1

Rulemaking1CEm Resource

From: RulemakingComments ResourceSent: Wednesday, March 16, 2016 10:39 AMTo: Rulemaking1CEm ResourceSubject: Comment on ANPR-26, 50, 52, 73, and 140 - Regulatory Improvements for

DecommissioningAttachments: Tab C - 02-09-16 Tavares.pdf

DOCKETED BY USNRC—OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

SECY-067 PR#: ANPR-26, 50, 52, 73, and 140 FRN#: 80FR72358 NRC DOCKET#: NRC-2015-0070 SECY DOCKET DATE: 3/15/16 TITLE: Regulatory Improvements for Decommissioning Power Reactors COMMENT#: 065

TOWN OF PLYMOUTH

February 9, 2016

Annette Vietti-Cook Mail Stop 0-16G4

11 Lincoln Street

Plymouth, Massachusetts 02360

FAX: (508) 830-4140

Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff

To Whom It May Concern:

Board of Selectmen Town Manager

(508) 747-1620 ext. 100

Human Resources (508) 747-1620 ext. 101

The Town of Plymouth, Massachusetts, Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station host community since 1972, is pleased to provide the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission feedback related · to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Docket No. NRC-2015-0070).

Please find the Town of Plymouth's feedback, in response to the series of questions posed in the docket, attached for your reference.

In addition to the specific feedback, the Town of Plymouth would like to share feedback that relates to two issues not addressed in the docket.

First, the Town of Plymouth respectfully requests additional rulemaking hearings take place in · a variety of locations across the U.S. Given Plymouth's limited financial resources, fully participating in a rulemaking process centered on the NRC's headquarters .has already proven challenging. It is likely that a number of communities across the nation are in a similar position. Plymouth encourages the NRC to hold additional rulemaking hearings in the host communities, or at the regional level where the closure is due to take place, or underway.

In addition, the Town of Plymouth respectfully requests that host communities actively and substantively participate in the decommissioning process on a continual basis. The Nuclear Energy Institute serves as a unified industry voice and has formed a Decommissioning Task Force to advise the NRG. Plymouth strongly recommends that the NRC support a similar framework for host communities. Plymouth believes it is also important that host communities provide advice and guidance to the NRC on

.... '-'

1

Printed on Recycled Paper

decommissioning issues,· related to economic, fiscal, employment, and environmental impacts.

The Town of Plymouth looks forward to working cooperatively with the NRC in the coming years as the decommissioning process for Entergy's Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station evolves. If there are any questions related to the feedback, provided above and in the attached document, please do not hesitate to contact the Town Manager's Office at 508-747-1620, ext. 100.

Sincerely,

!(-&wr-~ Kenneth Tavares, Chair Plymouth Board of Selectmen

C: Senator Elizabeth Warren Senator Edward Markey Congressman William Keating Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker Attorney General Maura Healey Representative Viriato deMacedo Representative Mathew Muratore Representative Thomas Calter Representative Randy Hunt

2

TOWN OF PLYMOUTH

_ 11 LINCOLN ST. PLYMOUTH, MASSACHUSETTS 02360 r~-------------------- - ---------~------------·---:--!

[_~~J.\f\.Jf'-J_lf'.J§_~_l2§/_§_!:Q~_f\i'l~N~J

* 50% RECYCLED PAPER 30°/, POST-CONSUMER

.:snoc:JCToN

r:tFEB 2016

Annette Vietti-Cook Mail Stop 0-16G4 Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

I f\i] 1-" ,.,_,,. ___ ,, ____ ,,, •'.)

2t1555$0Ci01 J 1t1111.1.1, 1I111111jI•111t11' •''I 1I1I1111,,, 1' I·,,,, .. t .JI I'' 1 • l'

Tow

n of

Ply

mou

th, M

assa

chus

etts

Fee

dbac

k U

.S. N

ucle

ar R

egul

ator

y C

omm

issi

on’s

Adv

ance

d N

otic

e of

Pro

pose

d R

ulem

akin

g

(Doc

ket N

o. N

RC

-201

5-00

70)

Dat

ed: F

ebru

ary

10, 2

016

1

A.

QU

ESTI

ON

S R

ELAT

ED T

O E

MER

GEN

CY

PREP

AR

EDN

ESS

REQ

UIR

EMEN

TS F

OR

DEC

OM

MIS

SIO

NIN

G

POW

ER R

EAC

TOR

LIC

ENSE

ES

ITEM

D

ESC

RIP

TIO

N

TOW

N O

F PL

YMO

UTH

’S F

EED

BA

CK

EP

-3

a. P

rese

ntly

, lic

ense

es a

t dec

omm

issi

onin

g si

tes

mus

t mai

ntai

n th

e fo

llow

ing

capa

bilit

ies

to in

itiat

e an

d im

plem

ent e

mer

genc

y re

spon

se a

ctio

ns:

Cla

ssify

and

dec

lare

an

emer

genc

y, a

sses

s re

leas

es o

f rad

ioac

tive

mat

eria

ls, n

otify

lice

nsee

pe

rson

nel a

nd o

ffsite

aut

horit

ies,

take

miti

gativ

e ac

tions

, and

requ

est o

ffsite

ass

ista

nce

if ne

eded

. W

hat o

ther

asp

ects

of o

nsite

EP

and

resp

onse

ca

pabi

litie

s m

ay b

e ap

prop

riate

for l

icen

sees

at

deco

mm

issi

onin

g si

tes

to m

aint

ain

once

the

requ

irem

ents

to m

aint

ain

form

al o

ffsite

EP

are

di

scon

tinue

d?

Exis

ting

resp

onse

act

ions

sho

uld

rem

ain

in p

lace

du

ring

deco

mm

issi

onin

g an

d un

til 1

80 d

ays

follo

win

g th

e te

rmin

atio

n of

the

deco

mm

issi

onin

g pr

oces

s an

d th

e re

mov

al o

f spe

nt fu

el s

tora

ge.

b. T

o w

hat e

xten

t wou

ld it

be

appr

opria

te fo

r lic

ense

es a

t dec

omm

issi

onin

g si

tes

to a

rrang

e fo

r of

fsite

ass

ista

nce

to s

uppl

emen

t ons

ite re

spon

se

capa

bilit

ies?

For

exa

mpl

e, li

cens

ees

at

deco

mm

issi

onin

g si

tes

wou

ld m

aint

ain

agre

emen

ts

with

offs

ite a

utho

ritie

s fo

r fire

, med

ical

, and

law

en

forc

emen

t sup

port.

Lice

nsee

s at

dec

omm

issi

onin

g si

tes

shou

ld m

aint

ain

agre

emen

ts w

ith o

ffsite

aut

horit

ies

for f

ire, m

edic

al,

and

law

enf

orce

men

t sup

port

, as

wel

l as

loca

l el

ecte

d of

ficia

ls s

uch

as m

ayor

s an

d bo

ards

of

sele

ctm

en.

Com

mis

sion

ers

shou

ld c

onsi

der t

he v

alue

in th

e co

oper

ativ

e ag

reem

ent a

nd g

rant

pro

cess

to th

e St

ate

and

host

com

mun

ity.

Thes

e ag

reem

ents

wou

ld

assi

st g

over

nmen

t and

offs

ite re

spon

se

orga

niza

tions

in c

arry

ing

out f

unct

ions

rela

ting

to

emer

genc

y pr

epar

edne

ss a

nd re

spon

se in

the

even

t of

any

acc

iden

ts o

r oth

er u

npla

nned

occ

urre

nces

as

soci

ated

with

dec

omm

issi

oned

reac

tors

and

with

th

e co

nstr

uctio

n an

d op

erat

ion

of s

pent

fuel

sto

rage

fa

cilit

ies.

Tow

n of

Ply

mou

th, M

assa

chus

etts

Fee

dbac

k U

.S. N

ucle

ar R

egul

ator

y C

omm

issi

on’s

Adv

ance

d N

otic

e of

Pro

pose

d R

ulem

akin

g

(Doc

ket N

o. N

RC

-201

5-00

70)

Dat

ed: F

ebru

ary

10, 2

016

2

At a

min

imum

em

erge

ncy

prep

ared

ness

and

re

spon

se re

quire

men

ts f o

r dec

omm

issi

onin

g re

acto

rs a

nd s

pent

fuel

sto

rage

faci

litie

s sh

ould

in

corp

orat

e th

e fo

llow

ing

into

coo

pera

tive

agre

emen

ts a

nd g

rant

s su

ppor

ted

by th

e Li

cens

ee:

A

. D

escr

iptio

n of

em

erge

ncy

actio

ns, s

trat

egie

s,

and

trai

ning

take

n to

ass

ist t

he S

tate

& h

ost

com

mun

ity g

over

nmen

ts in

car

ryin

g ou

t fu

nctio

ns re

lativ

e to

loca

l em

erge

ncy

prep

ared

ness

and

ons

ite re

spon

se. (

e.g.

Pl

ans,

Pro

cedu

res,

Com

mun

icat

ion

Prot

ocol

s)

B.

Des

crip

tion

of e

quip

men

t (e.

g. N

FPA

appr

oved

en

sem

bles

, fire

fight

ing

resp

onse

, and

sec

urity

eq

uipm

ent),

env

ironm

enta

l mon

itorin

g eq

uipm

ent,

and

emer

genc

y m

edic

al a

nd p

ublic

he

alth

sup

port

requ

ired

(e.g

.; R

adia

tion

Expo

sure

/ Ac

ute

Rad

iatio

n Sy

ndro

me

(AR

S)

trea

tmen

t cap

abili

ties)

C

. A

nnua

l ass

essm

ent o

f the

saf

ety

stat

us a

nd

inte

grity

of t

he o

nsite

spe

nt fu

el s

tora

ge

oper

atio

ns a

nd h

ost c

omm

unity

em

erge

ncy

prep

ared

ness

and

resp

onse

read

ines

s.

D.

Acc

ount

ing

of a

ll fu

nds

expe

nded

thro

ugh

coop

erat

ive

agre

emen

t and

gra

nts

for

activ

ities

car

ried

out t

o en

sure

acc

ount

abili

ty

and

read

ines

s re

port

ing.

E.

Rec

ogni

tion

that

add

ition

al a

ssis

tanc

e m

ay b

e pr

ovid

ed fr

om th

e Li

cens

ee fo

r cap

abili

ties

to

resp

ond

to e

mer

genc

ies

invo

lvin

g on

site

op

erat

ions

.

Tow

n of

Ply

mou

th, M

assa

chus

etts

Fee

dbac

k U

.S. N

ucle

ar R

egul

ator

y C

omm

issi

on’s

Adv

ance

d N

otic

e of

Pro

pose

d R

ulem

akin

g

(Doc

ket N

o. N

RC

-201

5-00

70)

Dat

ed: F

ebru

ary

10, 2

016

3

180

Day

s fo

llow

ing

term

inat

ion

of th

e de

com

mis

sion

ing

proc

ess

and

rem

oval

of s

pent

fuel

st

orag

e, a

ll co

oper

ativ

e ag

reem

ents

and

gra

nts

with

re

spec

t to

the

emer

genc

y pr

epar

edne

ss a

nd

resp

onse

will

be

term

inat

ed.”

c. W

hat c

orre

spon

ding

cha

nges

to §

50.

54(s

)(2)(

ii)

and

50.5

4(s)

(3) (

abou

t U.S

. Fed

eral

Em

erge

ncy

Man

agem

ent A

genc

y (F

EM

A)-

iden

tifie

d of

fsite

EP

de

ficie

ncie

s an

d FE

MA

offs

ite E

P fi

ndin

gs,

resp

ectiv

ely)

may

be

appr

opria

te w

hen

offs

ite

radi

olog

ical

em

erge

ncy

plan

s w

ould

no

long

er b

e re

quire

d?

Offs

ite re

spon

se a

ctio

ns s

houl

d re

mai

n in

pla

ce u

ntil

180

days

follo

win

g th

e te

rmin

atio

n of

the

deco

mm

issi

onin

g pr

oces

s an

d th

e re

mov

al o

f spe

nt

fuel

sto

rage

.

EP-4

a.

Sho

uld

§ 50

.54(

q) b

e m

odifi

ed to

reco

gniz

e th

at

nucl

ear p

ower

reac

tor l

icen

sees

, onc

e th

ey c

ertif

y un

der §

50.

82, “

Term

inat

ion

of L

icen

se,”

to h

ave

perm

anen

tly c

ease

d op

erat

ion

and

perm

anen

tly

rem

oved

fuel

from

the

reac

tor v

esse

l, w

ould

no

long

er b

e re

quire

d to

mee

t all

stan

dard

s in

§ 5

0.47

an

d al

l req

uire

men

ts in

app

endi

x E

? If

so, d

escr

ibe

how

.

Req

uire

men

ts s

houl

d re

mai

n in

pla

ce u

ntil

180

days

fo

llow

ing

the

term

inat

ion

of th

e de

com

mis

sion

ing

proc

ess

and

the

rem

oval

of s

pent

fuel

sto

rage

.

b. S

houl

d nu

clea

r pow

er re

acto

r lic

ense

es, o

nce

they

cer

tify

unde

r § 5

0.82

to h

ave

perm

anen

tly

ceas

ed o

pera

tion

and

perm

anen

tly re

mov

ed fu

el

from

the

reac

tor v

esse

l, be

allo

wed

to m

ake

emer

genc

y pl

an c

hang

es b

ased

on

§ 50

.59,

“C

hang

es, T

ests

, and

Exp

erim

ents

,” im

pact

ing

EP

re

late

d eq

uipm

ent d

irect

ly a

ssoc

iate

d w

ith p

ower

op

erat

ions

? If

so, d

escr

ibe

how

this

mig

ht b

e

Req

uire

men

ts s

houl

d re

mai

n in

pla

ce u

ntil

180

days

fo

llow

ing

the

term

inat

ion

of th

e de

com

mis

sion

ing

proc

ess

and

the

rem

oval

of s

pent

fuel

sto

rage

.

Tow

n of

Ply

mou

th, M

assa

chus

etts

Fee

dbac

k U

.S. N

ucle

ar R

egul

ator

y C

omm

issi

on’s

Adv

ance

d N

otic

e of

Pro

pose

d R

ulem

akin

g

(Doc

ket N

o. N

RC

-201

5-00

70)

Dat

ed: F

ebru

ary

10, 2

016

4

addr

esse

d un

der §

50.

54(q

).

EP

-5

Sho

uld

§ 50

.54(

t) be

cla

rifie

d to

dis

tingu

ish

betw

een

EP

pro

gram

revi

ew re

quire

men

ts fo

r ope

ratin

g ve

rsus

per

man

ently

shu

t dow

n an

d de

fuel

ed s

ites?

If

so, d

escr

ibe

how

.

Req

uire

men

ts s

houl

d re

mai

n in

pla

ce u

ntil

180

days

fo

llow

ing

the

term

inat

ion

of th

e de

com

mis

sion

ing

proc

ess

and

the

rem

oval

of s

pent

fuel

sto

rage

.

EP-6

At w

hat p

oint

(s) i

n th

e de

com

mis

sion

ing

proc

ess

shou

ld E

RD

S a

ctiv

atio

n, E

RD

S e

quip

men

t, an

d th

e in

stru

men

tatio

n fo

r obt

aini

ng E

RD

S d

ata,

no

long

er

be n

eces

sary

?

Req

uire

men

ts s

houl

d re

mai

n in

unt

il 18

0 da

ys

follo

win

g th

e te

rmin

atio

n of

the

deco

mm

issi

onin

g pr

oces

s an

d th

e re

mov

al o

f spe

nt fu

el s

tora

ge.

EP-7

Wha

t cha

nges

to §

50.

72(a

)(1)(i

) sho

uld

be

cons

ider

ed fo

r dec

omm

issi

onin

g si

tes?

Not

ifica

tion

Req

uire

men

ts s

houl

d re

mai

n in

pla

ce

until

180

day

s fo

llow

ing

the

term

inat

ion

of th

e de

com

mis

sion

ing

proc

ess

and

the

rem

oval

of s

pent

fu

el s

tora

ge.

EP

-8

Wha

t cha

nges

to §

50.

72(b

)(3)(x

iii) s

houl

d be

co

nsid

ered

for d

ecom

mis

sion

ing

site

s?

Rep

ortin

g re

quire

men

ts s

houl

d re

mai

n in

pla

ce u

ntil

180

days

follo

win

g th

e te

rmin

atio

n of

the

deco

mm

issi

onin

g pr

oces

s an

d th

e re

mov

al o

f spe

nt

fuel

sto

rage

.

A

. Q

UES

TIO

NS

REL

ATED

TO

TH

E PH

YSIC

AL

SEC

UR

ITY

REQ

UIR

EMEN

TS F

OR

DEC

OM

MIS

SIO

NIN

G P

OW

ER

REA

CTO

R L

ICEN

SEES

IT

EM

DES

CR

IPTI

ON

TO

WN

OF

PLYM

OU

TH’S

FEE

DB

AC

K

PSR

-1

(In

tent

iona

lly b

lank

) N

o se

curit

y re

quire

men

ts s

houl

d be

con

side

red

for

chan

ge, a

nd a

ll se

curit

y re

quire

men

ts th

at e

xist

for

an o

pera

ting

plan

t sho

uld

rem

ain

in p

lace

unt

il 18

0 da

ys fo

llow

ing

the

term

inat

ion

of th

e

Tow

n of

Ply

mou

th, M

assa

chus

etts

Fee

dbac

k U

.S. N

ucle

ar R

egul

ator

y C

omm

issi

on’s

Adv

ance

d N

otic

e of

Pro

pose

d R

ulem

akin

g

(Doc

ket N

o. N

RC

-201

5-00

70)

Dat

ed: F

ebru

ary

10, 2

016

5

deco

mm

issi

onin

g pr

oces

s an

d th

e re

mov

al o

f spe

nt

fuel

sto

rage

.

PSR

-2

a.

Are

ther

e an

y su

gges

ted

chan

ges

to th

e ph

ysic

al

secu

rity

requ

irem

ents

in 1

0 C

FR p

art 7

3 or

its

appe

ndic

es th

at w

ould

be

gene

rical

ly a

pplic

able

to

a de

com

mis

sion

ing

pow

er re

acto

r whi

le s

pent

fuel

is

sto

red

in th

e S

FP (e.g.,

are

ther

e ci

rcum

stan

ces

whe

re th

e m

inim

um n

umbe

r of a

rmed

resp

onde

rs

coul

d be

redu

ced

at a

dec

omm

issi

onin

g fa

cilit

y)?

If so

, des

crib

e th

em.

Secu

rity

requ

irem

ents

that

exi

st fo

r an

oper

atin

g pl

ant s

houl

d re

mai

n in

pla

ce u

ntil

180

days

follo

win

g th

e te

rmin

atio

n of

the

deco

mm

issi

onin

g pr

oces

s an

d th

e re

mov

al o

f spe

nt fu

el s

tora

ge.

b. W

hich

phy

sica

l sec

urity

requ

irem

ents

in 1

0 C

FR

part

73 s

houl

d be

gen

eric

ally

app

licab

le to

spe

nt

fuel

sto

red

in a

dry

cas

k in

depe

nden

t spe

nt fu

el

stor

age

inst

alla

tion?

Secu

rity

requ

irem

ents

that

exi

st fo

r an

oper

atin

g pl

ant s

houl

d re

mai

n in

pla

ce u

ntil

180

days

follo

win

g th

e te

rmin

atio

n of

the

deco

mm

issi

onin

g pr

oces

s an

d th

e re

mov

al o

f spe

nt fu

el s

tora

ge.

c. S

houl

d th

e D

BT

for r

adio

logi

cal s

abot

age

cont

inue

to a

pply

to d

ecom

mis

sion

ing

reac

tors

? If

it sh

ould

cea

se to

app

ly in

the

deco

mm

issi

onin

g pr

oces

s, w

hen

shou

ld it

end

?

The

DB

T re

quire

men

ts th

at e

xist

for a

n op

erat

ing

plan

t for

radi

olog

ical

sab

otag

e sh

ould

rem

ain

in

plac

e un

til 1

80 d

ays

follo

win

g th

e te

rmin

atio

n of

the

deco

mm

issi

onin

g pr

oces

s an

d th

e re

mov

al o

f spe

nt

fuel

sto

rage

.

PSR

-3

(In

tent

iona

lly b

lank

) Th

e sa

me

secu

rity

requ

irem

ents

that

exi

st fo

r an

oper

atin

g pl

ant s

houl

d re

mai

n in

pla

ce u

ntil

180

days

fo

llow

ing

the

term

inat

ion

of th

e de

com

mis

sion

ing

proc

ess

and

the

rem

oval

of s

pent

fuel

sto

rage

.

PSR

-6

a.

Sec

tion

73.5

4 cl

early

sta

tes

that

the

requ

irem

ents

fo

r pro

tect

ion

of d

igita

l com

pute

r and

co

mm

unic

atio

ns s

yste

ms

and

netw

orks

app

ly to

The

lang

uage

in th

e “p

ream

ble”

to 1

0 C

FR 7

3.54

sh

ould

be

mod

ified

to in

clud

e lic

ense

es in

a p

erio

d of

“co

ntin

ued

effe

ctiv

enes

s,”

as d

escr

ibed

in 1

0 C

FR

Tow

n of

Ply

mou

th, M

assa

chus

etts

Fee

dbac

k U

.S. N

ucle

ar R

egul

ator

y C

omm

issi

on’s

Adv

ance

d N

otic

e of

Pro

pose

d R

ulem

akin

g

(Doc

ket N

o. N

RC

-201

5-00

70)

Dat

ed: F

ebru

ary

10, 2

016

6

pow

er re

acto

rs li

cens

ed u

nder

10

CFR

par

t 50

that

w

ere

licen

sed

to o

pera

te a

s of

Nov

embe

r 23,

200

9.

How

ever

, § 7

3.54

doe

s no

t exp

licitl

y m

entio

n th

e ap

plic

abilit

y of

thes

e re

quire

men

ts to

pow

er

reac

tors

that

are

no

long

er a

utho

rized

to o

pera

te

and

are

trans

ition

ing

to d

ecom

mis

sion

ing.

Are

any

ch

ange

s ne

cess

ary

to §

73.

54 to

exp

licitl

y st

ate

that

de

com

mis

sion

ing

pow

er re

acto

rs a

re w

ithin

the

scop

e of

§ 7

3.54

? If

so, d

escr

ibe

them

.

50.5

1(b)

, inc

ludi

ng IS

FSI-o

nly

site

s. F

urth

erm

ore,

the

sam

e di

gita

l sec

urity

requ

irem

ents

that

exi

st fo

r an

oper

atin

g pl

ant s

houl

d re

mai

n in

pla

ce u

ntil

180

days

fo

llow

ing

the

term

inat

ion

of th

e de

com

mis

sion

ing

proc

ess

and

the

rem

oval

of s

pent

fuel

sto

rage

.

b. S

houl

d th

ere

be re

duce

d cy

ber s

ecur

ity

requ

irem

ents

in §

73.

54 fo

r dec

omm

issi

onin

g po

wer

re

acto

rs b

ased

on

the

redu

ced

risk

prof

ile d

urin

g de

com

mis

sion

ing?

If s

o, w

hat w

ould

be

the

reco

mm

ende

d ch

ange

s?

The

sam

e cy

ber s

ecur

ity re

quire

men

ts th

at e

xist

for

an o

pera

ting

plan

t sho

uld

rem

ain

in p

lace

unt

il al

l sp

ent f

uel i

s re

mov

ed fr

om th

e si

te, a

nd th

ere

shou

ld

be n

o re

duct

ion

in c

yber

sec

urity

requ

irem

ents

for

deco

mm

issi

onin

g po

wer

reac

tors

.

C. Q

UES

TIO

NS

REL

ATE

D T

O F

ITN

ESS

FOR

DU

TY (F

FD) R

EQU

IREM

ENTS

FO

R D

ECO

MM

ISSI

ON

ING

PO

WER

R

EAC

TOR

LIC

ENSE

ES

ITEM

D

ESC

RIP

TIO

N

TOW

N O

F PL

YMO

UTH

’S F

EED

BA

CK

FF

D-2

a.

Sho

uld

any

of th

e fa

tigue

man

agem

ent

requ

irem

ents

of 1

0 C

FR p

art 2

6, s

ubpa

rt I,

appl

y to

a

perm

anen

tly s

hut d

own

and

defu

eled

reac

tor?

If

so, w

hich

one

s?

All

exis

ting

fatig

ue m

anag

emen

t req

uire

men

ts

shou

ld re

mai

n in

pla

ce u

ntil

180

days

follo

win

g th

e te

rmin

atio

n of

the

deco

mm

issi

onin

g pr

oces

s an

d th

e re

mov

al o

f spe

nt fu

el s

tora

ge.

b. B

ased

on

the

low

er ri

sk o

f an

offs

ite ra

diol

ogic

al

rele

ase

from

a d

ecom

mis

sion

ing

reac

tor,

com

pare

d to

an

oper

atin

g re

acto

r, sh

ould

onl

y sp

ecifi

c cl

asse

s of

wor

kers

, as

iden

tifie

d in

§ 2

6.4(

a) th

roug

h (c

), be

su

bjec

t to

fatig

ue m

anag

emen

t req

uire

men

ts

All

exis

ting

fatig

ue m

anag

emen

t req

uire

men

ts

shou

ld re

mai

n in

pla

ce u

ntil

180

days

follo

win

g th

e te

rmin

atio

n of

the

deco

mm

issi

onin

g pr

oces

s an

d th

e re

mov

al o

f spe

nt fu

el s

tora

ge.

Tow

n of

Ply

mou

th, M

assa

chus

etts

Fee

dbac

k U

.S. N

ucle

ar R

egul

ator

y C

omm

issi

on’s

Adv

ance

d N

otic

e of

Pro

pose

d R

ulem

akin

g

(Doc

ket N

o. N

RC

-201

5-00

70)

Dat

ed: F

ebru

ary

10, 2

016

7

(e.g.,

secu

rity

offic

ers

or c

ertif

ied

fuel

han

dler

s)?

Ple

ase

prov

ide

wha

t cla

sses

of w

orke

rs s

houl

d be

su

bjec

t to

the

requ

irem

ents

and

a ju

stifi

catio

n fo

r th

eir i

nclu

sion

. c.

Sho

uld

the

fatig

ue m

anag

emen

t req

uire

men

ts o

f 10

CFR

par

t 26,

sub

part

I, co

ntin

ue to

app

ly to

the

spec

ific

clas

ses

of w

orke

rs id

entif

ied

in re

spon

se to

qu

estio

n b

abov

e, fo

r a s

peci

fied

perio

d of

tim

e (e.g.,u

ntil

a sp

ecifi

ed d

ecay

hea

t lev

el is

reac

hed

with

in th

e S

FP, o

r unt

il al

l fue

l is

in d

ry s

tora

ge)?

P

leas

e pr

ovid

e w

hat p

erio

d of

tim

e w

orke

rs w

ould

be

sub

ject

to th

e re

quire

men

ts a

nd th

e ju

stifi

catio

n fo

r the

tim

ing.

All

exis

ting

fatig

ue m

anag

emen

t req

uire

men

ts

shou

ld re

mai

n in

pla

ce d

urin

g de

com

mis

sion

ing

until

180

day

s fo

llow

ing

the

term

inat

ion

of th

e de

com

mis

sion

ing

proc

ess

and

the

rem

oval

of s

pent

fu

el s

tora

ge.

d. S

houl

d an

alte

rnat

e ap

proa

ch to

fatig

ue

man

agem

ent b

e de

velo

ped

com

men

sura

te w

ith th

e pl

ant's

low

er ri

sk p

rofil

e? P

leas

e pr

ovid

e a

disc

ussi

on o

f the

alte

rnat

e ap

proa

ch a

nd h

ow th

e m

easu

res

wou

ld a

dequ

atel

y m

anag

e fa

tigue

for

wor

kers

.

All

exis

ting

fatig

ue m

anag

emen

t req

uire

men

ts

shou

ld re

mai

n in

pla

ce u

ntil

180

days

follo

win

g th

e te

rmin

atio

n of

the

deco

mm

issi

onin

g pr

oces

s an

d th

e re

mov

al o

f spe

nt fu

el s

tora

ge.

E. Q

UES

TIO

NS

REL

ATE

D T

O T

HE

CU

RR

ENT

REG

ULA

TOR

Y A

PPR

OA

CH

FO

R D

ECO

MM

ISSI

ON

ING

PO

WER

R

EAC

TOR

LIC

ENSE

ES

ITEM

D

ESC

RIP

TIO

N

TOW

N O

F PL

YMO

UTH

’S F

EED

BA

CK

R

EG-1

a.

Sho

uld

the

curre

nt o

ptio

ns fo

r dec

omm

issi

onin

g—D

EC

ON

, SA

FSTO

R, a

nd E

NTO

MB

—be

exp

licitl

y ad

dres

sed

and

defin

ed in

the

regu

latio

ns in

stea

d of

so

lely

in g

uida

nce

docu

men

ts, a

nd h

ow s

o?

The

curr

ent o

ptio

ns fo

r dec

omm

issi

onin

g—D

ECO

N,

SAFS

TOR

, and

EN

TOM

B—

sho

uld

be e

xplic

itly

addr

esse

d an

d de

fined

in th

e re

gula

tions

and

the

NR

C s

houl

d ex

plic

itly

disc

uss

the

risks

and

ben

efits

Tow

n of

Ply

mou

th, M

assa

chus

etts

Fee

dbac

k U

.S. N

ucle

ar R

egul

ator

y C

omm

issi

on’s

Adv

ance

d N

otic

e of

Pro

pose

d R

ulem

akin

g

(Doc

ket N

o. N

RC

-201

5-00

70)

Dat

ed: F

ebru

ary

10, 2

016

8

as

soci

ated

with

eac

h.

b. S

houl

d ot

her o

ptio

ns fo

r dec

omm

issi

onin

g be

ex

plor

ed?

If so

, wha

t oth

er te

chni

cal o

r pr

ogra

mm

atic

opt

ions

are

reas

onab

le a

nd w

hat t

ype

of s

uppo

rting

doc

umen

ts w

ould

be

mos

t effe

ctiv

e fo

r pr

ovid

ing

guid

ance

on

thes

e ne

w o

ptio

ns o

r re

quire

men

ts?

Bes

t pra

ctic

es fo

r oth

er fo

rms

of d

ecom

mis

sion

ing

shou

ld b

e ex

plor

ed, p

rese

nted

and

dis

cuss

ed. F

or

exam

ple,

the

NR

C s

houl

d co

nsid

er a

new

de

com

mis

sion

ing

optio

n th

at e

nabl

es n

on-

radi

olog

ical

con

tam

inat

ion

and

haza

rdou

s w

aste

s to

be

cle

aned

up

imm

edia

tely

afte

r shu

tdow

n, w

hile

re

acto

rs u

tiliz

ing

SAFS

TOR

pre

pare

for d

orm

ancy

.

c. T

he N

RC

regu

latio

ns s

tate

that

dec

omm

issi

onin

g m

ust b

e co

mpl

eted

with

in 6

0 ye

ars

of p

erm

anen

t ce

ssat

ion

of o

pera

tions

. A d

urat

ion

of 6

0 ye

ars

was

ch

osen

bec

ause

it ro

ughl

y co

rresp

onds

to 1

0 ha

lf-liv

es fo

r cob

alt-6

0, o

ne o

f the

pre

dom

inan

t iso

tope

s re

mai

ning

in th

e fa

cilit

y. B

y 60

yea

rs, t

he in

itial

sh

ort-l

ived

isot

opes

, inc

ludi

ng c

obal

t-60,

will

have

de

caye

d to

bac

kgro

und

leve

ls. I

n ad

ditio

n, th

e 60

-ye

ar p

erio

d ap

pear

s to

be

reas

onab

le fr

om th

e st

andp

oint

of e

xpec

ting

inst

itutio

nal c

ontro

ls to

be

mai

ntai

ned.

Com

plet

ion

of d

ecom

mis

sion

ing

beyo

nd

60 y

ears

will

be a

ppro

ved

by th

e N

RC

onl

y w

hen

nece

ssar

y to

pro

tect

pub

lic h

ealth

and

saf

ety.

S

houl

d th

e re

quire

men

ts b

e ch

ange

d so

that

the

timef

ram

e fo

r dec

omm

issi

onin

g is

som

ethi

ng o

ther

th

an th

e cu

rrent

60-

year

lim

it? W

ould

this

cha

nge

be

depe

nden

t on

the

met

hod

of d

ecom

mis

sion

ing

chos

en, s

ite s

peci

fic c

hara

cter

istic

s, o

r som

e ot

her

com

bina

tion

of fa

ctor

s? If

so,

ple

ase

desc

ribe.

A ti

mef

ram

e ba

sed

on th

e de

cay

of C

obal

t-60

inad

vert

ently

pla

ces

an u

nrea

sona

ble

burd

en o

n ho

st c

omm

uniti

es, a

nd a

mor

e ap

prop

riate

tim

efra

me

wou

ld b

e re

late

d di

rect

ly to

the

tech

nolo

gica

l and

fina

ncia

l cap

aciti

es o

f pla

nt

owne

rs. A

ckno

wle

dgem

ent a

nd d

iscu

ssio

n of

new

te

chno

logi

es s

houl

d be

revi

ewed

bef

ore

the

60-y

ear

limit

is a

ppro

ved.

REG

-2

a.

Is th

e co

nten

t and

leve

l of d

etai

l cur

rent

ly re

quire

d fo

r the

lice

nsee

's P

SD

AR

, ade

quat

e? If

not

, wha

t Th

e PS

DA

R s

houl

d al

so q

uant

ify s

ocio

-eco

nom

ic

impa

cts

pert

aini

ng to

the

shut

dow

n of

the

plan

t if

Tow

n of

Ply

mou

th, M

assa

chus

etts

Fee

dbac

k U

.S. N

ucle

ar R

egul

ator

y C

omm

issi

on’s

Adv

ance

d N

otic

e of

Pro

pose

d R

ulem

akin

g

(Doc

ket N

o. N

RC

-201

5-00

70)

Dat

ed: F

ebru

ary

10, 2

016

9

shou

ld b

e ad

ded

or re

mov

ed to

enh

ance

the

docu

men

t?

the

reac

tor d

ecom

mis

sion

ing

wou

ld le

ad to

the

cess

atio

n of

all

pow

er g

ener

atio

n on

site

, and

in

clud

e a

requ

irem

ent t

hat l

icen

sees

com

pens

ate

host

com

mun

ities

for s

pent

fuel

sto

rage

. The

fact

th

at th

e D

OE

has

been

foun

d fin

anci

ally

liab

le to

the

licen

sees

for s

pent

fuel

sto

rage

cos

ts d

emon

stra

tes

that

ther

e is

a v

alue

to s

pent

fuel

sto

rage

, and

hos

t co

mm

uniti

es c

ould

be

com

pens

ated

with

in th

at

fram

ewor

k. F

urth

erm

ore,

the

deco

mm

issi

onin

g co

st

estim

ates

incl

uded

in th

e PS

DA

R s

houl

d in

clud

e a

“sta

tus

quo”

sce

nario

for t

he D

OE’

s ac

cept

ance

of

spen

t fue

l, to

refle

ct th

e fa

ct th

at th

e D

OE

has

no

tem

pora

ry o

r per

man

ent r

epos

itory

(som

e co

st

estim

ates

now

ass

ume

the

rem

oval

of s

pent

fuel

fr

om th

e si

te s

tart

ing

in 2

020,

whi

ch is

ove

rly

optim

istic

).

b. S

houl

d th

e re

gula

tions

be

amen

ded

to re

quire

N

RC

revi

ew a

nd a

ppro

val o

f the

PS

DA

R b

efor

e al

low

ing

any

“maj

or d

ecom

mis

sion

ing

activ

ity,”

as

that

term

is d

efin

ed in

§ 5

0.2,

to c

omm

ence

? W

hat

valu

e w

ould

this

add

to th

e de

com

mis

sion

ing

proc

ess?

Yes.

Con

tinue

d N

RC

ove

rsig

ht is

cru

cial

to th

e sa

fety

of h

ost c

omm

uniti

es.

REG

-3

a.

Sho

uld

the

curre

nt ro

le o

f the

Sta

tes,

mem

bers

of

the

publ

ic, o

r oth

er s

take

hold

ers

in th

e de

com

mis

sion

ing

proc

ess

be e

xpan

ded

or

enha

nced

, and

how

so?

Lice

nsee

s sh

ould

be

requ

ired

to c

reat

e a

com

mun

ity

advi

sory

boa

rd a

nd s

olic

it pu

blic

adv

ice.

Hos

t co

mm

uniti

es m

ust b

e gi

ven

a vo

ice

in th

e de

com

mis

sion

ing

proc

ess

and

in s

ettin

g th

e re

quire

men

ts fo

r the

saf

ety

and

secu

rity

of s

pent

fu

els

stor

age.

Tow

n of

Ply

mou

th, M

assa

chus

etts

Fee

dbac

k U

.S. N

ucle

ar R

egul

ator

y C

omm

issi

on’s

Adv

ance

d N

otic

e of

Pro

pose

d R

ulem

akin

g

(Doc

ket N

o. N

RC

-201

5-00

70)

Dat

ed: F

ebru

ary

10, 2

016

10

b. S

houl

d th

e cu

rrent

role

of t

he S

tate

s, m

embe

rs o

f th

e pu

blic

, or o

ther

sta

keho

lder

s in

the

deco

mm

issi

onin

g pr

oces

s fo

r non

-radi

olog

ical

are

as

be e

xpan

ded

or e

nhan

ced,

and

how

so?

Cur

rent

ly,

for a

ll no

n-ra

diol

ogic

al e

fflue

nts

crea

ted

durin

g th

e de

com

mis

sion

ing

proc

ess,

lice

nsee

s ar

e re

quire

d to

co

mpl

y w

ith E

PA

or S

tate

regu

latio

ns re

late

d to

liq

uid

efflu

ent d

isch

arge

s to

bod

ies

of w

ater

.

In a

dditi

on to

com

plyi

ng w

ith E

PA o

r Sta

te

regu

latio

ns re

late

d to

liqu

id e

fflue

nt d

isch

arge

s to

bo

dies

of w

ater

, all

pert

inen

t loc

al re

gula

tions

sh

ould

be

incl

uded

.

c. F

or m

ost d

ecom

mis

sion

ing

site

s, th

e S

tate

and

lo

cal g

over

nmen

ts a

re in

volv

ed in

an

advi

sory

ca

paci

ty, o

ften

as p

art o

f a C

omm

unity

Eng

agem

ent

Pan

el o

r oth

er o

rgan

izat

ion

aim

ed a

t fos

terin

g co

mm

unic

atio

n an

d in

form

atio

n ex

chan

ge b

etw

een

the

licen

see

and

the

publ

ic. S

houl

d th

e N

RC

's

regu

latio

ns m

anda

te th

e fo

rmat

ion

of th

ese

advi

sory

pa

nels

?

Com

mun

ity E

ngag

emen

t mus

t be

a re

quire

men

t and

sh

ould

incl

ude

all i

ssue

s re

late

d to

the

envi

ronm

ent,

safe

ty, s

pent

fuel

sto

rage

, hos

t com

mun

ity

com

pens

atio

n, a

nd o

ther

soc

io-e

cono

mic

impa

cts

to

the

host

com

mun

ity. N

RC

regu

latio

ns s

houl

d en

sure

fu

ndin

g su

ppor

t fro

m li

cens

ees

and

stat

es fo

r the

C

omm

unity

Eng

agem

ent P

anel

s to

mee

t nec

essa

ry

expe

nditu

res

for s

taff

time,

spa

ce, f

acili

tatio

n or

re

sear

ch n

eeds

, et c

eter

a.

G

. QU

ESTI

ON

S R

ELA

TED

TO

DEC

OM

MIS

SIO

NIN

G T

RU

ST F

UN

D

ITEM

D

ESC

RIP

TIO

N

TOW

N O

F PL

YMO

UTH

’S F

EED

BA

CK

D

TF-1

Sho

uld

the

regu

latio

ns in

§§

50.7

5 an

d 50

.82

be

revi

sed

to c

larif

y th

e co

llect

ion,

repo

rting

, and

ac

coun

ting

of c

omm

ingl

ed fu

nds

in th

e de

com

mis

sion

ing

trust

fund

, tha

t is

in e

xces

s of

the

amou

nt re

quire

d fo

r rad

iolo

gica

l dec

omm

issi

onin

g an

d th

at h

as b

een

desi

gnat

ed fo

r oth

er p

urpo

ses,

in

orde

r to

prec

lude

the

need

to o

btai

n ex

empt

ions

for

acce

ss to

the

exce

ss m

onie

s?

The

regu

latio

ns s

houl

d be

revi

sed

to c

larif

y th

e co

llect

ion,

repo

rtin

g, a

nd a

ccou

ntin

g of

com

min

gled

fu

nds

in th

e de

com

mis

sion

ing

trus

t fun

d, th

at is

in

exce

ss o

f the

am

ount

requ

ired

for r

adio

logi

cal

deco

mm

issi

onin

g an

d sh

ould

incl

ude

the

cost

of

spen

t fue

l sto

rage

and

rem

oval

.

Tow

n of

Ply

mou

th, M

assa

chus

etts

Fee

dbac

k U

.S. N

ucle

ar R

egul

ator

y C

omm

issi

on’s

Adv

ance

d N

otic

e of

Pro

pose

d R

ulem

akin

g

(Doc

ket N

o. N

RC

-201

5-00

70)

Dat

ed: F

ebru

ary

10, 2

016

11

DTF

-2

a. W

hat c

hang

es s

houl

d be

con

side

red

for §

§ 50

.2

and

50.8

2(a)

(8) t

o cl

arify

wha

t con

stitu

tes

a le

gitim

ate

deco

mm

issi

onin

g ac

tivity

?

The

guid

ance

sho

uld

codi

fy “

(1) t

he m

aint

enan

ce

and

stor

age

of s

pent

fuel

, (2)

the

desi

gn a

nd/o

r co

nstr

uctio

n of

a s

pent

fuel

dry

sto

rage

faci

lity,

(3)

activ

ities

that

are

not

dire

ctly

rela

ted

to s

uppo

rtin

g lo

ng-te

rm s

tora

ge o

f the

faci

lity,

or (

4) a

ny o

ther

ac

tiviti

es n

ot d

irect

ly re

late

d to

radi

olog

ical

de

cont

amin

atio

n of

the

site

.” W

orkf

orce

trai

ning

and

ho

st c

omm

unity

com

pens

atio

n sh

ould

als

o be

add

ed

to th

is li

st.

b. R

egul

atio

ns in

§ 5

0.82

(8)(i

i) st

ates

that

3 p

erce

nt

of th

e de

com

mis

sion

ing

fund

s m

ay b

e us

ed d

urin

g th

e in

itial

sta

ges

of d

ecom

mis

sion

ing

for

deco

mm

issi

onin

g pl

anni

ng a

ctiv

ities

. Wha

t sho

uld

be in

clud

ed o

r spe

cific

ally

exc

lude

d in

the

defin

ition

of

“dec

omm

issi

onin

g pl

anni

ng a

ctiv

ities

?”

The

defin

ition

of “

deco

mm

issi

onin

g pl

anni

ng

activ

ities

” sh

ould

incl

ude

the

reso

lutio

n of

any

and

al

l neg

otia

tions

bet

wee

n th

e lic

ense

e an

d lo

cal a

nd

stat

e en

titie

s th

at p

erta

in to

dec

omm

issi

onin

g -in

duce

d ch

ange

s to

pro

pert

y va

luat

ion,

tax

reve

nues

, em

erge

ncy

plan

ning

, wor

kfor

ce a

djus

tmen

ts,

regi

onal

eco

nom

ic im

pact

s, a

nd n

on-r

adio

logi

cal s

ite

clea

nup.

“D

ecom

mis

sion

ing

plan

ning

act

iviti

es”

shou

ld a

lso

incl

ude

rela

ted

plan

ning

wor

k ca

rrie

d ou

t by

host

com

mun

ities

, to

fairl

y co

mpe

nsat

e of

ficia

ls in

volv

ed in

the

proc

ess.

H. Q

UES

TIO

NS

REL

ATE

D T

O O

FFSI

TE L

IAB

ILIT

Y PR

OTE

CTI

ON

INSU

RA

NC

E R

EQU

IREM

ENTS

FO

R

DEC

OM

MIS

SIO

NIN

G P

OW

ER R

EAC

TOR

LIC

ENSE

ES

ITEM

D

ESC

RIP

TIO

N

TOW

N O

F PL

YMO

UTH

’S F

EED

BA

CK

LP

I-1

a. S

houl

d th

e N

RC

cod

ify th

e cu

rrent

con

serv

ativ

e ex

empt

ion

crite

ria (i.e.,1

0 ho

urs

to ta

ke m

itiga

tive

actio

ns) t

hat h

ave

been

use

d in

gra

ntin

g de

com

mis

sion

ing

reac

tor l

icen

sees

exe

mpt

ions

to §

14

0.11

(a)(4

)?

Ten

hour

s sh

ould

be

codi

fied

as th

e m

axim

um

amou

nt o

f tim

e al

low

ed.

Tow

n of

Ply

mou

th, M

assa

chus

etts

Fee

dbac

k U

.S. N

ucle

ar R

egul

ator

y C

omm

issi

on’s

Adv

ance

d N

otic

e of

Pro

pose

d R

ulem

akin

g

(Doc

ket N

o. N

RC

-201

5-00

70)

Dat

ed: F

ebru

ary

10, 2

016

12

c. T

he u

se o

f $10

0 m

illio

n fo

r prim

ary

liabi

lity

insu

ranc

e le

vel i

s ba

sed

on C

omm

issi

on p

olic

y an

d pr

eced

ent f

rom

the

early

199

0s. T

he a

mou

nt

esta

blis

hed

was

a q

ualit

ativ

e va

lue

to b

ound

the

clai

ms

from

the

Thre

e M

ile Is

land

acc

iden

t. Sh

ould

th

is n

umbe

r be

adju

sted

?

The

num

ber s

houl

d no

t be

chan

ged.

d.

Wha

t oth

er fa

ctor

s sh

ould

be

cons

ider

ed in

es

tabl

ishi

ng a

n ap

prop

riate

prim

ary

insu

ranc

e lia

bilit

y le

vel (

base

d on

the

pote

ntia

l for

dam

age

clai

ms)

for a

dec

omm

issi

onin

g pl

ant o

nce

the

risk

of

any

kind

of o

ffsite

radi

olog

ical

rele

ase

is h

ighl

y un

likel

y?

Con

side

ratio

n sh

ould

be

give

n to

insu

ring

the

safe

tr

ansp

ort o

f spe

nt fu

el o

ff si

te.

I. Q

UES

TIO

NS

REL

ATE

D T

O O

NSI

TE D

AMA

GE

PRO

TEC

TIO

N IN

SUR

AN

CE

REQ

UIR

EMEN

TS F

OR

D

ECO

MM

ISSI

ON

ING

PO

WER

REA

CTO

R L

ICEN

SEES

IT

EM

DES

CR

IPTI

ON

TO

WN

OF

PLYM

OU

TH’S

FEE

DB

AC

K

OD

I-1

a. S

houl

d th

e N

RC

cod

ify th

e cu

rrent

exe

mpt

ion

crite

ria th

at h

ave

been

use

d in

gra

ntin

g de

com

mis

sion

ing

reac

tor l

icen

sees

exe

mpt

ions

fro

m §

50.

54(w

)(1)

? If

so, d

escr

ibe

why

.

The

requ

ired

leve

l of o

nsite

pro

pert

y da

mag

e in

sura

nce

shou

ld n

ot b

e un

til 1

80 d

ays

follo

win

g th

e te

rmin

atio

n of

the

deco

mm

issi

onin

g pr

oces

s an

d th

e re

mov

al o

f spe

nt fu

el s

tora

ge.

b. T

he u

se o

f $50

milli

on in

sura

nce

leve

l for

bo

undi

ng o

nsite

radi

olog

ical

dam

ages

is b

ased

on

a po

stul

ated

liqu

id ra

dioa

ctiv

e w

aste

sto

rage

tank

ru

ptur

e us

ing

anal

yses

from

the

early

199

0s.

Sho

uld

this

num

ber b

e ad

just

ed?

If so

, des

crib

e

The

requ

ired

leve

l of o

nsite

pro

pert

y da

mag

e in

sura

nce

shou

ld n

ot b

e re

duce

unt

il 18

0 da

ys

follo

win

g th

e te

rmin

atio

n of

the

deco

mm

issi

onin

g pr

oces

s an

d th

e re

mov

al o

f spe

nt fu

el s

tora

ge.

Tow

n of

Ply

mou

th, M

assa

chus

etts

Fee

dbac

k U

.S. N

ucle

ar R

egul

ator

y C

omm

issi

on’s

Adv

ance

d N

otic

e of

Pro

pose

d R

ulem

akin

g

(Doc

ket N

o. N

RC

-201

5-00

70)

Dat

ed: F

ebru

ary

10, 2

016

13

J. G

ENER

AL Q

UES

TIO

NS

REL

ATE

D T

O D

ECO

MM

ISSI

ON

ING

PO

WER

REA

CTO

R R

EGU

LATI

ON

S IT

EM

DES

CR

IPTI

ON

TO

WN

OF

PLYM

OU

TH’S

FEE

DB

AC

K

GEN

-1

(Inte

ntio

nally

bla

nk)

The

NR

C s

houl

d de

velo

p SA

FSTO

R-s

peci

fic

trai

ning

pro

gram

s fo

r em

ploy

ees

mai

ntai

ning

and

m

onito

ring

long

-live

d pa

ssiv

e st

ruct

ures

and

co

mpo

nent

s. T

he N

RC

sho

uld

also

ado

pt

regu

latio

ns to

cla

rify

site

man

agem

ent

resp

onsi

bilit

ies

in th

e ev

ent t

hat a

lice

nsee

goe

s ou

t of b

usin

ess

or n

o lo

nger

exi

sts.

GEN

-2

(Inte

ntio

nally

bla

nk)

Yes.

GEN

-5

d. P

leas

e pr

ovid

e an

y su

gges

ted

chan

ges

that

w

ould

furth

er e

nhan

ce b

enef

its o

r red

uce

risks

that

m

ay n

ot h

ave

been

add

ress

ed in

this

AN

PR

.

Rea

ctor

dec

omm

issi

onin

g pl

aces

hos

t co

mm

uniti

es w

ith s

ingl

e -re

acto

r pla

nts

at a

n el

evat

ed ri

sk o

f pro

long

ed e

cono

mic

har

dshi

p.

Ther

efor

e, th

e N

RC

sho

uld

cons

ider

revi

sing

se

ctio

n 4.

3.12

of t

he “

Gen

eric

Env

ironm

enta

l Im

pact

Sta

tem

ent o

n D

ecom

mis

sion

ing

of N

ucle

ar

Faci

litie

s,”

whi

ch a

ddre

ssed

soc

ioec

onom

ic

impa

cts

asso

ciat

ed w

ith re

acto

r dec

omm

issi

onin

g an

d de

term

ined

that

suc

h im

pact

s w

ere

“nei

ther

de

tect

able

nor

des

tabi

lizin

g.”

Furt

herm

ore,

the

NR

C s

houl

d co

nsid

er re

visi

ng it

s de

com

mis

sion

ing

cost

est

imat

es to

mor

e ac

cura

tely

refle

ct th

e de

com

mis

sion

ing

cost

es

timat

es fi

led

in re

cent

PSD

AR

s.