ML20011D587

Responds to Urging Commission to Allocate Resources to Ensure That Advanced Reactor Designs Evaluated Equitably & in Timely Manner

ML20011D587
Person / Time
Issue date:	12/06/1989
From:	Remick F NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:	Stallings R HOUSE OF REP.
Shared Package
ML20011D588	List: ML20011D587 ML20011D589
References
CCS, NUDOCS 8912280036
Download: ML20011D587 (32)

Text

_

['

'o UNITED STATES 8

o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

{

WASHINGTON, D. C,20065 k.....

December 6, 1989 CHAIRMAN The Honorable Richard H. Stallings United States House of Representatives Washington, D. C.

20515

Dear Congressman Stallings:

I am responding to your letter of October 30, 1989 in which you urg2d the Commission to allocate the necessary reso,urces to ensure that all advanced reactor designs submitted for design certifica-tion are evaluated equitably and in.a timely manner.

In the Commission's final rule on licensing reform (10 CFR Part'52), we adopted a certification process (design certification by rule-making) that would allow the Commission to consider.the broadest range of design certification requests, including those submitted ~

by foreign corporations, and to allow the Commission greater flexibility in establishing hearing procedures..

Our intent was to ensure that our certification process would be both equitable and efficient.

We also noted in the Statement of Considerations accompanying the rule that priority would be given to designs for which there is a i

demonstrated interest in the United States (see enclosed Federal Register Notice dated April 18, 1989 - p. 15375).

This language was included to assist the Commission in prioritizing'its review i

of advanced designs.

Where a clear. domestic preference exists for a particular design, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission-(NRC) will l

assign the highest priority to review ofLthat. design in order to ensure early identification of the regulatory requirements for the design and timely notice of the design's acceptability from the regulatory standpoint.

Although there have been some indications that evolutionary light water reactor designs may be preferred in-the short term, there has been no domestic preference expressed for any particular design.

In the absence of such interest..we are proceeding to review those designs that have-been submitted-

.for review as they have been received.-

In all cases, these re-views have been and wi.ll continue to be conducted in'a fair manner-based on safety and technical considerations, subject only to the constraints imposed by current resource limitations and our obligations to meet our other regulatory responsibilities.

-0P I t 8912280036 891206 Pi)R COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDC aTvs

c For your information, I am also enclosing a listing of advanced designs that have been submitted to date or are anticipated by the NRC.

The list indicates the staff's estimated completion dates.

If you need any further information, please contact me.

Sincerely,

^

j/

_ s F

t J. Remick ing Chairman

Enclosure:

1.

April 18, 1989 Federal Register Notice 2.

Status of Review of Advanced Reactor Designs Submitted to the NRC.

cc:

Rep. Sid Morrison l

t

ENCLOSURE 1

'13372 Federal Resister / Vol. 54. No. 73 / Tuesday. April 18, 1989 / Rules and Rerulations 1

Paprwork Red.ction Act of 1980 (44 roa evav' tm inspoessanoes coerrac r:

pubbe workshop, this time on the text of s

U.S.C. 3501 at seg.).

Steven Crockett. Attorney.Of5ce of the the proposed rule.8 Eneastive Order 12372 General C.ounsel. telephone (301) 492-During the second. 75.dey comment 1900, on procedural matters or Jerry penod. the Comnussion received over 70 nie program /settvity is listed in the Wilson. Office of Nuclear Regulatory uts of comments, ranging from one page Catalog of Federal Domeouc Assistance Research, telephone (301) 492-3729. on lettere to multi. paged documents one of under No.10.028 and is subject to technical matters. U.S. Nuclear which included an annoteted rewnte of Executve Order 1237L which requires Regulatory Commission. Washington, the whole rule. no commenters intergovernmental consultstion with DC 20555.

state and local officials. (See 7 Cm Part Included the Department of Energy suppt.sasserfamy neronasanose (DOE). agencies and offices in the states 3018 Subpart V.)

1. Backsmund of Connecticut. ladiana. New York. and

! Jet cf Subjects la 9 CFR Part 77 North Carohna, the Nuclear Utihty Animal diseases. Bison, Cattle, The Commission has long sought Management and Resources Council Transportatior. Tuberculosis.

nuclear power plant standardisanon (NUMARC), the American Nuclear and the enhanced safety and licensing Energy Council. Westinghouse. General Accordingly, we are edopting as a reform which standardisation could Electric. Combustion Engineering. Stone final rule, without change, the interta make possible. For more than a decade, a Webster, the U.S. Chamber of rule that amended e CFR Part 77 and the Commisalon has been adding Commerce. the Union of Concerned that was pubhshed at 64 FR 1146-1144 provisions to to CFR Part 80 and Part 2 Scientists (UCS), the NucleM ca lanuary 12.1989, that allow for limited s'egrees of Information and Resource W e Arther6ty: 21 U.St 111.114.114a.116-117 etandardisabon. and for es many years, (NIRS), the Ohio Citizens for un 121 usb. taaf; 7 QR 117.1st and the Commiselon has been proposing Responsible Ecerty(OCRE) the art.tidl.

legislation to Congmes on the subject.

Maryland Nuclear Safety Coahtion. and Done at wohington. DC. this 12th day of De Commission was frequently asked several utilities, corporenons, public w 1see by Members of Congmes to what extent interest groups, and individuals. All the

(

mlmror.A$r les station on the subject was necessary, comunents may be viewed in the w classe unalandMan #eol:A and in doing the analyste necessary to agency's public document room.

reply to these questions, the no Commission has carefully

• ". s"o#'"

Commission came to believe that much considend all the comments and wishes

[7R Doc. eta m17.ea nas am) of what it sought could be accomplished to express its sincere appreciation of the anmeesos** **

within its current statutory authonty, often considerable efforts of the Due the Commiulon embarked on commenters. While the broad outlines.

NUCLEAR REGULATORY etandardization rulemaking, and even many of the details, of the l

COMMISSION The rulemaking process has been proposed rule remained unchanged in lenfJiy and highly public. A year and a the finalrule, few sections of the 10 CFR Parts 2. 50. 81. 82, and 170 bau ago, the Commission announced its proposed rule have escaped revision in intent to pureue standardisation light of the comments, and some have t

c a sts u cet rulemaking inits Poucy Statement on been thorou8hlY revised. In the Nuclear Power Plant Standardization (52 remainder of this section of this final Earty Site permite; Standarti Deelgri FR 34884: September 15.1987).De rule preeable,the Commission makes Corufications: and Combined Licensee Pohey Statement set forth the prsaciples two general responses to comments and for Nuclear Power Reactore that would guide the rulemaking and then summarises both the comments c.camev: Nuclear Regulatory Provided for a forty.five. day comment and its responses to them. In Section il

?

Comnussion.

penod on the Policy Statement. On of thle finas rule preamble, the October 20.1987, about mid.wey Commission responds to comments on acmost Finalrule.

through the comment period the NRC the chiefissues raised by the comments.

suasesAny:The Nuclear Regulatory staff held a public workshop on the While Section 11often touches on the i

Commission is now adding a new part Polley Statement. During the Workshop.

broad policies which lie behind the rule.

l to its regulanons which provides for the staff presented a detailed outhne of maders wis to know more about issuance of early site permits, standard de proposed rde and amed those Wd po 'cies may consuh ee design certificanons, and combined preliminary questions about it. A statement of considerations which was construction permits and operating transenpt of the workshop may be found published with the proposed rule. In Licenses with conditione for nuclear in the Commission's public document Section Ill, which proceeds section.by.

p;wer reactors, ne new part sets out room. Celman Building. 2120 L Street.

section through the final rule, the the revtew procedures and licensmg NW, Washington. DC. After a lengthy Commission notes minor changes and requirements for applicauona for these internal consideration of the comments offers some minor clarifications of the new licenses and certifications. no mee ved on the Policy Statement and meaning of some provisions. For a final acuen is intended to achieve the the outhne of the rule presented at the complete record of the differences early resolution of licensing issues and Workshop, and after public briefings of enhance the safety and whability of the Commission and the Advisory s ci,se na i.e ey med nuclear power plants.

Committee on Reactor Safeguarde

% - ana,m e e, mas pee se try oommeewe se tw (ACRS). the Commission issued a P"*d'******h***'**'u"**"""

antCTive Datt:May 18.1989-proposed rule (53 m 32000: Auguest 23.

e3,Ny",",ujier"Me*e M seevise 8

Acci.eea: Documents relstive to this 1988) and provtded for a sixty. day Dets) u re nei pne se unpeneses of me rek.

final rule mey be examined and copied comment penod.The comment period

• as "* =W *leh *** *e NRC wouM eessurese me for a fee at the NRC Pubbe Document wee extended to 75 days on October 24

• d""*6"****'"""*"'-

Room. 2120 L Streei NW, Washington.

1988 (53 m 41800b Mid.way through

' d '" d* **j'e',7 M I N 8

DC.

that pened the NRC staff again held a commm eed.

se agter T voCM. No. 73 / Tuesday. April 1L 1989 / Rules and Regulations _ _ _ - _ -

_ _ _ _. _ _. - - - -- - - - - ~ ' - - ' ~ '

18373 i

between the proposed rule and the Anal ruid.rnders may consult the States. On the one hand the co:parenve tent of the Anal rule, which Coaumssion is vigorously accused af scope onlyin high)y restrteted circumstances.

promotmg the nuclear adustry and is avadable in the agency's public document room, shuttaglocal governments and As to ht.w designs should be eernfied.

ladendual cinzens out of the hoename most commentm think the Cosumssion has authonry to cernfy either by rule or i

Two Genern/Aesponses ao Comments process. On the other hand the Before euauning up the comments and Conumasion is told tha by beense. However. some commenters the Comnussion's responses to them, the process is "the reason"t the boensms for "the loss of m advantepes in oeruficadon by I

Comuussion wishes to make clear what the nuclear opton", and that reform of licene.OCRL forinstance says that it has not tried to do in this rulemaking.

that process is the " sine que non" of the ceruficat on bylicense is more First, although this is an important nabibty of that opbon.

appropnete. and some industry rulernaking, it does not resolve au the Certaaly. the Commission hopes that commenters think that more protecuens safety, aonronmental, and political this rule wdi have a b are avellable to the bolder of a design issues facing nuclear power. The the licensma process. eneficial effect on In other words.

licenu then are evallable to the Comnussion received urgm' ss to the Commission hopes that effort has

" holder" of a design rule. Some undertake deep reforms before too not bun wested on a rule which wn!

commenters prefer certincation by not out to secure. - "- 'mmission is licenu becaun they bel? eve that a never be used. But the Co this finalrule. na Commission was, lacance, urged to streamhne the heartng viability of the tad t,, the heanns on a license has to be a formal r

or to shot the adjudication.

procedures in to CFR Part & Subpart C.

restructure the utilities

• l1 abilities under general public out.

future of nuclear

& Analrule reDecu the the Price Anderson Act. decide once power depends not only on the licensing Comedesion's long standing preference and for allwhat safe criteria shaU be procen but also on economic trends and for ceruficauon by rulemaking (see the applied to su future p ants, solve the events.the safe and rehability of the old to CFR Part 30. Appendia 0, problem of naclear weste, turn su health planta, political es, and much else.

graph 7 and safety regulation-not just the h Comadssion's intent with this

@nns proc)e. and for cert Scation dures which while they hiRC'o.-ever to the states reconsider rulemakingis only to have a sensible permit formal procedures when needed, whether economic considerations and stable procedural framework in do not assume that formal procedures should ever enter into safety decisions, place for the consideranon of future are the best means for resolving every desi ug,y g,,,'

conductlocalrunnmg referenda on

s. and to make it possible to whether a given nuclear power plant reso ve safety and envsronmentalissues Nah, the dupat Mmme am should be built, and have Congress before plants am built. rather than after, t

the coinmenwn cone.em the i

directly review designs. In sum. the Summaryof the Comments and the consequences of standardisation and

\\

Cotrassion was urged to do everything Commsmn's Apponses ohr devices for earl resolution of beforeit did a licensms tems for licensing Howmr. th Commission has stuck The comments on the reposed rule process. One commenter believes that.

to the sunple aim in this rulemaking of m charactersted both their broad oncea providing procedures for the agreement that standardisation and bcense. plant is built under a combined them need be no hearms et au standardization of nuclear power plante early resolution of licensing issues are befom operetion begms.Sevmlof hw end more generally for the early desirable. and by their often deep commenters charactense the proposed ruolution of safety and environmental differences on what kinds of designs rule's provision for an opportuni fora issues in licensmg proceedings. De should be certified. how they should be hearms just before operation as old Canumssion has declined to he the fate comfied. and what consequences cernfication shou two steplicensms process under a elthis rulemakms to the progress of the licensms process'ld have for the different name. Othere believe not only agency's many othet ongoing efforts.

such as revision of the agency's hearms As to what kinde of designs should be that there should be such a hearms but also tho' resolution ofissues in earlier

.i procedures. Implementation of the cefuSed.except for the very few who policy Statement on Safety Goals (51 FR opposed anylicensing of any nuclear proceen. age does not entail any 1

restriction on the issues which may be 2002a; August 21.1986), development of power plant. no commenter opposes the raised in the beenne after construction.

techruques of analysis of risk and cost.

ceruficabon of designs which differ and preparation for the licansms of a significantly from the designs which Many of hoe commenters attribute to high level weste repository. no hnal have bun built thus far: but some: UCS,the Commission an intent to do away rule necessarily touches on substance for metance, say that only " advanced" with public parucipation in the licensing whenever it sets forth requirements for designs should be certiBed, and many, he Commission has given snore Process.

including UCS. DOL and Westm the technical content of applications for say that only designs for whole consideration to this issue than to any

ouse, early site permits, design certficauona, should be cerufled.

other procedural question raised by me nts i

or combined licenses or discusses the

(

While not withholding certification proposed rule. As a result. the proposed appbcabihty of esusting standards to new designs and new situstions. But fmmincomplete designs or designs rule's provisions on beermes just before sveo here, the Commission has avoided which are not advanced. the Anal rule operation have been revised in the fmal utebbshing new safety or has moved a long way from the position rule (the revised provisions are envtronmental standards, although the the Comnussion took in the legislative discussed in more detall below).

l Commission may choose to adopt proposalit made shortly before this Howmt, the final rule still provides for edditional safety standards apphcable rulemaking began. There. certification an oppo.1 unity for a heanns on limited to new designs prior to the advent of was held out only for evolutionary light issues before operation under a design certificauons.

water designs, but was permitted for the combined license. But the mere fact of l

Second. many saw this rule as the design of any"snalorportion"of a plant. this opportunity does not mean that the occasion for arguments over the future ne final rule provides for certification rule is hiding the old two step process viabihty of nuclear power in the United of advanced designs and permite under a different name.By far the cernficaton of designs ofless than full yester part of the issues which in the past have been considered in operating i

i

~

.,,....+-*7'et*T""*

'l5374 Federal R:gletor / Vol St. No. 73 / Tuesday. April 18, 1989 / Rules and Regulatiens licenn heannes w:uld. und:r the gew As is noted above. the rule, unkke the is already secured. See 10 Cm 80.109 rule, be considered at the combined legisletive proposals which proceded it.

and UCS v. A7tC. &24 F.2d 108 (D.C. Cir, licean state or in a ceruncanon provides for cerencanon of advanced tes7). However, initial ceruncauon does proceedag. includg.g the bulk of designs. However. it also provides for not involve backfitting. Desipers will.

emergency planrung usues. Similarly, cernficecon of evolutionary hght water of course, stnve for a cost effecuve the mere fact that any heanns pnor to desips. N Comaussion's legislative design. but the Commission dochnes to opersuon would be hrnited does not Proposals on standardnation beve incorporate a ecst benefit test in the mean that the Commuoion is attempung always focused on these designs. on the standards for cernficanon.

(

to remove the pubbe from the hcenoms grounds that the bght. water designs now i

processes rule does not prevent the in opersuon provide a high degree of

c. Ryu u on Scom of Dnip and public from perucipatmgin the protection to public health and safety.

,,p g fyPe, i

resolubon of any operstag bconse issue. Moreover, the Comaussion does not in the statement of consideranone It simply moves the bulk of the issues up bebeve that the requirement in some front m the licensing process to the cases for a prototype is such a burden.

secompanying the proposed rule.the Cornmission noted that the proposed design ceruficaton. sarly site pernut.

Whatever burden having to test a rule pernutted corn $ cation of and combinedlicense parts of the Prototype may be, the burden may be lacomplete designs only in limited cases.

p,,,,,,

lessened by agreemes is of cost.sharms l

IL De Pelocipallesues assong utdities and other organisations, while the legislation the Commi=wn and by beansing the prototype for had proposed to the 100th Congress had i

J.RequimmentsforApplications for comunercial operation. !t is well to been less strtngent about scope nf 3,,jp c,fg,pe,g,,,

remember also that, under the rule.

design.The Comnussioninvited i

Because design cernfication is the key prototype testmg is required only for onement on whether the Analrule procedural device in Part 82 for bringmg cernfication or an unconditional Anal abound return to the pobey reRected in about enhanced safety and early design approval. If at all. A Anal design the proposed legislation. DOE.

resoluton oflicensms issues. the approval under to Cm Part 82.

Westinghouse. and UCS, among others, Comnussion begins its discussion of the Appenda O(formerlyin Part 80) can be arpe that ondy designs of complete pnneipalissues with responses to granted sub}ect to cond tions requinns power plants-excluding site specific comments on the pro osed rule proto testas. See to Cm Part 62.

elements of course. ehould be cerufled.

requtrements for opp cations for Appen ' O. paragraph 5.Moreover, a NUMARC.bowewr, advocates a return licensed prototype may be npbcated.

to the policy of the legislation proposed

a. " Advanced" Designs

b. Requirement to Address Unresolved to the tooth Congress.One engmeenns firm argues that requiring complete Safetyissues and Safety Goals designs would hmit market forces that ne proposed rule provided for ceruficauon both of evolutionarylight*

Several commenters object to the could contribute to standardisation. '

water desips, that is. improved proposed rule's requirement that De Analrule is own som stringent versions of the baht water desips now applicants for ceruficauon propose about completeness of design than the in operauon. and of " advanced" designs. technicaltwelutions of Unresolved proposed rule wasas fmalrule's Safety issues and high, and me&um.

Provisions on scope, see i SL47. reflec.t that is, designs which d ifer significantlY from the evolutionarylight water prianty Genenc Safety issues.This a policy that certain designs. especially l

designs, or which incorporete. to a wquirement. and similar ones relatmg to designs which are evolutions of light.

greeter extent than evolutionary hght.

probabihetic risk assessments and the water designe now in operation should water designe do. simphfied. Inherent.

Commission's Three Mile Island not be certified unless they include a3 of a

passive, or other innovanve means to requirements for new plants. 30 Cm a plant which can affect safe operaton accomphsh their safety functions (the 50.34(f). wm announced in the of the plant except its site specific distinction between evolutionary light.

Commission's Severe Accident Policy elements. See i S2.37(b). Examples of Statement (50 m 32138: August a.1965) designs which an evolutions of weter designs and advanced designs is I

6scussed at greaterlength below). The and in the Commission's Poucy currently operstmg hght water designs proposed rule required that some Statement on Standardi stion(52 m am GeneralElectne's ABWR.

34484: September 15.1987). Some Westinghouse's SP/00, and Combustion advanced designs could not be certified until full.seale prototypes of them were commentm callit " inappropriate" to Engineenng's System a0+. Full scope built and tested. While sgreeing with the impose this burden on apphcants, may also be required of certain requirement for prototype testma of Othere say that no ruolution of one of advanced designs. asmely, the some edvanced designs, several these issues should be imposed on a

" passive" hght.weier designs such as design unless the resolution had passed General Electnc's S8WR and commenters. UCS prominent among a cost. benefit test.

Westinghouse's Apt 00. Considerations them. say that ceruficauon should be The Commission believes that it is not of safety. not market forces, constitute l

held out only to edvanced designs. UCS inappropriate to require that an argues that without such a limitation on applicant for certification show either the basis for the final rule's requirement that these designs be full-scope designs.

t the designs which could be offered up that a particular issue is not relevant to long exponence with operstag light.

i for certficecon.the proposed rule the design proffmo in the opphcation, weter designs more than adequately would disenminate against the or that the applicant hasin hand a demonstrates the adverse safety impact development of advanced designs of design specific resolution of the issue which portions of the balance of plant greeter safety, because, given the choice (the applicant is of course not regrJred can how on the nuclear island. Given between seeking cernfication of a to propose a genene resolution of the familist design and seeking cerufication issue). As to cost benefit tests, the this experience, certification of these designe must be based on a of a desip which the Commission might Commission will of course apply them to require to be tested in a full. scale the resolution of safety issues where the considerstion of the whole plant. or else the cerufi:stions of those designs will prototype, an applicant would choose to resolations are being imposed on lack that degree of finality which should avoid hovmg to build a prototype.

existing plants and adequate protection be the mark of certification.

-o

l Tederal Resistor / Vol. 64. No. 73 / Tuesday. April St.1939 / Rules and Retrulations 15375 However. the commission has not functions such as passive decay best edepted UCS's position that no design of removal and reecavity control, which provisinos in to CFR Part 30 for trensfer incomplete scope could ever be uruned.nore is no reason to conclude have not been beensed and opereted in orrevocation of a heense.See to CIR the United States. See 6d.

80.a0 and 30.100.However, a rule that there could cent be e desip which cerufying a design does not.etnetly protects the nuclearinirod agemet

& CatBeahn by Rukaaking

%aking belong to the desiper.

adverse effects caused by events in the ne proposed rule provided for design refore,such a rule cannot be balance of plant.De Anal rule therefore cert 2 cation by rulemaking.Here the transiened or mvoked by ediu6catory j

provides the opportunity for certification proposed rule was in socord with the enforcement. Applying i 80.30 in 1

i of designs of less than complete scope, if old to CF'R part 80. Appendia O.

particular, to a rule cernfring a design they belong to the class of advanced Paragraph 7 (this paragraphis now would be akin to pving the vendor of designs. See 6 52.47(b). Examples of being replaced by Subpart 8 of part 82)-

the design a potest. but the Censussion designs in this class include the passive However. in the notice of p bas no authority to leave potents.

rulmaking. the camwaa'a=roposed Nonetheless,the vender whose desip light.weier designs mentioned above invimd and non light.wster desips such as coments on whethe oortscaem is eartined by ruleis not without General Electnc's PRISM. Rockwell's should be by Doense rather than rule.

protectica. Section SRA3(a),the SAFR. and General Atomic's hOfTGR.

Alhough es Commission expressed Administrative procedum Aet, and, t

But ham too the rule sets a high some doubts on the matter.comm ultimately, judicial review protect the standard: Ceruncation of an advanced genmuy agm est he a=='aa'entere vendor against arbitrary n===d=aat or r

a= bas desip of incomplete scope will be pven the authortry to boense designs. Some reaission of the certification rule. sad i

only after a showms.using a fuD scale industry commente and some public he kw of patents and trade emeu prototype, that the balance of plant intmst groups shke 30 furtherand protects the vendor against malawful use -

cannot sign 2camly affect the safe argue that cernficahon bylicme is of the design. In order to giw the vendor operouse of the plant, preferable. industry commenters arguing more oppormaity to tmat elements of Standard sanon along these hnes may this position beheve that the rights and the desip as trade secrets. the final rule indeed hmit some market forces, obhganone wWch ausch 2 a henee am provides that propnetary informaten cleamt &an son wWeh anach to a containedin an apphcaboa for design harticularly those which encourage ahly differentated range of prcducts, winstancs,a hcenseis ponessed cert $ cation shau be given the same However, the final rule's requirements h,'$',","] 8",d.

s treatment that such information would on scope in no way hmitinnovative t

" I" 8 P****"8 ** ""

errengements amo vendoreand entity's consent. Some public interest apPu"cauon fw a constmcuan pnnu architect 4ngmeere or bringmg new Q',]i run88Mg, Id*****8 '

by an operating license under 10 CFR Part desips before the Cominission.

j;,,

30.See referenc$ SLgt. Moreover, as apphcant

%e final ruleis clearet than the a license would have to be a forma ing e design cert 1Acetion and proposed rule wee in identifying those adjudication seeking to use a designer other than the designs which cannot be ceraned De Commission continues to believe d"I 8"AI'A 88AI'd Ih8 8

that cert 2 cation by rule is breferable to certification would have to comply with vothout a pro 6 ram of testing. For certification by Ucense. As E says, a purposes of determuung which designs Il Stas (c and 82.F3.and he o&er designer w)ould have to pay a poru design certification will.like a must undergo a testmg program to be genene opphcation. Moreover, rule, have cerufied therulediramguishes between 1

the cost of review of the appli. cation for 1

aU advanced designe--be they passive certificauon by rulen:akingleaves the certi!! cation. See to CFR 170.11(d) and light water or non. light water-and Conunisalon tree to adapt beanne (e), as amended in this document.

evolutionary hght.weter desips. Some procedures to the requireinents of the testmg may be requued of all advanced. subject matter, rather than rely

e. Applicability of Existing Standards designs. Passive hght water designe are exclusively on formaladjudicatory With one usephon. the propowd mie to some extent also evolutions of the devices even when they are not useful did not say what safety standards light weter designe now licensed. but (heanns procedurn are more fuuy would be applied to a design proffered they have design lestures which are not 1._sliscussed below). FinaDy. cert 2 cation'"'l or certificanon, or even preci f

by rulemaking permits the Commission,

existinginformanon mquamments

(

present on plants licensed and operating to consider reactot d in the United States.Therefore the rule

, foreip corporsuons.esigns submitted bytapphcants would have to meet.'in its However, the I

light. water designs be demonstratedrequires that the matunty of the passive '

Conunission will give priority to designs y and highly detailed comments.

i C proposes addag to the rule a for which there is a demonstrated large number of highly specdc cross.

l through a combination of experistice, appropnate tests, or analyses, but most interest in the United States.no references to part 30. and a statement likely not through prototype tesung. See Commission will review other designs that no other portions of Part to apply.

i S2.47(b)(2). While analyses may be

,gg.tssources pennit.

The finalrule provides that the rule retains provisions for cefuficationFor the reasons just gi rebed upon by the staff to demonstrate 1

30 and its appendices, and Parts 73 and j

the neceptability of a particular safety by rulemaking. Westinghouse suggests 100 willapply to the new designs whm feature which evolved from previous also addin by license.g provisions for certification those standards are technically relevant expenence or to justify the acceptability leavngit to the applicant to to the design proposed for the facihty.

of a scale toodel test. It is very unlikely that an advanced design would be choose between cerufication by heense See new I 82.44. Application of Parts 20.

cerufied solely on the basis of analyses.

and certificauon by rulemaking.De Prototype testmg te likely to be required Commission. however. pmfors

50. 73, and 100 to the cerufication of new for cernficaton of advanced non light.

rulemaking and sees no advantage to e Tse pioposed Me ed state thes ea erphceuen water designs because these providmg such an option.

revolutionary designs use innovative NUMARC. while supporting for esmnessen womad have is e easesia mei vw enten comeded wie me wcha,eavy mneni means to accomphsh their safety certification by rule, suggests adding

,',,,$# *[ *N"o 'M provisions analogous to ex.istmg i uwe). u rt saors tproposed Men

i 3g37s raderal Regiat:r / Val. 54. No. 73 / Tuesday. Anni 18,19D / Rales and Reguletform 3

desasas. as reflecad in 4 52.m abould mist be a formal adiodicatos. However, porten af the oosts tecured in go a kng way toward estabbshing the this conclasion is alearly act the law; mgulance.Deferralof feesis more a regulatory standard that new desagas therefore, the facts in a cere8cauen line with the pobcies behind1 hose must meet, and thamby prende the proceedag are not whaDy ediudicatory.

statutes than as puttas the borden of reguletory stability thatis an essental Moreover, tf such facts must be encenataty on the pubhc.

prmquisne to reabsing the beneAss of catesonsed et all. they am more standardization, na Commission

" legislative" than "adledicaeve", as h.Panabry

(

recognizes that new dealsme may UCS dennes those terris, for wtuk they Standardisano has the double aim of inco' porate new fes tarts not addreased an "related to ace 6 of the paroes",

aahamang safety and makams it poemble by the current standards in Ptarts atL 30.

they are not anaquely so, and they are to resolve designissues before 73 or 100 and that, accordingly.new feets about "todustry proctices.

construcuse. Of these two stas, etandards may be required to address oserm8e data", eegineenne principles, enhanced safety is the chief, boossee any suc.h new design fastwes.

and the like.

pm.coastruceos resoluton of design nerefore, the NRC staff shall, as soon Severalcommentere also argue that leeuse eeund be achieved simply through

)

as prac6 cable, advise the nemiasjon the carencation pmceedias should be a combined construcces perente and e

of the need for criteria for judging the formal adiodsosues because eres**

opwetag beanses wie senditees.

safety of designe offered for ceruDestion esaminamos is sa answpassed means Aiddeveisent of the enhassed safety that are different from or supplementary for discovering the truth. Agam. the which standarthastion mahan poemble to current standards in to CPR Parts 20 argument proves too mock, namely, that wiu be frustrated if too bequest abanges so 73, and 100.na Commission shall every rulemakias,indeed every spemes to either a certi6ed dense se the plaats constder the NRC staffs views and oflawmaking, obound be formal determine whether additicnal adfodication. Part 62 does not aseene reistenstag it are pwommed, rulemaking is needed or oppropriate to the egenority, or even the usefulness,

.!b proposed ruk petforward resolve genenc goesnons that are of formal procedures for resolving we'Y principally three means of preventing a rppheable to multiple designs.The leeue: but at does provide for their use conunualregrossica tres obieenve of such rulemakmg would be where they are the only means available standardisauen.First, the proposed rule to incorporete any new standards in for resolnas an loses property.

hutre.d that any amendment pro 5ered hidw of a cernacenes be fa = 2 'o',' 2 " a de m r-i- w r ^nu-a-4a

• -wam-i h context of the Comnussion's reyww he Analrule adheres to the fee policy rulemaking and greatedif the and approval of inchvidual appbconone embodied in the proposed rule. An amendmeet comphed with the Atenc g

for design cero6 canons.On the other applicant for design certincation does Energy Act and the Conniesisa's hand, new design featurve that are not have to pay an application fee, but mguladoas. Second, b pmposed ruk addreened in the context o$' would be the applicant will have to pay the full prohibited the licensee of a plaat built unique to a particular des rulemaking cost of the NRC renew of h accordag to a aernSed desiga drum proceeding for that particular design, application, although not until the making any change to any part of the f.Heanage on Applications for Design ceru8 cation is referenced in an plant which was denaribedis the Ceruncaunas applicatien for a construenon permit or certificanon unless the Isoonees had combined license, nr. failing that. not been graned as saempnas mader 30 g

Ilke the proposed rule, the final rule until the certaficauen expires.The CR 40.12 from the rule certifying the j

prondes fornouce and comment details of the scheme of deferralof the design.Rird, the proposed rule stated rulemaking on an apphcanon for a fees appear in confornung amendments that the Co - -

. would not backAt a i

design ceruScauon together with an to the recently amended to CFR Part 170 cernRed design or the plants hedit 1

l opportunity for an informal heanns on (53 FR 52332: December as. Isas).

according to H unless a backAt were a

i en opphcation for a design cerencation.

UCS asserts that the pmvnsion for necessary to assure complianos with the ne rule also permits the see of more deferral of fees for NRC renewis applicable regulations or to assure formal procedures where they are the

" unconscionable". To the contrary, the adequate protecnon of public heahh and l'

only procedures available for resolving f ammmaion believes that there is safety. See 4 83.63 of the proposed rule, a given issue properly. See i 42.81. UCS nothms "saconscionable" about deferral 53 FR 32074, col. 3. to 3a075. sol. & The and othere argue that any beenne on of fees for a program whose simia to ra-i== ion invited comment en ceru6 canon abould be a formal enhance safety.

whether the amendment and exemption

)

ediudicanon. In paracular. UCS argues Some industry commenters sacert that standards were etnagent enough, and on j

that the cernbca non proceeding wtil be the requirement for payment of thi full whether the backAtlang standard gave dealing with adjudicative, as opposed to cost of NRC review presents an ceruAastions a roesonable degree of i

lemslauve, facts and therefore ebeuld be " insurmountable disincenuve" to the flaality.See 63 m Saog7. col.a.

)

fully ad6udiestory. UCS charactarises development of certified desagna.Some De comments focus se the standard 4

adtudicanve facts as " uniquely related ladastry commantere propose putting a of amending the cornfication. one group to activities of the parties that are at ceiling on fees for cerufication review, ofeomments wanting to make it harder inue" and legislauve feete as " facts in order to help vendore better asumate for the " holder" of a cert:Acanon to get i

about industry precuoso, econosuc the costs of developing and cernfying a en====i==nt. and another group impact. scianu6c data. and other design. The Comrnission fully recosmzes wanting to make it easier.Several informetion about wh;ch the pernes that it will be difficult for a vendor to caminentere say that the p rule have no specialinformanen."

estimate the costs of taking a design wmngly makes u easier for designer UCS' argument proves too much. lf the through to cartBeation.However.a to amend the cerufled design than it is feets to be considered in a certification ceiling on fees only displaces the burden for the Commussion to backAt the proceeding are wholly adjudacative, of that uncertainty from the vendor to design.To correct this perserved then, because thoce facts are like the the public. in recent years, the NRC has imbalance UCS, among othere, proposes facte considered in any rulemakmg on been obliged by statute to charge fees that no amendment be granted unless it safety issues every such rulemaking which return to the Federal Treasury a consututes a safety enhancement.and

~

~ ~ ~

~~1

a Fodoral Rogister / Vol. 54. No. 73 / Tuesday. April 18. 1969 / Rules and Reeulations15377 that anyamendment granted be backAtted on all plants built accordag regulations.Re Atomic Energy Act features that i 80.80 prohibits changmg i

allows the Commission to consider costs to the desip botas amended. OCRE ordy in deciding whether to establish or without pnor NRC approval. Moreover.

amendment should be granted which whether to enforn through backfitung the level of desip detailin certancahone proposes that. at e inanimum, no safety requirements that are not should afford licensees an opporturuty would entall e decrease in safety. On necessary to provide adequate to take advantage ofimprovements in the other side.NUMARC proposes protecnon. See UCS v.MtC. 824 F.2d equipment.

vtttually the same standard as a 108.130(1987).

%e comments or, the proposed rule maximum: Any amendment which has ne Baal rule,like the proposed rula, raise two other important Anality issues.

)-

i i

DOEin effect arfues that the permits applicants for combined both connected with backfitting.no no safetyimpact should be granted.

Commission does not have authority to licensesissued under the rule,and Aret bears on the critena for renewal of a desip certification. De proposed rule ask for more than OCRE's minimum.

licensees of a plant built according to a provided that the o= wad = would because this type of amendment would cernfied design. to request an exemption grant a request for renewal of a design be proposed for economic, plant under to CFR 50.12 from a rule cernfying certification if the design complied with efficiency. or other business seasons and a design. Among the comments on theregulations in effect at renewal and any appropnoteness of using i 30.12 in the the NRC has no expertise or authority in standarchtstion content were NIRS*

more stringent safety requirements law firm of Bishop. Cook. Purcell, and comment that i 50.11 permitted which would bring about a substantial areas involving business judgments. The Reynolds. representing several utilities, exemptions at a **whim" and DOE's increase in safety at a cost lustined by suggestion that no exemptione should be the lacrosse (strictly speaking, the proposes a backStting standard more granted at all. Out of respect for the backRt rule would not apply at renewel, strmsent than the one in the proposed unforenen. the Commission has decided but the proposal nonetheless rule: ne Commission should not impose to adhere to i 50.12. but the final rule incorporated the backfit rule's cost.

comphance with applicable regulations does requin that. before an exempton benent standarde). See i 83.sg(s). 83 FR beekfits on a desip for the sake of 32D74, col. 3. Bishop. Cook, among unless the lack of compliance has an can be granted. the effect which the othere, proposes that the standard for exemption might have on adverse impset on safety. Going even standard:tanon and its safety benefits renewal be compliance with regulations further m the same vein, the U.S.

must be considered.

in effect not at renewal but rather at the, Chamber of Commerce proposes that even where the lack of compliance has As a further guard against a loss of time the certificauen was originally leeued. together with any other more an adverse impact on safety. the backfit standarchtstion, the final rule, again like stringent requirements which are i

should have to pass muster under a the proposed rule,also prohibits a justified under the backAt rule.The cross. benefit analysis.

licensee of a plant built accordmg to a proposed rule's enteria were in fact

%e finalrule places a designer on the cornfied design from making any change equivalent to Bishop. Cook's in their same footing as the Commission or any to any part of the plant which is impact on a given design certification.

cther interested member of the public.

desenbed in the cernfication unless the No matter who proposee it, a change licensee has been granted an exemption but they differed in their impact on the under to CFR 50.12 from the rule bains of some backAt analyses, the willnot be made to a design certifying the design. Because the proposed rule providing that some certification while it is in effect unless would be done in rulemakings while the the change is necessary to bring the certification is a rule.10 CFR 50.12. not given certification was in eriect.

certificanon into compliance with 60.59 is the standard for determining Commission regulations applicable and whether the licensee may make changes However, the final rule adopts Bishop.

)

Cook's proposal because it more clearly in effect when the certificanon was to the cerufted portion of the design of says that imposition of more stringent luued. or to assure adequate protection the plant without pnor approvaltrom requirements on a design durms a of public health and safety. See the NRC.NUMARC says that, given the renewal proceedmg wdlbe governed by I 52.63ts)(1). Thus, the final rule cannot ' practicalities of construction and the backfit standards.

be said to make it easier for a designer lunited resources of the NRC staff.

The second of the otherimportant i

to amend a certification than for the licensees need the flexibility afforded by finahty issues reised by the commen i 50.50.However, the Conminalon Commission to backfit the design.But believes that the certifications concerns the Anality of to CFR part 62.

provides greater assurance that themselves and i 50.12 will provide the Appendix 0 (formerlyin part Solfeel more unportant, the final rule thus etandarthsauon and the concomitant necessary flexibility with respect to the design approvals (yDAs)alreadyin safety benefits will be preserved.

certified portion of the plant (or at least effect on the effective date of this rule.

Section 52.47(s)(2) of the proposed rule ne Commission is not adoptmg as much flexibility as is consistent with stated that holdere of PDAs in effect on achieving the safety benefits of Bishop. Cook's suggesnon that standarthzation), while i 50.53 will the effective date of the rule sucht have compliance be required only when non.

conunue to apply to the uncertifled la connection with the review for to submit more information to the staff compliance would have an adverse peruon. How much flexibility 6 50.12 impact on safety. Licensees seeking will provide depende inlarge part on certification. NUMARC proposes adding rehef from a design certification, who a " grandfather" clause which would -

believe that non compliance would have how much detallis present in a design prohibit the Comrnission from imposing.

no adverse impact on safety, should certification, and lust how much le present will be an issue which will have during the certification proceeding, any request an exemption under to CFR to be resolved in each certification change on that part of the design which so.12.Neitherle the Commission is covered by en already effecuve FDA adoptmg the suggestion of the U.S.

rulemaking.The Commission does unless the change meets the enteria of expect, however, that there will be less the backfit rule.

j Chamber of Commerce that cost. benefit detailin a certification than in an analysis be used to determine whether to impose backfits on designs to bnns application for certification, and that a Adoption of NUMARC's proposal would not only entall a significant them mto compliance with appheable rule certifying a design is likely to change in the force of an FDA. It would encompass roughly the same design also extend the range of application of

+--%=-

,,,---v.-

,m..

r

gggg Fuesday. April 18.1939TRuhe and Regulations W UC m 8 Wok 23.930.996 a

t%e backnt rule.Under er.istag NRC to CPR 2.gos and toCm Part s2.

epplicants fer early oho permits. See ugulabons, sa FDA binds the etct! ta a Appendix Q (formerly 6 part sol.

6 &L17(a).

1,celsma proamedag but not is 0 -

paragraph 8. De Coansoncut Seting laet, although the Commission cornhceboo proceemas and evenin a Cmac0 spongly suggests that the State Econung g _ M - tas staff may,on of Cormonacet would be enable to acknowledges the posesbihty that non-nuclear dowlopinem of e site would be the grounds of sigraficant new participatela na NRC baarang on an postponed when e oneis reserved for a informouon or other good causa, appbcataan for as aerly site perinst nuclear plant and ther a plant never reconsider en oather deannaansuom. See urueos the applicanon propeeed a buut there.the Commisoton believes to Cm part &L Appendix 0, parograph "spea6c" muciant powet plant. Pira!!y.

that such a possibility does not loom

• 1 I,. Moreover, the FDA dess not bind the one commenteris scaterned thatland very large, persons se not hkely to go to Comnussion or the Comm'asion's.

approsed under an earfy site parant the expense of applying for en early site a diadicatory panels. 3d. at paregraph 4.

trusht never be used for a nacleat power ne backat rule apphes to any proposal plant and thus dewiopment ei theland peract unless them to a good prospect that the ette wiu be used for a esclear which would require the holder of an for a son.ouclear use would have been TDA to meet a new standard in order to needlessly delayed.

power plant.Momover,it may be that many of the estes for which early site remein m possession of the TDA. ase 10 ne Commissica believes that early permits taight be sought am already set Cm 21Du(s)(t1. but the backLt rule site peruute can assfully serve as aside for use by stilmes:thus,even does not change the force an TDA has in vehicles for neolvmg most site issess though non nuclear development of the a licensing procanding or certificauon before large costnutments of sesources site might be postponed. non.st!! sty sees proceedms.

are mada. Moreovw.the Comadasion of the site would not be. Last, even NUMARC's proposal, however, would bind both the sta5and the =wmon believes that a term of ten to twenty during the period in which an early site c

years for early site pennits will snake perant to in offect. non.noclear uses of to a certification proceedag and would early site permita more useful foe early the site are not prohibited altogether.

add a cost benefit test to the tests which retalution of site isones than would the Seet$138.

must be met before a determination five. year termin to Cm Laos and to m comments on the proposed rule r.sde in ao mA could be reconsidered.

NUMARC's proposal thus would CTR part 52. App. Q. because the longer raise two other unportantissues af!ecuvely amend both the backfit rule tatewAltetruin less frequent concerning the ruWe primolons on early 1

and the cited paragraphs of Appendix reassessments of iseuse than would the site permits. no first issue concorse the 0; it would,in effect. turn any existas shorter term.The fwe. year term is e division of authonty between the mA into a perual centfication. Here the funcoon not of the rehabihty of the Federal government and local Corn mesion would rather edhere to the informaton available to make the f.nality provisions m the axistmg decisions, but rather of the fact that the governmente over the esting of nuclear power facihties.no New York State regulations,includmg Appendix 0 and decisions tnade under those provisions Energy Office is concerned that the

~

the backfit rule.ne Comaussion may only peoolve isolated site tesues a believes that.in this situation, these and anucapete site utilisation in the very pmposed rule leaves the impresesos that only an early ette permit from the NRC trovisions adequately balance the need near term. ne Comnussion is conadent is necessary to set aside land for a br finality with the need for flexibuity ht hn wtB be Wormanon @uW melmm ple T@ enrary, to deal with anforeseen safety advances to support ante approvals lasting up to 30 the rule does not,indeed, could not, or nska.

years. After all,the Ccamission heenses change the division of setberity plants and their sites for operatico for J.Korly Site Parouss penode of up to Iwice twenty years.

between the Federalgovernment and What design eernficationis to the Where adequateinformationis not the states over the stung of nuclear eatly resolution of daign lessee, the available, early site permits will not be plants. An early site pennit constitutes ly site it to to the early insmed.

approvel of a e te only under the Federal esolution i te.related issues. Both the ne Commission is also confident that statutes and regulanons administered by cernfication and the permit make it enoughinformanon on mector desegn the Commission. net under any other applicable laws.

possible to resolve important Doensing wnD be available in an early este pennit he last irsportant issue reised by the issues before a construenon permit proceedag to pernut sound iudgments commente on early site petmits concerns proceedmg.ney m effect make possible about envvenmental ete and thus b proposed rule's requirement that the the banking of designs and ettes, thenby Io enable state andi agencase such application contain a plan for redress of making the beenema of a given plant as the Connocucut Smag Coimmito the siteinthe event ht the site snore efficient.However, some parncipate effecovely in an early ette preparation work and similar work and commentere queenon whether the penmt proceedag.The Councilsays sissilar work allowed by10 Cm Commission should issue early site that for it to meaningfully participate la pernuts.The Attorney Ceneral of Ne,,

e decision on en applicanon for en early 50.10(e)(1)is perfonned and the site York. forinstanos. sees no need for site perant. the appbcation would beve permit expirve before it is referonood in to contain "

an oppuestion for a construction pennit early mte permsts and questions whether -

there could be grtiends odoquate to discharges, pmjected emission, or combined licenseissued under the site impacta, safety factore, espport approval of a este for twenty and exact opetetsoned parameters * * '

rule. The proposed rule required that tbc pan, the term of early site perudte proposed for a ette".It le just such plan prov6de reasonable soeurance that f

under the proposed rule (the final rule tafonnation which bodi the, proposed mdress carried out under the pian would provides that permrts wtli beve terms of rule and the feal cule weeus requare of achieve e "self maintaming, between ten and twenty yeare). He environmentally stable and aestheticauy acceptable site" which pomts out thet under the NRC's current

'h me commamies deetmas = #suem regula tions. NRC early decisions on erte nes"m ehbe enseemss ere o(same* *es conformed to local soning laws.De only important difference between the suitabibty issues reised in connection M,$'Nj"j',','l",Q*/M,8 proposed and final rules on this subject mth a construction permit generally emam effect.tve for only five years. See newd have ve e.y.e et eneher whash a somn is that the feal rule mqum each a plan

t. ans meassw.enttowe mustas only of applicants whe with to perfonn

s Toderal Register / Vcl. 64. No. y3 / Tuesday. ADril 18. 1909 / Rules and Reeulations 15379 the souvihies allowed by to CFR (for the tant of esetica 105, ese below).

shap thevesyse esses a hasnee e me i

50.10:e)(11. NUMARC soye that this Rey often sie Arwer Assosor orphcant....

i nqmrement na "shanndy unworkable" DeveJopment Ca. v. Jademononol uaion l

sad would icvolve the Comaussion in ofElecanon/ Wankese.as? UA tes 42 USC. 3338.To be swe. the section tnateldas redreas a l

local sorung laws. gamst a vanety of (tset) as support for Llus interpretauon speaks in teries of a construccon To the contrary the ruis's provisions of section 186.To these arpments-emit's being luned fkret, and then s those who believe that there should be ioense (presumabl en site redress. Ancludmg the provision no heanns or else only a highly license). However,y en operatingthe contreet b en soning. are roodaled an the redress restricted heanns. after construodos is the two licenses is not fundamental to nqmrements imposed on the Chnch complete reply that seanoa teth of the the secuen.%e substance of the section River Breeder Reactor project. See in the Atomic Energy Act gives the is clearly indicated by the atle of the Matter of the UA Drparument of Energy. Coramission authonty to sombine a sec6en and by thelist of Andings the l

et s!. (Cunch River Breeder llanctor constnsetson perunit and as opment Commission must make.The seccon Plant). LDp-45 7. 21 NRC 507.(1965).

llosase la e single license (for the tomt of may be paraphrased thus: A

(

Moreover, the Conmission has long sectson 191h. see below).

consensaties perundtis not a aqmred that applicants' environmental A closerlook at section selb and185

,,ga,g,y g,p,,,,,,,,past of

,,,,,g, g, teporte discuss comphance with local shows that sec6cn leth clearly gives the

,,,p3,g. bdore opwe6en beguis. 6e

(

lsws. Includ.ng soruns laws. See to CFR Commission authority to cambine a eri lul opphendon must be brought up 11.45(d). Apparendy,NUMARCis not construccon pensit and operatin to te, and the Casumission must make oppened to rodress per se, for sheense is a single Scanse and that ceuk affireauve An& ass.nus b NUMARC's proposed revision of I 52.25 secnon 188 is not inconsistant with critical matter is not the seperutica of of the proposed rule speaks of the section selb. Section teth says.in the two licenses, but the need for ponibility that redress of adverse perunent part. that the Commission has speificlin&ngs him opwstem. With environments! impacts might be the authonty to " consider in a single this substance, both the propeesd rule necessary.no Commission is only applicanon one or more of the eenvities and the final rule are enutely in accord nqmnna that such redress foDow the for which a heense is required by this (h

t provisions of he finalrule precedent established at Chnch River Act [andJ combine m a singlelicones wiu desenbed in more detail below).

I and proceed accordmg to a plan one or more of such ecovities..." 42 biomover,in &ffwensatag htwnn a incorporated in the early site permit.

U.S.C. 2201.Re plain languay of this "y,nsru.c.un peaut and a later co Contamtna a redress plan. the permit section clearly applies to the combining

,,. n eu m W is am uking steelf wiu consttute assurance that,if of construccon pernuts and opereting neepum 2 pean ten.Subu W este preparation activities are carried licenses,for both construenon and dbtwiktan&ng myeingis secum e am my.for houses, i

out but the site never und for a nuclear operemon of nuclear power plant. the site wn!! not be left in

" activities for which, power facilitsee are Sgth 2 he contruy, applicants shau k a licenseis en unacceptable condition, recruired by this Act, naisely by granted initially only e construccon 5

J. Combinedhoenses secom m and W d he Act,en 42 p,gg, b spekhg of a wpesh

a. ne Commission's Audinrtty to issue UAC. 2231 and 2238, and secdon tasa lassance of a license after completion of I

Cambmed ucenses of the Act makes anylicense to operste costrucuan,ucdoslas simply I

a commercial nuclear power facility conforms itself to the sunplest case. in

%ere are two important questions in suMeet to such conditions as the which the liosases are in their '

Commission s provisions on combined construction establish...,isy by rule or regulation elementary, uncombined states, and cennecuan with the proposed rule's See 42 U.S.C. 2233. Had avolds having to make an alreadylong peruuts and operating bcenses with Congress intended that construction ucuan Amew h mdw 2 acknowldge conditions. The first is whether the permits and operetinglicenses for se em which wouon182 maku Commission has the authonty to issue coeumcial nucim poww plants be pg, %,,,g, g l

combined licensea. The second is excluded frove thelanguage of wcdon acknowledges scenen 10thlmpbcatly i

whether,in cases whm all design Sgth, surely Congress would beve said whenit speaks not of a separate loues are resolved before construction so right in that section. fo: the plain application for as operstmg license but begins there should be a hearing after languese of that secuan invites their sim y M an updenne M 6e wignal construction is complete, and if so, what inclusion,and they are the most dos.Therefore, neither the op issues should be considered at the is ont licenses lassed under the Act' d rule nor se Analrule can W bearmg.

m W te nM to &e contrary.

ted for not providing for a se Comments on whether the Secum W says,in perenent put.

Issuance of an operating hcense.parate Commission has the authonty toissue CONSTRUCf10N ptMffS-All

%Isinto tion of section 105 le combined licanus tend io mirror the e

confirmed thelegisladve history of commentere' views on what kind of ageants for lieuem so mestruct...

the section. 1984,when Congress was a

be teinally betimg should be held after g,

considering proposed amendments to construction is complete. In other words, compiones et the eenveena *.','[se the Atomic Energy Act of1946.

the discussion of this issue tends to be feethty, span the tung et any ademenal representatives of the industry 4

ruult.onested. nus, many who believe taformones aseded to bras the engual complained that the proposed secdon that there should be a beanns after opphcomes up to dese. ans spee anding that 185 utred that construenon of a the facety authorised has been esseveened facili be completed "under a mere construction and that it should be as and wiu opereis in seafonssty wie the full a heanng as operstmg license ep sdm os beatmas often are argue that the j

ud,ed e la eenioeuu y constructionpermit withoutany m

g, g

assurance at that stage that there will be Comnussion has no authonty to issue rdee end reguleune d me compiuseme. pd issued any license to... operate it after combined licenses, ney claits that in the ebeena et any good sense bees it has met all the speci8canone of the section tas of the Atomic Energy Act abowa in the Commmene why the gresung et Icandatea a two-step beensing process a heense would not be le socordanes with construction pernut." Atomic Energy Act of1954: Hearings on S. 3323 and H.R.

the provleians el this Act, the Comatee6en 8881 before the joint Comnuttee on

,__,_,.,.n..-----==~~~

' " ' ' " " * ^ ~ "

.gg;90 Federal Register / Vol. 54. No. 73 / Tuesday. April 18. 1989 / Rulsa and Regulations At:mic Energy, card Conyees.2d Administrative Procedure Act (ApA) hearing also believes that en issue in the Sonica.113 (May tu. tem).Dese wluch says, in effect. that adiudicat on haanns should be whether construcuen repenentauns proposed instead that is not required in som in which the has been completed in accord with the power facility appheants should be able agency decistort reste " solely on -

. terins of the combined license, and the to obtain a smgle license covenng all inspections tests. or elocuons". See a final rule a provides. Also.under aspects of their ecovities--construcuen.

U.S.C.154(s)(3). Under Part $2's section 146 of the Atomic Energy Act, possession of fuel, and opersuon-.end provisions of combined licenses. a the Commission must And, prior to that the bcense should contain the combined license will contain the tests.

facihty operation. that the facihty has condluons the appbcant would have to laspection, and analyses. and been constructed and willoperste m meet before opersuon of a constructed ecceptance criterte therefor, which are conformity with the application and the faciDty could tiegm. ld. at n3 and 11s.

necessary and sufficient to provide rules and regulations of the Comaussion.

On this proposal, the following coUoquy reasonable assurance that the facihty took place:

has been constructed and wiu operste in his statutory finding. in the context of Reymentenve HINSHAW.mt seems to conformity with the license and the Act-Subpart C of this rule. trenelates into me to be enseeable that you should put all Su i 8257EEo argument amounts to two separete but related regulatory the condigens mio 1 heense that saa be put the claim that the kind of tests and Andage:that compliance with the into 1 besame. net would be fear eneush.

inspections spoken of in Part 42 is the acceptance criterie in the combined chairman C011 Weald yev sund my same as the kind of teste and Beense wW provide reasonable interrupcont why canaos that be done under ins _pecuona spoken ofin the ApA.

noeurance that the facility has been the taas of ik billas it is newt The Commission agrees that Andings constructed and willoperamin e of tuts soondance wie se Commission's Ed on thlak beedi would so opwewd.

a asp' o obouldn requirementa. and that the seseptance chairman cm mmru h would.

criterla have in fact been sausned. De fann Anding & made pnw w vi s 82 03 w

not Id. at 119. Chairman Cole said this even eve finding tne Commission must issuance of the combined license, and though neither of the draft bills before h Committee contained the text of mak before operation begins under a wW necmar@ es dW any what is now section seth. Twelve days combined license willnecessanly combined license beanns under sectaon later, as if to put the metter beyond all always be based on wholly self.

Sees of ee Act.De latwr Anding doubt, the Comnuttee incorporated the implemen;ing acceptance enteria and cannot by he natum be made anullawr, pmunt text of section 16th into both therefore encompassed within the APA sher construcuanis subantiaUy j

bills. The final rule provides for just exception. De Commission does not complew,and emim eenmOyite such a single license, with cond:tions. as believe that it is prudent to decide now, natum be se subject of any heanns j

before the Commission has even once feense. issuance of es combined w2 1

was discussed in this colloquy.

some through the process of judgmg Dus, to Se extent est an power AeactorDevelopment Co. v.

Electrical Workere. 367 U.S. 396 (1961).

whether a plant built under e combined opportunity for hearms should be is not to the contrary.no issue a that license le ready to operste. that every agorded prior to opwation. it should be finding the Commission willhave to confined to the sirsle issue that cannot case was not whether the Commission make at that point wiu be cut and-how bwn husewd miser-deen se 1

had the authonty to combine a dried--proceeding according to highly acceptance criteria are setiefied. No construcuon permit with an operstir*

detailed "objecuve enteria" entailing commenwr has offed anylegal license with conditions but whether the little judgment and discretion in their argument to the contrary.*

Commission could poorpons the ultimete esfety findings until construenon was apphcauon. and not involving questions Comunenters disagree yestlyon of " credibility. conflicts, and whether any otherissue should be i

complete.The Court ruled that the sufficiency". questions which the Court considered in a hearing.De proposed Commission could. and found support in UCS v. NAC 738 F.2d 1437 (D.C. Cir.

rule provided that intervenors could for its conclusion in section 185. which 1984). held wm marks of Ames which '

contend that signiAcant new informanon showed. the Court said, that " Congress should be litigated at least under the showed that some modi 8 cation to the contemplated a step by step procedure." facts of that case. Indud, trying to site or the design was necessary to 367 U.S. at 406. But the Court did not assure that the tests. inspecuona, and assure adequate protection.To this.

ny "section sts mandates a separate related acceptance entene in the NUh4 ARC responds that"no one enuld issuance of an operating license.

combined license are wholly self.

seriously consider ordering a new plant notwithstanding section 16th."De implementing may well only succeed in with the licensing uncertenties it would interpretsuon of section161b of the Act introducing snordinate delay into the face." NUh4 ARC proposes a complete was not at issue.

heenns on the applicauon for a rewrite of 4 81.105 elements of which

b. Heenngs After Construction is combined license.

are Aam===d below.Severalindastry Complete hus, h qunnon h6hh e m p p ee**added the rule should provide an opportunity burdens" that applicants would be The first issue concerning hestmas for a post. construction hearing on the assuming under the posed rule as after compledon of construccon under a issues which are not excepted from grounds for severel limiting the issues combined Ucense is whether there adjudication by the APA. Whether the forbeanas.Rockw ulaternational.for should be such bearings et all. Most Commission could or should so further instance, claims that, with the hearing commenters, whatever their affiliation.

under its governing statutes we leave to believe that them should be the futum consideration and expenence:

opportunity ior such bearmas.They this rule adopts an approach within the

,,,,e,eso w,,not,ne,.e,,,e.e.

me = wiw an etesem et seed seem tems disagree only over how limited the bounds of ourlegal authonty which sets shown = e. commienies wt, se puseos W ik heanngs should be. DOE argues that reasonable limits on any post-I"**"**d**b'*""'***"'"***

there should be no such heenngs at all.

construction been'ng. In this regard.

^^

• gd *,*6

., eY Un*edN As the pnncipal support for its every commenter who believes there esenhas an opperunier tw beenes se eu andese argument. DOE cites the secton of the should be such an opportunity for eat wiu te ease ener w feabir seeveuen

l raderal Reedster / VtJ. M. Ns. y3 / Tuesday. April sa.1939 / Rules and Regulations 15381 l

under i b1103, there wdl be four pahuc To the extent that these soonnesters CFR 1308.This appmach to leones i

heannge for each plant, Pubbeinterset groups also take a dim offer any practical argumente in feeor of concermostheinadequeryof the view of the proposed rule's Emitsuons this approach, they are not persuasive, combined boense is well-founded in the on the bearms, though their reasons are Rockwelllaterostonal may engagein discronos afforded the Comaussion some doeb' 1 w whenit asserts under escoonlas of the Act to i

not the industry's. UCS asys that a i

heensmg proceeding without uncertainty that there are four puhis hearsage for deterndne what eonentutes " good i

is a sham. OCRE goes further and each plant. but when the Maryland rasse" for not permitting operation and upris that the uncertainty abould be Nuclear Safety Coahtien asys that the in the analogy which this approach has distnbuted equaUyi"In a pubbe can debate liceostag issues only proceeding. itbe) chance (perfectly fair in an early este perett hennas and after with the wey construction permite are would be 30Er%e Maryland Nuclear construccoa.and therefore needs treated in opereting boense proceedags, of wtaning)

Safety Coalition counts only two another hearms on deelenissues.it Cententions alleges inadegosoies in a construccon peruut are test now beennes for each plant. NIRS says that inexphanbly staplyignores the,

admissible in an opere - license many problems with the current mandatory pubhc bearias on the proceedios.Similarly, the final generation of reactors were cured under opphostion for the esebined hoenee and rule, oestantions alleging the full two etep bcensing process, the opponunity for a public bearing on in a sembinedlicense are act ible es This latter group of commesters an applicanon for a design certincation.

In a poet.coastruedes heartas.

appears to be opposed to any limitation Moreover, sentrary to NIRS.

Moreover, as we noted, this a shonce in certain to were not fully estisBes apphenbie law,ppseash on the post. construction hearing. for not one of them proposes e concrete discovered use the '

attemente to the proposed rule e proceedings consisted of two steps but M

lomas pronsions on the beenng. UCS does say rather because design issues had to be Dese are takenup secties by section.

that the heanns should encompase "all resolnd and construction made to inns that are meterial to the NRC's conform to design before operation Not discussed are meet of the many changes made to the proposed rule for approval of an operating license for the beten. Part 82 provides for no less, the sake of clarity, brevity, eessistenc plant, but that statement le either so he finalrule adopts a straight.

opecificity, and the hka. Worth moungy, f

generales to et another w to put app M a M

hownw.is est thle Fedwal O' 9 "" D *"

• la say post construccon beenne on a notice moves Appendiens M.W. O. and w#,"I'c'o"nt*#eo deie,.ane$' h g,'

combined license. As a matter of logic, Q of part 30 to Part 61no that as t

N arr =ca= ive6ie conannon which

'a' s=6p a r a' $ = P= a *. *n **

whether the plant has been built in could be reised at that stage would Commission's regulations on conforsuty with the terms of the necessanly take one of two general stashdanhaation and early secolation of combined license, all the opereting forme.it would allege either that licensing issues wdl be in one port of to licenseissues moeind before construcuon had not been completed-Cm ChapterL Readere are reminded

{

construnnon should be treated as if they and the plant would not operate-in had never been resolved. Many confornuty with the tortas of the that e comparative text showing all commentere do in fact ases to be combined license, or that those terms deletions from and additions to, the making such a claim, for they contend were themselves not in confonnity with proposed rule is available in the NRC's public document room.

asemst anylimits on the post.

the Atomic Energy Act and pertnent construccon beanns at the earne ame Coomseios requirements. The Gnal rule 1KarWieAsnn/ts that they support the ides that design makes issue of conformity with the At the suggestion of NUMARC and inves should be resolved befom terms of the combinedlicense any poet. construction baanns,part ofothere, i 11.17 now gives applicants for construccon, unless early site permits the opuon of Tbm how to be substannallimits on thoseissues are excepted from the inns that enn be raised after adiudication by the APA exception for subautting parnalor complete Also,gencyplans for Analapproval.

emer constroccon. A licenses proceeding findings which are based solely on the the section requires a redress plan without any uncertainty in result may be results of tests and inspections. The only of applicants who wish to be able a sharn. but the bulk of the uncertainty finalrule does not attempt to anyin to perform the site preparation work and should be addressed and swoolved prior advance whatissues sught fallunder to. not after, construction. Part 12 does that exception. The comments are similar work allowed under 30 CFR not remove uncertainty,it simply nearly unanimousin the opinion that to.10(e)(1).Last incorporstmg reallocates it to the besmning of the lesun of confornuty with the combined suggescons by UCS and othere,the Lcensing process. The alternanve llosose are properly encompassed in any considered in determining whether t secuon says what factors should be apparvatly offered by opponents of poet.construccon beannp. Moreover, lu:uts on the post construction hearms is in effect, to double the uncertainty b this lunited opportunity for bearms is area surroundmg the site is " amenable" considering every design issue twice.* y consistent with the Conunission's behe!

to emergency planning.To avoid that. even if section 146 did not speak at suggestas that tne Comaussionis all to the need for a conformity fmding, adopnas new eswegericy plannmg standards,i &L17 abandons the

. Em euwees = ocare essen ere pes w the Commissionitself would need to a

ts, prose. ding in wwd esevesi heuem esws b.r make such a Gndmg pner to operationin proposed language of "amesebility to umevee br metecine Ndea met seeen et esima, emettency planame"in favor of

,7l _" ***jd("

order to conclude.In the '

- of langvsge drawn from exioung d,',,,, "m.,,,,,,,,,

$'*,d,","*e $

section 103, that operation ta'noT

.ge.,u.

inimical to the health and safety of the reguletions on emergency plannang.

Section 52.1e now makes clear that euen in aw e..em eAe.eu em eeweeise, to e ns denn eveen te s. Ow 'Aaaee of ee**e pubhc.%e final rule elao provides that need for power is not a consideration at issues of whether the terms of the Ne$

• M ". Noe Nnye.$s combmed license are themselves the early site peruut stage.

o. M..# m s

yset. cur ime". s w est emer eas is ocas.

Inadequate are to be brought before the in a number of placee-.46 52.23,52.53, Comaussion under the provisions of to

$2.87,and portions of other sections-the rule prendes exphcitl) for ACRS i

)

_~.

Federal Registct / Vol. 54. Ne. 73 / Tuesday. April 18,193g / Rules and Repulations at nmw ofisson ta make clear that, even enginalpermit can be Amed at a term performance mquirements and include though the Atosuc Energy Act does not, shorter than twooty years. See in terms, give the ACRS e role in the i E27(e),

the necessary codes, studards, and other acceptance and performance granung of early site permits, design in its comment on i 82.31.14Boeuf.

criterta to which the equipment and cerufications or combined Ucenses, the lamb sugewis that at renewal.the materials will be fabricated and tested.

ACR51s to have the same role with burden should be on the Comsuss6on to Construction and installation respect to these devices that it does with show why an early site permit should specificahone would have to identify the respect to construction permits, not be renewed. but that a given permit centeria and methods by which systems.

operenne licenses, and the uke.

should be renewed only ones,and for Wherever the ACRS is spoken ofin Part not more than ten years.De Anal rule structures and components are erected n the intentionis that the ACRS renew retains the pronsions of the proposed orinstaued in h facility and include the perunent issues socordmg to the rule, because they revide nom neceptanes, performance. inspesuon.

and testag requirements and ersteria.

standards specafied therein.

DemibuHy W boe Commission and lal52.47,the ions on testing of As in the proposed rule. 6 SL25 holders of permits.

prendo that the holder of en early site Much of es discusion in Secues prototypes have sworded to avoid suspetms a presumption that des of pernut which contains a site redress H.1.f. and E3.b. abwe a de Ana d

plan or the applicant for a construction dulgn een$cause and beartage the effaced class could be only er permit or combined Heense which construcconis alwant to the after oncesasful nesung of a prototype.

references such an early site peredt.

poWsions in l BLag on tam Anahty of Oneindividualand the U.S.bestric may perform the activities at the site wh sim persim.Secuen SAM now Association urged that the rule require ellowed by to CTR 80.10(e)(1) without eutu eat,emoeptin wtain kmhed that technicalinformationin first obtaining the separete circumtenom.iseum moolwd in a applicadens be in astric unita. De NRC authonestion required by I 50.10. The Pmcwding on en wh sim pundt shau stat behoves there is such merit in thia New York State Ene Office appears to treated as moolvedin anylater but beesume the public has not to take this to mean t the holder of proceedag on en apo!icauon which an opportunity to comment on it. it the pernut may perform the work mimac# ee wh sim pwan. One of is not 'nwted in the Anal rule.De without NRC approval. To the contrary.

b circumtence mvoins peudons NRC sta5is considering proposing an the ury site peruut which contains e under to Cf12.206 that the terms of the amendment to Part 82 on the subject for redress plan is itself NRC approval. ~he early site permit should be modified:

Comuniasion revWw.

8) e se On il 8L51stssad 82m.su ee law firm of148ceuf. Lamb. laiby a

,,f,2 remarks in Section H1.1.above on uscRae.,e,,ess ng sevmi uuuues.

ii n.

.a

,,6,,,,y., o uso.i u a.u =.. peouveiy.

s es esi,eceni case isw. es,emany "g',..',,,,g,,o,,, ma,,,,,==

NEDC v. EPA. 468 F.2d 156 (D.C. Cir.

in paratraph (s)(1) of e.,o,oew,uie.eiien years as the dureuon of cer:18ssuons.

Seas).callsinto qwstion the Commission's haitations on non. safety

2. Design Certificotions he Analrule utends the duration to related construction before issuance of a fifmen years, to perant more operstmg permit.1480euf.14mb concludes that la the proposed rule,6 82.45 contained nyerience with a ginn daign to i 5L25 and related portions of Part 52 material on scope of design and testag accumulam bdom the cerunostion should be deleted and the limitations in of prototypes. nis metert.) now comes up for renewalorossess to be 180.30 reviewed in the light of the case annears, in modified form, in 182.47.

avellable to eglicants for combined i

law. The Office of the General Counsel IVe phrm" essentially complete Hoenses. In a tion. 8 SL83(a)(3) now is undertaking a review and will nuclear power plant." which is used in limits Commission.mdemd recommend to the Comnussion if any SL45.is defined as a design which modificauons of desip ceruned changes to these sections are warranted. includes all structures, systems. and elements of a speeds plant to situations i

In the meantime, the Comnussion has components which can effect safe in which the mod:Acetion is noosesary decided to keep Part 62's provisions on. operation of the plant oncept for site.

for adequate protection and special site work intact and consistent with the specific elements such as the service circumstances as definedin to CFR related provisions in Part 80, water intake structure and the ultimate 80.12(a) are present.nis double Section $127 now contains some of heet sink. Therefore. those pordone of requirement dou not meen thatif a the nr.sterial which appeared in 4 52.28 the design that are either site specific specific plant pruents an undue risk but of the proposed rule.OCRE objects to (such as the service waterintake no special circumstances are present the the pronsion in i 52.27 which treats an structure or the ultimate best sink) or plant will not be modined. Rather, the include structures, systems and modification will take place through l

early site permit se valid beyond the components which do not affect the safe modificeuon of the ceruned design l

date of empireuon in proceedings based operation of the facility warehouses and sewage (such as itself as provided for elsewhere in the on applications which have referenced l

the utly site permit. OCRE argues that facilities)may be escluded from the

%eoreticeUy. it would be possible for treetsient same section.

this provision allows clever opplicants scope of design.In addition, an an applicant whose application to avoid new site requirements by essentially complete design is a design referenced a cerufled design to select referencing en early site permit just that has been Anahsad to the point that before it expires. At bottom, this is procurement specifications and designer (s) other than the designer (s)

I resHy an argument that early site construcuan andinstallation which had achieved certification of the standard design. Section 62.83(c) makes permits should have shorter duretions.

specifications can be completed and clear that such an appucant might be 1

The Commission is confident that the mede available for auditifitla egency will be stda to make site determined that they are required for required to provide information which is judgments which willretain their Commission review in accordance with normaHy containedin procurement validity for the duranons provided for in the requimments of I 52.47(a),

specifications and construcuan and the final rule. However, the final rule Procurement specifications would have installeVon specifications and which is consistent with the certified design and does provide that the durauon of an to idenufy the equipment and material available for audit by the NRC staff.

Federal Reedster / Vol. 54. No. 93 / Tuesday. April

18. 1939 / Rtiles and Rerulations 18383 Also. 6 5233 sqmros a demonstraton Section 62.43 now prendes that the thatit would be acceptable for that the new designeris quahhed to supply the design.last the new initial term of a combined license shall interested persons to wait until nouce is designer would how to pay a pomon of not exceeri forty years from the date on which the Commtseson makes the received before they esasune the record the cost of the renew of the appbcat on findmps nquired by I 62.103(c).

of cons.ruction.nese time penods s'e for ceruficanon. See to Cf11170.121d) and (e). as amended in this document. It On i 82.87. see the discussion in hke the sixty. day limit in the Hobbs Act, is expected. se a proctical matter, that Section in.1. on i 62.23.

at U.S.C. 2344. for peutions for cbrect NUMARC proposed removmg from ludicial renew of an agency rule. These appheants nimacmg s certafled desip h' alto assume that the petitionst is would select the designer which had g stas any reference to design familiar with the indamentals of the achieved certification of the standard cornfications. on the grounds that.

record before the tunited pened beges.

design.

envitornentalimpact statements should De hm!ted pened is then prended for not be preparedin connectionwith a CombinedLicenses cernficetion rulemakings,no consideration of options. consultation with otherinterested persons.and Section 1272 now prendes that the referencesin this section to design drafting of pleadings. in any event. the entity that obtained cernfication for a cerufications are not meant toimply Analruse provides sixty days.in design must be the enuty that suppliJe that environmentalimpact statements the nesip to an opphcant for a must be preparedin connection with consideration of the pleading standard combined license referenems the design. design certifications.

i SL10Bimposes on peutioners.

unless it is demonstrated that another Section 62.99 bas been reworded to Moreover, as noted above.to assist entity is quahfied to supply the des.gn.

reflect more clearly that the inspection interested persons in becaudng familiar with the construction record. I St.99 his pronsion was sdded because an comed out during construction under a now provides that notice of staff enuty supplying the design should be combined license will be based on the approvals of construccon willbe quehfied to do so:the entriy which katshpechom. analyses, and related publisbod penodically in the Federal obtained the cernficetion will have seceptance enteria proposed by the Register. Any heanns held under demonstratedits quahlications by opph. ant. approved by the staff and i 52103(b)(2)(1)wiu useinformal et enYe incorporated in the combined license.

procedures to the maximt::n extent preposed rule now appelars in i 52.79 of Sesetal industry cornmenters proposed practicable and permissible under law.

f 52.78 of the adding to this section a requirement that m particular. tne h==iaalon intends to the balrule the staff prepare a review schedule in make use of the provisions in 6 U.S.C.

DOE proposes redrafting 6 52.79 to connection with each combined ucense.

654,556, and 687 which are applicable to nquire that no spbeation for a However, such a requirement would be determining applicanons for initial h

combined license considered unless largely duplicative of a long. standing licenses. Under i 12.103(b)(I)(11). the it references a cert fed design. ne fmal staff practice under which the staff rule does not contain this restnction prepares an annualinspection plan NRC staff willreview the i gJ06 pet tion and make appropnete because there may be circumstances in which auscates resources accordmg to recommendations to the Commission which a combinedlicense would the pnonties among au pending concoming the petition. He properly utilise a non standard design, inspection tasks.no annualplan Commission itself willissue a decision and because such a restnction would should assure the timeliness of staff mean, among other things, that every review of construction imder a granting or denymg the petition in whole combined license.Section 6 orin part.

prototype would have to be licensed in a fully two. step process. In connection envisions a " sign as you go"2.99 Finally.Urenco.Inc is concerned that processin witn 152.79's provisions on submission which the staff signs off on inspection the last subsection of 9 52.103 not be of complete emergency plana. NIRS units and notice of the staffs sign offis taken to suggest that the Commission somehow concludes that Subpart C's published in the Federal Register. UCS we' tid have to make neoerste findir.es provisions on emergency planrung says that it is "totauy inappropnate" for for was of the numerous " modules" of a I

" extend", to the detr.mont of state and the Commission, while construction is gaseous diffusion facility. The issue of local governments, the " realism" docume set forth m io CFR 50.47 and going on, to sign off on inspections and how the modules of a gaseous diffusion thus put matters beyond dispute which facility should be licensed is beyond the recently affirmed in Commonwealth of might otherwise be raised after scope of this rulemaking: 4 52.103 Meseachusette v. NRC. 458 F.2d 37 (1stconstruction is complete. However. UCS Commiesion would have to make therefors cannot suggest that the Cir.1988). Apparently. NIRS believes that to settle emeregency planrung has misunderstood the Commission's issues before construction is to "extenda role in the inspection process. While seperste findings for each of the the doctree.To the contrary, although construction is going on. only the staff modules of such a facility, signs off oninspecuons.no E RepHosta Munt Coocept Subpart C assumes the " realism" doctrme. as it is enntled to do. It does Commission makes no findings with not extend it.The doctrme remains respect to construction until in the notice of proposed rulemakmg.

construction is complete. Section 52.99 the Commission published a revised precisely what it is in i 50.47. Moreover, has been modified to make this point policy statement on replication of plants the Commsesion's aun in drafting more clearly.

and invited comment on the revised Subpart C's provisions on emergency UCS and othst ecmmenters object to policy. See 53 FR 32087, col. 3. to 32068.

planrung has been to follow to the maxunum feasible extent the National the section in i 52.103 of the proposed col.1. Severalindustry commenters Govemors' Association's rule which provided interested persons remarked that the statement's Recommendation. at its 79th annual thirty days altst notice of proposed requirement that the applicat on for meetmg. in 1987, that "... emergency authonsstion of operation in which to replication be submitted within five i

plans should be approved by the NRC request a hearing on the specified years of the date ofissuance of the staff safety evaluation report for the base before it issues the construction permit grounds. Yet the thirty day requirement plant effectively made replication was drawn from section 189a of the Act.

for any new nuclear power plant."

Neither the Act not part $2 imagmes unavailable for the short term. They recommended removmg the restnet.on, t

15384 Tederal Regist:r / Vol. H. No. 73 / Tuesday. April 18. 1989 / Rults and Regulatirns I

' or at least1:ngtheasag it. De subsequently idanufied by the ACKS or Paperwerk Reducaies Act Statement Commission has decided to retam this dunna the public haannes on the base restnetiors. De five. year figure is in la et plant appbcation as regturms later Die finalrule amends information already a lengthemns of the analogue resolution:

collection requirements that are subject Egure an the immediately preceding (5)Idenafication of the maior p

g gg, g,gg g version of the pobey statement, ne contractors, with jusuficataon for the g ggg g g'Og' 79, restnetion is a re0secon of the acceptabihty of any that are different requirements have been submitted to the I

Comm:ssion's bebelthat appbcations than those used by the base plant Office of Management and Budget which nach back further than a ven oppbcant and DMB)!w any rmew appropnate under number years probably ought to he i

(6) A discussion of how the replicate the Act.De effective date of this rule g

i considered as custom-plant plant design wdl conform to any provides for the ninety days mquired for cpplicanons.

changes to the Comnussion's regulations OMBreviewof theinformation hhcyon Aephooran which have become effecuve emce the collection requirements contained in the De replicate plant conceptinvolves touance of the hcanse for the bau rule.

j plant.

Pubbc reporting burden for this an application by a utility for a license to construct or operste one or more EavironmntallaipeaWegenesi cellection of information is estimated to nucleat power plants of essentially the Eselusion average 22.000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> per response, including the time for toviewmg same design as one alresdy licensed.

De finalrule amends the procedures instructions, searching existing data The design of the plant strendy licensed (termed the base plant design) currently found in Part go andits sources, gathering and maintaining the may be replicated at both the appendices for the fihng and reviewing data needed, and completing the of applications for construcUon permits, renewing the collecton of information.

construcuon permit and opweting license stages, and in opplicanons for opereting licenses, early site renews.

Send comments regardmg this burden combined construction pennits and and standard dulgn approvals. As such estamate or any other aspect of this opersting licenses in a one-step they meet the eligibility entens for the collection of information. including hcensing process. Rephcstion of an categoncal exclusion set forth in to CFR

~

approved base plant design et the 51.22tc)t3).DM utton appbes to suggesnons or reducing this burden, to the Records and Reports Management construccon permit etsge is a

-[s)mendments to... Part () 50...

Branch. Division ofInformation i

prerequisite for its repbestion at the which relate to (1) procedures for filing Suppport Sernees. Office ofinferrastion cpersting license stage. Although and reviewmg applicatons for bcenses and Resources Management. U.S.

replication of the base plant design at or construction peruuta or other forms of Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the o;.ersting beense stage is not permission....* As the Commission Washington. DC 20555: and to the explainedin promulgating this Paperwork Reduction Project (3150-I mandatory, that is, the operstmg h.eense exclusion. "[s !though amendments of this type affec]t substantive parts of the 0000). Office of Management and application may be submitted as a custom plant ap recommended. phesuon. itis strongly Comm:ssion's regulations, the Budget. Washington. DC 20503.

amendments themselves relate solely to Regulatory Analysis inp fa matters of rocedure. Iney)...do not '

n' 'E[d'a*'#aMl"#' 2,"7*stia"rgefy"!f*'"'?.""

mu eo e

wi the As presently constituted. the l

'i,";,'n'r.gg's'e"'~

d

@nafaenmninentalprotecton eo Commissi n's Severe Accident Policy Ngu ns). Accordingly.pmuant to kind designs. Exponence has shown that Statement (%0 R 32138: August 4.1985).

Each appbcation reposmg to 1

5%. no enmamatal the highly individualistic character of repheate a previous y bcsensed plant E P "' " "'"8 " " " 8I'I 4ts popu1Mion has consumed enannous wsil be subjected to a quahficauon essessment need be preparedin resources in the processes of design, review to determme the acceptability of connectim wie thew nnel nales.'

construction, and safety renew.

the base plant for repbceuon and to Because, typically, design of a plant was define specific matters that must be

' I' **h" " "h***" dd"*" 8" the not complete when construction ofit began,inany safety questions were not eddressed in the appliceuon for the E d*'" M p' M'.f L resolved untillatein the beensms r phcate plant. A further requusment sa The emaisseau m. in im omseemsem a,m,,e, proceedmg for that plant.ne late f or quehficanon is that the oppheauon Peri so posees w and esmid how been pi eed a resolution of questions introduced great for a repheate plant must be submitted y',,", *"**,*,",,"g,*,T Q*,',p the process of resolution often entailed uncertainty into proceedings, because within five years of the date ofisevanc.e of the etaff sefety evsluation report ior the base plant.The quahfication rentw e,,

e,in,e ine esiege,, onesuded br lengey safey mviews, constnacnon i nuncitn smee in esser wie me eagemess.,

delays, and backAta. Moreover, the low will consider the followmg information:

an appucant met hen = build and inne s p miype incidence of duplicanon among designs (1) The arrangement stade with the developers of the base plant design for

(", ',"%j'gl,,(**gyg*l,8",'

has meant that exponence gainedin te its replicatiotu i sualem valae. tw temnen. me pennie nee construction and operation of a given et a saleir rule wwch sopam ie esmeene pines.

Plant has often not been usefulin the (2) The compatibility of the base plant me semai sense et premmisenes a star am see e construction and operation of any other r

design with the charactenstics of the g *g g,"g' h'* y,j,,,,',empus,,,,,,

plant and has made the genene site proposed for the repbcate plant:

base) plant design, with justificanon for(3 A descr.ption of any changee to the,,, n ne,ee,ee,gei g t;nder me penem arc-- me mesmoseen envvennesial unaement er impem sistement een seeneween pwan and e, mens basene ter a g g,DI3; be mese cr es rs si sur. ehe ten enes inie paeorpe pieni weila er esmo. be e seier senerei (4)The etstus of any matters an serveseni vrie e state ender secess are et the usee one e eipuncasi sapes a me envo mment 1:lentified for the bese plant design in Aiesse smerer As has se moned.eis er meneerebie end woulet steal the prepareten of en se,veen manspeciand merei n =erream e environnesial empea eteisment cr. ia. e L s (sie the aafety evaluetion nport, or cawsoncalnoussent Timimemase etas sieme mesi,,. desed.,emmassi sempe meter mer bamm wrum useieset

i Toderal Rgeter / Vol. 54. No F3 / Tuesday. April

18. 1989 / Rules and Regulations 18383-molution of conunuing safetyissues standardisation. Clearly,if the (Dec e.1985). The impact on intervenors t

l mon compbcated.

Comaussion and the industry spend the or potenbalintervenors will be neutral.

i-In the face of this experience with a resources necessary to eartdy a score of For the most part the final rule will i

populebon of unique plants, there have designs and then no applicant effect the timing of heannes rather then long been fundamentally only three references any of them. those resources alternauves for Commission action. the will beve been largely wested.On the the scope ofissues to be heard. For last two of them not mutually exclusive:

other hand. It is lust as clear that if a example.many site and design issues t

either make no effort to brms about an score of plante uses a single carufied will be considered earlier, in connection

{

inemesed degree of standarthsauon, or design. there will have been a great with the issuance of an early site permit propose legislation on standardmabon.

sevmg of the maources of the industry.

or standard design certificanon. rather i

or enact by rulemakmg as much of a the agency. and the interested public than later. in connection with a facility scheme for promotes standardmanon alike. To be added to the uncertainties licensingproceedag $1milarly,a as the Commission's current statutory surrounding the industry's response, combined licensed proceedmg will authonty pernuts. no Commission has there are also uncertainties concernin include considerstion of many of the for some ume concluded against the first the costs of the cernfication process, g issues that would ordinarily be deferred until the operating license proceedmg.

ahernauve, havma decided that a and the costs of developing the designs nu, the timing rather than the onnt of substantial increase in standardasation themselves, especially the advanced would enhance the safety and reliability designs, which may require testing of participating in NRClicensms of nuclear power plants and require Prototypes.However,if theindustry proceedings will be affected. latervenors fewer resources in safety reviews of Ands it in its interest to proceed with the may exponence someincreased plants, and that the Commission should development of nuclear power, there is preparation costa if they seek to reopen have in place provisions for the review every reason to expect that the safety previously decided issues because of the of standardized designs and other and economic benehts of increased showmg that will be requimi.

devices for assunna early resoludon of standardization will far outweigh the Once a beanns commences, howes er, safety quest;ons. The Comnussion has upfront costs of design and Commission anintervenor's costs should be therefore pursued standardisation both ceruficauon: Review nme for decreased because theissues will be by propoems legislation -without applications forlicenses willbe more clearly defined than under existmg success-and by promulgatmg rules. in drastically reduced, the public brought practice.Therefore,in accordance with particular Appendices M. N. and O to mm the process befom constmetin.

the Regulatory Flexibility Act of1960. 5 Part 60 (now Part $2) of 20 CI'R. I.acking construction times shortened, economm.

U.S.C. so6(b), the Commission hereby e

legislation on standardisation the of scale created, reliability of plant certifies that the final rule will not has e Commission believes that the most performance increased. maintenance a significant economicimpact on a suitable alternauve for encouragmg made easier, qualified vendor support substantial number of small entities and further standardissuon is to fall out and made easier to maintain, and.most that, therefore. a regulatory flexibill*y e

need analysis need not be prepared.

expand the Commission's regulatory I"{,tanse scheme for standardizauon and early Bac At eis resolution of safety issues, ggg g,

nerefore,the Commission now sbsolute assurance that cerufted designs his rule does not modify or add to promulgates a new set of mgulations, to willin fact be used by the utilities'-

the sysutns. stmetums, compmentsa be placed in a new part in to CFR, Part however. It is certain that if the design of a facility;or the design

52. nis new part facilitataa the early reasonably expected benefits of 8Pproval or manufacturms license for a resoluton of safety issues by providing standardization are to be gained, then facility; or the procedures or for pre-construction. permit approval of the Commission must have the organization mqmmd m constmet a power plant sites. Commission procedural mechanisms in place for operate a facility. However. it could be.

ceruficauon of standardized designs, avww of applicanes in early sim argued that this rule modifies and adds and the issuance oflicenses which approvals, design cernfications and to the procedures or orgerusation combine permission to construct a plant combined licenses. na most required to design a facility, since the with permission to operate it once fundamental choice is, of course, the rule adds to, or else at least spells out.

t construccon of it has been successfullY industry's, to proceed or not with the requirements for appbcants for completed. !deally, a future applicant standardization, according to its own design certifications.Moreover, the rule.

will reference an approved site and a weighing of costs and benefits.But the at the veryleast substanually mod:fics cerufied design in an application for a Commission must be ready to perform the expectations of anyone who had combmed license, thus obviating the its review responsibilities if the industry hoped to apply for a design certificatin chooses stancardisation.

under the previously existing section 7 nud for an extensive review of the apphcanon and construction, ne Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification of Appendix 0 particularly of any such certificaton of designs has the The fmal rule will not have a who presently hold pieluninary or final provisionin Part 52 for Coeunission additional objective of encouraging the significant impact on a substantial design approvals under that Appendix.

t use of standardized designs.thereby number of small entities. The rmal rule Nonethelese, the Commission beheves adding to the beefits of early resolution willreduce the procedural burden on

- that the backfit rule does not apply to the asfety benefits of accumulated NRC licensees by improvmg the reactor this rule end. therefore, that no backfit expenence and the economic benefits of licensms process. Nuclear power plantsnelysis pursuant to to CFR 50.10elells economies of scale and transferable licensees do not fallwithin the required for this rule. The backfit rule dormiuon of small businesses in sectionwas not intended to apply to ever) experience.

Quantheation of the costs and 3 of the Small Business Act.15 U.S.C.

action which substantially changes settled expectations. Clearly. the backf:t benehts of this rulemsking is probably 632, the Small Business Size Standards rule would not apply to a rule which of the SmallBusiness Administrationin not possible. Much depends on the 13 CFR Part 121 er the Commission's would impose more stringent extent to which the industry pursues Size Standards published at 50 FR 50241 requirements on all future applican'. f.:r construction permits, even though s.n.h a

,,,,-nv-

,,e--u m

e,--

15386 Federal Resister / Vcl. 54. No. 73 / Tuesday. April 18.193 / Rules and Regulations rule arguably might have an adv:ree the Energy Retrysnisation Act af 1974, sec.

impact on a person who was as amenaed, and 8 U.S.C. &&2 and &&3.

s2As Eavironmentaireeww.

considahng applying for a permit but the Comaussion is adding to to CFR sLet Ausbonnauon to conduct seu h.d na done so yot a sk uit ca.e.

Chapter i..ew Pari s2 and ado,iing

. canna.

the backat rule protects the construccon amendments to to CFR Paris a. 50. 51.

y y,',*g'd,unn[e,n*'g*basioni

• peruut holder, not the prospecove and 170:

n as g,s n

appbcant, or even the present applicant.

t Part 52 's added to read as follows:

,g,,

n am g p, p

,, u u s o e Th Anaj PART $3-EARLY SITE PERiffTt:

"E W"'d h' " ***

g rule arguablyimposes more strmsent STANDARD DESIGN CERTip1 CATIONS:

requirements for duign ceruncauon and AND COMSINED UCENSES POR Apposa M-4madw&um W W-thereby may heve se edverse impact on NUCLEAR POWER PLA8f75 Manufactum of Naasar poww Meestors:

Commuenos and Operessa of Nuclear eome pereons. However, the e5ects of c

p,,,ing,

poww muctom Manufaciend pumant 8**.

nd ruled e not q y

APpen&s ad nos of Nuclear present holder of a design approval (no pe person holds a design ceruncation) to y S**y ens Come end Opees niam poww meet new standards in order to remain g, g, as Rosatore of Duphoste Design et Muluple in possession of such an approval su IMwasu M eue p u.

Sites OMB approval Ust of Subjects Appn&s p.-(Reewved) gesbpart A-Early tita perupts Appeona O. 4tandardisatsen of Deeten.

JO Cn!forf J Ett Scope of subpart Staff Review of Standard Denipes Administrouve practice and sL13 Releuonalup to Subpart F of to CFR Appendia Q--pre.Appheaues Early Review procedure. Anutrust. Byproduct part 2 and Appendia Q of this part of Site Suttabihtylesses material. Classtfied informahon.

nas rihas of spebcabana.

Aetheatryt Seas.10s.104.101.1BL 183.188.

sL17 Conants of appucauone.

10s, to Stat saa. Dn en es4.est, eso, w Environmental protecnon. Nuclear sL1e standards for nnew of appaceuons.

amende:L sec. 334, as staL 1244. as amended Matenals. Nuclear power plants and nts Peruut and renewal fees.

142 UAC 3133. 2201,223L taas.Saan asas, reactors. Penalty. Sem discnminsuon.

sut Heenass.

2382t sees. sot. 30L 30s, to Stat 13a11344.

Source matenal. Special nuclear sua Referral to the ACRS.

taes.12n as amended (42 UAC 8441. $N2.

matenal. Weste treatment and disposal.

s2.24 taeuance of early site perunit.

sess).

52.25 Estent of actyttee paraatted.

20 CTR Perf 50 star Dureuon of peruut Geoma4Maiens AntitrusL Classi$ed information. Fire

$ A7,$"d",*'gwel ISM Seeps.

c, protection. Incorporsuon by reference, Intergovernmental relations. Nuclear sua Dureuonof neewel Ma pan gowns the immence of nas Use of site for other purposes.

Wly sik pennits, standard design power plants and reactors. Penalty, staf Reporens of defects and carnficauona, and combined licenses for Radiation protection. Reactor siting noncomphance: revocation. sospension.

nuclear power facilities licensed under entena.Reportmg and recordkeepms mo&ficanon of peruuts for amuse.

section los or 104b of the Atomic Energy 7equirements.

sL39 Finahty of early site peredt Act of 1954, as amended (80 Stat. 919),

deterspeauens.

20 CTR Perf SJ and Title !! of the Energy Reorganissuon Subpart t standare Design caseneemens Act of 1974 (88 Stat.1242).

Administrative practica and procedure. Environmentalimpact nu Scopo d abput iBLS Denneens.

statement. Nuclear materials. Nuclear nas get g.onship to Appendiese M.N.and o of stos peri.

As need in thk Part.

power plants and reactors. Reporting sLes rihnsof apphessoas.

(e)" Combined license" means a and recordkeeping requirements, n47 Contents of apphensons.

combined construction persut and g

JO CDI Porf 52 n4a Standards for mvww of appucanona.

oPereting license with conditions for a nos Feesfornyiewof appucanoaa.

nuclear power facility issued pursuant Administrative practice and sist Admuustreon avww of appheatona. to Subpart C of this part.

procedure. Antitrust.Backfitting, sina Referral to the ACRS.

su usaes of standard dessen (b) *T.arly site permit" means a Combined ifcense. Early site permit.

Camluion approvstluued pursuant g

Emergency planmns. Tees. Inspecton.

sul Dureuon of caruficeboa.

to Subpart A of this part for a alte or Limited work authorization. Nuclear sLs7 Appheauen for renewet sites for one or more nuclear power power plants and teeetoro. Probabilisuc s2.se cntens for renewal facilities, risk aese sment. Prototype. Reactor stat Dureuen of maewel siting enteria. Redress of site. Reporting sina rmehry of stardard dalen (c)" Standard design" means a design and recordkeeping requirments, casacasons.

which is sufficiently detailed and complete to support ceru$cationin Standard design. Standard design subpart c-coenNned Usenses accordance with Subpart B of this part.

certificabon.

82.71 scope of subpart.

and which is usable for a muluple yp ggg p,fg pp n y3 RelebenshJp to Subparts A and B.

number of units or at a multiple number Byproduct materialNuclear SL7s Filingof appbcanone.

of sites without reoperung or repeating stf7 cantants W spphcanone: seneral the review.

I matenals. Nuclear power plants and informenon.

(d) **Sunded dui reactors. Penalty. Source material sL7e contents of appucanene: technical d@ cuuncauon'sa c Spectal cucleat meterial.

g,on,go,,,,,,g,,p,,

means a Commission approvalissued

,,,,t

,g p

For the ressons set out in the sta3 Appbeabdity of part So provtstone.

pursuant to Subpart B of this part of a preamble and under the authority of the sLas Admitustrouw mvww of apphcanons. standard design for a nuclear power l

Atomic Energy Act of 19H. as amended, nar Referralto the ACRS.

facility. A design so approved may be

?

en -

,we.

t rederal Regleter / Vol. H. No. 73 / Tuesday. April

18. 1939 / Rules and Rerulations 15387 tefernd to as a *mrated standard frem the Conanasion esparately from an l

(e) All other terms in & part have opphaenon for a construction permit ur need notinclude en assessment of the design".

benents the nearung set out m 10 CFR na2, or a comtuned hasnee far a incihry, of the pro (for saample. need for power) posed acnon. but must include neuon u of the Atomic Energy Act, as W5 FIBng of appteenene, an evalsadon of shemenve sites to i

appbcable.

(s) Any person who may apply for a deternune whether there is any l

obylousiv I st.s integretesana.

construccon permit under to CFR part proposed. supenor alteri.ange to the site Except as specificaDy authonsed by 50.or for a combined utenne under to ph(ys)ical chancterwace unique to t the Commaston in wnung, no Cf1t part 12. may file wie the Director interpretation of the maarung of the of Nuclear Reactor Regulation an regulations in & part by any officer or appliceboc for an early site permit. An proposed sita, such as egress haitauens employee of the nelon other than application for an early site permit meY from the tres surroundag the sita, that a wntten interpntation by the General be Aled normthstanding the fact that an could pose a signancant impediment to Counsel will be neognised to be binding applicstion for a construccon permit or the development of emergency plans.

upon the C a combined bcense has not been Aledin (2)De appucation may also eitber:

connecuan with the a te or sites for (1) propose may futwas W *.be 182.0 DWomenenseassee,n wM a pennit is sought.

emergency plans. such as the easet attes

. gue,,,,,,,,

(b)he appucauon must comply with of the emergency plannas amnes.that aaso can be reviewed and soproved by NRC (e)b Nuclear Regulatory (s). (b). g neuinments of 3 e n and (f) as they would apply to in consultation with FEMAin the Comnussion her submitted the information coUection to uirements an applicadon for a construction permit.

absence of complete andincapated i

contained m this part to t e Office of lh emergency pleas:or Management and BudgetlOMB)for jb 30 (ii) Propose complete and lategrated fg)Pbcabl 8 phs(**Ib I'

emergency plans for renew and approvalas requind by the paperwork p

• (d),an

)'

approval by the NRC.in consuhation Reduccon Act of1980 44 U.S.C.3501 et see.). OMB has appnv(ed the with the FederalEmergency informanon collecuan mmurements iSt.17 Contentaof appasemann, Management Agency.in accord with the contained in thfs (s)(1)b application must contain applicable pronsions of to Cf1t 40.47 number 3150(b). part uncler control the informstion requind by to CFR 80.33 (3)Under paragraphs (b)(1)and(2W (b)The approvedinformation (eHd), the first thru untances of of h action. the apphcation must of emerge)(nc),y plans is sought underl 50.34(a 1 and. to the e include a descnption of contacts and i

collection requirements contained in this part appear m il 82.15.52.17. 52.39.

arrangements made with local, state.

1 3:45. 52.47. 52.87. 82.75, $2.77. and g2.73.

paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this section. the and federalsomnmentalagencies mth information remuned by 4 50.33 (g) and emergency planame twpensibulbes.

Su"'*" A "N Site Perenna (j). and 4 50.34(b)(6)(v), la paracular, the Under the option set forth in paragraph l

$ st.11 Seepe of magert.

applicanon abould desenbe the (b (2) followmg:

sh)au m(U) of this secuan, the appheast ake good fahh efforts to obtain his subpart sets out the requirements (1)The number, type and thermal cnd procedures appbcable to power level of the facihtles for which from the same governmentalagencies certifications that(1 The proposed i

Commission issuance of early site the site may be used; emergency plans are)precocanie (ii) i prmits for appnval of a site or sites for (illN boundaries of the site:

Nee agencies are committed to one or mon nuclear power facilities (ill) he proposed general location of parecipating in any further development separate from the filing of an application each facihty on the site:

l for a construction permit or combined (iv)The anuctpated maxismmalevels of the plana,incluem' s any required Aeld heense for such a facihty.

of tediological and thermal effluents demonstrations, and (iii) that these l

182.t3 IsolemanaNp so Subvert F et 10 each facihty will produce:

agencies are committed to executes their responsibilities under the plans in CFR port 3 anu Appeness Q of fue part.

(v) he type of cochng systems, the event of an emergency b W procedures of this subpert do not intakes. and outflows that may be application must contam any replace those set out in Subpart F of 10 associated with each facihty; certifications that have been obtained. lf (vi)The seismic meteorological.

these caru$ canons cannot be obtained.

CFR part 3 or Appendix Q of this part, hydrologic, and geologic characteristice the appbcation must contain 4

Subpart F applies only when early renew of site suitsbibtylesseeis seaght of the proposed site (see Appendix A to informadon. including a utdity plan.

to CFR part 2001:

in connection with an opphetion for a permit to construct certain power (vii) The location and description of enflicient to show that the proposed facihties. Appendix Q spplies only when any nearby industrial.mditary.or plans nonetheless prende masonable NRC staff renew of one or sure site trtneportation fecutties and rentes: and assurance that adequate protective (viii) h existing and projected futurs measures can and will be taken.in the suitability issues is sought separately population profile of the ares event of a radiological emergency at the from and prior to the submittalof a surroundma the ette.

site.

construccon pernut. A Staff Site Report (2) A compiete entronmentalreport (c)If the applicent wishes to be able issued under Appendix Qin no way affects the authonty of the Consnieelon as required by to CF1L 81.45 and 81.50 to perform, after grant of the early site at se be included in the oppbcation.

permit. the activines at the site allowed or the presiding officerin any provided. howevw. that such by to CF1t 80.10(e obtaining the sepa)r(3) without first pmceedmg under Subpart F of G of to ate authonsstion ennronmental report must focus on the CFR part 2. Subpart A applies when any environmental effects of construction required by that section. the applicant ptroon who may apply for a and operation of a nector. or nettore.

shall propose,in the early site perout, a construction permit under to CF1L part which beve charseteristics that fall plan for rednse of the site in the event 50 or for a combmed license under to within the postulated alte parametere, that the setivities are performed and the t

CFR part $2 seeks an early site permit and prended further that the nport referenced in en apphcation for a site permit expina befom it is 4

4

..--.u

-.,m.e.-,

35iss Federal Register / Vcl. 54. No. 73 / Tuesday. April 18. 1989 / Rt.les and Rerulations construenon perm' it or a combined requirements for docketmein (bilf the acuvities permitted by license issued under Subpart C of this ll L101(a)(tH4), and the requirements paragraph (s) of this section are part. no appbcanon must demonstrate for issuance of a notice of hearmsin performed at any site for which an early that there is reeweeble assurance that i l L104(a). (b)(1)(iv) and (v). (b)(2) to site permit has been granted, and the redress carned out under the plan will the extent it runs parallel to (b)(1)(iv) site is not referenced in an application achieve an ennronmentaDy stable and and (v). and (b)(3), prended that the for a construcuon permit or a combined aestheticaUy acceptable site suitable for designated sections may not be Ucanse issued under Subpart C of this wbstever non. nuclear use may conform construed to require that the part whue the peruut remains vahd. thea with local sonas isws.

envuonmentalreport or draft or haal the early site permit must remain in isaas mansoresermmwW ennronmental impact statement include effect solely for the purpose of site an annement of the benefits of the redress and the holder of the t

Appbcations Aled under this subpart proposed action. In the hearms. the shaU redress the altein a ance with will be reviewed according to the presidmg officer shau also deternme the terms of the site redress plan applicable standards set out in to Cm whether, taking into conalderston the required by 8 52.17(c). !f. before redress Part 80 and its appendices and Part 100 alte criteria contained in to CFR Part is complete, a use not envisaged in the as they apply to appbcat;ons for 100, a reactor, or reactors. having redress plan is found for the site or garts construchon perlatte for nuclear power charactenstics that fab within the thereof, the holder of the perant shau plants.1r. particular, the Conurussion paramotus for the site can be carry out the redress plan to the greatest sbau prepare en ennronmentalimpact constructed and operated without undue extent possible consistent with the statement during renew of the risk to the health and safety of the alternate use.

appbcation. in accordance with the public. All hearmas conducted on apphenble provisions of to Cf1t Part St.

appliestions for early site permits filed i SSM Durseen W pnne.

provided, however, that the draft and under this part are govemed by the (a)Except as provided in paragraph final ermronmental impact statements procedures contained in Subpart C of (b) of this section, an early site permit Part 2.

prepared by the Comuussion focus on Issued under this subpart may be valid for not less than ten nor more than the ennronroental effects of i SL23 Refwrer to me Acsts, i

construction and o ersuon of a reactor, twenty years from the date of issuance.

or reactors,which ave charactenstics ne ConWuion shaU win a copy of (b)(1) An wly siw pumn conunun that faU within the postulated site the appbcation to the Advisory to be vahd beyond the date of parameters, and provided further that Committee on Reactor Safeguards expiration in any proceedag on a the statements need not include an (ACRS).De ACRS shaU report on those construction peruut applicauon or a messment of the benefits (for example, poruone of the application which combined license application which need for power) of the proposed action.

concern safety.

references the earl site permit and is docketed either before the date of but must include an evaluation of g 83.24 laauenos of earty alte pennn-allemative sites to determine whether expiration of the early site perinit, or if there is any obviously superior After conducting a hearms under a timel opbication forrenewalof the l

attemative to the site proposed.De i 52.2% of this subpart and receiving the permit as n fued. before the report to be submitted by the Advis Commission has determmed whether to g,'[,n th Federa'l Committee on Reactor Safeguards un er renew the permit.

I 52.23 of this subpart, and upon (2) An early site permit also continues i

i for$a ion re u re of the determming that an application for an to be valid beyond the date of e er e applicant by l 52.17(b)(1) shows that early sim pumit meets the applicable expiration in any proceedag on an there is no significant impediment to the standards and requirements of the operstang licanae application which is development of emergency plans.

Atomic Energy Act and the whether anymajor features of Commission's regulations, and that based on a construction permit which references the early site permit. and in emergency plans submitted by the notifications,if any, to other agencies or any hearms held under i 52.103 of this apphcant under i 52.17(b)(2)(1) are bodies have been duly made, the part before operstaon beams under a acceptable, and whether any emergency Commission shellissue an early site combined license which references the plans submitted by the applicent under pennu. in the fann and containing the wly sim pennit.

t $2.17(b)(2)(li) provide reasonable conditions and haitations, as the casurance that adequate protective Comnussion deems appropnate and (c) An applicant for a construction pelinit or combmedlicense may at na rnessures can and wiu be taken in the necessary.

own nok. reference m its application a event of a radiologicalemergency.

g 82.25 gatent of asevices pumnese.

• *f*M Y

d d

w g ss.ts Permet one renewel fees.

(a)If an early site permit contains a granted.

ne fees charged for the review of an site redress plan. the holder of the appbcation for the ininalissuance or permit, of the applicant for a

$53.39 Appheaganforruwwal j

renewal of an early site pomut are set construction permit or combined license (e)Notless than twelve not more than forth in 10 CI1t 170.12 together with a who references the permit. may perform thirty six months pnor to the end of the schedule for their deferred recovery.

the activities at the site nuowed by to initial twenty year period, or any later The la no application fee.

CF1t 50.10(e)(1) without first obtaining renewal penod, the permit holder may i s2.21 Heartage.

the separate authorization required by apply for a renewal of the pernut. An that section. provided that the final apphcation for renewal must contain all j

An early site permit is a partial environmentalimpact statement information necessary to bring up to

(

construcuon permit and is therefore prepared for the permit has concluded date the informauon and data contained subject to su procedural requirements in that the activities will not result in any in the previous application.

10 CFR Part 2 which are applicable to significant adverse environmental construccon permits,includmg the impact which cannot be redressed.

be(b) Any person whose interests may effected by renewalof the permit i

l

Fed:ral Resistar / Vcl. 54. No. 73 / Tuesday. April

18. 1939 / Rules and Rirulati:ns 15389 may requist a haanag as the apphoanon for renewal. Da request for a haanag acuvitiu. He informaban prowded must comply with 10 CTR 2110 if a could be the baais forimposang new facie. eat the acceptanea antena have beenng is granted. nonce of the baarms requirements on the pernut. la not been met.The perupt holder and l

will be pubbabed in accardance with 10 accedanos with the pronaions of NRC staff may LJe answers to the CTR 2J03.

l EL30. If the permit holder informs the peution withis the time specified in 30 i

(c) An early site permit, alther ongmal Director that the holder na longer CFR L730 for answers to monome by or renewed, for which a timely intends to une the sita for a nuclear parties and staff. lf the Comaussion. in power plut, the Director shall taruunate its tudgment. decides. on the basis ei the applicacon for ranewal has been Aled, pentions and any answere thereto, that the peruut.

remains in effect until the Commission the poetion moets the mqaromants of has determined whether to renew the I$3J7 Reperen W this paragraph that the leeues are not

,er.ui.ifes,e.ahnoi, eww.it a::::::",lr:r,e,mlestumandremma

. exempt from adjudication under 5 U.S.C.

contmoes to be validin certain wem hig-meiss.es of mannai proceedings in accordance with the For pur provisions of I $2E(b).

N "" Poses of Part g1 and so CPR fact are rained and that settlement or

• • % 'N other infonaal resolution of the issues is (d)no Comnussion shallrefer a copy constmenon pennn'.P'""" A8

• not possible then the genutne leemos of of the application forunewal to the material fact raised by the pention must AdvisoryCommittee on Reactor g 33.38 Fmessy of eerey ese passist be resolved in sonardamos mth the mport on those por)tions of theSefeguards (ACRS.no ACRS aball esserweassene.

pronsions in hat 666. and &$7 which are (e)(1) Notwithetending any sien applicable to deterniaing appboation for applicaton which concern safety and in 10 Cm 50.108 while en y site lattialliceans.

shau apply the antena set forth in permit h in effect under il S&27 or SL33 (ill) A poetion which alleges that the

) $2.31.

the Coramission me;not impose new requimments, including new einergency terma and conditions of the early site i etJ1 Crfteria for reneuet planning mqmmments on h est sia pernut should be modined willbe (s)ne Cosmussion shall grant the permit or the site for which it was procaned to accad me to Cm 2.308.

tenewslif the Comnussion determmes issued. unless the Commission Before construcuan cosumences, the that the site comphes with the Atonue determmes that a modancanon is Commission shall consider the pention Energy Act and the Commismon s men eho bWw and detwnune whether anyinunediate lations and orders applicable and in b sim m emphnu 6 h udon h regamdif b putin W rr ei ect at the nme the site perust was Comion's regulations and orders nud. em u appmpum wdw win ongmally issued, and any new applicable and in effect at the time the issued. Constructan under the mqutrements the Comaussion may wish pan wu houd one construction permit or combined license odequate protection of the public health wiu not be aRecwd by W groung d the petition taless the orderis made there substantalin es in oversu and safety or the conunon defense and rotecuen of the public health and m unty.

immediately e5ective, afety or the common defense and (2)In making the findings required for (ie) prioHo construcuan, the acunty to be denved imm the new issuance of a constraction pernut, Conuniasion shau And that the terms of mbuirements and that the direct and operating license, or combined license.

the early site pernut have been met.

ect costa ofimplementation of those of the findings required by 8 82.103 cf (b) An applicant for a construction sn requirements are tustdedin new of this this part.if the application for the pumit, opersuas hcease, or combined increased protection.

constnicuen ennst opwenns Deanse Ucense who has filed an appbcation or combined ficense references an ear.

nimacmg an early aita persutissued does)not bar the pernut holde or(b A denial of renewalon this basis ly site penst the Commission shall treat under this subpart may tacludein se another opphcant from filing a new as resolved those matters resolved inopphcation a request for a eenance from applicanon for the ate which proposes de procudmg on the appilcatin for one or more eksents of es pusut.in changes to the site or the way m wiuch issuance or nnewal of the early site deternuning whether to grsat the it h used which correct the denciencies permit, unless e contention is admnted varance, the th* ion shall apply cited in the denial of the renewal that a reactor does not At within one or tl.a same technicauy relevant entens as 3tts puremen of reneuraL more of the site parameters included in wei, applicable to the appbcauco for the site ermit. or a petition is filed the cr 3.nal or tonewed site persut.

which ageges either that the site la not 1: svante of the vananca must be subject Each renewalof an early alte permit j

tney be for not less than ten not moi, than twenty years, in compliance with the terms of the to hugaboo during the construction early aim permit or that the terms and pernut, operstmg bcenas, or combined i

conditons of the earl bcense proceedagin the same manner j $3.38 Use of atte for other pm t

abould be modifkd y site permit u ohrinns mutarial to eose A site for which an early site permit (1) A contenton that a reactor doesproceedings.

has been issued under this subpart may be used for purposes other than thoes not fit within one or more of the site Suboart 5-Standard Dealen desenbed in the peruut. including the parameters included in the site permit Cartifications location of other types of energy may be litigated in the same manner as iscuities. ne pernut holder shaU inform other issues material to the proceeding.I 53 M the Director of Nuclear Reactor (II) A pettion which alleges that the so m ofevapert, Regulstion of any sigmficant uses for the site is not in compliance with the terms nla subpart set out the requirements site which have not been approved in of the early site pernut must include, or and procedures applicable to the early site permit. ne infortnation clearly reference, officialNRC Commluion issuance of rules granting documents, documents prepared by or standard design certification for nuclear ebout the acevities must be given to the for the permit holder, or evidence power facilities separate from the filing Director m advance of any actual construccon or site modificaton for the admissible in a proceeding under of an application for a construction Subpart C of part 2, which show, prima permit or combined license for such

facihty, l

6 i----,.-.w---

l

)

m g6 Tederal Redeter / Vcl. 54. No. 73 / Tuesday. April 18, 1989 / Rules and Regulations g ss.as R'lemenemp to Appensees st.II.

Nuclear Reactor Regulation an be sufficiently detailed to allow o

cas o of INe part.

apphcanon for a Analdcsign approval completion of the Baal safety analysis (s) Appendix M to this part governs and comficaban.

and design. specific probabihetic nok the issuance of !! censes to manufacture (2) Any person who seeks certification asusement mquued by perspeph rinclear power mactore to be installed but already holds, or has appbed for, a (a)(1)(v)of this secnon:

cad opereted at sites not identified in Anal design approval, also shall file with the manufactunns license applicanon.

the Director of Nuclear Reactor wuh the)usufication that compliance (viii) interface nquirements of Appendix N sovems licenses to Regulation en appbcanon for paragraph (a)(1)(vil) of this section is canstruct and operste nuclear power cefufication. because the NRC staff may venfiable throughinspecnon testing i

reactors of dupbcate design at muluple require that the informa' ion before the (either in the plant or elsewhere). or sites. nese appendices may be used staff in connection with the review for analysis.The method to be used for independently of the provisions in this the finaldesign approval be venfication of interface regarements subpart unless the applicant also wishes supplemented for the review for to use e certtlied standard design ceruficebon-must be included as part of the ed i

I l

spproved under this subpart.

(d)The applicant must comply with tests. inspections, analyses.

l (b) Appendix 0 govems the staff the filing requirea mts of to Cm acceptance enteria required by I

nyiew and approval of preliminary and 80.30(s)(1)-(4) and (6) and 80.30(b) as parepaph (a)(1)(vi) of this secuen: and i

(tm) A representsuve conceptual i

Anal standard designs. A staff approval they would apply to an application for a daign for thou portone of the plant for under Appendix 0 is no way affects the nuclear power plant construction permit. which the applicauon moes not seek cuthority of the Commission or the ne following portions of 6 30.4. which presiding officerin any proceedag le Mferenced by 6 50.30(a)(1), am certification. to aid the staff in its review under Subpart G of to CFR Part 1.

applicable to the extent technically of the final safety analysis and Subpart 8 of Part 82 govems relevant:peregraphs (e):(b) except for probabilistic risk assessment required Comnussion approval or certi$cetion, perspaphs (6):(c): and (e),

by paragraph (e)(1)(v) of this section.

'8 and to permit assessment of the

• *fa"r gg) dee vs i BL47 Contents of appesomena.

adequacy of the interface requirements ca for by paragraph (a)(1)(vii) of this Appendix 0 is a rere visite for (s)Re requirements of this paragraph certification of a standard design under apply to all apphcauons for design su uon.

aefe e

)

op licationfordesign le es traf u

uf6cienuo l

si op eppheant intende to seek certi8 cation of cerufication must contata:

enable the Commission to fu the l

the design.lf the applicant does so (1)ne technicalinformation which is applicant's proposed means o assuring intend. the appbcauon for the Anal required of applicants for construction that constmetion conforms to the dungn design approval must,in addition to permits and operatinglicenses by to and to reach a finalconclusion on all contaming the information required by Cm Part 20. Part 80 and its appendices, safety guntions suociated with se Appendix 0, comply with the applicable and Parts ya and 100, and whichis design before the caruficationis requirements of Part 52. Subpart B.

technirally relevant to the design and granted. ne information submitted for a particularly ll 52.48 and 82.47.

not site specific:

design certification mustinclude l

3 52.e5 Flung of appeestions-(11) Demonstration of compliance with Performance requirements and design any technically rolevant portions of the wormation sufficiendy detailed to (a)(1) Any person may seek a nrw Mile Island requirements set forth permit the preparation of acceptance i

standard design cerufication for an in10 CR 50.34(f);

and inspection requirements by the I

essentially complete nuclear power (tillne site parameters postulated for NRC.and procumment specifications plant design which is an evolutionary the design. and an analysis and and construction andinstallation change from light water noctor designs evaluation of the design in terms of such specifications by an applicant.The of plants which have been hcensed and ' parameters:

Commission will nt(uire. pnor to design in commercial operation before the (iv) Proposed technical resolutions of ceruficauon. that wormauon normally i

sfiectve date of this rule.

those Unresolved SafetyImues and contained in certain procurement l

(2) Any person may also swk a medium and high priority Generic specifications and construction and 1

standard design cernficauon for a Safety lesues which are idenufied in the Installation specifications be completed nuclear power plant design which version of NUREG 4033 current on the and evallable for auditif such differs significantly from the light water date six months prtor to application and informationis necessary for the reactor designe described in paragraph which are technically relevant to the Comroission to make its safety (a)(1) of this section or utilises des -

determination.

simplified. inherent, passive, or other (v

design specific probabilistic risk (3) ne staff shall advise the applicant k

innovauve means to accomplishits assessment on whether any technicalinformation j

cafety functions.

(vi) Pro (b) An appbcation for certification analyses,powd tests. inspections, beyond that required by this section and acceptance criteria which must be submitted.

may be filed notwithstanding the' fact are necessary and sufficient to provide (b) Ris paragraph applies, according that an application for a construction reasonable assurance that. if the testa, to its provssions, to partcular permit or combinedlicense for such a inspecuons and analyses are performed applications:

facility has not been filed.

and the acceptance criteria met. a plant (1) ne applicadon for certification of (c)(1) Because a final design approval which references the design is built and under Appendix 0 of this partis a will operste in accordance with the a nuclear power plant design whichis parequisite for cernficanon of a design ceruficauon.

an evolutionary change from light water reactor designs of plants which have standard design, e person who seeks (vu)ne interface nquirements to be bunlicensed and in commercial such a ceruGcanon and does not hold, met by those portions of the plant for operation before the effecure date of i

or has not applied for, a final design which the applicauon does not seek this rule must provide an essentially approval, shall S!e with the Director of certificatf ort. Dese requiremente must complete nuclear power plant design

Tod:ral Resister / Vo). 54. No. 73 / Tuesday. Apri) 18. 1989 / Rules and Regulations 15391 except for one-opecif.c elements such as various options. including any in a formalhennas. De staff will be a the service water mtske structure and restnetions which will be necepary party in the heanng.

the ultunate best sink.

during the construe

• ton and startup of a (2)(t) Ceruncauon of a standard given module to ensun the safe (c)De decision in such a heanns will be based only oninforestion on which design which ddfers sigraficantly from opration of any module already allparues have had an opportunity to the bght water reactor designe desenbed operstmg.

in paragraph Ib)(t) of this section or comment. eitherin response to the utthnes sunphfied. inherent, passive, or i St.as stenseres ter revees of nouce of proposed rulemaking or in the cther mnovative means to accomphsh appseemena.

informal hearms. Notwithstanding its safety funcuons will be granted only if Applications filed under this subpart anything in to Cm 2.730 to the contrary.

(A)(7)The performance of each safety will be reviewed for compliance with propnetaryinformation will be the standards set outin to CM Part 30-protected in the same manner and to the featum of the designMe been demonstreted @ rough either analysis.

Part so and its appendices, and Parts 73 same extent as propnetary information i

and 100 as they apply to applications for submitted in sonnection with appropnate test programs. exponence.

or a combinsuon thereof:

construcuon pernuts and operating applications for construction permits licenses for nuclear power plants, and and operatinglicenses under 30 Cm (2)1nterdependent effects amo e

Part 80 [shallbe publishefin ded that the desi as those standards are technically ufety features of the design have n

certifice found acceptable by analysis-relevant to the design proposed for the facibty.

Chpte i M this Title' eppropriato test programs. exponence.

or a combination thereof:

I St.de Poes for review et appaeseena.

I St.83 Mme sie ACMS.

(3) sufficient data exist on the safety features o/the design to assess the ne fees charged for the review of an ne Commluion shau Mw a un d analyucal tools used for safety analyses application for the truual issuance or

^

"#I over a sufficient range of normal renewalof a standard design Commann on Reactw SafeguaMs operaung conditions, transient certdication are set out in to Cm 170.12.

(ACRS). The ACRS shall report on those conditions, and e afied accident together with a schedule for their portions of the applicauon which deferred recover sequences. inclu equilibrium core opphcation fee. y. Dere is no encem safety, I 53.54 leeuense et stoneses season (v)The scope of the design is

$ 53.s1 Aaministratwo review et complete except for site specific appueseens.

clements such as the service water After conducting a rulemaking intake structure asd the ultimate best (a) A standard design certification is a proceedag under i 82.81 on en emb or rule that wiu k inued in accoMuce application for a standard design (B)There has been acceptable testmg with the provisions of Subpart H of to cerufication and moeiving the report to si an appropriately sited full size.

CTR part 2. as supplemented by the be submitted by the Advisory p ototype of the design over a sufficient provisions of this ucuom The Committee on Reactor Safeguards under l

range of normal operaung conditions.

Comunion shallWuste the i 82.83. and upon determuung that the transient conditions, and specified rulemaking after en applicanon hu application meets the opplicable equilibrium core conglu been filed under 6 $2.45 and shall standards and requirements of the accident sequences, j

one. ithe specify the pro:edures to be used for the Atornic Energy Act and the this sec i n$s no Comminia's reguladas, the et.

te of the (b)The rulemaking proceduns must Commission shau issue a standard prototype must demonstrate that the provide for notice and comment and an design cernfication in the form of a rule non. certified porton of the plant cannot opportuntry for eninformal hearing for the design which is the subject of the eigruficantly affect the safe operation of before an Atomic Safety and Licensing spPhcahom the plant.

Board.The procedures for the informal (ii)The application for fmal design hearms must include the opportunity for i St.ss Ouremen of sortmessen.

approval of a standard design of the wntten presentatons made under oath (a)Except as providedin paragraph tpe desenbedin this subsecton must or affirmauon and for oral presentations (b) of this section, a standard design propose the specific testing necessary to and questioning if the Board finds them certification issued pursuant to this support ceruficauon of the design, either necessary for the creation of an subpart is valid for fifteen years from whether the testmg be prototype testeg adequate record or the most expeditious the date ofissuance.

or the testing required in the altemative way to resolve controversies.

(b) A standard design certification by paragraph (b)(2)(1)(A) of this section.

Ordinanly, the questioning 'n the continues to be valid beyond the date of i

The Appendix 0 finaldesign approval informalheannt wiu be done by l

of such a design must identify the members of the Board.using either the expirationin any proceedmg on an application for a combined license or specahe testing required for cerufication Board's questions or questions operating license which references the i

l cf the design submitted to the Board by the parties.

standard design certification and is (3) An application seeking The Board may also request authority docketed either before the date of l

cerufication of a modular design tnust from the Commission to use additional desenbe the venous opeons for the procedures, such as direct and cross expiration of the certification, or. if a i

configuration of the plant and site, examination by the parties, or may certification has been filed. before the timely application for renewal of the including vanations m. or sharms of.

request that the Commission convene a common systems. interface formal hearms under Subpart G of10 Commission has determmed whether to renew the cerufication. A design requirements, and system interecuens.

CFR Part 2 on specific and substannal certification also continues to be vahd The final safety analysis and the disputes of fact. necessary for the beyond the date of expiration m any probabilistic nok auessment should Comrnission's decision. that cannot be also account for differences among the resolved with sufhcient occuracy except hearms held under i 52.103 before operation berns under a combinni 1

,_.m

g3ge Federal Rtsister / Vol. 64. No. 73 / Tuesday. April stL 19'3 / Rules and Regulatione

{

beense whit.h references the design requirements are luen$ed in view of this to assure esquete protecton of the certificeuen.

inenesed protecnon. In addition. the pubbt health and safety or the common (c) An applicant for a construccon applicant for renewal may request an defense and secunty, and (ii) special permit or combined bconee may, at its amendment to the design ceruficauon.

circumstances as defined in to CFR on nok. reference in its opphcanon a no Comaussion shall grant the E12(a) are present, the Commission design for which a design certmcanon omendment request tfit detervunes that may notimpose new wquiteermte by apphcation has been docketed but riot the amendment wiu comply with the granted.

Atonue Energy Act and the plant.epecific order on any paa of the design of a speede plant referenemg the i sLs7 Apphomaan ser snoweL Commission's regulations in effect et the desip comfication if that part was l

(a)Not less than twelve nor more than time or renewal. U the amendmentapproved in the desip serafiestion. in j

thirty.eim months pnor to ermretion of nqunt entails such an extensive change addition to the factors hatedin l

the initial fihun. year pened, or anY to the design eartification that an i 80.12(a). the Commission shall l

leter renewal penod. any person may essentially new standard design is being consider whether the spemal apply for renewal of the ceruficanon, proposed. an opphcauon for a design circumstances which i 80.12(a)(f) l An application for renewal must contain cerufication shau be Aled in accordance requires to be present outweigh any ell informouon necessary to brias up to with I $2.48 and 82.47 of this part.

date the information and data contatned (b) Denial of renewaldoes not bar the decrease in safety that may result from the reduccon in standardiastion caused in die previous applicatiort ne applicant. or another apphcant. trom by the plant.epecific order.

Commiselon will require, pnor to filing a new application for eerufication (4)Except se providedin to Cm of the design,which proposes design normauy contained in osttain changes which correct the deficiencies 2.788. In making the findings required for unewal of cernficauon. that informou.on issuance of a combined boense or procurement spec $ cations and cited in the dental of the renewal.

operatinglicense,or for any beenna construcuon and instalisuon i 82.01 Dwesen of m under i 62.103. the Commission shall specificauons be completed and Each renewal of cernficauon for a treet as resolved those matters resolved available for audit if such informa con is standard design wiU be for not less than la connocuon with the issuance or necessary for the Comnussion to make ten nor more than fifteen years' renewal of a design cerufication.

c$r hPr (bH1) An opphcant or heensu who e ur m a b us fora l atts Finenty et staneers seesp references a standard design dmg on th' serunestsena, certification may request an exemption pl ca o

swal. n e (s)(1) Notwithstanding any provision from one or more elements of the design Commiesion. in its discretion, may in 10 CR 80.109. whue a etendard certificauon. De Comunission may grant nquire the use of additional procedures design cernfication is in effect under such a request on) ifit determines that in individual renewal proceedmas.

I 62.55 or $2.81, the Commission may the esemption wil comply with the j

(b) A design certification, either not modify, nocind. or impose new requirements of to CFR 80.12(a). In onginal or nnewed. for which a timely requiremente on the cerufication, eddition to the factors listed in i

appbcation for renewal bas been filed whether on its own mouon orin I to12(a). the Commission shall remains in effect until the Commission response to a petition from any person, consider whether the special has determmed whether to renew the unless the Commission deternunes in a circumstances which I to.12(aK2) t certification.11 the cerufication is not rulemaking that a modificationis requires to be present outweigh any I.

renewed. it contmues to be valid in necessary either to bring the decrease in safety that may result from certain proceedings. in accordance with certtficauon of the referenema plants the reduction in standardisation caused the provisions of I 52.55.

into compliance with the Commission's by the exemption.De granting of an (c)ne Comnussion shallrefer a copy regulauons appbcable and in effect at exemption on request of an opphcant of the opplicauon for nnewal to the the time the cerufication was leeued, or must be subject to litigation in the same

)

l Addsory Commutee on Reactor.

to assure edequate protection of the manner as otherissues m the operatin Safeguards (ACRS).no ACRS shall public health and safety or the common license or combined license hearms. g

{

report on those portions of the defense and security.Do rulemaking (2) Subject i 50.80, a licenses who appheation which concern safety and procedures must prot ide for nouce and references a standard design

{

ehall apply the enteria set forth in comment and an opportunity for the cerufication may make changes to the l 52.59.

party which applied for the certdJhon design of the nuclear power facihty, ISLss cenerteforrenewaL to request an taformalhearms which without prior Commission approval.

(a)ne Comnussion sheHissue a rule uses the procedures desenbed in i St.81 unless the proposed change involves a 4

of this subpart.

change to the design as desenbod in the granting the renewalif the design.either (2) Any modificauon the NRCimposes rule certifying the design. De licensee se onsinally certmed or se modded on a design cernficanon rule under shall maintain records of all changes to durm' s the rulemaking on the renewal.

paragraph (s)(1)'of this section will be the facility and these records must be comphes with the Atomic Energy Act apphed to su plants referenems the maintained and available for audit until end the Commission's regulatione certified design, except those to which the date of termination of thelicense.

apphcable and in effect at the tune the the modificauon has been rendered (c)ne Commission wiu require, prior certtficauon wee issued, and any other technically '.rrelevant by action taken to granting a construction permit.

requirements the Commission may wieb under paragraphs (a)(3) (a)(4), or (b) of combined license, or opersta' g license to impose after a determination that this section.

which references a standard design there is a substantialincrease in overall (3) Whue a design certificationisin terufication, that informatos normaUy protection of the public beelth and effect under i 52.55 or i 82.81. unless (i)contained in certain procurement sefety or the common defense and a modification is necessary to secure specificanons and construction and secunty to be denved from the new compliance with the Commission's installation spec 2 cations be completed

^

requirements and that the duwet and regu.ations applicable and in effect at and available for auditif such in& rect costs ofimplementaton of those the time the certification was issued. or informstion is necessary for the 1

Federal Resister / Vol. 54. No. 73 / Tuesday. April 28, 1989 / Rules and Repulations 33393 Commission to make its safety Comaussion a connection with the determmanon that the appbcauon is early site permit, but must contam. in mierences a ceruned standard design. -

deteramauona. including the addition to the irtformaton and analyses the test. inspections, analyses and consistent with the certihed design. This otherwise required. tnformauon cerufied design must apply to those acceptance entena contained in the mformation may be acquired by sufficient to demonstrate that the design appropnate arrangements with the of the facthty falls within the parameters portions of the facility desip which are design cerancahon applicant.

spectried in the early site permit, and to covered by the design cerufication.

Subpart C-Combined usenses resolve any other sigmficcat (d)ne application must aantain environmental issue not considend in emergency plans which provide reasonable assurance that adequate 153.7t Seepe W Sutert.

any[revious proceeding on the site or protective measures can and wiu be Die subpart sets out the requirements 1

2) application does not

"*

• f[e * *

1. ' 'Et Co e

osuan of robined appl all com ly w

1) th applice onnierenose an licenses for nuclear power facilities.

requimmenu of to Cm ta30(f)by early site permit. the application may I 81.73 ptetesenente to subparta A and S.

including with the application en

'P Q)a't 8

under tbplication for a combined bcense environmentalreport preparedin n

Ana f

lans. approved in connecnon with tbe s subpart ma, but need not.

grdance M'

• seuence of es peruut.

nierence a standard esign ceruhcauon refen{,nce an early site perniit which.

0 g,1f the applicauon does'not Jesued under Subpart B of this part or en (21f the application does not refer)ence an early site permit. or if n early site permit issued under Subpan A 9

of this part or both.In the absence of a contains a site redress plan as descnbod emergency plans were approvedin demonstration that an enury other than in 152.17(c). and if the appbcant wishes cometion with the issuance of the the one ongmally sponsonna and to be able to puform W acuvatin at 6 perunt. the applicant shall make good site allowed by to CTR 50.10(e)(1 obtaining a design cernficauon is the appbestion must contain th, ), then faith efforts to obtain cernfications from cualiLed to supply such design, the the localand State governmental Commission wsil entertain an information required by l 52.17(c).

agencies with emerpacy planning application for a combined bcense (b)ne appbcation must contam the responsibilities (1) met the proposed which references a standard design technically relevant informanon emettency plans are practicable. (ii) ceruficanon issued under Subpart B required of applicants for an operating that these agencies em committed to only if the enuty that sponsored and license by to Cm 50.54. he final safety participaans in an ' further development obtained the certificanon supphes the analysis report and other required of theplana.inclu inganyrequiredfield l

cerufied design for the oppheant e use.

information may incorporate by demonstrations and (iii) that these refemnce the final safety analysis report agencies are connutted to executing i sa.7s rung et appseemens.

for a cernfied standard design.in their neponsibilities under the plans in Any person except one excluded by panicular, an applicatiori referencing a the event of an emergency.he 10 Cm 50.38 may file an apphcation for certified design must desenbe those applicauon must contain any l

a combined license for a nuclear power portions of the design which are site.

facility with the Director of Nuclear specific, such as the service weser certifications that have been obtained. lf these cerufications cannot be obtained.

Reactor Re lation. The appbcant shall intake strucnan and the ultimate beat the application must contain i

cornply wit the filing requirements of sink. An appbcauon niennems a 20 CTR 50.4 and 50.30 (a) and (b). except cernfied design must also demonstrate information, tncluding a utility plan.

sufficient to abow that the proposed for paragraph (b)(6) of I 50.4. as they compbance with the interface plans nonetheless provide reasonable would apply to an application for a nuclear power plant construcuon permit. - requiremente established for the design assurance that adequate protective under i 52.47(a)(1), and have ave 61able ne fees associated with the filing and for audit procurement specifications and measures can and will be takenin the teview of the appbcation a*e set outin construchon and installation event of a radiological emergency at the site.

10 CTR pan 17a speciDcauons in accordam wuh reference)(a) certified design. thei 52.47(a 2.1f the application do I st.s1 standares for renew of g s2.77 centenes of appasemens; generes awasemana.

t.tormemen.

application must comply with the Applications filed under this subpart The application must contain all of the requirements of 6 52.47(a)(2) for level of will be reviewed accordmg to the ir.formauon required by to CR 50.33, as design information, and aball contain standards set out in 10 cm Parts 20. 50.

that section would apply to applicants the technical information required by

51. 55.73, and 100 as they apply to for construction permits and operaung ll 52.47(s)(1)(1) (ll),(lv), and (v (31. and. if the design is modular,) andapplications for construction permits beenses. and to CR 50.33a. as that section would apply to an applicant for 152.47(b)(3).

and operstmg licenses for nuclest power a nuclear power plant construction (c)The application for a combined plants, and as thou standards are termit. In parucular, the appbcont shall license must include the proposed test.

technically relevant to the design comply with the requirement of inspecuens. and analyses which the proposed for the facility.

150.33a(b) regerding the submission of licensee shall perform and the 183.43 Appasalieny W Pan 80 pnWetens.

ent trust information.

acceptance enterie therefor which are Unless otherwise specifically llL7s contents of appocations:toonneoef necessary and sufficient to provide provided in this subpart. all provisions l

W8'mation, ressonable aseurance that. if the tests, of10 Cm part 50 and its appendices (a)(1)In general.lf the application inspections and analyses are performed applicable to holders of construction and the acceptance entena met, the references an early site pernut, the facility has been constructed and will permits for nuclear power reactors also cpphcation need not contain operate in conformity with the combined apply to holders of combined licenses miem,ation or analyses submitted to the beense. Where the application issued under this subpart. Similarly. all I

provisions of to Cm Part 50 and its

l M

7'ederal Register / Vol. 54. No. 93 / Tuesday. April 18. 1933 / Rules and Regulations appen' dices apphoeble to holders of acevities allowed by to CFR to.10(e)(1) i SL97 leeuense of esmeinse esonese, operstag lleenses also apph to holders without Stet submitung a site pedress (a)he Comminion shau issue a of combmed licenses issued under this plan in accord with i SL79(e)(3) and combined license for a nuclear power 4

subpart once the Commission has made obtaining the separete authonseton facihty upon finding that the opphcable the findings required under i SLSOE required by 10 CFR 80.10(e)(1).

requirements of to CFR 80.40,30.4L prended that as opphed to a combined Authorisation must be granted only after 80.43. 50.47, and 80.00 have been met.

license.10 CFR to $1 must require that the presiding officer in the proceedas and that there is reasonable assurance the iniual durston of the boense may on the appbcanon has made the Badags that the facihty wiu be conswucted and not exceed 40 years from the date on and deternunation requimd by to CFR operated in conformity with the hcense, which the Comaussion makes the.

30.10(e)(2) and has determined that the the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act.

findmas required under i LL101, site redress plan meets the enteria in and the h=miaaion's regulations.

j However, any hmitations contained in i SL17(c).

the(b) De Commission shall laantify in part 60 regardag applicability of the prons one to certam classes of facihties (3) Authonssoon to conduct the beense the tests. inspections, and contmus to apply.

W WCm analym h h heemm shau pwform 30.10(e)(3)(i) may be granted only after and the a:ceptance criterie therefor Isa.ss Aamentsvethereviewof the presiding of6cerin the combined which are necessary and suf6cient to espnesuene, license proceedes makes the additional provide reasonable assurasse that.if the A proceeding on a combined hcense is fmding required by to CFR tute,laspectons.and analyses e.m sub}ect to su appbceble procedural 30.10(e)(3)(u).

Performed and the seceptanos enteria mquirernente contained in to CFR part 2.

(b)If, after en a Boant for a met, the facihty has been sonstructed including the requirements for docketing combined license e performed the and wiu be operated in eenfeemity with Ye N ns'( UL1 N EN t[s$e"c'n'oTa*ppfca7o"nE,$*I*'

d Ac ad combined beenses are governed b the procedures contained in Part 2. Subparthcenu is @swn a denbd, and b regulations. Andeletion from the tenne o modi $cauon to.

addition to or g'

early site pernut referenced by the appbcaton expires, then the opplicant a combinedlicense. including any I sa af netweel to the Acas.

shall redress the site in accord with the modificataon to, addition to, or deletion The Commission aballrefer a copy of terms of the site redress plan. lf, before from the tests, inspections, analyses, or related acceptance criteria sentained in the opplication to the Adnoory redress is complete. a use not envisaged such license. is a proposed amendment Comnuttu on Reactor Safeguards in the redress plan is found for the site to such heense.nore shall be an (ACRS). The ACRS shau report on those or parts thereof, the apphcant shall opportunity for a hearms on the pornons of the oppbestaan which carry out the ndrus plan to the greatest proposed amendments,and any hearms concern safety and shall apply the extent possible consistent with the held must be completed before critene set forth in 4 52.31 in altwaate use.

accordance wnh the Anahty provisions operation of the facihty, of this part.

Isa.es gaemamensonevertanees.

I gs.es enoposeen swing eensememen.

l g,,, gn,,,,

i,,,,

(a) Appbcants for a combined hcense Aftwinuance of a combinedlicense.

n ut d ba"d"'E under this subpart, or any amendment to the NRC staff shallassure that the

'

• PP a combined license, may include in the required inspections, tests, and analyses daign, the ennronmental review must application a request. under 10 CFR are performed and that the prescribed focus on whether the design of the 80.12, for en exemption from one or acceptance enteria are met. Holders of fecihty falls within the parameters more of the Commission's regulations, combined licenses aball comply with the specified in the early site pernut and including any part of a design pronsions of to CR 50.70 and 30.71. At any other sigruficant environmental cerufication rule. The Comnussion shall

• ppropriate intervals durms i

issue not considered in any previous grant such a request if it determunes that construenon. the NRC staff shall publish proceeding on the site or the design. lf the exemption will comply with the in the Federal Register notices of the lj, the application does not reference an requirements of to Cm 80.12(a)or successful completion of inspections.

1 i early site peruut or a certified standard SL63(b)(1)if the exemptionincludes any tests, and analyses.

design. the envtronmental review part of the design certification rule, g 33,33g preepwomeneiangemet towww.

procedures set out in10 Cm part 81 (b) An applicant for a combined must be fotowed. including the issuance license, or any amendment to a U.both Commluion makn h

~

An th of a finalenvironmentalimpact combinedlicense.who has filed an

)"

$Id w'th the statement. but excluding the issuance of applicauon referencing en early site Attorney GenereL detennines that e supplement under i 81.SS(a).

permitissued under this subpart may significant changes in the hoensee's I5L31 Authertsenen to senshot one include in the application a request for e see,m s, vanance from one or more elemente of acuvities or proposed activities have -

(s)(1)If the appbcation nierences an the permit.1n determining whether to occurred subsequent to the previous early site perunt which contains a site grant the vanance, the Commission shall review by the Attorney General and h Comminionin ooruncuan with the ndress plan as described in i 52.17(c) apply the same technicauy relevant issuance of the combined license, the the applicant is authorized by i 82.25 to criteria as were appbcable to the antitrust review required by section perfonn the site preparation activides application for the original or renewed 105c(2)of the AtomicEnergy Actmust desenbed in to CFR 50.10(e)(1).

site permit.!ssuance of the venance be completed prior to commencemerit of l

(2)If the opplicadon does not must be subject to litigetion dunns the commercial operation of the facility, reference an early site permit which combined license proceeding in the Upon completion of this review, the contains a redress plan. the opphcant same manner as other issues material to Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation rne,y not perform the site preparetton that proceedmg.

may impose any additionallicense 1

,t Federal Roadstar / Vcl. M. No. 73 / Tu sday. April 18, 1989 / Rules and Regulatione 18395 can' eo= =.u e n w by.= non iosc of the Atoaue Energy Act.

be p=.e.w u s =qu i fn woon in scoord with to CFRIJos.The pettoner oww =mwe te he mmfem-w p ennt f Sa.tse Opemeenmeereesmesses shall Ele the pennon with the Secretary v e comause6es besase and sehseemently of the Co l'"*ll'd ** *i" Psonst to e commesimi e.wty munianlon. Before the

,e uo, i,uenoam,. cta by. licensed a i== = *punst, an of the type doenbod sommre ie gi ) sone.. &o i.o days bef-o@e,'*mt*ed c *au, e d>y.ne e

a*

a iow -e, tes 2 s,pme* = = ~*a-*e=*- w***e -

coaamm==.* C--au-a,s,.

m "T".'"e,"s"e.orwi.

id..

expected d*etr of both fuelloodme and wbou, e,e... and deio,mme

.~.

wn== m

• C=a a't::'e*s.e,se.,e.m.,,e v

e.ie..o.

to somewmenos,,perenn.s in ee in e.

e.

ort anticauty.Tbe Comaussion ehd required. If the petition is yested, then pubhah nouce of these dates in the an appropnote seder will be issued. Fuel taeludes the Federal Register. The Federal Regists' loedmg and operation under the.

,oguirement in t aas of this shapier for t8vww of the opphestem by the Adneery nouce must also advise persons whose combindlicean wdlnot h aNumd by Comunes en Aneiersele tr.tmots may be agected by facihty th granung W *e pegeon anlow h baldies of a pubhc beenas,gunsde and the apply is esatsst.

(b)of this secuen. ghts under paragraph ordu h made lainedeely eMutw-wnh respeet to maisse of eseeleswal health operetionof theirn (c) Prior 2 kl bdeg,b and safety enveeanast

)(1)Notlater than 80 deye after Comnussi88 8bd 88d.that the

"""** **#"* ** "e"al preisenen a

>u canonof th once regered by empance enMa in e co pummaat to this Appos n W es manalestere peregraph (e) o,e,n,e section. am person u.en.ebev, % meisa.mMnd neelear

-, pew mesen n '.m i.e.thd ai.

A whose interest may be effected escordagly, hisonity bu bwa te.e e,end at e W h ap, pinna, facih operanon may Ale one or thof constructed sad wGloperate in

3. As opphesses for a meaufesasses a lo owmgin wnung:

conformity wtth the Atomic Energy Act (i) A peuuon which shows, prima and the Commission's regulations.If the beense pumuant to ein Appeedom M met be ubmuwd.se spwined to 6 88.4 of ele facie, that one er more of the acceptance comwgi a

cupw ud men nu th vegeremens W cntene in the combmed license have not cluign, nch ructor mWule maY re9uire il to N(e) (t He) and to.No (a) and (b been met and. as a result. there is good

• "P*' te findas as construccon u.h chapter enes

..hty miyou a.yt met to pehminary cause to modify or prohibit opersuon; or pmcwds.

u pet hu h desped as (11) A peution to mo&fy the terms and g.,,,,,,,g

,g,,

,,,,,,g condiuons of the combined license.

Appendiese A.I.[Resereed) laterma,use,er ana, lyses s,eestes te m (2)(t) A good cause peution bd under Appendix M-Standardination of mattere shall be predseetd en poenilated este parayeph (b)(1)(1) of this secuan wQl be heignWanuischse of Nuclear Pwer paremmes which meeth speci6ed as the granted by the Commission onlyifit Reactore: Construction and Operation of opphcauseMe applicasse met also includes. or clearl references, of$cial Nuclear Power Rasctore Manufactured include nnformatism pensamine to design NRC documents.[ocuments prepared features of the propeeed sessesstelthe effect Pumuant toco-.i..i yes,,

plan for some me engemes a es by or for the combmed license holder or Secuen tot of to Atomic Energy Act of endence admissible in a procee&ng 1984. as amended, and i 30.10 of this shopter under Subpart G of Part 2. which show, fe,

..raan=ms beenu mquire e Commission hasan to wassier er purnam a the Appensa M deu sabout I.nma f.ci.. a.t se.oceptance anteria ass = in enaa=ie sommerce. masafa n=o.

wie he opphmuen an vencib..mei.rhecembined

>=d== =saefw. ai====e-* ues.

m,e,uime of e,,ucen.enouemmenal repen fw license bolder and NRC staff mey file M O* * $ **f j *,,d

,e euss in eesenience.e annesmeima requn h lumace d a m,'j'Q", p,g 81 of this shaptw. pended. boomew, that ubpen of pe,i answere to the petition within the time specified in to CFR 2.730 for onewm to aneuce such repen shau be dueewd at the motions by parties and staff. If the by te Comsmmon before -

en pean

• • • • I*"*"d """"""I *' **

of conewucues of a producson er enhastien Comftussion in its judgment decides, on

"***I**"un*"a"nd opmhan of to i

8"*'*I """' "'

fac6hty,and h luvance of as oppeb the basis of the petitions and any to enewuc beense lufom opereuos of the fac6hr memorie)et Apenal sue w min i

answere thereto, that the petition meets e

the requarements of this paragraph, that

[mnone 90 lottas th the issues raised by the petition are not on the eseumpson,that me feathty wiu be g

dren and Analanmanumlimpemmawant esempt from adjudication under 6 U.S.C.

suembbd udceammewd a h m pmped by the Coeunismen's vo 554(a)(3), that genuine issues of material which a h w be opmud.In ene staff wulbe euniluly dimewd. gunatory fact are raised. and that settlement of circunstonese, both feathty desten and site.

4. (e) Sections 80.10 (b) sad (cl. 30.12(bl.

other informal resolution of the leeues isfeleud inues can tw eenendmed in tlw innial.

30.33. 30.ac(dl. ItL34(eln0]. to.asatcl. 80.35 constructea pereut stage of the beseems and (c). to.40(e).10.45. 80.Alld). 8tL88 el this not posenble. then the genuine issues of

pmeses, material fact reised by the petition must eks and Appendia lotpart 80 de set However bosaw may, under the Atomic Energy Act, abe sought and ine E and H of Part so apply to manufactunt.

be resolvedin accordance with the app y to manufacturms homen. Appedica provisions in 8 U.S.C. 354. 556, and 857 the mesufacture of facihttee but not thett hcenses only to the ement that the which are apphesble to determining ansem ud trumum m m seqdromuu Wemuppedian ovelve applications for inidallicenses.'In such wiuch es faeumn are w h oprowd.pne fadhty deden futurn.

cases, the riotice of hearms from the to ee

• commencement of sometruceam". as Commission must speafy the denned sn 3 stL3alcl of this etapwr of a (b)h Anancialinformaties subautted faculty manufactured puromant to such a pursuant to i so.sstt) of thle chapter and consus(sion heensel en the alte at which H is Appendix C of part to sh&D be directed at a procedures to be fellowed. Mattere exempt from adjudicauon under s U.S.C.

insten'suon of the facAhty-e construenon** *P '**-ih*t 88 DmP

$54(a)(3)may be decided by the of the applicent for the meauf.cturmt heense Comnussion solely on the basis of the p"sul 2*L emons oew &lage. NSecu to carry out the manufactunns scunt) for showing of good cause and any be opusted. must be leend by theapproval of the este on which the fa wWeh me beenu is sought.

6. The Comreission may issue a br.ense to responsive pleadings.

(ii) A pennon to modify the terms and Commiselon. 'This appendra sets out the muufacture one or mon nuclur power conditlocs of the combined license will partteuler requinmente and pronstons reertore to be operated at sties not ident:f ed opphcable to such situanone where nuclear in the beense opphcot ce if the Comessa.on finds that 4

k y---.

c_-..

,.-m.,.,.

a 1 5396 Federal Register / Vol. 54. No. 73 / Tuesday. April 18. 1989 / Rules and Regulations (e)he appbcaat bee desenbed the power reactoMe) meaufseturad pursuant to Appendix N-Standardisation of proposee design of and b eine paremeters this appendia frors the manufactunas facihry Nuclear Power Plant Designe:IJconses postule ted for the reactortel, indudas. but to the site si which the reactorte) mu be n:t knuted to, the pnacapal arttutectural and tastalled and opereted. In eddates, such To Construct and Operate Nuclear engmeenne entene for the seeign, and has nuclear power reector(e) shau not be Power Reactore of Duplicate Design at I

identified the motor featume of componente incorporated therem for the protectos of the removed from the manufactunas site emul the y,3,gPg, g;g,,

final dman of the reactorte) hu been heshh or d eefety of the pubbc.

l (b) Such further techrdcal or design approved by the Comause6os in scesedance

^ "" I" informecon se mey be requued to complete wie pampmph F.

ten es amended. and I 80.10 of this chapter the design report and wluch ces reasonably

g. An oppbcebon for a peraut to construct a wquim a Commin heensew n ulw w be leit for later considereuen.w nckar pww ruewW which h b @

reconve ta latorstate commerce. manidacture, g

eu,,aed m e eu,,iemeniio *e ill be of as appbca ymduce,transfw acquim.poena eu.

,,,,,,,,,,, bon,for a m,,an,ufacturag haemse a.gn,v,on.

,,,d,,,

is,e,, e, e a.,,,,oduc.es e, s.hason d'

', ",,N N $",

contata such informatos or analyses as bate feathty.The mguleuono e Port to wguin h beve boa deoenbod by the oppbeant and the previously been submitted to the Commissess taseanse of a construccon puest by the opphcant hoe idenufned, and them wiu be in eeanecuon with the oppbeauos for a Comanesian befom sommmessent of conducted a meearch omd development snanufactanas bcease.but shaU by sonstrustee of a producten er suhoeuon l

program reasonably dwigned to ruolve any ll to.34(a)and 80.ses of thle amepter, fasihty, encept as provided la i to. tele) of esfory quescone eseemeted wie such sufficient informenos to demoristrate that the this chapter, and the issuanes of an operating futurn of componente: and site on wiuch the reactor (s)is to be operated beenes before the operemos of the feathly.

(d) Oc the book of the foregoins, there is falls withta the postuleud ette parametere no Conaussion's regulations to Part 8 of I

nosonsble eseurance that b) such safety specified in the relevant manufactunne thne shapter specifncally prende for the quescone mil be senefactonly resolved beenu appbcecort.

bolding of beannge se parucular issues I

before any of the proposed nuclear power 10.The Comsuesion may teene e perett to aparewly from othw ice,n involved 6n I

reactorts) am removed from the ranufacnaring este and fu) teksne into construct a nuclear power roectorte) wiuch to heannge 2 bconsing procedings il 8.731a.

%e subwet of an opphceuon for e Appendia A. escoon I(c)). and for the Pe e Co a

set

,(

,g,gg,,,, p, g

octo e c be e t t peret d et

• • "*"" " " N 'P""d situ hevmg characteneoce that feu wtthm the ete parametere poorulated for the dengn falle mhn the postulated ette parametere adjudicatory proceedings such as hcensing af the mectorte) mthout undue nok to the ePectfied in the relevant appbeacon for a prawdmW N1.7'M l

hulth and safety of the pubbc.

manufactunas bcense and (b) makes the This appendix sets out the parucular (e)The appbcaat to teciuucally and fmdmge othermee required by part 80 la ao mquh a n u ud p m opphubb 2 naanciaUy quehfied to design and mot mU a conHrucuen permit be teamed W

M phu h m amlW by manufectum the propowd nuclear power untu h relevant manufactunne boense has one er men appbcante for beenees to beenissued.

construct and operate nuclear power reactore ebj uuance of a beanse to the

11. An operenne beense for e nuclear of nwanauy es name dwien a be located cppbcant wiu not be intaucal to the common Power reactor (s) that has been manufactured at di5ersat entes.*

deleue and secunty or to the health and under e Cossaussion hcense isowd pursuant

1. Encept as otherwies openfled la this safety of the pubhc.

to this Appends M siey be issued by the appendia er as the esatest otherense (g) On the beste of the evalueuono and Consuosion pursuant to i 30.57 and Subpart ladicates, the provisions of part 30.

cnolyeu of the envsn.tunentaleffects of the A of part 51 of this chapter except that the appbcable to soastruction permute and i

proposed e': con mquared by Subpart A of Comrnission eheU find, piarsuant to Par 181 of 2 chapter and peregraph 3 of this i 80.57(el(1), that construcson of the operating bcenses. includaag the requpement la 4 8038 of thle chapter for review of the Appendia. the scuon celkd for to the reactorte) bee been substaouaUy completed application by the Advisory Committee en I

invence of the beenn.

in confornuty with both the manufactunns Note: When an opphcent bee supphed beenu and the construccon punit and h Reestor Safeguards and the holding of pubbe I

regtured to coroplete the opphcaboa, oppbcecons therefor, as amended, and the beannes, apply 2 eoanrucha peruuu and inicaDy su of the sectuucalinformauen includmg the final design of the mactortel.

provisions of the Act, and the rules and 3."Appbcat'one for construccon peruute "I**"""

^

e r,guleuone of es ComahWon.

the find.nss mquired for the invance of the bcense wiu be oppmpnetely mod:Aed to Notwithstandag the other provisions of this I

nGect that fact.

paragraph, ao oppbceuen for an opersang teclude the informenon poquared by ll 50.33.

a I:sch manufactunas Ucense leeued bcense frst a suelear power reactor (s) that E83a 8034(e) sad 80344 (a)and W Aie

},

pununt io this appendia will specafy the bar been manufactured under a Comminion chapter, and be submitted as openned in number of nucleat power reactore authonsed beenee tesued pursuant to this Appendam M i 80.4 of thle chapter.The opphcant shou also to be insnufactured and the latest date for the wiu be docketed until the appbcenes for sa submit the informaues required by 4 81.30 of etspleuon of the manufacture of au such amendment to the relevant manufactunns thee chapter, mectore. Upon good coup shown. the license requared by paragraph 7 hee been For the technicallnformation required by docketed.

ll 80&tts)(1) through (5) and (e) and 40.34a t

t a me noble p o na e.'

11. In making the findings aquired by thle (e) and (b) of thle chapter. reference may be y.The bolder of a manufactunas bcones part for the leeuance of a construccon perunt made to a single preliminary safety analysis toeved pu:went to thle Appendas ht shal or an operstmg bcense for e nuclear pown of the design wiuch, for the purposes of a

submit to the Comuussion the final deog:s of reactorte) that has been manufactured under the nuclear power reactorte) covered by the a Comauseion beanse leeued pursuant to thle Lcense o econ se such design has been appendam, or an amendment to such e 8 N b w Iw k poisw se uiw alpree m d ccepteted. Such subauttal eheu be in the meaufacturing Ilceties.construccon perstit or m e pweeuner opphuese a em iseneent a vie sh est appbcomes may em he peeseemed ender form of en oppbceton for amendment of the Operstmg bcense, the Comaussion wsil treat une eependia and subter D of part 3 of this manufactunna bcense.

se resolved those mattere which? ave been chepu S. The protubitaon in i 50.10(c) of this neolved at an eerber stage of the beenemg e As and to this eependui. the duien of a nucim chepier seemet commencemeni of pruen. unlese em eiueu ognmeaniaew p-- =**d a u* *==d *r cenetrucuen of a produenon or utthutaen informauen that oubetenueUy affects the facihry pnot to tuuance of a constructen conclusion (s) reeched at the eather stage Se

%YZ'"[,*,'",*,'j,'j,,',Q'-

pernut oppbee to the transport of a nuclear other good ceues.

seehh and ulety and ibe ecumes defense ne n,y,

j Federal Resister / Vol. 54. No. n / Tuesday, April 18.19D / Rules and Rerulathns 15397 I to.34 felt 1)laeludu ese set of site parametere postaleted for the desagn of the mater pornoe thereof. ne subauttal obau to the Commason's Staff forits wnew i

alas include taformauem portantung to desige reacters, and as analyene and evaluauos of separately trea and pner to an appliceben the seectore in terms of such postulead este feeturee est affect plane for copeg with for e sonstrucuos permit for a feeihty. Seek a emergencos is the operenes of the toector or ' subnuttal shaU be seeempeme parametatt Such stagne prehamary safety mejor porboa thereot analyou shall slee inetude talermanos penntn;as to design feetwee of the proposed

4. Once the regulatory staff bee taitiated a requared by part 170 of tius shopter and shah meetste met affect plans ter espas with techrucal renew of a submuttal under ske coasst of the porten of the taltimeson emergencase la the opereest of the reactors, appenom. the subauttal mt! be referrea to requand of appheaste for esasessuem and aball dessesbe the quahty soeurense h Adnoory Corneuttee se Reetter peruute by ll to.33 teHe) and (e) of this i

program wie respect to aspects of desieri.

Safeguards (ACRS) for a review and esport.

chapter, and insofar es et reistes to the febnca uen, procwoment and emnetresson SSpon semplehen of their evview of a leeuelo) of site estabihty for which early that are commes to au of the senators, subsutsal meet thne appendia. the agulatory

,ewww W eeught by ll to.netellt)and

3. Applications for operetang beensee etaff sheU pubheh in the Federal Regleur a 30.30(f) of this shapter, eseeps that deteramanos as to whether er mot the taformaton wie roepest to operoses of the submitted pursuant to ele Appendam N obau prehminary or floal deelen le esseptable, feelhty at the protected lassel power level mr.lude the informenos required by ll 80.33.

I to.H (b) and (c), and 30.34efcl of thlu chapter, emblect to such esadsuene se may be need set be supphed l

The appucent shau eine subaut the apprepnete. and make avallable la the pubbe 3.N subautulfor early renew Welm

'i inferreeuos regetred by 6 31.88 of this Document Room na analyene of the destga la sensbutty leavels) must be made la the same the form of e An approved design manner and in the same number of espes se shapter. For the technical talesmanen eheU be a '

by and rebed upon by the seovedd in ll 304 and 30.33 W th ebpter regaared by ll 8044(b) (2) through (6) and reguletory staff and the ACRS in theirmvtew je kceau apphcauses.N embmHulmal

,30.34elc). reference may be made to a stagle of a leefde sumaient laformouse essenesung whi.ny Indsvidual facility lisones a'te' sign reage of postulaud issuity d,e,ep a.nd mai safe,y easiye. of.e de setna ir.or,oreise by reie-s e - ed m escord e,,,,uon,a,ame,,,,,e ama,

$'j,"g'['ari- -* =e paragre,h

,e,,e,m.e,e,uested,ev,ew s,.e,a

. Appendix O. -Standardisation of Design:

Q*""g,, g, suitabihty issues. The submittal must aantais ette

.ff nee-of sa.da,d nosete es,,,e, de,e,mmaues o, o.e,,ood cause.

g e g, g,s; es b as - g,,

nie appendia sets out procedures for b t.%e detersunenes and report by the hhng. etaff tenew and referral to the regulatory staff abau not conena.w e sesemparued by a statement of the bases or Advisory Comeuttee on Reactor Safeguense comminnent to luue a permit er beenes, or m es reasons for these senclusaaes.Se of standard designe for e nuclear power any way affect the authenty of the submitalmuh hn W h awnt nector of the spo desenbod to i 30.22 of this Comaussiert Atomic Safety and ucensing peu e any kng+aage ob> g,,

chapter or maior porcene thereot Appeal panel. Atonue Safety and Ucensing

• ** 8"

"' "I i

1. Any person may subaut a proposed Soard Penet and peer presidir.s emcere in

1. any W ee pmme was mg any procesa;ng under Subpart C of part 3 of in ympanns &e submHtal desenho any W prelieunary of Anal standard desten for e

)

tlue chapter, esbeuse pmem me and explain what nuclear power reesier of the type elesenbod m I 60.32 to the reculatory staff for ate 7.Informeuen aqueste to the approval eeneWmuen. If any, wee gins to alwmeuw j

nnew. Such a subauttal may moneast of bolder regardme an approved design shsU be '".h ceN ehau pubhah e now of other the prehminary or Anal design for the evaluoted pner to leeuence to ensure that the 3

enure reestor faubty or the prehmanary or burden to be imposed en roependente is deckeens of the subnattalis the Fodsesi 1

final dessen of maior persons thereof.

lueufied la www of the potenual safety Rfockeung to to Gomner ereenand sh j

2.De subtaittel for review of the standard signiAcance of the toeve to be eddressed in of design must be made la the same manner and the requetedinformenon.Each such apprepnete omstel of the State in which the in the same number of copwe se provided in evolusuon performed by the NRC staff shall m to locates We noem shouideoufy de be la accorcance wie 10 CMt 80.84 f) and laceuon of the sitehfly dwenbe h p lino.4 and 30.30 of this chapter forbcaase sball be approved by the Execuuve(Director nuabditytem(s)tederwvWw andinn opphcauona.

for Operstone er his er h s.De subraittal for review of the standard lasmance of the esquem. erdesignes pner to commeate fross Fedwel State, and local design eheu include the informauon agenstes and interseted persons within 130 chepter and the opphea)le tocauucalduenbed in il 80.33 (e throush (d) of this Appendia P(Remved]

days of publicehon er such othee tune se may j

be spectrad. for considereuen by the staff in b

informouos requared by ll 90.34 (el and (b).

Appendia WA plication Early esanecitos mth the iniuanen er esteeme of se appropnate, and alkate of thle chapter Review of Site Sulla ty it.eues e Mmw an appNpneM by b ACRS.

j l

(obr then theI required by ll 8044(e)(e)

We appenda ute out procedures for the la eennectoe with the outcome of east t

end it01,30.34(b)(11. (e) (1). (ul. (1v). and (v) fihes. Staff revww. and referret to tem review. no person requeenas review shau and ac34(b) (7) a nd Is)).no subnuttal shau eleo include e descnpuos analyste sad Advisory Commattee on Reactor Safeguards serve e espy of the submittalen the Govemer or other appropnete omstal of the State in evelvoton of the interfaces between the (ACRS) of requests for early review of one or which the ette le locateel and en th subauned design and the baleaos of the siere site suitabthty issues relatans to the esecuevo of the munimpahty la orhish the nuclear power pleet. With respect to the seastruction and operouse of eartain site le located er,if the site to set loosted in a nquiremente of ll 80.34(e)(1) of thle shopter, utdisaton faciliues separetely tres and prior municipahty, on the sidef eussenve o the submittal for nyiew of a standard design to the submittalof appucatises for shallinclude the ette paremetere postulated.

cemetruenon permits for the fac6htles. De county.De peruon of the submittal for the deelga. and sa analyste end oppenda elao sets out procedures for the contelains informenon requested of evolueuen of the design in terms of such preparsuon and leavenen of Staff Site applicante for construcuan permHe by postulated alte parameters. De informauon Reports and for their inearperessa by il 80.33(enc)and(e)and AgLSeleWt)of this eubmitted purevant to 6 8034(a)(7)of this reference la appheatene for the enastruction chapter wiu be referred to the ACRS for a chapter, shall be hated to the quahty and operation of certata utilisetten facthues.

review and report. net, wul be as referrel I.

murence program to be apphed to the De utdiaation facuttles are those which are to the ACRS unless earty avnew of the ette design, procurement and fabricataos of the subiest to 4 St.30(b) of this chapter sad are of safety teouse under 4 80.34(aXt)is sequeste structures, eyetems, and componente for the type specified in i to.21(b) (2) or (3) or

4. Upse semplease of review by the staft wtuch desqu revnew has been requested and i 40.12 of this chapter or are testma faculties.

and if appropnete by the ACRS of a the informanon submitted pursuant to his appenda does not apply to proceedmse subenittel mader this appendam, the staff shau i no.34(el(s) of this chapter shad be hmited to coeducted pursuant to Subpert F et part 8 of prepare a Staf Site Report which abau thle chapter, identify the lossues of the ette. state the site the ovahficeuone of the person subauttmg the standard design to design the reactor or

1. Any pman may evbmit inforroecon suitabihty issues aviewed explain the regardmg one or more site euttehtitty (seues asture and scope of the resiew, state the conclusions of the ete!!regardag the leewa i

l

~

4 i

25P')

Toderal Retieter / Vel. 54. No. 73 f Tuesday. April 18. 1969 / Rules and Repulations i

wwwed and atew the sweene for these I

conclusions. Upon semanes of a 6 tan 51w PART t-RULES OF P1LACTICE FOR Report the eten ebau pubheb a sebes of the 3pggl71C UCENSING PROCEEDINGS PART SD=0C40tSTIC UCENtlNG OF PRODUCTION AND VTILitATION stenobsbry of the repen in de Fodsel FAClWTIES asewiet and aball pleen sopos of the report g.agte authonry citebon for Part 2 I

in the Commweien e pubbe Desweest et 2130 continues to resd in part se follows:

13.N eusority citebon for Part 40 L $treet h*W. Lower level (Reem Ibel.

Aethaner loc 101.Se Stet tot se contnaute to read na part se follows-Wuturces. DC 30037, and te e taeal pubbt amendei (et USC 3a011. see, apt, as SteL AutherWr let 1st, et Stat tea, se puumem p#omm imwd par me m usa, se anned ist UIC nas1i.

• • • need to UAC samt we. an. as sut.

tdent.f.ed a the Eteli$ne Report The stag neu eln med e sepy of se =pwt u me Ia.m (Anoness) ma. se siented (62 UAC 24

i Gonener et other opprepnete efflesal el the sute in wb ch the m a lowied. and te me 3.18 paragroph (e)(1), the reference to l

aief nuvon of me numcipaher in which Appenda o of Part 30is amended to

• I"P " M ' M

• r

"' " " " "am^o #."d io,ef. to ee ene,e - ed e, u e snete.etions,ed refw to Apmdit O of Pan 82, and in 4

Pan u

j to muniopshty to the chief eneouove of the

'I I

I APPendicoe K N and 0 of Part at

{

t. Any 6mt Sne Repen propered and

I*f 18 APPendia Q of Part St PART 81-EffYlRONMENTAL l

nund in usertanes wie thu appesas eny be inserpereed by referessa es apprepnois.

1 Lees (Asnenese)

PROTECTION RESULAfl0NS POR in en oppbeenen for e construcues permit ler 00448879C LICENSING Atee RELAft0 3

e atematien focuity which a subleet to 4.N refwesee to APPendia N of Part R800LATORT PUNCTIONS l st.actb) of thee chaptw and is of the type 60 h amended to referio Appendia N of Part g s.pecibe in I,60.21lb)(2) er (3) er i 80.32 of 18.h evtbonty ellation for Part $1 i

a es,,e te e iesong fe.ai,y. no i t t iAmensesi continues to read la part se follows:

,,$,,,,,,,,,,o,,,,,,,,t.,,,,e, i

)

8. In the heading and paragraph (s).

3 set.teSut a

e y e sta hen ye w mon have elepoed between the loopence of the references to Appendia N of Part 60

}

the EM tu Repen and ne maarporebon by are amended to refer to Appendia N of Ist.se tAsnenseel nie a seasowecon penan Put 12,

$ leennee of a sinff siw Repen shau not it in paragraph fa)(6), the referenee iLaos tAmensee) to A af=PPendia M of Part tole amended t l

comu,u,e e.ommuimoei ie.oeue e p ma e,

= Amna M of Pen n L a,a,,,,,,,y,3, a,,,f,,,,,,,,

Ito el o th e pie r any oy effect AppendLa N of Part Solo amended to

$81.4d (Afnenesel the ousenty of the Comeussion Atenut Miw to Appendia N of Part SL Safety and utenome Appeal panel. Atomic tr,m reference to Appendia M of safety eni ucessing Board panel. and meet lL4De IAmesm e)

Part 50le amended to nier to Appendia M of Part 4 pmiams officere as any proceedans under

7. In the beadant and paragraph (e).

Subpen F ondler C of part 2 of 64 chaplet, the references to Appendia N of Part A0 lnts tAsnensee) 7.The otos wiu not eenduct am than one are amended to refer to Appendia N of SE la Paragraph (b), the reference to t

temw of a mubcity inne wnh resord a Pan 62.

i i

Appendia M of Part His amended to i

e perueular etw pnet to me full saaeuwc""

t pernut renew tequued by Subpart A of pen g 3,ses ( Asnensee) refer to Appendam M of Part SL

.i of me as,,e,.no e n my deame i.

{

i.1.,.

i Amansosi

.en.0.ensuedio,fio'de'"fM.'"e'a',*,Wa N of

=e"e's"l:: ' 'a",12,*r",','en where,, e,,eere.e ut

• * =f=

=^ >== M d eenaa==a'=d==p==^mne euen. cases w,,e,e.o ran remw of the nieun menu of ee oubautted ' Appendia N of Part $2.

M of Part SL ette one alterneun enes undet subpan A of Port st of tbje chapter to noussied. shete is a

$ L488 (Afnenseel ggg,yy gg,,,,,,,

reesonable hkollhood that further staff mww would 6dentJy m er more yveterable 9 The teference to Appendia N of Part 30.The reference to 10 CFR Port to.

ahemeuw me and the steif Mmw of ese n0le amended to refer to Appendia N of Appendia M le amended to refer to to w mon eiw mubdity usues would need to Pan SL CFR Pan 6L Appenda M.

as munible and snetnenble someuteent af mounes pner to the subantal of the iLees !Amenese)

PART 176-FEES POR FACILifft$

AND MATERIALS LICENSES ANO analyeie of aliemoun snee in the 4 % reference to Appendia M of OTHER RESULATORY SERVICES Eawrofusesial Report that would prejudsee Port 60 le amended to refer to Appendia UNDER THE ATOMIC ENERST ACT OF t

the leter nnew and deoews en alumeun M of Part &L enn undat subpart F sedler G of part I and 1964, AS AMENDEO j '

Subpen A elpart at of th4 chapten et.fb)la l L901 (Amenese)

The authority citation for Part 170 mee w$ere.m me iudemoni ef e eien.

,3, 3 ts,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,g,3' conimon io,eed o fono.s:

e we7d ao th'idmnees to APPendia M of Part 8O Auesr et U.S C erot.as stet mt. uc.

e pu c in e t.

w considenng (1) the de ree oflikehheed that te emended to refer to Appendia M of M b t3-41 e

5,w 122(42 sty early findmge on those inues would art SL g,

g, g, ded tetam tr.ett nehdity to later tenews. (2) the ggg g, sbiectione if any.of cogrusaat state wlocal iL403 iAmenesel enemment opencin to the conduct of an

21. Secti m 170.2 is ernended by early nnew on then usun. and (3) the 11In the heading and test of the mvising peregraphe (g) and (k) to reo d ronible effect on the pubbe intervet of section, the referencer to Appendia M of 88 follows:

hems se nely,if not numanly concluawe. Fort 50 are amended to refer to 1

re oluton of then neun Appendia M of Part 62.

I a

4

i i

Fedwal Register / Vcl. 54. No. 73 / Tunday. April 13. 1933 / Rules and Repulatione 18399 i

s i

(3) An appheast for er holder of a payable upon metsceuen by the

$1ne full cost of rmew for a

{

producten er suheauen facihty Comanesion. nere to no fee for en standardsed dwig approvalor 1

construcuos peruut opetetag bcense, appbcation for renewal of an early site cert $ cation must be paid by the holder or manufuturms boense isoned permit or a standard dwien cwuhesuon of the deoip approval the opphtant for purount to part to of this shopter, or as leeued under10 CFR pan 6L Each early site peruut, standard dugn applicant other than an appbcant for cernficeben, or other entry supWyms certdcabon. or combined boense leeued renewalof sa utly ette pwmit or a es design to an appheant for a pureuse' to part 62 of this chapten standard design cert $cauon wsil be construcuan peruut. combined boense blued at six monthinwrvals for au toeved under part 51 or operating

+

+

+

(k) Applying for or already hae,

accumulated costs on each application usense, as apprepnete. In en f 6) equel opphed for renew.under to CFR part that the applicant has on Ale for n""

twenmenu. As helaumem to popble

52. Appendia Q.of a facihty sate pnor to by the Coauniosion umul the mnew to uch of the Aret Ave uses the approved,/conde,d dwign to solenood es submissios f. e.,iinuen,o, a

-pi ed.iacau m h.gto*e in an a,,,,s,lon o,e een,,,,euen construction peruut:

a cauono and the easte wie perests, cashined license seemed under 33 CFR part sier operating boense.1n at section170.8 le amended by yI (3)Fue for rmew of an opphcation b u m faMaded

',fy' j

rensing paragraph 0) to read ae iollows:

eoruncevon.the oppheam l175.8 Doesseena.

fouows:ne fullcost of renew for a soninceum shau pay eeinstallmut.

i tenewed standard design contfncauen unless another entity le supplying the I

0)'Nanufactunne Ucense" means a must be pold by the appboant for design to the oppheant for se heenu purount to Appendix M of Part renewal or other enury supplying the esostruction pwudt. combind license, i

52 of this chapter to manufacture a design to an oppheant for a construction et operating beenes. ta which case the

{

nuclear power nettorte) to be operetod permit, combined license issued under other antity shau pay the installment.

i at elles not identified in the license Part 81 or operstag beenee,se (ii)(A)la the case of a design which

)

1 j

rppbcation.

apprepnete. in Ave (s) equal has been approved but not cerufied and installments: an installment to payable

23. Section !?D12 le amended by each of the first five tirnos the renewed for which no apphcation for eartancauon

)

rensing paragraphe (b). (d). and (e)(2) to cerufication to referenced in an to sending,if the design le not med as followe:

application for a construction permit'

,,(weneed, w M au emu are am i

reconrod,within En pue afwr Se l

(pDA or th I

sp a

o e an r u (b) L/ cense fees. Fees for applicatione I

for perrante andliconen that m sub supplying the deoip to the oppheant for D',

[,0' toim bued on ne fuu cost of the }ect the construccon permit. combmeo i

g gg boenee.or opereune hcense,in which bun) approved and for which an(3 In renew are payable upon mottAcetion by case the other enuty shaU pay the the Commission.Encept se prended installment.lf the designis not applicauen for certfr.stion is pending.

below.uch appbcant willbe bhd at refererned. orif aU costs an not u fees are due untilaher the sta.mone intmals for all accumulated recovmd within ten years after the certification le granted.1f the design is i

costs for each appbcation the appbcant dt.te of noewal of the teruficauon. the not nierenced, orif au costs are not has on file for renew by the applicant for renewal shall pay the costs recovered within ten yeare sher the Comnesolon unut the rmew to for the nykw of the apphcauen for date of certincation. the apphcant shall i

completed. nore is no application fee renewal or remotador of those costa, at pay the costa, or renamder of then for early site permite inued under to that time, CFR Part && Fees for the rowew of an (8) Fees for the wview of an costs, at that ums.

op lication for en early ette permit are appbcation for renewal of an early site (C)la the case of a deoip for which e deferred as foUows: De permit holder i

shall pay the appbcable fees for the permit abou be deferred as follows: ne con $cauon hu bun granted W et 1

peruut at the has en apphcauon for a holder of the renewed permit shall pay 0"I8"I'"" "I" "'*d'" N'U " "

the appbcable fees for the renewed an am nooved,wiein un ynn shcr construction permit or combined ucense i

nimncing the urly alte permit le God.

permit at the time an applicauen for a the date of the certineauon.the Ef. et the end of the initial pened of the construcuen permit or combined Econes apphcant shaU pay se enu fw ee relemnema the permit le filed. !!. at the smw of the oppheauen, or rememder permit.no facihty apphesuon and of the renewal period of the pwaut.

of those costa, et that time.

mfmacing the urly site permit has no facihty application referencing the been decketed, se permit holder eball urly ette permit has bun docketed the j

pay any outstandmg fees for the permit, rmit holder sheU pay any outstandtag

23. Section 170.21is amended by

)

Each bill must idenuty the applicatione een for the penait, amuding ee Schedule of Fu.shly Fm i

and costa related to each. Fees for (4) Renewal fees for materials licenses bymkW Pamucim pwn applications for materiale licenses not and approvale not subject to full cost Ructon.nvioing fut now & and i

sub)ect to full cost recovery must review must accompany the appheation adding a nw pcud entry n ped.

)

i eocompany the oppuceuen whenit le whenitis Aled.

Advanced Reactore to reed se fouows:

1 j

fded.

(e) Appsvolfees.

g,,,,

(d)Menewolfm.1 FmIor applications for rene(w)sle that are (2)(1)nere is no applicauon fee for ans utnnmauen tumues. twww of stansers standardised deoip approvale or retwenee seeign appemis, sposent i

subject to full cost of the review are certifications issued under 10 CTR Part pro;wie,enginspeesons,

7 s'

i

.. dec',

F'ederal Register / W1. 64. No. y3 / Tuesday. April it,1980 / Rul:e and Reenlatione

}

i sasema.: o raaservpass

' e===e==a = oo -

- = na. M.e--e.'Es'w" wee w Im m a

• ee e'== i e = = -

l

,,,,,,s.,, e., esw r

w a

e =.eg as no.g a sran6w of mm somed by

}

<e e,mty.n a in = = eni U eUe'e ressersamemmesu esea esse pase 6 *

==

=="o eye"e I,*E U*esey, Ngulation.

".e".",e.'Pe"s".:='J" 's"

'.".*e e o e=#'" R s m m.a = Apresi.i ns.

= = = - -

aa" e"* "

24l'A 4

2"'*e"s* 2'""*o"s ";r E.".,.,

e"

,umen a.s.amari.e nrue.

e ".':llllr.ee e.ll:.re'::re.l.lr.,llel Riend u.sawwe. An==yam l

se-u e am e.e 1

e, unses6 na er = es a = esen. e e so.eeen oebna Dawn.aspioiny aan- = a~~ a=== ** c=

see e'*"*

Counset (302) 906 4446: Kares Solomon,

= -

e'"en'*e." "ll*er. =lll'., :r et"."be,en ="3 Amoe6s= GonwalConaut(3DB)900.-

4*e ",e'"'"~= m'===.

. es e

en e e me.me m

' ** De wm,*oma.andi.,misma lllllll=.*,A.lll".M.r.t l:,5.="Ar"JW"i re,dmiHome ta

,. com 1

of o m a mi Ce = = t r.no a

eg. e.

-=m.

4

. gmgJ=e,",,

esse e,e se se s,$,a,,'s.=,,=,e=ar,=e,=,,=rll:

s==i.w.w., wwwasim DC mist a

asessenen ey consnamen same-e.tes eas ans esen ensemeen a se Robert Fishman. Sea 6er policy Analyst.

aser see seest Cassusten s Cast 8ense.

e","y"",,e, """

(g)333 4333,Ogasg(gaggiggery Dened et Reakville. MD. Ibie Peb der of AeNees.FedalHomeimes Beak Apre sees.

System. tot tith Seset.NW.

t esees es as es s e ret the Nealeet Asgelstory Commissies.

Washlages. DC 80000.

(

$ P,,,,,,,,,,*,,*,,*e*,.gs w esee t", e",en see,esaryofshe -

-.a Desseber 28.1 tea the Seard proposed cownesen wows Pese ee,'j$'n,*u,'"e ems er gamesi) tanak, ausm.assenerany asis.annattest On e

l

= en

• • seas we*'"

• e '***** **w"oes = ese-.

(FR Dee,es sees yued 6 tr ma tase am) to assedlie egety nekinvesasant i

4 7,,,'c*es,','$'Es",w"'n*,",eE's"Is t"o.Is.YsIi rule.* Board Res. No, as-tset (Dec. 22.

re en eow assess _noe e.as,see. r..*.'a.n 1988). 84 FR 1&B Caa.4.1989

,,,,"g"*",,,, M,,"Q'E;,",*,*,Z FEDERAL N004E LOAN SANK 00 Aft 0pr,oposed to extend t,he sur.

._e ee nt%uiry.

M" en -

a w we nes *

"*"e'."**' * ""eeM 13 CFR Part St3 regul a we schedule to e ton

• • I"s=meeswee.

Apr018.1800.See it GR 808.6 4(b) esensyear n o l

,",',so,s y,ee,,,,,,,,eja,,sey,gugi,e,$,j (No so 131eI (ttet).

na Board received six commentein

,w, nones = en e e_=es=se w es,.o,.ien u esse se aimes e.

Equity ftlakinvestment8 response toits proposal nroe of the j

r inne se es e,se, men,m,lng g,og,g,e,ssase se menen es es** ***

esaments were frominsered Daupre ts.sene laeututions twowerefromtrede

• • l e.ss,e"e,.k*e M,m.e.a.s.u.*se.es'"I,'ve M.n cE s,es e ll"..w e

a smev:FederalHomeImenBank amoeishan, and m wm b a K e

e.e-.

se s

1 j

e,*",*g,",,585*,E,*E,es g og. g

,g, government.oponeered '."dEsed se s i

.e usa.Of misurcomm u a.i Asviese Finalrule.

v

{

%'"""'esu 130 day extens6on of the ty risk p remeE *s

• men man e ne wee,, suesuaavthe redwalHomeIman Bank d' 7dagulauen,allsupported I

Board (the " Board"), as operena ne e.swere.is.e.sweenes t=arano cor,savines and toe.s head e en e of the rederai For as nasons udore bekw.ee

,a" 'r"i,f,s rJltetlrtl*e",,l".et..*l=ll:.

aa

.e"M

=== resu aard nu dearmind = =inie se p,=e=lla.*;;;e,,,es, *, ",:':: hmbyamenda 3:cruinc po n

==

m e==ia af Se ee*y r** ia==at eense w ee.wie so, isen nee. se.

e

. t=emas emmine inm==n= by re mesumima e sa se...e e.- ei = -- e.e, LPoeedtaltoden jn y'* pas *ey onsm ene e-me.

utuum as d.posiis of.nich a,e L the outed eatit begest sa insured by the PSLIC( insured Ene"E*u'eIsas E e*se*ne*es"e"neSYe*w"E inettotions")in egety secunnes.real menenes was ammaar en

.we so, seen am. ma se ou sweg maisee" oeute, service corporations. operating additional time was nee @ded to stud

^

l'e[,*se.7. e'",

" e"e.r.nm*o*v.*e,,Ind w e'e'nEQ n eubsidiaries, tenatalandloans and empirical evidence secompen r

=,':'ge.ro.r,1l'ee"e,e enes.,ellll'it'3e' lit ("omoidani co.imena ion.

alma sard auvity sma L*'.

1 odwk.riskinvesi ente i.

P=Patal. Pmposed legislogen has boa y,,e e

--.e.

sire amende se e ey. risk e

'-a-os=" =

llr:re".'s".e,,e.e,, c,e,,,,,,e, ;-llll",e; ta====i reni.e. by em,nene se im

,

n,:l:,=,a lll:=e e e pen e.m i

f ana *n=e e obr = ===== = =

,..e e. e e,t,,,e,e',am,.*a. = no san = >to d.yo a.in ocio6er is, st * *=e e aa' as== =

• 4

'g sets.na re,*un me.seded is

.e"",', gg;=' *"t,as,","lll'll"e' ",,a ea.

s.ees e

. euasei on Apr0 sa. sets. no soard aosiesen s.,

s s

m s.aa ei.soseis

.s.ne.,

as.,,ee,

,., scenes==== aroess massee baem sai ae.deu.aiseo de

-- e-e ases cwees, ens es es see a se, e,= sea me wulallow it to evaIunte reore care

~~

se=r.

.es mi es==. au g,,,,,,,,,L No masse,== me,,. u-em enom tw en 4 et m noensane esse y

nee e,s,e, the aspirical evidence mealting Gresa

,,,,',',, "*"M 7 '*,'"e",*,*,*,7,e.e*

the Board's recent proposal to amend ite pio.,m t g,,,

g s

or M in =

w,seews nesse else y,seemed se messe ne e e amesa wes=w=esee a regulatory capitai requiremento and the aetases tem en edannen et *sesser mewar m es,

ene a

e.e.ns. e menormee evnenma ** u isan et e'*m Mport on equity. risk investment sont to e

w e vie,e em ein e it we ses sealse,noe usue er me receal i

esaw se msnee m easeaw. esses soeveen are the Congrees on February 10.1988, Neseed Mwwege Ansessen r7 ness ham lane a sei = cones pursunt to the Competitive Equahty h rose,M Home hu Mwwees Casessense g,7,,,*"II,m,,,,", T,"e*,'e",' ",,,,'"e Benking Act of lear ("CEBA"). Pub.1.

r?rese,e Mug p shene er answw emesseem i

3 j

4" *$,ga *** mar **e"*'*s enseemens No.10048 101 Stet. 552, tel, i 133 se e, etwe peeseen n assa e esos seer ewens. w aanse Newmen

'Pe*er** 88*. B i

',*[,,*" @ ywompmWm,Mhhsd,[e (1987). Moreover. the Board annetpata i

that within the 100 day penod, ram,Wu e,s.

s,e

-n

e eo I

i' ENCLOSURE 2 l

l NRC REVIEW OF ADVANCED REACTOR DESIGNS t

i NRC Estimated Evolutionary LWR Designs

. Requested Action Ctc letion Date o Electric Power Research Institute Generic Guidance 3/91

- Advanced Light Water Reactor Approval Requirements Document for Evolutionary Designs o General Electric Advanced Final Design Approval 12/90 Boiling Water Reactor and Design Certification 3/92 o Westinghouse Standard Plant - 90 Preliminary Design Approval 6/90 Combustion Engineering System 80*

Final Design Approval

- 12/91 o

and Design Certification 3/93 t

Advanced LWR Designs o Westinghouse Advanced Passive - 600 Preapplication Review 6/90 o Asea Brown Boveri - Process Preapplication Review Currently being i

Inherent Ultimate Safety developed Advanced Non-LWR Designs o General Atomic Modular High Preapplication Review One year after Temperature Gas Cooled Reactor receipt from DOE of requested info. on containme o General Electric Power Reactor Preapplication Review One year after inherently Safe Module receipt from DOE of requested info. on containme o Atomic Energy of Canada Final Design Approval

- 4/94 Limited - CANDU-3 and Design Certification

- 4/95 (AECL has indicated their intent to request this.)

l l

.