Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendations 2.1, 2.3, and 9.3 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Event
ICR 201208-3150-002 · OMB 3150-0211 · Historical Active
⚠️ Notice: This information collection may be outdated. More recent filings for OMB 3150-0211 can be found here:
Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendations 2.1, 2.3, and 9.3 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Event
Extension without change of a currently approved collection
In accordance with 5 CRF 1320, the information collection is approved for three years.
table that charts list comparision
Inventory as of this Action
Requested
Previously Approved
02/29/2016
36 Months From Approved
02/28/2013
525
0
485
457,502
0
461,067
0
0
0
Following events at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear power plant resulting from the March 11, 2011, earthquake and subsequent tsunami, and in response to requirements contained in Section 402 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act (Public Law 112-074), the NRC sought an expedited clearance from OMB to allow the collection of information from power reactor licensees pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f). OMB approved this clearance, which will expire on September 30, 2012. The NRC is resubmitting this collection to the OMB under the normal clearance processes. The information requested includes:
--Seismic and flooding hazard reevaluations to determine if further regulatory action is necessary
--Walkdowns to confirm compliance with the current licensing basis and provide input to the hazard reevaluations
--Analysis of the Emergency Preparedness capability with respect to staffing and communication ability during a prolonged multiunit event
The emergency clearance request was approved on March 6, 2012 as a new collection with a total burden of 1,383,200 hours and 1,456 responses (annualized to 461,067 hours and 485.3 responses).
The current request is for 1,372,506 hours and 1,576 responses (annualized to 457,502 hours and 525.3 responses), a decrease of 3,565 annualized hours and an increase of 40 responses.
As discussed in the comments resolution section, NEI challenged some areas of the NRC's burden estimate. Although the NRC is confident in its original assessment, it is recognized that there are a number of uncertainties estimating the burden of such a large effort. Therefore, the NRC increased its burden estimate in these locations. The estimates for to conduct an SPRA, SMA, flooding hazard reevaluation, integrated assessment for flooding were increased by approximately 30%. The estimates for communications and staffing analysis were increased 500%. Although the burden estimates for the requirements were increased, no new requirements were imposed as part of this renewal submission.
In addition, 4,400 hours and 110 responses were added to account for submission of responses indicating an inability to comply with requirements. Subsequent to submission of the initial clearance request, licensees identified a dependence between implementing a recent rulemaking and their response for the EP assessment. Specifically, it was identified that the changes necessary for the new rule would need to be made prior to responding to the Staffing portions of the EP assessment. Additionally, recognizing the additional complications introduced from this interface, the NRC increased the burden estimate for responding as well. As a result, licensees will submit letters indicating that they will be unable to comply with the requirements in the EP assessment in the timeframes requested.
There is a change in methodology used to estimate burden for seimic risk assessments and flooding hazard reevaluations due to the fact that the current request takes into account the accrual of burden over time. These activities require licensees to perform analyses and submit reports up to seven years after receiving the 50.54(f) letters from the NRC. The original emergency clearance request included burden that would be incurred outside of the three year clearance period, whereas the current request includes burden for only those information collection activities that are estimated to be conducted during the next three years.
The increase in responses from the original request is due to the addition of 6 respondents: 2 reactors in the process of resuming licensing, and 2 Combined License (COL) applicants (2 units each). The power plant licensees will be asked to perform all information collections (seismic and flooding reevaluations and walkdowns and emergency preparedness evaluations). Reactors resuming licensing will be asked to perform seismic and flooding reevaluations and emergency preparedness evaluations, but not walkdowns, as they have not yet completed construction. COL applicants will be asked to submit emergency preparedness evaluations only. The addition of these respondents was determined to be necessary after submission of the original request, and will provide information from these licensees that is not available from any other source.
On behalf of this Federal agency, I certify that the collection of information encompassed by this request complies with 5 CFR 1320.9 and the related provisions of 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(3).
The following is a summary of the topics, regarding the proposed collection of information, that the certification covers:
(i) Why the information is being collected;
(ii) Use of information;
(iii) Burden estimate;
(iv) Nature of response (voluntary, required for a benefit, or mandatory);
(v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and
(vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control number;
If you are unable to certify compliance with any of these provisions, identify the item by leaving the box unchecked and explain the reason in the Supporting Statement.
50-54(f) letter to licensees.docx
50-54(f) burden comparison.xlsx
Guidance for Seismic Margin Assessment.pdf
50.54(f) SS revised 2-4.doc
10 CFR 50.54(f) Request to Licensees for Seismic, Flooding, and Emergency Preparedness Information