ML23005A132
| ML23005A132 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/13/2022 |
| From: | George Tartal Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards |
| To: | |
| References | |
| RIN 3150-AK71, NRC-2020-0036, 20221205 | |
| Download: ML23005A132 (5) | |
Text
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Public Meeting Summary
Title:
Reporting Requirements for Nonemergency Events at Nuclear Pow er Plants Rulemaking
Meeting Identifier: 20221205
Date of Meeting: December 13, 2022
Location: Webinar
Type of Meeting: Information meeting with a question and answer session
Purpose of the Meeting: The purpose of this meeting was to provide stakeholders with information to facilitate comments on the regulatory basis for changes to reporting requirements for nonemergency events at nuclear power plants.
General Details: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff conducted an online public meeting on December 13, 2022, to facilitate public comme nts on the regulatory basis for changes to reporting requirements for nonemergency events at nu clear power plants. This meeting was intended to summarize information on the NRCs publ ication of the regulatory basis document (ML22108A004), provide information on providing formal comments, and describe next steps in the rule making process. The NRC previous ly held public meetings on this topic on November 4, 2021 (meeting number 20211342, summary ML21341B452) and December 9, 2021 (meeting number 20211475, summary ML21350A033). There were approximately 70 participants, including NRC staff and management, State representatives, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), nuclear power industry, non-gov ernmental organizations, trade press, and other members of the public.
George Tartal from the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Sa feguards started the meeting by welcoming all attendees and describing the purpose, agenda, and meeting logistics. He stated that the purpose of the meeting was to provide stakeholders wit h information to facilitate comments on the regulatory basis and noted that comments would not be accepted at this meeting. Mike King from the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulati on (NRR) provided opening remarks for the meeting and welcomed attendees.
Chris Speer from NRR presented background on the history of non emergency event notification regulations and the related petition for rulemaking submitted b y NEI. He also presented a brief summary of the regulatory basis, the evaluation criteria the st aff used, and the resultant recommendations. Mr. Steve Catron of NextEra Energy questioned why the NRC recommended to retain the requirements for reporting degraded a nd unanalyzed conditions, and the NRC staff responded that the 60-day licensee event repo rt (LER) is not timely enough considering that these potentially safety significant events ma y result in special inspections.
Mr. Tartal then summarized the costs and benefits of a potentia l rulemaking addressing the staffs recommendations. The net benefits for the rulemaking wo uld be a total of $4.8 million dollars. He also described some of the staffs assumptions made in this analysis, including the licensee burden for making each notification. Mr. Tartal then d iscussed the regulatory efficiency and reliability improvement related to these recommendations, a nd the categorical exclusion for environmental impact considerati ons. He also discussed the rati onale for why there would be no backfitting associated with these recommended actions, and the lack of specific information to quantify impacts on State, local and Tribal governments. Mr. Ta rtal then stated the regulatory basis concluded that there is sufficient basis for proceeding w ith rulemaking on these matters.
Mr. Jeff Semancic of the Connecticut Department of Energy and E nvironmental Protection then asked for clarity on how to assess reporting burden. Mr. Tartal explained that a licensees time assessing the plant condition to determine whether it needs to notify the NRC under these regulations would not be included in the reporting burden, but any time devoted to creating and delivering the notification would be included in the reporting burden. Mr. Edwin Lyman of the Union of Concerned Scientists then stated that the regulatory b asis did not adequately take into consideration the needs of the public for this information. Ms. Cini Powers of the New York State Department of Public Service stated that State and local authorities rely heavily on these public reports as they assess any actions they may need to take. Ms. Rani Franovich of the Breakthrough Institute asked the staff to clarify whether these recommendations would impact any of the LER requirements under 10 CFR 50.73, and Mr. Tartal replied that none of the LER requirements would be changed under these recommendations, rath er only the notification requirements under 10 CFR 50.72 are within scope. Mr. Tartal ad ded that eight of the 11 notifications also have a corres ponding LER. Mr. Steve Catron of NextEra Energy stated that, in response to some of the statem ents made in this meeting, licens ees take their obligation seriously to operate the plants safely, and that removing these requirements would relieve some of the time pressure to make decisions. Mr. Jeff Semancic added that the 10 CFR 50.72 requirements do not require control room personnel to make the notifications, and that licensees could be placing that burden on control room personnel as oppos ed to other staff. Mr. Ace Hoffman asked how much money does the industry or the NRC spend on training each year.
Mr. Tartal responded that the NRC does not have access to indus try estimates of annual training, but the regulatory basis made assumptions on training burden for NRC and industry associated with the recommended actions. Mr. William Freebairn of Platts asked whether the NRC evaluated the costs and benefits of not making these notifi cations available to the public.
Mr. Speer responded that this is an area where the NRC is looki ng for public comments to assist the NRC in better quantifying these impacts. Mr. Tony Le shinski stated his state would benefit from a longer public comment period, possibly through t he end of January 2023.
Mr. Tartal discussed the ways to obtain more information on the rulemaking docket and the available options for submitted a public comment. He described the NRCs next steps, which include the preliminary schedules for delivering a proposed rul e to the Commission in May 2024 and a final rule to the Commission in February 2026. Mr. Tony B rown of the Nuclear Energy Institute asked if NUREG-1022, Event Reporting Guidelines: 10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73, could be updated sooner than the planned rulemaking to address other potential improvements and clarifications. Mrs. Lisa Regner of NRR replied that the staff is considering short-term improvements to this document. Mr. Tartal adjourned the meeting.
Next Steps:
While the initial Federal Register notice (87 FR 67571; November 9, 2022) for this action stated that the public comment period would close on January 9, 2023, the NRC published a subsequent Federal Register notice (87 FR 79258; December 27, 2022) extending the public comment period through January 31, 2023. The NRC plans to devel op a proposed rule on this matter and deliver that proposed rule to the Commission in May 2024.
References:
- 12/13/2022 Public Meeting Notice - Notice of Public Meeting to Discuss the Regulatory Basis for Changes to Reporting Requirements for Nonemergency Ev ents at Nuclear Power Plants, November 22, 2022 (RIN 3150-AK71; NRC-2020-0036) (ADAMS Accession No. ML22326A257)
- 12/13/2022 - NRC Staff Presentation on the Regulatory Basis fo r Changes to Reporting Requirements for Nonemergency Events at Nuclear Power Plants, D ecember 8, 2022 (ADAMS Accession No. ML22342B163)
- 11/9/2022 - Federal Register notice, regulatory basis, request for comment - Reporting Requirements for Nonemergency Events at Nuclear Power Plants (8 7 FR 67571; November 9, 2022)
- 12/27/2022 - Federal Register notice, regulatory basis, extension of comment period -
Reporting Requirements for Nonemergency Events at Nuclear Power Plants (87 FR 79258; December 27, 2022)
MEETING ATTENDANCE
PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR NONEMERGENCY EVENTS AT NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS
WEBINAR
DECEMBER 13, 2022, 1:00 P.M. - 3:30 P.M. (Eastern Time)
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ryan Alexander Mike King Robert Beaton Paul Laflamme Brian Benney Chris Miller Howard Benowitz Meredith Neubauer Jason Carneal Andres Orozco Restrepo Julie Ezell Bo Pham Russell Felts Lisa Regner Dan Frumkin Carla Roque-Cruz Megan Gangewere Aaron Sanders Jim Gaslevic Christian Scott Tyler Hammock Alexa Sieracki Tara Inverso Chris Speer Don Johnson George Tartal
Public
Name Affiliation (if provided)
Sahar Azmat New Jersey State DEP Ernest Bates Southern Company Jana Bergman Curtiss Wright Tony Brown Nuclear Energy Institute Steve Catron NextEra Energy Clifford Chapin New York State DPS Christopher Courtenay Duke Energy Phil Couture Cecil Fletcher II Duke Energy Rani Franovich Breakthrough Institute William Freebairn SP Global Nicole Good Stars Alliance David Gullott Constellation Nuclear Ace Hoffman Anthony Leshinskie State Liaison Officer - Vermont Leigh Lloveras Breakthrough Institute Edwin Lyman Union of Concerned Scientists Kenneth Mack NextEra Energy Howard Mahan Entergy Enclosure Andrew Mauer Nuclear Energy Institute Stephen Meyer Certrec Patrick Mulligan New Jersey State DEP Marty Murphy Curtis Wright Ruben Papraniku New Jersey State DEP Cini Powers New York State DPS Tim Riti Nuclear Energy Institute Jeff Semancik CCP (Connecticut)
Carlos Sisco Winston & Strawn LLP Adam Stein Breakthrough Institute Justin Waring PSEG Nuclear Tony Zimmerman Duke Energy
Note: Attendance list based on Microsoft Teams participant list. This list does not include individuals who did not provide their last name either in registering for the meeting or by a follow-up email.