ML20245K320

Forwards Documents Re Regulatory History AC61-1 Concerning Proposed Rule 10CFR52, Early Site Permits;Std Design Certification & Combined Licenses for Nuclear Power Reactors

ML20245K320
Person / Time
Issue date:	06/27/1989
From:	Urban P NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC)
To:	Huyer D STATISTICA, INC.
Shared Package
ML19317A604	List: ML20245D474 ML20245E624 ML20245H522 ML20245K320 ML20245K325 ML20245K432 ML20245K469 ML20245K823 ML20245L134
References
FRN-53FR32060, RULE-PR-52 AC61-1-01, AC61-1-1, AC61-2-1, SECY-88-169, NUDOCS 8907050092
Download: ML20245K320 (19)

Text

o

jd* *'Guq j,

UNITED STATES '

• -[

( [,g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION E

=/

WASHINGTON, D. C, 20555 C

s i

f 4,,,

June 27, 1989 TO:

Darlene Huyer NUDOCS P1-24 FROM:

Pamela Urban OGC 15-B-18 l

SUBJECT:

REGULATORY HISTORY "EARLY SITE PERMITS; STANDARD DESIGN CERTIFICATIONS; AND COMBINED LICENSES'FOR NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS" Enclosed are the documents of central relevance to the above rulemaking.

The documents have been marked with the appropriate designator and have been marked either "PDR" or "CF."

l Please provide me with a computer printout of the documents as soon as possible.

o

' 't b

If you have any questions, please call me on x2-1632.

Thank you.

Enclosures:

As stated I

i I

e907050072 890627 PDR PR 52 53FR30060 PDR l

a 1: D

,l*'

Tederai Register / %1. S3, No.106 / Tuesday, August 23,1s88 / %osed hfas

, p f (.- l e

32080 L~

gither of commission on omission.es Acnosr Proposed rde; mopenlag of conducted by the Department's Office of such member, afternate.

Ioyee,or comment p*.riod: correction.

the Inspector General (OIG).The OlG agent, except for acts of dis safy.

i I

willful misconduct, or gross negligance, suumannOn May 13,1983, the Food recommended that FSIS " require that Safety and inspection Service FSIS) foreign meat products antaring the

$ 955.86 e a a d

• T published a proposed rule to amend the United States be las ected * *

• an]

if any provision of 9 mobpart is Federal meat and poultry products at the point of fir:t val" O!G stated that this action would enable FSIS to d!clared invalid, or the applicability inspection regulations by ohibi the thereof to any person, circumstance, or transportationofimporte meat maintain control over meat products thing is held invalid, the validity of the poultryproducts prior to their entering the United States, remainder of this subpart, or the pection.The proposa! would FSIS has received requests to reopen

.1 applicability thereof to anyother

t. quire that importad pmducts be the comment perkd so that additional I

I person, circumstance, or thfng shall not. reinspected at the port of first arrival Iorma can FSIS.IhSisi terestedin be affected theraby.

FSIS also proposed to eliminate the gg 3 965.87 h officialimport seal and current sealing receiving additional information and is, requirements forimported products Oeref M. Npen% b comment pedod Amendmems to this subpart may be wh!ch are transported f r an ed&tional 30 days.

propeeed, fmm time to time.by the reinspection. The - prior to This document also corrects a period committee er by the Secretary.

cbsed on July 12.1988.FSIS has mathematical min the computatm, n ar adng Asmund

{o e ! eyda tha dd nal w

ae y a pmposal

'I955.90 Counterparts.

Information may be provided to FSIS.

as cornpared to total unports. In the This agreement may be executed in FSIS is granfmp therte requests and is preamble to the proposal,it was stated taultiple counterpart 4 and when one reopening tha enmment period for an that onh 7 percenWtahmpwis may c:unterpart is signed b the Secretary, additional 30 days.This document also be affected; the ebrrect figure is 14.5 ell such counterparts a a!! constitute.

corrects a statement in the preamble to percent of totalimports.This percentage q

when taken together, one and the same the proposal concerning the percenta e is based on the amount of product inst ument as if ell signatures were of totalimpnrta that may be affected y moved after unloading in one district contained in one ori;inal, this proposal.11 was stated that only 7 and p*esented for reinspection in i

'8 966.st AsscNtional pertes, percent of totalimports would be another district-361,473.786 pounds affected: the correct figure is 14.6 during calendar year 1985.This amount After the effective date the'vof, any percent of totalimports.

ofproduct is 14.6 percent of total handler may become a party to this DATE: Comments must ber received on or ph2,478.643.236 pounds-for cgreement if a counterpart is executed before September 22.1988.

cagendaryear 085.

by such handler and delivered to the Secretary. This agreement shall take ADDetsa: Written commente to: policy De smashingum.DC, on August in.

ma.

Ef!Ict as to such new contracting part at Offlu, A'ITN:lAda Carey FSIS the time such counterpart in delivered to Hearing Clerk, Room 3171 South I** W the Secretary, and the benefits.

Agriculture Bauding. Food Safety and Adminstrefor. roodsaferrandInspection j

1. **'. 88-19076 Piled 6-22-86 8 privileges, and immunities conferred by Inspection Service. U.S. Department of th!e agreement shall then be effective as Agriculture. Washingtnn, DC 20250. Oral

[FR Doc to such new contracting party.

comments, as provided by the poultry

• • • :008 ****a products inspection Act, should be

'l 965.92 Order men ausdceeng directed to Patricia Stalfa. Depety agramment.

Administrate. hdemational prograsos, NUCMAR REGULATORY Each signatoryhereby requeste the Food kfety and Inspection Service, COMMISSION Secretary to issue, pursuant to the Act, (202) 447-3473.

cm order primding for regulating the FOR PURTHE? N6FOMMAT104 copfTACT:

10 CFR Part 52 h adling of Vidska onions in the same Patricia Stolfa.Depmy Administrator.

menner as is provided for in this International pr agr ams. Food Safety and Earty Site Permits; Standard Design agreement.

Inspection Serv ce, U.S. Department of CertiMonsW ComWned iJceses Dated: August 12.1asas Agdealture. WaoNegton, DC 20250, for Nuclear Power Resetors

g. Petda geyle, (202) 447-3673.

AoEncy: Nuclear Regulatory Administaraar.

SumEsstWTAwT s'#Powam On %y Commission.

FR Doc e&MtasNN a W 13,1987. FSIS published a proposed M?

(53 FR 17059) to amend the Federal mest Actrope proposed rule."

and poultry products inspection SUMMArf:The Nnc!rwrRegulatory regulations by removing entrent Comunasion is considermg adding a Food Safety and laspecuors Serdos prcylaions that permit the transportation new part to its regulations which would ofimported products prior to provide for issuanca of eady site 9 CFM Parts 327 and 381 reinspection by FSIS. Instead PSIS permus, etandard design certifications, Met h 86-03 W proposed to requhe that imported and combined construction permits and products be reinspected at the port of conditional g-ilus hcenses for Proh!NHon on ht W haported first arriva!. In addition, FNS proposed nuclear power reactors. The proposed Product Prior to Rs6nspectiori, to eliminate the official import meal and rule sets out the review pmcedures and EsopW W Conyment W sealing requiren.ee for product that is licensing reqmrements that would apply transported pdor to reinspection by to applications far these new !! censes f4 ENCV: Food Safety andInspection FSIS.This action resulted from an aedit and certifications. The proposed action Service USDA.

of the import inspection prograin is intended to achaeve the early

Federal Register / Vol. 53 No.163 / Tuesday August 23, 1988 / Proposed Rules 32061 resolution of licensing issues, thereby early years of the industry, when proposes to add to its regulations a new enhancing the safety and reliability of innovation was most needed, the "one-Part, which is described in Sections U-V nuclear power plants, and reducing the of-e. kind" approach may also have below.

complexity and uncertainty of the hindered the growth of significant ne Commission announced its licensing process.

economies of scale of benefit to safety intention to pursue rulemaking on cAtas:ne comment period expires and to the efficiency and predictability standardization in its recent Policy October 24,1988. Comments received of regulation. Standardization of reactor Statement on Nuclear Power Plant citer this date will be considered if designs should result in greater Standardization (52 FR 34884; practical to do ta, but only those accumulation of construction and September 15,1987).%e Policy comments received on or before this operating experience with a given Statement, now superceded by this date can be assured of consideration.

design, easier transfer of that experience proposed rule and preamble, described ADOna89t.S: Comments may be sent to from one reactor to another, and more the Commission's experience with the Secretary of the Commission, easily maintained qualified vendor standardization, set out the Attention: Docketing and Service support, all of which should advance Commission's reasons for pursuing a Branch, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory safe and reliable operation. Moreover, greater degree of standardization, and Commisalon, Washington, DC 20555, or by permitting early identification and outlined some of the crucial elements may be hand-delivered to One White resolution of safety 1 sues, the Commission would seek to embody Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike, standardization and other means of in a rule.The Policy Statement provided Rockville, MD 20852, between 7:30 am achieving early resolution oflicensing for a sixty-day comment period and cad 4:15 pm weekdays. Copies of issues should afford public participants gave notice that a public workshop comments received may be examined at in the licensing process an earlier entry would be held during the comment the Commission's Public Document into that process, greatly reduce the period so that the NRC and interested Room at 1717 H Street NW.,

number and importance of safety issues parties could have a more thorough Washington, DC, between the hours of which are decided late in the process.

discussion of the Policy Statement and 7:45 am and 4:15 pm weekdays.

and permit a speedy, yet thorough, NRC the pending rulemaking than written staff review whenever an application comments alone would permit.The Fon runDen NFOnMADON CONTACT.

Steven Crockett. Attorney, Office of the incorporates a certified standardized workshop was held in Bethesda on Gene *al Counsel, U.S. Nuclear design.Thus, early resolution ofissues October 20,1987, with representatives of Regulstory Commission. Washington, should lead to a simpler and more the NRC staff, the Department of DC 20555, telephone: (301) 492-2000.

predictable licensing process.

Energy, and the industry participating.

Through such devices as early site During the Workshop, the NRC outlined suPPLauptrAny swrons4AD0sc reviews, final design approvals, and the proposed rule and answered

~Public Meeting reviews of duplicate and replicate preliminary questions about it. A The NRC staff will conduct a public plants, the NRC has for some time transcript of the workshc'p may be found meeting to answer questions on the offered applicants the means to achieve in the Commission's public document meaning and intent of any of the a degree of standardization and to reach room.1717 H Street, NW., Washington, provisions of this proposed rule, and to early resolution of issues. The NRC will DC 20555.

continue to offer these means.1 During the comment period, the hear and,if appropriate, respond to preliminary views on any of the However,it is the opinion of the Commission received comments from provisions c,f this proposed rule. It is Commission that the nuclear power six organizations and two individuals.

hoped that such a meeting would be industry is now sufficiently advanced in Chief among the comments were the helpful to persons who intend to submit technology ar.d organization to enable highly detailed ones submitted by the written comments on the proposed rule.

appbcants to submit essentially Nuclear Management and Resources The meetings will begin at 9:00 am, on complete designs or major portions Council (NUMARC), which were September 16,1988, in the Conference thereof for certification by miemaking endorsed, or at least reflected to a large before construction and thus secure the degrec, by the comments submitted by Theater of the Crowne Plaza Holiday Inn,1750 Rockville Pike, Rockville, benefits of a greater degree of the other organizations, among them two Maryland 20852, telephone (301) 468-standardization and early resolution of engineering firms and three reactor issues. Moreover, the NRC now has manufacturers.These comments also 1100.

under review several designs which aro may be found in the Commission's I. Background amenable to standardization, and the Public Document Room in Washington, The Nuclear Regulatory Commission industry is showing increasing interest DC.This proposed rule incorporates has long believed that standanlized in these designs. For the past several many of the suggestions made in the nuclear power plant designs and other years, the Commission has pursued comments. For instance, the rule means of achieving early resolution of Congressional affirmation of the goals of provides for certification of " advanced" licensing issues could significantly standardization in the form of a Nuclear designs, establishes a rulemaking enhance the safety and reliability of Pc ver Plant Standardization and process which goes beyond notice and nuclear plants, and could likewise 1.icensing Act. However, much of what comment, provides that a design enhance public participation in the this proposed legislation would provide certification remains in effect during the licensing process while reducing the can be put into effect now, under the proceeding on a request for renewal of complexity end uncertainty of that Commission's existing statutory the certification, and does not make the process.The considerable variation in authority.The Commission therefore granting of a cotabined license the design, construction, operation and dependent upon State and local maintenance of nuclear plants has led to 8 The NRC's cunect pobey en rephcadon appcars government certification of Willingness an operating reactor population of great in this Federal Resmer nobce aner this to participate in emergency planning, variability and diversity, even among

$'j',(*g,",'

'gg, although it does seek the sarliest reactors from the same vendor. While whether the NRC should conunue to offer the opbon possible resolution of emergency giving freedom to innovation during the of repucanon.

planning issues.

[

32062 Federal Register / Vol. 53, No.163 / Tuesday, August 23. 1988 / Proposed lisles In some instances, the pmposed rule review of standardized designa.This is for resolution before a bh* to m

does not incorporate suggestions made not the case now and wDinot bemm operala under the combined license in the comments. Dese suggestions and so.ne Commission means only te give would be much raore liraited and well-our reasons for not including them are priority among applicants to those defined than are the issues which

{

discussed in the

. riste placeein proffering or referencing standardized remain to be resolved in an operating Sections HI,IV, an V elow,in Section designs and early site permita, license proceeding under the currant VI we raise certain questions on whfch we would appreciate --. Some of H. MSe ad Shhs Practice.

All three subparts of the proposed these questions have to do with Part 52 is intended to impmve the Part 52 draw lasarily on existing suggestions we have not incorporated in licensing of nuclear power plants by the provisions in to CFR Part 50 and its the proposed rule.

use of three proceduralinnovations, two append >ces. Reference to pre-existing Altimugh many interveners have long of which have been in partis! noe by the sections obviates the need to repeal supported standan!!xation, even to the Comamon h several years. W first identical provisions. la addillon.most of point of arguing that the Commission

, of these is the early rite permit orsite-the provisions of Pad 50 have beenla should make standardization bank concept, elready in partial use use for many years and are comrnonly mandatory, some of the comments on through the procedures of Appendix Q understood by appucanta, idervenots, the Policy Statement opposed to to Cm Pet 50. Subpart A af Part 52 and the NRC staff. Finally.Part 50 standardization. In particular. one formalizes the early site approval should remain intact because Dcensing individual claimed that standardization process, anowing a prospective under it may be expected to continue for will stifle enginesdn6 ngenui!y, close apphaant to obtain a pemit fw one e some time in paraNel with licensing i

the pubhc out of the liceming process, mom pre-approved sites on which futum undes the improved procedures of Part spread the safety problems of a given nuclear power stations can be located.

52. II, in the futuse, alllicensing la design to a Istge number ofresetors.

Subpart B carnes forward the standard conducted under Part 52. the two parts and owntually meet defeat at the hands design approval process of Appendix 0 can be combined into a single part of a multitude of afte-specific changes to to Part 50 in amcb the same way, EUEwin6 & pm8pective applicant containing all provisions applicable to a certified design. nis individual also vendor, or other interested party'to the licensing of production and claimed that it was not the pmper role uuhah Mhdu.

of the Commission to " enhance the obtain thisalon approval of a design f a 80mP ete saclear power pknt w a IH. DennidoWh 52J l

availability of nuclear plants", as the Commission had pot it in its Policy

[ bh p

ap pa This section contains largely self.

t Statement on Standardization. or to "give ority" to standardization rather of a cambined construction permit and explanatory definitions of " combined than e safety pmblems of present conditional operating license (hereafter license,""early site permrt,"" standard referred to as a combined licensel for a design." and " standard design plants.

nuclear power plant.The combirsed certification". W om:.ibua provision in To the contrary, the Commission license is essentially a construction paragraph (e) incorporates other useful believes that competition among permh which also mquhes definitions from Part 50 and the Atomic designers will more than adequately consideration and resolution of many of Energy Act.

encourage ingenuity, that the public will the issues currently considered at the IV. Subpart A-Early Site Permits be better able to participate in the operating license stage. It does not licensing process ifit is given an authorine operation. Operation will be This subpan allows any prospective essentially complete design even befwe authorized only after the Commission applicant for a construction permit or a any plant of that design is built, that has decided that the relevant bcense combined license under Subpart C to good design, thorough regn! story review, apply for an early site permit, and long experience with nuclear power. conditions have been rsst. The proceduras also provide anmmmg, notwithstanding the fact that an should together go a long way to for a hearms on carefully.dafmed issues application for a cocatructinn permit or preclude significant safety pmblems in before operation is antherized. Mthough combined hcense for a facility has not certined designs, and that the proposed a pre. approved atte and certified been filed. Filing requirements are set rule's restrictmas on changes in certified sta,dard design need not be d a out in if 52.15 and 52.17. The designs should assure a lasting and high for the cornb6ned Dcenseasaxmmm application should describe, among degree of standardtzstion. Under the efficiency willresult if site-related other things, the number, type, and Energy Reorgenfration Act of 1974, the issues, as well as design-relakd insaas, thermal power level of the facilities for Commission is not permitted to develnp have been resolved before which the alte may be used.Section nuclear power plants and then regulate commencement of the combined license 52.17(b) requires that the application what it bee developed but it may pmceedang.

contain a plan for redress of the site for nonetheless do wbst it can by way of his structure reveals the overall use in the event that site preparation sound procedural mechanisms and purpose of Part E2: to improve reactor activities are performed under the appropriate distribution of resources to safety and to stnarnhne the latenaing perrett and the pennit expires without enceirage and enable others to develop process by encouraging the use of having been referenced in an better designs and build better plants.

standard designs and by permitting appbcation for a construction perrnit or The principal aim in such early resolution of, environmental and a combined license under Subpart C of

" enhancement" is, as always, pubhc safety issues related to the reactor site Part 52. Finally, 5 52.17(c) requires the health and safety. In the Eght of this and dealgn. As a result, the scope of the application to demonstrate that the area overarching atm, the Commission's combined license proceeding for a surrounding the sile is amecable to statement that it intends to give priority facility can be far more limited than the emergency planning which would to standardized designs and the like scope of the two-step licensing process provide res sonable assurance that must not be misread to mean that the currently in use. Similarly, after the adequat:e protective measures could be safety of the presently operating phmts combined license pmceedmg, the taken in the event of a radiological will become lese important than the regulatory metters which would remain emergency at the site. This last

Federal Register / VII. 83, Nm 183 / Tuesday, August 23, 1988 / Propos;d Rules 32063 paragraph of I 52.17 also requires the permit and was docketed prior to the of standard designs by rulemaking. The application to include a description of expiration of the early site permit term " certification" is used for this contacts and arrangements made with

($ 52.29(c)). An application for renewal approval to distinguish it from the local, state, and federal agencies with must be filed not less than twelve nor preliminary and final staff approval of responsibility for coping with more than thirty-six months prior to the standard designs as set forth in emergencies.

expiration date (i 52.29(a)).

Appendix 0.

Section 52.19, along with conforming An approved site may be used for Section 52.43 addresses the amendments to 10 CFR Part 170 which purposes not related to the construction relationship of Subpart B to Appendices cre currently being made as part of a of a nuclear power facility (for example, M. N. and O of 10 CFR Part 50, as general revision of Part 170, establish a e fossil-fueled station or a park) described in the preceding paragraph.

n;w procedure for collection of fees provided that the Commission is These Appendices represent different casociated with the review of an informed of all significant non-nuclear approaches to standardization and will application for an early site permit or a uses prior to actual construction or site remain in effect, as will the replicate renewal thereof. The applicant for the modification activities [l 52.35). A plant approach to standardization.

permit will be assessed these fees only permit may be revoked if a non-nuclear Appendices M and N may be used when an application referencing the use would interfere with a nuclear use, independently of Subpart B unless the cirly site permit is filed while the permit or would so alter the site that important applicant also wishes to use a certified is valid. If no application referencing the assumptions underlying issuance of the etandard design. A final design approval carly site permit is filed, the permit permit were called into question.

under Appendix 0 is a prerequisite for holder must pay these fees at the end of Section 52.30(a) provides that.

certification of a standard design under the initial twenty-year period. Fees for a notwithstanding the provision in 10 CFR this Subpart. An application for a final renewed permit will be assessed in the 50.109 for backfits aimed at substantial design approval must state whether the same manner.However,if an increases beyond adequate protection, applicant intends to seek certification of application for an early site permit or during the initial or renewal period in the design, because staff review of a renewalis denied or withdrawn. any which an early site permit is in effect, design for which certification is sought outstanding fees will be immediately the Commission may not impose more may be different from staff review of a due and payable by the applicant for the stringent requirements on the early site design for which only a final design permit or renewal.

permit or the site for which the permit approvalis sought. For the same reason, Section 52.21 states that an early site was issued unless the Commission anyone who holds a final design permit is a Commission license, and is determines either that significant new approval on the effective date of this subject to the applicable procedural information shows that more stringent rule and wishes to a ply for certification requirements of10 CFR Part 2.

requirements are necessary to bring the of the design must o tain a new final The issues presented in an early site site or the perm!t into comphance with design approval. However, the permit proceeding are to a considerable the Commission's regulations and orders applicatkn 6 this casway simply extent environmental, but because they in effect at the beginning of the initial or lement the application update and su7for the original final cleo involve significant safety issues, a renewal period, or that more stringent which was file report by the Advisory Committee on requirements are necessary for adequate design apprwal, and the staffa review R: actor Safeguards (ACRS) on the protection of the public health and U

8 U' pp a

sh permit application is required by I 52.23.

safety. Section 52.39(b) provides that an

,s d

Section 52.25 provides that issuance of applicant for a construction permit.

Sections 52.45 and 52.47 contain the cn early site permit allows the holder of operating license, or combined license.

the permit to conduct site preparation or an amendment to such a license, who requirements for fding and contents of cctivities without having to seek prior has filed an application referencing an applications for certifications of designs.

NRC approval.The holder possesses early site permit may request a variance These sections are drafted in general terms 6e that Part 52 will not have to be what is commonly referred to as sa from one or more elements of the permit.

"LWA-1" for the site and may perform amended every time the information and the activities permitted in 10 CFR V. Subpart B--Certified Standan!

safety criteria in to CFR Parts 20,50,73, 50.10(e)(1). Section 52.25 also requires Designs and 100 undergo some further redress of the site if the permit is not The Commission's existing rules development. The NRC staff is currently renewed and not referenced in an regarding standard designs are found in developing safety criteria for application application.

Appendices M, N, and O, to to CFR Part in the review of advanced reactor An early site permit is valid for an

50. Appendix M concems licenses to designs.These criteria will define initial period of twenty years (l 52.27) manufacture ore or more nuclear power minimum safety requirements for cnd may, upon application, be extended reactors to be installed and operated at advanced reactors and will provide for for periods of up to twenty years each sites not identified in the license assessment and documentation of the (i 52.29), provided certain criteria are application. Appendix N concerns enhanced safety the Commission m;t ($ $2.31). Section 52.29 provides that licenses to construct and operate expects these reactor designs to cny person whose interests may be nuclear power reactors of duplicate embody, part 52 deals only with cffected by renewal of the permit may design at multiple sites. Appendix 0 procedural aspects of the certification of request a hearing.

governs the staff review and approval of reactor designs.The staff will advise the An early site permit for which a standard designs for an entire nuclear prospective applicant for certification on timely application for renewal has been power reactor or a major portion precisely what information is required filed remains in effect until the thereof, and includes a provision for for the staffs consideration of the l

Commission has determined whether to Commission approval of a standard application.

renew the permit. If an early site permit design in a rulemaking proceeding. This Certification of a reactor design which is not renewed,it continues to be valid Subpart concerns only the latter differs significantly from a reactor in any proceeding on an application for provision of Appendix O. Subpart B is desion which has been built and a construction permit or a combined intended to set forth the procedures and operated may be granted only after the license which references the early alte requirements for Commission approval design has been shown to be sufficiently

)

$2064 Federal Registe- / Wl, 53, Nr.163 / Tuesday, August 23, 1988 / Propos;d Rul;s I

mature.There is a presumption in which, under a series of statutes going standard design concern the safety I 52.45 of the proposed rule that this back to the Independent Offices features of the design. Section 52.53 maturity will have to be demonstrated Appropriations Act, the agency must therefore provides for mandatory ACRS l

through comprehensive testing of a recoup at least in part, review of the application. Review by the j

prototype.The same section of the rule However, the Commission is free ACRS will be limited to issues on which sets forth the criteria which must be under cunent law to lessen the the ACRS has not made findings and l

antisfied if the presumption is to be disincentive effect of the fees it must recommendations in any earlier review i

overcome.'Ihe same criteria must be charge for review of standardized of the design.The Commission may, of eatisfied by any applicant proposing to designs.Therefore,in addition to not course, ask the ACRS to report on any demonstrate the maturity of a design by charging an application fee, the NRC matter within its expertise.

means of a prototype of only part of the will defer any fees associated with The certified standard design will design. If an applicant for a construction review of the application, pending the initially be valid for ten years (I 52.55).

permit or combined license under this filing of applications for construction but it may be renewed, upcn Part chooses to reference a final design permits or combined licenses application, for periods of an additional cppmval for a design whose maturity referencing the certified standard five to ten years each (i 52.57).The must be demonstrated by prototype and design. Any outstanding fees will procedures to be used for a rulemaking has not yet been so demonstrated, the become due and payable by the holder proceeding on the application for cpplicant will be sub}ect to the of the design certification at the end of renewal must be those required for requirements of ( 50.34(a)(8) regarding the initial period of the certification.

rulemakings on applications forinitial research and development to confirm Fees for the renewal of a standard certification of designs. A design the adequacy of the design.

design certification will be assessed in certificedon for which a timely Ideally, designs for which certification the same manner, application for renew &l has been filed is sought will be for an essentially Section 52.51 provides that a standard remains in effect until the Commission complete plant. The designs would make design certification is a rule that will be has determined whether to renew the more straightforward the preparation of issued in accordance with the provisions certification If the certification is not a probsbilistic risk assessment and of Subpart H of 10 CFR Part 2. Subpart renewed,it continues to be valid in any stfety analysis and would help minimize H of10 CFR part 2 implements section proceeding ultimately based on an the extent of the staff's review of the

$53 of the Administrative Procedure Act application which references the license applications which reference a for NRC rulemaking proceedings.10 CFR certified design and was docketed prior cin;1e design. The designs would also 2.805(b) provides that the Commission to the expiration of the certification h11p assure that no two plants of the may hold informal hearings and may (i 52.57(b)).

same design would vary significantly structure them as the Commission Section 52.59 contains the criteria for from each other. For these reasons, the determines will best serve the purposes evaluating an application for renewal.

NRC will gf ve priority in allocation of of the proceeding. In addition to notice The initial burden is on the applicant to resources to support review and of an application for a design show that the design complies with the cpproval of apphcetions for essentially certification, and an opportunity to Atomic Energy Act and all the complete designs. However. the NRC provide written comments on the Commissien's regulations other than the l

will entertain applications for application, the Commission will design certification itself. During the certification of a major portion of a plant provide an opportunity to request an rulemaking on the application for if, and only if, that portion contains all informal hearing on the application renewal, the Commission may,in buildings, structures, systems, and before an Atomic Safety and Licensing addition to requiring that the design components that can significantly affect Board. Any hearing held will provide an conform to current regulations and the safe operation of the plant. See opportunity for written presentations orders, impose more stringent safety I 52.45(d) below.

made under oath or affirmation, and for requirements on the certification, but Applications for certification of any oral presentations and questioning if the only if the Commission determines that d: sign must contain a level of detail Board finds them either necessary for there is a substantialincrease in overall comparable to that required for a final the creation of an adequate record, or protection of the public health and d: sign approval under Appendix 0 and the most expeditious way to resolve safety or the common defense and cufficient to enable the staff to judge the controversies. Ordinarily, the security to be derived from the more cpplicant's proposed means of assuring questioning will be done by members of stringent requirements and that the that construction conforms to design, the Board, using the Board's questions or direct and indirect costs of cnd to reach a fmal conclusion on all questions submitted to the Board by the implementation of those requirements mitters which must be decided before parties.The Board may also request are justified in view of this increased the certification can be granted. See authority to use additional procedures protection. If a renewal application is i 52.47 below.

such a? discovery, or may request that denied, the applicant may revise the Section 52.49 parallels 6 $2.19 with the Commission convene a formal design and file a new application for a regard to fees. Conforming amendments adjudication on discrete issues invoh'ing standard design certification. See ce being reade to Part 170 as part of the substantial disputes of fact, necessary I 52.59(b).

general revision of that part. One for the Commission's decision, that The stability of a certified standard engineering firm argued that fees would cannot be resolved with sufficient design is essential to the concept of be a substantial damcentive to potential accuracy except in formal adjudication.

standardization. For this purpose, cpplicants for certification. And, of The staff will be a party in any informal i 52.63 contains provisions whose course, any fee the NRC charges is to hearing, and the decision in the hearing purpose is to preserve design stability some degree a disincentive. However, will be based only on information on against three possible sources of change, the agency is now legally bound to which all parties to the hearing have First,52.63(a), which parallels 9 52.39 for t

charge fees which account for a had an opportunity to comment.

early site permits, provides that, during substantial part of its budget. Design The majorissues associated with the the initial or renewal period in which a review will require substantial resources review of an application for a certified design certification is in effect the 1

l 1

Federal Reg! ster / V;:1. 53, N2,183 / Tu:sday, August 23, 1988 / Proposed Rules 32065 Commission will not require design Commission's regulations and orders.

were commonly issued with the changes unless the Commission An amendment to a design certification understanding that open safety issues i

determines,in a notice and comment initiated by the holder of the would be addressed and resolved during l

rulemaking, that significant new certification will be applied to all plants construction, and that issuance of a 1

information shows that the changes are referencing the design onlyif the construction permit did not constitute i

necessary to bring the design or the amendment is necessary for adequate Commission approval of any design j

plants referencing it into compliance protection of the public health and feature. Consequently, the operating i

with the Commission's regulations and safety.

license review was very broad in scope.

l orders in effect when the certification Third and last. I 52.63(c), which Now that the nuclear industry has I

was issued or renewed, or that the parallels 52.39(b) for early site permits, rnatured,it is possible to describe and I

changes are necessary for adequate provides that a licensee or an applicant evaluate plant designs on a generic l

protection of public health and safety.

for a facility license or amendment basis, to have designs essentially Of course, as the Atomic Energy Act which references a certified standard complete in scope and level of detail l

requires, the Commission will make design may request an exemption from prior to construction, and to propose f'

such determinations without regard to one or more elements of the design and evaluate plant sites without plant

'I economic costs. Mod!'ications to a certification rule. ne Commission will design details. These circumstances, design certification rule will be applied grant the request ifit complies with the make it possible to combine the I

to all plants referencing the certified requirements of to CFR 50.12(a).

construction permit proceeding with i

design.

NUMARC suggested that a lesser much of the operatinglicense The Commission believes that standard than i 50.12 be applied to a proceeding into a single proceeding for carrying out modifications by way of request for an exemption, namely, that the issuance of a combined construction rulemaking will not hamper the the request for an exemption simply permit and conditional operating Commission's ability to act quickly in meet the Commission's regulations license. Full-power operation can then the event that plants referencing a (except, of course, for the particular be authorized under the combined certified design pose undue risks.There design certification regulation itself)-

license following an opportunity for a is no reason why such a rulemaking However, the Commission believes that hearing on e'more limited set of should proceed less quickly thau a the benefits of standardization will not carefully defined issues.

license amendment proceeding for the be fully achieved unless significant site.

The application for a combined I

same purpose. Indeed, the procedures specinc variation among plants license may, but need not, reference a for rulemaking would appear to be referencing a given certified design is cimpler than those forlicense kept to an irreducible minimum. In standard design which has been cmendment. Moreover, the Commission harmony with the aim of keeping certified under Subpart B, or a site for i

which an early site permit has been i; I has the authority to issue immediately variation to a minimum, t 52.63(d) issued under Subpart A (i 5253).1f the cffective interim rules, pending Permits the licensee of a plant built facility is to be of a design which has accord to a standardized d to comple, tion of final rulemaking been certified, the scope of the resolutions of undue risk issues.

""8 proceeding on the application for a Members of the public may challenge [

',fp facility license is narrowed, the major l

i ant ut yi ange c design certification rule by means of etitions for rulemaking and, durW does not involve changes to ee design safety questions having been resolved in ficensing proceedings on application _s as desenWn 6e mie cerWy@e the earlier rulemaking on the design.

l Similarly,if the facility is to be located i

• 8"'

• I 8'

'I which reference a standardized design, P

have on a site for which an early site permit I

ithe\\i s

has been issued, the scope of the facility cnly by claims that adequate protection hen g"ran*t u der cipublic health and safety, or compliance with the Commission's i 52.63(c)*

license proceeding is further narrowed.

If an early site permit is not referenced, regulations and orders, requires VI. Subpart C-Combined Construction the early site review procedures of to mo&fication of the rule NUMARC Permits and Conditional Operating CFR Part 2 remain avallable to expedite urged that a design certification rule be Licenses the environmental review. Obviously, j

subject to challenge by a member of the Section 181h of the Atomic Energy Act the efficiency and effectiveness of the l

public only in a rulemaking proceeding.

and 10 CFR 50.52 provide that the combined licensing process is

)

However, members of the public cannot Commission may issue a single lioer.se maximized if both a certified standard be barred from making claims in a for several activities which could design and a pre-approved site are proceeding that the criteria by which the otherwise be licensed separately.

referenced. For this reason, the Commission is to make its decision on However, this provision has not been Commission anticipates that this will be the application are not met. Moreover, applied to construction permits and the preferred approach, particularly with

)'

paragraph 7 of Appendix 0 to 10 CFR operating licenses for nuclear power regard to standard designs. In order to 1

Part 50, of which Subpart B of the plants. Indeed, the current licensing encourage standardization, the i

proposed rule is an elaboration, process has not changed substantially Commission will give pricrity among l

provides for challenge to the design since it was ori,inally enacted. In the applications to those which reference q

certification rule outside of rulemaking.

early years of the nuclear power certified standard designs and pre-l Second among the provisions aimed at industry, there were many first-time approved sites.

{

maintaining stability for certified nuclear plant applicants, designers, and Sections 5255 thronoh 52J9 contain l

designs, I 52.63(b) provides that the consultants l and,many novel design the requirements for filing and contents l

holder of a design certification may concepts. Accordingly, the process was of applications. It should be noted that j

request an amendment to the design by structured to allow licensing decisions an environmental report is not required way of notice and comment rulemaking.

to be made while design work was still if a pre. approved site is proposed for the l

The Commission will grant the in progress and to focus on case-specific facility (i 5257). The r >licant must emendment ifit complies with the reviews ofindividual plant and site make good faith effov to obtain

(

Atomic Energy Act and the considerations. Construction permits certifications from responsible State and i

32006 Federal Register / Vd. 53, N2.163 / Tuesday, August 23, 1988 / Proposed Rules local governmental agencies that the followed for review of the This is done because the competitive proposed eme ncy plans a:e environmental part of the application.

circumstances could alter markedly practicable that the responsible As noted above in the discussion of between the issuance of the agencies are committed to execution of Subpart A, once the application for a construction permit and the completion their responsibilities under the plans. lf combined license has been docketed, an of the facility.The proceeding on the the certifications cannot be obtained, applicant who plans to use a site for application for a combined license the applicant must nonetheless which an early site permit has been includes consideration of the antitrust demonstrate that the proposed plans issued may perform "LWA-1" activities situation. However, because operation I

provide reasonable assurance that (see i 50.10(e)(1)) without prior NRC under a combined license cannot be cdequate protective measures will be approval. If the application does not authorized until the plant is constructed, taken in the event of a red.iological reference an approved site, the i 52.101 provides for posrible further em:rgency at the plant (l 5219(d)). The applicant must request this antitrust review at the stage when antitrust review will be conducted as it authorization before performing "LWA-authorization of operation is being has been done in the past for 1" activities (I 52.91). lf the activities are considered. If significant changes have construction permit applications.

carried out and the application is occurred since issunce of the combined Because the antitrust review can withdrawn or denied, redress of the site license, the statutoey antitrust review i

proceed in parallel with the technical will,in some cases, be required. To must precede commercial operation of review, the antitrust review should not perfom "LWA-2" activities, all the facility and could result in the effect the efficiency of the combined applicants must seek authorization from imposition of additionallicense license proceeding.

the Licensing Board under conditions.However, because most I 50.10(eX3XI), which aUows further issues will be decided prior to issuance Sections 52.81 and 52.83 inc orate, whIre appropriate, the techni]o c natruction activities at the site prior to of a combined license, and because the st:ndards and requirements of Part 50 issuana f a e natmetion pemit m scope of the proceeding authorizing as they would be applied to power plant operation under the license will be license applicants and licensees under Section 52.93 governs the extent to correspondingly narrowed, the time the existing system. %at is, applications which a certmed standard design m an between issuance of the combined ear site penit may be modmed by the license and the authorization of for a combined license will be reviewed 8

ap ce on an operation should be short enough to cccording to the Part 50 standards for

, 3

,g construction permits and operating provided in i 52.93(a), the applicant may 8"

""I

licenses, where appropriate (i 52.81),

tion from one or more request an exem[esign for that particular Before the facility may operate, the cnd holders of Part 52 combined elements of the licenses will be held to the appropdate facility.The Commission will grant the holder of the combined license must Part 50 standards for plants under request ifit complies with the apply for authorization of operation construction or, upon authorization for requirements of10 CFR 50.12(a). As under the combined license. The operation. in operation (i 52.83). All limitations contained in the Part 50 provided in I 52.93(b),if the application Commission will publish a notice of the for the combined license references an proposed authorization in the Federal provisions (for example, requirements early site permit, the applicant may also Register pursuant to 10 CFR 2.105.

for plants receiving operating licenses request a variance from some element of Within 30 days, any person whose eft:r a certain date) carry forward to the permit.

interests may be affected by the Part 52.

Section 52.97 provides that the authorization may request a hearing on

%e combined license headng will be Commission may issue a combined the basis (1) that there has been a govemed by the appropriate sections of license for e facilityif the applicable nonconformance with the license, the to CFR Part 2 (l 52.85). ACRS review of requirements of fi 50.40,50.42,50.43 licensee's written commitments, the the application is mandatory (i 52.87),

and 50.50 have been met and there is Atomic Energy Act, or the Commission's cithough the scope of the report will be reasonable assurance that the facility regulations and orders.which has not much narrowerif the application will be constmeted and operated in been corrected and which could ref;rences a certified standard design or conformity with the license, the materially and adversely affect the safe a pre-approved site that the ACRS has provisions of the Atomic Energy Act, operation of the facility; or (2) that some previously reviewed. Section $2.89 and the Commission's regulations. In raodification to the site or the design is provides that,1f the application addition to technical specifications, the necessary to assure adequate protection references an approved site or a license will include the inspections, of public health and safety or the c:rtified standard design, the tests, and analyses that the licensee common defense and security.The environmental review must focus on the shall perform and the acceptance petitioner must set forth with reasonable suitability of the site for the design and criteria therefor which will provide specificity the facts andarguments cny other significant environmental reasonable assurance that the facility which form the basis for the request.

issue not considered in any previous has been constmeted and will be These provisions are designed to accord proceeding on the site or the design. It operated in accordance with those finality to the Commission's earlier should be noted that because both the requirements. %e Commission wiU decisions regarding the facility and to cerly site permit and the standard verify the licensee's compliance those assure that the operating license design certification require the requirements through 1,ts inspection proceeding is focused on significant preparation of an environmentalimpact program (i 52.99).

safety issues.

statement, only an environmental Section105c.of the Atomic Energy VII. Commission Questions essessment need be prepared in Act requires that the Commission connection with the application for a determine whether significant changes" The Commission will, of course, combinedlicense.lf the application have taken place with respect to the appreciate receiving comment on any does not reference a pre-approved site, antitmst situation during the review of aspect of this proposed rule.However, I

the usual Part 51 procedures must be an application for an operating license, the Commission will be particularly

i, 1

Federal Register / Vcl. 53, Na.163 / Tu sday, August 23, 1988 / Proposed Rul:s 32067 appreciative of comment on the affect the safe operation of the plant,"

construction authorized by this part.

following questions:

but does not contain the detailed design devote the resources necessary to 1.M implementing by rulemaking the for such buudings, structures, systems, achieve the earliest possible staff-level Commission's legislative proposals on and cotaponents? Such an approach identification and resolution of quality standardization, does this proposed rule would be more conalstent with the assurance and design conformance take full advantage of the Commission's legislation the Commission proposed in questions. However, the NRC does not authority under the Atomic Energy Act?

March of 1987. Section 104 of the see how Commission-level finality can i

Does it in any way exceed the proposed legislation would entertain an be afforded the resolution of such Commission's authority?

application for certification of "any questions without risking an almost

2. Should a design certification take major subsystem which represents a continual hearing on the construction of the fann of a license rather than a rule?

discrete element"of a nuclear power the plant.

Does the Commission have the authority facility.

11.The National Governors' under existing law to license a design?

6. What are the appropriate standards Association adopted the following 1

NUMARC believes that the rights and to apply to a request by a holder of a Recommendation, among others, at its obligations which attach to a license design certification to amend the 79th annual meeting. July 26-28,1987:

i may be more clearly understood than certification?If the amendmentis "In the future, emergency plans should those which would attach to a granted, should all plants which be approved by the NRC before it issues certification which took the form of a reference the certification be required to the construction permit for any new rule.The proposed rule accords with backfit to comply with the amended nuclear power plant." To what extent paragraph 7 of Appendix O to 10 CFR certification, or only some, as required should approval of emergency plans be Part 50 in treating the certification as a by the proposed rule?

required before an early site permit or a rule. Rulemaking may provide greater

7. In order to prevent continual combined license is issued? Are the procedural flexibility than a license regression from standardization among provisions of the proposed rule proceeding does, and certification by plants initially built according to the adequate in thi,s regard? See iI 52.17(c) rule would be open to a wider pool of same design, should stricter standards and 52.79(d) applicants than certification by license than those in 10 CFR 50.12 be applied t 12.The staff is considering whether I

(see 10 CFR 50.39).

requests for exemptions from a design there is a need for fuMher rulemaking or

3. What procedures are appropriate certification rule?

for design certification by rulemaking?

8. The proposed rule generally permits guidance ior future reactors, both lighb

4. Should the Commission require, as the NRC to impose modifications on site water reactors and other types, to part of a certified standard design, the peimits and design certifications only fde d as the ion a ae standardization of construction for the sake of com liance or ad uste Safety Goal Policy Statement (51 FR pactices. operation and maintenance protection. Under e proposed e,

practices, quality assurance, and only when an early site permit or a 30028; August 21,1986)h in the l

and the personnel trainir.g?

design certification comes up for licensing crit,eria set fo i

i

5. Section 52.45(d) of the proposed rule renewal would the NRC be able to Commission s Severe Accident Policy saye that the NRC will entertain an impose modifications which went Statement (50 FR 3213% August 8.1985),

j application for certification of a design beyond requiring adequate protection, particularly the criteria that call for j

of only a major portion of a plant only if Does the propsed rule provide a demonstration of compliance with the 1

that portion contains all buildings, reasonable degree of finality to early applicable parts of 10 CFR 50.34(f) and structures, systems, and components site permits nd desip certific, dons?

completion of a probabilistic risk that can "significantly affect the safe 9.The proposed rule places a term of assessment (FRA) together with a operation of the plant", The intent of twenty years on early site permits and systematic consideration of any severe j

this language is to rule out of allows for an unlimited number of accident vulnerabilities the PRA might consideration for certification any renewals of up to twenty years each.

expose. !s the language in il 52.47(a) j incomplete design in which events in the Should a longer or shorter term be and 52.47(b) sufficient to assure that balance of plant could have an adverse placed on the permit? What should the future applications adequately address j

impact on the safety of that portion of respective burdens of the permit holder these matters? Given the Commission's the plant for which certification is and the NRC be at renewal?

guidance,in its Policy Statement on j

sought. Would some phrase other than

10. How might the proposed rule Safety Goals for the Operation of j

"significantly affect the safe operation provide for a " sign-as you-go process Nuclear Power Plants, that the Safety of the plant" better serve as a standard of NRC inspection of a plant being Goals sheuld not be used to make J

by which to determine whether to constructed according to a certified individual licensing decisions (51 FR at j

accept an application for certification of design? NUMARC suggested instituting 30031-32), should the rule contain the i

en incomplete design? Should the NRC, such a process in order to secure the requirement in 5 52.47(b)(3) that an in addition, require of any such earliest possible resolution of quality applicant provide "a realistic application a showing of good cause, or assurance and design conformance assessment of the degree to which the

]

the like, for seeking certification of a questions. The NRC encourages the design conforms to the Commission's design ofless than full scope?

earliest possible resolution of these Safety Goals"?

l On the other hand, should the questions. To this end, the rule requires Replicata Plant Concept j

language of I 52.45(d) be more lenient

.sppilcations for design certifications and permit an application for and combined licenses to propose for

'Ibe replicate plant concept involves certification of a design of a major inclusion in the certification or license an application by a utility for a license portion of a plant, as long as the inspections, tests, analyses, and related to construct or operate one or more application contains the requirements acceptance criteria which will help nuclear power plants of essentially the for the interface between the portion for provide reasonable assurance that the same design as one already licensed.

j which certifintion is sought and all facility has been well constructed. See The design of the plant already I

buildings, structures, systems, and il 52.47 and 52.79 of the proposed rule.

Licensed (termed the base plant design) components which can "significantly Moreover, the NRC would, during may be replicated at both the i

1

32068 Federal Register [ Vol. 53, No.163 / Tuesd:y, August 23, 1988 / Proposed Rules construction permit and op reting constmetion permita, opera ting licenses, Commission has submitted the rule to license stages, and in applications for early site reviews, and standani design OMB and setting forth the information combined construction permits and appmvals. As such they meet the which section 3507(a)(2)(B) requires the

'T operating licenses in a one-step eligibility witeria for the categorical agency to set forth in the notice.

licensing process. Replication of a:

exclusion set forth in 10 CFR pending submission of the propo,ed cpproved base plant design at the 6 51.12(c)(3).That section applies to rule to OMB,it may be useful to construction pennit stage is a

"[a)mendments to * *

• PartD commen*ers to note three aspects of the prerequisite for its replication at the 50 * *

• which relate to(1) procedures information collection requirements in cperating license stage. Although for filing and reviewing applications for this proposed rule. First. most of them repbcation of the base plant design ".t licenses or construction permits or other rely on information collection the operating license stage is nW forms of permission * * *." As the requirements already approved by OMB l

m ndatory, that is, the operating license Commission explained in promulgating for promulgation in other parts of 10 application may be submitted as a this exclusion "[a}]though amendments CFR, particularly Part 50. Semnd. the custom plant application,it is strongly of this type affect substantive parts of rule is expected to reduce the reporting recommended.

the Commission's regulations, the burden on applicants for construct;on I

l An application for a replicate plant amendments themselves relate solely to permits and operating licenses for must demonstrate compliance with the matters of procedure. [They) * *

• do nuclear plants, because any person f urlicensing requirements for new not have an effect on the environment."

seeking a part 52 corabined license plant designs as set forth in the (49 Fit ' '";, 9371, col. 3: March 12,1964) which references a Part 52 early site l

Cornmission's Severe Accident Policy (fina!. i fronmental protection permit and a part 52 design certification l

Statement (5n FR 32138: August 8,1965).

regulations).8 Accordingly, pursuant to will, aimply by referencing the pennit i

Each application proposing to 10 CFR 51.22(b). no environmental and certification, be relieved of the f

replicate a previously licensed plant will impect statement or enviromnental burden of providing much of the

{

be subjected to a qualification review to assessment need be prepared in information Part 50 requires of determine the acceptability of the base connection with these proposed rules '

applicants for c6nstruction pennits and plant for replication and to define specific matters that must be addressed Paperwork Redudion Act Statamarrt operating licenses. Third, the public in the application for the replicate plant.

The proposed rule contains reporting burdens which would be A further requirement for qualification la information requirements that are imposed l'y Part 52 are estimated to that the application for a replicate plant subject to the Paperwork Reduct on Act range from a low for an early site permit must be submitted within five years of of 1980 ("the Act") (44 U.S.C. 3501 et (which would "9utre ont part of the Y

the date ofissuance of the staff safety segl This proposed rule will be ini manon mquind for a constmcum svaluation report for tLe base plant. The submitted to the Office of Management ne e c or de I " wh ch 8

qualification review will consider the and Budget (OMB) for review and following information:

approval under the requirements of the p oba w

oe e ng d

p ype)-

(1) The arrangement made with the Act. When the proposed rule is developers of the base plant design for submitted to OMB the Commission,in The Commissim welcomes any its replication; compliance with section 3507(a)(2)(B) of suggestins for mducing the burdens (2)The compatibility of the base plant the Act, will publish a notice in the which would be imposed by the dreign with the characteristics of the Federal Register stating that the infomatim collectim mquirements in site proposed for the replicate plant; the proposed rule.The numbers of the secuons & prW mk wM sd (3) A description of any rbnFes to the

• ri makes no enb tantive ofference for the base plant design, with justification for purpou of h citesorical excluion et the forth the infomatim requirements am the changes:

proposed amendments wu! be placed in Part 62 listed in l 52.6 of the proposed rule.

(4) The status of any matters

'**" $' a$ P" dart w'"

'""w*6"$

Regniainry Analysis

,,, d n w

identified for the base plant design in beve been placad in et Part.

As presently constituted, the the safety evaluation report, or a m requinments concernins tutins of fw-stu subsequently identified by the ACRS or pictotypes of edvanced reectors. eee a sus (c) of American population of nuclear power during the public hearings on the base h propmd ru e. my appear mot to fat meo Se reactors consists largely of one-of a-plant application as requiring later cates a ndaded by i smenst em to empy kind designs. Experience has shown that nao1utim:

wie the rwuiremaat. as appbcant most laaly mil the hi hl individualistic charaeter of 8Y have to bed and test a prototype plant. an act (5) Identification of the major charty wie an enetronmentalimped. Neshku.

this population has consumed enormous contractors, with justification for the a sus (c) w ebsibk for acteeton under resources in the processes of design, ceceptability of any that are different I smcR8Wah bstanca. 6e -@ n construction, and safety review.

n than those used by the base plant Ne'f N b Y

[ NcQ-Beatrse, typically, d,esign of a plant was cpplicant; and have ordy a potentialimpact on the environent.

not complete when con,tmetion ofit (6) A discussion of how the replicate Nt impact becomu meta =1 cedy if a desisner began, many safety questions were not plant design will conform to any chmen a peu mruncanos d e advand resolved untillate in the licensing changes to the Commission's regulations he'e'8,"M b "[ D i U 'm.'n$ "gm*p.a proceeding for that, plant. This late which have become effective since the statement can be med.. cf es rs ai a:rer. cols. 2-s resolution of questions introduced great j

issuance of the license for the base (aterins imm as=nnem wie e stais nader uncertainty into proceedings, because 3

plant.

Secum m d be AbwMnegy Act ham the process of resolution often entailed L*"d

[g"* w mesmbw sammentaarnpaa and lengthy safety reviews, construction EnA

=-M 1mpact: Categodad g*,cag,,ucluYpmuns delays, and backfits. Moreover, the low

,d DE licenu far a prototype plant would. of course, to a incidence of duplit;ation among designs The proposed rules would amend the

=> fadwal acha **

• as=6cm* kapet = N has meant that expericuee gained in the l

procedures curnatly found in Part 50

'",g[" %C'g"j,*[*" consbuction and operation of a given

)

cad its appendices for the filing and statu mut prepm dataned environmental plant has often not been usefulin the ritiewing of applications for analym besor, they beenu certain ectivina).

construction and operation of any othe i

Y

Federal Register / Vol. 53, No.163 / Tuesday, August 23, 1988 / Proposed Rules

$2069 1

plant, and has made the generic not possible. Much depends on the 13 CFR part 121, or the Commission's l

resolution of continuing safety issues extent to which the industry pursues Size Standards published at 50 FR 50241 l

more cornplicated, standardization. Clearly,if the (Dec. 9,1985). The impact on interveners In the face of this experience with a Commission and the industry spend the er potentialintervenors will be neutral, population of urdque plants, there have resources necessary to certify a score of For the most part, the proposed rules long been fundamentally only three designs and then no applicant will affect the tuning of hearings rather alternatives for Commission action, the references any of them. those resources than the scope ofissues to be heard.For last two of them not mutually exclusive:

will have been largely wasted. On the example, many site and design issues either make no effort to b about an other hand,it is just as clear that if a will be conaldered earlier,in connection increased degree of standa tion, or score of plants uses a single certified with the issuance of an early site permit propose legislation on standardization, design, them will have been a great or standard design certification, rather or enact by rulemaking as much of a saving of the resources of the industry, than later, in connection with a facility scheme for promoting standardization the agency, and the interested public licensing proceeding. Similarly, a as the Commission's current statutory alike.To be added to the uncertainties combined license proceeding will

' authority permits.The Commission has surrounding the industry's response, include consideration of many of the j

for some time concluded against the first there are afso uncertainties concerning issues that would ordinarily be deferred alternat!w, having decided that a the costs of the certification process, until the operating license proceeding.

substant..A increase in standardization and the costs of developing the designs Thus, the timing rather than the cost of would enhance the safety and reliability themselves. especially the advanced participating in NRC licensing of nuclear power plants and require designs, which,it is presumed, will proceedings will be affected. interveners fewer resources in safety reviews of require testing of prototypes. However.

may experience some increased plants, and that the Commission should if the industry finds it in its interest to preparation costs if they seek to have in place provisions for the review proceed with the development of reopen previously decided issues of standardized designs and other nuclear power, there is every reason to because of the increased showing that devices for assuring early resolution of expect that the safety and economic will be required. Once a hearing safety questions. The Commission has benefits of standardization will far commences, however, an intervenor's therefore pursued standardization both outweigh the upfront costs of design and cosis should be decreased because the by proposing legislation-without Commission certification: Review time issues will be more clearly defined inan success--and by promulgating rules, in for applications for licenses will be under existing practice.Therefore, in particular Appendices M N, and O to drastically reduced, the public brought accordance with the Regulatory part 50 of 10 CFR. Lacking legislation on in to the process before construction.

Flexibility Act of 1980,5 U.S.C. 605(b),

standardization, the Commission construction times shortened, economies the Commission hereby certifies that the believes that the most suitable of scale created, reliability of plant proposed rule, if promulgated, will not i

alternative f or encouraging further performance increased, maintenance have a significant economic impact on a I

standardization is to fill out and expand made easier, qualified vendor support substantial number of small entities and the Commission's regulatory scheme for made easier to maintain, and, most that, therefore, a regulatory flexibility l

standardization and early nesolution of important, safety enhanced.

analysis need not be prepared.

safety issues.

'Ihus, the rationale for proceeding Therefore, the Commission now with this rulemaking: Tliere is no Backfit Analysis proposes to promulgate a new set of absolute assurance that certified designs if this proposed rule becomes final,it j

regulations, to be placed in a new part, willin fact be used by the utilities; will not modify or add to the systems, i

10 CFR part 52. This new part facilitates however,it is certain that if the structures, components, or design of a the early resolution of safety issues by reasonably expected benefits of fa'il th de i l

,,n acturing lice e7or facility; or providing for pre-construction-permit standardization are to be gained, then approval of power plant sites, the Commission must have the Commission certification of procedural mechanisms in place for the procedures or organization required p

f cil standardized d= signs, and the issuance review of app'ications for early site y,,"

c d ea ed this of licenses which combine permission to approvals, design certifications, and construct a plant with a conditional combined licenses.The most rule will modify and add to the parmission to opera'e it once fundamental choice is, of course, the Procedures or o'8anization required to th rul uld construction of it has been successfully industry's, to proceed or not with d, or e s t es t epell out, th completed.

standardization, according to its own Ideally, a future applicant will weighing of costs and bvnefits. But the requirements for applicants for design ceruficadons. Moreover, the rule, if reference an approved site and a Commission must be ready to perform its review res[ardization.onsibilitiesif theindustry made final, will, at the very certified design in en applicadon for a chooses stan substantially modify the expectations of combined license, thus obviating the need for an extensive review of the anyone who had hoped to apply for a application and construction.The Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification design certification under the existirq provision in part 52 for Commission The proposed rule will not have a Paragraph 7 of Appenoix O, particularly certification of designs has the significant impact on a substantial of any such who presently hold additional objective of encouraging the number of small entities. The proposed preliminary or final design approvals use of standardized designs, thereby rule will reduce the procedural burden under that Appendix.

adding to the benefits of early resolution on NRC licensees by improving the Nonetheless, the Commission believes the safety benefits of accumulated reactor licensing process. Nuclear power that the backfit rule does not apply to

)

experience and the economic benefits of plant licensees do not fall within the this proposed rule and, therefore, that no economies of scale and transferable definition of small businesses in section backfit analysis pursuant to 10 CFR experience.

3 of the Small Business Act.15 U.S.C.

50.109(c)is required for this proposed Quantification of the costs and 631 die Small Business Size Standards rule. The backfit rule was not intended benefits of this rulemakingis probably of ud Small Business Administration in to apply to every action which

____-__--------J

33070 Federal Register / Vol. 53. No.163 / Tuesday. August 23. 1988 / Propos:d Rules substantia!!y changes settled sec.

nuclear power facility issued pursuant expectations. Clearly, the backfit rule E27 Dundos d permit.

to Subpart C of this part.

5229 App B,os fs nnewal.

"Early site permit" means a would not apply to a rule which would Cri

,,m,,

impose more stringent requirements on ns3 Dum6aa d recewal Commisalon approval, issued pursuant all future applicants for constmetion 52.3s Use of alte far other p es.

to Subpart A of this part, for a site or permits, even though such a rule 52.37 Reporting of defects an sites for one or more nuclear power j

crguably might have an adverse impact noncomphance: avocation, suspension, facilities.

l Cn a person who was considermg mod 1Destion of permits fer cause.

" Standard design' means a design cpplying for a permit but had not done 52.39 Finality of early site permit which is snfrently detailed and so yet. in this latter case, the backfit rule determinations.

complete to support licensing of a

{

protects the construction perndt holder.

sot >part s standans DeWgn Carticca6ans nuclear power facility or approval of a j

not the prospective applicant, or even net scope of subpart.

major portion af such a facility when the present applicant. He propocad rule 52.43 Relationship to to CFR part so, referenced in an application for a below is of the character of such a Appendices M, N, and O.

construction permit. combined hypothetical rule.%e proposed rule 52.45 Filing of applications.

construction and conditional operating argoably imposes more stringent 52.47 Contents of applications.

license, or standard design certification.

)

requiren%ts for design certification and 52.49 Fees for design orrtification and as ap priale, and which is usable for a I

thereby may have an adverse impact on gjfk"y,"

multi le number of units or at a multiple

]

some persons. However, the effects of 52.53 Referral to the ACRS 11 umber of sites wieout nopening or 2 55 Dandon of eMn.

repeating the review.

g cny final rule based on this proposed rule will be largely prospective, and 52.57 Application for renewal.

" Standard design certification" means i

such a final rule will not require any 52.59 Criteria for tunewal a Commission approval, issued pursuant I

present holder of a design approval (no nel Duratior.of renewal to Subpart B of this part, of a standard person bolds a design certification) to 52.63 Finality of standard & sign design for a nuclear power facility, or a meet new standards in order to remain certiacations.

major portion of such a facility. A design in possession of such an approval.

subpart c-comtened Licenses so approved be referred to as a Ilst of Suliscts la 10 CFR Part $2 52.71 Scope of sobpart.

• certiEed stan rd design".

i 52.73 Relationship to Subparts A and B.

(b) All other terms in this part have j

Admmistrative praetice and 52.75 Filing of appbations, the meaning set out in 10 C5'R 50.2, or procedure. Antitrust,Backfitting.

j 52.77 Contents of applications: general Section 11 of the Atomic Energy Act, as Combined license, Early site permit-information.

applicable.

Emersency planning. Fees, inspection, 52.79 Contents of applications; technical Limited work authorization Nuclear information..

I52.s triformationcosection power plants and reactors Probabilistic 52.81 Standards for review of applications.

reg 4roments:OMB approval risk assessment. Prototype, Reactor 52.83 Applicability of part 50 provisions.

(a)The Nuclear Regulatory i <

siting criteria, Redress of site, Reporting 52.85 Administrative review of applications. Commission has submitted the cad recordkeeping requirements, 52.87 Referral to the ACRS.

5 eo information collection requirements Standard design, Standard design contained in this part to the Office of 9s Au to et site certification.

.ctiviti.

Management and Budget (OMB) for For the reasons set out in the n93 Exemptions and variances, approval as required by the Paperwork preamble and under the authority of the 52.97 Issuance of combined beenses.

Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501, et Atomic Energy Act of1954, as amended, 52.99 Inspection during constr.,ction.

seq.). OMB has approved the the Energy Reorganization Act of1974, 52.10 pre. operational antitrust review.

Information collection uirements cs amended, and 5 U.S.C. 553, the 52.103 Authorization to operate undar a contained in this part un er control Commission is proposing to add to 10 combined hcense, number 3150(b)-.

CFR ChapterI a new Part 52:

Authority: Secs.103,181.182,183,100,189' (b) The approved information 68 Stat 936, 948. 953. 954,955,956, as PART 52-EARLY SITE PERMfTS; amended, sec. 234,83 Stat.1244, as amended c 11ecti n requirements contained in this.

STANDARD DEStGN CERTIFICATIONS; (42 U.S C. 2133,2201,2232. 2233,223e. 2239, part appear in il $2.15(b),52.17 AND COMBINED LJCENSES FOR 22a2h sees 201,202, act es Stat.1242,1244.

52.2Ma), 52.35,52.37. 52M, 52AS, NUCLEAR POWEfi PLANTS 124a as amended (42 U.Sn salt. 5842,5848L 52M,52.57N,526 Wc),52J5.

52.77, 52.79, 52.83, 52.91(a), 52.93, 52.99, enera Proh.a can.e i ymgalona 52.101, and 52.103.

f 52.1 scope.

Subpart A--Early Site, Permits s,c, n1 Scope.

"This part governs the issuance of 52.3 DeGnitions, early site permits, standard design f 52.11 Scope of subpert, j

E2.8 information collection requimments:

certifications, and combined This subpart sets out the requirements OMB approval construction permits and conditional and procedures applicable to i

Subpart A-Earty site Pomdte opera ting licenses for nuclear power Commission kauance of early site

[

facilities under the Atomic Energy Act permits for approval of a site or altes for 52.11 Scope oisubpart.

$2.

Re stionship to Sebpart F of to CF11 of 1954, as amended (68 Stat. 919), and one or more nuclear power facilities Title Il of the Energy Reorganization Act separate from and prior to the filing of 52.15 Filing of oppbcstions.

of1974 (88 Stat.1242).

an application for a construction permit 52.17 Contents of apphcstiona.

or combined license for such a facility.

Pe ndten 1 ees a

u this part-9 52.13 MetettonsNp to Subpert F of 10 52.21 Hestings.

" Combined license" means a CFR Part 2.

52.23 Referral to the ACRS.

combined construction permit and The procedures of this subpart do not 5225 Extent of actMeles perndtted.

conditional operating license for a replace those set out in Subpart F of to l

Federal Register / Vd. 53, NL 183 / Tuesday, August 23, 1988 / Proposed Rules 32071 CFR Part 2. Subpart F applies only when reasonable assurance that redress application referencing the early site carly review of site omtability issues is carried out under the plan wiD achieve a permit is filed.lf, at the end of the sought in connection with a forthcoming self. maintaining, environmentally renewal period, no facility application application for a permit to constmet stabla, and aesthetically acceptable site referencing the permit has been filed, certain powar facilities. This subpart suitable for whatever non-nuclear use the permit holder shall pay any cpplies when any person who may may confonn with local zoning laws.

outstanding fees for the renewal.

cpply far a construction permit vnder 10 (c) The application must demmstrate (c)If an application for the issuance CFR Part 50 or for a combined license that the area surrounding the alte is or' renewal of an early site permit is under 10 CFR Part 52 seeks an early alte amenable to emergency planning which denied or wfthdrawn, any outstanding permit separately from and prior to an would provide reasonable assurance fees associated with the review of the application for a construction permit foe that adequate protective measures could application are due immediately and c f:cility.This subpart may not be used be taken in the event of a radiological payable by the applicant for the permit cnce an application has been docketed emergency at the site.The application or renewal.

pursuant to 10 CFR 2A03.

must include a description of contacts and arrangements made with local, t 52.21 W

$ 5115 mng of aps*means.

state, and federal governmental An early site permit is a partial

( ) Any person wuo may apply for a egencies with responsibility for coping constmetion permit and is therefore construction permit under 10 CFR Part with emergencies.

subject to all procedural requirements in

50. er for a combined license under to to CFR Part 2 which are applicable to CFR Part 52, may file with the Director 9 52.1s standards for redow of construction permits, including the cf Nuclear Reactor Regulation an appucsena.

requirements for docketing in ii 2.101(a) application for an early site permit. An Applications filed under this subpart (1}-(4), and the regnirements for application for an early site permit may wm be reviewed according to the issuance of a notice of hearing in be filed notwithstanding the fact that an apphcable standards set out in10 CFR II 2.104 (a), (b)(1) (iv) and (v). (b)(2) to application for a construction permit o; Part 50 and its appendices as they apply the extent it runs parallel to (b)(1) (iv) e combined license has not been filed in to applications for construction permits sind (v), and (b)(3). All hearings connection with the site or sites for for nuclear power plants. In particular.

conducted on applications for early site which a permit is soud t.

the Commission shall prepare an permits filed under this part are (b) The applicat'on must comply with environmentalimpact statement during governed by the procedures contained in th) f1?ing requirements of 10 CFR 50.30 review of the application, and the Part 2.

(!), (b), and (f).

Commiesion shall determine, after consultation with the Federal

'I 52.23 Referralto the ACMS.

I5117 Contents of a;+;;s.UWA Emergency Management Agency in The Commissisn shall refer a copy of (t)(1) He application must contain accord with the applicable portions of10 the application to the Advisory the infonnation required by to CFR 50.32 CFR 50.47(a)(2), whether the information Committee on Reactor Safeguards (a)-(d) and 50.34(a)(1). In particular, the required of the applicant by i 52.17(c)

(ACRS).ne ACRS shall report on those application should describe the demonstrates that the area surrounding portions of the applir 'on which following the site is amenable to emergency concern safety.

(f) umber, type, and thermal planning which would provide power level of the facilities for which reasonable assurance that adequate 5 52.25 htent of acmes pennnted.

the site may be used; protective measures could be taken in (a) The holder of an early site pennit (ii)The boundaries of the site:

the event of a radiological emergency at may perfonn the activities at the site (iii) The proposed general location of the site.

allowed by 10 CIP 50.10(e)(1) without cach facility on the site; first obtaining the separate (iv) The anticipated maximum levels t 52.19 Permit and renewal fees.

authorization required by that section.

cf radiological and thermal effluents The fees charged for the review of an (b)If the activities permitted by cach facility will produce; application for the initialissuance or paragraph (a) of thie section are (v) The type of cooling systems, renewal of an early site permit are those performed at a given site and the permit int:.kes, and outflows that may be for special projects, as defined in to CFR is not renewed for that site and not casociated with each facility:

170.3 and met forth in 10 CFR 170.21.

referenced in an application for a (vi) The seismic, meteorological.

There is no application fee. All fees for construction permit or a combined hydrologic, and geologic characteristics the review of an application are license issued under Subpart C of this cf the proposed site (see Appendix A to deferred se follows:

part, then the permit remains in effect to CFR Part 100), and (allf an application is filed for a solely for the purpose of site redress, (vil) The existing and projected future construction permit or combined bcense and the holder of the permit shall population profile of the area for a facility to be located at a site for redress the site in accord with the terms surrounding the site.

which an early site pennit has been of the site redress plan required by (2) A complete environmental report issued, the permit holder shall pay the i 52.17(b). If, before redress is complete, ce required by to CPR 51.45 and 51.50 applicable fees for the permit at the time a use not envisaged in the redress plan oust be included in the application.

the facility application referencir.3 the is found for the site or parts thereof, the (b) De application must propose a early site permit ip fijed. If, at the end of holder af the permit shall carry out the plin for redress of the site in the event the initial period of the permit, no redress plan to the greatest extent that the activities permitted by l52.25(a) facility application referencing the early possible consistent with the alternate l

cre performed and the site permit site permit has been docketed, the use.

sxpires before it is referenced in an permit holde? shall pay any outstanding I

application for a construction permit or fees for the permit, f 52.27 Nabon of pend j

o combined license issued under (b)If the permit is renewed, the permit An early site permit issued under this l

Subpart C of this part.The application holder shall pay any outstanding fees subpart is valid for twenty years from

{

nust demonstrate that there is for the renewal at the time a facility the date ofissuance. An applicant for a l

l I

~~

32072 Federal Register / Vd. 53, No.163 / Tu:sdiy, August 23, 1988 / Proposed Rules I

construction permit or combined license implementation of those requirements permit issued under this subpart is in m:y at its own risk, reference in its are justified in view of this increased effect, the Commission may not impose application a site for which an early site protection.

more stringent requirements, including pennit application has been docketed (b) A denial of renewal on this basis more stnngent emergency planning but not granted.

does not bar the permit holder or requirements, on the permit or the site another applicant from filing a new for which it was issued unless the 95229 Appucanon h mM application for the site which proposes Commission determines either that (a) Not less than twelve not more than changes to the site or the way in which (1) Sigrdficant new information shows thirty.six months prior to the end of the it is used which correct the deficiencies that a modification is necessary to bring

.nitial twenty-year period, or any later cited in the denial of the renewal.

the permit or the site with the Commission,into compliance renewal period, the permit holder may i

s regulations and j

cpply for a renewal of the permit. An I 52.33 Duration of renewal.

application for renewal must contain all Each renewal of an early site permit orders in e&ct at the ume the pennit i

was renewd or j

information accessary to bring up to will be for not less than ten nor more date the information and date contained than twenty years.

(ii) A modification is necessary to in the previous application.

assure adequate protection of the public (b) Any person whose intehesta may

$ 52.35 Use of atte for other purposes.

health and safety or the common i

be affected by renewal of the permit A site for which an early site permit defense and security.

may request a hearing on the application has been issued under this subpart may (b) An appbcant for a construction i

f;r renewal. The request for a hearing be used for purposes other than those permit, operating license, or combined must comply with 10 CFR 2.714. If a described in the permit, including the license, or any amendment to this type hiering is granted, notice of the hearity location of other types of energy oflicense, who has filed an applice2 n will be published in accord with 10 CFR facilities. The permit holder shall inform referencing an early site permit lasued I

{

2.703.

the Director of Nuclear Reactor under this subpart may include in the f

(c) An early site permit, either original Regulation of any significant non-application a request for a variance frem cr renewed. for which a timely nuclear activities for which the site is to one or more elements of the permit. In application for renewal has been filed, be used. The information about the determNing whether to grant the remains in effect until the Commission activities must be given to the Director variance, the Commission shall be has determined whether to renew the in advance of any actual construction or guided by the considerations set forth in permit.If the permit is not renewed,it site modification for the activities. lf the 10 CFR 50.92, which guide the

{

continues to be valid in proceedir:gs on Director finds that a particular non-Commission's determinations on i

cn application for a construction permit nuclear use may have a significant applications for amendments to cr combined license referencing the adverse effect on the suitability of the construction permits.

permit and docketed before the end of site for the purposes described in the i

t the initial period of the permit, or a later early site permit, the Director may issue Subpart B-Standard Design renewal period. An untenewed permit an order to show cause why the permit Certification clso continues to be valid in proceedings r,hocid not be revoked or modified.

on an application for an operating I 52.37 Reporting of defects and This subpart sets out the requirements license which is based on c construction r> noncompliance; revocanon, suspension, permit referencing the permit and modmcation of permits for cause.

and procedures applicable to Commission issuance of rules granting docketed prior to expiration of the For purposes of part 21 and 10 CFR standard design certi'ications for permit or renewal.

50.100, an early site permit is a nuclear p wer facilities, or major (d) The application for renewal must construction permit.

be forwarded to the Advisory portions thereof, separate imm the filing Committee on Reactor Safeguards I $2.39 Finanty of earty atte permit of an application for a construction l

(ACRS), which shall review the determbat6ons.

permit or combined license for such a application and report its findings and (a)(1) Notwithstanding any provision facility.

recommendations to the Commission.

in 10 CFR 50.109, during the initial I 52.43 Relatkmahlp to 10 CFR Part 50, The ACRS need not reconsider issues on period in which a permit issued under Appendices % N and O.

l which it has made findings and this subpart is in effect, the Commission j

recommendations in any earlier review may not impose more stringent (a) Appendix M to 10 CFR Part 50 of the site which is the subject of the requirements, including more stringent governs the issuance of licenses to I

application, emergency planning requirements, on manufacture nuclear power reactors to l

the early site permit or the site for which be installed and operated at sites not

( $2.3 t Crtteria for renewM lt was issued uniess the Commission identified in the manufacturing license (a) The Commission shall grant the determines either that application. Appendix N governs renewalif the Commission determines (i) Signifinnt new information shows licenses to construct and operate that the site complies with the Atomic that a modifu tion is necessary to bring nuclear power reactors of duplicate Energy Act and the Commission's the permit or the site into compliance design at multiple sites.These regulations and orders in effect at the with the Commission's regulations and appendices may be used independently k

time of the renewal and any more orders in effect at the time the permit of the provisions in this subpart urJess the applicant also wishes to use a stringent requirements the Commission was issued: or e

may wish to impose after a (ii) A modification is necessary to certified standard design approved determination that there is a subste.ntial assure adequate protection of the public under this subpart.

increase in overall protection of the health and safety or the common (b) Appendix 0 governs the staff public health and safety or the common defense and security.

review and approval of preliminary and defense and security to be derived from (2) Similarly, notwithstanding any final standard designs.These designs the more stringent requirements and that provisions in CFR 50.109, during any may be challenged in individual the dinct and indirect costs of renewal period in which an early site licensing proceedings. This subpart r

Federal Register / Vol. 53, No.163 / Tuesday, August 23, 1968 / Propos2d Rules 32073 govIrns Commission approval, or demonstrated through either previous applicable portions of the Three Mile certification, of standard designs by experience or full-scale testing:

Island requirements set forth in to CFR ruleosaking, as set forth in paragraph 7 (ii) Interdependent effects among the 50.34(f). The staff shall advise the -

of Appendix 0. A final design approval safety features of the plant have been prospective applicant for certification on undir Appendix 0 is a prerequisite for found acceptable by analysis, testing, or whether the information required by the certificate of a standard design under previous experience; and listed portions of10 CFR Chapter Iis this subpart. An application for a final (111) Sufficient data exist on the appropriate to the staffs consideration d; sign approval must state whether the performance of the safety features of the of the application, and on whether any cpplit. ant intends to seek artification of plant to assess analytical tools used for additional technicalinformation on the the design.If the applicant does so safety analyses over a full range of design is required.

intend, the application for the final operating and accident conditions, (b) The application must also include design approval must,in addition to including equilibrium core conditions *

(1)ne site parameters postulated for containing the information required by W S -~-- +b afaty f a +"-

the design, and an analysis and Appendix 0, comply with the applicable r=

• 19 " S("'

evaluation of the design in terms of such requirements of 10 CFR ChapterI.

(1)h Appendix 0 maldesign parameters-particularly El 52.45 and 52.47.

approval of such a design must identify (2) propoEd tecimicalresolubna d h*j

'# '",g equimd for the Unresolved Safety Issues and I s2.45 Fang of appucations.

me 8

priody Genet (a)(1) Any person may seek a (d) Designs should be essentially Safety lasues applicable to the desion:

st:ndard design certification for an complete in scope.W NRC will (3) A design-specific probabilistic risk essentially complete nuclear power entertain an application for artification assessment ( pRA ), together with a f:cility, or a major portion of such a of a design of only a majo portion of a consideration of any severe accident facility. An application for certification lant onlv if that portion contains all m:y be filed notwithstanding the fact buildings, structures, systems, and and a re@alistic assessment of the degree vu a

s &ade PRA exposes that an application for a construction components that can significantly affect t which the design conforms to the permit or combined license for such a the safe ohration of the plant and are Conunission's SafeWoals for plant f:cility has not been filed. Applications not fixed site-specific considerations operations: and for certification of less than a complete or parameters. In any case, site-specific (4) Proposed tests, analyses, f:cility must meet the cdteria set forth elements, such as the service water inspections and acceptance criteria in paragraph (d) of this section.

intake structure or the ultimate heat which are necessary to provide (2) Because a fmal design approval sink, may be excluded from the scope of reasonable assurance that a plant which under Appendix 0 of to CFR Part 50 is a the design. However, excluded site-references the design is built and prerequisite for certification of a speciBc elements that can significantly perated within the speciScations of the strndard design. a person who seeks affect safe operation must be addressed such a certification and does not hold, by the application in the technical design.

or has not applied for, a final design information which lI 52.47(b) and (c) AD 8pphcation seeking cpproval, shall file with the Director of 52.47(d) require the application to certification of a modular design must Nuclear Reactor Regulation an provide on the site parameters and iescribe the vanous options for the including variab,the plant and site, configuration of application for certification. Any person interface requirements for the design.

ons in common systems, who seeks certification but already holds, or has applied for, a final design 5 52.47 contents of applicauona.

interface requirements, and r, tem cpproval, also shall file with the The application must ontain a level interactions.W final safet; analysis Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation of design information equivalent to that and the probabilistic risk essessment en application for certification, because required for a final design approval should, when necessary, take into the NRC staff may require that the under Appendix O. The information account differences among the various information before the staffin submitted for a design certification must options, and the analysis should set connection with the review for the final include performance requirements and forth any restrictions which will be d sign approval be supplemented for the design specifications suffic;ently necessary during the construction and review for certification.

detailed to permit the preparation of startup of a given module to ensure the (b) The applicant shall comply with procurement speci5 cations and safe operation of any module already on thi filing requirements of 10 CFR 50.30 acceptance and inspection lino

(:) and (b) as they would apply to an requirements. %e information must also (d) An application for a design application for a nuclear power plant be sufficient to enable the staff to judge certifica tion must meet the following ccmstruction permit.

the apphcant's proposed means of criteria:

(c) & NRC will entertain an assuring that construction c4== to (1) N application must contain application for certification of a reactor design and to reach an final conclusion interface requirements to be met by design which differs significantly from on all matters which must be decided those portions of the plant for which the re:ctor designs which have been built before the certification can be granted.

application does not seek certification.

cnd operated. However, certification of in particular, These requirements must be sufficiently such a design will be given only ai'ter (s) h appliation must contain the detailed to allow completion of the fmal the design has been shown to be technical information which is required safety analysis and design-specific sufficient!) mature, of applicants for construction permits or probabilistic risk assessment reqmred (1) The maturity of such a design must operating licenses by art 20, Part 50 by paragraph (b) of this section.

p be demonstrated by means of an and its appendices, and Parts 73 and (2) h application must demonstrate appropriately sited, full-aize, prototype 100, and which is not site-specine or that compliance with these interface reactor, unless the following cdteria are irrelevant to the design for which the requirements is vedfiable through satisfied:

applicant is seeking certification. In inspection, tes+ing (either in the plant or (1) ne performance of each safety particular, the application must elsewhere), previous experience, or inture of the design has been demonstrate compliance with any analysis. Compliance with interface

)

32074 Federal Register / V 1. 53, Ns 163 / Tuesday, August 23, 1988 / Propos:d Rules requirements dealing with reliability of

$ 52.45(a) and shall specify in detail the the application for renewal must be components must be verifieble through procedures to be used for the those required by I 52.51 for previcas experience or testing.

rulemaking. De rulemaking procedures rulemakings on applications for initir.1 (3) ne application must also contain must provide notice and comment and certification of a design.

c representative design for those an informal hearing before an Atomic (b) A design certification, either pordons of the plant for which the Safety and Licensing Board.The origi:.al or renewed, for which au application does not seek certification.

procedures for the hearing must include application for renewal has been timely The representative design must the opportunity for written presentations filed remains in effect until the illustrate how the interface requirements made under oath or affinnation and for Commission b as determined whether to can be met, so as to aid the staff in its oralpresentations and questioningif the renew the certification. lf the review of the final safety analysis and lioard finds them either necessary for certification is not renewed,it continues probabilistic risk assessment required the creation of an adequate record or to be val!d in proceedings on an by paragraph (b) of this section.

the most expeditious way to resolve application for a construction permit, c troversies. Ordinarily, the combined license, or operating license f 52.49 Fees for design oeftification and queadoning will be done by members of referencing the certified design and cwttncaum ruwd the Board, using either the Board's docketed prior to expiration of the The fees charged for the review of an questions or questions submitted to the certification or renewal.

cpplicatio for the initialissuance or Board by the parties.The Board may (c) The Commission shall forward als request authority to use additinal application for renewal to the Advisory certi cation are set out in 1 CFR Part procedures, such as discovery, or may Committee on Reactor Safeguards 170, tofether with a schedule for the'r req est that the Comissim emene a (ACRS).The ACRS shall review the ph th rtifi d na adjudicade on dircrete inun application and report its findings and standard d signi refere ced Thereis inv lying substantial disputes of fact

• recommendations to the Commission, p11 cati n f Allfee f vi f

a 6 a d fe d i

[e" cision t a ann t resol ed with hic ha ade pp sufficient accuracy except in formal recommendations in any earlier review for a construction permit or combined Tb st will be in of the design which is the subject of the license fora. facility referencing the eh a

• N design for which.a standard design treatment of reprietary information will certification has been issued, the holder be governe y 10 CFR 2.790 and I 52.59 Crtteria for renewal of the design certification shall pay the applicable Commission case law.The (a) The Commission shallissue a rule 8

decisim in such a heari ill be based granting the renewalif the design, either op r alat ty nly e inimatie m w ch all parties as originally certified or as modified application referencing the certified-have had an opportunity to comment.

during the rulemaking on the renewal, ctandard design is filed. lf, at the end of the initial period of 'he certification, no I$2.53 Referraltothe ACRS.

Complies with the Atomic Energy Act i

facility application referencing the The Commission shall forward the and the Comminia's re8uladons and orders in effect at the time of the certified standard design has been filed, application to the Advisory Commit;ee renewal, and any more strin8ent safety the holder of the design certification on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS).The shall pay any outstanding fees for the ACRS shall review the application und

• * '",t e o

, fee et tion a (b)ift standard design certification ht IC there is a substantialincrease in overall on.

ee not is renewed, the holder of the design reconsider issues on which it has n.ede protection of the public health and safety or the common defense and certification shall pay the specified findings and recommendations in any security to be derived from the more portion of any outstanding fees for the earlier review of the design which is the stringent requirements and that the j

renewal each time a facibty application subject of the application.

direct and indirect costs of referencing the certified standard design is filed. lf, at the eud of the renewal l 52.55 Duration of certification, implementation of those requirements period, a facility application referencing A standard design certification Issued are justified in view of this increased the certified standard design has not pursuant to this subpart is valid for ten protection.

l been filed, the holder of the design years from the date ofissuance. An (b) Dental of renewal does not bar the certification shall pay any outstandmg applicant for a construction permit or holder of the design certification or fees for the renewal.

combined license may, at its own risk, another applicant from filing a new

]

(c)If an application for the issuance reference in its application a design for application for certification of the design 4

or renewal of a certified standard design which a design certification application which proposes design charges which is denied or withdrawn, any fees has been docketed but not granted.

correct the deficiencies cited in the j

i casociated with the review of the denial of the renewal.

j application are immediately due and I,, gpp payable by the applicant for the design (a) Not less than twelve nor more than I 52.61 Duration of renewal j

certification or renewal.

thirty-six months prior to expiration of Each renewal of certification for a 1

the initial ten. year period, or any later standard design will be for not less than I 52.51 Administrative review of renewal period, the holder of the design five nor more than ten years.

appiketions-certification may apply for renewal of A siandard design certification is a the certification. An application for l 52.63 Finality of standard design l

rule that will be issued in accordance renewal must contain all information I

with the provisions of Subpart H of to necessary to bring up to date the (a)(1) Notwithstanding any provision CFR part 2.The Commlulon shall information and data containe Iin the in to CFR 50.109. during the initial initiate the rulemaking after an previous application. The procedures to period in which a design certification application has been filed under be used for a rulemaking proceed.ng on issued under this Subpart is in effect, the

~ _ _, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __.

.y

~

Federal Register / Vcl. 53. Ns.163 / Tuesdays August 23, 1988 / Prop:s:d Rules 32075 Commission may not impose more license for which the exemption was required of applicants for operating stringent safety requirements on the requested.

licenses by 10 CFR Part 50. !n particular, certification unless the Commission (d) The licensee of a plant built an application referencing a certified determines in a rulemaking either that according to a standarda'.ed design may design must describe those portions of significant new information shows that make a change to the standardized the design which are site specific, such a modification is necessary to bring the portion of the plant, without prior as the service waterintake structure or certillcation or the referencing plants Commission approval, only if the change the ultimate heat sink. An application into compliance with the Commission's does not involve changes to the design referencing a certified design must also regulations and orders in effect at the as described in the rule certifying the demonstrate compliance with the time the certification was issued, or that design, or in the certifying rule together interface requirements established for e modification is necessary to assure with any exemption which may have the dealgn under i 52.47(d) of this part.

cdequate protection of the public health been granted the licensee under If the application does not reference a cnd safety or the common defense and I 52.63(c).

certified design, the application must security.

comply with the requirements of 5 52.47 (2) Similarly, notwithstanding any Subpart C-Combined Woonees of this part for level of design provision in to CFR 50.100, during any

$ 52.71 scope of subpart.

information, and shall contain the renewal period in which a design technicalinformation required by certification issued under this Subpart is TMs sub[ art sets out the requirements ll 51.47(a),52.47(b)(2) and (3), and, if a

e y gi in effect, the Commission may not

, impose more stringent safety s on seu ce >f mbined the design is modular,52.47(c). The appilcation must also include proposed construction permits and conditional )

requirements on the certification unless operating licenses ['

mbined licenses technical specifications prepared in the Commission determines in a rulemaking either that significant new for nuclear power fa ties.

accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR PM information sho,ws that a modification is i 52.73 Relationship te Subparts A and B.

(b)The appliegtlon for a combined necessary to bnng the certification or the referencing plants into compliance An application for a combined license license must include the proposed with the Commission s regulations and under this subpart may, but need not, inspections, tests and analyses which orders in effect at the time the reference a standard design certification the licensee shall perform and the certification was renewed, or that a issued under Subpart B of this part or an acceptance criteria therefor which will modification is necessary to assure early site permit issued under Subpart A provide reasonable assurance that the edequate protection of the public health of tMs part.

facility has been constructed and will operate in conformity with the cnd safety or the common defense and

$ 52.75 Filing of appilcations.

application, the provisions of the Atomic security.

Any person except one excluded by Energy Act, and the Commission's (3) Any modification the NRC imposes 10 CFR 50.38 may file an application for regulations.

on a design certification rule under a combined license for a nuclear power paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this facility with the Director of Nuclear (c)If the application references an early site pennh, de apphcation must section will be applied to all plants (b) n older of a standarbesign Reactor Replation. The applicant shalldemonstrate the suitability of the site for referen the certified desi the design and c ust discuss any other 50 4 a a) an

) as ey certification issued under this Subpart would apply to an application for a signhant e&nmwaMasue nd may file a request for an amendment to considered in any previous proceeding p

p an

" p

' on the site or the design. If the the design certification by way of notice "g"he ees a d

figa and comment rulemaking. The appkadon does not Merene an ea%

Commission shall grant the amendment review of the application are set out in request if it determines that the 10 CFR part 170.The APP cant shall site permit, then the application must li contain the information required by amendment will comply with the Atomic include an environmental report with I 52.17(b) of this part on redress of the Energy Act and the Commission's de apphcanon E H does not reference site in the event that the activities regulations.The amendment will be an early 811e permit.

permitted by I 52.91(a) of this subpart applied to all plants referencing the 152.77 Contents of applications; general are performed.

design only if the amendment is information.

(d) The application must contain necessary for adequate protection of the The application must contain all of the emergency plans which provide j

public bealth and safety or the common information required by to CFR 50.33 reasonable assurance that adequate i

defense and security. Any other and 50.33a as those sections would protective measures can be taken in the emendment will apply only to plants apply to an applicant for a nuclear event of a radiological emergency at the referencing the design after the power plant construction permit. In site.

cmendment is granted-particular, the applicant shall comply (1) The applicant shall make good (c) An apphcant for a construction with the requirement of I 50.33a[b) faith efforts to obtain certifications by permit, operating license, or combined regarding the submission of antitrust the responsible local and State Ucense, or a licensee whose license information.

governmental agencies that:

I su d der t a pa may requ st I 52M Contents of e yt r.c.n., technical (i) The proposed emergency plans are r

en exemption from one or more information.

Practicable, slements of the design certification.The (a) The application must contain the (ii) These agencies are committed to Commission shall grant such a request if final safety analysis report required by participating in any further development it determines that the exemption 10 CFR 50.34(b).The report may of the plans, including any required field comphes with the Atomic Energy Act.

incorporate by reference the final safety demonstrations; and the Commission's regulations and analysis report for a certified standard (iii) These agencies are committed to orders, and the requirements of 10 CFR design, but must be supplemented to executing their responsibilities under the 50.12(s). Execiptions apply only to the include, as appropriate, the information plans in the event of an emergency.

)

I

\\

32078 Federal Register / Vol. 53, No.183 / Tuesday, August 23, 1988 / Proposed Rules

{

(2) he application must contain any the design.The results of this limited (b) An applicant for a combined certifications that have been obtained. lf review must be presented at the hearing license, or any amendment to a j

these certifications cannot be obtamed, on the application.However, the combined license, who has filed an j

the application must demonstrate that Commission may not modify any final application referencing an early site i

the proposed plans nonetheless provide determination on an issue that has been permit issued under this subpart may reasonable assurance that adequate considered and decided in any earlier include in the application a request for a protective measures can be taken in the proccoding on the referenced site or variance from one or more elements of event of a radiological emergency at the design, except as provided in i 52.39 the permit. In determining whether to site.

and 52.63 regarding finality of early site grant the variance, the Commission will permit determinations and finality of De guided by the considerations set forth 9 52.81 Standards for rewtow of standard design certifications, in 10 CFR 50.92. which guide the appucesons, respectively. lf the application does not Commission's determinations on i

Applications filed under this subpart reference an early site permit or 6 applications for amendments to d

certified standard design, all of the construction permits.

repria e e t

ards set 8"

p I

out in to CFR Part 50 and its appendices

,u 1

P 51 m a llow d, 5 52.97 leeuance of combhed Scenses.

including the issuance of a final (a)%e Commission may issue a cn c

rr an op ' s licenses for nuclear power plants.

environmentalimpact statement.

combined license for a nuclear power facility upon finding that the applicable

$ E2.33 Appucately of Part 50 proviolona. 9518t Authortsation to conduct sh requirements of Il 50.40,50.42,50.43,

• • N Unless otherwise speciDeally 50.47, and 50.50 have been met, and that provided in this subpart, all provisions (a)1f the application references an there is reasonable assurance that the of to CFR Part 50 and its appendices early site permit, the applicant may facility will be constructed and operated applicable to holders of construction Perform the site preparation activities in conformity sylth the license, the permits for nuclear power reactors also authorized in i 52.25 after the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act, apply to holders of combined licenses application for a combined license has and the Commission's regulations.

Issued under this subpart. Similarly, all been docketed. Otherwise, the applicant (b) The Commission shallidentify in provisions of10 CFR Part 50 and its shall request authorization to conduct the license the inspections, tests, and appendices applicable to holders of site preparation activities pursuant 1010 analyses that the licensee shall perform operating licenses also apply to holders CFR 50.10(e)(1) and (2). In either case, and the acceptance criteria therefor of combined licenses issued under this authorization to conduct the activities which provide reasonable assurance subpart who have received written described in 10 CFR 50.10(e)(3)(1) may be that the facility has been constructed r

authorization for full-power operation granted only after the presiding officer and will be operated in conformity with under i 52.103. However, any limitations in the combined license proceedin8 the license, the provisions of the Atomic l

contained in part 50 regarding makes the additional finding required by Energy Act, and the Commission's l

I applicability of the provisions to certain to CFR 50.10(e)(3)(li).

regulations.

classes of facilities continue to apply.

(b)If, after an applicant for a combined license has performed the 5 52J9 Inspec%n durtre constmcBon.

f 52.85 Adminletrative revlow of activities permitted by paragraph (a) of Afterissuance of a combinedlicense, appucations.

this section, the application for the the Commission shall assure through A combined license is subject to all license is withdrawn or denied, and the inspections, tests, and analyses that applicable procedural requirements early site permit referenced by the construction of the facility is completed contained in to CFR Part 2, including the application expires or the holder of the in conformity with the combined license, requirements for docketing ($ 2.101) and - early site permit so requests, then the the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act, l

issuance of a notice of hearing ($ 2.104).

applicant shall redress the site in accord and the Commission's regulations.The i

n7ained in with the terms of the site redress plan Commission shall apply to holders of ove ed the p d s required by I 52.17(b). lf, before redress combined licenses the same inspection Part 2 is complete, a use not envisaged in the program applied to holders of nuclear l

I 52.87 Referral to the ACRS.

redress plan is found for the site or parts power plant construction permits.

t The Commission shall forward the thereof, the applicant shall carry out the Holders of combined licenses shall application to the Advisory Committee redress plan to the greatest extent comply with the provisions of Il 50.70 on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS).The possible consistent with the alternate and 50.71.

l ACRS shall review the application and use.

$ 52.101 Pre ornretionti antitrust review.

N ASn"ee i not I 82#3 D'*P8" 8"d '*"'**-

Prior to caversion of a combined ot reconsider issues on which it has made (a) Applicants for a combined license license to an verating license, the NRC findings and recocunendations in any under this subpart, or any amendment to staff shall conduct an antitrust review earlier review of the site or the design a combined license, may include in the pursuant to i 50.42(b) to determine which is the subject of the application.

applicat;on a request, under 10 CFR whether significant changes in the 50.12. for an eaemption from one or licensee's activities or proposed I 52.89 Environmental review.

more of the Commission's regulations, activities have occurred subsequent to If the application references an early including any part of a design the previous review by the Attorney r

alte permit or a certiBed standard certification rule.The Commission shall Ceneral and the Commission in design, the environmental review must grant such a request if it determines that connection with the issuance of the focus on the suitability of the site for the the exemption will comply with the combined license. If the Commission design and any other significant Atomic Energy Act, the Commission's determines that significant changes have r

environmental issue not considered in regulations, and the requirements of 10 occurred. the antitrust review required any previous proceeding on the site or CFR 50.12(a).

by section 105c(1) of the Atomic Energy l

i

F' Federal Regist:1r / V:1. 53, N2.163 / Tu:sday, August 23, 1988 / Propos:d Ruts 32077 Act must be completed prior to specificity the facts and arguments the Federal Aviation Regulations and of commencement of commercial operation which form the basis for the request.

denials or withdrawals of certain of the facility. Upon completion of this (b)If a hearing is not requested, or if petitions previously received.The review, and following receipt of the all requests are denied, the Commission purpose of this notice is to improve the advice of the Attorney General, the may authonze operation under the public's awareness of, and participation Directer of Nuclear Reactor Regulation combined license, as provided in i 50.56, in, this espect of FAA's regulatory may impose any additionallicense upon making the findings in i 50.57.

activities.Neither publication of this conditions needed to avoid creating or Dated at Rockvilia, MD. this 17th day of notice not the inclusion or omission of maintaining a situation inconsistent August 1988, information in the summary is intended with the antitrust laws as specified in For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

to affect the legal status of any petition section105a of the Atomic Energy Act.

F,amuell. Chitt r its final disposition.

9 82.103 Authorization to operata under a SecretarycMe Commission.

DAtt Comments on petitions received must identify the petition docket number comtdned scense.

[FR Doc.88-189S4 Filed 6,22-88; 8:45 am) inv'olved and must be received on or

""** CC 8 7'""

(a) Before the facility may operate, the before October 24.1988.

holder of the combined license shall AnoRess: Send comments on any apply for authorization of operation petition in triplicate to: Federal Aviation under the combined license. lf the DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Administration Office of the Chief combined license is for a modular Federal Aviation Administration Counsel. Aum Rula Docket (A%2@,

design, each module is the subject of a Petition Docket No,

,800 separate authorization. The Commission 14 CFR Ch. I Independence Avenue.SW.,

shall publish a notice of the proposed Washington, D.C. 20591.

authorization in the redero/ Register

[ Summary Notice No.PR 44-91 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:The under 10 CFR 2.105. Within 30 days, any petition, any c9mments received, and a person whoce interests may be affected Petition for Rulemaking; Summary Of copy of any final disposition are filed in may request a hearing on the basis Petluona Received the assigned regulatory docket and are either (1) that there has been a AotNcy: Federal Aviation available for examination in the Rules nonconformance with the license, the Administration (FAA), DOT, Docket (AGC-204), Room 918, FAA licensee's written commitments, the Headquarters Building [ FOB 10A),800 Atomic Energy Act, or the Commission's ANN N Uce of penb.ons for angulations and orders, which has not rulemaking received and of dispositions Independence Avenue,SW.,

been corrected and which could f priorpetitions.

Washington, DC 20591: telephone (202) 267-3132.

materially and adversely affect the safe

SUMMARY

Pursuant to FAA's This notice is published pursuant to operation of the facility; or (2) that rulemaking provisions govern ng the paragraphs (b) and (f) of i 11.27 of,Part i

significant new information shows that application, processing, and disposition 11 f the Federal Aviation Regulabons sorne modification to the site or the of petitions for rulemaking (14 CFR Part (14 CFR Part 11).

design is necessary to assure adequate 11), this notice contains a summary of Isued in Washington, DC, on Augut to, protection of public health and safety or certain petitions requesting the initiation 1988.

the common defense and security.The of rulemaking procedures for the Deborah E. Swenk, petitioner shall set forth with reasonable amendment of specified provisions of Acting Manager. Progrom Management Stag PETITIONS FOR RULEMAKING Petitone Regdations affected Desenpt on of rehof sought disposition 24969 Nabonal Rifle Association of Ameice 14 CFR I 108.11 To add a new paragraph to read that no certifacete holder shall place upon. or in any way attach to. the outande of checked baggage or any other checked parted any marungs of any kind whicn would indicate that the baggage or parced contained a firearm. Doned.

August 8.1988.

(TR Doc. 88-19o28 Fued A22-ea; e 45 am)

SUMMARY

This notice proposes a new DATES: Comments must be received no sawa coca seie is.m airworthiness directive (AD), applicable later than October 17,1988.

to certain Boeing Model 757 series ApoRessrs: Send comments on the airplanes, which would require proposalin duplicate to Federal C

Part 39 replacement of both spouer wheel Aviation Administration, Northwest Mountain Region Office of the Regional IDodet No. 88-NM-97-ADI pop b

p rts ta t ntial failure m de exists which could cause Counsel (Attn: ANM-103), Attenbon:

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Airworthiness Rules Docket No. BS-NM-757 hplanes

[ght offers on on w to th i full 97-AD,17900 Pacific Highway South, C-AGENCv: Federal Aviation up position.This condition,if not 68966, Seattle, Washington 98168. The Administration (FAA). DOT.

corrected, could result in a sudden large applicable service informabon may be ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking rolling moment and, after recovery by obtained from Boeing Commercial the pilot, diminished roll capability and Airplanes, p.O. Box 3707, Seattle, a significant loss oflift.

Washington 98124.This information