ML20151J008

Rev 1 to Reg Guide 2.6,Task Hf 201-4, Emergency Planning for Research & Test Reactors

ML20151J008
Person / Time
Site:	Ohio State University
Issue date:	03/31/1983
From:	NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES)
To:
Shared Package
ML20084N680	List: ML20151J008
References
TASK-HF-201-4, TASK-RE REGGD-02.006, REGGD-2.006, NUDOCS 8405170160
Download: ML20151J008 (5)

Text

Revision 1 s

• % U.S. NUCLEAR RE2ULATCRY CSMMISSION March 1983 m

(v )

@[g/l REGULATORY GUIDE

\ ..., OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH REGULATORY GUIDE 2.0 (Task HF 201-4)

EMERGENCY PLANNING FOR RESEARCH AND TEST REACTORS A. INTRODUCTION threaten to cause radiological hazards affecting the health and safety of the public. Emergency plans should be Paragraph 50.34(b)(6Xv) of 10 CFR Part 50,"Domestic directed toward mitigating the consequences of emergencies IJcensing of Production and Utilintion Facilities," requires and should provide reasonable assurance that appropriate that each application for a license to operate a facility measures can and will be taken to protect the health and include in a Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), along safety of the public in the event of an emergency, Although with other information, the applicant's plans for coping it is not practicable to develop a completely detailed plan with emergencies, including the items specified in encompassing every conceivable type of emergency Appendix E, "Emergency Pla.nmng and Preparedness. for_ situation, advance planning and provisions for ensuring the Production and Utilization Facilities," to 10 CFR Part 50, availability of necessary equipment, supplies, and services Paragraph 50.54(q) requires licensees to follow and can create a high order of preparedness and ensure an maintain in effect emergency plans that meet the require- orderly and timely decisionmaking process at the time of an ments of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50. emergency. The plans should be an expression of the overall concept of operation that describes how the elements of This regulatory guide provides licensees and applicants advance planning have been considered and the provisions with a method acceptable to the NRC staff for complying that have been made to cope with emergency situations, with the Commission's regulations with regard to the content of emergency plans for research and test reactors. In the judgment of the NRC staff, the potential radio-Jogicalhazar6 to the'pablic ' associated with the operaiion'~

[7 Any guidance in this document related to informa- of research and test reactors are considerabiy7eii~tidn'

~

(V) tion collection activities has been cleared under OMB Clearance No. 3150-0011.

those"involved with nuclear power plants. In addition, because there ireTiany different kinds of research and test '~

~ ~

reactors, the potenital for' eme'rbesey'sittiations arisin'g"and

~

B. DISCUSSION the consequenies [the'reolTa'ry [frosi facility to faitlity. _

These differences and variations are expected to be reflected Working Group ANS 15.16 of the American Nuclear realistically in the emergency plans and procedures developed Socie ty Subcommittee ANS 15 has develeped ANSI / for each research and test reactor factlity.

ANS 15.16-1982. "Emergency Planning for Research Reactors,"' which is generally consistent with current C REGULATORY POSITION regulatory requirements. This standard was developed to provide specific acceptance criteria for complying with the The requirementsin ANSI /ANS 15.16- 1982, "Emerge n cy applicable requirements set forth in { 50.54 and in Appen. Planning for Research Reactors," are generally acceptable dix E to 10 CFR Part 50. These criteria provide a basis for to the NRC staff as a means for complying with the require-research and test reactorlicensees and applicants to develop ments in @ 50.54 and in Appendix E,"Emergency Planning accept 01c radiological emergency response p!ans and and Preparedness for Production and Utilization Facilities," ~

improve emergency preparedness at their facilities. to 10 CFR Part 50 as Yeladd to'researdi anitest rea'ctirs subject to the following clarifications.

The Commission's interest in emergency planning is focused primarily on situations that may cause or may 1. Responsibility for planning and implementing all

--- 'Cories may tw obtuned from the American Nuclear Society, emergency measures within the site boundaries rests v.ith, sss North Kensangton Avenue, La Grange Park,llt 6os25. the licensee. In this contest, the site boundaries should be USNRC REGULA50RY OUIDES Comments should be sent to the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. P4uclear R egulat or y CommissJon Re,uistory cuaes are inued to descrie,e and moe av4Hable to the Attentioni Docketing and Seryke preach, Washington, D.C. 20sss, pu mic met h ans acceptaue to the NRc statt of im piementing specifs parts of tme comrmssio* ; regulat6ons, to de46neate tech. The guides are issued in the foHowing ten broad d6 visions:

ntques used by the staff in ovata ating specific prob 6 ems et postua lated acC6 dents, or to Pfovide g ude%Ce to appiKants. Regulatory 1. Powet ReaClOrs 6. ProduC ts Guides are not substitutes for regulations, and compliance with a. Research and Tast Reactors r. Transportation

/

(g them is not teou6 red. Methc4s an a solutions dif ferent from those set a. F uets and Mater 6ats p acilittes a. Occupational Health k provide a basis 9. Antitrust and Financial Revleve i l ou t in the fmomes guide.s to

,eouisa will ih be. inu acce,.y

,e ssH ,if thefmuance of a pe,for o con miithe, o 4.

5.Euaie nvir,onmental ia s and and nae$,dting P otemon io. Gene,si t , i,conse v ihe Co-nion.

Copies of issued guides may be pufchased at the Current Govefnment Th6s gu669 was IsAed afttf consideratlon of comments received from Paldteng Office prue. A subscription serige foe future autoes in 500-the putoc. Comments and suesestions for improvements in these cif e dtvisions is avallatde througn the Govotnment Printmg Office.

Su6 des are encouraged at all times, and pu6 des m64 be revised. as infoemation on the subscription servue and current GPO pr6ces may appropriate, to accommodate comments and to reflect new 6mtorma- be ottamed by writine the U.S. Wclear Reeulatory Comminion, tion or emperience. W ashingt on, D.C. 20s ss. Attention Pubinations Sales Manator.

a

e ,1 clearly defined. Supporting organizations that would and step-by4tep procedures or checklists that m'ay be augment the licensee's emergency organization, e.g., fire altered as a result of experience or test exercises, should not department, hospitals, and sec.arity organizations, should be be incorporated into the plans but should be listed in the specified. Planning and implementation of measures to cope emergency implementing procedures, with reactor related emergencies beyond the site boundary should be commensurate with and based on the potential 5. Emergency procedures that implement the emergency consequences of credible accidents or incid ents. The plan need not be incorporated into the plan but should be emergency plan should describe this planning basis and the listed by title in an annex to the emergency plan. The corresponding arrangements and agreements among the emergency implementing procedures should be maintained licensee and the local, State, or Federal agencies expected and available at th* facility for inspection and review at any to respond. time by a represent.tive of the NRC.

2. The radiation dose levels of the emergency action levels established for the various emergency classes are 6. The procedural system used by the licensee for the slightly different from those specified for power reactors, review and approval of emergency implementing procedures llowever, in the judgment of the NRC staff, the radiation should contain instructions governing the writing, revising, dose levels specified in Table 1 of the standard are adequate and updating of implementing procedures. 'lhe instructions for the credible accidents associated with the operation of should specify the methods to be used to ensure that research and test reactors, and the specified action levels procedures, revisions, and changes are teviewed for adequacy, provide reasonable assurance that protectise measures approved for use, and distributed to user organizations and associated with the action levels.specified in Table I can and indhiduals having the responsibility for implementing the will be taken, provided appropriate emp!. asis is also given to procedures.

developing emergency action levels that relate directly to facility parameters (e.g., pool water levels and area D, IMPLEMENTATION radiation monitors).

Except in those cases in which an applicant or licensee

3. Emergency action levels related to facility parameters, proposes teceptable alternative practices or methods for effluent release levels, and equipment conditions should be complying with specified portions of the Commission's developed to the extent feasible for each emergency class. regulations, the practices or methods described in this guide will be used as a basis sor evaluating ,the adequacy of the

4. Details that can reasonably be expected to change emergency plans and preparedness of applicants for a from time to time, e.g., names and telephone numbers, license to operate a research or test reactor as well as the specific items of equipment and supplies, inventory lists, plant and preparedness of current licensees for such reactors.

O i 2.6 2

. t D

VALUE/lMPACT STATEMENT l I. Tile PROPOSED ACTION 2. TECllNICAL ALTERNATIVES The licensee of a research and test reactoris required by Because the regulatory guide would endorse a consensus ,

the Commission's regulations to develop plans for coping standard, no technical alternatives have been considered, with emergencies. Specific guidance is needed to provide acceptance criteria for complying with the applicable require- 3. PROCEDURAL ALTERNATIVES ments set forth in f 50.54 and in Appendix E of 10 CFR Part 50. Regulatory Guide 2.6, "Emergency Planning for Because ANSI /ANS 15.16 1982 is generally consistent l 4

Research and Test Reactors," provides basic guidance for with current regulatory requirements, revising Regulatory complying with the regulations. More oefinitive guidance, Guide 2.6 to endorse that standard was selected as the howeser, has been developed by the American Nuclear l appropriate procedural alternative. '

Society Subcommittee ANS 15 in ANS!/ANS 15.16-1982, "Emergency Planning for Research Reactors." The proposed 4. STATUTORY CONSIDERATIONS action would endorse this standard with appropriate supple.

mentary materialin a revision to Regulatory Guide 2.6. 4.1 NRC Authority l

1.1 Value/ Impact Assessment Authority for this action is denved from the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, through the Commission's The proposed action would provide licensees and appli- regulations in Title 10, Chapter I, of the Code of Federal cants definitive guidance for developing emergency plam Regulations.

that meet the appropriate regulation.

I 4.2 Need for NEPA Auessment falue The value of the proposed action would be more effective emergency preparedneu around research and test Since the guidance in the proposed regulatory guide i

, reactors. Endorsing a national consensus standard reduces the revision does not represent a major action as defined by 3 expenditure of staff resources in developing the guidance. paragraph 31.5(a)(10) of 10 CFR Part $1, implementation of '

the regulatory guide does not require a NEPA assessment.  !

/mpact Most of the impact or' industry has already I occurred dunng development, review, and approval of the '

consensus standard and in attempting to comply with the 5. RELATIONSillP TO OTilE R EXISTING OR PROPOSED upgraded emergency preparedness requirements promul. REGULATIONS OR POLICY l gated in August of 1980. For those members of the research reactor community that have not previously ihis revision to Regulatory Guide 2.6 relates to the NRC upgraded their emergency plans,it is estimated that it wtll emergency preparedness regulations, Regulatory Guide 1.101, take approximately 2 man-months to do so, and NUREG-0654/ FEM A REP l.

1.2 Decision on the Action

6. SUMM ARY AND CONCLUSION Regulatory Guide 2.6 should be revised to endorse ANSI /ANS 15.16 1982. A revision to Regulatory Guide 2.6 should be published.

I l

l I

l 2.6 3 l d

UNITED STATES P ,1.p ci ass 1,, ,

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Postact a sus sa o <

usot WASHINGTON, D C. 20%5 .asa 3 c r: m v 4 =. I s t OFFICIAL SUS +NES$

PtNAlfv 70s ParvAT( V5E, sXO j l

I i

I i

l l

I I

i l

l l

l t

9i, l

l l

l

< l 1

e d

I I I

I l

i

(