[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 20, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-23202]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: September 20, 1994]
VOL. 59, NO. 181
Tuesday, September 20, 1994
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 50
RIN 3150-AF06
Technical Specifications
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to amend
its regulations pertaining to technical specifications for nuclear
power reactors. The proposed rule would codify criteria for determining
the content of technical specifications. These criteria were developed
in recognition of the overly broad use of technical specifications to
impose requirements, diverting both NRC and licensee attention from the
more important requirements in these documents to the extent that it
has resulted in an adverse but unquantifiable impact on safety. Each
licensee covered by these regulations may voluntarily use the criteria
as a basis to propose the relocation of existing technical
specifications that do not meet any of the criteria from the facility
license to licensee-controlled documents. The voluntary conversion of
current technical specifications in this manner is expected to produce
an improvement in the safety of nuclear power plants through a
reduction in unnecessary plant transients and more efficient use of NRC
and industry resources.
DATES: Comment period expires December 5, 1994. Comments received after
this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the
Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received
on or before this date.
ADDRESSES: Mail written comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, ATTN: Docketing and Service
Branch.
Deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland,
between 7:45 am and 4:15 pm on Federal workdays.
Copies of comments received may be examined and copied for a fee at
the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW. (Lower Level),
Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher I. Grimes, Chief,
Technical Specifications Branch, Division of Operating Reactor Support,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Telephone: (301) 504-1161.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Section 182a. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (Act), as amended
(42 U.S.C. 2232), mandates the inclusion of technical specifications in
licenses for the operation of production and utilization facilities.
The Act requires that technical specifications include information
concerning the amount, kind, and source of special nuclear material,
the place of use, and the specific characteristics of the facility.
That section also states that technical specifications shall contain
information the Commission requires through regulation to enable it to
find that the utilization of special nuclear material will be in accord
with the common defense and security and will provide adequate
protection of public health and safety. Finally, that section requires
technical specifications to be made a part of any license issued.
The Commission promulgated Sec. 50.36, ``Technical
Specifications,'' which implements Section 182a. of the Atomic Energy
Act on December 17, 1968 (33 FR 18610). This rule delineates
requirements for determining the contents of technical specifications.
Technical specifications set forth the specific characteristics of the
facility and the conditions for its operation that are required to
provide adequate protection of the health and safety of the public.
Specifically, Sec. 50.36 requires the following:
Each license authorizing operation of a production or
utilization facility of a type described in Sec. 50.21 or Sec. 50.22
will include technical specifications. The technical specifications
will be derived from the analyses and evaluation included in the
safety analysis report, and amendments thereto, submitted pursuant
to Sec. 50.34. The Commission may include such additional technical
specifications as the Commission finds appropriate.
Technical specifications cannot be changed by licensees without
prior NRC approval. However, since 1969, there has been a trend toward
including in technical specifications not only those requirements
derived from the analyses and evaluation included in the safety
analysis report but also essentially all other Commission requirements
governing the operation of nuclear power reactors. This extensive use
of technical specifications was due in part to a lack of well-defined
criteria (in either the body of the rule or in some other regulatory
document) for what should be included in technical specifications. This
use has contributed to the volume of technical specifications and to
the several-fold increase in the number of license amendment
applications to effect changes to the technical specifications since
1969. It has diverted both NRC staff and licensee attention from the
more important requirements in these documents to the extent that it
has resulted in an adverse but unquantifiable impact on safety.
On March 30, 1982 (47 FR 13369), the NRC published in the Federal
Register a proposed amendment to part 50. The proposed rule would have
revised Sec. 50.36, ``Technical Specifications,'' to establish a new
system of specifications divided into two general categories. Only
those specifications contained in the first general category as
technical specifications would have become part of the operating
license and would have required prior NRC approval for any changes.
Those specifications contained in the second general category would
have become supplemental specifications and would not have required
prior NRC approval for most changes. The NRC review of the first
general category of specifications would have been the same as that
currently performed for technical specification changes, which are
amendments to the operating license. For the second category,
supplemental specifications, the licensee would have been allowed to
make changes within specified conditions without prior NRC approval.
The NRC would have reviewed these changes when they were made and would
have done so in a manner similar to that currently used for reviewing
design changes, tests, and experiments performed under the provisions
of Sec. 50.59. Because of difficulties with defining the criteria for
dividing the technical specifications into the two categories of the
proposed rule and because of other higher priority licensing work, the
proposed amendment was deferred.
In the early 1980s, the nuclear industry and the NRC staff began
studying whether the existing system of establishing technical
specification requirements for nuclear power plants needed improvement.
During this time frame, an NRC task group known as the Technical
Specifications Improvement Project (TSIP) and a Subcommittee of the
Atomic Industrial Forum's (AIF) Committee on Reactor Licensing and
Safety performed two studies of this issue.\1\ The overall conclusion
of these studies was that many improvements in the scope and content of
technical specifications were needed and that a joint NRC and industry
program should be initiated to implement these improvements. Both
groups made specific recommendations which are summarized as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\SECY-86-10, ``Recommendations for Improving Technical
Specifications,'' dated January 13, 1986, contains both
``Recommendations for Improving Technical Specifications,'' NRC
Technical Specifications Improvement Project, September 30, 1985,
and ``Technical Specifications Improvements,'' AIF Subcommittee on
Technical Specifications Improvements, October 1, 1985.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) The NRC should adopt the criteria for defining the scope of
technical specifications proposed in the AIF and TSIP reports. Those
criteria should then be used by the NRC and each of the nuclear steam
supply system vendor owners groups to completely rewrite and streamline
the existing Standard Technical Specifications (STS). This process
would result in the transfer of many requirements from control by
technical specification requirements to control by other mechanisms
[e.g., the final safety analysis report (FSAR), operating procedures,
quality assurance (QA) plan] that would not require a license amendment
or prior NRC approval when changes were needed. The new STS should
include greater emphasis on human factors principles in order to make
the text of the STS clearer and easier to understand. The new STS
should also provide improvements to the bases section of technical
specifications, which gives the purpose for each requirement in the
specification.
(2) A parallel program of short-term improvements in both the scope
and substance of the existing technical specifications should be
initiated in addition to developing new STS as stated in Recommendation
(1).
On February 6, 1987 (52 FR 3788), the NRC published in the Federal
Register for public comment an Interim Policy Statement on Technical
Specification Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors containing
proposed criteria in response to Recommendation (1). These criteria
were generally derived from the criteria proposed in the AIF and TSIP
reports and were modified slightly on the basis of discussions between
the NRC staff and the industry. The public comment period for the
interim policy statement expired on March 23, 1987.
The criteria were developed with the intention that they would
apply to limiting conditions for operation (LCOs). The NRC staff
believed that the safety limits needed to remain as is in the technical
specifications because of their more direct link to protection of the
physical barriers that guard against the uncontrolled release of
radioactivity. At the time the criteria were developed, the industry
did not wish to address administrative controls and design features in
the effort to improve the STS. Later, however, both the industry and
the NRC staff realized that it would be beneficial to include upgraded
administrative controls and design features in the improved STS, and
these were handled separately from the application of the criteria to
the LCOs.
The NRC has developed a program for short-term improvements as
described in Recommendation (2). These are known as ``line-item''
improvements and are generic improvements developed and promulgated by
the NRC staff for voluntary adoption by licensees.
Subsequently, improved vendor-specific STS were developed and
issued by the NRC in September 1992. The improved STS were published as
the following NRC reports:
NUREG-1430, ``Standard Technical Specifications, Babcock
and Wilcox Plants''
NUREG-1431, ``Standard Technical Specifications,
Westinghouse Plants''
NUREG-1432, ``Standard Technical Specifications,
Combustion Engineering Plants''
NUREG-1433, ``Standard Technical Specifications, General
Electric Plants, BWR/4''
NUREG-1434, ``Standard Technical Specifications, General
Electric Plants, BWR/6''
Copies of NUREGs may be purchased from the Superintendent of
Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, by calling (202) 275-2060
or by writing to the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government
Printing Office, P.O. Box 37082, Washington, DC 20013-7082. Copies are
also available from the National Technical Information Service, 5825
Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161.
These improved STS were the result of extensive technical meetings
and discussions among the NRC staff, industry owners groups, vendors,
and the Nuclear Management and Resources Council (NUMARC).
Finally, on July 22, 1993 (58 FR 39132), the Commission published a
Final Policy Statement on Technical Specifications Improvements for
Nuclear Power Reactors, which incorporated experience and lessons
learned since publication of the interim policy statement. The interim
policy statement identified three criteria to be used to define which
of the current technical specification requirements should be retained
or included in technical specifications and which LCOs could be
relocated to licensee-controlled documents, as follows:
Criterion 1: Installed instrumentation that is used to detect, and
indicate in the control room, a significant abnormal degradation of the
reactor coolant pressure boundary.
Criterion 2: A process variable, design feature, or operating
restriction that is an initial condition of a design basis accident or
transient analysis that either assumes the failure of or presents a
challenge to the integrity of a fission product barrier.
Criterion 3: A structure, system, or component that is part of the
primary success path and which functions or actuates to mitigate a
design basis accident or transient that either assumes the failure of
or presents a challenge to the integrity of a fission product barrier.
The interim policy statement also stated that, in addition to
structures, systems, and components captured by the three criteria, it
was the Commission's policy that licensees retain in the technical
specifications LCOs for a specified list of systems that operating
experience and probabalistic safety assessment had generally shown to
be important to public health and safety. In the final policy
statement, the Commission retained this thought as a fourth criterion
to capture those requirements that operating experience or
probabilistic safety assessment show to be significant to public health
and safety. The final policy statement also addressed comments received
on the interim policy statement and described the Commission's intent
with regard to use of the criteria and their codification through
rulemaking.
The Commission believes that amending Sec. 50.36 to include the
four criteria contained in the final policy statement could codify a
viable, potentially safety-enhancing and cost-saving method for
technical specification improvement. The Commission encourages
licensees to use the improved STS as the basis for plant-specific
technical specifications. As stated in the final policy statement, the
Commission will place the highest priority on requests based on the
criteria for individual license amendments that are used to evaluate
all of the LCOs for an individual plant to determine which LCOs should
be included in the technical specifications. Related surveillance
requirements and actions would be retained for each LCO that remains in
the technical specifications. Each LCO, action, and surveillance
requirement should have supporting bases.
In addition, the Commission will also entertain requests to adopt
portions of the improved STS, even if the licensee does not adopt all
STS improvements. These portions will include all related requirements
and will normally be developed as line-item improvements by the NRC
staff. The Commission encourages all licensees who submit technical
specification related submittals based on these criteria to emphasize
human factors principles.
LCOs that do not meet any of the criteria, and their associated
actions and surveillance requirements, may be proposed for relocation
from the technical specifications to licensee-controlled documents,
such as the FSAR. The criteria may be applied to either standard or
custom technical specifications. The Commission will also consider the
criteria in evaluating future generic requirements for inclusion in
technical specifications.
During individual technical specification conversions, a backfit
analysis will be performed in cases of nonvoluntary addition of new
requirements from the improved STS to individual plant technical
specifications, unless the staff-suggested additional changes are
needed to make the changes requested by the licensee acceptable from
the standpoint of adequate protection or compliance with NRC
regulations, in which case the request may be denied without the
additional items.
The Commission requests comments on the criteria being proposed for
inclusion in Sec. 50.36 and, particularly, on Criterion 4 and what
guidelines the Commission should use in defining ``significant to
public health and safety.''
Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability
The Commission has determined under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, as amended, and the Commission regulations in
Subpart A of Part 51, that this rule, if adopted, would not be a major
Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human
environment and would not degrade the environment in any way.
Therefore, the Commission concludes that there will be no significant
impact on the environment from this proposed rule. This discussion
constitutes the environmental assessment and finding of no significant
impact for this proposed rule; a separate assessment has not been
prepared.
Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
This proposed rule does not contain a new or amended information
collection requirement subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing requirements were approved by the
Office of Management and Budget, approval number 3150-0011.
Regulatory Analysis
The Commission has determined that a regulatory analysis is not
required for this proposed rule. The Commission believes the intent of
the regulatory analysis has been met through the extensive
consideration given to the development of the Final Policy Statement on
Technical Specifications Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors and
the improved STS, both of which involved an opportunity for public
comment. The criteria being added to Sec. 50.36 are identical to those
contained in the final policy statement and have been used by the NRC
and the nuclear power industry to define the content of technical
specifications since September 1992. The criteria will continue to be
used even if this proposed rule is not adopted. The proposed rule does
not impose any requirements but, rather, allows nuclear power reactor
licensees to voluntarily use the criteria to relocate existing
technical specifications that do not meet any of the criteria to
licensee-controlled documents. The NRC staff also uses these criteria
to determine whether technical specifications are appropriate to
provide continued regulatory control over new requirements or positions
that have been justified consistent with the backfit rule.
The Commission considered the need for and consequences of this
proposed action when it made the decision to not only publish the
criteria in the final policy statement but also to codify the criteria
through rulemaking. Appropriate alternative approaches to this action
have been identified and analyzed over the life of the Technical
Specifications Improvement Program, beginning with an earlier attempt
to define the content of technical specifications through rulemaking.
As described in the background discussion, the Commission published a
proposed amendment to Sec. 50.36 (47 FR 13369) on March 30, 1982.
However, because of difficulties with defining criteria for technical
specifications and because of other higher priority licensing work, the
rule change was deferred. In February 1987, the Commission published an
interim policy statement on Technical Specification Improvements and in
July 1993, published the final policy statement. During review of the
final policy statement, the Commission concluded that the four criteria
should be codified in a rule. Thus, alternative approaches to
regulatory objectives have been identified and analyzed, and the
Commission has decided that there is no clearly preferable alternative
to codifying the four criteria in a rule. With regard to evaluation of
values and impacts of alternatives, the Commission believes there is no
difference in the values or impacts of implementing the criteria
through use of the final policy statement or through a rule, except
that the criteria are more readily available to future users in a rule
than in a policy statement.
Regulatory Flexibility Certification
In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 [5 U.S.C.
605(b)], the Commission certifies that, if promulgated, this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. This proposed rule affects only the licensing and operation
of nuclear power plants. The companies that own these plants do not
fall within the scope of the definition of ``small entities'' as given
in the Regulatory Flexibility Act or the Small Business Size Standards
in regulations issued by the Small Business Administration at 13 CFR
part 121.
Backfit Analysis
The NRC has determined that the backfit rule, Sec. 50.109, does not
apply to this proposed rule and, therefore, a backfit analysis is not
required because these amendments do not involve any provisions that
would impose backfits as defined in Sec. 50.109(a)(1).
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 50
Antitrust, Classified information, Criminal penalties, Fire
protection, Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear power plants and
reactors, Radiation protection, Reactor siting criteria, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons given in the preamble and under the authority of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization
Act of 1974, as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 553, the NRC is proposing to
adopt the following amendment to 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, 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. 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, 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).
2. In Sec. 50.36, paragraphs (c) (2) and (3) are revised to read as
follows:
Sec. 50.36 Technical specifications.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) Limiting conditions for operation.
(i) Limiting conditions for operation are the lowest functional
capability or performance levels of equipment required for safe
operation of the facility. When a limiting condition for operation of a
nuclear reactor is not met, the licensee shall shut down the reactor or
follow any remedial action permitted by the technical specifications
until the condition can be met. When a limiting condition for operation
of any process step in the system of a fuel reprocessing plant is not
met, the licensee shall shut down that part of the operation or follow
any remedial action permitted by the technical specifications until the
condition can be met. In the case of a nuclear reactor not licensed
under Sec. 50.21(b) or Sec. 50.22 of this part or fuel reprocessing
plant, the licensee shall notify the Commission, review the matter, and
record the results of the review, including the cause of the condition
and the basis for corrective action taken to preclude recurrence. The
licensee shall retain the record of the results of each review until
the Commission terminates the license for the nuclear reactor or the
fuel reprocessing plant. In the case of nuclear power reactors licensed
under Sec. 50.21(b) or Sec. 50.22, the licensee shall notify the
Commission if required by Sec. 50.72 and shall submit a Licensee Event
Report to the Commission as required by Sec. 50.73. In this case,
licensees shall retain records associated with preparation of a
Licensee Event Report for a period of three years following issuance of
the report. For events which do not require a Licensee Event Report,
the licensee shall retain each record as required by the technical
specifications.
(ii) A technical specification limiting condition for operation of
a nuclear reactor must be established for each item meeting one or more
of the following criteria:
(A) Criterion 1. Installed instrumentation that is used to detect,
and indicate in the control room, a significant abnormal degradation of
the reactor coolant pressure boundary.
(B) Criterion 2. A process variable, design feature, or operating
restriction that is an initial condition of a design basis accident or
transient analysis that either assumes the failure of or presents a
challenge to the integrity of a fission product barrier.
(C) Criterion 3. A structure, system, or component that is part of
the primary success path and which functions or actuates to mitigate a
design basis accident or transient that either assumes the failure of
or presents a challenge to the integrity of a fission product barrier.
(D) Criterion 4. A structure, system, or component which operating
experience or probabilistic safety assessment has shown to be
significant to public health and safety.
(iii) A licensee is not required to modify technical specifications
that are included in any license issued before [THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF
THE FINAL RULE] to satisfy the criteria in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this
section. However, for technical specification amendments a licensee
proposes after [THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FINAL RULE], the criteria in
paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section provide an acceptable scope for
limiting conditions for operation.
(3) Surveillance requirements. Surveillance requirements are
requirements relating to test, calibration, or inspection to assure
that the necessary quality of systems and components is maintained,
that facility operation will be within safety limits, and that the
limiting conditions for operation will be met.
* * * * *
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day of September, 1994.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John C. Hoyle,
Acting Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 94-23202 Filed 9-19-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
