ML20154P115

Request for OMB Review & Supporting Statement Re 10CFR50, Domestic Licensing of Production & Utilization Facilities. Estimated Respondent Burden Is 9,500 H

ML20154P115
Person / Time
Issue date:	01/13/1986
From:	Norry P NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
To:
References
OMB-3150-0011, OMB-3150-11, NUDOCS 8603200135
Download: ML20154P115 (13)

Text

v s

fD S"d"83 e s~~ 1~

Request for OMB Review c..-

"'7%# ~

~

imp rtant Read instructions before compk. ting form. Do not use the same SF 83

'~ " '

'W Send three copies of this form, the material to be reviewed, and for to request bot 1 an Executive Orcer 12291 review and approval under paperwork-three copies of the supportirig statement, to the Paperwork Reduction Act Answer all questions in Part 1. If this request is for rev.ew under E.O. Of fice of Information and Regulatory Af fairs 12291, comp!ete Part ll and sign the regulatory certification If this Office of Management and Badget request is for approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act and 5 CFR Attention: Docket Library,. Room 3201 1320. skip Part 11, complete Part lll and sign the paperwork certification. Washington. DC 20503 PART l.-Cornplete This Part for All Requests.

1. Department / agency and Bureau / of fice or @natir'd recuest 2. Agency r. ode U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission _3_ 1_ _5_ _0

3. Name of person who can best answer questions regarding tnis request Teiephone number Alan Rubin (301 ) 492-8303

4. Title of information collectiorter ru;emaking ,

10 CFR 50, Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities

5. Legai authonty for information collectio, or rule (cite ONed States Coce, Pubhc Law, or Decutive Order) 42 usc _2?Mo) . or _

6. Af*ected pubhc (check att tha!Japt) 5 C Federalagencies or empicyees 1 C Individuals or housenolds 3 C Farms 6 C Non-profit institut>ons 2 C Stateorlocalgovernments 4 90 Busmesses or other for-profit 7 C Small businesses or organcations PART ll.-Complete This Part Only if the Request is for OMB Review Under Executive Order 12291

7. Regulat on Identif;er Number (RIN)

_ _ ___. _ _ . cr. None nsigned C STi ppe of suomission (ct'eck 0-e on e.scn caWori) Type of review requested Classification Stage of development 1 C Stancard s 1 O ma;or i C e nooseo or erart 2 eend>ng 2 C Nonmaior 2 u imiorin erim 0ral.wrtnpriorproposal 3 C Emergency 3 C Firal or entenm f nal, w.thout pnor proposal 4 C Statutoryorjudicialdeadhne 97CFR section af fected CFR

10. Dces this regulation contain report:ng or recurdkeep.ng requ,remer:ts that requrre OMB approval under the Payrwork Reduction Act and 5 CFR 1320? . O y .s O na I1. If a maior rule. is there a regulatory impact anal <s s.ittached ? 1 C Yes 2 C too It"Nu/* did OMB wase the s ulysis' 3 C Yes 4 U Ni Certification for Regulaton Submissions in submitting this request for GMB renew. the autnnotest it gul#0ry cortact and tne prngram official cert.fy that the requ:rements of E O.12291 and an r a;Wican'e ponc y airectwes have been cornpfd with, 9gnature of pragram official Date

$w.atu'e of authontt t.1 regulatory s oritact Date

12. t0 afb use only) -

bev% e%m s <hadete d 4 108, stand.ord Iorm 8J Oves snD hew' rett.,'#3H SSN 75 40 00 63 s 4014

" "~" "

B603200135 860113 PDR ORG EUSOMB PDR

PART 11.-Complete This Patt Only if the Request is for Approval of a Collection of information Under the Paperwork Reductiori Act and 5 CFR 1320.

13, Abstract-Dascribe needs, uses ai d affacted pubhc in 50 words or less

" Nuclear powerplants, safety" Proposed rule 10 CFR 50.63, Station Blackout, requires licensees and applicants for operating licenses to submit information to support the length of time nuclear plants can withstand a total loss of alternating current power.

14. Type of informat.on cohection (check only one)

Information collections not containedin rules 1 ' Regular submission 2 O Emergency submisuon (certa, cation attached)

Information collections conta!ned in rules 3 0 taisting resuiation (no change provosed) 6 rinai or inie,im finai .itnout pnor NpRM 7. cnter date of e,pected o, aciuai rederai 4 b N_otice of proposed rulemaking(NPRM) A Reguiar submiswon Register pubhcation (month. dar. y,,,)

a(this stahe van. 86 of ruiemak 90 rinas. neRu .as pre.ousiy pubbsned e O cme,gency sunmission(c,rta,c, tion,tt,ched)

15. Type of review requested (cr ec& only one) 1 O New collection 4 O Reinstatement of a previous y approved coitectio i for nien app,ovai 2 $ Revision of a currently approved collection **'*"'

3 O Extension of tne e paration date ef a currenti, approved conect. 5 0 Existing conection in use without an oMB control numter without any change in the substance or en the method of coHection

16. Agency report 1orm rumbert1)(include standard / optional form nurnber(s)) 22. Purpose of snformatm cotiection (check as many as apply) g 1 O Apphcation for benefits 2 O erogram evaiuation

17. Annual reportir g or disciost.re burder. 3 C Generalpurpose statistics 1 Number of respondents . 4 @ Regulatoryorcompliance 2 Number of respor ses per respondent 5 0 Program plannir g or management 3 Total annual responses (/,ne 1 teres Inne 2) 6 0 Researen 4 Hours per response 7 O Audit 5 Total hurs (f.ne 3 times rene 4)

18. Annual recordmeeping burden 23. Frequency of recordkeeping or reporting (check allthat apply) 1 Number of recordbeepers 1 O Recordkeeping 2 Annual hours per recordkeeper. Reporting 3 Total recordkeeping hours (Ime 1 temes tene 2) 2 O onoccasion 4 Recordkeeping retention penod years 3 0 weekiy

19. Totai annual burden 4 0 u onthir 1 Requested (tine 17 5 pluslone 183) . 3*880*522 5 Quartetty 2 in current oMB inventory 3,880,522 s O semi-annuaiiy 3 Difference (lune l less line 2) 0 7 O Annuaily Esplanation of ditterence ^ 8 0 B*ennially 4 Program change 9 @ 01her(describe); One timp 5 Adjustrnent .

20. Current (most receggBgil number or comment number 24. Respondents' obhgation to compfy(check thestrongerf obligation thatapplies) 1 O voiuntary *

21. Requested espirati ae 2 Required to obtain or retain a benefit 3 LJ Mandatory

25. Ara the respondents pnmarity educationai agencies or institutions or is the pnmary purpose of the coliection related to Federa! education programs? O ves @ No

26. Does the agency use sampbng to select respondents or does the agency recommend or presenbe the use of samphng or statistical analysis by respondents? . . O ves O No

27. Regulator uthority for the information conection CFR 50.63  ; or. rR  : or.other(spec,1y):

Paperwork Certification in submitting this request for oM8 approval, the agency head, the senior official or an authonzed representative, certsfies that the requirements of 5 CFR 1320. the Pnvacy Act, statistical standards or directives, and any other apphcable information pohcy directives have been comphed wrth.

I

signature of program official Date Signature of agency head. t'se senior o+fic>at er a t authortred representative Date Patricia G. Norry, Director /

Office of Administration 4MC s P7 jT St O CPO 1584 0 - 453-776

Supporting Statement for Proposed 10 CFR 50.63 And Anendment to Appendix A, General Design Criterion 17 Station Blackout

1. Justification (A) Need for the Information Collection This issue concerns the reliability of the alternating current (AC) electrical power for essential and nonessential service in nuclear power plants. The AC electrical power is supplied primarily by the

' offsite (preferred) power supply; redundant onsite emergency AC power systems also are provided in the event that the preferred power source is lost. The loss of both the preferred and onsite

emergency AC power systems is called station blackout.

The AC electrical power systems provide power for various safety systems including reactor core decay heat removal and containment heat removal. These systems are essential for preserving the

, integrity of the reactor core and the containment building. The reactor core decay heat also can be removed for a limited time period by safety systems that ar'e independent of AC power. If a total loss of all AC electrical power persists for a sufficient timethatthecapabilityoftheAC-independentsystemto. remove decay heat is exceeded, core melt and containment failure could result.

This issue has been studied extensively by the Commission under Unresolved Safety Issue A-44, Station Blackout. As a consequence of these studies, the NRC is proposing to amend its regulations by l

adding a new 6 50.63 to 10 CFR (Attachment 1) to require that light water reactor nuclear power plants be designed to withstand a total loss of AC electrical power for a specified time duration and maintain reactor core cooling during that period. This proposed requirement is intended to provide further assurance that a station blackout will not adversely affect the public health and safety.

The proposed requirements and information collection contained in s 50.63, " Loss of All Alternating Current power," are as follows:

(a) Requirements. Each light-water-cooled nuclear power plant licensed to operate must be able to withstand and recover from a station

' blackout as defined in 5 50.2 for a specified duration in accordance with the requirements in paragraph (e) of General Design Criterion 17 of Appendix A of this part.

l (b) Limitation of Scope. Paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section do not apply to those plants licensed to operate prior to (insert the effective date of this amendment) if the capability to withstand ,

station blackout was considered in the operating license proceeding and a specified duration was accepted as the licensing basis for the facility.

(c) Implementation - Determination of Station Blackout Duration.

(1) For each light-water-cooled nuclea'r power plant licensed to

operate on or before [ insert the effective date of this amendment],

the licensee shall submit to the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation by [ insert a date 270 days af ter after the effective date of this amendment]:

(i) a determination of the maximum duration for which the plant as currently designed is able to maintain core cooling and containment integrity in the event of a station blackout as defined in s 50.2(y);

(ii) a description of the procedures that have been estab-lished for station blackout events for the duration determined in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section and for recovery therefrom; (iii) an identification of the factor (s) that limit the capability of the plant to cope with a station blackout for a longer time than that determined in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section; (iv) a proposed station blackout duration to be used in determining compliance with paragraph (e) of General Design Critericn 17 of Appendix A of this part, including a justification for the selection based on: (1) the redundance of the onsite emergency AC power sources, (2) the reliability of the onsite emergency AC power sources, (3) the expected frequency of loss of offsite power, and (4) the probable time needed to restore offsite power; and (v) an identification of the factors, if any, that limit the capability of the plant to meet the requirements of Criterion 17 for the specified station blackout duration proposed in the response to ' paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this section.

(2) After consideration of the information submitted in accordance with paragraph (c)(1) of this section, the Commission will notify the licensee of its determination of the specified station blackout duration to be used in determining compliance with General Design Criterion 17 of Appendix A of this part.

1

(c) Implementation - Schedule for Inplementing Equipment !!odifications.

(1) For each light-water-cooled nuclear power plant licensed to operate on or before [ insert the effective date of this amendment), the licensee shall, within 180 days of the notifi-cation provided in accordance with paragraph (c)(2) of this l

section, submit to the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation a schedule for implementing any equipment and procedure modifications necessary to meet the requirements of General Design Criterion 17 of Appendix A of this part.

This submittal must include an explanation of the schedule and a justification if the schedule does not provide for com-pletion of the modifications within two years of the notifi-cation provided in accordance with paragraph (c)(2) of this section.

(2) The licensee and the NRC staff shall mutually agree upon a final schedule for implementing redifications necessary to comply with the requirements of Criterion 17.

The data collection aspects of $ 50.63, would require each light water reactor 1;censee to determine and submit to NRC (1) the maximum duration of a station blackout that the facility, as I

designed, is capable of withstanding, (2) a proposed acceptable station blackout duration for compliance with the recommended revision to GDC 17, (3) an identification of factors that limit the capability of the plant to cope with a station blackout, and (4) a schedule for any plant modifications needed to meet the acceptable station blackout duration. In making the determination required by 9 50.63, the licensee would consider: (1) the redundancy of the onsite emergency AC power sources, (2) the reliability of the i

nnsite emergency AC power sources, (3) the expected frequency of loss of offsite power, and

,-, , , . ,c c- , ---, e- , , . -

. . _ _ _~

l i

l (4) the probable time needed to restore offsite power. Guidance for performing this assessment is provided in a draf t regulatory guide entitled " Station Blackout." Collection of this information is necessary to assure compliance with 10 CFR 50.63.

(B) Practical Utility of the Information Collection the information will be reported on the plant's docket through the NRC Licensing Project Manager (LPM). The LPH will coordinate review of the information by the appropriate branch depending on the technical subjects covered. The NRC staff will review the

' licensees' proposed station blackout duration and the proposed schedule for modifications to assure conformance with the proposed rule. The estimated staff time for NRC review of this information is discussed in Section 4 of this Supporting Statement.

(C) Duplications with Other Collections of Information There is no other NRC requirement for licensees to submit infor-mation on the length of time that nuclear power plants should be able to withstand a total loss nf AC electrical power. Before the resolution of USI A-44 was completed, the NRC requested, as an interim measure (Generic Letter 81-04 dated February 25,1981),that plants implement, as necessary, emergdncy procedures and operator training programs to cope with station blackout events. The information requested by G 50.631s not duplicative of the request for improved procedures and operator training. An issue relating to station blackout was previously cleared under 0MB Clearance No. 3150-0067, which expired on May 31, 1983. The purpose of that clearance was to provide specific information in response to a questionnaire on emergency diesel generator operating experience at nuclear power plants and is not duplicative of this proposed information collection requirement.

(D) Consultations Outside NRC We have reviewed our overall station blackout recommendations on several occasions with the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards

! (ACRS), including the information gathering aspects. The ACRS is in basic agreement with our reconmendations (letter to William J. Dircks, from J. J. Ray, Chairman, ACRS, Attachment 2) including the proposed requirement that the minimum station blackout duration cepability be i

determined from site- and plant-specific parameters rather than applying a uniform generic fix.

' We have based our recommendations on results of technical reports by NRC consultants at Sar.dia National Laboratory and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (NUREG/CR-3226, NUREG/CR-2989, NUREG/CR-3992, Attachments 3-5).

(E) Other Supporting Information Other supporting information is presented in NUREG-1032, For Comment, " Evaluation of Station Blackout Accidents at Nuclear Power Plants," (Attachment 6), and NUREG-1109, For Comment,

" Regulatory Analysis for the Resolution of USI A-44, Station Blackout," (Attachment 7). j

2. Description of Information Collection (A) Number and Type of Respondents The licensees of all light-water-cooled reactors would be subject to this regulation. There are currently approximately 90 reactors with operating licenses (from fuel load to full power). In addition, we anticipate that approximately 35 plants currently I under review for OLs will receive OLs in the next 3 years.

Therefore, we expect a total of about 125 respondents to this infornation collection on a one-time basis.

wp (B) Reasonableness of the Schedule for Collecting Information The relatively high estimated frequency of station blackout for some reactors as well as the potentially severe consequences of i such an event require that the needed assessments be performed without delay. Within 9 months after final promulgation of the rule, licensees will submit to NRC the duration for which the plant should be able to cope with a station blackout, a justification for the duration, and a description of the procedures to cope with a station blackout for that duration. The NRC staff will review the licensees' submittals, and, within 6 months after that review,

' the licensees will submit a schedule for implementing equipment modifications, if necessary, to comply with the proposed rule.

The factors that need to be considered to detemine the minimum acceptable station blackout duration, as specified in the proposed revision to Appendix A, GDC 17, are relatively simple. Thus, this duration can be determined in approximately one or two months.

Licensees will be required to perform plant-specific analyses to determine how long the plant, as designed, can cope with a station blackout, and to determine what modifications, if any, are needed

! to meet the acceptable duration. These analyses could require 6

, to 9 months to perform. Thus, it is not unreasonable to request that the information be submitted to the NRC within nine months after the date of the proposed rule. "This is consistent with the schedule for information collection as stated in 10 CFR 50.63.

(See pages 2 and 3 of this supporting statement.)

(C) Method of Collecting the Information The required station blackout durations and justifications are plant-specific and therefore are required for each plant. The

_g_

information will be filed in a report on the plant docket and subsequently distributed to various branches for review. This is the most efficient method of obtaining the information because there are significant differences between plants.

(D) Record Retention Period The proposed 9 50.63 does not have any requirements for record retention.

(E) Reporting Period This is a one-time reporting requirement to determine the station blackout duration. Subsequent periodic reports are not required.

1 (F) Copies Required to be Submitted One original and 37 copies responding to information requirements in 5 50.63 submitted on the docket are acceptable.

3. Estimate of Licensee Burden Licensees and applicants for OLs of all light water reactors would be subject to this regulation. This will req 0 ire that approximately 125

, plants (90 licensees and 35 new OLs within the next 3 years) provide:

(1) the maximum time the plant is able to cope with a station blackout, .

(2) a minimum acceptable station blackout duration, (3) an identifi-cation of the factors that limit the capability of the plant to cope with a station blackout, and (4) a schedule for any necessary plant  ;

modifications. The estimates shown below apply only to the effort for l preparing the reporting requirements and do not include costs for

i performing any assessments because, even if there were no reporting requirements, in order to comply with the proposed rule, all licensees would need to: (1) assess the ability of the plant to withstand a station blackout, and (2) determine an acceptable station blackout. In addition, approximately 20 percent of the plants would need some

, hardware or equipment modifications and therefore would need to develop a schedule for implementing any necessary modifications.

(a) Estimated Person-hours (1) Blackout Duration - 100 person-hours per plant (125 x 100 =

12,500 person-hours total) j (2) Schedule - 100 person-hours per plant.(25 x 100 = 2,500 l person-hours total) i Therefore, the total estimated person-hours is 15,000.

(b) Estimated Cost:

i o

^

(1) Blackout Duration - $6,000 per plant (125 x $6,000 = $750,000 l total).

(2) Schedule - $6,000 per plant (25 x 56,000 = $150,000 total).

1 Therefore, the total estimated cost is $900,000, sixty percent of which should be incurred within one year on a one-time basis.

The remaining 40 percent would be incurred by new OLs within the next 3 years.

i

- , -. , - - . - _ _ , . _ . . . . . , , _ , . m.,. - . . ._ . . . - . . - . . . . ~ , . - , . , . . _ . , . - . . , , . - . . - , - ~ ~ _ - -

.,- .-..m , ._ .-

(c) Source and Itethod for Estimates (1) Blackout Duration - The information required for this report will come from a plant-specific analysis of the ability of the plant to cope with a station blackout and from other infor-mation available to each licensee. This includes data on diesel generator reliability as well as certain site-specific factors specified in the proposed amendment to GDC 17 and the draft regulatory guide. The time to prepare the reporting requirement is based on the engineering judgment of the NRC staff for preparation of reports of similar content. The cost estimate is based on $120,000 per person-year.

(2) Schedule - These estimates are based on the judgment of the NRC staff for preparation of similar reports.

(d) Reasonableness of Ettimate The estimates given above represent the best judgment of the staff and are based on actual experience with similar analyses prepared for the St. Lucie facility.

4. Estimate of Cost to Federal Government The submittals by the licensees will be evaluated by the staff at the estimated cost given below.

(1) Blackout Duration We estimate that 90 blackout duration reports will be submitted by the light-water-cooled reactor licensees nine months after the

4 effective date of the rule, and another 35 reports will be submitted within 3 years by new OLs. The submittals will be reviewed by the Powe.- Systems Branch, the Site Analysis Branch, and the Reactor Systems Branch, as appropriate. The review time per report is estimated to be 60 person-hours; the total review time is 7,500 person-hours. The total estimated cost is $450,000. Seventy percent of the expenditure will be made in FY-86 and the remainder in FY 87-88.

(2) Schedule

• The schedule for any proposed plant modifications will be submitted by approximately 25 licensees. These submittals will be reviewed by the LPM and, if appropriate, the Reactor Systems Branch, the

, Power Systems Branch,'and/or the Auxiliary Systems Branch. The total estimated review time is 80 person-hours per plant. Thus, the total estimated time is 2,000 person-hours, and the total i

estimated cost is $120,000.

i The total cost to the Federal Government is estimated as follows:

Task Person-hours Staff Cost l Blackout Duration 7,500 $ 450,000 4

Schedule 2,000 $ 120,000 TOTAL 9,500 $ 570,000 l

l l

. .- .- - . .--._-.---.-.!