ML20052H508
| ML20052H508 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/06/1978 |
| From: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20049A611 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-82-172, RULE-PR-50 NUDOCS 8205210152 | |
| Download: ML20052H508 (3) | |
Text
_ _.
23 o
e PROP @$EE) RULES 57157
- 8. On page 54( 47 in the middle (7590-01-M]
td for lleensing safety evaluation column, the 4th I aragraph, the 2nd and 3rd sentences should read. "The NUCLEAR REGULATORY were reviewed on a case by-case basis.
{
witness stated th tt L sit plans to COMMI5510N information on the LOCA/ECCS had By 1971, much significant research I
divert milk from it, pool supply plant at Springfield, M).,
to its nonpool N M F*d N been obtained, and the Regulatory staff had acquired extensive experi-plants at Bentony lle, BerryM11e and poMI5UC UCEN54 40 OF PsODUCDON AND ence in its licensing review of over 50 Spr'.igfield begin ling in the fall UUUZADON FAQtmES ECCS designs. Included in this experi-months of 1978.
Jnder the present
. order provisions, an;1k diverted to Ben. Auym CmW fw Emwomy Cm Co.3*
ence was the large amount of staff tonville and Berr: ville from Spring.
las systems tw Ught-Wster-Cooled Nedw time spent in individual ECCS-related field would be prictd at Springfield be-F** " P'*"
licensing reviews. In some cases new evaluation rnodels, assumptions, and
(
cause these two l< cations are within AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory parameters were proposed for each 120 m!!es of Spring 'leid.**
Commission.
successive plant.
I
- 9. On page 54648 in the 1st column, the 4th paragraph should read, "One ACTION: Advance notice of proposed To alleviate this situation, an Inter.
of proponent's coni erns was that milk I"I'"**.
im Policy Statement (IPS) providing Specifie guidance on ECCS evaluations l
which is diverted t > its planta at Ben-
SUMMARY
- The U.S. Nuclear Regula. and based on the then current state of tonville and Berryv 11e be priced at the tory Commission is considering knowledge of LOCA/ECCS was devel-same level. The prosent provisions pro. arnending its regulations to change oped. The IPS was issued by the Com-vide that milk dUerted to nonpool certain technical as well as nontechn!. mission immediately effective on June
[
plants within 120 miles of Springfield cal requirements withta the existing 29, 1971. However, following public or St. Louis shall be priced at the emergency core coohng system rule. comment, the Commission announced plant from which fiverted. Since the Modifications under consideration its decision on November 30,1971, to Bentonville and BerryviDe plants are would take into account (1) experience hold a rulemaking hearing to deter-within 120 miles of Springfield, any gained in the lleensing process (2) new mine whether the IPS should be re.
milk diverted by Kraft from the research information, and (3) operat. tained as issued or whether different Springfield plant tc such locations will ing experience. This notice is to invite criteria should be adopted.
receive the same pr ce."
advice and recommendations on sever-A rulemaking hearing, convened in
- 10. In the midd:e column, the 1st al questions concerning the acceptance January 1972, generated an extensive paragraph, the 15tt and 21st lines, the criteria for emergency core cooling record of discussion and evaluation of words. " producers and " previous ~ systems in light water-cooled nuclear the available evidence (i.e., experimen-should replace " procedures" and " pro. power planta. There will be a later op.
tal results and analytical models) per.
vious", respectively, portunity for public comment in con-tinent to LOCA/ECCS. The cornplete t
- 11. The middle cclumn, the 2nd sen, nection with any proposed rules that hearing record was certified to the tence should read, "The money is de-may be developed by the Commission. Commission for the Commission's use ducted by the market administrator in DATES: Comment period expires Feb-in making its determination of policy the computation cf the blend price ruary 5.1979.
on ECCS. Based on this record, the and is turned over to an agency com.
Commission Opinion of December 28, ADDRESSES: Interested persons are posed of pro-Iducer representatives.1".
- 12. In the 3rd col unn* the 2nd para-invited to submit written cenents 1973 (CLI-73-39, 6 AEC 1085) was issued, providing the basis for the graph, the 1st sen enc should read, and suggestions to the Secretary of "At the request of the cooperative a the Comission U.S. Nuclear Regula-ECCS rule 10 CFR $ 50.46, " Accept-ance Criteria for Emergency Core representative of tr e United Dairy in-tory Commission Washington, D.C.
I dustry Association presented data in 55 Attention: Drketing and Serv-Cooling Systems for Light Water Nu.
ice Branch. Copies of comments re-clear Power Reactors," and Appendix e e by h K. "ECCS Evaluati Models " to 10 add ti n ur ds eede P
50 ub hd he Frnta-t n
13 o in the 3 'd column, the 4th W
a h1
- n. D.C-w fully onsidered' the different views paragraph, the 2n i sentence should c
read. "He stressed that while he was FOR FURTHER INFORMATION produced by the record and decided on not opposed to advertising and promo-CONTAC'It the criteria and the required and ac-tion he felt that
.he higher assess-Mr. James A. Norberg, Office of ceptable features of the ECCS evalua-ment to producers nould be passed on Standards Development. U.S. Nucle-tion models. The Commission stated to Kroger through :he price that pro-ar Regulatory Commission, Wash-its belief that the margin provided by ducers charge Kroger for milk.".
Ington, D.C. 20555, phone 301-443-these criteria and their inherent con-
- 14. On page 54649 in the 1st column, 5921.
servative features would be adequate the 1st full paragr ph, the last sen-tence should read. }The funding rate SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: to assure core cooling should a design basis LOCA ever occur'Its Opinion also adopted herein is n line with these HisToRICA!. BACKGROUND
.The Commission in costs inc cases for rewpaper and radi stated St3 intent to provide latitude for Emergency core cooling systems change when new research informa-(ECCS) were recognized in 1966 as im-tion became available, 72 portant engineered safety features for For many years, the Commission the 8th I ne should r ad* **
ted..,,, al mitigating the consequences of a (and its predecessor agency, the percent of the weigL
- 16. On page 5400 in the middle postulated loss-of-coolant-accident Atomic Energy Commission) have had (LOCA) in light-water-cooled nuclear programs of experimental and theo-column, i 1062.7R K3),
the word'
." plan should read. ' plant,,
power plants. During the period 1966 retical research related to ECCS per-
- 17. Also, the last sentence in that to 1971 extensive research programs formance. The rulemaking Opinion were initiated to better understand noted the ongoing research programs column should r-ad,, 2.
Sectio 1062.13 is revised t< read as follows:,1,2 the LOCA and several comprehensive of the Commission and the nucicar in-reviews were made to evaluate the ade-dustry, and their potential for im-quacy of ECCS. ECCS designs submit-proved knowledge (6 AEC 1085,1088, Fes. frat REGISTER, VOt. 43, NO. 215-WEDNE5 DAY, DEUMBER 6,1978 8205210152 820507 PDR FOIA HIATT82-172 PDR
57158 PRCPOSED RULES 1094, 1103, 1120, 1124, 1129). The gov. conservatism of the rule of the pro-1 and 4 above.The resulta of the assessment ernment and industry ECCS research posed Phase 1 changes. Concurrently, which show that these changes have a neg11-programs have produced significant the staff is developing the methodolo-gible impact on the overan conservausm of the rule will be made available as part of new information in the years since the gy for assessing the technically com-the rule maw pr cess.
rulemaking. Furthermore, the Com-plex Phase 2 changes. It is expected mission has acquired significant expe'.
that the Phase 1 assessment will be ntAsE 3 (tDNQ -TERM) RULE CnANGEs rience in using the ECCS rule completed within six months. A com-RASED oN NEw rNFoRMATioN FRoM RE-L j
through its review of many ECCS pletion time for the Phase 2 assess-SEARCH AND oFERAftNG EXPERIENCE evaluation models and lleensing of ment has not been established, but The following changes to the ECCS i
ECCS designs.
this assessment is expected to take rule band on new infonnation from In order to utilize new technical in-several years to complete. In each eho m$$n, formation and experience in the 11-case, the drafting of the proposed rule being ns ere y censing process, the Commission is could begin with the end of the assess-
- 1. Resear'ch Infonnation a. Fission Prod-considering modifying the ECCS rule ment.
with both procedural changes and uct Decar near Rate. The changes would in-acchnical changes. The procedural BrEcmc CONSIDERATIONS volve revising paragraph I.A.4 of Appendix K which assumes a heat generation rate changes provide improvements to the The foHoming specific areas are from radioacuve decay of 13 times the N rule which would eliminate difficulties under considerat!on by the Commis. tober 1971 ANS Proposed Standard' to an-previously encountered in applying sion for proposed rulemaking-other specified decay heat rate consistent the rule. The technical changes would with present knowledge. Consideration will be in the direction of improving the rHAsE 1 (snonT TEnM) raocEDunE-omi. be given to the combination of uncertainues in decay beat with uncertainties in inittaa realism of ECCS licensing evaluation ENTG AND CERTAIN &FIX2 TIC TECHNI.
heat rate, in the light of present knowledge, CAL RULE CHANCI3
- b. Zircoloy Oxidation Rata The changes while preserving a level of conserva.
tism consistent with that knowledge.
- 1. Reanalysis Requirements. s. Reanalpris would involve revising paragraph I.A.S. of Requirements for Construeffon Permit Ap.
Appendix K from the Baker 4ust equation *
SUMMARY
or PRoroSED RULE CHANCES pitcations. Changes to 10 CFR l 50.34 would of May 1962 to a calculation method based allow for certain corrections to be made to on present knowledge and needed conserva.
The Commission is considering the vendor ECCS computer analysis codes tism. In addition. the basle performance re-intiation of rulemaking in two phases, during the construction permit review or quirement set forth in 150.46(bX2) that as follows during construction of the plant without a
a operating license review. Criteria would be would also be reexamined to ensure consist Initiate rulemaking for procedure-provided to define the bounds within which ency with the new data on strength and oriented and certain specific technical the corrections could be accepted without duettlity of partially oxidized zircaloy, changes in the ECCS rule. These rule plant specifie rcanalysis,
- c. Additional Data. The changes will in-1 changes are expected to have little
- b. Reanalpris Requirements fbr Operating clude any changes to the ECCS rule needed Impact on the overall conservatism of License Applications and Licensed plants. to take into account new information that the rule, and such changes are antici. The changes to 10 CFR I50.34 would dia.
indicates the present Iule is less conserva.
pense with ECCS performance recalcula. Live than previously believed. such as (1) the pated to require a minimum of time tions in the event of correctJons to vendor delay of emergency coolant injection caused j
and effort to implement.
ECCS computer analysis codes if it is dem.
by heat transfer to the coolant from hot onstrated, on a generic basis, that the model walls and (2) less favorable distribution of FRASE 2 MM HRM) changes reduce the peak cladding tempera. BWR ECCS core spray.
In parallel with Phase 1 initiate de-ture and if no change in plant technical
- 2. Operating Expertence. The changes will v
!T velopment of the bases for a more specifications is involved.
Include any revisions to the ECCS rule 2.
Return to Nucleate Bothna. The needed to account for phenoment not spe-
'i comprehensive rulemaking action to changes would allow an assunption of a cifically identified at the time the rule was incorporate new knowledge and oper-return to nucleate boiling during the blow.
promulgated but that have since been iden-ating experience into the ECCS rule, down phase of the IDCA when supported tifled through operating experience as This effort would include assessing the by applicable data. This change sould in.
having a significant effect on ECCS per-impact of proposed chas ces on the volve modincations to 10 CFR Part 50. Ap.
formance. Such revisions will be identified overall conservatism of tN rule. As pendix K. paragraph I.C.4.e. 'Ihe objective during the dcvelopment of the proposed rule.
part of the overall assessment of con.. of this change is to allow use of recent data
}
servatism, a systematic review of all CD "gt Cooling Requirements for flood. posed rule changes, an assessment will S
During the development of the pro-3.
relevant information will be per-a ina Rates Below One Inch Per Second. The be made of the impact of the proposed formed to ensure that it is appropri-changes would delete the requirement (Ap.
changes on the overall conservatism of stely considered. Ne information on pendia K. paragraph 1.D.51 that heat trans, decay heat and zirconium. water reac-fer calculations be based on the assumption the ECCS rule. The impact assessment tion would be considered together that cooling is only by steam for flooding will include a reassessment of the re-with all other new information, includ. rates below one inch per second and replace quirements presently specified in Ap-ing any adverse results (for example, it with a requirement that heat transfer cal.
pendix K in light of current inform-discrepancies in the pretest prediction culations be based on appitcable experimen-tion (e.g., statistical combination of tal data appropriately accounting for flow heat sources) as well as consideration of significant research test results, un-DI ekage if it ts predicted to occur.
of other phenomena of importance to certainties associated with the predic-ECCS performance that have been tion of counter. current flow phenom-,, c',.g.his es dr e re e ena and core spray distribution, and ence to the transition boning correlation in the possibility of steam generator tube Appendix K. paragraph I.C.5. with an im-
' Proposed American Nuclear Society failures). If, during this review, it is proved reference in a later pubilcation by Standards " Decay Release Rates Following determined that any information re.
the same authora.
Shutdown of Uranium-Pueled Thermal Re-Items 2 and 3 above constitute certain spe-actors " approved by Subcommittee ANS-5 quires more specific treatment than is eine technical changes to the present rule. ANS Standards Committee. October 1971..
presently provided in Appendix K or However, recent assessments strongly indi-
- Baker. l. C " Studies of Metal Water Re.
In present licensing practices, appro-cate that these changes do not significantly actions at Hish Temperatures. III. Experi-priate rulemaking action will be taken. affect the overall conservatism of the rule. mental and Theoretical Studies of the Zir-The Cornmission staff is presently Therefore, these changes will be considered conlum Water Reactor." ANic6548, page 'l, assessing the impact on the overall along with the procedural changes of items May 1962.
MDERAL EEGf$TER, VOL. 43, NO. 235-WIDM11 DAY, DECEMBER 6,1978
PROPOSE 3 RULES 67109 e
identified since the promulgation of For the Nuclear Regulatory Com. the United States ' law on diplomatic Appendix K (e.g., new semiscale and miss!on.
LOF1' test results, steam generator immunity.
tube ruptures, countercurrent flow S w C C n.K.
Section 6 of the Act requires d'plo.
phenomena. IlWR core spray distribu.
Secrefary offAc Commission.
matic missions, rn< mbers of missions, their familles, anc senior officials of tion, subcooled break flow). A method.
'I 88'
- I the United Nations who are endtled to
{
ology will be developed for assessing diplomatic immutlty to have and the impact of proposed technical changes on the overall conservatism of [4710-08-M]
maintain ability insurance against t
risks arising from their operation of i
the rule.
DEPARTMENT OF 5 TATE motor vehicles, nssels, or aircraft.
Advlee and recommendations on the The President is directed to establish l
proposed areas of revision to the ac.
[ 2 CFR PART 151]
the requirements for this liability in-ceptance criteria for emergency core s
goocket ro. sp.14oj cooling systems in light-water-cooled O r 121 (4
R5
- 5) e ga nuclear power plants are invited from COMPtit$ORY tlAbitfTY INSURANCE fog to the Secretary o ! State the author!.
all interested persons. SpecificallF DiPtOMATIC MIS $DNS AND FitSONNEL ty to prescribe the!e regulations.
commente are requested on the follow.'
In consideration of the foregoing, it Notice of Progesed Eule eMa8 is proposed to amtnd Chapter I of 22 AGENCY: Deptitrthent of State.
CFR, by adding a new Subchapter P,
- 1. Under what circumstances abould cor.
to read as follows:
rections to ECCS models be used during II.
ACTION: Propose:1 rule.
censing review without necessitating com.
plete reanalysis of a given plant or an entire
SUMMARY
- The Department of Btate
'$fN propdses to add new regulations to 22 Subchapter P-D!plomatic PART I5I COMPULSORY 11ABILTTY INSUR.
2.
a o ld be the impact of the pro.
CFR as posed procedure-oriented and certain specif. Privileges and Imtnunftles. These reg.
ANCE FOR DIPIOHANC MIS $10NS ANO ic technical rule changes?
ulations specify the insurance required Pit $ONNEt
- 3. How abould safety margins be quantJ. of all diplomatic t'tissions, members of fled and how can acceptable safety margins missions and thelr familles, and offi.
8'C-best be specified?
cials of the Uniteil Nations entitled to 151.1 Purpose.
- 4. What phenomena have been identified since promulgation of the ECCS rule that diplomatic immu11ty, including the are algnificant to ECCS performance and limits of liability, snd describe the evt.
wired.
that are not adequately considered in the dence of insurante necessary before 151.4 Minimum 11 mis for motor vehicle in.
existing ECCS rule. in light of current the Department cf State endorses ap.
aurance.
knowledge and expertence. or in current 11 plications for dipl< imatic automobile 11 151.5 Recommended limits for motor vehl.
censing practices?
cense plates or ex Frnptions from regis.
ele insurance.
- 5. How should the ECCS rule provide for tration fees.
151.6 Authorized insIrer, the inclusion of new research information 151/f Policy terms ciinsistent with the Act.
and operating experience? Can or should DATES: Written comments must be 151.s Evidence of in;urance for motor veht.
thls be done on a continuing basis? Ilow received by Februtry 2,1979. In addl.
eles.
should provision of acceptable marstns be tion, interested persons may offer 151.9 Evidence of 1. tsurance required for handled in such a process?
Comments orally at a public meeting diplomatic licens4 plates and walver of The Commission has mncluded pre. to be held at 10 a.: n., February 5,1979, 151.1 Minimum limits of insurance for liminarily that the procedure-oriented at Room 1912 Dppartmer.: M~A7 aircraft and/or vesels.
and certain technical changes (Phase 2201 C Street NV., Washington, D.C.
151.11 Nottilettion of ownership. mainte.
20520. Written notification of intent
- 1) to the emergency core cooling nance, or use of,essel and/or aircraft:
to offer oral com,nents at this public evidence ofinsuraace.
t t te f
meeting must be received by February o F n p!D 2,1979, Atmioarry: see. 4, 53 stat.111 (22 UE.C.
fee g the quality th human 2658); Sec. 6 Pub. L I b393 (92 Stat. 809,22 ADDRESS: W rit en comments and UE.C. 254c); E.O.121 >1 (43 FR 54195).
requ the preparation of an emironmental wri
$ 151.1 Purpose.
impact statement pursuant to Section ing io ould 102(2XC) of the National Environmen. sent to David P.
stewart, Special As.
This part estab11;hes regulations re.
tal Polley Act of 1969 (NEPA).
sistant. Office of the Legal Adviser, quired under section 6 of the Diplo.
Room 6423,2201 C Street NW., Wash. matic Relations AcL (Pub. L 95-393; 22 In view of the uncertainty regarding ington, D.C. 20520 U.S.C. 254c). These regulations require the possible techacal changes to the ' FOR FURTHEI INFORMATION au rniss! ns, mem rs of rnissions and ECCS rule based on new information frora research and operating experl. CONTACT *.
their familles, and those officials of the United Nations who are entitled to ence (Phase 2),
the Commission David P. Stewnrt, Department of diplomatic immurity to have and t
cannot make a determination at this State Washington, D.C., telephone maintsu Ilability insurance against time concerning the possible need for 202-632-2149.
the risks of bodil/ injury, including an emtronmental impact statement. SUPPLEMENTAF Y INFORMATION: death, and propert r damage, including Any proposal for rulemaking action The Diplomatic R>lations Act. Pub. L. loss of use, arisina from the owner.
along these lines will include a Com.95-393, Septembei 30,1978 (22 U.S.C.
ship, maintenanci' or use in the mission determination whether or not 254a et seq., 21 U.S.C. 1364 will United States of any motor vehicle,,
i an emironmental impact statement become effective December 29, 1978. VC88el, or aircraft.
should be prepd for that action.
As of that date,1)revious statutes on i
diplomatic immur Ity dating from the I 1H.2 IMnltions.
l (5 UE C. 552; Sec.161. Pub. L 83 '103, 68 stat. 948: see. 201. Pub. L 93-438, as Stat.
eighteenth centui y will be repealed (a) "Act" means the Diplomatic Re.
{
1242 (42 UE.C. 2201,5841).)
and the privileges and immun!tles pro. lations Act, Pub.1.95-393 (22 U.S.C.
I visions of the 196: Vienna Convention 254a et seq.,28 U.S C.1364).
Dated at Washington, D.C.,
this on Diplomatic Re1 attons (23 UST 3227, (b) " Persons subject to the Act" l
30th day of November 1978.
500 UNTS 95), wil be established as means the memb(rs of mfulons who FEDERAt RIGt1TER, VOL, 43, NO. 23bWEDNE5 DAY, DECEMaEA 6,1974