ML21262A010

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Future Plant Designs Subcommittee: Emergency Preparedness for Small Modular Reactors and Other New Technologies
ML21262A010
Person / Time
Issue date: 09/21/2021
From: Soto S
NRC/NMSS/DREFS/RRPB
To:
Soto S
References
10 CFR Part 50, 10 CFR Part 52, NRC-2015-0225, RIN 3150-AJ68
Download: ML21262A010 (35)


Text

Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Future Plant Designs Subcommittee 10 CFR Parts 50 and 52 Emergency Preparedness for Small Modular Reactors and Other New Technologies September 21, 2021

Agenda 9:30am - 9:35am Opening Remarks 9:35am - 11:00am

Background

Technical Basis/Regulatory Analysis Final Rule Language 11:00am - 11:15am Break 11:15am - 12:30pm Final Rule Language (Continued)

Draft Regulatory Guidance 12:30pm - 12:40pm Comments on Draft Final Rule (Marc Nichol, NEI) 12:40pm - 12:50pm Comments on Draft Final Rule (Ed Lyman, UCS) 12:50 - 1:00pm Opportunity for Public Comment 2

NRC Staff Presenters

  • Soly Soto Lugo, NMSS - Rulemaking PM

4 Background

Background

  • Regulatory Basis

- Published the draft regulatory basis with a 75-day public comment period on April 13, 2017 (82 FR 17768)

- Received comments from 57 individuals and organizations with 223 individual comments

- Published the final regulatory basis on November 15, 2017 (82 FR 52862) 5

Background (cont.)

  • Proposed Rule

- Published the proposed rule with a 75-day public comment period on May 12, 2020 (85 FR 28436)

- Public meeting was held on June 24, 2020

- Extended the public comment period by 60 days on July 21, 2020 (85 FR 44025)

  • Public comment period ended Sept 25, 2020 6

Background (cont.)

  • Public comments

- Received comments from 2,212 individuals and organizations, including 2,087 form letters

- Identified 649 unique comments on the proposed rule

- Responses to public comments will be published upon Commission approval of the final rule 7

Background (cont.)

8

Background (cont.)

  • Draft final rule schedule

- Currently in concurrence

- Presentation to ACRS full committee during the week of November 1, 2021

- Due to the Commission by December 30, 2021 9

10 Technical Basis and Regulatory Analysis

Technical Basis

  • Graded approach to emergency preparedness:

- Performance-Based

- Technology-Inclusive

- Consequence-Oriented and Risk-Informed 11

Regulatory Analysis

  • Cost and Benefits/Averted Costs (7% Net Present Value)
  • Total Net Benefit (Undiscounted): $31,700,000

- 3% Net Present Value: $14,900,000

- 7% Net Present Value: $7,980,000 12 Industry NRC Costs

($110,000)

($70,000)

Benefits/Averted Costs

$5,730,000

$2,430,000 Net Benefits (Benefits - Costs)

$5,620,000

$2,360,000

13 Draft Final Rule Language

Draft Final Rule Language Overview of Major Provisions:

New alternative performance-based emergency preparedness framework A graded approach to EP Requirement for a hazard analysis of any NRC licensed or non-NRC licensed facility Requirement to describe ingestion response planning in the emergency plan 14

Draft Final Rule Language 15 New Alternative Performance-Based Framework

Draft Final Rule Language (cont.)

  • New Alternative Performance-Based Framework (cont.)

- Section 50.160(b)(1) establishes a new alternative performance-based EP framework (i) Maintenance of Performance (ii) Performance Objectives (iii) Emergency Response Performance (iv) Planning Activities 16

Draft Final Rule Language (cont.)

17 Scalable Approach to EP

Draft Final Rule Language (cont.)

  • Section 50.33(g)(2) - Scalable approach for determining plume exposure pathway EPZ size

- An analysis describing the area within which:

  • Public dose, as defined in section 20.1003, is projected to exceed 10 mSv (1 rem) TEDE over 96 hours0.00111 days <br />0.0267 hours <br />1.587302e-4 weeks <br />3.6528e-5 months <br /> from the release of radioactive materials from the facility considering accident likelihood and source term, timing of the accident sequence, and meteorology; and
  • Predetermined, prompt protective measures are necessary 18

Draft Final Rule Language (cont.)

  • EPZ Boundary and Physical Characteristics

- Under section 50.33(g)(2) applicants must propose their EPZ

- Section 50.160(b)(3) requires applicants to describe in their emergency plans the boundary and physical characteristics of the EPZ 19

Draft Final Rule Language (cont.)

  • Requirement to Describe Ingestion Response Planning

- Section 50.160(b)(4) establishes ingestion response planning requirements

- Applicants' and licensees emergency plan would describe:

  • Ingestion response planning
  • Capabilities and resources available to prevent contaminated food and water from entering the ingestion pathway

- Facilities with a site boundary EPZ must reference capabilities of Federal, State, and local authorities 20

Draft Final Rule Language (cont.)

  • Onsite and Offsite Planning Activities

- Section 50.160(b)(1)(iv)(A) contains required onsite and offsite planning activities for all applicants and licensees:

  • Public information
  • Communications with the NRC
  • Site familiarization training

Draft Final Rule Language (cont.)

  • Offsite Planning Activities

- Section 50.160(b)(1)(iv)(B) contains required offsite planning activities for applicants with a plume exposure pathway EPZ that extends beyond the site boundary:

22

  • Contacts and arrangements with Federal, State, Local, and Tribal governmental agencies
  • Notification of offsite organizations
  • Protective measures
  • Evacuation time estimate
  • Emergency response facility or facilities
  • Offsite dose projections
  • Dissemination of public information
  • Reentry
  • Drills and exercises

Draft Final Rule Language (cont.)

  • Requirement for Hazard Analysis

- Section 50.160(b)(2) requires a hazard analysis of facilities contiguous to or near an SMR or ONT facility

- NRC licensed or other facilities 23

Draft Final Rule Language (cont.)

  • Consideration of Credible Hazards

- Section 50.160(b)(2) requires a hazard analysis to include any event at a contiguous or nearby facility that would adversely impact the implementation of emergency plans

- Examples of facilities are:

  • Industrial
  • Military
  • Transportation
  • Multi modular and other nuclear units 24

Regulatory Oversight

  • Section 50.160(b)(1)(iii) requires all applicants and licensees to use drills and exercises to demonstrate their capabilities in the required emergency response functions 25

Significant Changes to the Proposed Rule

  • Revised section 50.33(g)(2) plume exposure pathway EPZ sizing criteria
  • Revised section 50.160(b)(3) to include entry criteria
  • Revised sections 50.160(c)(1)-(2) to allow licensees greater flexibility for initial exercise demonstration 26

Other Changes to the Proposed Rule

  • Revised section 50.2 definition of small modular reactor
  • Revised section 72.32(c) to clarify that the emergency plan that meets the requirements of sections 50.47 or 50.160 satisfies the EP requirements of section 72.32
  • Revised section 50.160(b) to state the reasonable assurance finding required in section 50.47(a)(1) apply to section 50.160 applicant 27

Other Changes to the Proposed Rule (cont.)

  • Revised sections 50.160(b)(1)(iii)(F)(1),

(3) and (4) to refer to applicable response organizations

  • Revised section 50.160(b)(1)(iv)(B)(4) to ensure ETEs include area within the site boundary 28

Other Changes to the Proposed Rule (cont.)

  • Clarified that an applicant complying with section 50.160 needs to submit an emergency plan of a participating Tribal government
  • Relocated requirements for site familiarization and maintenance of emergency plan to section 50.160(b)(1)(iv)(A) to ensure requirements are applicable to all applicants and licensees 29

Draft Regulatory Guidance 30 RG 1.242, Performance-Based Emergency Preparedness for Small Modular Reactors, Non-Light Water Reactors, and Non-Power Production or Utilization Facilities

Draft Regulatory Guidance

  • Conforming changes to the regulatory guide

- Made conforming changes based on changes to the draft final rule language

- Included additional reference documents

- Enhanced the guidance on accident likelihood, source term, timing of the accident sequence, and meteorology

- Added the definition of safe condition to the glossary 31

Draft Regulatory Guidance (cont.)

  • Appendix A, General Methodology for Establishing Plume Exposure Pathway Emergency Planning Zone Size

- Provides a general methodology acceptable to the NRC for the analysis for establishing plume exposure pathway EPZ size

- Added Section A-3.1, Event Selection, which discusses the applicants consideration of accident likelihood 32

Draft Regulatory Guidance (cont.)

  • Appendix B, Development of Information on Source Terms

- Provides guidance to develop source terms for plume exposure pathway EPZ size evaluations 33

Questions 34

Acronyms and Abbreviations ACRS - Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards CFR - Code of Federal Regulations EP - emergency preparedness EPZ - emergency planning zone ETE - evacuation time estimate FR - Federal Register mSv - millisievert NEI - Nuclear Energy Institute NMSS - Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards NRC - U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NSIR - Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response ONT - other new technologies PM - project manager RG - Regulatory Guide SMR - small modular reactor TEDE - total effective dose equivalent UCS - Union of Concerned Scientists 35