ML19247B918
| ML19247B918 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 02700039 |
| Issue date: | 12/09/1980 |
| From: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Eisenhut D, Hanauer S, Vollmer R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8101150925 | |
| Download: ML19247B918 (6) | |
Text
DI $.~.RI 3dII M -
Central riles JR:e r ce r-
- ca n2 eacing m
- e
- es::
3Lainas
.Th:vak G 1CifsNDUM FCR:
Darrei' 3. Eis ern :, Director, Di visicn o f Licensing
- icnard H-ic'l er, :ier;;;r, Divisi:n of Engineering Steven H Hanaaer, Dire:: r, Division of ~ uran Fact:rs S a f e t,
- ew::: :.
- ss, Direct r, Divisi:n of Sjsters Integra:icn Honas E. varley, Director, :ivision of Safety Technology Eer ard J. Snycer, Or:grar Director, 7I ;r grar Office FROM:
Harold R. Denton, Director, Office of Nuclear Reacter Regulati on SLL'ECT:
TER CFFICE LETTER N0.19 REVISION 1 PROCEDURES FOR NOTIFICATION TO LICENS1H BCAROS OF PJ. LEVANT AND MATERIAL NEW INFCRi'.ATION Effective irrediately, all NRR personnel >(ill use the following revised paocedures for assuring ;ror:pt and appropriate action on notifying Licensing Boarcs, Appeal Panel and the Cornission of new infomation which is considered by tne staff to be relevant and material to one er mere licensing proceedings.
These revised procedures reflect the experience we have gained since issuing the criginal Office Letter No.19 cn July 6,1978.
This Office Letter places an obligation on all NRR staff meders to be alert to the significance of new infomation that is developed in the course of their review anc to censider whether this infer =ation could reasonably be regarded as putting a new or different light upon an issue before Scards or es raising a new issue after publication of the staff's principal evidentiary documents.
This is the central theme of the procedures and requires the exercise of good jucgment to assure that Boards will not be burdened with material beyond that potentially significant to the indivicual licensing proceedings.
g.. _7,
..g.,.y tL 2. :: :n Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
Ecard Netification Procecure Tloll5o@5
~
cc:
E. Christenbury, OELD R. Rosenthal, ASLAP R. ca:0, AELEP F
~ ~.. :.
[
7)
, _2 L L
Y,D '
35
...g() 'e f_ rr r
., :; -m serm :
. _. 4 _. -n:e : 2
-.=
'[
?]
~[f i[
'[g L i 'E3 1.A, S
m,
dy
~
4 BOARD ROTIFICATICN PROCEDURE l
A.
BACKGROUND Following Cemission approval of its Boarc Notification policy on May 4, 1978, the Of fice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation issuec NRP Office Letter No.19, dated July 6,1978, which contained Boarc Notification procecures to be implementec by NRR. The term " Board Notification" refers to new inf ormation wnich is consicered to be relevant and naterial to one or nere licensing proceecings',
i.e., material relating to an issue before a Licensing Boarc. Appeal Panel, or the Cxnission which can d
reasonably be regarced as putting a new or M.ierent lignt on that issue, or raising a new issue. (Note that the term '3cara" will be used in this procedure to ref er to Licersing Boards, Appeal Panel and Comi ssion. )
In a memoranoum dated May 10, 1978, the Comission requested that an evaluation of the Board Notification policy be prepared when approximately one year of exoerience was available. To this enc, Comission Paper SECY-8Li-129, I
cated Marcn 10,19S0, provicea an assessment of tnen current procecures l
and proposec changes to those procecures to correct proolems encountered in carrying out tne Board Notification policy.
I B.
DISCUSSION There were tnree significant changes to the Board Notification procecures
'recomencec in SECY-80-129 and approved by the Com,issicn:
1.
Change tne time threshold for initiating the formal Board Notification procecures from tne issuance of the ACRS Supplement and FES to 30 days before the start of tne evicentiary hearing.
2.
Eliminate the routine transmittal to the Boards of staff correspondence anc notices to applicants and licensees. Staff corresponcence and notices to applicants anc licensees would be sent to tne Board only if it is determined to meet the guidelines for Board Notification, i.e., new inf ormation consicered material and relevant.
3.
Incorpcrate tne guidelines for staf f appraisal and evaluation of Boarc Notification matter set forth in ALAB-551, as follows:
6
+
a.
supply an exposition acequate to allow a ready appreciation of the precise nature of the Board Notification matter; b.
supply an exposition acequate to allow a ready appreciation of the extent to what the Board Notification matter might have a bearing upon the particular facility before the board; r
l C.
in the event a conclusion with regard to the safety or environmental
}
significance of the Board Notification matter is presented, set forth tne reasoning uncerlying that conclusion sufficient to allow the Doarc to make an informec judgment on the valicity of the conclusion; p
and h
1
, d.
where the beard has limited jurisdiction, spell out the possible relationship between the subject ratter of the notification and one or more of the issues before the Doard.
C.
DETERMINAT*CN OF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BOARD NOTIFICATION BY TECHNICAL RECEn GRJUP5 A'O PROJECT MANA3ERS The Board Notification policy is applicable to operating license proceedings as well as construction permit proceedings.
In these proceedings the staff will send new inferretion relevant and raterial to safety or environerntal issues to the Boards regardless of the specific issues which have been placed in controversy. This practice includes. procaecings for the conversion of provisional to f ull-term cperating licenses.
In hearings concerning operating license amendments Board Notification is limited to the issues under consic'eratica in the hearing.
All staff members are responsible for reviewing all inforr.ation received in the course of their assigned tasks, including reports identified by the Recearch and Standards Coordination Branch as being accroariate for consideration for Board Nctification, to determine whether it may be related to licensing proceedings and ray represent relevant and naterial new inf or:ation jhich snould be provided to appropriate Boards.
Information received from outside sources and considered to be 9,itable for Board Notification should be hancied in an expeditious manner. Scre examples of inf ormation f rom outside sources are:
(1) the reporting of errcrs discovered in a vendors Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) models cr codes which could result in changes to analyses previously evaluated and discus.ed in the SER, (2) the repcrting of geological features wnich could result in significant changes to these previously re;crted by the applicant and evaluated by the staff as discussed in the SER, and (3) these reports identified by the Research and Standards Cocrdination Brancn as being appropriate for consideration for Board Nctification.
Internally generated information that could reasonably be regarded as putting a new or cifferent lignt upon an issue before Boarcs should also de reported as expeditiously as practicable. However, the Ccamission's policy recognizes the cifficulty of cetermining the point when an indivicual staff member's perceived concern has developed into a staff issue of sufficient impcrtance that Boards are to be notified.
In accorcance with the Conmission's policy, internally generated information shoulo be proviced to Boarcs at the pcint wnen tne staff cetermines that it is necessary to get more information aDout a proDiem f rom a source external to the staff. That is, if such new information is ceterminec to de of sufficient impcriance to seek further information, analyses, tests, etc., from licensees cr vendors, NRC contracts, cr others outside the NRC staff, then the issue nas cevelcpec to the point wnere concernec Scarcs snould De infornec.
, As for internally generatec information, technical papers and journal articles sncula De provicea to Scarcs at a point mnen tne staff oetermines tnat (1) sucn ir.f urmation is of sufficient impcriance to cali into cuestion staff positions anc criteria or (2) tne staf f has cetermined to ><;.
furtner 1r.f ormation, analyses, tests, etc., frcm licenstes, vencers, AR: ccntractors or otners outsice the staff.
1.
Staff memoers snould provice promptly the folic =ing information, tnrougn tneir ranage:ent, to the Director, Division of Licensing:
a.
The item recommended for notification of Scarcs.
D.
An excesition acequate to allow a reacy appreciation of the precise nature of Boarc Notification matter.
c.
Consicerations regarding relevancy and materiality; i.e.,
putting a new or cifferent light upon an issue beforc the Scarc or raising a new issue.
c.
An exposition acequate to allow a reacy appreciation of the extent to what tne Scarc Notification matter mignt have a bearing upon tne particular f acility before the Scarc.
} e.
A statement as to the perceivec significance of the information as it may af f ect current staff positicns.
( A clear assessment of tne significance is not recuirec at tnis time and tne recc.cencation shoula not te ceiayec in orcer to permit lengtny ceterminaticns.
If a clear assessment anc final resoluticn is avaiiacle, it coviously provices for a clean Scarc sucmittal.
For all reccamendations which do not ccntain a final resolution folic up action is requirec to inform the Scarcs as to the ultimate staf f cisposition. )
f.
In :ne event a conclusion with regarc to the safety er environmental significance of the Boarc Nctification matter is presented, set fcrtn the reascning uncerlying tnat conclusion sufficient to allow tne Scarc to make an inf ormed jucgmenc on tne valicity of the conclusion.
g.
Where tne Boarc has limitec juriscicticn, spell out the possible relationsnip Detween the sub]ect matter of tne notification anc cne or more of the issues Defore the Ecars.
i
. I h.
If the inf erration relates to a specific decret, a staterent as to possi le acclicability to ciner cockets.
2.
NRR also has a res;cnsibility for icentifying inf erration potentially j
relevant and material to Scards consicering f acilities licensed under Part 70 and under the cocnizance of the Dffice of Nuclear Material
+
i Safety and Safeguards (N555). Staff members should make s
- u ch u
I reccamendations througn their cansoement to the Director, Division of Licensing. The inferration provided should, to the extent possible, I
conf orm to that listed in Item 1. above. The Director, Division of Licensing, will forward the Board Nctification raterial to the Direc:ce, Office of Nuclear Material Saf ety and Safeguards.
3.
Reccamendations may be judged by the Directcr, Division of Licensing, not to be raterial anc relevant a.c a cercrancum to that effect will be proviced tc :ne origina cr.
If the origina:Or still feels that the i-f erraticn sncule be ;rovided to Scarcs, he er she snoul: so state in a f cilewu; recernenca:icn. Such a f ollewup recommendation will be processed througn the norral Scard Nctification channels. Altnou gh ccaments ray be adced indicating disagreement by these wn judgec the inf er ation not to be relevant and material, it cill be forwarced ic
- ne Scarc.
d.
Scard Nctifications on ciffering professional cpinions will follow
- ne ;roceuures cf NRC "anual Chacter 4125, " Differing Pr fessional Opinicns."
n.
- n. :.c..t. m. a. c a n. :, Lm..,. C m-. u*a x__mv_v. x m-w N.c, m
v 1.
The key to ccamencement cf Scard Nctificatict.s cr. a s;ecific case is the establishnent cf tne date fcr tne beginninc cf evidentiary hearing and issoance cf relatec nctice ey the Scard. Pricr to 30 cays bef ore :ne hearing, new material whicn is consicered mr'erial and relevant to a creceecing is presented to the Ecaces via SER supplerent cr c her dccuments. Mc.ever, if there are items that have nc: been apprcariately dis;csec cf, a summary list is to be previced by the project manager D :ne Scar: 30 days before the start of the hearing.
For cases within 30 days of (or during) the evidentiary hearing new material found material anc relevant snall be forwarced promctly to the Board according to these prccedures.
2.
CELD will provide DL with periodic updates of a list of current proceecings f cr f acilities under the cogr.izance of DL, indicating whether the Licensing Scard, Appeal Ecard or Corrission has
- urisciction over proceedings.
l
i 1
I l
3.
The Dffice of the Directcr, DL, will establish and maintain tne record-keeping system related to all Board Notification ratters.
~his will incluce a log of current proceedings and a detailed list cf issues uncer ccnsideratien.
4 The Directer, Division of Licensing, shall review all recommendations ano determine whether they are relevant and material (5 wor (ing days f rom loggi ng). Reccamendaticns containing inf ormation considered to i
be directly related to a specific case are also reviewed for applicability to other cases.
If it is determined tnat a econmendation is not consicered to be relevant anc raterial, a nercrancum to tnat effect is sent to the reccanending parties.
If the inf ormation and accorcarying reccanendation are not clear enough for a determination to be mace, the Directcr will request clarifying inf ormation from the cri gi nat cr.
5.
For instances prict to 3D days of the evicentiary hearing, the Director, Division cf Licensing, shall ferward a nercrandum to the cogn1: ant DL Assistant Director (s) advising them tnat the 1:en be trougnt to tne attention of the Scard througn incorpcration in the SER or as supple-m_ tal staff testimony. A copy of the memorandum will be sent to the originator. The project manager is responsible for seeing that the iter is covered in evidentiary dccuments unless it has been determined that the item has been resolved ar.c that Board Nctification j
is not required.
Final disposition snall be reported to the Office of the Directcr, DL (Scard Notification Coordinatcr).
5.
For instances within 30 days of (or during) ne evicen'iary hearing, the Director, Divisicn of Licensing, shall forward a memov enca to the cognizant DL Assistant Directer advising them that the item must D3 brougnt prorctly to the attention of the appropriate Boarcs.
The cognizant DL Assistant Director shall assure tnat the item is brought proactly to the attention of the Scards (5 working days f rom receipt of the Director's neacrandum).
Copies of tne Boarc Nctificaticn shall be sent to the criginator, technical review group, Office of tne Director, DL (Board Nctificaticn Cocrcinator) and GELD (Hearing Division Director and Chief Counsel).
7.
A finding by the Director, Divisien of Licensing, with regard to Board reccanendations shall be reviewed by the DL Assistant Directors for a;plicability to proceedings related to applications f or construction permits, post-CP proceedings, a;plicaticns for operating licenses, as well as proceedings relating to issuance of license amendaents.
Proceecings related to research and test f acilities licensed under Part SD are to be taken into consiceration also.
,