essentially the same; or
2. Changing from a method described in the plant-specific DCD to
another method unless that method has been approved by the NRC for
the intended application.
G. All other terms in this appendix have the meaning set out in
10 CFR 50.2, 10 CFR 52.1, or Section 11 of the Atomic Energy Act of
1954, as amended, as applicable.
III. Scope and Contents
A. Incorporation by reference approval. The APR1400 material 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. You may obtain copies of the generic DCD from Yun-Ho Kim,
President, KHNP Central Research Institute, 70, 1312-gil, Yuseong-
daero, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 34101, Korea. You can view the generic
DCD online in the NRC Library at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. In ADAMS, search under ADAMS Accession No. ML18228A667.
If you do not have access to ADAMS or if you have problems accessing
documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC's Public Document Room
(PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, at 301-415-3747, or by
email at [email protected]. Copies of this document are available
for examination and copying at the NRC's PDR located at Room O1-F21,
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland
20852. Copies are also available for examination at the NRC Library
located at Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland 20852, telephone: 301-415-5610, email:
[email protected]. All approved material is 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 https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibrlocations.html.
1. Korea Electric Power Corporation and Korea Hydro & Nuclear
Power Co, Ltd
a. APR1400 Design Control Document Tier 1 (APR1400-K-X-IT-14001-
NP), Revision 3 (August 2018).
b. APR1400 Design Control Document Tier 2 (APR1400-K-X-FS-14002-
NP), Revision 3 (August 2018), including:
i. Chapter 1, Introduction and General Description of the Plant.
ii. Chapter 2, Site Characteristics.
iii. Chapter 3, Design of Structures, Systems, Components, and
Equipment.
iv. Chapter 4, Reactor.
v. Chapter 5, Reactor Coolant System and Connecting Systems.
vi. Chapter 6, Engineered Safety Features.
vii. Chapter 7, Instrumentation and Controls.
viii. Chapter 8, Electric Power.
ix. Chapter 9, Auxiliary Systems.
x. Chapter 10, Steam and Power Conversion System.
xi. Chapter 11, Radioactive Waste Management.
xii. Chapter 12, Radiation Protection.
xiii. Chapter 13, Conduct of Operations.
xiv. Chapter 14, Verification Programs.
xv. Chapter 15, Transient and Accident Analyses.
xvi. Chapter 16, Technical Specifications.
xvii. Chapter 17, Quality Assurance and Reliability Assurance.
xviii. Chapter 18, Human Factors Engineering.
xix. Chapter 19, Probabilistic Risk Assessment and Severe
Accident Evaluation.
c. APR1400-E-B-NR-16001-NP, Evaluation of Main Steam and
Feedwater Piping Applied to the Graded Approach for the APR1400,
Rev. 0 (July 2017).
d. APR1400-E-B-NR-16002-NP, Evaluation of Safety Injection and
Shutdown Cooling Piping Applied to the Graded Approach for the
APR1400, Rev. 1 (May 2018).
e. APR1400-E-I-NR-14001-NP, Human Factors Engineering Program
Plan, Rev. 4 (July 2018).
f. APR1400-E-I-NR-14002-NP, Operating Experience Review
Implementation Plan, Rev. 2 (January 2018).
g. APR1400-E-I-NR-14003-NP, Functional Requirements Analysis and
Function Allocation Implementation Plan, Rev. 2 (January 2018).
h. APR1400-E-I-NR-14004-NP, Task Analysis Implementation Plan,
Rev. 3 (May 2018).
i. APR1400-E-I-NR-14006-NP, Treatment of Important Human Actions
Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018).
j. APR1400-E-I-NR-14007-NP, Human-System Interface Design
Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018).
k. APR1400-E-I-NR-14008-NP, Human Factors Verification and
Validation Implementation Plan, Rev. 3 (May 2018).
l. APR1400-E-I-NR-14010-NP, Human Factors Verification and
Validation Scenarios, Rev. 2 (January 2018).
m. APR1400-E-I-NR-14011-NP, Basic Human-System Interface, Rev. 3
(May 2018).
n. APR1400-E-I-NR-14012-NP, Style Guide, Rev. 2 (January 2018).
o. APR1400-E-J-NR-14001-NP, Component Interface Module, Rev. 1
(March 2017).
p. APR1400-E-J-NR-17001-NP, Secure Development and Operational
Environment for APR1400 Computer-Based I&C Safety Systems, Rev. 0
(September 2017).
q. APR1400-E-N-NR-14001-NP, Design Features To Address GSI-191,
Rev. 3 (February 2018).
r. APR1400-E-P-NR-14005-NP, Evaluations and Design Enhancements
To Incorporate Lessons Learned from Fukushima Dai-Ichi Nuclear
Accident, Rev. 2 (July 2017).
s. APR1400-E-S-NR-14004-NP, Evaluation of Effects of HRHF
Response Spectra on SSCs, Rev. 3 (December 2017).
t. APR1400-E-S-NR-14005-NP, Evaluation of Structure-Soil-
Structure Interaction (SSSI) Effects, Rev. 2 (December 2017).
u. APR1400-E-S-NR-14006-NP, Stability Check for NI Common
Basemat, Rev. 5 (May 2018).
v. APR1400-E-X-NR-14001-NP, Equipment Qualification Program,
Rev. 4 (July 2018).
w. APR1400-F-A-NR-14001-NP, Small Break LOCA Evaluation Model,
Rev. 1 (March 2017).
x. APR1400-F-A-NR-14003-NP, Post-LOCA Long Term Cooling
Evaluation Model, Rev. 1 (March 2017).
[[Page 23454]]
y. APR1400-F-A-TR-12004-NP-A, Realistic Evaluation Methodology
for Large-Break LOCA of the APR1400 (August 2018).
z. APR1400-F-C-NR-14001-NP, CPC Setpoint Analysis Methodology
for APR1400, Rev. 3 (June 2018).
aa. APR1400-F-C-NR-14002-NP, Functional Design Requirements for
a Core Operating Limit Supervisory System for APR1400, Rev. 1
(February 2017).
ab. APR1400-F-C-NR-14003-NP, Functional Design Requirements for
a Core Protection Calculator System for APR1400, Rev. 1 (March
2017).
ac. APR1400-F-C-TR-12002-NP-A, KCE-1 Critical Heat Flux
Correlation for PLUS7 Thermal Design (April 2017).
ad. APR1400-F-M-TR-13001-NP-A, PLUS7 Fuel Design for the APR1400
(August 2018).
ae. APR1400-H-N-NR-14005-NP, Summary Stress Report for Primary
Piping, Rev. 2 (September 2016).
af. APR1400-H-N-NR-14012-NP, Mechanical Analysis for New and
Spent Fuel Storage Racks, Rev. 3 (August 2017).
ag. APR1400-K-I-NR-14005-NP, Staffing and Qualifications
Implementation Plan, Rev. 1 (February 2017).
ah. APR1400-K-I-NR-14009-NP, Design Implementation Plan, Rev. 1
(February 2017).
ai. APR1400-K-Q-TR-11005-NP-A, KHNP Quality Assurance Program
Description (QAPD) for the APR1400 Design Certification, Rev. 2
(October 2016).
aj. APR1400-Z-A-NR-14006-NP, Non-LOCA Safety Analysis
Methodology, Rev. 1 (February 2017).
ak. APR1400-Z-A-NR-14007-NP, Mass and Energy Release
Methodologies for LOCA and MSLB, Rev. 2 (May 2018).
al. APR1400-Z-A-NR-14011-NP, Criticality Analysis of New and
Spent Fuel Storage Racks, Rev. 3 (May 2018).
am. APR1400-Z-A-NR-14019-NP, CCF Coping Analysis, Rev. 3 (July
2018).
an. APR1400-Z-J-NR-14001-NP, Safety I&C System, Rev. 3 (May
2018).
ao. APR1400-Z-J-NR-14002-NP, Diversity and Defense-in-Depth,
Rev. 3 (May 2018).
ap. APR1400-Z-J-NR-14003-NP, Software Program Manual, Rev. 3
(May 2018).
aq. APR1400-Z-J-NR-14004-NP, Uncertainty Methodology and
Application for Instrumentation, Rev. 2 (January 2018).
ar. APR1400-Z-J-NR-14005-NP, Setpoint Methodology for Safety-
Related Instrumentation, Rev. 2 (January 2018).
as. APR1400-Z-J-NR-14012-NP, Control System CCF Analysis, Rev. 3
(May 2018).
at. APR1400-Z-J-NR-14013-NP, Response Time Analysis of Safety
I&C System, Rev. 2 (January 2018).
au. APR1400-Z-M-NR-14008-NP, Pressure-Temperature Limits
Methodology for RCS Heatup and Cooldown, Rev. 1 (January 2018).
av. APR1400-Z-M-TR-12003-NP-A, Fluidic Device Design for the
APR1400 (April 2017).
2. Combustion Engineering, Inc.
a. CEN-310-NP-A, CPC and Methodology Changes for the CPC
Improvement Program (April 1986).
b. CEN-312-NP, Overview Description of the Core Operating Limit
Supervisory System (COLSS), Rev. 01-NP (November 1986).
3. Westinghouse
a. WCAP-10697-NP-A, Common Qualified Platform Topical Report,
Rev. 3 (February 2013).
b. WCAP-17889-NP (APR1400-A-N-NR-17001-NP), Validation of SCALE
6.1.2 with 238-Group ENDF/B-VII.0 Cross Section Library for APR1400
Design Certification, Rev. 0 (June 2014).
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 except
as otherwise provided in this appendix.
C. If there is a conflict between Tier 1 and Tier 2 of the DCD,
then Tier 1 controls.
D. If there is a conflict between the generic DCD and either the
application for the design certification of the APR1400 design or
the NUREG, ``Final Safety Evaluation Report Related to Certification
of the APR1400 Standard Design,'' then the generic DCD controls.
E. Design activities for structures, systems, and components
that are entirely 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. An applicant for a COL that wishes to reference this appendix
shall, in addition to complying with the requirements of Sec. Sec.
52.77, 52.79, and 52.80, comply with the following requirements:
1. Incorporate by reference, as part of its application, this
appendix.
2. Include, as part of its application:
a. A plant-specific DCD containing the same type of information
and using the same organization and numbering as the generic DCD for
the APR1400 design, either by including or incorporating by
reference the generic DCD information, and as modified and
supplemented by the applicant's exemptions and departures;
b. The reports on departures from and updates to the plant-
specific DCD required by paragraph X.B of this appendix;
c. Plant-specific TS, consisting of the generic and site-
specific TS that are required by 10 CFR 50.36 and 50.36a;
d. Information demonstrating that the site characteristics fall
within the site parameters and that the interface requirements have
been met;
e. Information that addresses the COL items; and
f. Information required by Sec. 52.47(a) that is not within the
scope of this appendix.
3. Include, in the plant-specific DCD, the sensitive,
unclassified, non-safeguards information (including proprietary
information and security-related information) and safeguards
information referenced in the APR1400 generic DCD.
4. Include, as part of its application, a demonstration that an
entity other than KEPCO/KHNP is qualified to supply the APR1400
design, unless KEPCO/KHNP supplies the design for the applicant's
use.
B. The Commission reserves the right to determine in what manner
this appendix may be referenced by an applicant for a construction
permit or operating license under 10 CFR part 50.
V. Applicable Regulations
A. Except as indicated in paragraph B of this section, the
regulations that apply to the APR1400 design are in 10 CFR parts 20,
50, 52, 73, and 100, codified as of September 19, 2019, that are
applicable and technically relevant, as described in the final
safety evaluation report.
B. The APR1400 design is exempt from portions of the following
regulations:
1. Paragraph (f)(2)(iv) of 10 CFR 50.34--Contents of
Applications: Technical Information--codified as of September 19,
2019.
VI. Issue Resolution
A. The Commission has determined that the structures, systems,
and components and design features of the APR1400 design comply with
the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the
applicable regulations identified in Section V of this appendix; and
therefore, provide adequate protection to the health and safety of
the public. A conclusion that a matter is resolved includes the
finding that additional or alternative structures, systems, and
components, design features, design criteria, testing, analyses,
acceptance criteria, or justifications are not necessary for the
APR1400 design.
B. The Commission considers the following matters resolved
within the meaning of Sec. 52.63(a)(5) in subsequent proceedings
for issuance of a COL, amendment of a COL, or renewal of a COL,
proceedings held under Sec. 52.103, and enforcement proceedings
involving plants referencing this appendix:
1. All nuclear safety issues associated with the information in
the final safety evaluation report, Tier 1, Tier 2, and the
rulemaking record for certification of the APR1400 design, with the
exception of generic TS and other operational requirements;
2. All nuclear safety and safeguards issues associated with the
referenced information in the 53 non-public documents in Tables 1.6-
1 and 1.6-2 of Tier 2 of the DCD, which contain sensitive
unclassified non-safeguards information (including proprietary
information and security-related information) and safeguards
information and which, in context, are intended as requirements in
the generic DCD for the APR1400 design;
3. All generic changes to the DCD under and in compliance with
the change processes in paragraphs 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 paragraphs 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 under 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; and
[[Page 23455]]
7. All environmental issues concerning severe accident
mitigation design alternatives associated with the information in
the NRC's environmental assessment for the APR1400 design (ADAMS
Accession No. ML18306A607) and APR1400-E-P-NR-14006, Revision 2,
``Severe Accident Mitigation Design Alternatives (SAMDAs) for the
APR1400'' (ML18235A158) for plants referencing this appendix whose
site characteristics fall within those site parameters specified in
APR1400-E-P-NR-14006.
C. The Commission does not consider operational requirements for
an applicant or licensee who references this appendix to be matters
resolved within the meaning of Sec. 52.63(a)(5). The Commission
reserves the right to require operational requirements for an
applicant or licensee who references this appendix by rule,
regulation, order, or license condition.
D. Except under the change processes in Section VIII of this
appendix, the Commission may not require an applicant or licensee
who references this appendix to:
1. Modify structures, systems, components, or design features as
described in the generic DCD;
2. Provide additional or alternative structures, systems,
components, or design features not discussed in the generic DCD; or
3. Provide additional or alternative design criteria, testing,
analyses, acceptance criteria, or justification for structures,
systems, components, or design features discussed in the generic
DCD.
E. The NRC will specify, at an appropriate time, the procedures
to be used by an interested person who wishes to review portions of
the design certification or references containing safeguards
information or sensitive unclassified non-safeguards information
(including proprietary information, such as 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), and
security-related information), for the purpose of participating in
the hearing required by Sec. 52.85, the hearing provided under
Sec. 52.103, or in any other proceeding relating to this appendix,
in which interested persons have a right to request an adjudicatory
hearing.
VII. Duration of This Appendix
This appendix may be referenced for a period of 15 years from
September 19, 2019, except as provided for in Sec. Sec. 52.55(b)
and 52.57(b). This appendix remains valid for an applicant or
licensee who references this appendix until the application is
withdrawn or the license expires, including any period of extended
operation under a renewed license.
VIII. Processes for Changes and Departures
A. Tier 1 Information
1. Generic changes to Tier 1 information are governed by the
requirements in Sec. 52.63(a)(1).
2. Generic changes to Tier 1 information are applicable to all
applicants or licensees who reference this appendix, except those
for which the change has been rendered technically irrelevant by
action taken under paragraphs A.3 or A.4 of this section.
3. Departures from Tier 1 information that are required by the
Commission through plant-specific orders are governed by the
requirements in Sec. 52.63(a)(4).
4. Exemptions from Tier 1 information are governed by the
requirements in Sec. Sec. 52.63(b)(1) and 52.98(f). The Commission
will deny a request for an exemption from Tier 1, if it finds that
the design change will result in a significant decrease in the level
of safety otherwise provided by the design.
B. Tier 2 Information
1. Generic changes to Tier 2 information are governed by the
requirements in Sec. 52.63(a)(1).
2. Generic changes to Tier 2 information are applicable to all
applicants or licensees who reference this appendix, except those
for which the change has been rendered technically irrelevant by
action taken under paragraphs B.3, B.4, or B.5, of this section.
3. The Commission may not require new requirements on Tier 2
information by plant-specific order, while this appendix is in
effect under Sec. 52.55 or Sec. 52.61, unless:
a. A modification is necessary to secure compliance with the
Commission's regulations applicable and in effect at the time this
appendix was approved, as set forth in Section V of this appendix,
or to ensure adequate protection of the public health and safety or
the common defense and security; and
b. Special circumstances as defined in 10 CFR 50.12(a) are
present.
4. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix may
request an exemption from Tier 2 information. The Commission may
grant such a request only if it determines that the exemption will
comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.12(a). The Commission will
deny a request for an exemption from Tier 2, if it finds that the
design change will result in a significant decrease in the level of
safety otherwise provided by the design. The granting of an
exemption to an applicant must be subject to litigation in the same
manner as other issues material to the license hearing. The granting
of an exemption to a licensee must be subject to an opportunity for
a hearing in the same manner as license amendments.
5.a. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix may
depart from Tier 2 information, without prior NRC approval, unless
the proposed departure involves a change to or departure from Tier 1
information, or the TS, or requires a license amendment under
paragraph B.5.b or B.5.c of this section. When evaluating the
proposed departure, an applicant or licensee shall consider all
matters described in the plant-specific DCD.
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 Sec.
52.47(a)(28) to address aircraft impacts, requires a license
amendment if it would:
(1) Result in more than a minimal increase in the frequency of
occurrence of an accident previously evaluated in the plant-specific
DCD;
(2) Result in more than a minimal increase in the likelihood of
occurrence of a malfunction of a structure, system, or component
important to safety and previously evaluated in the plant-specific
DCD;
(3) Result in more than a minimal increase in the consequences
of an accident previously evaluated in the plant-specific DCD;
(4) Result in more than a minimal increase in the consequences
of a malfunction of a structure, system, or component important to
safety previously evaluated in the plant-specific DCD;
(5) Create a possibility for an accident of a different type
than any evaluated previously in the plant-specific DCD;
(6) Create a possibility for a malfunction of a structure,
system, or component important to safety with a different result
than any evaluated previously in the plant-specific DCD;
(7) Result in a design-basis limit for a fission product barrier
as described in the plant-specific DCD being exceeded or altered; or
(8) Result in a departure from a method of evaluation described
in the plant-specific DCD used in establishing the design bases or
in the safety analyses.
c. A proposed departure from Tier 2, affecting resolution of an
ex-vessel severe accident design feature identified in the plant-
specific DCD, requires a license amendment if:
(1) There is a substantial increase in the probability of an ex-
vessel severe accident such that a particular ex-vessel severe
accident previously reviewed and determined to be not credible could
become credible; or
(2) There is a substantial increase in the consequences to the
public of a particular ex-vessel severe accident previously
reviewed.
d. A proposed departure from Tier 2 information required by
Sec. 52.47(a)(28) to address aircraft impacts shall consider the
effect of the changed design feature or functional capability on the
original aircraft impact assessment required by 10 CFR 50.150(a).
The applicant or licensee shall describe, in the plant-specific DCD,
how the modified design features and functional capabilities
continue to meet the aircraft impact assessment requirements in 10
CFR 50.150(a)(1).
e. If a departure requires a license amendment under paragraph
B.5.b or B.5.c of this section, it is governed by 10 CFR 50.90.
f. A departure from Tier 2 information that is made under
paragraph B.5 of this section does not require an exemption from
this appendix.
g. A party to an adjudicatory proceeding for either the
issuance, amendment, or renewal of a license or for operation under
Sec. 52.103(a), who believes that an applicant or licensee who
references this appendix has not complied with paragraph VIII.B.5 of
this appendix when departing from Tier 2 information, may petition
to admit into the proceeding such a contention. In addition to
complying with the general requirements of 10 CFR 2.309, the
petition must demonstrate that the departure does not comply with
[[Page 23456]]
paragraph VIII.B.5 of this appendix. Further, the petition must
demonstrate that the change bears on an asserted noncompliance with
an ITAAC acceptance criterion in the case of a Sec. 52.103
preoperational hearing, or that the change bears directly on the
amendment request in the case of a hearing on a license amendment.
Any other party may file a response. If, on the basis of the
petition and any response, the presiding officer determines that a
sufficient showing has been made, the presiding officer shall
certify the matter directly to the Commission for determination of
the admissibility of the contention. The Commission may admit such a
contention if it determines the petition raises a genuine issue of
material fact regarding compliance with paragraph VIII.B.5 of this
appendix.
C. Operational Requirements
1. Changes to APR1400 DC generic TS and other operational
requirements that were completely reviewed and approved in the
design certification rulemaking and do not require a change to a
design feature in the generic DCD are governed by the requirements
in 10 CFR 50.109. Changes that require a change to a design feature
in the generic DCD are governed by the requirements in paragraphs A
or B of this section.
2. Changes to APR1400 DC generic TS and other operational
requirements are applicable to all applicants who reference this
appendix, except those for which the change has been rendered
technically irrelevant by action taken under paragraphs C.3 or C.4
of this section.
3. The Commission may require plant-specific departures on
generic TS and other operational requirements that were completely
reviewed and approved, provided a change to a design feature in the
generic DCD is not required and special circumstances, as defined in
10 CFR 2.335 are present. The Commission may modify or supplement
generic TS and other operational requirements that were not
completely reviewed and approved or require additional TS and other
operational requirements on a plant-specific basis, provided a
change to a design feature in the generic DCD is not required.
4. An applicant who references this appendix may request an
exemption from the generic TS or other operational requirements. The
Commission may grant such a request only if it determines that the
exemption will comply with the requirements of Sec. 52.7. The
granting of an exemption must be subject to litigation in the same
manner as other issues material to the license hearing.
5. A party to an adjudicatory proceeding for the issuance,
amendment, or renewal of a license, or for operation under Sec.
52.103(a), who believes that an operational requirement approved in
the DCD or a TS derived from the generic TS must be changed, may
petition to admit such a contention into the proceeding. The
petition must comply with the general requirements of 10 CFR 2.309
and must demonstrate why special circumstances as defined in 10 CFR
2.335 are present, or demonstrate compliance with the Commission's
regulations in effect at the time this appendix was approved, as set
forth in Section V of this appendix. Any other party may file a
response to the petition. If, on the basis of the petition and any
response, the presiding officer determines that a sufficient showing
has been made, the presiding officer shall certify the matter
directly to the Commission for determination of the admissibility of
the contention. All other issues with respect to the plant-specific
TS or other operational requirements are subject to a hearing as
part of the licensing proceeding.
6. After issuance of a license, the generic TS have no further
effect on the plant-specific TS. Changes to the plant-specific TS
will be treated as license amendments under 10 CFR 50.90.
IX. [Reserved]
X. Records and Reporting
A. Records
1. The applicant for this appendix shall maintain a copy of the
generic DCD that includes all generic changes that are made to Tier
1 and Tier 2, and the generic TS and other operational requirements.
The applicant shall maintain the sensitive unclassified non-
safeguards information (including proprietary information and
security-related information) and safeguards information referenced
in the generic DCD for the period that this appendix may be
referenced, as specified in Section VII of this appendix.
2. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix shall
maintain the plant-specific DCD to accurately reflect both generic
changes to the generic DCD and plant-specific departures made under
Section VIII of this appendix throughout the period of application
and for the term of the license (including any periods of renewal).
3. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix shall
prepare and maintain written evaluations which provide the bases for
the determinations required by Section VIII of this appendix. These
evaluations must be retained throughout the period of application
and for the term of the license (including any periods of renewal).
4.a. The applicant for the APR1400 design 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 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 periods of renewal).
B. Reporting
1. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix shall
submit a report to the NRC containing a brief description of any
plant-specific departures from the DCD, including a summary of the
evaluation of each departure. This report must be filed in
accordance with the filing requirements applicable to reports in
Sec. 52.3.
2. An applicant or licensee who references this appendix shall
submit updates to its plant-specific DCD, which reflect the generic
changes to and plant-specific departures from the generic DCD made
under Section VIII of this appendix. These updates shall be filed
under the filing requirements applicable to final safety analysis
report updates in 10 CFR 50.71(e) and 52.3.
3. The reports and updates required by paragraphs X.B.1 and
X.B.2 of this appendix must be submitted as follows:
a. On the date that an application for a license referencing
this appendix is submitted, the application must include the report
and any updates to the generic DCD.
b. During the interval from the date of application for a
license to the date the Commission makes its finding required by
Sec. 52.103(g), the report must be submitted semi-annually. Updates
to the plant-specific DCD must be submitted annually and may be
submitted along with amendments to the application.
c. After the Commission makes the finding required by Sec.
52.103(g), the reports and updates to the plant-specific DCD must be
submitted, along with updates to the site-specific portion of the
final safety analysis report for the facility, at the intervals
required by 10 CFR 50.59(d)(2) and 50.71(e)(4), respectively, or at
shorter intervals as specified in the license.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of May 2019.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2019-10715 Filed 5-21-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P