ML20003D099

Unofficial Transcript of 810305 Meeting in Washington,Dc Re SECY-81-20/20A Policy on Proceeding W/Pending CP & Mfg Applications.Pp 1-23

ML20003D099
Person / Time
Issue date:	03/05/1981
From:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:
References
REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8103190255
Download: ML20003D099 (24)

Text

_ _ _ _

NUCLEAR REGULATORI COMMISSION g.

j c

f

(.

nome DISCUSSION ~ OF' SECI--81--20/20A POLICT ON' PROCEEDING WITH PENDING CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND MANUFACTURING APPLICATIONS

~

~

' March _ 5,.19.81.

1 thrti 23' p

i Washingtorr,. D.C,

~

=

'%f c -

eEC[ft[,p:

1 t

MARog1981u -st

~~

V t

tu

/

l

~

M %Y M3G fk c_

40(L vi_WA Ave., 31 W= =h * "Ttczt,. D..C. 20024 Teleph-=r (202T 554-2341 G__

erosrsoa w

\\

s.

(.[.G3i

)

w DI5 6

~

j This.Ls an =

"^^ d21

=== -*ye ag s, m q ag y ap.a itasas Nuciaar Zagulaur7 E * ** m hall om 3,-5-81

12. tha W = =d -_ ' s om --.ac 1717 E ft=nec, 3 W., Was w a,

i D. C The anecing was c'paz cz p*M '- at==d-a-* and observ=ed

' h ~ "-d?t has anc beam Turissed,..

or w% d it mar dw Memm e.,_

The --===- 'ec is 4---aJ salaI7 far g===f_ < s - -* - t N h prev Ad by la CIE 9.101,. ic is me part of h WP or da"

• m e.of A d-M of :ha sar=a=x dis h.

EEF""* "* of cad * = is. :his ~~--d'c da me sacassaz*17

== M -

84,=1 a=,=,-w --, -. or b = 7 * = * =.

Ne p7--Ad - ee paper mar be. *d'=d_ 31=h. che Commission. in any pm-=Ud* as tha.

"*"7 of or add =assed. en any stacammac or a=3nment Md*=d W aznape as the. N==dv may an=haziza.

1 l

e 8

e e

e 9

l l

l l

1 e

e

~ ~.,

~.,.,. - - -...

..,e..,,--_..-

~~ATIONS 1

f

(

I i

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

.i O

4

'l 2

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

+++

3

\\

4 DISCUSSION OF SECT-81-2.0/20A i

e 5

POLICI ON PROCEEDING ~WITH PENDING CONSTRUCTION 5

8 6

PERMIT AND !GNUFACTURING APPLICATIONS i

l 7

&++

K

)

8I Nuclear Regulatory Co=missic:t R om 1130 dd 9

1717 H Street, Northwest y

Washington, D. C.

E 10 E

Thursday, March 5, 1981 E

11 The Commission met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.

m.,

d

[

II Joseph M. Hendrie,. Chai.w of the Commission, presiding j-

\\'

i 13' lii BEFORn E-14 g

JOSEPH M. ELERIE, mai nan of the Commission i

li i

VICTOR GILINSKI, Commissioner T 16:

I PETER A. BRADFORD, Commissioner 17 l

g.

JOHN F. AHEARNE, Commissioner E

18 ATE 0 PRESENT:-

l 19 l

- k LEONARD HICKWIT, General Counsel l-20 SAMUEL J. mrr, Secreta 7 21 i

WILLIAK J. DIRCK5, Ezecutive Director for Operations ROBERT A PURPLE i

13 :

~

l AL KENNEKE tbe M

I HAROLD DENTON 25!

l j

j GUT CUNNINGHAM

+++

l

2 p

1

?ROCEEDINGS L.

I 2

CHAIREN HENDRIE:

Come to order, please-3 The meeting this morning is. a continuation of a series 4

of meetings we have had on. Co* ssion policy on the pending g

5 construction. permit and "amifacturing license applicaticus, as E

g 6

well. as a. continuati.on. of the discussions of the last several R

7 days on. ways to deal with our licensing problems in general.

K

[

8 Why don?t we start out by some discussion on the paper dd 9~

which is nominally the subf ect of the meeting, namely SECY-81-20,.

10 the construction. permit and nanufacturing license proposals.

El 11 Sill, dn you want to start off?

in f

12 MR DIRCES:

Iust to say-.that we have done what 'ae were C

3 y

13 told to do as a result of the last meeting.

We have gone back

n l

14 and taken. 0718. and. taken the critical requirements out of it and E

E 15 incorporated. it into a.- proposed - into a rule.

We have done E

f 16 away with the incorporating 0718 by reference.

d

!i 17 I don t know how much.= ore we can add to that..

Bob, r

$~

5 la do you,want to say something?

5 19

& PURPLE:

Just a few remarks.

I did pass out, just 20, before the meeting, a. single-sheet of paper that says " Addenda" l

21 I with.three items on it.

/\\U 22,

I.might also make reference to the March 4th l

23 ! memorandum from the General Counsel on this subj ect.

And the 24 last paragraph.~ of the General Counsel's memorandum speaks to a 25 i reference to language about burden of proof on page 12.

The firstl I

I i

I 2

3 1

item in this addenda is intended to remove that language and 2

replace it with. language more accurately portraying what we meant 3

to sa7 there, and I believe that that removes the confusion that

,.3

/

4 OGC had on that point-5 MR. BICKWIT:

It does.

g, MR. DIRCK5r Secondly, in; discussion. with. Len Bickwit,-

=

1 E

7 there la a suggestion. in this Iast paragraph of the March. 4th.

X l

8 memo that language from the revised statement of policy-be used r1

=i y

along witir a brief explanation that the ruleeltself does not i

h 10 contain all of the NUBEGM718:.8 We certadnly have no problem with E

E 11 that.

d 12 What we would intend to do, based on this comment,.1s, z

13 ;

in the pranmhle language of the rule use some of the language 5

i E

14. '

that is irr the revised. policy statement that would provide a-Ns 2

15 more sound fuctification. for why it; is all right that these. set

(

f 16 of requirements are the ones that are necessary for these CE'a.

a6 d

IT l It is the kind of language, I believe, that la in the-I 5

18 policy statement-that. talks about the many months of study and the' many months oh attention by the Commission to derive a. set of 19 R

l 20-necessary-things.

21 So,. in response to that comment., although.it is not yet i

22 revised in the paper 1n frone of you,. we wou1d propose to, if rou O

I 23 l agree, modify the preamble language to. include the kind of C

24 language. that is in the revised policy statement.-

i 25 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

John?

i i

4 1

COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

I would like to see that before p

2 signing off on it The revised policy statement had some 3

language idIifJ.that I'wouldn't want to agree to, some language.

4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

All right.-

I assume the rest of us e

5 don't. care what kind of language goes in.

I{

6 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:.

As long as it is true.

7 MR PURPLE:-

The other two items.in the addenda are i

X g

a more miniaterial.than they are substanti.ve_

dn 9

The-second-item picks up two places where, in our

!g 10 revision to.the.rulet from.its proposed state, where we had Ej li references to staff,.. we were trying to catch all of those and it g

12 conform them to a consistent. reference to Commission.

We missed.

U ]g

,m n

13 two of them; and that picks-this up a

l 14 n

The third iten is, agains administrative.

We inserted.

$i 2

15

.in. the II.B.8 requirements reference, specific. reference to the g

16 ASME. code ani. paragraphs thereto, and we had overlooked the fact f

d g

17 that when. yott do that. you have-to. have the_ Federal Register

$li 18 approval TM s adds a. footnote that is needed in the regulation,.

19 and we, of course,. will. have to go get; that Federal Register:

I k

20 approval.

But I don!t anticipate a. problem there, since we have 21 referenced. the ASMK code irt many other places in the regs.

22 So,. that la what the. three addenda are I believe that i

23l the. response that I have described to the March 4th memo from OGC b

24 resolves at least portions,. if not all of their concerns that were 25 the underlining /of that-memo.

m-aravw:vwm nrve

5 1

MR. BICK7IT:

Yes, I would say it. resolves all our 2

concerns.

3 MR. PURP E :

As Mr. Dircks said, 4

CHAIRMAN M RII:

Before. you get too far along, what g

5 about the. question. raised. about the wa7 in which the draft rule R

{

would be interpreted with. regard, for' instance, to cententions?

R N,,.

T MR. BICT4IT:

'ihen, we read the rule, we were unclear as l

to how it was to-beiinterpreted.

The staff has clarified its r.1 2

9 intent so. as. to.

• Tim 4nate concerns that were e:tpressed in this 10 me=o.

E j

11 Its intent, as I understand it,. is that this rule is tc 3

g

12. !

establish. the necessary and. aufficient requirements for a licence

=

k,/

h

13. '

when. added. to existing regulations a

14 I th*% in. view of the r mt that the rule as drafted u

'z 2

15 could be read either way,. I thhk that oust

• to be made absolutely a

z f 16 p Tai m But if it is made plain, then scme of the concerns we s

i IT '

ontTined.in this memo are = coted, i

x l

E{

18 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Good.

Let's exercise this point a.

s ir i

19 little bit,. because I anr having a. certain amount of trouble being k

i l

20' clear-m N ad about it_

t 2T It is the staff intent that - what. is this, 50. 34(e) -

l I C 22 plus the existing regs equal okay including TMI.

23 MR. CUNNINGHAM:

Right.

24 CEAIRMAN HENDRII:

Ncw, the point CGC was s king was l

v i

25 that it wasrJt so. clear to you but what the draft rule could be l

I ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.

6 1

read to say anything connected.with TMI is covered exclusively by 2 '

this rule 3

MR. BICKWIT:

That-ia right.

4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Which would be a much narrower e

5 interpretatiorr than. the one thecstaff proposes?

h g

6l MR,SICKVIT:

That is right

~

W 7

CHAIRMAR HRMDRIE,:

All right I guess that improves my X

g 8

undarstanding: to the point where let me turn. and ask if others t1d 9

would; like to - yes,. John?

i h

10 COMMISSIONEH AHEARNE:

I don't argue with the conclu-E I

11 sion r think that that is the. description the way I had

.. cf 12 understooi it all along_

But I had thought that there wamat z

g it least. one place; in. here where it mentioned. explicitly-that these a

. {

14 are-additional. requirements,, and I was kind of puz= led. by how youc l

5 E

1E could. read tha-conclusion. that you. reached.

5.

f 16 MR. BICKWI.T:

Eow we could read tha other conclusion?

I as

[

IT Well, in the preamble, page 12,. it says, "The Commission.Was t

i lii 18 concluded that; the requirements con.tained. in. this rule are

=W 19 necessary and sufficient response to the accident at Three Mile 22 Island with respect to thesa applications.

2T COMMISSIONER AWEARME:

Raad.the next sentence..

ilO 22.

Ma. aICxWIr:

res, t xnow.

That sentence..when read l

l 23,

in con $ unction wittt the next sentence,. I think, creates an 24 l ambiguity, " Satisfaction of the requirements of this rule, i

l 25 '

together' with. all other applicable. regulations, will entitle i

-l f

m I

7 I

applicants to receive a construction permit or manufacturing 2

license."

3 If you. read those two sentences together, one reading --

( l 4

in fact, the reading that half of our office gave it, was that

=

5 the first sentence talks about the Three Mile IC and situation, Xe i

j dr !

the second sentence says the ather applicable regulations are R

7 deLigned to deaI. with. aspects not connected. with Three Mile, it l

IL Island.

I find. that - I. find. either interpreta", ion as d

9; acceptable as the ather, and my understanding was that the 10 matter was being debated. at. the staff level as late as yesterday.-

E j

11 And. so, apparently-there was y ' 12:

COMMISSIONER ~.AHEARNE:

It wasn't debated in. the 11 technical staff.

m 14 MRTCUNNINGHAM:

I think it was.

I thinic the debate 2

15 was what the techn4 mI staff wanted, not what. these words meant..

E j

16 We c.ra now.in_ agreement that the words mean.the way you. read them,

w ti 17 and that is what the staff wants.

E{

18 MR BICIGi[rEr I, will stand err the proposition that it is E

19 not absolutely clear.

l i

20 COMMISSIONER AWARNE:

Okay.-

I didn't want to argue r

l l

2i this nows l

C 22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:.

I understand better where we are.

23,

John understands.better.

In the process of creating that l

i 7G 24 understanding, we have now upset Vic.

Vic, please go ahead and Peter 25 l get yourself squared. away, trying not to upset John and me.

i i

-. - - - ~

nrowr:vvwz mua 4

8 1

your chance will come thereafter.

1 COMMISSIONER GIIINSKY:

I have had trouble following 3

this.

It seems to me we have a set of requirements,. if we 4

approve these, or approve them in. some other ferm.

They, together e.

5 will all the. other regulations, become the. set of. requirements

$6 for a. construction permit _

Now, what needs to be added. about TMI,.

W 7

or whtch regulations apply to TMI,. or donJe apply to TMI?

This ili g

simply-becomes the bod 7 of regulations that the Commission d

i 9

applies at this point.

!g in COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

Let me just asic how the-I E

g IT position on which all. three of yott have now agreed can be squared it.

l y

12',

with the first two full sentences at the top of page 12?

g' q

13.

ME..BICKWIT:

I. thinic they can be squared, 5a l

[

14 COMMISSIONER.BRADFORD:.

As.necessary and sufficient T

E 15 except for the other requirements?'

I U

gg'. T&

MR ' BICKWI'Er As necessary and sufficient at this s

17 point, but nothimr is ever put to bed in this world, and there I

(

{

18 will be additional thintr4ng, and one of thesendays an additional f

requirement.may come.to mind, k.

19 l

20 COMMISSIONER.GIId.a m :

I assume that someone has new l

21 information. that we have not taken into account and you. can come h

22 up and propose and asic for. a new rule be promulgated, and he can 23 draw on TMI experien.ce just like any other experience.

L 24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

Well, first of all, the 25 '

sentence says the Cnmmission.hasn.'t comoleted its review of the AI f"% Enct"% ki m ent"% D*T"t h it"* P t'% h A D A A I V t A l#""

9 1

TMI action plan, but it has now decided everything that you need

-s 2

to do in response.

I must say I am not sure what that sentence 1

3 means.

4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

A very good question.

e 5

COMMISSIONEH:BRADFORD:

But having said it, I am not 2a i

sure how one can make a. statement about sufficiency e

8 7

MR. PURPI2h Well.,. what it literally meant was the. fact L

8 a

that when. you. approved. the action plan there were a. subset of dd 9

items in there that we enlled. decision group C'~a, for which. you icy 10 did not approve the items.

For instance, the nuclear data link i

g 11 is an item that la in. the. actionrplan :that. you approved for in j

12.

further staff development and further consideration on the part

(

E y

13 of the Commission.

And as; the months and years go by and the

=

l 14 staff brings. to you. these items. that were decision group C's, I

i E

15 they either become rejected or they becoma approved items.

I g

16 At that point in time decisions could be made about as 17 whether or not they apply to CP reviews, depending on when. they E

!ii 18 arrive.

By then planta conceivably might have their CP's.

But 6{

19 that is what was intended. here by saying the-review is not 20 complete,. because there-are items proposed for further considera_

21 tion. that have not yet been. brought to you.

It didn't mean that 21 there was another subset of things they hadn't even thought of v

23 yet..

24 l CHAIRMAN.HENDRIE:

Okay.

It seems to me.that the v

25 language at the top of page 12 might be usefully amplified a. little

f 10 1

bit to make that a little clearer, because I didn't catch that out 2

of it.

I also didn' t catch the point at all.-

I must have read 3

much too rapidly past this.

But-if I had stopped to read;.it, why, i

,3 4

I.would have scratched my head over what it meant to say that the e

5 action plan review was not complete by the Commission.

i I think if you. just point ont that, rather than saying

=

7 j ust that,. quitting there,. that there are some elemertts in. the G,

(

g.

action plan of a long range nature-which. the Commission has cid 9

directed. be subj ect to further' study,. and then will..comeuback to.

Yg 10 the Commission. for future decision,. and it is not inconceivable 5.{

11 that some of thess mi' ht eventunT7 7 affect the planta that this g

a d

12 rule intends to apply to But I don't think E

, m.

i c.

(

COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

But I thought we decided to 13

[

14 drop the necessary and sufficient language.

i

$E 2

15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:'

I don?t know.

It sounds great to I

We don't g

16 me,. hut I would ha glad to hear pro and con on it..

e g

17 normTN say that in. our rules, I guess, is the point.

Why is.

l II Ig this one 17 MH BICKWIT:

I would be inclined to go with. that 20 sentiment, because just as. 'it confused' our office, I think it 21 could confuse a reader of the rule, and I think it would be best

(;

22 not to contain.that.

23 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Well, where we were, as I read

'.s 24 the staff requirements memo, was that.OGC was to analyce the 25 j phrase "necessary and sufficient" and provide the implications and l

t t

l 11 1

options.

2.

MR, BICKWITt That la what our mamn intended to do.

3 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

But it didn't address the 4

necessi.ty for the phrase "necessary a::d sufficient."

e 5

MR. BICKWIT:.

That.is right.

It does not..

And one of K:*

{

6 the prohlame was that since it was unclear to us where the : staff eT 7

was. going ort this,. we had some difficulty analy=ing the problen I

m

{

8 against that backdrop, ed 9

But I would'sar, now that-I understand exactly what the i

U cy 10 ataff positiori is, I would be inclined to. drop references to E

{

IT "necessary and sufficient."

y-12.

Mr. Chairman, couli. I nake sure I understand MR.- CASE:

g J

s

's 13- !

the position expressed, that with or without that phrase, one E

l l

14 cannot argun that there.are additional requirements required on-2 15 these plants because of Three-Mile Ialand?

E-g' 16 MR BICKWIT:.

That.is right.

mi i

17 ME. CASE':

Irrespectivecof whether that phrase is in or E

t la nott 5

19-MR2 BICKWIT:

Tes.

And it la on. that basis that we 20 would recommend dropping it.

21 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE':

Which is another way of saying that C

22 it la the intent in drafting this rule that this rule', plus the 23l existing regulations, constitute a. body of regulations which, 24 !

conformed toe would bring a project to the Conedssion's definition l

25 ;

of adequate protection and so. on, including TMI related matters.

I k

i JEYSYVV VVNW2..JTWP A

12 1

MR DENTON:

Which seemed.to be where we were three or 2-four years ago with regard to the Commission's regulations at 3

that time..

(

\\

4 MR. CUNNINGHAM:

That has always been the Commi asion's 5

case law, in Seahroolc and. Maine Yankee, if you comply with l

b

(

6 existing regulations at any gi.ven. time you.are entitled to a R

R-7 permit or license t

E

(

8 g

MR BICKWI.T:

The departure from that has come in the a

d d

9 action plart policy statement with. respect to OL licenses.

bg 10-COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

If somebody seeks to litigate iE I

li the. adequacy of a particular piece. of equipment at the CP stage, ti 12' what is the board's normal reponse-to that now?

In the normal r

m

=

f 13 course of events, would. they allow > a contention about pressuri::er J

1

=

y 14 desigri, or would they say that they should. be resolved at the 7o 15 OL. stage?

i E

l g 1(r MR. DENTON':

I guess it depends on whether it goes to s

y 17 the conceptual. design. or riot.

I think we would in general argue U$

18 that the details. of it are-more appropriately takert up at the OL i:.

19 stage, but we do require. at the CR stage sufficient showing of 8n j

20 feasibility of a concept.

21 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:' And if the board agrees with Q

22 you., what is the specific type of finding that they make?

When 23 l they say something,. a contention is appropriately deferred to the i

s 24 OCatage, what is the basis that they use. for that?

25 MR. CUNNINGHAM:

They wouldn't.usually defer the i

AR r% PMP M h I r% E" F948% M*P t k f J"*

PP% & J F1 A k 1 %# I k l 4""

13 1;

contention.

The issue at the CP is whether you have given 2

assurance that by the time of the OL you will have resolved the 3

matter.

In either case, OL or CP, the contention has to be 73 4

framed. in terms of compliance with existing regulations.

But at g

5 the CP atage, you. only require prel4 min =7 design. information.

If N

j 6,

the intervenor had.a. contention at the CP stage that you 5

i 7

completely overlooked that and there is no indication you ever 8

are going to-look, at it, that. would be litigatable.

I

\\

(ad.

9 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

Aren.'t there situations in.

icy 10 which the. Intervenor is, in effect',, attempting to litigate the iE j

11 final design. type issues at the CP stage?.

Has that never arisen?

g 12 MR. CUNNINGHAM:

Oh, I am sure it has arisen, but I

(

5 O

s 13 l think the response is,. final desigrr is not a CP requirement, that l

l 14 '

will_ bellitigated. at the OL. stage.

T 2

15F COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:. And tha.t is the basis on which g

16 the contention. is rM mmissed.

e 17 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:.

But I think not infrequently within lii 18

a. contentiott that,. for instance - I don't know - ECCS doesn.'t 5

19 i meet all of the applicable. regulations..

It.is.not infrequently 20 ther will get off into. an argument on a. particular element in i

i 21 which,, by the time you. finish. dri.ving down, why you have darn.

(,-

22 near set final desigrL parameters, or at least requirements to be l

l 23 met.

i 24 l So, in scue aspect,. why, I think you can. end up i

25, arguing a pretty detailed. area,. not over the whole design, because

. k.

14 1!

it isn't practical to present that, but on some ; element of the 2.

thing.-

3 Okay_

Other comments?

What is the feeling on i

~

"necessary and.aufficient"?

j 4

e 5

COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Len, when you.have this statement 3 k

j 6e how would you; would you just strike the terms "necessary and e78 7

s.nfficient? so. it would say, it is concluded the requirements K

8 8:

contained in.this rule are a.responset This is on page 12, the dd 9

second paramh. from. the botton, i

h la MR. BICKWIT:. I have no problem with leaving that in iEj 11 - the supplementary informatierr,. although I would. like to clarify in j

12-it sa as to-eiwnater our misconception As far. as the rule is 13-concerned,. I uculd not put it in. there.

iiE

,E 14 NAN (AE HENDRIE:

Okay, page 13,. (e), additiona]. TMI E

15 related requirementsi One would modify by simplynstriking the E

16.

Iast sentence?.

• g W

G 17 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Tou. wouldn.' t. leave it, it is-U BT 18 determined that these are the additional requirements, to account

=

1:

1 93 for lessons-learnedt III other words,. ycn would strike all g

n 23 a7 Tunion. to Three Mile Islandt 21 CHAIRMAN'HENDRIE:.

Well, that remains in.the title.

(,

21 That. is what. the title of Ce) is, " Additional TMI Related 21 !

Requirements _*

24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

And you conclude that - I just s

25 I want. to make sure I understand - you. conclude that striking all

15 1

of that sti.11 would remove the possibility for argument that there

~

2 are additional requirements?

3 MR. BICKWIT:

That is right.

4 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Okay, I have no problea striking e

5

that, h

j CEAIRMAN HENDRIEr I don.'t have any problem with 7

str41thg it. - I guess my reasom would be more that - not that I Xl 8

see. it particularly obnoxious within. the contert of 50 34(e),. but d

9 since it is a. notable difference from the way.in which. the rest r

h 10 of the regnTa+-ions of the C'ommission. are frar.ed, it always raises E{

11 the question. of why does thia one read in. th;'.s different fashion, j

12' what-does. that mean. for this one, and what does it mean for all of N

E (d

12 the. others, does thatr mean all we have is "aren't necessary and a

h 14 sufficient?.. We may as well just save all. of that discussion.

$?

E 15 Vic?

f 16-COMMISSIONER GILINSKIr That is fine..

a6

![

17 I MA M MAN.HENDRIE:

Peter?

l Ni 18 CO M W ONER BRADFORD:

Well, I an all for striking it.

t

=

~

W l

{

19 MR BICKWIT:

Then I guesa I would change page 12 so es 20 that it; read,. "Tha Commission. has concluded" l

21l CHAIRMAJ HENDRIE:

This, plus the others,. yes.

b 22 MRs BICKWIT:-

"The Commission has concluded that the 23 !

requirementa contained in this rule, together with all other I

i 24 l applicable regulations, are necessary and sufficient' response to -

v 25 '

the accir* ant at Three Mile. Island."

And then,. " Satisfaction of i

l

16 I

the requirements of this rule, together with all other such 1

,~

~

regulations, will entitle applicants to receive a construction 2

3 permit."

n

/

~

COMMISSIONER GILINSKYi What. are you. reading from?

4 e

5 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Page 12,. the second to the last a.

3 6

paragraph Her is trying to make clear this. point about --

G' 7

MR. BICKWI.T:

The point that was. never unclear to. you.

X g

8 COMMISSIONER G1TJMSKr:. Why would we leave it in. there?'

d l

=i.

9-Why would we leave that "~necessary and. sufficien.t" business on

i h

10 page. 12?

15 j

11 MRe BICKWIT:

Well, it.Just seems to me that this is g

12

a. reasonabla characterization. of what-the Commission is doing.

E is 13 It. tells the story of what is happening, as often is the purpose.

'-s' 15.

[

14 of supplementary information.

T 2

15 COMMISSIONER GILINSKT:

I would strike it there, too, E

f 16 for the same reasons that Joe raised.

We. just have :.ot tended at g

17 to use this sort of language These are the requirements which E

lE 18 we.are.imposingw 5

l 19 CHAIRMAN ~HENDR E But. in. order to carry the thought X

l 20 elea::ly,. you ha.ve to say someplace out-here in. the supplementary 21 information that it is the CommissionJs view that this new rule, l

(,/

22 plus. the existing regulations,. together form a set of regulations,.

23,

conformance with which. meets the requirements. of the Commission a

24 for permits and so on.

-H 25 !

COMMISSIONER.AHEARNE:

Why don't we just say it that i

a a

- - mmm.mm.mm a n ---

---a m - m.mm a m amm a a ama ea a amm

17 1'

way and thcr volve all of our problems?

m I

2 CHAIRMAN'HENDRIE:

Or edited. suitably to get where you 3

p.

dant to go, and to make clear, and to avoid any of the kind of t

4 ambiguity that you. read into the thing before about our g.

5 contentions, TMI contentions 14mtted Just to this rule..

8{

6 MR BECKWIT:

Although: I must say, it. may crop up when R

i 7

we are picMng up language from. the policy statement applicable X]

8 to the NUREG document as it. relates. to this subject.

You don't t.1y 9

want it in there atr that. point-r c& 10 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

I guesa you will he.ve to craft E

11 around it E

y 12.

CHAIRMAN.HENDRIEr I art not sure that since it is

(.

s

=

M

)

[

11 framed in. the policy statement.

that you. have the same problem.

a.

l 14 MR. BICKWIT:.

I thinic it adds something as it is 5

f 15' phrased.in the policy statement.

It is not i=plicit..

f 16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

All.right.

We will simply have to at 17 :

see the lanringe and see how we digest it.

E{

16 MR. BICKWIT:

Irt essence,. you would be saying that I

C 19 1 compliance with the NUREG document would be necessary and ga 20 sufficient.to comply wi.th.the. rules I

f 11 CHAIPMAN'HENDRIE:

Well, never mind..

Let me see if I b

22 can.sitmmarize what.needs to be done to get to the next. step.

i I

on had. a. couple of errata, you will fix those.

At l

23 '

v 24 the top of page 12, the business about the Commission hasrnet l

l l.

25 l completed its review of the. TMI action plan, you will amplify to l

18 1

make c1 ear what the meaning is there.

1i The second to last paragraph on page 12 will be 3'

adjusted,bthe. legal office, you. can collaborate to find some set b,

4 of language which makes. clear the thrust of the discussion here e

5 this morning at. this point.

k g

You. will. build in some suitably adopted policy R

R T

statament language The aim there was to provide the Commission's

't

[

hiessing on 0737 and now- 0718, at least to the same extent that d

i 9

was. expressed in. the policy sta.tement.

io 10' Now,. that would get us a not very extensive modifica-

!E

{

11 tion of the 81-20B paper, a

y 12 MR PURPLE:

Just for completeness, on page 13 we were 13 going to delete that one sentence from the rule itself.

m

[

14 CHAIHMAN~HENDRIE:.

Yes..

And.on page 13 In fact,. so e

15 far, except for the errata items,. that is the only change we have j

16 made in tha draft rule, as yet e

d 17 Now, can I asic the Commissioners to give me their best N

!E 1E guess at what other points of discussion they want to cover on 5

l 19-this rule before we fins.lly bring outselves to a vote on it to see R

20-whether we have a proposition on which the Commissioners can 21 agree?

I

{

k,.)

22 Obviously, the manufacturing license in or out question, 23,

I regard that. as given in that discussion.

But now, what

..e r

~,

24 elements?

Peter?

7 l

13 23 ;

COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

I would like to understand how i

l l

.. - - - _.,-- - _ _..._ - -.... ~...-

19 1

the actions, or rather the studies proposed in here will play 2

themselves out as a. practical matter, what the staff plans to do 3

about. reviewing thoss studies, and to the extent necessary,

(,I 4

imposing requirements based on. the studies on the plants,. whether !

g 5

this will be done in. the. context of the operating license review, 8{

or whether it will be dona as the work goes. along.

E Tl R

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:.

Okay Anything else?

I assume you X

j E

will participate in. the manufacturing license discussion.

Any d

d.

9 other items. particularly? -

i h.

10 COMMISSIONEH. BRADFORD:

No, none that don' t fall. under 5y 11 that general topic is.

p 12' CHAIRMAN.HENDRIE:

All.right.

Vic, what strikes you?

()

E l

y 13' COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

Well, I would not like to vote v

a k

14 !

on.this today.-

I would. like to explora some of the k

E 15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIEr No, we are not going to vote on it.

f 16 Tou.have already sent um a. note.saying you.would prefer not to

@ 17 come finally to a. decistorr on it,. and we have some language l

l 18 adjustments which.. we would, all like to see how the words ccme out

=

10 19' and perhaps dinnuss them arut adjust them a. little hefore we come l

20 to #inal. votes..

AII. we are trying to do here la to anticipate 21 so far as I cazz the principal items that Commissioners would like m

sj 22 to.. thrash through. before we do come to a vote.

3 i

a l

23 :

COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

There are-a number of items.

[

24 One is. on purging.

I think.I will have some more questions about-25 l the hydrogen control features of the rule, and also about the L

Al NEDeM OCDADTIMC mkJD A MV I M t'*

20 1

business; of leaving open an option. for possibly venting the 2

containnent.

And I think I also want to be clear on what is going 3

to. he done with the various studies, and the point Peter raised.

~

4 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

Did you have some people looking at.

g 5

containmentrpressure?.

g

?

6 COMMISSIDER GILDISKI:-

Yes.

E.,

7 CHAIRMAN:HENDRIE:

Are:these your high pressure l

consultants.or your low pressure consultants?

d I

d 9

COMMISS10ER GILINSKY:

High. powered consultants.

iC I

g 10 MR. Ms NORD:

They tend to cone on when the pressure 1

.iE l

g 11 goes; up, so. I think. they are the high pressure.

ir j

11 CHAIRMAN ENDRIE:.

John?

l p

g l

y 13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

Oh, I think those are enough l

~'

r 14-subdects to occupy us.

I anr prepared to vote now.

$E 9

15 COMMISSIONEH GILINSEY:

I also would like to be a U-j 16 little. clearer on precisely what-is required of these plants' over j l

d l

6 17 and. above what is. required of the plants coming up for operating I

l I

5 18 license.

1 P

i I

19 j ME.. PURPLE':.

The current OL's?

I 20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

Yes.

I I

l 21 CHAIRMAN ENDRIE:

All right.

Could I.ask the staff l

l l

w.

22.

to please stop by and, see you. for a quick rundown. on these I

t) l l

23l subjects, just so that. they can get perhaps a. little better idea.

24 j. of the sort of things you. would like. to probe, and we will. be j

i l

25!

schedulfng this paper for further consideration as I can find a l

l ae menema r nenan-rt a re em m a n a s tu skte

21 1

good time on the agenda I would like to keep pushing it along,.

i 2

perhapsI the latter part of next week.

And what I will ask is for 3

the staff to please. make the changes we have enumerated in the l

I 4

paper and.get us down.something with the ner. language in it.

l g

5 I think the discussion-Commissioner Bradford would like

?

{

6 to hear about' where the. studies; go. and how they fit in and where R

3, 7

it:all works out,. I think that is clear enough.

I th i n't some of I

j 8

Commissioner Gt 74nsky's points of interest are clear enough, but dd

?

I think it woulcL be useful for you. to stop and. talk to him a.

t O

g 10' little bit about some. of the others.

E{

11 If ycu. ha.ve any in. particular you would like to get on ir j

12.

this list,.. Jahrt

=

h 13 COMMTRKTONER AHEARNE:

Well, all I was going to ask is,.

-~

m-d 14 is there a possibility that we could use some of the time this P.

15 morning, since w~etaracalllheuerand. they are all here, to perhaps N

16 get some of that answered?

g as 17 CHAIRMAN HENDHIE:

Well, I will tell you. what I wanted

~

A I

5 18 ta do with. the time, John, the remaining time this morning.

E think we are going td ' lose tomorrow's meeting, and I. would like 7

19 g

er 20 to shove-frc:a this subject over tntcontinue the meetings we have 2T been having on. how do we. get ourselves out of the licensing pit; 22 in partienie, we have. to form soma answers to some questions for,

23 ; the Congress,. which ha.ve to go a week from today, and we are going 24 l to be hard put, I. think, ta have adequate Comminsion time together 25 on some of these.

We may have to make individual answers, l

22 I

otherwise, to that query, and I am against that kind of duplica-2 tion, if we can avoid it..

And since we can't - I don't think we 3

can ask. for-a final vote I am ready to vote - I would be ready o(j 4

to. Vote on. it,, pending a. look at the language changes, but that e

5 isn't worthwhile.

Others may not want to do that.

E f

COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:

The only other suggestion I can R

7 make,. in the. interest of continuing to roll the rock up the hill, I

l E

is to the. extent items haven.'t been raised at this morning's dd 9

meeting or placed in controversy, if you. Will, thera is no reason

!g 10 for that. part of the staff that is working on CP's not to begin E

j T1 to move forward cn. whatever work is necessary for the proceedings l

it.

l l

11 they are involved in. based on. what you all are proposing.to do.

g

$ 11 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:

I think the principal action that.

I 14 is needed at the moment is a Commission final rule, so that the 1

E 15 license applicants who are waiting out there to respond f

16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

The problem is going to be - well,.

s 17 it is not outi of the questierr for the staff to go out to the CP d

!ii 1E applicants and say,. Icok, it looks as though the provisions will

?

{

19-come dowrt somethine. like this,. why don' t you answer' the questions.

n 20' COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:-

I.wouldn't. have suggested that i

21 the applicants start doing work yet.

I think that is a little

,q

'v 21 too uncertain - I thought that to the extent there was staff work 23 l that would follow immed'ately from the adoption of the rule, to x

24 l the extent that there are areas that don't seem to be in 25,

controversy, they might as well start doing them.

l

23 1

CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:

I would certainly support that,

m 2

Harold,. if there are things you can do along the lines, because 3

I think we are com1Eg;; reasonably close here.

s-4 Okay,. when. we-meet agairt we wilI. hope to take up these 5

particular 1.tems that. Cnmmisaioners have suggested, and possibly,

=

k

{

(r hopefullyy come to a; decision.

N 2

7 I would. Iika. to take us without a. moment's hesitation K]

E hack. to the discussions. of either yesterday or the day before.

We dd 9-were. pacing our way and' John.1:as taH = us down through a.

Yg 10 March 3rd; paper fronr OPE: and. OGC'.

E g

11 Okayi a. twa minute recess to grab necessary papers.

5-

{ 12 (Whereupon, at 10:50 a. m., the meeting was

(

3g.

13 concluded )

N a

l 14

+ + 4-E 2

15 1

g its e

G 17 1

!E ia ii 19 2a I

21 i

l l

td 22 l

23 i

I y

l l

15 l i

m m

i l

x l

NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO!C4ISSICN This is Oc certify tha: the attached proceecings ':efore the

(

in the =atter of: DISCUSSION OF SECY-81-20/20A

- POLICY ON: PROCEEDING WITH PENDING CONSTRUCTION PERMIT AND MANUFACTURING APPLICATIONS

• Date of Prcceeding:

March 5, 1981 Decket !!u='c e r :

2' ace c.#

.D

• a c e a. d...

Washington,.D.C,

.o

.3 were held a,s herein appears, and tha: this is the Original transcri;;

thereof for the file cf the Cc==issicn.

Marilyn Nations Official ?.eporter (Typed)

{s Official perter (signature) l l

l

.