ML20128B681
| ML20128B681 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/24/1992 |
| From: | Jordan E NRC OFFICE FOR ANALYSIS & EVALUATION OF OPERATIONAL DATA (AEOD) |
| To: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19341G314 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-57FR28642, RULE-PR-50 AD03-1-014, AD3-1-14, NUDOCS 9302030139 | |
| Download: ML20128B681 (25) | |
Text
F r
- sm-i on a
/p %,% UNITED STATES
[ NUCLEAR REOULATORY COMMISSION g .E W ASWNGTON, D. C. 20b55 MAR 2 4 1992 HEMORANDUM FOR: James H. Taylor ;
Executive Director for Operations !
l FROM: Edward L. Jordan. Director Office for Analysis and Evaluation or Operational Data
SUBJECT:
PROPOSED HINOR RULEMAKING TO MODIFY OPERATING POWER REACTOR EVENT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 10 CFR 50.72 AND 50.73 Enclosed are:
(1) A Notico for Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) on minor modifications to nuclear power plant event reporting requirements, and the associated " Approved For Publication" form, for your signature following (4) below.
(2) Letters for OCA to send to the Congressional Committees noticing the forwarding of the NPR to the Federal Reaister.
(3) A weekly highlight to the Commission for issuance when the NPR is sent to the Federal Reaister.
(4) A Negative Consent paper for the Commission including the above NPR and a draft Regulatory Analysis to obtain Commission approval to publish the NPR.
After you have signed and dated the original NPR, and the associated " Approved for Publication" form, please return them to us together with your concurrence on the Congressional Committee letters. We will then coordinate as necessary withADM/RPB.
Following your approval to initiate the rulemaking activity on November 8, 1991, we have incorporated headquarters and regional staff comments on the draft rulemaking package. The final package being submitted has the concurrence of NRR, RES, ADh, and OGC The ACRS and the CRGR have deferred review until the final rulemaking stage, g20g139930129 50 57FR28642 PDR L m
-( ,
If you have any further questions, please call me on 492-4848,
/
L ordan, Direc Office [o Analysis and Evaluation '.
of Ope tional Data
Enclosures:
As stated e
-'f L&
s
,. 5
i .
4 approved for Publication The Commission delegated to the LDO (10 CFR 1.31(a)(3)) the authority to develop and promulgate rules as defined in the APA (5 U.S.C. 551(4)) subject to the limitations in NRC Manual Chapter 0103, Organization and functions, Office of the Executive Director for Operations, paragraphs 0213, 038, 039, and 0310.
The enclosed proposed rule, entitled " Minor Modifications to Nuclear Powr.
Reactor Event Reporting Requirements," will amend 10 CFR Part 50 to elimis a:
licensee reporting of certain Engineered Safety Feature (ESF) actuations currently required by 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73.
This proposed rule does not constitute a significant question of policy, nor does it amend regulations contained in 10 CFR Parts 7, 8, or 9 Subpart C concerning matters of policy. I, therefore, find that this rule is within the scope of my rulemaking authority and am proceeding to issue it.
Date James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations
4; 9
[7590-01)
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION-10 CFR PART 50~ ;
RIN 3150 AE12 Minor Modifications to Nuclear Power Reactor Event Reporting Requirements AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule. .
SUMMARY
- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission-(NRC) proposes to amend its regulations.to make minor modifications to the current nuclear power reactor event reporting requirements. The proposed amendments would. apply to all nuclear power reactor licensees and would delete reporting requirements for:
some events that-have been determined to be of little or no safety.
significance. These proposed amendments would reduce the-industry's reporting burden and the NRC's response burden in event review and assessment.
DATE: The comment period expires I75 days following publicationLin-the-Federal Register). Comments received after.this date will- be considered if it~is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to assure consideratiori only for comments received on-or before this date.
ADDRESSES:- Mail written comments to: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, ATTN: Docketing and Service Branch.
1
Ae i .
_i+
Deliver comments to One White Flint North, ll555 Rockville. Pike, Rockville, MD 20852, between_7:30 am and 4:15 pm on-federal workdays.
Copies of the draft regulatory analysis, the finding of no significant-impact, the supporting statement submitted to OMB, and' comments _ received may be examined at: The NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW., Lower Level, Washington DC 20555.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Raji Tripathi (10 CFR 50,73) or Eric Weiss (10 CFR 50.72), Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555. Telephone (301) 492-4435 and (301) 492-9005, respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Commission is proposing minor. changes to the current nuclear power-reactor event reporting requirements contained in 10 CFR 50.72, "Immediate Notification Requirements for Operating Nuclear Power Reactors," and 10 CFR-50.73, " Licensee Event Reporting System," as part of its ongoing activities to-improve its regulations.
In this regard, various NRC reviews of operating experience and the patterns of licensees' reporting.of operating events since_1984- have indicated that the reporting of certain types of events is not contributing useful information to the operating reactor events database and is no longer 2
L L -4 '
necessary. ,The unnecessary reports are consuming resources in preparation and review that would be better applied elsewhere.
Over the past several years, the NRC has increased its~ attention to event reporting issues to ensure uniformity, consistency, and-completeness in .
event reporting.- As a result, in September 1991, the NRC's Office for:
Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (AE00) issued for comment a draft NUREG-1022, Revision 1,1 " Event Reporting Systems 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR-50.73 -- Clarification of NRC Systems and Guidelines for Reporting." '
Following resolution of public comments, the NUREG will contain improved-guidance for event reporting. The NRC's continuing examination of reported-events during development of this document-indicated that certain types of events primarily . involving invalid engineered safety feature (ESF) actuations-are not important to safety.- Therefore, any ' resources expended. in reporting ,
these events could be better spent in other activities. For the same reasons, the NRC determined that ESF equipment actuations-need no longer be reported -if L the actuations occurred from non-ESF signals.
NRC'sevaluationofboththereported-eventssinceJanuary1984[when the existing rules first became effective, and the comments; received during
- E the Event Reporting Workshops conducted in Fall-1990, identifieo needed--
improvements in the rules. The NRC determined'that some events that involve only invalid ESF actuations are of little 'or no safety significance.
A free single copy may be requested by writing to the Distribution-and Mail-
-Services' Section, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC .20555 : A copy is also available for inspection or copying for' a fee at the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW,-Lower Level, Washington, DC 20555.
3
( .h_1 ,w
=.
e ,
m However, these events are currently reportable under 10 CFR. 50.72 (b)(2)(ii)-
and 10 CFR 50.73.(a)(2)(iv).- Examples of events in: this category. include <
invalid actuations of the reactor water clean-up (RWCU) system and the control-room emergency ventilation (CREV) system which actuate various system components but pose no safety concerns.
The final rules for the current event reporting regulations,10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73 (48 FR 168, August 29, 1983, and 48-FR 33850,_ July 26,-
1983, respectively), stated that ESF systems, including the reactor. protection.
system (RPS), are provided to mitigate the consequences of a significant-event. Therefore, ESFs should (1) work properly when called upon and (2) should not be challenged frequently or unnecessarily. The Statements of Consideration for these final Rules also stated that operation'of an ESF as part of a pre-planned operational procedure or test need not be reported. The.
Commission noted that ESF actuations,. including reactor trips', are frequently associated with significant plant transients and are indicative of events that are of safety significance. At that time, the Commission also required;all ESF actuations, including the RPS actuations, whether manual or automatic, valid or invalid -- except as noted, to be reported to the NRC by telephone within 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> of occurrence followed by a written Licensee Event Report (LER).
within 30 days of the incident. This requirement on timeliness of reporting remains unchanged.
The reported information is used by the NRC in. confirmation of the licensing bases, identification of precursors to severe core damage, reviews 4
y[*-
- '~
3, .
of management control systems, performance indication,1and the identification?
of actions to minimize unnecessary'actuations'of safety systems.-
i Discussion ,
Relaxing reporting requirements for certain ESF actuations, primarily invalid actuations, could save resources for both the industry and the NRC..
The Commission emphasizes that not all invalid ESF actuations would be exempt from reporting. The relaxations in event reporting requirements contained in the pror ssed rule would-apply only to a limited set of specifically defined' invalid ESF actuations. These events would include -invalid actuation,_ isola-tion, or realignment of a limited set of ESFs or-their equivalent systems, subsystems, or components (i.e.,- an invalid actuation, isolation',: or re-alignment of only the-RWCU system, or the CREV_ system, reactor _ building ventilation system, fuel building ventilation system,_or auxiliary building ventilation system). These types-of actuation / isolation / realignment events are of minimal safety significance because they result in the system-being in-a safe condition and contribute little to operating experience data. However, invalid actuations of other ESFs would continue to be reportable._ Reportable'
. invalid actuations would include emergency core cooling system isolations/
actuations, containment- isolation valve closures that affect cooling systems, main steam ~ flow, essential support systems, etc., containment spray- actuation, and residual heat removal system isolations. In addition'to the specified invalid ESF actuations, the proposed rule would exclude ESF actuations from
. signals that originated from non-ESF circuitry.
5 1
r
- a. , , - - -
'. a o ' '*
liowever, the Commission emphasizes that if an invalid ESF actuation .
reveals' a defect in the system so that- the system failed or would fai1 = to perform _its intended function, the event. continues to be reportable under If a condition or
~
other requirements of 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 CFR 50.73.
deficiency has (1) an adverse impact on safety-related equipment and conse- ,
quently on the ability to shut down the reactor and maintain it in a' safe' shutdown condition, (2) has a potential for significant radiological release or potential exposure to plant personnel or the general public, or (3) would compromise control room habitability, the event / discovery continues to be-reportable.
Invalid ESF actuations that would be excluded by this proposed rule, but occur as a part of a reportable event, would continue to be described as part-of the reportable event. That is, the proposed amendments are not intended to' preclude submittal of a complete, accurate, and thorough description- of an event that is otherwise reportable under 10 CFR 50.72 or 10 CFR 50.73. The-Commission is proposing to relax only the selected event reporting-requirements specified in this proposed rule. Licensees are still required under 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, " Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power
-Plants and Fuel Reprocessing-Plants," to address for corrective action events or conditions that are adverse to quality, whether they are reportable or not.
In addition, minimizing ESF actuations (such as RWCU isolations) to reduce operational radiation exposures associated with the investigat_ ion and recovery.
from the actuations, are consistent with ALARA requirements.
l l:
I 1: 6 e
1 tc '
The existing provisions in 10 CFR 50.72 (b)(2)(ii) and 10.CFR 50.73 (a)(2)(iv), require-the reporting of an event or condition-that'results-in-a ,
manual or automatic actuation of- an ESF, including the RPS, except when the-actuation results from or was part of-the pre-planned sequence during~ testing or reactor operation. A' pre-planned sequence implies th'a_t the procedural step-indicates the specific ESF or RPS actuation that will be generated and control room personnel are aware of the specific signal generation before. its occurrence or indication in the control room. However, if the ESF, including the RPS, actuates during the planned operation or test in a way that is not' part of the planned procedure, such as at the wrong step, the event is.
reportable.
The Commission proposes to make additional relaxations to event-reporting by excluding four additional categories of events as follows:
(1) The first category excludes events in which an invalid ESF or RPS actuation occurs when the system is already properly removed from service if all requirements.of plant procedures for removing equipment from service have been met. This would include required clearance documentation, equipment and control board tagging,-and properly positioned valves and power supply breakers.
(2) The second category excludes events in which an invalid ESF or RPS acttiation occurs after the safety function has already been completed (e.g., an invalid containment isolation signal while the-f i- 7 l
k
< 4 T,
containment isolation valves are.already: closed, or an' invalid - .
actuation of the RPS when all rods _-are fully' inserted)..
(3) The third category excludes events in which an invalid ESF_
actuation occurs that involves only a liniited set' of ESFs [i.e., _
when an invalid actuation, isolation, or realignment of.only the-reactor water clean-up-(RWCU) system, or any of the following ventilation systems: control room emergency ventilation (CREV);
system, reactor building ventilation system, fuel building ventie lation system, auxiliary building ventilation system, or-their-equivalent ventilation systems occurs), invalid actuations that -
involve other ESFs not specifically excluded, (such as_ emergency-- _
core cooling system isolations or actuations; containment' isolation valve closures 'that affect 'conling systems, main steam - .
flow, essential support systems, etc.; containment spray.
actuation; and, residual heat removal system-isolations), would continue to be reportable.
(4) The fourth- category excludes- events -that involve actuations of ESF '
components [which have both protective (ESF) and non-protective 2 (non-ESF) actuation circuitry) and the actuation results from a signal. originating in the non-ESF circuitry. For instance, in a ,
boiling water reactor, if an~RWCU system isolation occurs because of a high pressure signal, the incident is reportable because the
~
signal originated from the protective-(ESF) circuitry. However, the event-is not reportable if the RWCU isolation' occurs because-8
~
1 7, _ > - , :
of a high:. temperature signal originating.in the~non-ESF. circuitry.
'Although the same system components respond in:both instances, in the latter case the triggering mechanism.was intended only to protect the RWCV system resins'from damage, flowever, the '
Commission remains interested-in unplanned-reactor shutdowns-originating from any source (i.e., from the RPS as well as:other anticipatory or non-RPS signals). These events continue to be-reportable.
Licensees would continue to be required to submit LERs if a de_ficiency--
or condition associated with any of the invalid ESF actuations of the RWCU or:
the CREV systems (or other equivalent ventilation systems) satisfies any-reportability criteria under 550.72 and %50.73.
Impact of the Proposed Amendments Relaxing the current requirement for reporting of certain types of ESF '
actuations will reduce the industry's reporting burden-and the NRC's response ,
burden. This reduction would be consistent'with'the objectives and the requirements of_the Paperwork Reduction Act. The proposed amendments would-have minimal impact on the NRC's. ability _ to fulfil its mission to ensure-
- public health and safety because the reporting requirements that the-Commission proposes to delete have little or no safety significance.
It.is estimated that the' proposed changes to the existing rules will-result in.about 150 (or 5-10 percent) fs er Licensee Event Reports'each year.
9
a i 3 .
'Similar reductions are expected in the number of prompt event notifications-reportable under 10 CFR 50.72.
Submittal of Comments-The licensees are encouraged to submit their-estimates on impact-of the proposed amendments in their comments on the proposed rule.
Commenters are encouraged to submit, in addition to the original paper' copy, a copy of their comments in an electronic format on IBM PC DOS-compati-ble 3.5- or 5.??-inch, double-sided diskettes. Data files should be provided -
in Wordperfect 5.0, or 5.1. ASCII code is also acceptable, or if. formatted text is required, data files should be submitted in IBM Revisable Format' Text Document Content Architecture (RFT/DCA). format. l Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability The NRC has determined that this proposed regulation is the type of' action described in categorical exclusions 10 CFR 51.22 (c)(3)(ii) and (iii).
Therefore neither an environmental impact statement nor an environmental q assessment has been prepared for this proposed regulation.
Paperwork Reduction Act Statement u
This proposed rule amends information collection requirements that are subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501'et seq). This ,
10
a
.g rule has been submitted to the Office of Management _ and Budget for review and
. approval of the paperwork reduction requirements.
Because the rul.e would relax ' existing reporting requirements, public
-reporting burden for the collection of information is expected to-be reduced.
_It is~ estimated that about 150 fewer Licensee Event Repor.ts (NRC Form 366)-and-a similarly reduced number of prompt event notifications,-made pursuant-to
-10_CFR 50.72, will be required each year. The resulting reduction in burden-is estimated to average 50 hours5.787037e-4 days <br />0.0139 hours <br />8.267196e-5 weeks <br />1.9025e-5 months <br /> per response, including the time _for-reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering-and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection-of information. Send comments regarding the estimated burden reductions or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for-further reducing reporting burden, to the Information and Records Management-Branch (NMBB-7714), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,_DC 20555; _
and to the Desk Officer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, NE0B-3019, (3150-0011 and 3150-0104), Office of Management and Budget, Washington,-
DC 20503.
Regulatory Analysis The Commission has prepared a draft regulatory analysis on this proposed rule change. The analysis examines the costs and benefits of the alternatives-considered.by the-Commission. The draf t analysis is available for inspection' in the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW, Lower Level, Washington, DC 20555. Single copies of the draft analysis may be obtained from: Raji 3)
- si
'Tripathi, Office f6r ' Analysis and Evaluation of- Operational Data, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. -Telephone (301): 492 4435.
Regulatory Flexibility Certification In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 605 (B)), the Commission certifies that this rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small- entities. The ,
proposed rule affects only the event reporting requirements for operational nuclear power plants. The companies that own these plants do not fall within the scope of the definition of "small entities" set forth-in the Regulatory-Flexibility Act or the Small Business Size Standards set out in-regulations issued by the Small Business Administration Act in 13 CFR Part 121.
Backfit Analysis As required by 10 CFR 50.109, the. Commission has completed an. assessment of the need for Backfit Analysis for the proposed rule.. The proposed amend-
-ments include relaxations of certain existing requirements on reporting of information to the NRC. These changes neither impose. additional reporting requirements nor require modifications to the facilities or their licenses.
Alternatively, the Commission believes that recordkeeping andl reporting requirements are not subject to the Backfit Rule. Instead, recordkeeping and reporting requirements must be assessed against. criteria analogous to those-used in assessing NRC requests for information under 10 CFR 50.54(f). In the 4
12 t y
. ;, . ? -
Commission's view, it would be. extremely difficult to justify' any
~
=
recordkeeping or-informationirequest under the criteria.of. the Backfit Rule if -
the test of a'" substantial increase" in public protection:is viewed as an actual, quantifiable increase.
Accordingly, the NRC has concluded that the proposed rule'does not-constitute a backfit and, thus, a backfit analysis is not required.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 50 Antitrust, Classified information, Criminal penalty, Fire l prevention, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, -Nuclear power plants and reactors, Penalty, Radiation protection, Reactor siting criteria, Report-ing and recordkeeping.
For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of the-Atomic Energy Act of 1964, as amended, the Energy Reorganization Act 'of 1974, as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 553, the Commission is proposing to adopt 1the following amendments to 10 CFR Part 50.
PART 50 DOMESTIC LICENSING OF PRODUCTION AND-UTILIZATION' FACILITIES
- 1. The authority citation for Part 50 continues to read as follows::
AUTHORITY: Secs, 102,_103, 104, 105, 161, 182,.183,-186, 189, 68' Stat.
936, 937, 938,.948, 953,.954, 955, 956, as amended,.sec. 234, 83 Stat. 1244,-
as amended (42 U.S.C. 2132, 2133, 2134, 2135,-2201,-2232, 2233, 2236, 2239, 13
-J 2282); secs. 201, as amended,- 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244,.1246 (42 U S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846).
Section 50.7 also issued under Pub. L.95-601, sec. 10,-92 Stat. 2951:
(42 U.S.C. 5851). Section 50,10 also issued under secs. 101,-185,-68 Stat.
936,.955, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2131, 2235); sec'.-102, Pub. L.91-190, 83 Stat. 853 (42 U.S.C. 4332). Sections 50.13, and 50.54(dd), and 50.103 also issued under sec. 108, 68 Stat.- 939, as amended (42 U.S.C.-2138). Sections 50.23, 50.35, 50.55, and 50.56 also issued under sec. 185,-_68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2235). Sections 50.33a, 50.55a and Appendix Q also issued under sec. 102, Pub. L.91-190, 83 Stat. 853-(42 U.S.C. 4332). Sections-50.34 and 50.54 also issued under sec. 204, 88 Stat. 1245 (42 U.S.C. 5844). . Sections 50.58, 50.91, and 50.92 also issued under Pub. L.97-415, 96 Stat. 2073 (42_U.S.C.
2239). Section 50.78 also issued under sec. 122, 68 Stat. 939 (42 U.S.C.
2152), Sections 50.80 - 50.81 also issued under sec.184, 68 Stat. 954, as_.
amended (42 U.S.C. 2234). Appendix F also issued under sec.'187, 68 Stat. 955
-(42 U.S.C. 2237).
For the purposes of sec. 223, 68 Stat. 958, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2273);
s550.5, 50.46(a) and (b), and 50.54(c) are issued under s'ec.'161b, 68' Stat.
948, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201(b)); 5950.5, 50.7(a), 50.10(a)-(c), 50.34(a) and (e), 50.44(a)-(c), 50.46(a) and (b), 50.47(b), 50.48(a),-(c), (d),-and
-(e),50.49(a),50.54(a),(1),(i)(1),(1)-(n),_(p),-(q),.(t),;(v),and.(y),.
50.55(f),50.55a(a),(c)-(e),(g),andl(h),50.59(c),50.60(a),-50.62(b),
50.64(b), 50.65, and 50.80(a) and (b) are issued under sec. 1511, 68 Stat.
949, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201(i)); and s&50.49(d), (h), and'(j), 50.54(w),
L (z), (bb), (cc), and (dd), 50.55(e), 50.59(b), 50.61(b),.50.62(b), 50.70(a),-
i l
14 L
{_ i L -, . , .
50.71(a)-(c) andL(e), 50.72(a),-50.73(a) andL(b),. 50.74, 50.78, and 50.90 are:
-issued under $1610,-69 Stat. 950,-as amended (42 U.S.C.~2201(o)).- [
- 2. In 650.72, paragraph (b)(2)(ii):is revised to read as follows:~
550.72 Immediate notification requirementsL for operating nuclea' power:
reactors. ,
Non-Emergency Events. * * *
(b)
(2) Fnor-hour reports. *- * *
(ii) Any__ event lor condition that results in a manual or automatic-actuation of_any-engineered safety-feature (ESf), including the reactor-protection system (RPS), except when:
(A) The actuation results:from or is part of a pre-planned sequence-during testing or: reactor operation;---
T(B) The: actuation is-invalid and:
111 - Occurs while the system-is properlyEremoved from service;_ :
1211 Occurs after. the' safety function has been already' completed; o r.-
15
r- ,
3 c!: >
1111 Involves only the;following_ specific ESFs'oritheir .
t
-equivalent systems:
-(i) . Reactor water clean up system; (ii) Control room ' emergency ventilation' system;
-(iii) Reactor building-ventilation? system; (iv) Fuel buildi'ng ventilation" system; or-
-(v) Auxiliary building ventilation system.-
(C) The actuation: involves an ESF (except the RPS) and results- from a' signal that originated from non-ESF (e.g., control).circuitrya
- * * * ~*
- 3. In 550.73, paragraph (a)(2)(iv)_is revised:
Licensee Event Report System.
650.73 (a) Reportable events.. * -*
(2) The licensee shall report: * *- *
- (iv)- Any event or condition that= resulted in a manual or automatic ~
actuation of_any engineered safety feature (ESF)', including the reactor protection system _-(RPS), except when:
16
~.
n m
ex '
t.-
(A) The actuation resulted from or was;.part of<a_' pre-planned sequence during testing or reactor _-operation;;
(B) The actuation was-invalid and:
ill Occurred while the system was-properly removed from service;-
1]L]. Occurred after the safety function had- been. alreadyf completed; or 11). Involved only .the following specific ESFs or their equivalent systems: 1
_(i) Reactor water clean-up system; (ii) Control room emergency ventilation system;- ,
(iii) Reactor building ventilation: system;_
(iv) Fuel. building ventilation system; or (v) Auxiliary building ventilation system.
(C) The actuation involved an ESF-(except t'he RPS):and resulted from'a-signal that originated from non-ESF-(e.g,, control) circuitry.-
17-
v
. Dated at Rockville, MD, this day of , 1992.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission James M. Taylor, lxecutive Director for Operations 18
- . . - . . . _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ . _ . _ - - _ - - - - _ _ _ _ _ . - . - - - - .-_ _ _ ...._)
4-(s V .
& Y Ay
- o,, . UNITED STATES
[ .g . NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
^g j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20S55
\ *s ,*/
The Honorable Bob Graham, Chairman Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation Ccomittee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate Washington, DC 20510-
Dear Mr. Chairman:
The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC):has sent to the Office-of the Federal Register for publication the enclosed proposed amendment to the Commission's rules in 10 CFR Part 50. The amendment, if adopted,-would relax reporting (by telephone as well as in written Licensee Event Reports) of, certain events involving actuations of a limited set- of-specifically defined -
engineered safety features. These events have been determined to be of minimal safety significance. The Commission's review of such events over several hundred reactor-years of experience indicates that-the events have provided little useful information upon which to assess plant safety performance. Relaxing reporting requirements.on these events will- save the industry as well as the NRC resources which could be expended on matters of greater urgency. The proposed rule will have minimal impact on the NRC's ability to carry out its mission to. ensure public health and safety.
The Commission Is issuing the proposed. rule for public comment and has specifically requested comments with respect to assessment on incremental reduction in the licensees' resources.
Sincerely, Dennis K. Rathbun, Director-Office ofLCongressional Affairs
Enclosure:
As stated cc: Senator Alan K. Simpson
o .
,J. . ' .
we uq jo-g UNITED STATES -
8 o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I* h W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 l
The Honorable Philip R.- Sharp, Chairman Subcommittee on-Energy and Power Committee on Energy and-Commerce United' States House of-Representatives Washington. DC 20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has sent to the'0ffice .
of the Federal Register for publication the enclosed proposed amendment to the-Commission's rules in 10 CFR Part 50. The amendment, if adopted, would relax reporting (by telephone as well _ as in written Licensee Event Reports) of certain events involving actuations of a limited set of specifically defined engineered safety features. These events have been determined to be of minimal safety significance. The Commission's review of such events over several hundred_ reactor years of experience indicates that the events have provided little useful information upon which to assess plant safety-performance. Relaxing reporting requirements on these events will save the
- industry as well as the NRC resources which could be expended on matters of greater urgency. The proposed rule will have minimal impact on the NRC's ability to carry out its mission to ensure public health and safety.
The Commission is issuing the proposed rule for public comment and has specifically requested comments with respect to assessment on incremental reduction in the licensees' resources.
Sincerely, Dennis K. Rathbun, Director _.
Office of Congressional _ Affairs
Enclosure:
As-stated cc: Representative Carlos J. Moorhead
= --
.v
., . v-'
~
A*js>* *Cug
~
o
~g n
. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION -
a;
'[
h f WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
- %....../
The Honorable Peter Kostmayer, Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs United States House of Representatives ,
Washington, DC 20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has sent to the Office of the Federal Register for publication the enclosed proposed amendment = to the Commission's rules in'10 CFR Part 50. The amendment, if adopted, would relax reporting (by telephone as well as in written Licensee Event Reports) of' certain events involving actuations of a limited set of specifically defined engineered safety features. These events have been determined;to be of minimal safety significance. The Commission's review of such events over several hundred reactor-years of experience indicates that .the events have provided little useful information upon which to assess plant safety performance. Relaxing reporting requirements on'these events will save the industry as well as the NRC resources which could be expended on matters of greater urgency. The proposed rule would have minimal impact on.the NRC's-ability to carry out its mission to ensure public health and safety.
The Commission is issuing the proposed rule for public comment and has specifically requested comments with respect to assessment:on incremental reduction in the licensees' resources.
Sincerely, Dennis K. Rathbun, Director Office of Congressional' Affairs
Enclosure:
As stated cc: Representative John J. Rhodes L
r
'7 ..
2 v.
~The Honorable Bob Graham, Chairman Subconsnittee on Nuclear Regulation-Comittee on Environment and Public Works United. States Senate Washington, DC 20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I The United States Nuclear. Regulatory Commission (NRC) has sent to the Office of the Federal Register for publication the enclosed proposed amendment to the-Comission's rules in 10 CFR Part 50. The amendment, if adopted,' would' relax reporting (by telephone as well as in written Licensee Event Reports) of _ .
certain events involving actuations of a limited set'of specifically defined engineered safety feat.ures. These events have been determined to be of minimal safety significance. The Commission's review of such events over several hundred reactor-years of experience indicates that-the events have provided little uteful information upon which to assess plant safety performance. Relaxing reporting requirements on these events will save the industry as well as the NRC resources which could be expended on matters of greater urgency. The proposed rule will have minimal impact on the NRC's ability to carry out its mission to ensure public health and safety.
The Commission is issuing the proposed rule for public comment and has specifically requested comments with respect'to assessment on incremental reduction in the licensees' resources.
Sincerely, L
Dennis K. Rathbun, Director '
Office of. Congressional Affairs '
(Identical letters to:)
Enclosure:
The Honorable Philip R. Sharp, Chairman As stated Subcommittee on Energy and Power Committee on Energy and Commerce cc: Senator Alan K. Siropson United States House of. Representatives Washington, DC '20515 Distribution: cc: Representative Carlos J. Moorhead. '
RTripathi, TPAB/AE00 .
JCrooks, TPAB/AEOD The Honorable Peter Kostmayer, Chair:aan PBaranowsky,TPAB/AE0D Subcon:mittee on Energy and the Envf romnent.
VBenaroya, AE00 Committee on Interior and Insular Affair:i TNovak, AEOD United States House of Representatives Dross, AE0D Washington, DC 20515 EJordan, AE0D cc: Representative John J. Rhodes DRathbun, CA DSP R/F
'AE00 R/F CA R/F
(*see previous concurrence)
TPAB* TPAB* C:TPAB* D:DSP* DD:4EOD .- EDO D:CA RTripathi JCrooks PBaranowsky TNovak DRpts o dan JTaylor Dfsathbun 3/13/92 3/13/92 3/16/92 3/17/92 3[ /92, / 92 3/ /92 3/ /92 enjuwe spsw