ML16344A227

A Base Program of NRC Safety Research

ML16344A227
Person / Time
Issue date:	04/15/1985
From:	Ward D Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
To:	Dircks W NRC/EDO
References
Download: ML16344A227 (3)

Text

D850415 April 15, 1985 Mr. William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555

SUBJECT:

A "BASE" PROGRAM OF NRC SAFETY RESEARCH During its 300th meeting, April 11-13, 1985, the ACRS considered the report entitled, "NRC Safety Research Program," Draft 2, dated December 19, 1984. This matter was discussed in detail by the ACRS Subcommittee on the Safety Research Program at a meeting on April 10, 1985.

The purpose of the NRC Safety Research Program report is stated to be:

"... to provide a basis for determining the future size and direction of the program."

This, of course, is a desirable, or even necessary, objective. However, it is not clear, simply from this statement of the purpose, why this report is needed in addition to the Long-Range Research Plan now being prepared by the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES). It appears rather that the ultimate objective of the report is to determine a minimum level of funding that is needed to support the research program required for the NRC to accomplish its mission.

The report concludes that:

"A base level of funding for a stable, continuous NRC research program is essential to continue to enable rapid and successful resolution of regulatory problems as they arise."

We agree with this conclusion. However, we cannot now agree with the further conclusion that this base level of funding is at the "FY 84 and FY 85 budget levels in the President's budget" (about $165 million).

In our view, research in the context of a base program should have some or all of the following characteristics:

It should be anticipatory rather than reactive. It should provide a base of knowledge and of expertise, both within the NRC Staff and among outside research organizations, that will permit the prompt recognition and resolution of new problems as they arise, and will provide a basis for judging new proposals that may be presented to the NRC.

It should provide the NRC Staff with access to and indepth understanding and appreciation of safety research and safety-related concerns and approaches outside the NRC and the U.S.

It should be of such scope and nature as to maintain a cadre of experts in each of several areas that will almost certainly be important in the future. It is essential that such experts be available to the NRC as consultants or to carry out research to help resolve new or different short-or long-term problems as they arise.

It should not be static but should be expected to change in time as experience shows changes in the nature of the problems to be expected.

It should provide leadership in areas that are not, or are not likely to be, covered in the research programs of industry or other governmental agencies.

A significant portion of the current and of recent NRC Safety Research Programs meets the above criteria and should be continued as a base program to meet future needs. However, not all of the current program is of this kind, nor should it be. Now, and at any given time in the future, the research program supported by the NRC should include two components: One will be the base program; the other will include research on new or different problems that require separate or additional research for their resolution. In other words, we do not believe it is possible, or appropriate, to try to develop a base program that will provide the background or basis for rapid unassisted resolution of all problems that may arise.

For these reasons, we do not believe that the need for a base program, in the areas we would now consider appropriate for inclusion in such a program, is itself sufficient to justify a "base level of funding" at a level of $165 million. Neither we nor the RES Staff has attempted to estimate a level of funding for this kind of base program. If such an estimate can be made, it would be the level of funding for a base program but not necessarily the level of funding for a complete research program to meet the NRC's needs at any given time.

In summary, we find the draft report less than convincing as an argument for a base level of funding. We find merit in defining and seeking support for a base program. We believe that such a program cannot be expected to solve all important problems and that research beyond or in addition to the base program will always be needed, and the funding required for such research, although almost certain to be needed, cannot be estimated or justified in advance.

Sincerely, David A. Ward Chairman

Reference:

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "NRC Safety Research Program," Draft 2, dated December 19, 1984.