ML24254A351

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
9/19/2024 Presentation Public Meeting Alternative Physical Security Requirements for Advanced Reactors--Proposed Rule
ML24254A351
Person / Time
Issue date: 09/19/2024
From: Dennis Andrukat
NRC/NMSS/DREFS/RRPB
To:
References
NRC-2017-0227, RIN 3150-AK19
Download: ML24254A351 (1)
v • d • e


Text

PublicMeetingonProposedRule 10CFRParts50,52,and73 AlternativePhysicalSecurityRequirementsforAdvanced Reactors

[89FR65226,August9,2024]

September19,2024

Purpose

  • Provideinformationtohelpstakeholdersprepare commentsontheAlternativePhysicalSecurity RequirementsforAdvancedReactorsproposedrule anddraftregulatoryguidance.

2

Agenda

  • WelcomeandLogistics
  • OpeningRemarks
  • BackgroundandStatus
  • OverviewoftheProposedRule
  • TipsforPreparingComments
  • NextSteps
  • PublicFeedbackandQuestions 3

Logistics

  • Meetingisbeingrecordedandtranscribed.
  • Keeplinemuteduntilyouintendtospeak.
  • RaisehandbuttoninTeams(*5onphone).
  • UnmutebuttoninTeams(*6onphone).
  • Chatfeatureisdisabled.
  • PresentationslidesshownontheMicrosoftTeams screenandinADAMSatML24254A351.

4

AnthonyBowers DeputyDirector OfficeofNuclearSecurityandIncidentResponse, DivisionofPhysicalandCyberSecurityPolicy 5

OpeningRemarks

BackgroundandStatus 6

BackgroundandStatus TheNRCdecidedtopursuethisrulemakingduetotheemergenceofnew reactordesigns,whichmaywarrantmethodsformeetingtheNRC'sphysical securityrequirementsthataredifferentthantherequirementsforthe currentlyoperatingreactors.

TheNRCconductedextensivepublicoutreachincludingsolicitingcomments onaregulatorybasisdocumentandhostingpublicmeetingsonthe preliminaryproposedrulelanguage.

TheproposedrulewaspublishedintheFederalRegisteronAugust9,2024 (89FR65226).The75daycommentperiodendsOctober23,2024.

7

ProposedRuleandRelatedDocuments

  • ProposedRule

- Citation:89FR65226(August9,2024)

- Webversion (ML24178A370)

  • Supporting&RelatedMaterial

- DraftRegulatoryAnalysis(ML24178A372)

- DraftEnvironmentalAssessment(ML24178A374)

- DraftSupportingStatementsforInformationCollections (ML21334A009;ML22131A161;ML22131A167) 8

GuidanceDocuments DG5072/RG5.90,Rev0(ML20041E037)

- GuidanceforAlternativePhysicalSecurityRequirementsforSmallModular ReactorsandNonLightWaterReactors

- EarlyversionpostedbyNRCforawarenesson020524,postedforpublic commenton072424.

DG5071/RG5.81,Rev2(ML22021B529)(OfficialUseOnly)

- TargetSetIdentificationandDevelopmentforNuclearPowerReactors

- Withheldfrompublicdisclosureandcanbemadeavailabletothosemembers ofthepublicwithaneedtoknow.

9

OverviewoftheProposedRule 10

Proposed RuleLanguage FOCUSAREAS:

  • 73.55(b)(3)- Addedrequirementsspecifictosmallmodular reactors(SMRs)andnonlightwaterreactors(nonLWRs)
  • 73.55(s)- Alternativephysicalsecurityrequirements

- 73.55(s)(1)- Generalrequirements

- 73.55(s)(2)- Specificalternativephysicalsecurity requirements 11 Where is this discussed in the FRN?

Section III.D (pages 65230-65233)

ProposedRuleLanguage 10CFR73.55(s)(1)

(s)Alternativephysicalsecurityrequirements.

(1) Generalrequirements.

(i)Applicability.Therequirementsofthissectionapplytoanapplicantfor orholderofalicenseunderpart50ofthischapterorpart52ofthischapter forasmallmodularreactor,asdefinedin§ 171.5ofthischapter,oranon lightwaterreactor.

(ii)Eligibility. Theapplicantorlicenseemustdemonstratethatthe consequencesofapostulatedradiologicalreleasethatcouldresultfrom apostulatedsecurityinitiatedeventdonotexceedtheoffsitedose referencevaluesdefinedin§§ 50.34(a)(1)(D)and52.79(a)(1)(vi)ofthis chapter.

EligibilityCriteriainpreliminaryproposedrulelanguagehas beenreplacedbyasingleapplicabilitystatement 12 Where is this discussed in the FRN?

Section III.D (page 65231)

ProposedRuleLanguage 10CFR73.55(s)(1)

(iii)Identificationanddocumentation.Theapplicantorlicenseemust identifythespecificalternativephysicalsecurityrequirement(s)itintends toimplementaspartofitsphysicalprotectionprogramanddemonstrate howtherequirementssetforthinthissectionaremetwhentheselected alternative(s)isused.

(iv)Analysis.Theapplicantorlicenseeelectingtomeetoneormoreof thealternativesecurityrequirementsinparagraph(s)(2)ofthissection mustperformatechnicalanalysisdemonstratinghowitmeetsthe criteriainparagraph(s)(1)(ii)ofthissection.Thelicenseemustmaintain theanalysisuntilsubmittalofthelicenseescertificationsrequiredby§ 50.82(a)(1)ofthischapteror§ 52.110(a)ofthischapter.

13 Where is this discussed in the FRN?

Section III.D (page 65231)

DG5071:NonLWR&SMR TargetSetDefinition

  • Theminimumcombinationofequipment,operatoractions, and/orstructuresthat,ifallarepreventedfromperforming theirintendedsafetyfunctionorpreventedfrombeing accomplished,barringextraordinaryactionsbyplant operations,wouldlikelyresultinasignificantreleaseof radionuclidesfromanysource(e.g.,sufficientdamagetothe radionuclideinventorytoexceedtheradionucliderelease fractionanalyzedforthedesignbasisaccident(DBA)and creationofareleasepathway).

14

  • Atargetsetthatis:(1)withinthecapabilitiesofthe designbasisthreat(DBT)adversarytocompromise, destroy,orrendernonfunctional,(2)cannotbe mitigatedafteranadversaryinterferenceprecluded time(AIPT)andpriortotheadversaryachievingthe targetsetobjective,and(3)onanirreversiblepathto thetargetsetobjectivepriortoaboundingor protectiontime.

15 DG5071:NonLWR&SMR AchievableTargetSetDefinition

DeterminingAchievableTargetSets 16 LEGEND APSR = Alternative Physical Security Requirement DBA = Design-Basis Accident DBT = Design-Basis Threat SBT = Security Bounding Time AIPT = Adversary Interference Precluded Time GREEN Boxes - APSR can be implemented in accordance with RG 5.90.

BLUE Boxes - Process and/or analysis.

RED Box - Cannot implement APSR using target set analysis; however, RG 5.90 provides guidance to determine if an APSR can be used.

    • After an AIPT and before a release to the environment exceeds that analyzed in the DBA licensing basis.

DeterminingEligibility 17

ProposedRuleLanguage 10CFR73.55(s)(2)

  • Fiveproposedspecificalternativephysical securityrequirements:
1. Allowingfewerthan10onsitearmed responders.
2. Allowingflexibilitiesforperforminginterdictionandneutralizationfunctions whenafacilitywouldhavezeroonsitearmedresponders.
3. Allowingalternativemeansforaccomplishingdelayotherthanwith physical barriers.
4. Allowingthesecondaryalarmstationtobelocatedoffsite.
5. Allowingtheoffsitesecondaryalarmstationandthelocationofitssecondary powersuppliestonolongerbeconsideredvitalareas.

18 Where is this discussed in the FRN?

Section III.D (pages 65231-65233)

ProposedRuleLanguage 10CFR73.55(s)(2)(i)

(i)Alternativerequirementforarmedresponders.A licenseethatmeetsparagraph(s)(1)ofthissectionandis relievedfromtherequirementfortheminimumnumberof armedrespondersinparagraph(k)(5)(ii)ofthissection.

19 Where is this discussed in the FRN?

Section III.D (page 65231)

ProposedRuleLanguage 10CFR73.55(s)(2)(ii)

(ii)Alternativerequirementsforinterdictionandneutralization.Alicensee thatmeetsparagraph(s)(1)ofthissectionandhasnoarmedresponse personnelonsitewhoseprimarydutyistorespondto,interdict,and neutralizeactsofradiologicalsabotage:

(A)Mayrelyonlawenforcementorotheroffsitearmedresponderstofulfill theinterdictionandneutralizationfunctionsrequiredbyparagraph(b)(3)(i)of thissection.

(1)Thelicenseemustmaintainthecapabilitytodetect,assess,interdict,and neutralizethreatsasrequiredbyparagraph(b)(3)(i)ofthissection.

(2)Thelicenseemustprovideadequatedelayforthreatsuptoandincluding theDBTofradiologicalsabotagetoenablelawenforcementorotheroffsite armedresponderstofulfilltheinterdictionandneutralizationfunctions.

20 Where is this discussed in the FRN?

Section III.D (page 65232)

ProposedRuleLanguage 10CFR73.55(s)(2)(ii)(A)

(3)Thelicenseemustprovidenecessaryinformationaboutthe facilityandmakeavailableperiodictrainingtolawenforcement orotheroffsitearmedresponderswhowillfulfillthe interdictionandneutralizationfunctionsforthreatsuptoand includingtheDBTofradiologicalsabotage.

21 Where is this discussed in the FRN?

Section III.D (page 65232)

ProposedRuleLanguage 10CFR73.55(s)(2)(ii)(A)

(4)Thelicenseemustfullydescribeinthesafeguards contingencyplantherolethatlawenforcementorotheroffsite armedresponderswillplayinthelicenseesprotectivestrategy whenreliedupontofulfilltheinterdictionandneutralization capabilitiesrequiredbyparagraph(b)(3)(i)ofthissection.The descriptionmustprovidesufficientdetailtoenabletheNRCto determinethatthelicenseesphysicalprotectionprogram provideshighassuranceofadequateprotectionagainstthreats uptoandincludingtheDBTofradiologicalsabotage.

22 Where is this discussed in the FRN?

Section III.D (page 65232)

ProposedRuleLanguage 10CFR73.55(s)(2)(ii)(A)

(5)Thelicenseemustidentifycriteriaandmeasuresto compensateforthedegradationorabsenceoflaw enforcementorotheroffsitearmedrespondersandpropose suitablecompensatorymeasuresthatmeettherequirements ofparagraphs(o)(2)and(3)ofthissectiontoaddressthis degradation.

23 Where is this discussed in the FRN?

Section III.D (page 65232)

ProposedRuleLanguage 10CFR73.55(s)(2)(ii)

(B)Isrelievedfromapplying:

(1)Therequirementsinparagraphs(k)(3)through(7)ofthissectionandthe requirementinparagraph(k)(8)(ii)ofthissectiontolawenforcement responders.

(2)Thetrainingandqualificationrequirementsrelatedtoarmedresponse personnelinsectionVIofappendixBtothispartforlawenforcement responders,exceptfortheperformanceevaluationprogramrequirements relatedtoarmedresponsepersonnelinsectionVI.C.3ofappendixBtothispart, whichthelicenseeshallcontinuetosatisfyforallarmedresponsepersonnel, includinglawenforcement.

(3)Thelocationrelatedrequirementsinparagraph(k)(5)(iii)ofthissectionand insectionII.B.3.c.(iv)ofappendixCtothispartrelatedtoarmedresponders.

24

ProposedRuleLanguage 10CFR73.55(s)(2)(iii)

(iii)Alternativerequirementsforphysicalbarriers.Alicensee thatmeetsparagraph(s)(1)ofthissectionmayutilizemeans otherthanphysicalbarriersandbarriersystemstosatisfythe physicalprotectionprogramdesignrequirementsofparagraph (e)ofthissection.Acceptablemeanscanbeanymethod(s)that accomplishesthedelayandaccesscontrolfunctionsnecessary toallowthelicenseetoimplementitsphysicalprotection program.

25 Where is this discussed in the FRN?

Section III.D (page 65233)

ProposedRuleLanguage 10CFR73.55(s)(2)(iv)

(iv)Alternativerequirementsforonsitesecondaryalarmstations.Alicensee thatmeetsparagraph(s)(1)ofthissection:

(A)Mayhaveonealarmstationlocatedoffsitenotwithstandingtherequirementin paragraph(i)(2)ofthissectiontohaveatleasttwoalarmstationslocatedonsite.The centralalarmstationmustremainonsite.

(B)Isrelievedfromtherequirementinparagraph(i)(4)(iii)ofthissectiontoconstruct, locate,andprotecttheoffsitesecondaryalarmstationtothestandardsforthecentral alarmstation.Thelicenseeisnotrelievedfromtherequirementinparagraph(i)(4)(iii) ofthissectionthatbothalarmstationsshallbeequippedandredundant,suchthatall functionsneededtosatisfytherequirementsofparagraph(i)(4)ofthissectioncanbe performedinbothalarmstations.

26 Where is this discussed in the FRN?

Section III.D (page 65233)

ProposedRuleLanguage 10CFR73.55(s)(2)(v)

(v)Alternativerequirementsforvitalareas.Alicenseethatmeets paragraph(s)(1)ofthissection:

(A)Isrelievedfromtherequirementinparagraph(e)(9)(v)(D)ofthis sectiontodesignate anoffsitesecondaryalarmstationasavitalarea (B)Isrelievedfromtherequirementinparagraph(e)(9)(vi)ofthis section tolocatethesecondarypowersupplysystemsforanoffsite secondaryalarmstationinavitalarea.

27 Where is this discussed in the FRN?

Section III.D (page 65233)

DraftGuidance:

KeyElements 28

DG1365(nowDG5072)

  • RedesignatedasDG5072
  • WhatisDG5072?

- NewguidanceforSMRsandnonLWRsthatelecttomeet oneormoreofthealternativephysicalsecurity requirements

  • WhatarethemajorpieceswithinDG5072?

- Guidancefor§ 73.55(s)(1)

- Guidancefor§ 73.55(s)(2) 29

DG5072:Overviewof(s)(1)guidance

  • Guidanceexplainsoneapproachforaddressingthe requirementsin§ 73.55(s)(1)thatwilldemonstrate theeligibilitytousethealternativesecuritymeasures.
  • Theserequirementsare:

- Identifythespecificalternativephysicalsecurity requirement(s).

- Performasitespecificanalysistoevaluatethe potentialoffsiteradiologicalconsequencesand demonstratehowtheperformancerequirementsset forthin§ 73.55(b)(3)aremet.

30

DG5072:SignificantRelease"

  • Areleaseofoffsitedosesthatexceedthereferencevalues definedin§§ 50.34(a)(1)(ii)(D)(1)and(2)and 52.79(a)(1)(vi)(A)and(B).
  • The25remreferencedosehasbeenusedinParts50,52,70 and100asareferencevaluethatisusedtoevaluateplant designfeatureswithrespecttopostulatedreactoraccidents, includingDBAs.
  • TheDBAsarenotintendedtobeactualeventsequencesbut areusedassurrogatestoallowtheNRCandlicenseesto evaluatetheresponseofafacilitysengineeredsafety features.

31

DG5072:ConsequenceAnalysis

  • Anactivityperformedbytheapplicantorlicenseeto determineradiationdosesattheexclusionarea boundaryandtheouterboundaryofthelow populationzonefrompostulatedradiological releases
  • Neededtodemonstrateapplicabilityforusingthe alternativesecuritymeasuresfoundin§ 73.55(s)for thephysicalprotectionprogram 32

DG5072:Overviewof(s)(2)guidance Thisguidanceincludes:

  • methodsandapproachesthestaffwouldfind acceptableforsatisfyingthealternativesecurity requirementsin§ 73.55(s)(2);
  • amethodologyforcalculatingSBT;and
  • explanatoryinformationandclarificationsrelatedto thereliefprovidedwithinthealternativesproposed in§ 73.55(s)(2).

33

DG5071

  • RevisiontoRG5.81,TargetSetIdentificationand DevelopmentforNuclearPowerReactors
  • Thisrevisionprovidesguidanceto:

- identifytargetsetsforSMRsandnonLWRsconsistent withchangesto§ 73.55(b)(3).

  • Preventasignificantreleaseofradionuclidesfromany source.

- utilizethetargetsetprocesstodetermineapplicability ofalternativephysicalsecurityrequirements.

34

RegulatoryAnalysis Theconclusionfromtheanalysisisthatthis proposedruleandassociatedguidancewould resultinnetavertedcoststotheindustryand theNRCof$80,000usinga7percentdiscount rateand$130,000usinga3percentdiscount rateduetoreductionsinexemptionrequests.

35

SpecificRequestsforComment

1. Some advanced reactors may have designs that are significantly different from the current operating large LWRs [light-water reactors]. These large LWRs must meet the requirement found in § 73.55(b)(3) for preventing significant core damage and spent fuel sabotage. The NRC is proposing that advanced reactors meet a new technology-inclusive requirement that would prevent a significant release of radionuclides from any source.

a) If non-LWRs and SMRs should use a different requirement, then what other suitable requirement besides preventing a significant release of radionuclides from any source could be applicable to SMRs and non-LWRs? Please provide the basis for your response.

b) The NRC also considered using a more specific technology-inclusive requirement, such as the dose reference values currently found in §§ 50.34(a)(1)(ii)(D) and 52.79(a)(1)(vi). How could the NRC implement the use of such a dose-based requirement (e.g., offsite dose reference values) in the context of evaluating physical security for a site? If there should be alternative value(s) (such as a different dose-based or safety-based value(s)), what would be a suitable alternative value(s)? Please provide the basis for your response.

36 Where is this discussed in the FRN?

Section IV (page 65234)

SpecificRequestsforComment

2) The NRC is not proposing a hybrid approach that would allow a licensee to rely on a combination of onsite armed responders and law enforcement or other offsite armed responders to implement the licensee's protective strategy. Why should or shouldnt the NRC establish requirements and supporting guidance to allow for such a hybrid approach? What changes are necessary to the proposed rule and supporting guidance to address potential hybrid approaches? Please provide the basis for your response.
3) The NRC recognizes that allowing licensees to rely entirely or partially on law enforcement, rather than onsite armed responders, to interdict and neutralize threats up to and including the DBT of radiological sabotage, is a novel approach to meeting the performance objectives in § 73.55(b). Has the NRC adequately addressed the uncertainties associated with the proposed requirements at 10 CFR 73.55(s)(2)(ii)? Please provide the basis for your response.

37 Where is this discussed in the FRN?

Section IV (page 65234)

SpecificRequestsforComment

4) Some advanced reactors may have design characteristics or engineered safety features that would contribute to the ability of a designer to show that the criteria in proposed § 73.55(s)(1) are met. However, the NRC is not currently proposing to add any submittal requirements in this regard for standard design certification applications under subpart B to 10 CFR part
52. What would be the potential benefits and challenges if the NRC were to add optional submittal requirements on such design characteristics or engineered safety features to § 52.47, Contents of applications; technical information, similar to those for emergency plans for early site permit applicants in § 52.17(b)(2) and (3)? To what extent should the NRC consider security matters resolved under

§ 52.63(a)(5) for a standard design certification when the information that would be required to show that the criteria in proposed

§ 73.55(s)(1) are met is provided by a design certification applicant and reviewed by the NRC as part of the certification process?

38 Where is this discussed in the FRN?

Section IV (page 65234)

GeneralRequestforComments The NRC is seeking comments on both its initial RFA [Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980] analysis and on its preliminary conclusion that this proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because of the likelihood that most expected applicants would not qualify as a small entity. Additionally, the NRC is seeking comments on its preliminary conclusion that if a small entity were to submit an advanced nuclear reactor application, the small entity would not incur a significant economic impact as it would most likely not be in competition with a large entity.

39 Where is this discussed in the FRN?

Section IV (page 65235)

GeneralRequestforComments Any small entity that could be subject to this regulation that determines, because of its size, it is likely to bear a disproportionate adverse economic impact should notify the Commission of this opinion in a comment that indicates 1.

The applicants size and how the proposed regulation would impose a significant economic burden on the applicant as compared to the economic burden on a larger applicant; 2.

How the proposed regulations could be modified to take into account the applicants differing needs or capabilities; 3.

The benefits that would accrue or the detriments that would be avoided if the proposed regulations were modified as suggested by the applicant; 4.

How the proposed regulation, as modified, would more closely equalize the impact of NRC regulations or create more equal access to the benefits of Federal programs as opposed to providing special advantages to any individual or group; and 5.

How the proposed regulation, as modified, would still adequately demonstrate compliance with the NRCs obligations under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.

40 Where is this discussed in the FRN?

Section IV (pages 65235 - 65236)

TipsforPreparingComments 41

  • Regulations.gov:CommentForm or
  • Email:Rulemaking.Comments@nrc.gov or
  • Mail:Secretary,U.S.NuclearRegulatory Commission,Washington,DC20555 0001 Attn:RulemakingsandAdjudications Staff Appliestoallpubliccommentsontheproposedruleand DG5072(commentsonDG5071followaseparateprocess, contactLouCubellisformoreinformation) 42 Howtosubmitacomment
  • CommentersChecklistlinkavailableonthis commentsubmissionformwebpage:

https://www.regulations.gov/commenton/NRC 201702270038

- Alsoavailableinaprintableformat (alsoreferredtoTips forsubmittingcomments) 43 ReviewtheCommentersCheckliston Regulations.gov

  • Publiccommentperiodends:October23,2024
  • FinalruletotheCommission:September9,2025 (estimated)
  • Finalrulepublication:March2026 (estimated) 44 NextSteps

QuestionandAnswerSession 45

ThankYou!

DennisAndrukat ProjectManager-OfficeofNuclearMaterialSafetyand Safeguards,DivisionofRulemaking,Environmental,and FinancialSupport Email:Dennis.Andrukat@nrc.gov Regulations.govdocketID:NRC20170227 Pleaseprovidefeedbackonthispublicmeetingusingthis link:https://www.nrc.gov/publicinvolve/public meetings/contactus.html 46

Acronyms 47 AgencywideDocumentsAccessandManagementSystem ADAMS adversaryinterferenceprecludedtime AIPT alternativephysicalsecurityrequirement APSR CodeofFederalRegulations CFR designbasisaccident DBA designbasisthreat DBT draftregulatoryguide DG FederalRegister FR FederalRegisterNotice FRN lightwaterreactor LWR NuclearEnergyInstitute NEI nonlightwaterreactor NonLWR NuclearRegulatoryCommittee NRC RegulatoryFlexibilityActof1980 RFA regulatoryguide RG securityboundingtime SBT smallmodularreactor SMR

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML24254A351&oldid=3750475"