ML19347F326
| ML19347F326 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/14/1981 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19347F327 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8105180396 | |
| Download: ML19347F326 (35) | |
Text
g i
l
)
i 7
4 g
,.., y.
i
,.j
'. NUCLEAR REGULTORY COMMISSICN s
7 7-h.
?.
},,
c n'
- ;.. b
', l - g,; ;,-,. -
,t o.
n.-.
.s F
k y
r,g
- ..~ -.
Discussion of Policy, Planning S Program bl.
i; 4
/\\Pp.,dISS/g$
~
'41 M 4,,,[% ?; m
' Guidance for FY '83
'87
\\q/n s
/
3 Mjyyrfb
~
('.
cg m April 14, 1981 PAGES:1 thru 32 g;. - ' Washington, D. C.
~
e l
z...
l
._...::11.DERSON REPOttTING
(..
4 00 :VL:q' ~' a Me., S.'d. Wash!.r.q~;r., D.C.
23024
...T.41aphene: (202) 554-2345 8105180J9/o
i AR/cr i
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
'4 e
5 5l 6
Discussion of Policy, Planning & Program j
Guidance for FY '83 '87
^
I Nl 8
dd 9
i h
10 3
h 11 Room 1130, U
1717 H Street, Northwes t, y
12 Washington, D.C.
5 (s g 13 Tuesday, April 14, 1981 u
E 14 w
g 15 The Commission met at 10:30 a.m., pursuant to I
16 j
notice, Joseph Hendrie, Chairman of the Commission, presiding.
s g
17 !
Commissioners present:
Chairman Joseph Hendrie, 5
M 18 Commissioner John Ahearne, Commissioner Victor Gilinsky and 19 '
g Commissioner Peter Bradford.
F.
20 Present for the NRC Staf f/ OPE:
21 D.
Rathbun G. Eysymon t 22 Present for the NRC Secretary's Office:
23 ;
S.
Chilk l
24 l Present for the NRC Of fice of General Counsel:
l 25,
l I
L.
Bickwit, Esq.
l i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
C DISmW O
- st= t-=====fet=1 1. c======t>= os a. =an =1=> ce es C=1 a4 Statas Nuclaar lag *.zia:c:7 C O sics held on.
9////71 f
- ' 11 the Ccumissian's. officas a: 1717 E Se: e=, N. W., Wash 1=g:=n,
. D. C.
Tha: see:1=g was open c= puh
4::andasca a=d obsarracica.
. This.===~p: has :n beerr raviawad, cc :ac:ad,, c= edi::ad, and 1: =ar contain d-= ms _=.
The ::zuse:ipe is i===d=d sola17 for gn=aral ' 'c a::1c-4 pu= poses.
As p;svidad. by 10 CZ2. 9.103,1: is =ce par: of -de fo =al or # ' :=a.1 :secri of decisi..=. of.he =a::ars disc =ssad.
Tzprassicus of opd d===. 1=.-lis
.c.se:19: dc =or cacassa:117
- sflac: f1=al da*=--d-==1ons or baliafs.
No plead 1=g or c ha:
paper =a7 be. filad. vi:5. ee CQsic=. i= a=7 pr:cand1=g as -la.
=asul= of or add.assed. o a=7 s a: amen: c a.g e== c==21=ad.
ha a1=,. excape as the. Ccm=1ssics a7 au:ho:i:a.
(3 e
i e
i e
'2 I
_P _R O_ _C E_ E _C _I N_ _G _S 2
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
If the Commission will come to 3
order.
We meet this morning on a subject that is dear and near O
4 to commissiomer shearne.s heart.
5 I want to associate myself with my other colleagues 5
0 in this matter.
R b
I (Laughter. )
M k
0 All right, now, we were making steady progress d
I through the document.
My staff has equipped me with a new set 10 of papers, and I can't find my way through any of them.
=
.N U
John, you probably understand where we are.
Would a
g 12 you tell me what I should grasp?
=s f
13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Well, unless Dennis has some 3
14 g
other comments, I would propose that you look at the paper I s
sent out on April 10.
3[
16 What I had attempted to do, Jim Blahah, working us I
withGeorgeEysymon/t, had attempted to go through -- this is x
1 IO now Section III.B, because --
E g
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
We were getting ready to do III.B, right?
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
And'what we attempted to do 22 was to take the comments that had been provided up to them, and s
3l either see if we couldn't get a version that would take 24 j
everybody's comments in, or in as many cases as I could, I gave 25 l up on my plan to try to get to some compromise language.
I I
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
'3 1
(Commissioner Bradford left the room at 10:33 a.m.)
)
2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I see.
3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
There were a set of comments 4
submitted last night.
e 5
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
On the previous one?-
6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: But they relate reasonably R
R 7
well, and I don't think there will be any difficulty, so the Kl 8
three pieces of paper I would suggest you have is the paper I d
q 9
sent out, Peter's comments, and then also a set of NMSS revi-2o 10
'sions which you may have.
E) 11 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
NMSS?
3 i
12 (Documents handed to the Commissioners.)
=
() f 13 l MR. RATHBUN:
Mr. Chairman, do you have Commissioner z
l 14 Bradford's April 13th?
E g
15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Yes, I've got John's, I've got x
j 16 Peter's, I've got the one we have been working from before, w
g 17 l which was the February 27 draft, which. I may have to open up, N
}
18 because it may be the only thing that I can keep track of.
c8 19 (Commissioner Bradford re-entered the room at X
20 10:34 a.m.)
21 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Dennis, would that be it?
22 Im. RATHBUN:
I think that's exactly right.
23 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Now, let's see.
This proposition 24 of yours, John, which is dated April 10th, starts out 1.1, New 25 ;
Reactor Applications.
I
,l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
'4 I
COMMISSIONER AHEAFNE:
That's III.B.
2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
It, in fact,.is -- oh, I see.
3 It's III.B.
4 MR. EYSYMON Which is where you left off last
=
5 time.
5l 6
CHAIRMAN HENDPIE:
What did we do with 1.0, George?
G R
7 MR. EYSYMON)dT:
1.0 is left as is.
7 8
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Peter says this section has d
c; 9
been overtaken by events.
z 10 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Did I se r E
' that?
II CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Or did I?
3 g
12 Yeah, I see.
3
( } y 13 CDBEISSICNER.AEEARE: We're not there yet.
That 's T. 0 m
i l
14 CHAIRMAN HEUbRIE:
Okay.
1.0 stands.
15 We move on to 1.1.
John now has some language.
g 16 Let's see, in your draft, how do I tell differences from the us f
I7 February 27 OPE distribution?
Is the base of this the 27th, z
{
18 and then their handwritten changes on it?
Y n
l9 MR. EYSYMONpT:
There are some typed-in changes.
g 20 CHAIRMAN HENDRTE:
But at any rate, I will be 21 able to distinguish those?
EYSYMOh:
22 MR.
Yes.
23 ;
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Okav.
All right.
Okay.
24 Peter, do you give up comments all the way through to 25 3?
i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
5 I
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
No, my earlier memo, with the sentence -- if you got that far.
3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
And if I fold those into this m
one that we have --
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Does it?
I didn't notice that.
0 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
You didn't get that far.
,n R
7 (Laughter.)
a 8
I carefully put it on the page at the end.
dd 9
j COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
This was one that was sent out O
10 g
March 20th.
=
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Oh, yes, the previous.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
You didn't get that far.
c
/l d 13
(
g Also you have to go back to that number --
3 14 l Q
l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I think we folded it in.
U COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Right.
I 16 g
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Okay.
Let us march down the
.d 17 April 10 paper from Commissioner Ahearne.
i am 18
=
1.1, New Reactor Applications.
19 l j
I' object to "a minimal," John.
20 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Between now and the beginning
~
of FY '827 l
l 22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Well, since you're only asking 23 '
for the capability to process them, and not -- why, I don't 24I l
know what " minimal capability" is.
I guess a minimal capability 25 l is no staff and you have got a list of people in your pocket i
I ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
6 I
you'd hire or something; I don't know.
2 CONIISSIONER BRADFORD:
Since this actually focuses
~
3 on beginning FY '83 --
4 COM1ISSIONER AHEARNE:
Well, it's guidance the 5
j Staff will be using in '82, and it focuses for planning purposes 0
also for the '83 through '87 period.
a R
7 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
I was going to say that the n
k minimal capability, you'd really be talking about the period d
d 9
}
between now and the beginning.of FY '82.
h 10 COMMISSIONER AHEAItiEs I have no problem with dropping z=
that.
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
What are we talking about here?
People who are standing by doing nothing, or what?
l CHAIR EM HENDRIE:
I guess I've fostered this
=
l 9
15 '
s paragraph, or sentence in the paragraph, and the reason I have x
l wanted it in is not to require some particular level of staffing l;[
17 l in these functions, people that are nominally assigned to this, a.z i
Si 18 '
but then get told off to do other things; but rather just to 19 i j
make it clear to the staff managers that we don't want to see 20 tha capability to handle these sorts of projects disappear out
~
of the Staff.
22 That would be a possible way to manage the agency, to say no, we're not going to be able to process new CP 1
24 i l
j applications, site reviews, special projects, and we give up 25 '
on standardization, and anybody that -- you know, reassign the
{
l l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
7 1
people, and never mind those functions, and what I'm saying is b
2 I think it's important that it be clear that we want the 3
capability maintained out there, even though the people will be k./
4 doing other things for the present, between those subjects.
e 5
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, since we have a number 5l 6
of reviews in-house --
R d
7 COMMISSIONER AESARNE:
But through that five-year M
8 8
planning period, you sea, there may well be a different forecast.
d ci 9
COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
We're talking about a five-zo g
10 year planning period?
E j
11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yeah.
And it may well be 3
y 12 that when they start doing these planning forecasts, they 5
. ( ) y 13,
see a period in which there aren't going to be any CP reviews.
=
m
.h 14 MR. EYSYMONpT:
I think the last estimate is they g
15 don't expect any CP applications through 1984.
=:
j 16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
Well, capability is fine.
It u$
g 17 i
seemed to me the more interesting thing to address is the Y
I
{
18 '
question of what sort of standard you wanted new plants to i:;
19 meet, and do we want to divert some people into thinking about 5
20,
that.
21 !
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Well, it's been recommended to us 22 i in various ways, j
i 23 l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I would favor that.
I think i
24l some people are doing that now.
t 25 ;
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I would not object to it I guess i
l
~
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
'8 I
in view of what are clearly going to be hard days for this
/9 2
reactor-knowledgeable people which you would like to have think v
3 about that, I guess it would not make it have a very -- you know,
(\\:.'
4 sort of a -- very many people or very much pressure behind it 5
versus the priorities for other things.
0 But'I agree, it would be a good thing to do.
R b
7 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I don't think you need a lot 3
l 8
of people if -- the value of it seems to me to be that even if dd 9
applications are going to be a while, those people who are j
10 putting them together need some guidance.
Let's not get into
=
II the same --
3 g
12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Otherwise, the time will come O!I3 when the Agplicant fine 117 gees reedy, end we won't have any-m I4 l
thing.
kl 15 CHAIRMAN HUNDRIE:
I think it would be fine.
I z
j 16 don't know how detailed one wants to get here.
one could add a w
h II sentence to this Section 1.1 saying what the NRC or the Staf f --
E 3
18 l I don't know quite who will consider what, desirable improvements, P
l 19 !
or will consider possible or desirable improvements in safety 9a 20 that should be --
II COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
-- incorporated in new plants.
22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
-- that might be incorporated into 23 '
new design, would be a good way to put that.
Something like 24 that, you know, would not exactly say we were into a big project s
25 and it isn't all that definite, but it's a point in a useful l
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
9 1
direction.
()
2 You want to try something along that line, George?
e 3
LMr. Eysymon/t nodding affirmatively.)
()
4 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:
I guess I need it more e
5 definite in 'that we ought to try to develop those requirements b
~
]
6 that we believe ought to be incorporated in new designs, and R
7 if there aren't any, there aren't any.
But if there are to be new 3
)
8 requirements, then the designers ought to know about it as early dd 9
as possible.
,2og 10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
All right.
Why Caesn't George 11 come and see you with that sentence, and then work on that, u
y 12 1.1.1.
The plan to accomplish this one will be
=
( 13 submitted to the Commissicn oy the end of FY '82. l 14 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That was just a proprosal n[ 15 to try to get some guidance. u g{ 16 CHAIRMAN RENDRIE: I'll tell you, the end of FY '82 W 17 is far enough away so that -- you know, my planning horizon, as 4 { 18 I said the other day, is 10 working days. C 19 Any objection? n 20 Without objection, sustained. 21 How about the rest of that? There aren't page numbers, 22 l so I can't call page numbers. l 23l 1.2.1. 2d i COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: On 1.1.1 -- I'm sorry, Joe, I t 25 j I thought you were just dealing with the last sentence of it. l l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
'10 I CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: All right. 2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: It's been too long since the 3 siting and licensing debates for me to remember. On the sentence 4 in there that says, " Consideration will be given to the i a 5 advantages of structuring the review," dadadada, so that h l 0 except for those aspects, if an approved standardized design R 6 7 is referenced in an application, a single-stage licensing i X l 8 process, does that require legislation, or is that something we d 8 9 decided we could do for ourselves? .2 10 MR. BICKWIT: The two-stage process is required by = II law, so that if you abandon it, it would take legislation. D f I2 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I thought the law says you Q " 13 l can run them together. You have to give two licenses, but l 14 l you can effectively -- 15 MR. BICKWIT: As to what has to be in the first u d 16 and what has to be in the second, that's not entirely clear at ws h I7 the moment; but no, you would have to have two different a { 18 proceedings. l~ I9 ; CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: You couldn't do them jointly? g l 20 MR. BICKWIT: No. 2I CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I had ndver thought of that. Are 22 ) you sure? i l 23 : MR. BICKWIT: That's certainly'the way I read it, 24 j and I read it this morning. 25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: What it seems to me that ';e could l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
'll 1 do, if we wanted to, would be to put a rule in place which would h 2 be titled "The Review of Complete Designs in the First Place" 3 rule, which would say that where the guy comes in with O 4 a fina1 safeey ana1ysis and sufficiene eesign worx done to back i. 5 that up, that a construction permit will issue as per the h j 6 Atomic Energy Act, but that it will be a -- I don't know, a R E 7 Class AA construction permit, and what that means is that 5 l 8 it is the Commission's intent simply to confirm as the construc-d q 9 tion goes along, so that when we come to the operating license ig 10 stage, it's the Commission's intent to simply confirm that 11 the plant has been built the way everybody said it was going to b e is g 12 built, and that it would be our intent to issue an operating Q 13 license without requiring submittal of a Final Safety Analysis l 14 Report, since we presumably already have the essence of that, 15 and without staff Safety Evaluation Reports and the rest. j 16 Now that doesn't leave -- that still leaves the plant W f 17 liable to a request for a hearing, and at some point you would = { 18 have to notice your intent to issue an operating license, if i: } 19 everything came out right, and if somebody wanted a hearing, i 20 as I expect they will on most of these plants, why, then you'll 21 have to have a hearing and then the Staff will get sucked in to 22 ] do a review at least to cover the elements at issue in the 23 l hearing, so they can prepare testimony and their arguments and ~ / '. 24 l so on. V 25 i It's not nearly as tidy as having legislation that l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
1l 12 1< would let you issue a combined CP-OL in the beginning, but it's 2 sort of halfway possible. 3 COMISSIONER AHEARNE: These are some of the things 4 that are planned that wodd be submitted. e 5 COMISSIONER GILINSKY: I think what's lacking here 5 6 is a statement that the Applicant would have to submit a near-a b 7 final design. I think that ought to be incorporated, and I A j 8 think it ought to say that we will encourage Applicants to do d d 9 this, and that if it is done, we will try to arrange our affairs .2 10 so that we can have a near-final review at the earlier stage. = II COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Of course, an approved U f 12 standardized design is that.- h-35 13 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Not necessarily, because a u I4 lot of these are prelimi e ry designs. .g 15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: All the ones we've got at the a tj 16 moment at preliminary designs. I think one outfit has submitted 2 f I7 a final one, and how that's going along, I don't know. b IO lI Probably not very fast. C l b I9 COMMISSIONER GILI'4 SKY: So underlying this idea is a 20 really tu expectation that an Applicant can submit a near-final 21 standard design. ~ ') 22 COMMISSIONER AHEAR'4E: What you want back up here v 23 is the options to submit for agency review, which is combined 24 .] in a balance-of-plant design. It's a single entity. You l 25 i want either near-final. i I l l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
13 1l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Not there. O 2 cOMM1SS10NER AHEARNE: No2 where do you wane it2 3 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Because up above we ought to 4 encourage them to submit as a single entity, even if they're e 5 only able to do that.at the construction stage permit level 5l 6 of detail, it just is a better standard plant, even though it's 7 still preliminary. Xl 8 Down at the bottom where it says, " Consideration d =; 9 will also be given to the advantages of structuring the review" z h 10 of an essentially complete nuclear steam supply and the ba?ance-E 11 of-plant application, except, dadadada. is y 12 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: You've got to have the word 5 1 A'l 5 13 " design" in there because you can have a near-complete a l 14 preliminary CP application.- A near-complete or essentially Y g 15 complete design. z 16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: If you get those words in there, 3;
- d 6
17 put an asteri.sk in the margin, we will, want to doctor them up, 5 { 18 because what we have to make clear is it isn't necessarily E 19 g a complete design, it has to be complete in the safety analysis a 20 -- essentially complete in the safety analysis sense. 21 But, you know, there coi:ld be all kinds of secondary 22 ] plant detailing that just isn't even approached and stial have 23
- what we need for our purposes.
24 l COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: The concern I had was a slightly 25 different one. r t ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
14 1 CHAIRMAN HFNDRIE: We never did get to yours. We 2 started it and then went off in a different direction. You 3 need something about a single-stage licensing process will be 4 used --- I don't know, to the extent compatible with existing = 5 statute or -- 5l 6 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Or that we will seek legisla-R 7 tion authorizing a single-stage licensing process, in the X] 8 event --- d
- i 9
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I would like that. z 10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Any way you want to make the E 11
- words, is
{ 12 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Try it that way. Q 13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I would guess that if we can l 14 get in --- if the Commission does get into that successfully, 15 the whole system will just function more effectively, if we j 16 actually get legislation or Congressional endorsement for that as i ( 17 l approach. 18 l CHAIR E HENDRIE: Actually, if we had a fairly well _c I 19 laid-out plan, that might be something that a unanimous R I 20 Commission could go for, a neat little few-line package which i 21 would be a major revision, no great revolutionary changes. 22 ] I'm beginning to think maybe the way to do legislation 23 ' is two lines at a time. 24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Section A could be that, 25, and Section B could be the Intervenor Funding Act. l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
e '15 1 (Laughter. ) 2 MR. BICKWIT: Just to underscore the unanimity on A? 3 (Laughte r. ) 4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: 1.2.1. e 5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Based on last year's wording, j 6 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: This is last year's? R 6, 7 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. You had said -- Ml 8 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: That's right, I'm now trying d d 9 to find the'old side-by-side. ,z h 10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: The addition -- the difference sk.rg-z i was +n,;.; n __10}. eJ L a. Q lI ~7 0 f 12 In 1.2.2, the insert on the next page, you had said O!13 vou had waneed a 2 from last year put back in. l 14 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: That's fine. 15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Can I get a "will" in there? d 16 I believe the subject verb structure is, "These reactors are w( 17 ! designed," dot dot dot, "and will provide." Okay? h 18 COMMISSIONER BRADMRD: Where are you? 1.2.l? E I l9 s CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: 1.2.2., the insert. The third a 20 line. It has to be "and will provide," since it's the future. 21 MR. BICFICf: "To provide." 22 ( ') COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Yes, I think you could do it 23 ! either way. l l /) 24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: All right, that's another way to l V 25 ; do it, and is at least -- i i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
16 1 COMMISSIONER AHEAPNE: I'll go whichever way. h 2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: -- as good. 3 Okay, "to provide." h 4 1.2.3. = 5 Okay. !] 6 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Peter had wanted to have an 7 "unless" clause at the end of that last sentence. And my X g 8 comment would be that these are planning goals, and that's dd 9 phy I didn't put it in. mi h 10 (Simultaneous conversation.) E 3 11 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Where it that? L1 g 12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: So I just added "as a target 5 Q g 13, objective". u i 14 l COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: That's all right. 2 15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Now, Joe, you had just put a U i gj 16 I question mark on 24 months. us l d 17 l COMMISSIONER ">ILINSKY: Shouldn't we say, "OL reviews i 5 18 l should be completed on a schedule that assures," and not "will E I 19 l be comoleted"? M i 20l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Anything to get agreement. h 21 : MR. BICKWIT: It's consistent. ,7 22 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: No, it has nothing to do ') l 23 l with the substance, it's just that this ought not to be ) 24 l a prediction, it ought to just be our intent, that this is what j ~s 25 we want done. 1 i I i i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
e 17 1 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I don't mind "should". Whether ih 2 it turns out to be "should" or "will" as a fact will depend 3 on the case, the unique case characteristics, and the O 4 inteseinet foreteude of a11 1ovo1ved, end noe in whether it'e e 5 a "will" or "should". 5l 6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Is this planning? We're 7 out of policy? Kl 8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. d d 9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: We're down to planning. If we 10 get through this, then we've got program and financial. It 3 l 11 will go on forever. l> g 12 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Is this still a Commission p' la 13 function? l 14 COMMISSIONER AHEAR'1E: Planning is, although I'll be a 15 glad to take a proxy. y 16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Do we want to say a 10-month w ti 17 hearing process and a month Commission. review or something like { 18 that here? E 19 g COliMISSIONER GILINSKY: That's fine. M 20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Or is it worth -- 21 MR. BICKWIT: As a preliminary matter, I don't think 22 it's what you're focusing on, but a 10-month hearing process 23 isn't at all clear to me. I think what you mean is the time 24 ! from final supplemental SER to initial decision should be 10 ,V 25 ] months. 1 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
^18 I COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Whatever trick is the -- 2 MR. DICKWIT: When we've been using 10 months in 3 these discussions, that's what we've been referring to. O 4 COMMISSIONER RHEARNE It., ehee fine 1 erigger 5 that really starts the clock. 6 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: What you are telling the 7 licensors or the reviewers to do is to count back to the X j 8 construction date 11 months and get their document ready at d o; 9 that point? 2 h 10 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: It should read, "The Staff i 1I should assume an 11-month interval from issuance of the final is I 12 Staff Supplemental Safety Evaluation Report to a final licensing 5 (] y 13 decision by the Commission." = l 14 In contested cases. Of course, in noncontested $j 15 cases you don' t do that. Okay? z 3[ 16 MR. BICKWIT: I guess it should be until issuance d 6 17 of a license in contested cases. Y $i 18 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yeah, or effectiveness or some-g 19 l thing like that, until issuance of an operating license. And n 20 ' if you say issuance of an operating license, it kind of -- it 21 doubles up the emphasis to make it clear that it is the OL process. <) 22, COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: There is still an extra piece, l I ~3 which is that you want tha+, to come before the plants are ready l 24 l to go. (. 25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yeah, that's the previous sentence. l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
19 1 You just got through saying the review should be scheduled 2 so that. ~ 3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Okay. 4 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: In a contested case you have = 5 to say until a final licensing decision, I think, until 5 6 issuance, or else there is not much point in a contested case. R 7 MR. BICKWIT: But the final licensing decision, as M j 8 a legal matter, may be a review many, many years after -- 4 c 9 (Simultaneous conversation.) ,2 10 KR. BICKWIT: Decision on license issuance would m Il take care of your problem. B y 12 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Okay. c O i 13 CaAIRMAN nENDRIE: wheeever te eekes. m 14 1.2.4. t g 15 Wait a minute. z y 16 COMMISSICNER BRADFORD: It's hard to quarrel with M p 17 this, but I think the meat of it is really in the last sentence. 5 i { 18 ' CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: It's all confused. The NRC Boards 9 h 19 don't have a great deal to do with reactor operator licensing. 5 20 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I think that's supposed to be 1 21 reactor licensing. ~ (]) 22 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Oh, you're right. You're 23 right. l 's 24 l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, that's a good thought, %J 25 too. l i ALDERSON REPORTING. COMPANY, INC.
20 I' (.Laughte r. ) 2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I wonder, was that section 3 originally aimed at operator licensing or reactor licensing? O 4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Or was it operating license 5 program? Improvements in the reactor operating licensing 3 0 program? It was either that or operators, and I don't know 7 which in last year's. Xl 8 MR. BICKWIT: The final rule was December '81. O d 9 MR. EYSYMON I think it was directed at reactor 10 operators. = k II COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I thought it was (inaudiblel. D g 12 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Yes, so did I, and when I O!I3 egreed with your commene hefore, I wee thinking exact 1y the seme l 14 thing you were. m bI CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Let me remand 1.2.4 to Commissioner u E Ib Ahearne to decide whether he wants improvements in the reactor us II ! licensing program, or in the reactor operator licensing program. I0 1.2.5. E I' i g COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: That's nice and crisp. 20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Wait. You need to say "and 21 - the solutions implemented." We have already, after all, 2 ('j implemented the unresolved safety issues. l COMMISSIONER AHEAPliE: Yes, you are correct. f i CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: 1.2.6. l l 25 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Did Peter write l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
21 1 " appropriate"? 2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: No. 3 (Laughter. ) 4 I've let it go by a couple of times, wincing. 5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Leave it here. It's fine. = ] 6 1.3. R 7 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Shouldn't we say something a X g 8 little more than that,"the staff should devote appropriate d d 9 effort to programs which have a high potential of reducing 10 risk and to all other programs"? E II (Laughter. ) is N I2 COMMISSIONER AREARNE: I was trying to say ]5 13 something about the concept if in the unlikely event the Staff' 14 has a question of where they put their priorities, if they 15 have any extra slack in their system, it should go in -- 16 g COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Don' t you mean that the M I7 I potential for reducing risk ought to guide the priorities? 18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. E I9 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: In fact, I think you put g 20 your finger on one of my problems with the word " appropriate," 2I it does tend to mask the more concrete statements that can be 22 ]) r.ade, such as the one you just made. 23 l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Have you agreed on 1.2.6? 24 { COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yes. 25 l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Good. i i ALDERSON RFPORTING COMPANY, INC.
22 1 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I modified 1.3 to pick up 2 what I understood to be the latest date. 3 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I wince, but the April 1 date 4 is obviously not going to be met. = 5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: 1.3 sort of predicts the outcome h j 6 on a SECY paper, doesn't it? R 7 MR. EYSYMON You mean in the sense.it says / j 8 integrate? d:i 9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: It says "will develop and implement 2 h 10 a comprehensive plan for," et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. 3=y 11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I imagine when the Staff put \\ j 12 that together, they were only tracking at the time what the law 5 I (] y 13 had laid down, not so mdch to recognize an argument -- m I e h 14 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: But the law doesn' t say anything n 15 about the integration of the SEP, t' e IREP, the NREP. d 16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: No, I think that's right.
- d
!d 17 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: One of the problems I have $u 18 with the way we evolve these documents, it's not clear where 3 P 19, we're breaking new ground. 20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, this is clearly one place, 21 this is in advance of final Commissiori -- ] 22, COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: In this case, I think that 23 the authors had good reason to think that we might actually 24l have dealt with the SECY paper before we had finalized it. v 25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I know, I agree with that. It's a l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
- / 23 s 1 reasonable draft to lay down in view of the SECY paper before h 2 the Commission. I'm just saying in terms of the Commission 3 saying, "Right, that's the language we want to see in here, and 4 we aren't going to comment on it any more," I think it's premature 1 = 5 I would suggest that we simply -- hl 0 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: The first sentence is just R 7 the law, 'so one could leave that, and then if we haven't in fact A j 8 decided the SECY paper, then maybe the second sentence has to d =, 9 come out. 10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: The first sentence tracks E 11 the law, and the last sentence tracks what we have directed it f 12 the Staff to do? O (]* g 13 COIMISSIONER BRADFORD: Right. m l 14 CHAIR M HENDRIE: I think if one tried to cut it E g 15 back to just Section 1.10, why, I would suggest that x y 16 " comprehensive" come out of the first line, and that we avoid as 17, in the last sentence talking about an essential element of x ti 18 the plan, because if we stick just to Bingham, why, the SRP _c 19 ! sort of doesn't enter. n 20 Rather than that kind of fine-tuning, what I would 2l suggest is just that Dennis and Georgs put a tag on this item, 22 O end we.11 recognise it when we act o,act in some w,y, or don.t 23! act, or whatever, on the paper in that program, why, then, you 24 ') know how to write this item, and this may be right, or one might 25; want to shade that one way or the other, rather than to predict l l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
24 1 all possible outcomes. (k 2 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: All right, although I wouldn't 3 think that we should hold up this document if in fact we can ) 4 agree on the -- e 5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: That's right. I think if that hl 6 became a bind on publishing the PQG, why, then one -- if you R 7 took " comprehensive" out of the first sentence, okay, because Ml 8 that's what the law says-- and I refuse to be party to d d 9 Commission documents that don't obey the law. ,2o U 10 MR. BICKWIT: The law does say comprehensive. 11 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:,It does say comprehensive? In that 3 g 12 case, this is what that's going to be. It's a comprehensive ({} cj 13 plan, by definition. u 14 (Laughter.) 2 15 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I thought you were going to U y 16 say something different, which is you refused to be party to w b^ 17 Commission documents that merely echoed the law. = 5 18 (Laughter. ) A 19 l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: No, no, I'm all for those documents. g 5 20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE : You could say in addition -- 2I CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: You could say " additional elements 22 of an overall plan" -- J 23 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: You may just want to stop 24 there. 25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE : "uncer consideration," period, t ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
O 25 1 and then -- and you could keep the last sentence in, " essential () 2 element of the" -- I don't knew, call it the extended plan or 3 whatever, "will be the development of a review schedule to be ) 4 completed," because I think it's quite clear that that is to be e 5 done, is being done, will be complete, whatever else. bj' 6 So if we had to push the PQG out, why, that would be a Rg 7 way of dealing with it without prejudgment on the final decision. Ml 8 1.4. dd 9 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Let's see, '" Emphasis will be -b 10 placed on implementing recommended solutions to generic safety 3j 11 issues whi~ch have been resolved." D y 12 Are these approved solutions? E '(]) 13 CRAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yeah, I think that's the sense l 14 in which it's meant. E 2 15 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Say " implementing approved .j 16 solutions to generic safety issues," period. M g 17 CRAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yeah. U 18 ' Other on 1.47 5 i 19 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Those issues which lack 20 safety significance, et cetera, ought to be dropped from the l 21 list, some of these issues are there because they come up in I 22 l hearings and -- !.) l 23 f CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: You've got two reasons to drop 6 24 ! -- there are two tests: 25 You drop an item if it (a) lacks safety significance i j ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
26 1 and Co) is of marginal importance in the regulatory program. 2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: You'want ts change "or" to 3 "and"? 4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yeah. e 5 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Are there generic environ-h h 0 mental issues that are -- g b 7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yeah. There are a whole pack of 2l 8 -- including some that -- one which I'll be glad to drop from d ci 9 the list, but I cited to see if by waving the red flag, I could 29 G 10 get a rise out of you. E 11 There's a generic issue that says develop better D y 12 ways of establishing the need for power. Ei hg 13 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I'm all for that. l 14 (Laughter. ) 15 I guess I would prefer to say issues which -- where x a[ 16 the word " safety" appears in that in 1.4, would be inclined to d I h 17 l add "or environmental". x { 18 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I put in " safety" because I l = t-19 g was trying to -- n 20 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: You were actually trying to l 2I get those out. ~ 22 (] COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yeah. 23 ! (Simultaneous conversation. ) i 24 l COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: NEPA is still part of our
- v 25 :
statutory mandate, and to the extent that -- 4 l i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
27 I COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Yeah, but if we say "and are of ( 2 marginal importance to the regulatory program" -- 3 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: How did that come out? ( 4 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Well, I'm not sure why 5 that "importance to the regulatory program" really picks up d 0 NEPA issues, except to the extent that one would 'say that you Rf7 have to comply with NEPA in order to get through the legal maze, a k 0 and getting through the legal maze is of importance to the d regulatory program, and therefore we do NEPA issues. 10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I think our two colleagues _E! II are getting~ tired of -- a f I2 (Laughter.) ()S e 13 j __ 7,11 give on that, wherever there is a majority, E 14 g I'll either stick with keeping it out or just drop " safety" w g 15 because those are the two kinds of issues. a y 16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I vote to drop this page. W 17 d (Laughte r. ) 18 l z COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I'd be happy enough to 19 g drop " safety" and just resume the posture saying that essentially 20 we will prioritize generic issues. CHAIMCui HENDRIE: Now how would that leave us? ) COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: It would say "which lack i 23 ' significance and are of marginal importance. n i l ~ 24 ;i I COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: You'd have to catch the I i 25 ' l " safety" in the fifth line, too. And in the seventh. i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
I ~28 I CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I think you want to keep the l 2} " safety" in the fifth line, because amo g generic issues, I 3 think the generic safety issues inevitably are going to have -- O 4 because those will include the unresolved safety issues. e 5 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Yeah, I see where you're 0 going. R b 7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: And clearly you're going to have Kl 8 to punch those. O ci 9 2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: I think that argument then 10 leads to keeping it in the seventh line. = II COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: You can drag me into the iJ g 12 fifth line. Beyond that I-would -- the 'fif th line seems to me E O s i3 to give ie enough emghesis. u l 14 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: You would leave " based on the .Yj 15 potential significance of each issue"? x d I0 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Yeah. d i I7 Well, that, in effect, actually is what we're doing b IO ll = now when we're combing through for issues that shouldn't be C I9 g litigated at the operating license stage. That is the potential t n 20 insignificance to each issue is taking up a fair piece of time. 2I CHAIPlWI HENDRIE: The lancjuage without the word 22 ) " safety" by no means prevents the Staff from identifying this i 1 23 ' as priority 2 item because of the safety significance. 24 I don't know, I guess John's intent, I think, from 25 the beginning was to say, "Look, let's take the generic issues i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
l l l l ~29 1 list and throw out anything that isn't clearly safety-related," 2 and then rank what you've got left, all of those things that 3 are safety-related, into desperate, crucial, urgent, good, -4 better and best, good, and fair, or whatever, and start working e 5 on them from the top down. h 6 Now I guess -- let's see if we can think of an i R 7 environmental generic issue which we would rathcr nave worked Kl 8 on than a sort of medium grade safety proposition. d ci 9 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Nell, I j us t don ' t recall 2o g 10 the list of generic issues. I would need to go back to it. E Il CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I'll tell you, my recollection is D f I2 that there were a nontrivial number of nonsafety matters on Q 13 the generic issues list in the various A, B, C, D, whatever, l 14 and that they tended to be there and receive a priority ranking $l 15 at least on how much of a problem one of them had been, given u gj 16 one had been in one or more cases. us 6 17 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Hearings? } 18 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Well, cases; probably hearings c t-19 g for the most part, but cases, because they may have been a n 20 problem in terms of difficulty -- suppose l' was an uncontested II OL case and the Staff just had a lot of trouble gathering 22 ^' itself together to a consensus view. That could very well put I I 23 ; it on. But I think most of them probably wer:e contested items 24 l in the hearings, and they were the sort of things where the 25 Staff people who suggested them felt, you know, if were was a i f I i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
l f .30 I well-thought-out and organized Staff generic position on this I (b) 2 item, I wouldn't have had' all this item in the Updike case, sort 3 of arguing it ad hoc', but I don't remember environmental NEPA 4 type issues, any one offhand, that sort of would rank up with e 5 what I.would regard as che urgency you get into with say the bl .6 first two safety categories. R A 7 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Well, clearly unresolved Xj 8 safety issues have a priority of their own. O q 9 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yeah, they have a priority of their z 10 own. I think since we are going to lose Commissioner Gilinsky b 11 and me by virtue of'-- 3 g 12 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: In body as well as spirit? c (])uy 13 ! (Laughter. ) 14 CHAIRMnN HENDRIE: Well, depending on your inclination g 15 you can either accept my assurance that we have appointments or - z j 16 ! (Laughter.) i j d 17 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I think I'd check your 5 18 calendar. E 19 g CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: -- or if that isn't good enough, M 20 ' why, -- 2I COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: No,"I'm willing to --- 22 CHAIRMAIT HENDRIE: -- our brains are turning to mush 23 at 11:30 promptly, so why don' t somebody drag out the grade A,
- 5 24
~ B, C, D list and let's thumb through them and pick up this Q 25 ; point next time. One might conclude, in fact, that there i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
I j 31 I wasn't anything on the generic list that you felt strongly 2 enough against say category A, B safety issues, and maybe one 3 would say, well, in view of the press, what we ought to do is D 4 to strike everything that isn't safety-related and attack 5 the high priority ones. 3 0 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Before you disappear, Joe, I R 7 would like to call attention on the next page, not to discuss 7.l 8 now, but what I tried to do is to put in a proposal. OPE, in d 9 their earlier draft, had said what do we do about backfitting, h 10 and so I tried to write something, not that it was very good. = II COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I'm sorry to miss that one. D y 12 It promises to be an interesting discussion. O i, '3 COMM1SSIONEa oItINsKv: I muse ser I m e litt1e sie l 14 ~ bothered about minimum level of protection. The law talks 15 about adequate protection, and I'm not sure -- d l0 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: That was the cnly thing in your M h I7 redraft which I struck out angrily with my red pencil. x y 18 - Let's see when this is on the schedule. c 1 8 i I9 ' 8 MR. CHILK: April 21st, on a Tuesday, n 20 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: April 21st. True. Why is it on 2I at 10:00 in the morning? Because people are tied up in the 22 h af te rnoon? 23 ' MR. CHILK: It was just on in the morning in the 24 () normal course of events, I think. 25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: If that's the only thing we've I i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
32 1 gdt going on -- 4 2 l h MR. CHILK; I just have one appointment for you 3 listed on the 21st. I don't know what it is, h 4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Neither do I. = 5 MR. CHILK: Well, we'll check it. E 6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: All right. Thank you very much. R 7 (Whereupon, at 11:30 a.m., the meeting was Al 8 adjourned. ) d d 9 iog 10 m. j 11 m 'd 12 Ea Q 13 l 14 m 2 15 s j 16 as 6 17 18 19 n 20 21 22 b-i 23 i l 24 I () I 25, l, i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
I l 1 i ) ] I NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO.*EISSION This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the NRC Commissioners in the matter of: I
- Date of Proceeding:
April 14, 1981 l Docket llumber: Place of Proceeding: Washincton, D.C. were held as herein appesrs, and that this is the original transcript I thereof for the file of the Ccomission. 1 ANN RILEY Official Reporter (Typed) O 'Mj) ~ ~ V \\ Official Reporter (Signature) l l i s s, / + l l l 1 __}}