RIS 2003-18, Use of Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 99-01, Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels, Revision 4, Dated January 2003: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Adams
{{Adams
| number = ML041550395
| number = ML051450482
| issue date = 07/13/2004
| issue date = 12/12/2005
| title = Use of Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 99-01, Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels, Revision 4, Dated January 2003
| title = Use of Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 99-01, Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels, Revision 4, Dated January 2003
| author name = Beckner W
| author name = Grimes C
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR/DIPM/IROB
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR/ADRA/DPR
| addressee name =  
| addressee name =  
| addressee affiliation =  
| addressee affiliation =  
| docket =  
| docket =  
| license number =  
| license number =  
| contact person = Casto  G NUEPPO 415-4072
| contact person = Johnson D, NSIR/EPD 301-415-4040
| case reference number = TAC MC3249
| case reference number = NEI 99-01
| document report number = RIS-03-018, Suppl 1
| document report number = RIS-03-018, Suppl 2
| document type = NRC Regulatory Issue Summary
| document type = NRC Regulatory Issue Summary
| page count = 7
| page count = 8
}}
}}
{{#Wiki_filter:UNITED STATES
{{#Wiki_filter:UNITED STATES
                            NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
                        OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION
                                WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 July 13, 2004 NRC REGULATORY ISSUE SUMMARY 2003-18, SUPPLEMENT 1, USE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE (NEI) 99-01,  
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 December 12, 2005 NRC REGULATORY ISSUE SUMMARY 2003-18, SUPPLEMENT 2, USE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE (NEI) 99-01,  


===METHODOLOGY===
===METHODOLOGY===
FOR DEVELOPMENT OF EMERGENCY ACTION LEVELS,
FOR DEVELOPMENT OF EMERGENCY ACTION LEVELS  
                        REVISION 4, DATED JANUARY 2003  
REVISION 4, DATED JANUARY 2003  


==ADDRESSEES==
==ADDRESSEES==
Line 28: Line 28:


==INTENT==
==INTENT==
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is providing this regulatory issue summary (RIS) to supplement previously issued information in RIS 2003-18, Use of NEI 99-01, Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels, Revision 4, dated January 2003. The NRC is clarifying technical positions regarding the revision of emergency action levels (EALs). This RIS requires no action or written response on the part of an addressee.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this regulatory issue summary (RIS) to supplement previously issued information in RIS 2003-18, Use of NEI 99-01, Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels, Revision 4, dated January 2003, and RIS 2003-18 Supplement 1, dated July 13, 2004.
 
The purpose of this supplement is to:
*
Supercede previously issued information in RIS 2003-18 and Supplement 1 regarding obtaining and documenting State and local governmental authority agreement to emergency action level (EAL) changes.
 
*
Provide more examples of EAL differences and deviations, as identified in reviews of EAL submittals, to ensure the consistency of future licensee EAL submittals and/or the consistency of licensee documentation for EAL changes made under 10 CFR
50.54(q).
*
Provide additional guidance on EAL upgrades from NUMARC/NESP-007 EALs to NEI
99-01 EALs.
 
This RIS requires no action or written response on the part of an addressee.


==BACKGROUND INFORMATION==
==BACKGROUND INFORMATION==
Recently, the NRC has reviewed licensee processes for emergency action level (EAL) changes and issued findings related to the improper implementation of EAL changes. In one recent example, a licensee made improvements to its emergency plan change process to require approval of proposed emergency plan changes by the station regulatory affairs department and the plant operations review committee. That licensee subsequently submitted changes to EALs which were not of sufficient detail to support NRC review. The NRC asked the licensee to withdraw the proposed changes.
The rule change to Section IV.B to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E (effective 4/26/05) removed the requirement to obtain State and local governmental authority agreement to EAL changes except when the EALs are initially implemented. However, licensees must continue to review EALs with State and local governmental authorities on an annual basis.
 
ML051450482


The NRC staff has received several recent prior approval submittals from licensees converting EALs to the endorsed NEI 99-01, Revision 4 scheme. Those submittals have been inconsistent in format and quality. The staff has conducted a review of NRC guidance and held discussions with the industry to ensure a common understanding of expectations for implementation of EAL
RIS 2003-18, Supp 2 The NRC is aware that licensees are considering seeking NRC approval for EAL upgrades from the NUMARC/NESP-007 scheme to the NEI 99-01 scheme rather than using the 10 CFR
revisions consistent with RIS 2003-18. The most recent information was received from a public ML041550395
50.54(q) process as referenced in RIS 2003-18. In a public meeting with NEI on January 26,
2005, industry representatives informed the NRC that licensees are reluctant to use the 10 CFR
50.54(q) process for EAL upgrades due to some confusion about what constitutes a deviation or difference.


RIS 2003-18, Sup 1 workshop held on April 26, 2004 (ADAMS Accession No. ML041210096), to discuss practices for making EAL changes. The NRC staff believes that additional explanation regarding documentation for proposed EAL changes could be helpful.
The regulations governing the development and implementation of EALs for nuclear power licensees are contained in 10 CFR Part 50. Guidance documents used to review EAL schemes are identified in Regulatory Guide 1.101, Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Nuclear Power Reactors Revision 4, dated October 2003.


The regulations governing the development and implementation of EALs for nuclear power licensees are contained in 10 CFR Part 50. Guidance documents used to review EAL schemes are identified in Regulatory Guide 1.101, Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Nuclear Power Reactors, Revision 2 (dated October 1982), Revision 3 (dated August 1992), and Revision 4 (dated October 2003).
RIS 2003-18 describes the 10 CFR Part 50 sections and guidance references that pertain to EAL revisions. RIS-2003-18, Supplement 1, clarifies the technical positions on revising EALs.
RIS 2003-18 describes the 10 CFR Part 50 sections and guidance references in detail, as they pertain to EAL revisions. The details contained in RIS 2003-18 remain applicable to this RIS.
 
The guidance in these documents remains applicable except as otherwise indicated.


==SUMMARY OF ISSUE==
==SUMMARY OF ISSUE==
The purpose of this RIS is to supplement previously issued information in RIS 2003-18 by clarifying technical positions regarding the revision of EALs. Specifically, this RIS provides clarification on the level of detail licensees need to provide to support proposed changes to EALs. RIS 2003-18 contained staff suggestions intended to enhance the review process.
State and County Approval According to a rule change to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E (effective 4/26/05), the licensee is only required to obtain State and local governmental authority agreement on the EALs during initial implementation. Subsequent changes to the EALs do not require State and local governmental authority agreement before implementation. However, licensees must continue to review EALs with State and local governmental authorities on an annual basis.


These suggestions were discussed during the April 26, 2004, public workshop.
Generic Guidance When revising their Initiating Conditions (IC) or EALs, licensees should address the following guidelines:
*
As stated in NEI 99-01 (emphasis added):
The guidance presented here is not intended to be applied to plants as-is.  The generic guidance is intended to give the logic for developing site-specific IC/EALs using site- specific IC/EAL presentation methods.  Each utility will need to revise the IC/EALs to meet site-specific needs with regard to instrumentation, nomenclature, plant arrangement, and method of presentation, etc.  Such revision is expected and encouraged provided that the intent of the generic guidance is retained.  Deviations from the intent may be acceptable, but will need to be justified during regulatory review.  Items associated with presentation, e.g., format, sequencing of IC/EALs, IC numbering, and recognition categories, are at the option of the utility.


As evidenced by recent licensee submittals for NRC prior approval of EAL changes, and as reinforced by discussion with licensees prior to and during the April 26, 2004 public workshop, licensees have not consistently provided the level of detail necessary to allow the NRC to effectively review proposed EAL changes. Further, the information in RIS 2003-18 did not appear to provide sufficient explanation of the expectations which NRC intended for the example EAL change scenarios discussed in RIS 2003-18. The following information was provided to the public in the April 26, 2004 workshop and may be useful to licensees preparing EAL revisions.
RIS 2003-18, Supp 2 The generic guidance includes both ICs and example EALs. It is the intent of this guidance that both be included in the site-specific implementation.  Each serves a specific purpose.


General Expectations As discussed in RIS 2003-18, the staff recognizes that certain EAL changes do not warrant NRC review and approval, and that licensees may make changes to EALs without prior NRC
The IC is intended to be the fundamental criteria for the declaration, whereas, the EALs are intended to represent unambiguous examples of conditions that may meet the IC.
approval when changes do not decrease the effectiveness of the emergency plan and continue to meet the standards of 10 CFR 50.47(b) and the requirements of Appendix E. As also discussed in RIS 2003-18, certain other types of changes, such as scheme changes from EALs based on NUREG-0654 to EALs based on NUMARC/NESP-007 or NEI 99-01, should include a formal review and approval by NRC prior to implementation. RIS 2003-18 provides detailed examples of the type of changes that should receive prior review and approval, as well as examples that are appropriate to implement in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(q).
Whether EAL changes warrant NRC prior approval or implementation per 50.54(q), it is recommended that detailed documentation be compiled to justify the EAL changes. EAL
justifications, which stand alone in the arrangement of documentation necessary to explain


RIS 2003-18, Sup 1 proposed changes, will aid in supporting an efficient review process. Supporting information, (such as engineering studies, calculations, referenced procedures, diagrams, maps, etc.), is useful.
*
Verbatim compliance with the wording provided in the basis section of each IC is not necessary as long as there is enough information to support the IC and associated EALs and the intent of the EAL is maintained. Information in NEI 99-01 that is primarily used to assist licensees in developing their EALs and EAL Basis Document need not be incorporated into the licensees EAL Basis Document unless the licensee chooses.


A pre-submittal conference between the licensee and the NRC, as referenced in 10 CFR
*
2.101(a)(1), is often useful prior to the submittal of proposed EAL changes. The conference serves to clarify the NRCs expectations for documentation and allows the licensee to understand the process by which the change will be evaluated, including NRC time estimations for completion of the review.
Verbatim compliance with the wording in Sections 3.0, 4.0, and 5.0 of NEI 99-01 is not necessary as long as there is enough information to:
*
Support the scheme,
*
Explain the layout of the EAL Basis Document,
*
Explain the treatment of multiple events and emergency class upgrades,
*
Explain the treatment of emergency class downgrades,
*
Explain classification of transient events, and
*
Discuss operating mode applicability and other information deemed necessary by the licensee to support emergency event classifications.


Submittal Documentation Methods which may provide for a more efficient and timely review process were discussed in the April 26, 2004 public workshop. Including the following information in EAL submittal documentation will facilitate the review process:
Differences and Deviations From Supplement 1 to RIS 2003-18 (emphasis added):
(1) Summary Explanation A summary document, which generally explains the considerations applicable to the EAL
A difference is an EAL change where the basis scheme guidance differs in wording but agrees in meaning and intent, such that classification of an event would be the same, whether using the basis scheme guidance or the site-specific proposed EAL.  Examples of differences include the use of site-specific terminology or administrative re-formatting of site-specific EALs.
change, provides the NRC reviewer information specific to the current EAL scheme, proposed EAL scheme, plant operational information, useful definitions applicable to understanding the EAL change, and emergency plan specific information that supports the EAL change. Example information in the summary explanation includes:
*      Contents in the submittal package, with an explanation for the contents
*      Current EAL scheme in use
*      Proposed EAL scheme on which the EAL change is based
*      Cross-reference comparing scheme basis (NUMARC, NEI) to proposed EAL change(s)
*      Specific discussion for the identification of differences and deviations from the proposed EAL scheme bases, including how changes are indicated for each difference and deviation
*      Description of operational modes, as applicable to the specific unit(s)
*      Discussion of applicable State and local government officials who have review and agreement authority for changes to EALs
(2) State/Local Government Official Agreement Documentation:
Review of and agreement with EAL changes by applicable State and local government officials is required by 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E. Evidence of reviews and agreement, provided with the EAL change submittal, documents the level of explanation provided to government officials regarding the impact of the change to offsite agency emergency notifications. For example,


RIS 2003-18, Sup 1 where NUREG-0654 to NUMARC/NESP-007 or NEI 99-01 scheme changes result in a higher or lower classification for a specific event, documentation should be included to show that State and Local government officials were made aware of those changes in classifications.
Expanded clarification:
Administrative changes that do not actually change the text are neither differences nor deviations.  Likewise, any format change that does not alter the wording of the IC or EAL is considered neither a difference nor a deviation.


(3) Detailed Justification To facilitate a timely EAL review, a description of each EAL difference or deviation from the basis scheme or prior NRC-approved site-specific hybrid EAL provides sufficient detail to stand alone as justification for the proposed change. It is recommended that supporting information be included (for prior approval submittals) or maintained for follow-up inspection (for 50.54(q)
The following are examples of differences:
implemented changes). Supporting information includes technical document references, engineering reports, calculations, diagrams, maps, and procedures.
*
Choosing the applicable EAL based on plant type (BWR vs. PWR).


Difference and Deviation A difference is an EAL change where the basis scheme guidance (NUREG, NUMARC, NEI)
RIS 2003-18, Supp 2 *
differs in wording but agrees in meaning and intent, such that classification of an event would be the same, whether using the basis scheme guidance or the site-specific proposed EAL.
Using a different numbering scheme than the NEI 99-01 scheme without changing the intent of the overall EAL scheme.  However, licensees are encouraged to adopt the NEI 99-01 numbering convention to facilitate communication among licensees, and between licensees, the NRC, and State and local governmental authorities.


Examples of differences include the use of site-specific terminology or administrative re- formatting of site-specific EALs.
*
The NEI guidance specifically provides an option not to include an EAL if equipment for the EAL does not exist at the site (e.g., automatic real-time dose assessment capability and telemetered perimeter rad monitoring systems), and the licensee, therefore, does not include the EAL.


A deviation is an EAL change where the basis scheme guidance differs in wording and is altered in meaning or intent, such that classification of the event could be different between the basis scheme guidance and the site-specific proposed EAL. Examples of deviations include the use of altered mode applicability, altering key words or time limits, or changing words of physical reference (protected area, safety-related equipment, etc.).
*
Good Industry Practices:
Pulling information from the basis section up to the actual EAL that does not change the intent of the EAL.
The use of good industry practices in the preparation of EAL change documents is encouraged by the NRC. As EAL changes occur, licensees are expected to gain experience and share information with the industry. Assistance to licensees in the preparation of EAL change packages can be provided by the NRC during pre-submittal conferences, and may be beneficial in reducing regulatory burden through the consistent incorporation of acceptable practices by the licensee.


==BACKFIT DISCUSSION==
*
This RIS requires no action or written response. Any action on the part of addressees to adopt the information contained in this RIS is strictly voluntary and, therefore, is not a backfit under
Stating ALL operating modes are applicable instead of stating N/A for the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) EALs, or listing each mode individually under the Abnormal Rad Level/Radiological Effluent and Hazard and Other Conditions Affecting Plant Safety sections.
10 CFR 50.109. Consequently, the staff did not perform a backfit analysis.
 
*
Using synonymous wording, for example:
*
rising or lowering vs. increasing and decreasing
*
greater than or equal to vs. at or above
*
less than or equal vs. at or below
*
greater than or less than vs. above or below
*
Adding site-specific equipment/instrument identification and/or noun names to EALs.
 
*
Changing the format of the EALs to conform to site-specific writers guides (e.g., numbering individual EALs, re-ordering individual EALs within an IC that does not affect the logic, etc.).
*
Combining like ICs that are exactly the same but have different operating modes as long as the intent of each IC is maintained and the overall progression of the EAL scheme is not affected.


RIS 2003-18, Sup 1
*
Any change to the IC and/or EAL, and/or basis wording, as stated in NEI 99-01, that does not alter the intent of the IC and/or EAL, i.e., the IC and/or EAL continues to:
*
Classify at the correct classification level
*
Logically integrate with other EALs in the EAL scheme
*
Ensure that the resulting EAL scheme is complete (i.e., classifies all potential emergency conditions)


===FEDERAL REGISTER NOTIFICATION===
RIS 2003-18, Supp 2 From Supplement 1 to RIS 2003-18 (emphasis added):
A notice of opportunity for public comment on this RIS was not published in the Federal Register because it is informational. NRC worked with NEI, industry representatives, members of the public, and other stakeholders to obtain information which was used in the development of this RIS.
A deviation is an EAL change where the basis scheme guidance differs in wording and is altered in meaning or intent, such that classification of the event could be different between the basis scheme guidance and the site-specific proposed EAL. Examples of deviations include the use of altered mode applicability, altering key words or time limits, or changing words of physical reference (protected area, safety-related equipment, etc.). 
Expanded clarification:
The following are examples of deviations:
*
Eliminating an IC.  This includes removing an IC from the Fission Product Barrier Degradation category because doing so impacts the logic of Fission Barrier ICs.


SMALL BUSINESS REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT FAIRNESS ACT OF 1996 The NRC has determined that this action is not subject to the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996.
*
Changing a Fission Product Barrier EAL from a LOSS to a POTENTIAL LOSS, or vice- versa.


PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT NOTIFICATION
*
This RIS does not request any information collections and, therefore, is not subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Action of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Changing a defined term where the intended meaning of the defined word is not maintained.
If you have any questions or wish to provide any feedback, please call the technical contact, listed below.


/RA/
*
                                          William D. Beckner, Chief Reactor Operations Branch Division of Inspection Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Any change to the IC and/or EAL, and/or basis, wording as stated in NEI 99-01 that alters the intent of the IC and/or EAL, i.e., the IC and/or EAL:
*
Does not classify at the classification level consistent with NEI 99-01
*
Is not logically integrated with other EALs in the EAL scheme
*
Results in an incomplete EAL scheme (i.e., does not classify all potential emergency conditions)
Use of 10 CFR 50.54(q) When Upgrading From NUMARC/NESP-007 EALs to NEI 99-01 EALs As discussed in RIS 2003-18, the NRC staff recognizes that certain EAL changes do not warrant NRC review and approval and that licensees may make changes to EALs without prior NRC approval when changes do not decrease the effectiveness of the emergency plan and continue to meet the standards of 10 CFR 50.47(b) and the requirements of Appendix E.  This supplement specifically clarifies the following statement from RIS 2003-18:
NUMARC/NESP-007 users implementing shutdown EALs or ISFSI EALs or updating EALs to include lessons learned from NEI 99-01, Revision 4, should implement changes under
10 CFR 50.54(q) since these changes are enhancements to the existing classification scheme.


===Technical Contact:===
RIS 2003-18, Supp 2 Licensees that decide to upgrade their NUMARC/NESP-007 EALs to NEI 99-01 EALs via
Greg A. Casto, DPR/NSIR
10 CFR 50.54(q) may determine that a few ICs or EALs from NEI 99-01 cannot be implemented at the site as intended in NEI 99-01.  Licensees can submit these specific ICs or EALs to the NRC for approval and update the remaining ICs or EALs in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(q).
                    301-415-4072 Email: gac@nrc.gov Attachment: List of Recently Regulatory Issue Summaries
However, the NRC expects the following information:
*
The other corresponding ICs in the applicable IC logic grouping, if applicable, should be provided to the NRC to ensure that the emergency class escalation logic is properly evaluated. (For example, if a licensee submits IC SS2 for prior approval, the NRC would also need to evaluate corresponding ICs SA2 and SG2 to determine the overall impact on the group of ICs.)
*
All supporting information related to why the IC or EAL could not be implemented as intended in NEI 99-01 shall be provided to the NRC (simplified plant system drawings, technical specification references, simplified electrical power drawings, etc.), as well as any applicable supporting information for evaluating an alternate IC or EAL.  Submittals should follow the guidance contained in RIS 2003-18, Supplement 1.


ML041550395                                      *See previous concurrence DOCUMENT NAME: C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML041550395.wpd OFFICE  DPR:NSIR    Tech Editor DPR:NSIR      DPR:NSIR        OE                  OGC
Good Industry Practices The use of good industry practices in the preparation of EAL change documents is encouraged by the NRC.  As EAL changes occur, licensees are expected to gain experience and share information with the industry.  Expectation of the content of EAL change packages can be provided by the NRC during pre-submittal conferences and may be beneficial in reducing regulatory burden through the consistent incorporation of acceptable practices by the licensee.
  NAME    GACasto      PEKleene*    EWWeis*      NLMamish*        JLieberman*          SCole*
  DATE    06/09/2004  06/09/2004  06/21/2004    06/24/2004      06/29/2004          07/02/2004 OFFICE  PMAS        OCIO        OES:IROB:DIPM A:SC:OES:IROB:DIPM        C:IROB:DIPM
  NAME    DLMcCain    BCStMary    CDPetrone        WDBeckner/for          WDBeckner DATE    07/072004    07/18/2004  07/12/2004      07/13/2004            07/13/2004


Attachment RIS 2003-18, Sup 1 LIST OF RECENTLY ISSUED
==BACKFIT DISCUSSION==
                                NRC REGULATORY ISSUE SUMMARIES
This RIS requires no action or written response.  Consequently, the NRC staff did not perform a backfit analysis.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Regulatory Issue                                            Date of Summary No.                  Subject                      Issuance      Issued to
_____________________________________________________________________________________
2004-11          Supporting Information Associated          06/29/2004 All submitters of proprietary with Requests For Withholding                        information to the Nuclear Proprietary Information                              Regulatory Commission.


2004-10          Preparation And Scheduling of             06/14/2004 All holders of operating licenses Operator Licensing Examinations                      for nuclear power reactors, except those who have permanently ceased operations and have certified that fuel has been permanently removed from the reactor vessel.
===FEDERAL REGISTER NOTIFICATION===
A notice of opportunity for public comment on this RIS was not published in the Federal Register because it is informational.  NRC worked with NEI, industry representatives, members of the public, and other stakeholders to obtain information used in developing this RIS.  A public meeting was held February 10, 2005, to discuss this supplement to RIS 2003-18.  (The meeting summary is available at ML050450434.)
SMALL BUSINESS REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT FAIRNESS ACT OF 1996 The NRC has determined that this action is not subject to the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996.


2004-09          Status on Deferral of Active              06/07/2004 All holders of materials licenses for Regulation of Ground-water                            uranium and thorium recovery Protection At In Situ Leach                          facilities.
RIS 2003-18, Supp 2 PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT NOTIFICATION
This RIS does not request any information collections and, therefore, is not subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Action of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).


Uranium Extraction Facilities
==CONTACT==
2004-08          Results of the License Termination        05/28/2004 All holders of operating licenses Rule Analysis                                        for nuclear power reactors, research and test reactors, as well as decommissioning sites.
If you have any questions or wish to provide any feedback, please call the technical contact, listed below.


2004-07          Release of Final Review Standard          05/19/2004 All holders of operating licenses (RS)-002, Processing                                for nuclear power reactors, all Applications for Early Site Permits                  applicants for early site permits (ESPs), and all prospective vendors of nuclear power plants in the United States.
/RA/
Christopher I. Grimes, Director Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation


2004-06          Independent Survey of Power                04/16/2004 All holders of operating licenses Reactor Licensees                                    for nuclear power reactors except those who have permanently ceased operations and have certified that fuel has been permanently removed from the reactor vessel.
===Technical Contact:===
Don A. Johnson, NSIR/DPR/EPD
301-415-4040
Email:  daj3@nrc.gov Note: NRC generic communications may be found on the NRC public Web site, http://www.nrc.gov, under Electronic Reading Room/Document Collections.


Note:             NRC generic communications may be received in electronic format shortly after they are issued by subscribing to the NRC listserver as follows:
ML051450482 DOCUMENT NAME: E:\\Filenet\\ML051450482.wpd OFFICE
                  To subscribe send an e-mail to <listproc@nrc.gov >, no subject, and the following command in the message portion:
Tech Editor NSIR:EPD
                                    subscribe gc-nrr firstname lastname
TL:NSIR:EPD
______________________________________________________________________________________
SC:NSIR:EPD
OL = Operating License CP = Construction Permit
D:NSIR:EPD
LA:PGCB
NAME
PKleene DJohnson SRosenburg EWeiss NMamish CHawes DATE
04/22/2005
06/23/2005
07/05/2005
07/06/2005
07/06/2005
    /    /2005 OFFICE
D:NSIR:DPR
TSS:IROB:DIPM
D:DLPM
OE
OGC (NLO)
OGC
NAME
ELeeds THBoyce/TTjader for LMarsh CNolan AFernandez DReddick DATE
07/06/2005
07/08/2005
07/13/2005
07/21/2005
08/18/2005
09/23/2005 OFFICE
PMAS
OIS
OES:IROB:DIPM
SC:OES:IROB:DIPM
BC:PGCB
D:DPR
NAME
DLMcCain/
AWMarkley MJRoss-Lee CJackson CIGrimes DATE
10/06/2005
10/13/2005
10/18/2005
10/20/2005
12/9/2005
12/12/2005
}}
}}


{{RIS-Nav}}
{{RIS-Nav}}

Latest revision as of 18:35, 15 January 2025

Use of Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 99-01, Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels, Revision 4, Dated January 2003
ML051450482
Person / Time
Issue date: 12/12/2005
From: Charemagne Grimes
NRC/NRR/ADRA/DPR
To:
Johnson D, NSIR/EPD 301-415-4040
References
NEI 99-01 RIS-03-018, Suppl 2
Preceding documents:
Download: ML051450482 (8)
v • d • e


UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 December 12, 2005 NRC REGULATORY ISSUE SUMMARY 2003-18, SUPPLEMENT 2, USE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE (NEI) 99-01,

METHODOLOGY

FOR DEVELOPMENT OF EMERGENCY ACTION LEVELS

REVISION 4, DATED JANUARY 2003

ADDRESSEES

All holders of operating licenses for nuclear power reactors and licensees that have permanently ceased operations and have certified that fuel has been permanently removed from the reactor vessel.

INTENT

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this regulatory issue summary (RIS) to supplement previously issued information in RIS 2003-18, Use of NEI 99-01, Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels, Revision 4, dated January 2003, and RIS 2003-18 Supplement 1, dated July 13, 2004.

The purpose of this supplement is to:

Supercede previously issued information in RIS 2003-18 and Supplement 1 regarding obtaining and documenting State and local governmental authority agreement to emergency action level (EAL) changes.

Provide more examples of EAL differences and deviations, as identified in reviews of EAL submittals, to ensure the consistency of future licensee EAL submittals and/or the consistency of licensee documentation for EAL changes made under 10 CFR 50.54(q).

Provide additional guidance on EAL upgrades from NUMARC/NESP-007 EALs to NEI 99-01 EALs.

This RIS requires no action or written response on the part of an addressee.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

The rule change to Section IV.B to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E (effective 4/26/05) removed the requirement to obtain State and local governmental authority agreement to EAL changes except when the EALs are initially implemented. However, licensees must continue to review EALs with State and local governmental authorities on an annual basis.

ML051450482

RIS 2003-18, Supp 2 The NRC is aware that licensees are considering seeking NRC approval for EAL upgrades from the NUMARC/NESP-007 scheme to the NEI 99-01 scheme rather than using the 10 CFR 50.54(q) process as referenced in RIS 2003-18. In a public meeting with NEI on January 26,

2005, industry representatives informed the NRC that licensees are reluctant to use the 10 CFR 50.54(q) process for EAL upgrades due to some confusion about what constitutes a deviation or difference.

The regulations governing the development and implementation of EALs for nuclear power licensees are contained in 10 CFR Part 50. Guidance documents used to review EAL schemes are identified in Regulatory Guide 1.101, Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Nuclear Power Reactors Revision 4, dated October 2003.

RIS 2003-18 describes the 10 CFR Part 50 sections and guidance references that pertain to EAL revisions. RIS-2003-18, Supplement 1, clarifies the technical positions on revising EALs.

The guidance in these documents remains applicable except as otherwise indicated.

SUMMARY OF ISSUE

State and County Approval According to a rule change to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E (effective 4/26/05), the licensee is only required to obtain State and local governmental authority agreement on the EALs during initial implementation. Subsequent changes to the EALs do not require State and local governmental authority agreement before implementation. However, licensees must continue to review EALs with State and local governmental authorities on an annual basis.

Generic Guidance When revising their Initiating Conditions (IC) or EALs, licensees should address the following guidelines:

As stated in NEI 99-01 (emphasis added):

The guidance presented here is not intended to be applied to plants as-is. The generic guidance is intended to give the logic for developing site-specific IC/EALs using site- specific IC/EAL presentation methods. Each utility will need to revise the IC/EALs to meet site-specific needs with regard to instrumentation, nomenclature, plant arrangement, and method of presentation, etc. Such revision is expected and encouraged provided that the intent of the generic guidance is retained. Deviations from the intent may be acceptable, but will need to be justified during regulatory review. Items associated with presentation, e.g., format, sequencing of IC/EALs, IC numbering, and recognition categories, are at the option of the utility.

RIS 2003-18, Supp 2 The generic guidance includes both ICs and example EALs. It is the intent of this guidance that both be included in the site-specific implementation. Each serves a specific purpose.

The IC is intended to be the fundamental criteria for the declaration, whereas, the EALs are intended to represent unambiguous examples of conditions that may meet the IC.

Verbatim compliance with the wording provided in the basis section of each IC is not necessary as long as there is enough information to support the IC and associated EALs and the intent of the EAL is maintained. Information in NEI 99-01 that is primarily used to assist licensees in developing their EALs and EAL Basis Document need not be incorporated into the licensees EAL Basis Document unless the licensee chooses.

Verbatim compliance with the wording in Sections 3.0, 4.0, and 5.0 of NEI 99-01 is not necessary as long as there is enough information to:

Support the scheme,

Explain the layout of the EAL Basis Document,

Explain the treatment of multiple events and emergency class upgrades,

Explain the treatment of emergency class downgrades,

Explain classification of transient events, and

Discuss operating mode applicability and other information deemed necessary by the licensee to support emergency event classifications.

Differences and Deviations From Supplement 1 to RIS 2003-18 (emphasis added):

A difference is an EAL change where the basis scheme guidance differs in wording but agrees in meaning and intent, such that classification of an event would be the same, whether using the basis scheme guidance or the site-specific proposed EAL. Examples of differences include the use of site-specific terminology or administrative re-formatting of site-specific EALs.

Expanded clarification:

Administrative changes that do not actually change the text are neither differences nor deviations. Likewise, any format change that does not alter the wording of the IC or EAL is considered neither a difference nor a deviation.

The following are examples of differences:

Choosing the applicable EAL based on plant type (BWR vs. PWR).

RIS 2003-18, Supp 2 *

Using a different numbering scheme than the NEI 99-01 scheme without changing the intent of the overall EAL scheme. However, licensees are encouraged to adopt the NEI 99-01 numbering convention to facilitate communication among licensees, and between licensees, the NRC, and State and local governmental authorities.

The NEI guidance specifically provides an option not to include an EAL if equipment for the EAL does not exist at the site (e.g., automatic real-time dose assessment capability and telemetered perimeter rad monitoring systems), and the licensee, therefore, does not include the EAL.

Pulling information from the basis section up to the actual EAL that does not change the intent of the EAL.

Stating ALL operating modes are applicable instead of stating N/A for the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) EALs, or listing each mode individually under the Abnormal Rad Level/Radiological Effluent and Hazard and Other Conditions Affecting Plant Safety sections.

Using synonymous wording, for example:

rising or lowering vs. increasing and decreasing

greater than or equal to vs. at or above

less than or equal vs. at or below

greater than or less than vs. above or below

Adding site-specific equipment/instrument identification and/or noun names to EALs.

Changing the format of the EALs to conform to site-specific writers guides (e.g., numbering individual EALs, re-ordering individual EALs within an IC that does not affect the logic, etc.).

Combining like ICs that are exactly the same but have different operating modes as long as the intent of each IC is maintained and the overall progression of the EAL scheme is not affected.

Any change to the IC and/or EAL, and/or basis wording, as stated in NEI 99-01, that does not alter the intent of the IC and/or EAL, i.e., the IC and/or EAL continues to:

Classify at the correct classification level

Logically integrate with other EALs in the EAL scheme

Ensure that the resulting EAL scheme is complete (i.e., classifies all potential emergency conditions)

RIS 2003-18, Supp 2 From Supplement 1 to RIS 2003-18 (emphasis added):

A deviation is an EAL change where the basis scheme guidance differs in wording and is altered in meaning or intent, such that classification of the event could be different between the basis scheme guidance and the site-specific proposed EAL. Examples of deviations include the use of altered mode applicability, altering key words or time limits, or changing words of physical reference (protected area, safety-related equipment, etc.).

Expanded clarification:

The following are examples of deviations:

Eliminating an IC. This includes removing an IC from the Fission Product Barrier Degradation category because doing so impacts the logic of Fission Barrier ICs.

Changing a Fission Product Barrier EAL from a LOSS to a POTENTIAL LOSS, or vice- versa.

Changing a defined term where the intended meaning of the defined word is not maintained.

Any change to the IC and/or EAL, and/or basis, wording as stated in NEI 99-01 that alters the intent of the IC and/or EAL, i.e., the IC and/or EAL:

Does not classify at the classification level consistent with NEI 99-01

Is not logically integrated with other EALs in the EAL scheme

Results in an incomplete EAL scheme (i.e., does not classify all potential emergency conditions)

Use of 10 CFR 50.54(q) When Upgrading From NUMARC/NESP-007 EALs to NEI 99-01 EALs As discussed in RIS 2003-18, the NRC staff recognizes that certain EAL changes do not warrant NRC review and approval and that licensees may make changes to EALs without prior NRC approval when changes do not decrease the effectiveness of the emergency plan and continue to meet the standards of 10 CFR 50.47(b) and the requirements of Appendix E. This supplement specifically clarifies the following statement from RIS 2003-18:

NUMARC/NESP-007 users implementing shutdown EALs or ISFSI EALs or updating EALs to include lessons learned from NEI 99-01, Revision 4, should implement changes under

10 CFR 50.54(q) since these changes are enhancements to the existing classification scheme.

RIS 2003-18, Supp 2 Licensees that decide to upgrade their NUMARC/NESP-007 EALs to NEI 99-01 EALs via

10 CFR 50.54(q) may determine that a few ICs or EALs from NEI 99-01 cannot be implemented at the site as intended in NEI 99-01. Licensees can submit these specific ICs or EALs to the NRC for approval and update the remaining ICs or EALs in accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(q).

However, the NRC expects the following information:

The other corresponding ICs in the applicable IC logic grouping, if applicable, should be provided to the NRC to ensure that the emergency class escalation logic is properly evaluated. (For example, if a licensee submits IC SS2 for prior approval, the NRC would also need to evaluate corresponding ICs SA2 and SG2 to determine the overall impact on the group of ICs.)

All supporting information related to why the IC or EAL could not be implemented as intended in NEI 99-01 shall be provided to the NRC (simplified plant system drawings, technical specification references, simplified electrical power drawings, etc.), as well as any applicable supporting information for evaluating an alternate IC or EAL. Submittals should follow the guidance contained in RIS 2003-18, Supplement 1.

Good Industry Practices The use of good industry practices in the preparation of EAL change documents is encouraged by the NRC. As EAL changes occur, licensees are expected to gain experience and share information with the industry. Expectation of the content of EAL change packages can be provided by the NRC during pre-submittal conferences and may be beneficial in reducing regulatory burden through the consistent incorporation of acceptable practices by the licensee.

BACKFIT DISCUSSION

This RIS requires no action or written response. Consequently, the NRC staff did not perform a backfit analysis.

FEDERAL REGISTER NOTIFICATION

A notice of opportunity for public comment on this RIS was not published in the Federal Register because it is informational. NRC worked with NEI, industry representatives, members of the public, and other stakeholders to obtain information used in developing this RIS. A public meeting was held February 10, 2005, to discuss this supplement to RIS 2003-18. (The meeting summary is available at ML050450434.)

SMALL BUSINESS REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT FAIRNESS ACT OF 1996 The NRC has determined that this action is not subject to the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996.

RIS 2003-18, Supp 2 PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT NOTIFICATION

This RIS does not request any information collections and, therefore, is not subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Action of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

CONTACT

If you have any questions or wish to provide any feedback, please call the technical contact, listed below.

/RA/

Christopher I. Grimes, Director Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Technical Contact:

Don A. Johnson, NSIR/DPR/EPD

301-415-4040

Email: daj3@nrc.gov Note: NRC generic communications may be found on the NRC public Web site, http://www.nrc.gov, under Electronic Reading Room/Document Collections.

ML051450482 DOCUMENT NAME: E:\\Filenet\\ML051450482.wpd OFFICE

Tech Editor NSIR:EPD

TL:NSIR:EPD

SC:NSIR:EPD

D:NSIR:EPD

LA:PGCB

NAME

PKleene DJohnson SRosenburg EWeiss NMamish CHawes DATE

04/22/2005

06/23/2005

07/05/2005

07/06/2005

07/06/2005

/ /2005 OFFICE

D:NSIR:DPR

TSS:IROB:DIPM

D:DLPM

OE

OGC (NLO)

OGC

NAME

ELeeds THBoyce/TTjader for LMarsh CNolan AFernandez DReddick DATE

07/06/2005

07/08/2005

07/13/2005

07/21/2005

08/18/2005

09/23/2005 OFFICE

PMAS

OIS

OES:IROB:DIPM

SC:OES:IROB:DIPM

BC:PGCB

D:DPR

NAME

DLMcCain/

AWMarkley MJRoss-Lee CJackson CIGrimes DATE

10/06/2005

10/13/2005

10/18/2005

10/20/2005

12/9/2005

12/12/2005


Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=RIS_2003-18,_Use_of_Nuclear_Energy_Institute_(NEI)_99-01,_Methodology_for_Development_of_Emergency_Action_Levels,_Revision_4,_Dated_January_2003&oldid=5382671"