[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 243 (Tuesday, December 18, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65141-65144]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-30927]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 18, 2001 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 65141]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 54
[Docket No. PRM 54-1]
Union of Concerned Scientists; Denial of Petition for Rulemaking
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Denial of petition for rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is denying a petition
for rulemaking submitted by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS or
the petitioner) (PRM 54-1). The petitioner requested that the NRC amend
its regulations to address concerns about potential aging degradation
of liquid and gaseous radioactive waste management systems. The bases
for the denial are that the liquid and gaseous radioactive waste
management systems are not involved in design and licensing basis
events considered for license renewal and that the existing regulatory
process is acceptable for maintaining the performance of the
radioactive waste systems throughout the period of extended operation
in order to keep exposures to radiation at the current levels below
regulatory limits consistent with the conclusions made in the
applicable regulations.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the petition for rulemaking, the public comments
received, and the NRC's letter of denial to the petitioner are
available for public inspection or copying for a fee, at the NRC's
Public Document Room, at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland. These documents are also available
at the NRC's rulemaking Web site at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen S. Koenick, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-1239, e-mail [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
By letter dated May 3, 2000, UCS submitted a petition for
rulemaking (PRM) seeking to revise 10 CFR parts 54 and 51. The
petitioner requested that the NRC regulations governing requirements
for renewal of operating licenses for nuclear power plants be amended
to address concerns about potential aging degradation of liquid and
gaseous radioactive waste systems. The petitioner believes the
degradation from aging of piping and components of liquid and gaseous
radioactive waste systems at nuclear power facilities may result in
increased probability of and/or consequences from design and licensing
bases events. In addition, the petitioner believes that the conclusions
made in Appendix B to 10 CFR part 51, subpart A, that public and
occupational exposures to radiation will continue at the current levels
below regulatory limits would only be valid if these systems are
covered by aging management programs throughout the license renewal
term.
A notice of receipt of the petition was published in the Federal
Register on July 10, 2000 (65 FR 42305). The comment period closed on
September 25, 2000. The NRC received letters from 12 commenters. Eleven
of the comment letters opposed the petition. Ten of those letters were
from nuclear utilities and the 11th was from the Nuclear Energy
Institute (NEI). The 12th commenter, a member of the public, supported
the petition. A discussion of the comments is provided in this
document.
This rulemaking petition was included as part of a petition
pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 in which the petitioner detailed concerns
related to the review of the license renewal application submitted by
the owner of the Hatch Nuclear Plant. Specifically, the petitioner was
concerned that the license renewal application for the Hatch facility
did not address deficiencies it believed existed in the aging
management of the liquid and gaseous radioactive waste systems. The
petitioner concluded that the requirements pertaining to renewal of
operating licenses for Hatch and other nuclear power plants do not
adequately address degradation from aging of liquid and gaseous
radioactive waste systems. The NRC issued an October 18, 2000, letter
to UCS, ``Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206.'' The Director's
Decision disagreed with the petitioner's contentions and concluded that
the Hatch Nuclear Plant was being operated consistent with its design
and licensing bases because the material condition of piping, tanks,
and other components of the liquid and gaseous radioactive waste
management systems was being properly inspected and maintained.
The Petition
UCS requests the NRC revise 10 CFR part 54, and part 51 if
appropriate, to specify that the liquid and gaseous radioactive waste
management systems must be covered by aging management programs during
the license renewal term. With respect to 10 CFR part 54, the
petitioner states that potential aging degradation of the liquid and
gaseous radioactive waste management systems at the Hatch Nuclear Plant
identified in the accompanying 10 CFR 2.206 petition, may result in an
increase in the probability of and/or consequences of design and
licensing bases events. In addition, the petitioner states that the
potential aging degradation may also apply to liquid and gaseous
radioactive waste management systems at other plants in the United
States. The petitioner cites 10 CFR 54.4 (a)(1)(iii) \1\ as the scoping
criterion that has been interpreted in previous license renewal
applications to exclude the liquid and gaseous radioactive waste
management systems from aging management consideration under the rule.
The petitioner also requests 10 CFR part 51 be revised, if appropriate,
to clarify that the liquid and gaseous radioactive waste management
systems must be covered by aging management programs during the license
renewal term. The petitioner states that the conclusions made in
Appendix B to 10 CFR part 51, subpart A, that radiation exposures to
the public and occupational exposures to workers during the license
renewal term will continue at current levels below regulatory limits,
were predicated on the liquid and gaseous radioactive waste management
systems not experiencing greater failure rates throughout the
[[Page 65142]]
license renewal term. However, aging degradation of the radioactive
waste management systems could lead to an increase in component failure
rates, thereby, invalidating the conclusions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``The capability to prevent or mitigate the consequences of
accidents which could result in potential offsite exposures
comparable to those referred to in Sec. 50.34(a)(1),
[Sec. 50.67(b)(2); sic], or Sec. 100.11 of this chapter, as
applicable.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Comments on the Petition
The NRC received letters from 12 commenters. Eleven of the comment
letters opposed the petition. Ten of those letters were from nuclear
utilities and the 11th was from NEI. The comments opposed to the
petition were similar in nature and will be discussed together. The
12th comment was from a member of the public who supported the
petition. Summaries of the comments and NRC's responses follow.
Comments opposed to the petition: The NEI comments were endorsed by
each of the utilities providing comments. NEI recommended that the NRC
deny the petition on the following basis: ``The design and licensing
basis of the liquid and gaseous radwaste systems are sufficiently
conservative such that the required analyses demonstrate that the
assumed catastrophic failure of components in the systems will result
in doses substantially below 10 CFR Part 100 guidelines and consistent
with 10 CFR part 20 guidelines [emphasis added]. In other words, the
radiological inventory in these systems is controlled and limited, and
a postulated event or malfunction will not adversely impact public
health or safety. Thus, there is no safety benefit to including these
systems within the scope of license renewal for either aging management
reviews (part 54) or environmental impacts (part 51).''
Response: The NRC agrees in principle with the comments opposing
the petition because the liquid and gaseous radioactive waste
management systems are conservatively designed to ensure that the
consequences of catastrophic failures of components will be well below
the scoping threshold for license renewal. However, the commenters
provide a limited basis for denying the petition and do not address the
petitioner's assertion about the conclusions made in appendix B to 10
CFR part 51, subpart A. However, as set forth below in the ``Reasons
for Denial,'' the NRC staff has concluded that the current regulatory
process is adequate to manage the performance of these systems without
additional aging management consideration, so that radiation exposures
to members of the public and occupational exposures will remain at
current levels below regulatory limits throughout the license renewal
term.
Comment supporting the petition: The commenter generally supported
the petition and was also concerned about coatings in general, their
application, and their degradation. In addition, the commenter
discussed the application of coatings to dry casks for storing spent
nuclear fuel and the hydrogen gas ignition event at Point Beach Nuclear
Plant on May 28, 1996.
Response: The commenter did not provide any additional information
on coatings as they apply to radioactive waste management systems. The
commenter's discussion on coatings, in general, and the application to
dry casks for storing spent nuclear fuel are not relevant to the issue
of radioactive waste management system functionality. Therefore, they
do not support the petition. However, for information on use of
coatings under nuclear plant operating licenses, the NRC issued Generic
Letter 98-04, ``Potential for Degradation of the Emergency Core Cooling
System and the Containment Spray System After a Loss-of-Coolant-
Accident Because of Construction and Protective Coating Deficiencies
and Foreign Material in Containment,'' dated July 14, 1998, and
Regulatory Guide 1.54, Revision 1, ``Service Level I, II, and III
Protective Coatings Applied to Nuclear Plants,'' dated July 2000. Both
of these regulatory documents are relevant to coatings under nuclear
plant operating licenses.
With respect to coatings for dry cask storage, specifically, the
hydrogen gas ignition event at Point Beach Nuclear Plant related to dry
cask storage, the NRC issued NRC Bulletin 96-04, ``Chemical, Galvanic,
or Other Reactions in Spent Fuel Storage and Transportation Casks,''
dated July 5, 1996. The information requested in the bulletin and the
subsequent safety evaluations of the requested information are relevant
to the commenter's concerns.
Reasons for Denial
1. Potential Aging Degradation of the Radioactive Waste Management
Systems May Increase the Probability of and/or Consequences of Design
and Licensing Bases Events
The petitioner argues that radioactive waste management systems
should be covered by aging management because potential aging
degradation may increase the probability of and/or consequences from
design and licensing bases events.
The NRC does not agree that aging degradation of these systems
would increase the probability of and/or consequences of design basis
events that would necessitate consideration within the scope of the
license renewal. The scope of license renewal was based on the NRC's
determination that with the possible exception of certain plant
systems, structures, and components, the regulatory process is adequate
to ensure that the licensing bases of all currently operating plants
provide and maintain an acceptable level of safety. Also, the plant-
specific licensing basis must be maintained during the renewal term in
the same manner and to the same extent as during the original licensing
term. Based on this determination, the scope of the rule focuses on
systems, structures, and components that are of principal importance to
the safety of the plant.\2\ As the petitioner concedes, the liquid and
gaseous radioactive waste management systems have no intended functions
which are considered by the Commission to be of principal importance to
the safety of the plant (that is why these systems do not fall within
the scope of systems, structures, and components for which aging
management must be considered for license renewal). Furthermore, the
consequences of any failure of a radioactive waste component were
analyzed during the initial license review and are bounded by the 0.5
rem acceptance criterion, which is a small fraction of the 10 CFR part
100 limits used in the scoping criteria of license renewal cited by the
petitioner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``Statements of Consideration,'' for 10 CFR part 54 [60 FR
22464; May 8, 1995].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the related 10 CFR 2.206 petition on the Hatch Nuclear Plant,
the petitioner did not identify any new failure mechanisms or
consequences associated with operations of the liquid or gaseous
radioactive waste management systems or any intended functions that
prevent or mitigate consequences of design basis accidents that would
cause the NRC to reconsider its determination not to specifically
include radioactive waste management systems within the scope of
license renewal pursuant 10 CFR part 54. In the absence of such new
information, the NRC continues to believe that the current regulatory
process is acceptable to manage the performance of these systems
throughout the license renewal term without the need for additional
aging management considerations. Therefore, part 54 adequately
maintains public health and safety as issued and does not need to be
revised to include radioactive waste management systems.
[[Page 65143]]
2. Aging Degradation of the Radioactive Waste Management Systems Could
Lead to an Increase in Component Failure Rates; thereby, Invalidating
the Conclusions Made in Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 51, Subpart A
The petitioner claims that the conclusions made in Appendix B to 10
CFR part 51, subpart A are predicated on the assumption that components
of the liquid and gaseous waste management systems do not experience
greater failure rates throughout the license renewal term.
In addressing environmental effects in Appendix B to 10 CFR part
51, the Commission determined that the impact of radiological exposures
to the pubic and occupational exposures would be ``small.'' In the
context of assessing radiological impacts, this ``small'' significance
determination was defined in Footnote 3 of Table B-1 of Appendix B to
10 CFR part 51, Subpart A as impacts that do not exceed permissible
levels in the Commission's regulations. The data supporting Appendix B
were contained in NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement
for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants'' (hereinafter the GEIS).
Contrary to the petitioner's assertion, the conclusions in the GEIS
relied on the current regulatory process which manages the performance
of the radioactive waste management systems to control radioactivity in
effluents to below permissible levels, irrespective of any system
degradation. For radiation exposures to the public, the GEIS states,
``Radiation doses to members of the public from current operation of
nuclear power plants have been examined from a variety of perspectives
and the impacts were found to be well within design objectives and
regulations in each instance. No effect of aging that would
significantly affect the radioactive effluents has been identified.''
The GEIS concludes, ``No mitigation measures beyond those implemented
during the current term license would be warranted because current
mitigation practices have resulted in declining public radiation doses
and are expected to continue to do so.'' For occupational exposures,
the GEIS concludes, ``the average dose increase of 5 to 8 percent to
the typical plant worker would still maintain doses well below
regulatory limits. Therefore, occupational radiation exposure during
the term of the renewed license meets the standard of small
significance. No mitigation measures beyond those implemented during
the current term license would be warranted because the ALARA process
continues to be effective in reducing radiation doses [emphasis
added].'' These GEIS findings were therefore based upon the existence
of and successful implementation of radiation control and mitigation
practices by licensees to comply with the NRC regulatory requirements
with respect to radiation exposures, irrespective of the cause.
For general protection against ionizing radiation, licensees must
comply with 10 CFR part 20, ``Standards for Protection Against
Radiation.'' The regulations contain requirements for radiation
protection programs and specify both occupational and public exposure
limits. The underlying requirement governing radiation protection is to
maintain occupational doses and doses to members of the public as low
as is reasonably achievable (ALARA). In addition to complying with NRC
standards, licensees must comply with the Environmental Protection
Agency's environmental radiation standards contained in 40 CFR part
190, ``Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Nuclear Power
Operations.''
Early industry experience demonstrated that licensees generally
maintained exposures to radiation and releases of radioactivity in
effluents at levels well below 10 CFR part 20 limits. To enhance the
regulatory framework for 10 CFR part 20 for assuring that releases of
radioactivity in effluents are ALARA, the NRC issued 10 CFR 50.34a, 10
CFR 50.36a,\3\ and Appendix I to 10 CFR part 50.\4\ To comply with
these regulations, licensees must identify design objectives, and the
means to be employed, for keeping levels of radioactive material in
effluents to unrestricted areas ALARA during normal operations,
including expected operational occurrences. The licensees' Technical
Specifications require that operating procedures for the control of
effluents be established and followed; that equipment installed in the
radioactive waste system is maintained and used; and that effluent
releases are reported. To implement the Technical Specifications, the
licensees are required to establish a surveillance and monitoring
program to detect and measure radioactivity levels in effluents. If
there is an increase of radioactivity in effluents beyond Technical
Specifications, irrespective of the cause, then a licensee must
identify the cause, take corrective actions, and return the
radioactivity levels in effluents to within Appendix I to 10 CFR part
50 design objectives. Subsequent to the Technical Specifications being
exceeded, the licensee must submit a report to the NRC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 10 CFR 50.34a, ``Design Objectives for Equipment to Control
Releases of Radioactive Material in Effluents--Nuclear Power
Reactors,'' and Sec. 50.36a, ``Technical Specifications on Effluents
From Nuclear Power Reactors'' [35 FR 18385; December 3, 1970].
\4\ Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50, ``Numerical Guides for Design
Objectives and Limiting Conditions for Operation To Meet the
Criterion ``As Low As Is Reasonably Achievable'' for Radioactive
Material in Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Effluents' [40
FR 19442; May 5, 1975].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For occupational radiation exposures, 10 CFR part 20 contain both
occupational exposure limits and the ALARA requirement. To meet these
requirements, licensees have radiation protection programs which
routinely monitor plant workers for radiation exposure when working in
radiation areas, including areas that contain the radioactive gaseous
and liquid waste management systems. Operational experience has
demonstrated that the licensees have been effective in maintaining
occupational doses ALARA. There is nothing to suggest--and the
petitioner cites no new information in support of a supposition--that
licensees are unable or unwilling to address ALARA taking into account
any possible failures of radioactive waste management systems resulting
from aging degradation.
Aside from the licensees practices and programs for ALARA and
Technical Specifications compliance, the NRC has an inspection program
that includes the liquid and gaseous radioactive waste management
systems. Although these systems have historically been considered to
have a low risk significance because of the nuclear industry's
compliance with the ALARA design objectives in appendix I to 10 CFR
part 50, routine, periodic inspections are required in order to
maintain confidence that the systems are actually maintaining doses
from radioactive effluents ALARA. Thus, the liquid and gaseous
radioactive waste management systems are explicitly identified in NRC
Inspection Procedure 71122, ``Public Radiation Safety.'' The objective
of the inspection is to verify that the licensee is providing adequate
protection of public health and safety from exposure to radioactive
material released into the public domain as a result of the routine
operation of nuclear power plants. The inspections focus on both the
gaseous and liquid effluent treatment systems and the radiological
environmental monitoring programs. There is also a corresponding
inspection procedure for occupational radiation safety. The primary
objective of NRC Inspection Procedure 71121, ``Occupational Radiation
Safety,'' is to
[[Page 65144]]
gather information to verify that a licensee is meeting the objective
of ensuring adequate protection of worker health and safety from
exposure to radiation from radioactive material during routine
operation.
In addition to performing these inspection procedures, NRC resident
inspectors regularly tour the plant, including areas containing
radioactive waste management systems. If a degraded condition is
identified by the licensee or reported to the licensee by the NRC, the
condition is evaluated and corrective action taken as appropriate in
accordance with the plant's corrective action program. In addition,
condition reports are trended by licensees. Further evaluation is done
and appropriate corrective actions are taken if an adverse trend is
identified. Periodic inspections of the corrective action program are
conducted in accordance with NRC Inspection Procedure 71152,
``Identification and Resolution of Problems,'' to verify that licensees
are identifying and correcting plant problems. The regulatory oversight
process increases public confidence and complements the performance-
based regulations that establish exposure limits and design objectives
to not only meet those limits but to keep radiological dose levels
ALARA.
In summary, the NRC has regulatory requirements and licensees
implement programs and practices that provide reasonable assurance that
exposures to radiation will remain within permissible levels consistent
with Appendix I to 10 CFR part 50 design objectives for public
exposures and within 10 CFR part 20 limits and ALARA for occupational
exposures, irrespective of the cause. The Commission has determined
that maintaining doses within these design objectives and dose limits
represent ``small'' environmental consequences. The petitioner did not
raise any information that would challenge the conclusions of the GEIS
that the impacts of radiation doses to the public and occupational
exposures will be ``small'' for the license renewal term.
Conclusion
The NRC staff finds that the information presented in the petition
does not support rulemaking to revise 10 CFR parts 51 and 54 to include
aging management of the liquid and gaseous radioactive waste management
systems during the license renewal term. If new information in the
future provides a basis that aging degradation of the liquid and
gaseous radioactive waste management systems needs aging management
consideration under 10 CFR parts 51 and 54, then the NRC may revisit
the need for rulemaking.
For the reasons cited in this document, the NRC denies the
petition.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day of December, 2001.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William D. Travers,
Executive Director for Operations.
[FR Doc. 01-30927 Filed 12-17-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P