ML16288A475

The Relationship of the Quantitative Safety Goal to the Concept of Adequate Protection

ML16288A475
Person / Time
Issue date:	11/20/1989
From:	Remick F Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
To:	Taylor J NRC/EDO
References
D891120
Download: ML16288A475 (23)

Text

D891120 Mr. James M. Taylor Acting Executive Director for Operations U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

SUBJECT:

THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE QUANTITATIVE SAFETY GOAL TO THE CONCEPT OF ADEQUATE PROTECTION During the 355th meeting of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safe-guards, November 16-18, 1989, we discussed the concept of "adequate protection" and its role in the plans for implementation of the NRC Safety Goal Policy. We discussed this subject during several previous meetings of the Committee and our Subcommittee on Safety Philosophy, Technology, and Criteria. During this review, we had the benefit of discussions with members of the NRC staff and of the documents ref-erenced.

In a series of reports to the Commission culminating in the report of February 16, 1989, the ACRS has commented on the staff's proposals for implementing the Commission's Safety Goal Policy. We also discussed this subject in a meeting between the ACRS and the Commission on May 3, 1989. Following this meeting and a meeting with the staff on July 26, 1989, the Commission asked for a clarification of the seemingly differ-ent positions held by the staff and by the ACRS concerning the role of the concept of adequate protection in the staff's plan for implementing the Safety Goal Policy (Staff Requirements Memorandum dated August 21, 1989). We provided an interim response in our report to Chairman Carr on October 11, 1989.

As an instrument for providing the requested clarification to the Commission, the staff prepared a draft paper entitled, "Adequate Pro-tection As It Relates to Safety Goals: ACRS and Staff Positions," that was forwarded to us for review as an attachment to a memorandum from E.

S. Beckjord, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, to R. F. Fraley, ACRS, dated November 2, 1989.

We take exception to the description of the ACRS positions, as described in the draft paper, as follows:

(1) On page 2 of the draft paper, the staff provides a quotation from the Committee's February 16, 1989 report (under Definition of "Adequate Protection"), as follows:

We believe that the safety goal should play an impor-tant, but indirect, role in defining adequate protec-tion. Ideally, compliance with the Commission's regulations is a suitable surrogate for defining adequate protection of the public. However, we believe that the adequacy of the regulations should be judged from the viewpoint of whether nuclear power plants, as a class, licensed under those regulations, meet the

safety goals. It is our understanding, following discussions with the staff, that the staff proposes the safety goal to be a sort of aspirational objective which would be sought but not necessarily reached.

To provide a better understanding of the ACRS position, the staff should also include the paragraph that precedes the above quota-tion, namely:

The term "adequate protection" has importance in the legal areas of safety regulation. Although it is needed and used with apparent precision in legal instruments, its technical definition is not precise.

In general, it is accepted as equivalent to the term "with no undue risk to public health and safety" often used in other contexts. Another term, "in full compli-ance with the regulations" is used as a surrogate, on occasion, for either of these.

(2) Following this quotation, the staff's draft paper describes the ACRS position as, in effect, equating the concepts of "safe enough" and "adequate protection." This is not correct. The ACRS believes that the safety goal sets a standard of what is "safe enough," for the population of plants or a class of plants. As we have consis-tently stated in our previous reports on this subject, the quanti-tative safety goal should be used only to judge the adequacy of the NRC's body of regulations and should not be used to judge the adequacy of the design and performance of a particular individual plant. We do not attempt to equate the safety goals to "adequate protection" in the sense in which the courts have recently con-sidered it.

Sincerely, Forrest J. Remick Chairman References

1. Memorandum dated November 2, 1989 from Eric S. Beckjord, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, NRC, to Raymond F. Fraley, ACRS, transmitting Draft Commission Paper for the Commissioners,

Subject:

Adequate Protection As It Relates To Safety Goals: ACRS and Staff Positions (Predecisional)

2. Memorandum dated August 21, 1989 from S. J. Chilk, Secretary, to J.

M. Taylor, Acting EDO, and R. F. Fraley, ACRS,

Subject:

Staff Requirements - Briefing on Integration of Policy Statements For Severe Accidents, Advanced Reactors, Safety Goals, and Standardiza-tion - July 26, 1989

1231 S-

n 3201232 VS-

é 3201233 *S-

/

3201234 T-

1

3201229 T-

3

²3211235 ÷sE

4

+ 3211236 AtE

6

-¶3211237 uE

9

WP3221238 ve

D

- 3221239

we

E

rA