ML20211P080
| ML20211P080 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/26/1986 |
| From: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| FRN-51FR43369, RULE-PR-50 PR-861126, NUDOCS 8612180384 | |
| Download: ML20211P080 (13) | |
Text
I*
JOCKET NWWEEN EBGE @ . N hh Olf$48.%h 00CKETED UMPC
[7590-01]
T6 N07 28 P6:59 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION !/rf:
10 CFR Part 50 Timina Requirements For Full Participation Emergency Preparedness Exercises For Power Reactors Prior to Receipt Of An Operatina License j AGENCY: Nuclear Reculatory Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY
- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission). .
proposes to amend its regulations to relax the timina l requirements for a full participation emergency preparedness. _
exercise for power reactors prior to issuance of a full-power operating license. The proposed amendment would require a full participation exercise, that includes State and local governments, to be held within two years before the issuance of a full-power operating license, as opposed to the current requirement of within one year. Exercises without full participation would still be required on an annual basis.
DATES: Comment period expires (30 days from date of issuance of proposed rules) . Comments received after~this date will be considered if it is practicable to do so, but assurance of consideration can be civen only for comments filed on or before that date.
ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to: Secretary, U.S.
g Nuclear Reculatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, ATTN:
rjlQf f illIll)! L L' r ll Yb d 8612180384 861126 PDR PR 50 51FR43369 PDR
a
- 2 (7590-01]
1 Docketing and Service Branch. Deliver comments to: Room 1121, 1 1717 H Street, NW., Washington, DC, between 8:15 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. weekdays.
1 Examine comments received at: The NRC Public Document l Room, 1717 H Street, NW., Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael T. Jamcochian, Reculatory Applications Branch, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Telephone (301) 443-7657.
?
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The Commission's regulations reoarding the frequency for full participation emergency preparedness exercises as originally adopted in 1980 had similar requirements regarding the frequency for full participation emergency preparedness exercises by State and local covernments in the emeroency planning zones (EPZ) for sites with operatina licenses and sites without operating licenses. In each case, the relevant State and local governments were required to participate in one annual ex'ercise. Specifically, sites with an operating license were required to conduct full-scale exercises "at least once every five years and at a frequency which will enable each State and local government within the plume exposure pathway EPZ to participate in at least one full-scale exercise'per year and which will enable each State within the ingestion pathway
o 3 (7590-01]
to participate in at least one full-scale exercise every three years." A "small-scale exercise" was requir.ed at each site with an operating license for each year a full-scale exercise was not conducted (45 FR 55402-55413, August 19, 1980).
At each site for which no operatina license had been issued, the Commission's regulations required a full-scale exercise "within one year before the issuance of the operatina license for full power, which will enable each State and local covernment within the plume exposure EPZ and each State within the incestion pathway EPZ to participate." Id. .
The Commission in 1984 revised its emergency preparedness '
regulations to relax the frequency of full participation -
exercises by State and local governments for sites with an operatina license. This was done in part because the Federal Energy Manacement Acency (FEMA), based on its experience in observing and evaluating exercises, adopted a biennial, rather than an annual, requirement for full participation exercises.
Under the bienniel requirement adopted by the Commission, State and local governments need only participate in one full participation exercise, at any site, every two years so lona as they participate in a full participation exercise at each individual operatina reactor site every seven years. The Commission revised this regulat. ion because it found that annual exercises used a disproportionate amount of Federal, State, and local covernment resources, and that State and local governments frequently exercised their emeroency preparedness
(7590-01]
4 capabilities by respondina to a variety of natural and man-made emergencies, such as chemical spills, on a continuing basis.
The Commission concluded that biennial full participation exercises were adequate to protect public health and safety.
The Commission in revisina its reculations for full participation exercises retained the requirement for annual exercises of each licensee's emergency plan (49 FR 27733, July 6, 1984).
The Commission did not make a similar change regarding the required frequency of full participation exercises at sites -
without an operatina license. Because of the opportunity in a'n operating license proceedina under Section 189a of the Atomic-Energy Act for a hearing on the results of a full participation exercise, this requirement created some difficulty in scheduling the exercise so that it would allow time for a hearina while still being conducted within one year of plant readiness to be licensed. In 1982 the Commission adopted a rule which, by finding that emergency preparedness exercises were not required for a Licensing Board, Appeal Board, or Com'ission m decision, would have allowed the exercise to be conducted close enouah to a licensina decision to avoid this difficulty and to avoid annual pre-licensina exercises (47 FR 30232, July 13, 1982). However, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated that rulemakina. The court held that the Commission could not remove from the hearina required under Section 189a of the Atomic Eneray Act a
5 [7590-01]
material issue relevant to its licensina decision, and that the prelicensing exercise was such a material issue. Union of Concerned Scientists v. NRC, 735 F.2d 1437 (D.C. Cir. 1984),
cert. denied 105 S.Ct. 815 (1985).
The Commission has thus been left with a regulatory. scheme for frequency of full participation emergency preparedness exercises that treats sites with an operating license differently than sites without an operating license. The Commission does not believe this disparity in treatment is warranted. The Commission is concerned about the burden the present rule may place on State and local governments. The requirement that those governments participate in a full -
participation exercise every two years is in addition to the requirement for their participation at sites without an operating license. Requiring annual participation at sites without operatina licenses could thus place a sianificant burden on State and local aovernment resources.
The Commission in the prior rulemakina determined that emergency preparedness would be adequate if State and local governments participated in an exercise every two years. There seems to be little reason why State and local covernments nonetheless should have to participate in full participation exercises on an annual basis in the pre-licensina staae solely because a license did not issue within 365 days of the exercise. The only requirement should be that the participants be adequately in place and trained to make the exercise
6 [7590-01]
meaningful. This could well occur two years before issuance of an operating license. If the exercise demonstrates that preparedness was inadequate, then remedial steps, includina another exercise, if appropriate, can be taken. Moreover, in accord with the Commission's regulations for sites with operating licenses, applicants will still have to conduct annual exercises, i.e., if the full participation exercise is held more than one year before issuance of the operating license, then the applicant must conduct an exercise of its emergency plan before license issuance. However, that latter _.
exercise need not involve State or local governments.
The revision proposed in this rule would be consistent -
with the Federal Emergency Management Acency (FEMA) reaulations, which only require full State and local government participation in an exercise every two years. See 44 C.F.R.
350.9.
The Commission is therefore proposina to revise Part 50, App. E, Sec. IV.F.1 so that a full participation exercise is required within two years of issuance of an operating license, rather than within one year.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT The Commission has determined under the National I i
, Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the i i
Commission's regulations in Subpart A of 10 CFR Part 51, that
7 [7590-01]
this rule is not a major Federal action sianificantly affectina the quality of the human environment and therefore an environmental impact statement is not required. See 10 CFR 51.20 (a) (1) . Moreover, the Commission has determined, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.32, that the proposed rule has no significant environmental impact. This determination has been made because the Commission cannot identify any impact on the human environment associated with changing the timina of full participation of State and local governments in pre-licensing emeroency preparedness exercises from within one year of
~
license issuance to within two years.
The need for this rulemakino is explained in the -
Supplementary Information accompanying this proposed rule. The alternative approaches that were considered in this rulemaking proceedina were:
- 1. To retain the requirement for a full participation exercise within one year of issuance of an operating license.
- 2. To relax the requirement to within two years of issuance of an operatina license.
There were no environmental impacts identified from either of the alternatives considered.
In addition, when promulgatina the oriainal emergency plannina and preparedness regulations in 1980, the NRC prepared an " Environmental Assessr.ent for Final Chances to 10 CFR Part 50 and Appendix E of 10 CFR Part 50, Emeraency Plannina
e o 8 [7590-01]
Requirements for Nuclear Power Plants" (NUREG-0685, June 1980),
and concluded that under the criteria of 10 CFR Part 51 an environmental impact statement was not required for the Commission's emergency plannina and preparedness reculations, which included 10 CFR Part 50, App. E as hereby revised.
NUREG-0685 may be examined in the Commission's Public Document Room, 1717 H Street NW, Washington, DC. Copies are available for purchase for $3.75 through the Superintendent of Documents, USGPO, Box 37082, Washington, DC, 20013-7082.
This proposed rule has been coordinated with FEMA. ,
ADDITIONAL VIEW OF COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE I disapprove this proposed rule change.
I continue to believe that the requirement to conduct a full participa-tion exercise, which includes State and local government participation, within one year prior to issuance of an operating license is needed to provide an accurate and timely verification of the adequacy of emergency preparedness. The purpose of this requirement is to provide an up-to-date assessment of the state of emergency preparedness for a new plant at the
- time the plant receives an operating license. This requirement has been easily satisfied in most cases. In the few cases in which there has been some difficulty, the Corrnission's exemption process provides a suitable alternate method for addressing the situation. Given the satisfactory experience with the current rule and the benefit in having up-to-date and accurate information on the state of emergency preparedness at new nuclear power plants, I would not relax the existing one-year requirement for a full participation exercise.
.< ~ -_- ._. _.
1 PAPERWORK REDUCTION REVIEW l The proposed rule contains no information collection requirements and therefore is not subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
REGULATORY ANALYSIS The Commission has prepared a regulatory analysis for this regulation. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of s the proposed action and the al'ternatives considered by the Commission. A copy of the reaulatory analysis is available for inspection and copyina, for a fee, at the NRC Public Document Room, 1717 II Street NW, Washington, DC. Single copies of the analysis may be obtained from Michael T. Jamgochian, Reculatory Applications Branch, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Telephone (301) 443-7657.
O
, - - , , , - - . , . , _ , t ,._ ., . . _ _ _ . , - - _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ .-. . . . . . - . . .,,-,.,--._m...m-_._..__
_ , . . - _m._
BACKFIT ANALYSIS This proposed rule does not modify or add to systems, structures, components or design of a facility; the design approval or manufacturing license for a facility; or the procedures or organization required to desian, construct or operate a facility. Accordinaly, no backfit analysis pursuant to 10 CFR 50.109 is required for this proposed rule.
REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY CERTIFICATION In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980; r
5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Commission certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact upon a substantial number of small entities. The proposed rule concerns the timing of a full participation exercise of emergency plans for applicants for nuclear power plant licenses. The electric utility companies owning and operating these nuclear power plants are dominant in their service areas and do not fall within the definition of a small business found in the Small 1
Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632, or within the Small Business Size standards set forth in 13 CFR Part 121. Although part of the burden for the conduct of emercency preparedness exercises falls on State and local governments, the proposed rule, by changina the frequency of the requirement, would if anythina l
_ __ _= __-2.-------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- - ----
4
. [7590-01]
lessen the amount of the current burden. Thus, the proposed rule would not impose a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980.
LIST OF SUBJECTS IN 10 CFR PART 50 Antitrust, Classified information, Fire prevention, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Penalty, Radiation protection, Reactor siting criteria, Reporting and .
recordkeeping requirements. "
For the reasons set out in the preamble, and under the -
authority of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorcanization act of 1974, as amended, and 5 U.S.C.
553, the NRC is proposing to adopt the following amendment to 10 CFR Part 50:
PART 50 - DOMESTIC LICENSING OF PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION FACILITIES
- 1. The authority citation for Part 50 continues to read as follows:
AUTHORITY: Secs. 103, 104, 161, 182, 183, 186, 189, 68 Stat. 936, 937, 948, 953, 954, 955, 956, as amended, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 1244, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2133, 2134, 2201, 2232, 2233, 2236, 2239, 2282); secs. 201, 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, 1244, 1246, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846), unless otherwise coted.
Section 50.7 also issued under Pub. L.95-601, sec.
10, 92 Stat. 2951 (42 U.S.C. 5851). Sections 50.58, n , ...-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
4
[7590-01]
50.91 and 50.92 also issued under Pub. L.97-415, 96 Stat. 2073 (42 U.S.C. 2239). Section 50.78 also issued under sec. 122, 68 Stat. 939 (4 2 U.S.C. 2152).
Sections 50.80-50.81 also issued under sec. 184, 68 Stat. 954, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2234). Sections 50.100-50.102 also issued under sec. 186, 68 Stat.
955 (42 U.S.C. 2236).
For the purposes of sec. 223, 68 Stat. 958, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2273), 50.10(a), (b), and (c),
50.44, 50.46, 50.48, 50.54 and 50.80 (a) are issued under sec. 161b, 68 Stat. 948, as amended (42 U.S.C.
2201(b)); 50.10 (b) and (c) and 50.54 are issued under sec. 1611, 68 Stat. 949, as amended (42 U.S.C.
2201(i); and 50.55 (e) , 50. 59 (b) , 50.70, 50.71, 50.72, 50.73, and 50.78 are issued under sec. 1610, 68 Stat.
950, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201(o)).
- 2. In App. E, Sec. IV.F.1 is revised to read as follows:
- 1. A full participation 4 exercise which tests as much of the licensee, State and local emergency _
plans as is reasonably achievable without mandatory public participation shall be conducted for each site at which a power reactor is located for which the first operatina license for that site is issued after July 13, 1982. This exercise shall be conducted within two years before the issuance of the first operating license for full power and prior to operation above 5% of rated power of the first reactor, and shall include participation by each State and local government within the plume exposure pathway EPZ and each State within the incestion exposure pathway EPZ. If the full-scale exercise is conducted more than one year prior to issuance of the operating license, applicant must conduct another exercise of its plan within one year of issuance of an operating license. However, that latter exercise need not have State or local covernment participation.
4 " Full participation" when used in conjunction with emercency preparedness exercises for a i particular site means appropriate offsite local and l State authorities and licensee personnel physically i l
- = -. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1
9 a [7590-01]
and actively take part in testing their intearated capability to adequately access and respond to an accident at a commercial nuclear power plant. " Full participation" includes testing the major observable portions of the onsite and offsite emergency plans and mobilization of State, local and licensee personnel and other resources in sufficient numbers to verify the capability to respond to the accident scenario.
Dated at Washington, D.C. this N day of( , 1986.
r the Nuclear Reaulatory Commission.
?
[ ~
~
( J. Ch k jSecretary o
'f the Co ission
.~