[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 68 (Wednesday, April 8, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19701-19706]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-07341]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 68 / Wednesday, April 8, 2020 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 19701]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 50
[Docket No. PRM-50-115; NRC-2017-0132]
Fire Protection Compensatory Measures
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; denial.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is denying
Petition for Rulemaking (PRM)-50-115, ``Petition for Rulemaking--Fire
Protection Compensatory Measures,'' dated May 1, 2017, submitted by
David Lochbaum and Paul Gunter (the petitioners) on behalf of the Union
of Concerned Scientists and Beyond Nuclear, respectively. The
petitioners request that the NRC issue regulations that establish
acceptable conditions for the use of compensatory measures (e.g., fire
watches, surveillance cameras) during periods when fire protection
regulations are not met, as well as define the maximum duration that
compensatory measures may be relied upon. The NRC staff concludes that
the petitioners did not present sufficient new information or arguments
to warrant the requested changes to the regulations in light of the
NRC's relevant past decisions and current policies. Therefore, the NRC
is denying PRM-50-115.
DATES: The docket for PRM-50-115 is closed as of April 8, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2017-0132 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of information for this action. You can
obtain publicly-available documents 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-2017-0132. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-
3463; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS
Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 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 Section IV, Availability of Documents.
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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pamela Noto, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, telephone: 301-415-6795, email:
[email protected], U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background and Summary of the Petition
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 2.802,
``Petition for rulemaking--requirements for filing,'' provides an
opportunity for any interested person to petition the Commission to
issue, amend, or rescind any regulation. The NRC received a petition
dated May 1, 2017, from David Lochbaum and Paul Gunter on behalf of the
Union of Concerned Scientists and Beyond Nuclear, respectively,
regarding the establishment of acceptable conditions for the use of
compensatory measures during periods when fire protection regulations
are not met. The NRC assigned Docket Number PRM-50-115 to this petition
and published a notice of docketing and request for public comment in
the Federal Register on October 6, 2017 (82 FR 46717).
Fire protection programs at U.S. commercial nuclear power plants
have the primary goal of minimizing both the probability of occurrence
and the consequences of fire. The fire protection regulations under 10
CFR 50.48, ``Fire protection,'' establish detailed requirements for
fire protection plans at U.S. commercial nuclear power plants. Under
Sec. 50.48(a), each operating nuclear power plant licensee must have a
fire protection plan that satisfies Criterion 3, ``Fire protection,''
of appendix A, ``General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants,'' to
10 CFR part 50, ``Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization
Facilities.'' The fire protection plan describes the overall fire
protection program and includes measures related to fire prevention,
automatic detection, suppression and response, as well as personnel
administrative requirements and the protection of safety-related
structures, systems, and components in the event of a fire. The fire
protection program for nuclear power plants uses a defense-in-depth
approach of administrative controls, fire protection systems and
features, and post-fire safe-shutdown capability to achieve the
required degree of reactor safety.
Licensees of nuclear power plants that were operating before
January 1, 1979, must meet the requirements of appendix R, ``Fire
Protection Program for Nuclear Power Facilities Operating Prior to
January 1, 1979,'' to 10 CFR part 50, except to the extent provided for
in Sec. 50.48(b). Licensees of facilities licensed to operate after
January 1, 1979, must meet the facility-specific fire protection
licensing basis that was reviewed and approved by the agency.
As an alternative to Sec. 50.48(b) or to the facility-specific
fire protection licensing basis, licensees may also adopt and maintain
a fire protection program that meets Sec. 50.48(c), ``National Fire
Protection Association Standard (NFPA) 805,'' which incorporates by
reference NFPA 805, ``Performance-Based Standard for Fire Protection
for Light Water Reactor Electric Generating Plants, 2001 Edition,''
with certain exceptions.
The petitioners stated that the current guidance documents
regarding compensatory measures are deficient due to the following
issues:
Issue 1: Compensatory Measure Guidance Documents Are Not Enforceable
Expectations
The petitioners assert that fire protection compensatory measures
guidance documents are not regulations and that they, therefore, convey
unenforceable expectations. As an
[[Page 19702]]
example, the petitioners describe an inspection at the Waterford Steam
Electric Station, Unit 3, in November 1995, where NRC inspectors
discovered that workers had revised procedures to define a continuous
fire watch from having someone in the area at all times to only having
a roving fire watch check the area every 15 to 20 minutes. The
petitioners assert that the NRC addressed the issue with a ``generic
non-answer'' and that no enforcement action was taken. In addition, the
petitioners note that the NRC issued: (1) Information Notice 97-48,
``Inadequate or Inappropriate Interim Fire Protection Compensatory
Measures,'' in July 1997, describing the discovery of a continuous fire
watch that had been improperly redefined; and (2) Regulatory Guide
1.189, Revision 2, ``Fire Protection for Nuclear Power Plants,'' in
October 2009, that included the definition of a fire watch. The
petitioners observe that the guidance in the information notices and
the regulatory guides are not NRC requirements or substitutes for
regulations; therefore, compliance with these documents is not
required.
Issue 2: Compensatory Measure Guidance Documents Are Not Clear
The petitioners observe that compensatory measure guidance
documents are not clear and, therefore, create confusion for licensees,
NRC inspectors and reviewers, and the public about what constitutes
acceptable compensatory measures for compliance with fire protection
regulations and the permissible durations of such measures. The
petitioners provide examples of instances in which the NRC regions
requested that NRC headquarters staff provide clarification of
compensatory measures. Petitioners also noted that NRC inspectors
frequently ask questions about the appropriateness and acceptability of
fire protection compensatory measures. In addition, the petitioners
assert that the available guidance and the lack of regulatory
requirements do not help NRC inspectors or industry workers determine a
reasonable time period to keep compensatory measures in place. In
particular, the petitioners assert that compensatory measures routinely
have been used for longstanding noncompliance with fire protection
regulations and that not all fire protection compensatory measures may
be acceptable for long periods of time.
Issue 3: Compensatory Measure Guidance Documents Were Not Developed
Through an Open Process
The petitioners assert that, because compensatory measure guidance
documents were not developed through an open process, the public did
not have opportunities to provide input on the acceptability of various
fire protection compensatory measures. In particular, the petitioners
assert that the public did not have opportunity to provide feedback on
the acceptability or the duration of fire protection compensatory
measures, as they had during the development of the NFPA 805
regulations in appendix R to 10 CFR part 50 and Sec. 50.48(c) via the
NRC's rulemaking process. The petitioners also assert that because fire
protection compensatory measures have been employed in lieu of
compliance with the regulatory requirements in appendix R to 10 CFR
part 50 and NFPA 805 for many years, the public's legal rights have
been infringed upon, and if compensatory measures will be used as a
long-term protection against fire risks, the public deserves an
opportunity to formally weigh in on their acceptability.
Petitioners' Requests
The petitioners assert that when violations of the NRC's fire
protection regulations are discovered, compensatory measures intended
to provide sufficient protection until compliance is restored have not
been properly established. Therefore, the petitioners request that the
NRC amend its regulations to include compensatory measures that would
provide enforceable requirements for licensees. In particular, the
petitioners request that the NRC issue a final rule that defines the
compensatory measures authorized for use and the conditions under which
such measures are required when the NRC's fire protection regulations
(e.g., Sec. 50.48 and Criterion 3 of appendix A to 10 CFR part 50) are
not met. In addition, the petitioners request that the final rule
define the maximum duration that compensatory measures may be relied
upon.
II. Public Comments on the Petition
A. Overview of Public Comments
The docketing notice for the PRM invited interested persons to
submit comments. The comment period closed on December 20, 2017. The
NRC received 7 public comment submissions that collectively contain 27
individual comments. The NRC reviewed and considered all comments in
its evaluation of the petition.
B. NRC Response to Public Comments
The NRC binned the comments on the petition into four categories.
The following discussion provides a high-level summary of each category
and the NRC's response to the binned comments, including--if
appropriate--a high-level summary of the basis for the response.
1. Enforceability of Guidance Documents
Comment: Two commenters do not agree with the petitioners'
assertion regarding enforceability because compensatory measures are
required by a facility's operating license (through a standard license
condition on fire protection). The fire protection license condition
contained in each power reactor operating license requires the licensee
to ``implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the approved
fire protection program as described in the updated final safety
analysis report, and as approved in the NRC safety evaluation reports .
. . .'' Failing to implement the compensatory measures would,
therefore, be a violation of the facility's license condition and
contrary to the updated final safety analysis report requirement, both
of which are enforceable.
NRC response: The NRC partially agrees with this comment. All
licensees are required to comply with the applicable regulations and
the facility operating license, which are enforceable. The NRC does not
agree that guidance documents are enforceable. The NRC issues guidance
to provide acceptable methods for meeting regulatory requirements.
Licensees may voluntarily rely on methods contained in guidance
documents to comply with regulations and the facility license, but the
methods themselves are not enforceable as a part of the guidance.
2. Clarity of Guidance Documents
Comment: Two commenters do not agree with the petitioners'
assertion regarding the clarity of guidance documents because facility-
specific requirements for compensatory measures are sufficiently clear
for licensees, the NRC, and the public. Section 50.48(a) requires each
facility to have a fire protection program that includes specific
features such as administrative controls. The fire protection program
is either included directly or is incorporated by reference into the
updated final safety analysis report for a facility. Expectations for
fire protection compensatory measures are explicitly described for each
facility, and are well-understood by the licensee and the NRC.
NRC response: The NRC agrees with this comment. The use of
compensatory measures is clearly described in each licensee's approved
fire protection program and in NRC guidance
[[Page 19703]]
documents. Additionally, the use of compensatory measures is discussed
in NRC generic communications. For example, (1) Information Notice 97-
48, ``Inadequate or Inappropriate Interim Fire Protection Compensatory
Measures,'' alerted licensees to potential problems associated with the
implementation of interim compensatory measures for degraded or
inoperable plant fire protection features, or degraded and inoperable
conditions associated with post-fire safe-shutdown capability; (2)
Regulatory Issue Summary 2005-07, ``Compensatory Measures to Satisfy
the Fire Protection Program Requirements,'' discusses how a licensee
with the standard license condition for fire protection may change its
approved FPP to use alternate compensatory measures; (3) NUREG/CR-7135,
``Compensatory and Alternative Regulatory MEasures for Nuclear Power
Plant FIRE Protection (CARMEN-FIRE),'' documents the history of
compensatory measures, details the NRC's regulatory framework
established to ensure that they are appropriately implemented and
maintained, and explores technologies that did not exist when the
current plants were licensed that may offer an effective alternative to
the measures specified in a licensee's approved fire protection program
and; (4) Inspection Manual Chapter 0326, ``Operability
Determinations,'' contains guidance on the use of compensatory
measures.
3. Development of Guidance Documents Through an Open Process
Comment: Two commenters do not agree with the petitioners'
assertion that guidance documents were not developed through an open
process because sufficient opportunities for public comment were
available in the development of related guidance documents and the
public had ample opportunity to participate. Specifically, Regulatory
Guide 1.189, Revision 2, ``Fire Protection for Nuclear Power Plants,''
which discusses treatment of fire protection compensatory measures, was
published for public comment under Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1214 in
April 2009, and the NRC responded to over 90 public comments.
NRC response: The NRC agrees with this comment. The NRC's policy is
to provide opportunity for public participation in the regulatory
guidance development process under Management Directive 6.6,
``Regulatory Guides.'' This is to collect input from external
stakeholders and allow for an open and collaborative environment. For
example, the NRC staff revised the final version of Regulatory Guide
1.189, Revision 2, taking into account comments received on Draft
Regulatory Guide DG-1214, which was published for public comment in
April 2009. (Revision 3 of Regulatory Guide 1.189 was subsequently
issued in February 2018 to incorporate editorial changes and align it
with current program guidance for regulatory guides. The changes were
intended to improve clarity and did not alter the Staff Regulatory
Guidance in Section C of the guide.)
4. List of Licensee Event Reports
Comment: Two commenters do not agree with the petitioners'
assertion that the list of licensee event reports in attachment 1 to
the petition is compelling testimony to the frequent need for fire
protection compensatory measures. The commenters state that, contrary
to the assertions in the petition, the licensee event reports show that
licensees were following their fire protection program requirements by
instituting fire watches when inoperable fire protection features
occurred or were discovered. The volume of licensee event reports
referenced is indicative of a program that provides little ambiguity or
flexibility in implementation. This is an illustration of the process
working as intended.
NRC response: The NRC agrees that the licensee event reports listed
in attachment 1 of the petition are indicative of regulations that
appropriately address the safety concern. The requirements of 10 CFR
50.72, ``Immediate notification requirements for operating nuclear
power reactors,'' and 10 CFR 50.73, ``Licensee event report system,''
apply to reporting certain events and conditions related to fire
protection at nuclear power plants. Licensees report to the NRC fire
events or fire protection deficiencies that meet the criteria of
Sec. Sec. 50.72 and 50.73, as appropriate under the requirements of
these regulations.
Additionally, one commenter identified unrelated concerns about the
NRC's regulations and practices that the NRC determined are outside the
scope of PRM-50-115.
Finally, several commenters provided general support for the
petition, recommending that the NRC should initiate rulemaking to
address the issues raised by the petitioners, but did not provide
supporting rationale for this recommendation.
III. Reasons for Denial
The NRC is denying the petition because the petitioners did not
present sufficient new information or arguments to warrant the
requested changes to the regulations in light of the NRC's relevant
past decisions and current policies. The remaining paragraphs of
Section III summarize the NRC's evaluation of the three main issues
identified in the petition.
Issue 1: Compensatory Measure Guidance Documents Are Not Enforceable
Expectations
The guidance documents referenced in the petition (i.e., regulatory
guides and information notices) are not directly enforceable. The NRC's
regulatory guides and information notices provide guidance to licensees
and inform licensees of operating experience on how to implement
specific parts of the NRC's regulations, techniques used by the NRC to
evaluate specific problems or postulated events, operating or
analytical experience, and data needed by the NRC in its review of
applications for licenses.
Historically, at the time of licensing of most currently operating
power reactors, compensatory measures were incorporated into the
licensee's technical specifications; accordingly, changes to
compensatory measures required NRC review and approval. Subsequently,
the NRC issued Generic Letter 86-10, ``Implementation of Fire
Protection Requirements,'' which described a process for relocating the
fire protection program, including management of compensatory measures,
into the final safety analysis report for a facility, and adding a
standard license condition to a facility's operating license that
requires the licensee to ``implement and maintain in effect all
provisions of the approved fire protection program as described in the
updated final safety analysis report, and as approved in the NRC safety
evaluation reports.'' Through the standard fire protection license
condition, a site's fire protection program still requires fire
protection compensatory measures for equipment that does not meet the
functionality requirements.
Section 50.48(a) requires each facility to have a fire protection
program; this provision stipulates what that program must contain and
includes administrative controls. The approved fire protection program
is either described directly in the updated final safety analysis
report or incorporated by reference. The licensee's commitments related
to fire protection compensatory measures (e.g., fire watches,
surveillance cameras) are contained within the fire protection program.
Therefore, failing to appropriately implement the fire protection
compensatory measures would be a
[[Page 19704]]
violation of the plant's operating license, which is enforceable. The
provisions of Sec. 50.48(a) require, among other things, that any
change to the approved fire protection program must meet Criterion 3 of
appendix A to part 50. Under 10 CFR 50.48(a)(3), a licensee must retain
each change to the fire protection program as a record until the
Commission terminates the license. The licensee's changes to the
approved fire protection program are subject to inspection, as
discussed in Inspection Procedure 71111.21N.05, ``Fire Protection Team
Inspection (FPTI).''
In April 1996, the NRC responded to a petition under 10 CFR 2.206,
``Requests for action under this subpart,'' by issuing Director's
Decision (DD)-96-03, 42 NRC 183 (1996), which concluded that fire
protection compensatory measures, as approved by the NRC on a facility-
specific basis, ``continue to ensure public health and safety.'' Since
this decision, the NRC has continued to evaluate fire protection
compensatory measures on a facility-specific basis. Thus, the current
framework ensures adequate protection of public health and safety.
Therefore, the NRC concludes that the petitioners' assertion that
compensatory measures guidance documents are unenforceable does not
raise any new significant safety or security concerns that would
support the request to amend the NRC's regulations in light of relevant
NRC past decisions and current policies.
Issue 2: Compensatory Measures Guidance Documents Are Not Clear
Section 50.48(a) requires each power reactor licensee to have a
fire protection program. This provision stipulates what the fire
protection program must contain and, as noted above, includes a
requirement for administrative controls. Through the fire protection
license condition, a licensee's fire protection program requires fire
protection compensatory measures for equipment that does not meet the
functionality requirements. The fire protection license condition
requires the licensee to ``implement and maintain in effect all
provisions of the approved fire protection program as described in the
updated final safety analysis report, and as approved in the NRC safety
evaluation reports.''
The required compensatory measures for fire protection systems and
equipment that do not meet the functionality requirements are
explicitly stated within each site's approved fire protection program.
These compensatory measures were originally incorporated into most
plant's technical specifications. Thus, the initial compensatory
measures, and any subsequent changes, were reviewed and approved by the
NRC. The NRC subsequently issued Generic Letter 86-10 and Generic
Letter 88-12, ``Removal of Fire Protection Requirements From Technical
Specifications,'' which formed the basis for licensee assessments that
provided the ability to make changes to approved fire protection
program's functionality and surveillance requirements, as well as to
the compensatory measures required for nonfunctional fire protection
systems and equipment.
The licensees could implement such changes under the regulatory
framework for fire protection programs that were removed from technical
specifications without the NRC's review and approval, provided that the
licensee performed an analysis that demonstrated the change would not
adversely affect the ability to achieve and maintain safe shutdown in
the event of a fire.
The NRC subsequently issued Information Notice 97-48, which
provided examples of NRC inspection findings of licensees implementing
inappropriate compensatory measures for nonfunctional fire protection
systems and equipment. This information notice also reinforced the
guidance provided to the NRC inspectors in Generic Letter 91-18, on the
resolution of degraded and nonconforming conditions affecting
structures, systems, and components relied upon for compliance with
Sec. 50.48.
In addition, Information Notice 97-48 reinforced the NRC's
expectations of the timeliness of corrective actions documented in
Generic Letter 91-18--that is, for structures, systems, and components
that are not expressly subject to technical specifications and are
determined to be inoperable, the licensee should assess the reasonable
assurance of safety. If the assessment assures safety, then the
facility may continue to operate while prompt corrective action is
taken. Generic Letter 91-18 states that the timeliness of the
corrective action should be commensurate with the safety significance
of the issue.
The NRC continued the expectation of timeliness of corrective
actions from Generic Letter 91-18 in Regulatory Issue Summary 2005-20,
``Revision to NRC Inspection Manual Part 9900 Technical Guidance,
`Operability Determinations & Functionality Assessments for Resolution
of Degraded or Nonconforming Conditions Adverse to Quality or Safety,'
'' which superseded Generic Letter 91-18. This expectation was further
clarified in Part 9900's superseding document, Inspection Manual
Chapter 0326, ``Operability Determinations & Functionality Assessments
for Conditions Adverse to Quality or Safety,'' which states,
When evaluating the effect of a condition on an SSC's capability
to perform any of its specified safety functions, a licensee may
decide to implement compensatory measures, as an interim action,
until final corrective action to resolve the condition is completed
. . .
In general, these measures should have minimal impact on the
operators or plant operations, should be relatively simple to
implement, and should be documented.
Conditions calling for a compensatory measure can place
additional burden on plant operators and inspectors should verify
the licensee addresses the conditions commensurate with its safety
significance per 10 CFR 50 Appendix B Criterion XVI.
It is important to note that the majority of long-term compensatory
measures that are/were in place for noncompliance with fire protection
regulations were put in place for regulatory issues that were the
subject of Enforcement Guidance Memoranda (see Enforcement Guidance
Memorandum 07-004, ``Enforcement Discretion for Post-Fire Manual
Actions Used As Compensatory Measures for Fire Induced Circuit
Failures,'' and Enforcement Guidance Memorandum 09-002, ``Enforcement
Discretion for Fire Induced Circuit Faults''), or for facilities that
were transitioning their licensing basis to meet the requirements of
Sec. 50.48(c). For facilities that are not transitioning their
licensing basis to Sec. 50.48(c), the deadline for compliance with the
referenced Enforcement Guidance Memoranda has expired. Therefore, where
a licensee is still relying on compensatory measures for the
noncompliances discussed in the Enforcement Guidance Memoranda, and
permanent corrective actions have not been taken, these instances would
be considered by the NRC for enforcement action.
For facilities that are transitioning their licensing basis to
Sec. 50.48(c), the compensatory measures would be removed once a
facility achieves full compliance with their new licensing basis. The
deadlines for achieving full compliance are detailed in each facility's
respective safety evaluation report and fire protection license
condition. Any required actions that have not been completed by the
deadlines stated in the safety evaluation report are considered by the
NRC for enforcement action.
Additionally, the NRC issued Regulatory Issue Summary 2005-07,
which informed licensees that alternate compensatory measures as
otherwise required by the approved fire protection
[[Page 19705]]
program may be used for a degraded or inoperable fire protection
feature under certain circumstances. The regulatory issue summary was
not meant to provide specific examples of acceptable alternate
compensatory measures. As stated in the regulatory issue summary, the
purpose was to discuss how a licensee, with the standard license
condition for fire protection, may change the approved fire protection
program to use alternate compensatory measures. The regulatory issue
summary also states that a licensee may change the approved fire
protection program to implement a different compensatory measure or
combination of measures. The licensee must perform a documented
evaluation of the impact of the proposed alternate compensatory measure
to the fire protection program and its adequacy compared to the
compensatory measure required by the fire protection program. The
documented evaluation must demonstrate that the alternate compensatory
measure would not adversely affect the ability to achieve and maintain
safe shutdown in the event of a fire. The regulatory issue summary
provides additional insights into what the documented evaluation should
consider, stating,
[t]he evaluation of the alternate compensatory measure should
incorporate risk insights regarding the location, quantity, and type
of combustible material in the fire area; the presence of ignition
sources and their likelihood of occurrence; the automatic fire
suppression and fire detection capability in the fire area; the
manual fire suppression capability in the fire area; and the human
error probability where applicable.
Additional guidance was provided in Regulatory Guide 1.189,
Revision 2, on what would constitute an acceptable evaluation to
determine that the change to the fire protection program would not
adversely affect the ability to achieve and maintain safe shutdown in
the event of a fire. Regulatory Guide 1.189, Revision 3, states that,
within the context of the standard fire protection license condition,
the phrase ``not adversely affect the ability to achieve and maintain
safe shutdown in the event of a fire,'' means to maintain sufficient
safety margins. The regulatory guide also states that, with sufficient
safety margins, the following applies:
a. Codes and standards or their alternatives approved for use by
the NRC are met.
b. Safety analysis acceptance criteria in the licensing basis are
met or proposed revisions provide sufficient margin to account for
analysis and data uncertainty.
Employing appropriate compensatory measures on a short-term basis
is an integral part of the NRC-approved fire protection program. The
NRC recognizes that some compensatory measures have been in place for
an extended period of time. However, this does not introduce a safety
concern.
The fire protection programs at nuclear power plants are built upon
the concept of defense in depth \1\ with layers of protective features.
The technical deficiencies being compensated for do not invalidate the
defense-in-depth approach. Further, licensees track fire protection
program deficiencies involving compensatory measures at their
respective nuclear plants. The NRC's resident inspectors review
corrective action programs on a daily basis and are aware of the
compensatory measures in place at reactor units. Additionally, the NRC
inspects a sample of these compensatory measures for adequacy during
routine fire protection inspections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Fire protection programs in U.S. nuclear power plants use
the concept of defense in depth to achieve the required degree of
fire safety by using echelons of protection from fire effects. The
three echelons for fire protection are: (1) Prevent the fire from
starting, i.e., plants maintain fire safety by taking measures to
minimize the likelihood that fires might occur; (2) rapidly detect,
control, and promptly extinguish those fires that do occur, i.e.,
plants establish fire protection systems (sprinklers, fire water
systems, etc.) to extinguish (and minimize the consequences of) any
fires that do occur; and (3) protect structures, systems, and
components important to safety so that a fire not promptly
extinguished by the fire suppression activities will not prevent the
safe shutdown of the plant, i.e., plants rely on redundant safety
systems (e.g., installing fire barriers) that are unlikely to be
damaged by a single fire.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, the NRC concludes that fire protection compensatory
measures guidance documents are clear and were not meant to provide
specific examples of acceptable alternate compensatory measures. As
stated in Regulatory Issue Summary 2005-07, a licensee with the
standard license condition for fire protection may change the approved
fire protection program to use alternate compensatory measures.
Issue 3: Compensatory Measure Guidance Documents Were Not Developed
Through an Open Process
It is the policy of the NRC that activities are undertaken in an
open and transparent manner; staff decisions are sound and consider the
need for and impact of proposed actions; and regulatory guidance will
be provided to identify acceptable methods for applicants and licensees
to meet applicable laws and regulations, when needed. The NRC views
openness as a critical element for achieving the agency's mission to
ensure the safe use of radioactive materials for beneficial civilian
purposes while protecting people and the environment. This is expressed
in Management Directive 6.6, ``Regulatory Guides,'' as an objective to
ensure that stakeholders (e.g., licensees, applicants, and members of
the public and Agreement States) and individuals and offices within NRC
all have an opportunity to consider and comment on a new or
substantively changed draft regulatory guide before it is issued as a
final (effective) Regulatory Guide. After considering the comments
received on a document, the NRC publishes the final version.
The NRC provided opportunities for public comment in the
development of guidance documents related to fire protection
compensatory measures, and the public had many opportunities to
participate. For example, Regulatory Guide 1.189, Revision 2, was
issued for public comment as Draft Regulatory Guide (DG)-1214 on April
21, 2009 (74 FR 18262). The NRC responded to 97 public comments on DG-
1214 on October 31, 2009 (74 FR 56673). The NRC held a public meeting
on May 20, 2009 to discuss comments and questions on DG-1214; and the
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards also held a meeting on October
9, 2009, to discuss comments and questions on DG-1214. As addressed
above, the staff revised the guidance document based on comments
submitted by the public. Revision 3 to Regulatory Guide 1.189 was not
issued for public comment because the changes were intended to improve
clarity and did not alter the Staff Regulatory Guidance in Section C of
the guide. A notice of opportunity for public comment on Regulatory
Issue Summary 2005-07 was not published because it is informational.
Therefore, the NRC does not agree with the petitioners' assertion
that compensatory measures guidance documents were not developed
through an open process.
IV. Availability of Documents
The following table provides information about how to access the
documents referenced in this document. The ADDRESSES section of this
document provides additional information about how to access ADAMS.
[[Page 19706]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADAMS accession No. or Federal
Date Document Register citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 24, 1986........................... Generic Letter 86-10, ML031150322
``Implementation of Fire
Protection Requirements''.
August 2, 1988........................... Generic Letter 88-12, ``Removal ML031150471
of Fire Protection Requirements
from Technical Specifications''.
November 7, 1991......................... Generic Letter 91-18, ML031140549
``Information to Licensees
Regarding Two NRC Inspection
Manual Sections of Resolution of
Degraded and Nonconforming
Conditions and on Operability''.
October 21, 1994......................... 1994 petition under 10 CFR 2.206. ML17311B356
April 3, 1996............................ DD-96-03, ``Director's Decision ML082401211
Under 10 CFR 2.206''.
July 9, 1997............................. Information Notice 97-48, ML070180068
``Inadequate or Inappropriate
Interim Fire Protection
Compensatory Measures''.
October 8, 1997.......................... Generic Letter 91-18, Revision 1, ML031200706
``Information to Licensees
Regarding Two NRC Inspection
Manual Sections of Resolution of
Degraded and Nonconforming
Conditions and on Operability''.
January 13, 2001......................... NFPA 805, ``Performance-Based Available at www.nfpa.org
Standard for Fire Protection for
Light Water Reactor Electric
Generating Plants''.
April 19, 2005........................... Regulatory Issue Summary 2005-07, ML042360547
``Compensatory Measures to
Satisfy the Fire Protection
Program Requirements''.
June 30, 2007............................ Enforcement Guidance Memorandum ML071830345
07[dash]004, ``Enforcement
Discretion for Post[dash]Fire
Manual Actions Used As
Compensatory Measures for Fire
Induced Circuit Failures''.
April 1, 2009............................ DG-1214, ``Fire Protection for ML090070453
Nuclear Power Plants''.
April 21, 2009........................... Notice of Issuance and 74 FR 18262
Availability of Draft Regulatory
Guide, DG-1214.
May 14, 2009............................. Enforcement Guidance Memorandum ML090300446
09[dash]002, ``Enforcement
Discretion for Fire Induced
Circuit Faults''.
May 6, 2009.............................. Notice of Meeting to Provide ML091240146
Overview and Discuss Comments
and Questions on Draft
Regulatory Guide DG-1214, ``Fire
Protection For Nuclear Power
Plants''.
June 10, 2009............................ Meeting Summary of May 20, 2009 ML091480283
Public Meeting Regarding Draft
Fire Protection Regulatory Guide
DG-1214.
October 20, 2009......................... ACRS Report on the Draft Final ML092880515
Revision 2 to Regulatory Guide
1.189 (DG-1214), ``Fire
Protection for Nuclear Power
Plants''.
October 31, 2009......................... NRC Responses to Comments on ML092580570
Draft Regulatory Guide 1.189,
Revision 2 (DG[dash]1214).
October 2009............................. Regulatory Guide 1.189, Revision ML092580550
2, ``Fire Protection for Nuclear
Power Plants''.
October 11, 2011......................... Staff Requirements-SECY-11-0032, ML112840466
``Consideration of the
Cumulative Effects of Regulation
in the Rulemaking Process''.
November 20, 2017........................ Inspection Manual Chapter 0326, ML16302A480
``Operability Determinations &
Functionality Assessments for
Conditions Adverse to Quality or
Safety''.
June 2015................................ NUREG/CR-7135, ``Compensatory and ML15226A446
Alternative Regulatory MEasures
for Nuclear Power Plant FIRE
Protection (CARMEN-FIRE)''.
May 1, 2017.............................. Petition for Rulemaking (PRM-50- ML17146A393
115).
October 6, 2017.......................... Petition for Rulemaking; Notice 82 FR 46717
of Docketing and Request for
Comment.
December 20, 2017........................ Public Comments on Petition for ML18088A076
Rulemaking: Fire Protection
Compensatory Measures.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Conclusion
The NRC completed an evaluation of the petition and determined that
the issues in the petition did not raise any significant safety or
security concerns. In addition, the NRC concludes that the arguments
presented in the petition do not support the requested revisions to its
regulations. Finally, the NRC reaffirms that its existing regulations
continue to provide reasonable assurance of adequate protection of
public health and safety. For the reasons cited in this document, the
NRC is denying PRM-50-115.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of April, 2020.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2020-07341 Filed 4-7-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P