ML19338F451
| ML19338F451 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/24/1980 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19338F445 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-45FR65466, RULE-PR-50 NUDOCS 8010200374 | |
| Download: ML19338F451 (4) | |
Text
-
04 0UTLINE OF VALUE-IMPACT STATEftENT FOR N W ADVANCE NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING CONCERNING
/
CONSIDERATION OF DEGRADED OR MELTED CORES IN SAFETY REGULATION I. Introduction This value-impact statement provides preliminary cost or burden informa-tion to assist in determining the propriety of the action proposed.
The reader should recognize, however, that in the context of health, safety,
~
and environment, the usefulness of cost information is limited; health, safety, and environmental protection are not economic considerations since they concern quality and operating confidence, not monetary value.
How-ever, where alternative means exist for realizing equivalent benefits in regulatory action, cost is given important consideration.
't 1
II. Proposed Action A.
Description Rulemaking,-currently under consideration, would provide the regulated industry and the-public an_ opportunity to advise on the content of a regulation requiring improvements to cope with degraded core cooling and to cope with accidents not covered adequately by traditional safety analyses.
Specifically, it is the intent of this rulemaking to determine to what extent, if any, reactor plant designs and safety analyses should consider reactor accidents beyond those considered 1
--801ogg 9 3 ys}
in u t at design basis accident approach, including a range of loss-of-core-cooling, core damage, and core-melting events both inside and outside historical design envelopes.
Furthermore, it is the intent of this rulemaking to require more coherent consiceration of this range of core damage events in the design of both normal operating systems and engineered safety features.
B.
Need for the Proposed Action A February 8,1930 memorandum from S. J. Chilk to W. J. Dircks stated that the Commission had approved the Near-Term Operating License (NTOL) requirements of the TMI Action Plan.
NT9L item II.B.8 requires that a "..... notice of intent to conduct rulemaking on requirements for design features for accidents involving severely damaged cores..."
be issued.
By memo from W. J. Dircks dated February 19, 1980, the Office of Standards Development (SD) sas assigned lead responsibility for this work and was requested to implement this portion of the Action Plan.
C.
Value-Impact of the Proposed Action Insufficient information exists at this time to estimate either tne benefits or the burden of any design or operational improvements that may be imposed to deal with degraded core cooling.
An advance notice of rulemaking is intendeo to obtain the information from which benefit and burden judgements can be made.
Accordingly, an assessment of value-impact concerning the proposed action will be held in abeyance 2
until industry and public coments to advarce notice of -
. :.i:ing have'been received.
D.
-Decision'~on the Proposed Action The Commission has directed advance notice of proposed rulemaking.
Therefore, this decision has been made.
Decision cancerning what improvements should be made to cope with degraded core cooling will be made after public comments are reviewed and evaluated.
Similarly, cost information referred to by this preliminary value-impact statemert outline will be prepared using cost data received from public comments.
III. Technical Approach
-The advance notice of rulemaking questions suggest several design improve-ments to cope with various aspects of degraded core cooling.
The questions request that industry and the public suggest additional or alternative improvements.
From the public comments, technical approaches will be presented at the proposed rulemaking stage.
IV. Procedural ~ Approach Since rulemaking has been directed'by the Commission, procedural alterna-tives have not been considered.
V. Statutory Considerations A.
NRC Authority A proposed rule on this subject would fall under the authority ol sections 103b.(3) and 1610.- of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
3
e-.
. - ~
~
.- =-
' B.
Need for NEPA Assessment
~
The proposed action is not a major action as defined by 10 CFR 51.5(d)(3) and does not require an environmental impact statement.
VI. Relationship to Other Existing or Proposed Regulations or Policies
-Recognizing the need for prompt action to correct specific design defi-ciencies uncovered during the Three Mile Island accident and subsequent investigations, the-Commission is' publishing a proposed interim rule that
-would require'certain. interim improvements to better cope with degraded reactor cores.
The advance notice of rulemaking states that the proposed interim rule should not be viewed as prejudging the final action concern-ing the advance notice of proposed rulemaking, and that industry /public comments should be framed accordingly.
Similarly, in parallel with work on degraded core cooling, Commission action is under way in related areas such as the siting of nuclear powe'r reactors, emergency planning and acci-dent consideration under NEPA.
VII. Summary and Conclusions An advance notice of proposed'.rulemaking willIbe prepared.
Reference
-1.
R. B. Minogue's memo ofJApril 13,.1977, contains an enclosure, "SD Staff Guidance 1for Preparation of;Value-Impact Statements,"'to be used by-SD
-staffrin preparing valuerimpact statements.
This guidance was-used in preparing.tFe foregoing value-impact' statement.
4 LS_