ML20033C154
| ML20033C154 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/09/1981 |
| From: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20033C148 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8112020740 | |
| Download: ML20033C154 (49) | |
Text
s 9
DRAFT e
POLICY AND PLANNING GUIDANCE November 9, 1981 1 -
l h5 l
l
~
8112O20740 811118 t
Policy and Planning Guidance TABLE OF CONTdNTS 4
Subject Page 1.
Introduction............................................
1 2.
Near-term Licensing Problems and Responses.............. 3 3.
Getting Control of Requirements.........................
5 4.
Streamlining the Licensing Process......................
9 i
5.
Supporting New Initiatives.............................
10 Waste Management..................................
10 o
o THI-2 Cleanup.....................................
14 6.
Othe r Impo rtant S tep s.................................
15 S i ti n g P o l i cy...........................,.........
15 o
o Moni toring of Operating Plants.................... 16 l
o Research..........................................
18 o
Human Factors.....................................
20 e
e 0
l s'.~J 4
4 l
I
-w--,y
-r
,--~,,.g g-m.
,-,,we,
,n,gnp,
,-e, y
a,
,,,,, e
-.m.
-.,g a mwy,,
.g, w
POLICY AND PLANNING GUXDANCE INTRODUCTION TheCongress'hasindicatedthatadiversemixofenergyresourcesisin
~
the public interest. NRC, along with other agencies of government, has a mandate to pres &rve that public interest. While it is not up to NRC to choose which technology should be utilized, the agency is responsible for assuring that nuclear power is a safe option for meeting the Nation's energy needs without imposing unjustifiable regulatory burdens on utilities and rate payers. NRC must provide rational regulation and, to the extent possible, eliminate uncertainties in the regulatory process that way be preventing utility managers from considering nuclear power a viable option today.
The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to the staff for establishing priorities and for improving the reguilatory process --
starting imediately.
It is therefore more than just a document to be used for preparing the FY 84-86 budget request.
It is management guidance intended to focus on specific areas which the Comission believes are
~
important.
In the presence of resource limitations, it is expected that this focus will lead to deferral or cancellation of some activities having a peripheral bearing on safety.
Guidan'ce with respect to each and every activity within NRC is not furnished, since.it is not intended that the document be all inclusive and since it would be impractical to address all issues here.
2_
The document is organized in terms of five major themes: Near-Term Licensing Problems and. Responses; Getting Control of Requirements; Streamlining the Licensing Process; Supporting Initiatives in Nuclear Waste and the Cleanup of Three Mile Island; and Other Important Steps.
4 The policy section is intended to establish a general framework for NRC managers to shape their own particular programs.
Planning guidance is furnished in those areas where the Commission believes more detLil is warranted to meet specific concerns about schedules and priorities or where major assumptions are needed for program development.
Specific guidance involving programs will be provided by the Executive Director for Operations. The EDO will also develop and provide a management system for the Commission to keep track of the major 1982 program accomplishments and resource expenditures $ hat support this policy and planning guidance.
4 y
e 0
a
-3 NEAR-TERM LICENSING PROBLEMS AND RESPONSES Policy A.
NRC's fundamental task is to make sure that existing plants, and those coming on line, operate safely. At the same time the Agency must recognize that regulation affects not only the safety of nuclear power, but also its economics and its future. The agency cannot be indifferent to the regulatory burden it imposes on the industry and rate payers. Steps must be taken to correct situations which lead to the regulatory process becoming an unjustifiable burden or creating unwarranted seriou~s uncertainties.
s Plannina Guidance 1.
Actions should be taken to eliminate all unwarranted delay in
- reaching regulatory decisions.
2.
Consistent with maintaining safety of operating plants, staff reviews and public hearings should be completed on a schedule that assures the licensing process will not unnecessarily be a critical path item which would delay reactor startup. It should take 'not more than 11 months from issuance of the final supplemental safety evaluation report to an operating license decision by the Connission in contested cases. The Clinch RivehBreeder Reactor license application will be reviewed to assure adequate protection of public safety and the environment while, at the same time, striving to avoid having the regulatory process unnecessarily delay the start of construction activities.
-4 3.
Boards should adhere rigorously to established schedules in order to reach timely decisions, while preserving individual rights of the public to pursue valid safety issues. The Commission reaffirms its Statement of Policy on the Conduct of Licensing Proceedings of May,1981, which urged the Hearing Boards to take firm hold of hearings and keep them moving.
4.
NRC will establish an internal project management structure to oversee project reviews on an integrated plant basis. Project managers will be responsible for keeping plant reviews within the general schedules established by the Commission. There should be sufficient continuity in the membership of review teams and adequate records kept so that decisions and commitments made early in the project are not abrogated or forgotten, thereby requiring the same issue to be resolved more than once during a project.
~
5.
NRC must continue to work with FEMA to resolve the difficulties in securing the findings for off-site emergency plans for a proposed nuclear plant site in a timely' fashion.
6.
The staff is encouraged to urge applicants to conduct independent design reviews prior to selection of majo.r systems. The purp'ose should be to get applicants to understand more fully the equipment and systems which are offered by the vendors and architect-engineers, a function which has been assumed la'rgely by the NRC.
I 7.
For the FY 84-86 time period, staffing proposals should recognize possible cessation of heavy demands for personnel to process reactor i
I casework.
-5 GETTING CONTROL OF REQUIREMENTS Policy A.
NRC must be sensitive to criticism that there is a large and unnecessary volume of requirements imposed on licensees, that frequently these requirements are not coordinated, and that sufficient time is not allowed for proper implementation of issued requirements. Strong measures need to be taken to control the issuance of new requirements.
B.
NRC must develop a safety goal with initial emphasis on individual and societal risks which might arise from reactor accidents. The purpose of this project is to assist in evaluating measures proposed t'o achieve incremental reductions in residual risk.
C.
In cases where there are conflicting priorities in establishing and implementing new requirements, priorities will be based on the expected risk reduction potential associated with the new requirement.
D.
Requirements imposed on the regulated industry by NRC are to have a positive contribution t'o safety, not only individually, but also when the requirements are taken as a whole.
Requirements proposed to achieve incremental reductions in residual risk should be evaluated on a cost-benefit basis.
av E.
Unresolved Safety Issues should be promptly pursued, and the solutions implemented based on a careful analysis of the costs and benefits of implementation. Priorities for implementation.should be established in light of all other requirements imposed on licensees.
F.
Issues which affect numerous licensees should be addressed in the context of rule-making as opposed to case-by-case review.
Planning Guidance-1.
In order to control and coordinate requirements imposed on licensees, a Generic Requirements Review Committee (GRRC) has been established to review proposed requirements and recommend action by the EDO.
The GRRC is expected to assume a powerful role in the full range of requirements considered by the agency, including backfitting and license amendments. The EDO, assisted by the GRRC, will exert strong management control over operating reactor licensing actions in order to reduce the existing backlog.
Priorities and procedures must be developed for eliminating the backlog, expeditiously (i.e.,
- by FY 84). Since the scope of the regional offices has been expanded
~
to create agency wide regional operations that include licensing as well as inspection and enforcement functions, a significant portion of the reactor license amendment reviews should be transferred to the regional offices to assist in cleaning up the large backlog..
2.
A management system will be developed to account for all new requirements issued, their relationship to the revised Standard Review Plan, and the status of their implementation. The management system to be developed shculd be coordinated with the system currently in use and should be capable of incorporating existing, ongoing regulatory requirements.
3.
Implementation schedules will be established consistent with the safety importance of the requirement. Licensees should be allowed sufficient time for in-depth engineering, evaluation and design, procurement-of high quality equipment, and its proper installation.
to the extent compatible with public health and safety.
In setting schedules, industry capability (e.g., engineering resources and manufacturing capacity) to implement the new requirement will be considered. NRC's ability to review licensees' proposals and to inspect implementation will also be considered. To the extent consistent with safety implications, schedules for requirements
~
will be set so as to avoid downtime on operating plants or delay in startup of new plants. The staff should work through owners groups
=
- to establish realistic schedules. The nuclear industry must be responsible for providing realistic estimates,of time needed to achieve compliance. Once compliance dates have been established, the Commission will vigorously enforce such dates.
4.
Qualitative safety goals and associated quantitative numerical guidance, when approved by the Commission, should be used in the
~
evaluation of proposed and existing NRC reactor safety requirements.
Simultaneous with obtaining public comment on a safety goal.the staff should prepare for Commission review a step-by-step action j
plan describing how it intends to usi'the goals and numerical I
guidance within the regulatory process.
l n--
w
,---o aww+-
=
e
.--+..v, r' r e-p.
8-5.
All generic issues will be integrated in an agency-wide program.
Issues ' included in the present program which are not directly related to NRC regula;ory requirements will be elimi'..ated.
Emphasis will be placed on implementing approved solutions to generic safety issues which have been resolved. As a first step in resolving generic issues, a priority list based on the potential significance and cost of implementation of each issue will be established.
Those issues which lack significance and are of marginal importance to the regulatory program will be dropped. The revised program will establish criteria for adding new issues.
Issues will be added to the program only after careful evaluation to assure that they warrant resource expenditures.
~
4
,e 9
N9 e
_.9_
STREAMLINING THE LICENSING PROCESS -
Policy A.
The Commission intends to streamline the present licensing process.
The mair. elements of the new process will. be based on concepts already studied such as one-step licensing, standardization, early site reviews, and changes in hearing formats. The Commission intends to consider a legislative package for submittal to the Congress and also a set of reforms which can be implemented by the Commission without the need for legislation.
Plannino Guidance 1.
A special task force will determine the issues which should be addressed in a legislative proposal as well as the specific changes that should be made ' internally to facilitate streiblining.. A senior Advisory
' Group will assist the Chairman in making specific recommendations to the Commission as a result of the task force's work. By January, 1982 legislative proposals wil1 be prepared. By April, 1982 recommendations
~
I for administrative remedies, together with the necessary paper work to implement them, will be ready.
2.
Staff should plan for increased use of standardization and early siting in connection with one-step 1.icensing starting in FY 84.
SUPPORTING NEW INITIATIVES Waste Management Policy Developmen[and demonstration of a high-lesel waste repository is A.
a task for the Department of Energy, or its successor.
It is important that the issues of the disposition of spent fuel accumulating
~..
at reactors and the ultimate disposal of nuclear waste be resolved.
Uncertainty about their solution undermines the confidence of the public, the utilities, and financial institutions in the viability of nuclear power. NRC waste management efforts will focus on the development of licensing criteria for high level waste repositories.
These criteria will be based on a defense-in-depth strategy that requires thorough consideration of various types of sites, demonstrated capabilities of the waste form selected, and the interaction of the waste form and packaging with the geological, hydrological, and engineered systems involved.
i l
B.
The Commission is presently undertaking a Proposed Rulemaking on the Storage and Disposal of Nuclear Waste (Waste Confidence P,roceeding).
The purpores of the rulemaking are (1) to assess the degree of assurance now available that radioactive waste can be safely disposed of; (2) to determine when disposal or off-site storage will be available; and (3) to determine whether radioactive wastes I
can, if necessary, be safely stored on-site past the ' expiration of existing facility licenses until off-site disposal or storage is available. The Commission decision will determine whether the l
l
~
current basis for licensing reactor operations and spent-fuel pool expansions adequately takes into account the environmental effects of the different possible modes of storage and disposal.
If the currentbasksforenvironmentalassessmentsisfoundtobeinadequate,-
it may have to be supplemented by generic or case-specific environmental assessments of extended at-reactor storage to permit continued licensing of reactor operation and spent-fuel pool expansion.
Plannina_ Guidance 1.
The planning basis for waste management activities will be that during FY 82-85, three sites will be characterized for a high level a
waste repository.
NRC should publish a final rule before January.
u 1983 covering the technical criteria for high-level waste repositories.
The staff should work with the technical cermiunity and the public to develop a consensus on the methods and tests needed to demonstrate compliance with the regulations. By mid-FY 84 the NRC will have in l
l place all regulatory guidance and criteria so that the licensing of waste repositories will provide for adequate protection of t'he public and will not be unnecessarily delayed. A permanent repository site will be selected and a license application to obtain construction authorization will be submitted to thp HRC as early as mid-FY 85.
I Duration of the licensing process should permit a decision on issuing a construction authorization by January, 1988.
i
r
. i
' ' ~,
~' -
i 2.
published' projections of spent fuel storage requirements indicate
/ !
that, using currently approved technology, existing reactor storaje basins can be modified to'acccmodate discharged fuel until ab,ouk I
the mid 1980s.
Longer-term storage will involve proposed new storage pools and the development of dry storage technologies. A 5
li:ensing capability for independent speni fuel storcge facilikies
,'[,-
should be in place in FY'82 to permit the NRC to act promptly on.
applications for new storage facilities. The NRC must be prepared
/
l to review industry or government proposals for away-from-reactor or' at-reactor independent spent fuel storage facilities. Because of
^
the lead time for design, licensing and construction, at least one
'o ~ ;-
s-r-
application for a new spent fuel storage facility is expected by S./
_ _ ~ <
1983. Licensing review will also be required for'dhvelopment_al facilities and work involving the storage of spent fuel in [ry
-p r
[
storage casks.
r #
f#
y g
N
. ;~ i.
/
i
. f
(.
t t
[
, / :,. _ ^
- s
^
l i,
t
(
l r
,,,a.
2 9
J s 6 g
3
---r
+--s v
.e 9
m a s.
r j
[j_. - ~ *:
- s..
- r,'
~
'7 TMI-2 Cleanup
/r Policy
~
s
]^
A.
lTh'c content of the containment at TMI-2 is a potential safety and health hazard to the public. Expeditious cleanup of the TMI-2
-. reactor it one of NRC's highest safety priorities. While direct responsibility for cleanup rests with the licensee, NRC will provide oversight and support to ensure decontamination of the facility as well as safe and timely removal of radioactive products from the L
~ ~~
site.
g
B. ' NRC shabid work closely with DOE to reach timely decisions on the Y.
'dispositfon of reactor fuel.
, IPlanning$aidance
,1
- 1. '
NRC will continue monitoring site cleanup activities through a
. dedicated TMI program office..The staff should encourage timely completion of reactor building water processing and timely start of 1
~'
containment decontaminatien (both by mid FY 82).
NRC should urge 4
,'1-the licensee'to' submit plans and schedules in mid-FY 83 for reactor
~
head removal. The.NRC will review and decide on the merits of
/
t'hese plans within three months.
planning for upper internals removal 7
should begin by the end of FY 83, wikh a goal of having the upper
--n,.
e h
internals removed during FY 84. Since the pace of cleanup 's
.f f
s,'/,^
dependent upon licensee's funding ability, the licensee's financial condition will be monitored closely by NRC.
J W
f Be
(
x 8'.
I' _
.g 14 -
2.
NRC will closelh monitor the agreement' with DOE which calls for removal' of high specific activity wastes for research and development, including complete removal of the Epicor liners remaining from the processing of auxiliary building water and the submerged demineralizer system liners after completion of water processing. The objective of NRC's monitoring is to help assure that the wastes are expeditiously removed from the site.
NRC should work toward the goal of assuring that DOE will assume responsibility for offsite disposition of the damaged core.
A -
s 46 9
6 O
OTHER IMPORTANT STEPS Siting Polic, Policy A.
Siting criteria for nuclear power plants and other major nuclear facilities need improvement. The staff has been working to prepare in the very near term modified regulations concerning the siting of nuclear powe'r plants. The Commission now believes that preparation of a safety goal and a better characterization of the radioactive source term must precede new siting regulations.
- Further, siting regulations should take account of engineered safety features.
Planning Guidance 1.
The radioactive source term should be reformulated by early 1983.
2.
Based on the safety goal and the formulation of a new radioactive source term, a proposed siting rule should be published by late 1983.
E,
. Monitoring of Operating Plants Policy A.
The safety of operating power reactors will receive first priority based on the fact that these reactors are the sources of any potential risks to the public health and safety.
B.
The NRC and the industry must continue to learn the lessons that only experience can teach. Efforts to collect, analyze, disseminate, and act upon operational data relevant to the safe operation of major licensed facilities must continue to receive priority attention.
The framing of effective regulations must be based on a close study of operating experience.
Plannino Guidance 1.
NRC will continue to operate and improve, as needed, a Licensee
~-
f Event Reporting (LER) system.
NRC should continue to work with the Institute of Power Operations (INPO) in its operation and dev'elopment of the Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System (NPRDS).
NRC should l
continue to support INP0 in the operation of an industry-wide 1
screening service to identify LERs.ahd other operating experiences l
of significance to nuclear power plant licensees.
l
2.
Utility managers and supervisors as well as operators should be encouraged to improve their ability to promptly diagnose and deal with off-normal conditions.
3.
NRC on-site inspection will focus on the direct verification of the activities and operations of licensees, licensee contractors, and vendors. NRC will improve its own capabilities for independent and confirmatory measurements. The analysis of operational data and systematic assessment of licensee performance will be used to help.
focus inspections and to allocate inspection resources.
4.
The goal of NRC's enforcenent program will be to assure compliance with NRC regulations and license conditions and to use experience gained from application of the enforcement poIicy to evaluate and
~
revise the policy and make it more effective.
For licensees who do, not comply with NRC requirements, prompt and vigorous action will be taken; a licensee must not benefit by violating NRC requirements.
e
=
O
. Research Policy A.
The research program will continue to emphasize support of the safety of operating reactors and other operating facilities. The purpose of the research program is to assist in establishing regulations for existing and future facilities.
Planning Guidance 1.
In view of general budgetary considerations, the agency must be prepared to carry out its research mission with fewer resources.
This can be accomplished through more business-like methods, consolidation and coordination of programs with industry and other agencies, and the elimination of marginal programs.
2.
Resource requests to support fast breeder reactor application in the FY 84-85 budget should be consistent with Administration plans.
The staff should identify 'its research and information needs.related to:
the licensing of breeder reactors, waste, and reprocessing facilities; notify the Department of Energy of these requirements; and to the maximum extent possible, have DOE provide the needed research and information.
. 3.
NRC will develop and maintain a long-range research_ plan to assure that agency resources are being properly directed toward areas of importance to the licensing and inspection processes. The research plan will b5' revised and updated annually and subjected to agency-wide review and be approved by the Commission. Research undertaken by the staff will be consistent with the approved long-range research plan.
e f
. Human Factors Policy A.
A long range human factors program plan should be developed.
B.
INPO and the NRC both have programs for developing standards and requirements in the human factors area. The Commission agrees in principle that the two programs should be coordinated.
In some areas it may be sensible to conduct activities in parallel and in others it may be appropriate to drop the NRC program should INP0's efforts be considered acceptable.
Plannino Guidance 1.
A program plan should be prepared by early 1982.
2.
The NRC should make maximum use of existing human factors data
~
i j
which is available from many sources. Only when crucial data, is l
not available should NRC seek to develop such data.
l l
t,
21 -
3.
Alternative approaches exist for resolving certain human factors concerns. For example, in the operator licensing area, NRC or its contractors could administer the necessary examinations. Al ternatively, individuals in the industry approved by the NRC could administer the examinations.
In those areas where fundamentally different approaches appear necessary, the staff should prepare policy papers for Commission consideration which recommend a course of action.
The possibility of interim actions or pilot programs actions should not te excluded from consideration. These papers should be prepared as soon as practicable.
~.
--w e
e e
,e e
8 i
o UNITED STATES
~,,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION November 6, 1981 n
y, j
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 N,64f CHAIRMAN MEMORANDUM FOR:
NRC Employees FROM:
Nunzio J. Palladino
SUBJECT:
POLICY AND PLANNING GUIDANCE The enclosed document is intended by the Commission to be a guide for all NRC employees. The document sumarizes current policy with respect to those issues which the Commission feels are of imediate importance and for which it is intended that the staff act upon expeditiously.
Guidance is not given with respect to every activity within the NRC since it is not intended that the document be all inclusive.
To carry out the policies of the Comission will require the dedicated effort of all employees as well as the effective and efficient use of all NRC resources.
Innovative, attentive and_ responsive management effort will be required to accomplish the Comission's goals.
NRC's greatest resource is its employees. Retention of our most creative and productive talent and the recruitment of new personnel with fresh insights and perspectives should be a management priority. Any factor which erodes job satisfaction can defeat the attainment of the Comission's program goals and can result in the loss of staff in whose work product
- ~
the Comission and the public has confidence.
To maintain a highly qualified and informed staff, the Comission's most creative and productive employees should be recognized and provided further opportunity for development.
Increased effort should be expended, in the face of highly competitive conditions, to' hire the best qualified individuals essential to the future ability of the NRC to carry out its regulatory responsibilities.
In addition, more attention should be given to the achievement of Comission goals in a timely manner. Administrative support services are vital to timeliness and should be provided consonant with applicable statutes and in a manner helpful to the completion of pmgram objectives.
Enclosure:
As Stated Above (7 pages single space when printed on both sides.)
PROPOSED SCHEDULE November 9, 1981 Chairman circulates draft to other Commissioners November 18, 1981 Commissioners. provide overview comments to Chairman and meet to discuss initial draft in broad terms November 25, 1981 OPE redrafts on basis of comments'and recirculates December 2-18, 1981 Commissioners and EDO meet to discuss the draft as needed. OPE to provide redrafts within 2 l
working days of meeting.
December 23, 1981 OPE provides final version to Commissioners January 8,1982 Commission approves final draft.
m
~
O*
Attachment I to Tab D A Commission Management System to Track
- Major Elements of the PPG The following list is based on a review of the activities which the ED0's office proposes to track (based on attachment 2 to Tab D) and the list of topics which the Chairman requested OPE to include in the draf t PPG. OPE recommends the Commission adopt this list for tracking activities related to the PPG.
Activity 1982 Resources 1.
Licensing o
OL Reviews (220 SY, $12M)-
-o CRBR (25 SY, 58M) 2.
Major Rulemakings (especially (Resources Unknown) radioactive source term)
- 3.
Licensing Actions Backlog (108 SY, $8M) a 4.
Waste Management o
LLW + HLW Jabout 99 SY, $21M) 5.
TMI-2 Cleanup (20SY,$1M)
- ~
6.
Monitoring of 0perating Plants (29 SY, $1M) - AEOD (1 SY, 50) - NRR 7.
Research o
LOFT Phasedown (6 SY, 530M) o Probabilistic Risk Assessment (53 SY, $16M)
The OPE tracking list differs from that proposed by the EDO mainly due 3
to different perspectives used to prepare the lists. There is agreement on four items:
OL reviews, major rulemakings, CRBR, and licensing actions. Of the other five activities proposed by the EDO, while their titles sound important the activites in fact involve very small resource commi tments. OPE, on that basis, has eicluded these activities from the tracking system.
u_
' Lastly, there is one a'ctivity which does not appear on any tracking list but concerning which the agency has had some difficulties. The agency spends about $40 million annually on data processing. There have been some' difficulties (e.g., TERA). Perhaps something should be done to track this area although it does not directly fall into the category of policy initiatives proposed by the Chairman nor does it directly relate to safety.
Rather it falls into the category of internal agency management.
If the Commission does not want to monitor this activity, perhaps the EDO should take a closer look at it.
em s
- Tab D o n,y UNITED STATES
)
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
{
g,
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 g
d
%[C)
/
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Chairman Palladino FROM:
William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
REPORTING ON THE STATUS OF SAFETY ISSUES In your August 7,1981 staff meeting we discussed various agency tracking systems in some detail and proposed periodic reports and briefings to the Commission on significant safety issues. We have selected nine topics and,
prepared reports to serve as examples of the material that could support quarterly briefings to the Commission.
The attached draft reports were prepared utilizing existing tracking systems and status reports to the maximum extent possible. They are self-explanatory and illustrate the degree of detail appropriate.for an executive summary for the Commission.
The formats are designed to present summaries and trends of t
important issues. We propose that these reports ba used as the basis for a
~ --
Commission briefing where detailed questions.would be answered by the staff.
Please note that some of the information in the attached draft reports, especially staff years and program support dollars, is approximate and, in some' cases, missing. Once scope and format decisions have been made, this information would be included.
Guidance in two areas would be appreciated.
First, are these the right topics?
I recommend strongly that the Commission not try to track more than nine areas.
Second, is this' the right format?
After incorporating your comments on the proposed format, we will prepare reports on the first quarter of FY 82 to be sent to the Commission during Ja'nuary or February of 1982.
I William J. Dircks ExeE0tive Director for Operations Attachment as Stated (list of topics) cc w/ attachment:
See Page 2 1
e w
wew wm~e.r-%,
. Dircks memo to Palladino dated re REPORTING ON THE STATUS OF SAFETY ISSUES cc w/ attachment:
Commissioner Gilinsky Commissioner Bradford Commissioner Ahearne Commissioner Roberts S. J. Chilk, SECY F. J. Remick, OPE E. K. Cornell, D/EDO T. A. Rehm, A0/EDO H. S. Bassett, MPA L. W. Barry, CON H. R. Denton, NRR R. B. Minogue, RES J. G. Davis, NMSS V. Stello, IE L. Bickwit, OGC
~%
. go e
SAFETY ISSUE STAT'US REPORTS Licensing Schedules (OL Reyiews)
/ 0 O Generic Issues /USI's o Systematic Evaluation Program
/0 Major Rulemaking Reliability Evaluation Programs (IREP/NREP) o o Qualification of Safety-Related Equipment
/o CRER
. e o Licensing Actions se
~
y-O Fire. Protection Appendix R Implementation Plan a
9 e
f.
FY 1982 Resources
- R l
i Staff Years iirogram Support Operating Plan 224 13,6'40K SEP 8 1901
- Includes 4SY and $300K PS in IE for review of emergency plans t
i BACKGROUND PROGRAll
SUMMARY
(Dased on July report. Note changes in August report.)
The 1981 Ap opriations Bill (ll.it. 96-1093) directed the i
NRC to provi e a monthly report on the status of its Plants Impacted By No. Impacted No. Months efforts to carry out its licensing and regulatory duties; NRC Schedule Plants Delay the first monthly report was submitted in November, 1980 April 1981 11 79 In the April 1981 report readjustments were made to improve July 1981*
8 42 the schedules; impact was calculated using the applicants' Change 3
37 estimates of construction complete; and a Casework Recovery i
Plan was instituted.
In Impact i
I The April report indicates HRC will process 19 OL Appli-
}
cations for 23 Operating Licenses. in 1981 and 1982.
PLANNED REVISED COMPLETED VS. PLANNED Full Power License issued to
'3 (APRIL (JULY ON/ AHEAD PAST~-
Salem 2,.McGuire 1
-19 REPORT)
REPORT) SCllEDULE SCllEDULE Construction Slippages at San SER 9
9 0
3 Onofre 2, Shoreham**, Sununer SSER (FINAL) 16*
19*
1 3
and Susquehanna ACRS REVIEWS 11 11 0
0 "O
LB DECISIONS 0
i COMM DECISIONS '
19*
22*
2 1**
Total 37 LICENSES.
20*
23*
2 1**
- Note potential delays for emergency plan i
- McGuire 2, LaSalle 2, San Onofre 3 added to list; one approvals which would add 15 months to the impact.
j fewer Conunission Decision than Licentes to be issued
- Slippage removes from impacted list.
4 since Commission will consider Diablo Canyon 1 and 2 i
at the same time.
)
- Low-Power ilcanse jssued for Sequoyah 2 on 6/25/81.
STATUS l Potential delays may occur for one plant already impacted by NRC due to anticipated late receipt of a F l
0 finding:
Comanche Peak (18 months).
j l
0 Construction slippage announcements expected in near future from Zimmer, Comanche. Peak 1, which could reduce the current NRC impact.
i 8
og
}
- l.,
n s
o n
n h
t n
n ot n
i o
t c
o t
o ic o
E i
n a"
i csi t a i
L t
o pl t uus cpn t
U c
n mae roi umo c
D u
irl ti c rii ue eel t
n h vm neD sss2 t n r
4 t
ep sve t
s.
rs Li UC s
y e
t eo or nui0 se DS n
b r
nsc cpn oon/
nc s
E o
r o"
o cin6 oi ll N c
d u
m n
tdi vo cL d
CO e
c so nes deC r ee SI d
c 8ei acs er o
dr sb T
e u
2 tt l ui sp f
ee GA p
d 1
sac pd n.
i s
pw ul s
NR p
e ucu en2 vssd po cl IE i
r e
oir d ro8 eehe iP si SP l
h idt e
C/
rctl l
iw NO s
t t
vns sh 1
unu sw d -
CT s
a n
r o
vi
.r.
't d od o
E c
ein i c s
neme sL si I N a
p a
pt c ehso ar h
a as LA h
m h
n rwhf c
2c h
wy L
i t
oan3 t
i ;
s FP t e l
ci t end l eo t e.
t ea O
nt s
r.
i nt oe pttl nt 1 l n N
aa u
et sld aaml pa l
aa8 ua TO cd o
hc h pn cd u
adsi cd/
d C
i i
t a t pi' i
3d ht 5
ee i
ES l n v
op nah' l n e
ent s l n2 ht fN po e
m o
e p o yh con po/
ce fO pi r
yi m
,b pibc nion pi 6 sl AI at p
a r
at s
it mo at p
S e
l s 2 es et se i
ed gm I
- l eh vh
- l cl l 2 s
- l e no V
ep e
dt set epal e p1 i epu ic E
nm n
n d wn n m pi nm c
nms r
R oo' o
oo d loo oomt oof e oos ae Nc N
Nm Al m Ncis HcoD Nci er il ho m n
iA TE e
CG g'.
AN ns at PA 0
4 0
2 0
l hn Ml
+
3 1
0 ca I C l
e Ap e
.s t e e
o rh s
t ot I
)
n nn1 p
sm o
eo8 er 1d mo 1
i.
ci/
ro I'
- 8 e s
ern 8
t2 is8 m f
1 /p t
tfo o
/
c8 Li o
85 p 1
n l
i i
t 1
u/
cor l t
/ i 8
a ns eyn1 r4 retf 9ml
/
c 1
noi esao t
eD va ic os 0
1 i
8 eic uiMio so w
d ep 1
/r n1 l
/t pse d c tt nt o
0e 8 m 6f n o
pt 0noiD ryc o
P
./p E,
o io pn i
1 a c
1 el u1 C1 1 5 p N
odi tt ae cf en 8 xrr8 8
w8 1
i 8e O
t et c
m oioDo
/ eat /
/
o/ml 9h T
se u1 op tl i
8 es8 6
L6 os S
1 il r8 ti pn8s 2 ;
n 1
r 1 t E
8vp t/
u 1 pols
/ gl om 8m rof n ye L
/ em s6 eq 8aiSi 5 niCo
/o ot o
l g I
5 ro n
ue
/
tam it r
4 r f
di un M
1 c
om d
5d u n
odn f
/f 1 et
/n co n
nl no t nu.
9 n8 ye Ja D
5on h
r go maoiC dd d
o/al ect i
E io1 df n
fdee oe i0l p h
r o
s 2
1 S
msi8 e
i s) rf esd8 8
l t p t p s3 em tl o oit/
se rl I
ff rpn/
/Aeep p
i/do V
rcc9 it aan a
ia7 5Mhli 8i c4 c
nie l p E
f eu va et o Rt rl 1 E pl 2l e
r owr R
Dro ed hti E sos 2 o
/Fems
/s Dmen1 d
tt r
i t S
f 8t 4
bo 8
owo8 dhy ens n
nma S y-t/
f cn n
nroi/
ecl son 1 t o i b c b s n6 2 mot o
mo ofpt8 sir iio8 ni ui n
ee 8
o oFi oi i
c ahe vsc/
at ysf i dl uo/
rt nOt rt sdl uo bwt es 6
ce a
i e u qt 5 f p E e fe sel rt r
ri; il l el ysde id l
l iyut n1 m s
,a l p et a aues2 m Rel np Rp n afs1 i
Rn8o pm D au s
it u l ahb8o E cuem E m nl n8 rq E o/r po
- l q eccu/r S eoho S o oeno/
so SC8f Ac
(
D( ss4 f S rcwc Sc CdoC5 i pt sex yre l
n a1 a
n8e 2
a9h
/
1t 1
s 2
3 ith
/
hst
/
n 1
2 o
t ui T
2 y
gw a
N
/
e n
t u n
2 A
1 r
a aAd n
L f
C h
e a
h P
e o
t ed h
a hu l
n o
r r
e y
etl l
O l
e e
u o
h a
b n
n q
u t
c S
n a
i e
onn n
n s
q a
a i
Nii i
u u
e L
S D
Z S
S S
i1j
!j;!a jqIIlj 1i!;}jjild l j jl.
1iji
- j
- }
1l{ l l
o d
s e
t 2
l t
t m
cd 81 oA c
s oo E
ae
/
t a
e rt L
pl 0g p
t f
m n
d U
nmu 1 n y
i o
de D
oid g
i l e l
e nnd i
. t t s c
et EE odt rah h
l l c h
Ll thh i
UC ct c ti acodt t o y'a ue t
d p si DS uns rs
,ah n
ntl i
ro ai psno' o
ht ex t w El N t mn t c2 m om nRgn h e n
l c
ad CO s
o se8idi Ei e SI n3i D/
et 1 Shth sn l e T
o s
n 1 st e8 S
ot o
pt
's
- pn yi g a
GA csi i B1 hcl 1 NR uc L
t ep ame o
l sn ei I E d oe yS nnpmf hot nm tii sc SP eiD aAooxoo rai ncr eo mec yfd 1
eea hs NO sv l
i E
ien ens y
l t
sDe t s CT vro dii0t na tdnlf e
h a
N e pi c1 nol neouo rn r
I LA r
s h ge aie eli s por ot L
- s t nDt ctd' susey i o fc FP t ei ni nic edira ssf a
O nt n ot nel uA rec l
hs d p s
N aan ml osprM ph e d e tit em TO cd o ui e pt E cDl d n n n ri s
C i
C 2ssrasF t s u
one r
ES l n esp n
n nol moi ue ol asoca Cc ch FN po l ri FO pi 2
a norca l hi n
2 i
ct s
pt sgo 1 of o
AI atd8 i gnt e i
S ee/
t no vet nsni tf e.
u s gt I
- l v9 niChesn
- oiit V
e epo er t wie emnri eRs enr i
E n
nmmr t ad novt n
nad nE gao o
ooeo oenoHeo o4oed oS e nhp I
N Ncrf Pham( rp N1Cha NSb ace h
r cot y t
l ndr aee TE ctt CG i
cr AN f ea pA 0
3 0
0 0
i pu Hl nxq i
I C ge i
t l.
St xoe
.nn n
t ee o
t r rrh w
g oat ne r
o i
t ah h
o mt 2
e n
0 p
e ct t
f o
0 8
i i
1 esn l
i o nm r1 4
/S vt f
/
rei p
l d oohe f8' 7R ennf 7
n m
pl nmrt m
/
s C g raea l od o
pl a fni R7gyeAn c pt d
l t e sd c
aa e
ot E
nar SioS e
i i
nnd m S mil orv Rl u
veu n
- ooe w
Sovef ol C po(
s ell 1 si p1 o rl d efo A pt s
Bic o
mn 8msdp l
- f o b
s A
i E
i N
t
[eieil l 1
sA ye s.
1 i
O c
9t c pl aa 8 weMdar 1
e7 s5 8d epsn
/ erE el 8
. s3 a2 9 ee T
u i
o Di oo 5i Ft er
/hn7 w/
1 sb S
r.
E t2 t n l nit 1 vn cdo 7t o0) 9 i
0 yvl L
s0 eBsot
)
/ eil e f
/np-iw 7 r aps 7 osGs 3 o l el n/
1 pL i
I M
o2 8oS)td es yi x h e meE e
/t uri c1
/
Anedi m oSat et m o
rR u 6
J w
D 8g olAve tRl n ni t1 U s 1
e E
do n,i p*
et C eet ot gN s r3 ehs S
et miR s m( ri 1 Adt om 1dn i
o/
hti I
s ovEi o 8
on w
8 ei g f8 t
,s V
i2 rl S cc
.S n
/ ;tP 2o
/ yd n t y
E v8 fos e
.Re 91 n g
l 0aiin d m nrl 8a nll) 3l vd e eo oea i
R e/
s(D n2C p 1
/eorm l r vn r7 we o8Ao
//i aa.
. i ersni/
60l sd n s
Sd rae uf dea pmn'oom pgg d
ew t m i
eot9rg 1
no vnnic on m
peiit e mR ea eR soe ar eiosuofi ooatft t
oE nrn hE~
al t I
iwi rSi a
cS b
e cf r
t srt v
rt i
ysit yl f
ede fS sm sS l
i l e S aen s2 ao 11 ncdin em s
.p i
i t m nn8l s R88enAve Rdt ed Rd pt Rl l pa C eioo/ee E / / pi
- ep E nat n E n ro Ad Ad mCC5dr S89os( ro Sali a S a soc ipsee yrr o
l -
a1 m n8 2
a9A
/
1 s
it k
hss T_
a t ut N
e 3
gn A
P t ua L
d aAl P
m e
r h
p a
h o
2 t e h
c f
he 2
e n
r et s,
?
i r
a e
m t
e p
o m
t r
onh N
h o
a e
Nit W
S C
W F
j]
4
!!li!
,:i]
- j i lj, j j jjl1!!
jiil!
l
.i;;!
N
~
i GENERIC SAFETY ISSUES /USIs FY 1982 Resources i
SEP s 19gI Staff Years Program Support Operating Plan USIs Only 15 3,050K i
BACKGROUND PROGRAM
SUMMARY
l In 1977, NRR identified 142 Generic Issues in NUREG-0410, 35 of these were rated to have A.
Unresolved Sa fety Issues rela tively higher priority and, af ter consoli-dation, resulted in 22 Unresolved Sa fety issues 1 - Resolved and Implementation Complete (USIs).
Four additional USIs were identified 10 - Technically Resolved and Being Ignplemented during FY 1981. Of the remainder of the generic 15 - Resolution Under Development issues,17 were categorized as Environmental
- O Issues, 38 were categorized as Licensing i
. Improvement items and 52 were categorized as B.
Generic Safety Issues Generic Sa fety Issues.
19 of the latter have i
been technically resolved and 2 have been 15 - Active consolidated with other issues, leaving 31
- nacdve Generic Safety Issues from the original list.
20 - New Issues There have been 20 new safety issues identified i
by the staf f since 1977.
Thus, the Generic 51 Issues Tracking System initially will include 1
51 Generic Sa fety issues.
(All 51 Issues will be prioritized in FY 1982) 1 The USIs are tracked in the AQUA Book; NUREG-0606, i
l STATUS Usi At least one additional USI, A-49 (pressurized thermal shock) will be proposed to the Conwnission for their approval in i
early FY 1982.
1
~
Technical-resolution has been completed for eleven USIs which includes four resolved in FY 1981. Based on present schedules, seven more USIs should lie resolved by the end of FY 1982.
i
'A new procedure for assigning priorities to generic issues has recently been initiated.
RESOLUTION OF UNRESOLVED SAFETY ISSUES (SCHEDULE FOR FINAL STAFF REPORT ISSUANCE)
JSI 10.
USI DESCRIPTION lFY80 lFY81 lFY82 FY83 FY84 l FY85 FY86
- -l k'ater Hammer d
h 1-2 Asymmetric Blowdown Loads A
S.G. Tube Integrity A
h A-7 Mark I Long Term Program A
, -8 i1 ark II Programs h,
4 A-9 ATWS
--A
... ~
A-10 SWR Nozzle Cracking A
A-11 Reactor Vessel Mtis.
Toughness O
A-12 S.G. & Reactor Coolant Pump Support
,d A-17 Systems Interaction M
A A-24 Qual, of Class lE Safety
~
Rel. Equipment b~A A-36 Control of Heavy Loads Near Spent Fuel A-39 SRV Pool Dynamic Loads A-40 Seismic Design Criteria N/S A-42 Pipe Cracks in SWR's 1
A-43 Containment Emerg. Sump h
A-44 Station Blackout M
A-45 S/D Decay Heat. Removal Req.
l h
A-46 Seismic Qual. of Eq. in Op. Plants l
4-47 Safety Implic. of Control N/S Sys.
A-48 Hydrogen Control Meas. &
Effects of Hydrogen Surns on Safety Eq.
N/S l
Q(InitialSchedule A Schecule from FYSO gCurrentSchedule 1 Comple '
nct in '80 A/R)
Annual Report
( Aug. 1981 )
$Y b l LIin t it, t.V 5Lutt i 1U11 I huufWe u6
..w..
~
FY 1982cResources_
Staff Years Program Support O
3M Operating Plan 27.0 1.250K-
~
BACKGROUND PROGRAM
SUMMARY
The program is a systematic safety review of the 10 The program consists of 137 topics per plant for a total of oldest reactors: Big Rock Point, Dresden 2. Ginna, 1370 topics, 466 of these topics have been deleted lladdam Neck. Lacrosse. Millstone 1. Oyster Creek, because they were either not applicable or were duplicating Palisades, San Onofre. and Yankee Rowe.
Originally the effotts of other programs such as the Unresolved Safety the plan consisted of 11 reactors but Dresden 1 has
' Issues program or the Three Mile Island Act.fon Plan.
The been deferred since it is shutdown and won't restart topic percent complete is a weighted average based on the until 1936.
stage of review. There are 7 ilifferent stages which correspond to a certain percent complete, Publication of the SEP status suninary report was restarted in December 1980 af ter being cancelled in 1979. From 1978 to November 1980 the program was only 30% (approximately) complete.
SYSTGiv.AYlC EVJ LU ATeute l ktuustAwt F~.-'
e,oo,... dl'^.8/c",'...ni. io,.
.7.
j p
)
,./;-
5=
3 t
/
.'/
E"
~
~
STATUS s
~
M, I"
Since November 1980 the SEP topic completion has
.. ((
been running at a rate of 3% (approximately) per month and is currently 67% complete.
l By July 1982 the last plant is schedule 1 i:'
complete all of its topics and by January 1983 to issue the final SER to the licensee.
..I I,,
.I O/.
2 N
8
/
t Ov 1
2 8
8 9
/2 1
1, 8
3 Q'
f n
e t
2 s
8 e
t s
u
/
g I
E u
e g
I Sic A
laL O
MJ_
i o n
f 2
L fT O
s d
,e
/
i A
le S
0 d
1 u
h MJ_
A e
h T
2 c
L S
c A
8
/
D 9
O 2
8
/8 A
2 0
/7 I
A-
,y 2
l 0
/
6 e
Ov e
2 s
o n 8
T e
/
5 c
RiL E
O b.
Sd g
t n S
2 aA l
8 U
/
e s 4
T Dt d
8 MA I
AT C
le A
u lS d
l 2
8 e
MN
/
h O
3 c
'l I
S c
fT P
E i
J.
3 P L 2
fP 8
l.
.S i
/
L M
2 O
C e,
2s
/
t s
8
?ny A,
8
/2 1
1 1
b, 08
/
1 e
\\_
l e
^L l
t t
Al s
p
/
1 t
m 0
a a o A
DC Ay s
e c l
D si e
p
/
E s o d
3 TT le
,e e
R R
u e
E d
i.
F e
h n
E c
e D
S C
/m s
is 5
o.
'P 6
4 0
4 5
1 2
9 0
4 2
P 7
7 4
4 3
4 3
2 3
2 4
4
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
3 5
0 G
9 2
7 3
3 8
0 A
c.
- i 9
9 9
D 8
9 8
9 9
9 9
a N n T
K N
E I
K E
C W
1 E
O E
E 2
R E
R P
O 1
E N
R E
M S
C N
F K
S N
A E
N O
O C
M E
S E
N D
E R
L T
N O
A E
O D
A 1
A A
D E
S O
O K
R S
T l
N S
f A
I N
S T
L D
N C
E 4 > -
E S
L N
G A
A A
R O
L N
L V
A I
R Y
I A
I I
Y L
D T
P G
D O
M S
D l
8 i
,i lt1
,J l'l
- I a
gn
' s i
k t
a n
m e
e d
7 l - i u
c r
c A
ro e
j r
a e
m v
e w
S o
h ro f
f o
d e
e l
d p
i m
v a
o x
r e
p n
e a
b G
r, N
s o
I i
s K
l A
n a
M o
d E
i 8
8 L
t l
U a
u R
c o
t w
t R
f O
t s
-s J
l t
A a
r M
u o
q pe r
R o
.t ta r
d e
e p
k O
ca n
r o
t t
e r
b o
p d
s e
l e
r u
l o
u d
w R
e h
s g
c e
n a
i i
t t
t t
i i
a v
S i
e t
d h
c n
T a
'a
)-
I Ij
}iii
- $j,
- ]);$,$
d J
kl
' ii
?
il 4
y i$
)
i I'lf tquit lju L i l l1% fs t et ta gpag tgl (13 Ul.
(Operator Qualification) i FY 1982 Resources a
Staf f Years Program upport f.
0.2*
0*
Operating Plan -
SEP 3 1901 BA'CKGR00fl0
_ PROGRAM
SUMMARY
The THI-2 Task Action Plan included a number of areas A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was submitted to the on the technical capabilities, education levels, and Connission in February 1981.
training for reactor operating plant personnel.
4 The next milestone, publish the proposed rule, is -
The starf proposed revisions to 10 CFR Part SS in scheduled for April 1982.
If the rulemaking remains l
SECY 79-330, SECY Br 49), and SECY 81-84 (Regulatory on schedule, a final rule could be expected by Guide 1.0 and the droit AtiS 3.1 are also being February 1983.
j revised.)
I In June 1981 the Connission directed the staff to form a peer review panel, hold workshops, and A
solicit connents from industry.
1 i
j STATUS i
0 A staf f proposal with further reconinendations is expected by January 1982.
Industry connents have been extensive, particularly regardi g education level requirements; a unified industry O
proposal (by AIF) is expected in September 1981.
o Of broad concern, are issues such as (1) cxtent of "grandfathering" for shif t supervisors and SR0's, (2) potential impact on turnover rate and availability of personnel, and (3) quantity and types of courses to be required.
f
- In the broader area of operator qualification, selection, and training 0.5 staff year and $500K are connitted for i
research to validate selection, qualification and training programs and to perform task analyses to define appropriate requirements for NPP operators.
1
..i
.?
i PAJOR RULEMAKING (Operator Qualification)
MILESTONE DESCRIPTION FYSO FY81 FY82 FY83 A
Develop Scope of Work Complete ACRS Review of l
Draft Proposed Rule 1
Submit Proposed Rule to g
Comission Publish Proposed Rule l
A Complete ACRS Review of Oraft Final Rule O
r-Submit Final Rule to Comission 1-d Publi:.5 Final Rule O
A August 1981 Schedule hCurrentScheduleAsOf A Complete N/S - Not Scheduled
(,
e O
e--me.
,.-,,---,,-,e.,,-,
-n,,
-,,,-,,,.--,,,,.-,,..--n,-
,,--.,,.---.,-e--.-,_,-
,,~..-..n,,.,,,,.y,..----
,,.,,w n.,
.,c-.-
~
~
P E
R I
l re e
i 1
d re r
b 8
nah rp m
9 1
a tk eA e
s se v
3 dt o i pd o
ert r n
N t o ha epsct n
P enii) i l
E protwE i s E w d
S mo1 sine o e
c1 il oI l t i vi (l
t seebd o
i asrae1 f m
wa bk8 b
hyor9 o u
7:
yPb ro1 t s
d pw u
,s e
.d t
e,gre b
S0wl ner 8 o e i b 'u o
r9ll eod t
t e1llbt e r
v oa cc P
o t.
,f reOo E
p Ry,ar r
R p
K l
parp N
u 0
l u2 o
S 0
aJ8 nsfl n
t 9I e a
o
)
4, sn1 rt n S
m a
3 yi uei r
N r
r n
.d sf e
A g
_CRiee p
/
o Y
R dcsh a
E e N yi o gt p
E r
t l
P A
h l urni E
M t o r G pi w n
l.
M t a t
o
.r U
f est e) i o
S od eneS s
s ed remN s
m aP e
M tt eum A
i l
T fttdsw(
m rE c
)
r s
aicese m
gR l
.P u
r G
rmecei2 o
oI
.E o
a E
dbposv8 C
r(
i s
e uxrse9 P
.R e
Y l
AsePar1 A
f non i
R7 R
4 f
I P
f oi
.E 2
f i
t R
'8 a
t a I
9 t
at un
. (
1 S
t cs l e Y
n it r
am F_
eho fe t n f e r
ve s,
dct g g
os rsa oh o
El ii n
n o
roil ;
t f
p chsi imsh oafl pseo rn cm
- u.
cwnt eriett e i
rs siep ii a
oahurs l nbt euo eevo t
s n
mirtDeo,ncoacn t
rhil am a
2at e t pyouibeot ut ge ma l
r a pf nraint ojinP d
v er uwt arbt eE ef ee t g P
d guoo
.I nol 9
p und puitR cord so g
aral y7 e yb i n st eI o
e gyr n
lPvld9heri uf cp rnwo nSp i
s eau 1 thargooeamf po tl i
i s a
del t
I n t
Tnt nf hroo ni st pc gstE n uha a
o gt seo i
r eina tt mot an n
nsnE o lt n e
lti ean.ica ondeo uaEi c
i i
p iaoshli)l n pi o e h i tcrI t) nhf O
Mudrt Peeiot ct s nsg aP it U
,dNE ir l
e ndErh gl asn n
ei n
R Pwo e a si hi e R pti ect ege sd evml t dl rvinint e
saeN E
f rE atit n{ aeoel e ri x rae h(
Rd h
euwna t
dpmeye p
syt Neds T yt o a p m n a s' p s pf hst m
/ del t
dl xaink oasxie et eef a Pl sa eid y e pe r ist eedh d i ni o r E euo wkc g
Rm g
hl att g,mi
,s ot i
ti eirrsoyor) esf c u,aot o I
e bll aearfd 2vao n
g eS rr eby f a - it wwPi y(i si sw aP rb t
oiCbso ttt skee ad rp o
l e l Ra pmnnae;nsrre oda n
ftlf seNim aoehfseid us nh neso hia hR l a3ridt att rad u it al ai t gws t
der gti snn ce e
c t
si wd e r gt oa s
eir cr
't msuea mso i
oev oiruoedd oeoo s
hNd u x
et y et rtl y r n pl t cnie hrf i l eP r c
i gaof pU a
nacrst p sl gnua E u pi t rvi ev) e coi s-sb naGv sRdil ugnt srhE1 uhamsdee aaec E
eNeho oeiniet
( qt ynvu l ri s u/ csp t
ehv y
elt
,l al q oit rey sPon D
e n e d Ti yt sant apoi t asert sE rot N
hI vi Rdi:
eannxvn v
mui iR pii U
t a
ul ethl eaeeh raeAdl I
tf
.l ti rn pu c. e v
ei l
tak O
ehy R
fh l sasbaec qyooes dfiecb S
awal c
. i G
otdktt a
direttttt roth oa U
rohea l
cnstiPil ese
' n o at ri T
el WRB K
l C
e s u i a y a l E c b w b f)) A a el Pl A
v A
naoul rheRcuoua34Rl ns eo e
T e
urt aR S
S o 0 o 'o B
O w w q pC t R I a p p s s.((P p I
?!
j~
jl;;i!{1jj jjj l'
j
] ;!]ji 4 ; !iijl;i !
1I
?
?
r r
~
~
~
~
1
_/
s s
IREP/NREP_ *
?,.;
MILESTONE FY80 FY81 FY82
'FY83 -
.V:
IREP Phase I (Crystal River Study)
~
Complete Study I
A Ccmplete Draft Report M
Submit Results to NRR d
- T Complete Final Draft Report 8
F8 Issue Final Report Phase II (Analysis of 4 Additional Plants)
Complete Studies l
O
~ l, Complete Draft Reports 1-0 Issue Final Reports i ' 'd Comoiete Revision to IP,EP
- i' Procedures Guide i
d~
~
e NREP i
Segin Dev. of Procedures A
[A l
IEEE Peer Review Conference Held i
Oevelop Commission Paper ANS Peer Review Conference Held AM
Complete Final Procedures IREP/NREP Imolementation NRR Selection of Procedures
'}
d D
Begin Implementation a-t e
A August 1981 Schedule
@CurrentSchedule A Complete (As Of
)
'f, S-E
_..,.,._..i.,,,,, _
y-.
t
,e
.q ysgy CRDR Data As Of:
y s
e ources?
< (
(
'f y id8' R s
/
Staff Years Prog'am Support GEP 3 Ull tf' Operating Plan G8
-(17,400K i
r
.Z
- ~;
- As requested in FY 1982 NRC Supplemental Reqqcst.'
't
+
~
BACKGROUND PROGRAM
SUMMARY
s NRC anticipates the DOE will request NRC to resume Th.e licensing review far t[;e CRilR assumes:docietinj of the CP review for the CRDR application in the fall an acceptable ER and PSAR.In early_fY '1982.with a of 1981.
CP Decision 31 36 nyonthi ! ster q'
LWA decision 20-22 months af ter acceptable -
NRC supports related fast breeder reactor safety research for the purpose of: developing methodology; updated ER and PSAR are docketed.
=
- providing audit verification; and, assessing safety
- CP decision 31-36 months af tec acceptable updated issues.
ER and PSAR are docketed.
- Schedule dependent on resources being made available to NRR.
STATUS O This schedule requires the timely, complete, and acceptable submittal by the applicant (DOE) of all information and material requested by the NRC.
o NRR resource estimates are based on the assumptions that the majority.of the review previously conducted remains valid and only the open issues identified in 1977, the THI-related requirements, and any new requirements would have to be resolved, e
o Updated ER and PSAR are expected from DOE in September - November 1981.
e 3
1
FY 1982 Iesources*
Staff Years
' program Support Operating plan 11.8 3,600K SEP 3 1901 aincludes only ItES and IE resources.
_ H0 GRAM SUlif4AR_Y p
UACKGROUllD In 1977 the Union of Concerned Scientists petitioned the This program will provide a systematic approach to ensure Conmission to shut down plants because of inadequacy of that all safety-related equipment in both operating and design and failure to qualify electrical equipment.
The new facilf t.les is properly qualified to perform its Conmission denied the petition in 1979 but directed the safety functions if subjected to postulated accident staf f to survey plants for status of equipment qualifi-conditions or a seismic event.
cation.
Information failed to demonstrate appropriate flajor FY 1982 planned Accomplishments qualification, in May 1980 the Conmission issued a Hemorandum and Order directing the staff to review
-- Coinplete corrective actions for environmental licensee equipment qualification and issue SERs on qualification of all electrical equipment.
Individual plants by February 1981.
The SERs were
-- publish c proposed rule on environmental, seismic and issued in March tlirough June 1981.
The Connission dynamic qualification of electrical equipment.
~~I' u mak st o er chanical equipment and relate tr 1
u i nt niust p rl qualified to tiRC requirements.
-- Licensees and applicants respond to llRC request for in August 1981 flRR proposed a comprehensive program plan seismic qualification information.
which includes an environmtital, seismic, and dynamic qualification testing program, rulemaking activities,
~~I%Qyg d$g $ht abo a
c and research to be conducted fu support of the program.
l-laboratories conductinq tests.
Initiate a rulemaking addressing accreditation of The plan has not. yet been approved by the Conmission.
STATUS O Utilities are having trouble in meeting the June 30, 1982 deadline set; by the Consission for completing corrective actions.
Licensees have petitioned for a 13-month extension. The staff is reconmending that this deadline be extended one year.
0 The proposed rule on electrical equipment qualification requirements is in office concurrence. The staff expects to submit the rule to the ED0/Consission in mid-September.
O To date, 6 industry tests have been reviewed and 2 independent verification tests have been performed.
O Ag'reement between NRC and IEEE concerning laboratory accreditation is in final concurrence.
IEEE is working on the details of the accreditation process.
~
^
1 D
t e
/,
./
FY 1981 and 1982 SCllEDULE FY.1931 IY 1982 J J A S 0 N D J F H A H J J A 5 Hajor Elements of Prograni A.
Environmental Qualification of Electrical
-A A
[\\
A c,,,,,
s-ei..i a 2
<=iaiiw Equipnent Sells Coa"""'
so sells M I **S A
Co.eise sta b-A
- c.,,
3,,,,,,,
B.
Independent verification Testing Prograni fieview app.,10 ineksse,y seses and p.......,. s i..umw. uni
..aric..i i.u. ii.e A i si.e,-d A
A A
A_
C.
Qualification of Ileclianical Equipnent and I I U.*o".."'i.
I...... ' l j,".,",* [o',"c"d Additional Electrical Equipnent (staff proposal)
"*p"Za"* 3','y,,i,";;"..",'-
,.n.
g D.
Ruleniaking on Laboratory Accreditation i,,,,,,,,p..,
nuse so. Comn.en.
e l
g
=
CRSR MILESTONEDESCRIPfl0N FY 82 FY 83 FY 84
- cket Acceptable ER and PSAR d_,... _ _ _ _ _ _,
ssue Supplemental FES and SSR l
d ssue SER l
A U 00cisien l
A 3 Cecision A
August 31, 1981 Schedule Current Schedule As Of A
Cc=pl ete N/S - Not Scheduled
--e
+-y 4,---r-e
-.ge--y-, - -
.-w
--w--
---w-gy-
LICEN11HG AC110fis_
Data As Of:
FY 1982 Resources t
l STAFF YEARS PROGRAM SUPPO!!T J.l Operating Plan 108 9,410K
}
SEP 3 f)01 T
.e DACKGROUND PROGRAM SUMMAllY o Complete 1408 licensing actions in FY 82.
The program consists of efforts on the 73 operating 0 ' Implement NUREG-0737 licensing actions consistent with power reactors. it includes resolving safety issues, completing licensing actions on schedule, and issuing tineframes prescribed by Consnission.
operating reactor memoranda. It also includes conducting specific plant evaluations to establish the accepta-bility of each reactor with regard to unanticipated problems and events; issuing generic letters on signif-PROJECTED LICENSING ACTIONS icant safety issues identified during operation and
=
1 issuing orders requiring licensee action as required; FY82 FY83 FYB4 and maintaining cognizance of operational problems and
, 880 1870
[
events as they arise and evaluating their significance.
Incoming 1902
}
Completed 1408 1550 2024 j
Backlog
- 3186 3516 3362 1
l
- End of FY i
4 STATUS i
0 As of June 30, 1981, roughly 1,500 licensing actions were completed (including THI) and the backlog has bcen reduced by approximately 750. NRR ori.ginally planned to complete 2,545 actions in FY Bl.
Ilowever, as a result of reallocating staff from Operating Reactors to Casework, NRR now expects to cenplete 1,775 actions in FY 81.
1 1
ilo t'c:
IE will assist NRR by performing SER reviews for licensing activities under the SRP Chapter 13. IE has agreed to conduct reviews at 11 different facilities.
j t
i,
t o
n s
t t
a ou n
9 t s n
y
.s e
7 r
o n
sl sm i
a na t e r
/
d d u 1
f 0
1 e
ep t
m ot nr o
/
i.
s a
st eif O
0 1
f oy t
n ai mu i
pt n
e emeqd s
A 3
e c
oi e
e rb re e r
e rl m
b uir n a
o p
pi e
s s u i
W f
s b
l e
u ql m E
t MP e
sa p
v or ea a I
a E
D b
e np m
a ii rc x V
S h
oa i
h re i e E
ah en e
.R 9
3 5
cL i
d t
i e
vt hh r e
e t
h )'.
0 1
1 1
I r
t c NR s
g an n
n cwx t6 e
re e e E
oi i(
h ok tt r D
e i
i c
t fdd d) t f a e a
N i
e. i t n oc mme U
l eR d ue r(
s my m
ohp f8 r
l o yo e e
at d s h s
x msp 4
v t
a t
t t
ri A
s r
n od f e n0 e
t r em
)
o a
f n off o5 w
i a ro s D
o mel r a
.E R
p l
e ao l
b y af OV 0
6 3
i R
p p
sp ss t n I
u s
po NO N
u ep n
3 mi s1 ds t
(
S K
l l A oe R
5 l
u et an n P
N m
9 a
df.
i t G.
t a xc s
rf ho a P
eo pnI ee e
i o
i l A
A a
4 L
r d1 h
i rI S
i e
yt p P
g e8 cs reI r
t h mep i
t uhm8 o
Y_
r/
st ct of N
r R
i9 n
sl n f o l
mt e2 O
P A
u1 d e eao i
ri x
M q/
nm d
i se c
ox ee r I
T M
e3 ae et tl a
.f a s o
D A
U r
r-ndc su fe m ud f
.E l
S y
si gi e ed n e ae OI 0
3 1
s s
eb nu i vS ue 2i t a ct s NN 1
1 l
aq so qh 7l a est o
e M
E H
c A
ut l e ero ec d d obe s D
E r
s R
ri P r D pt Rs ra t
u e
'L u
r G
m oe1 sq u i
o a
O eb
)
)
)
fd 8 p ne q i
6 s
e R
h u 1
2 3
/u or e'
0 P
Ts
(
(
(
d1 9 r
i e
Y e8 1 d ts 2
l i
t/ /e pt n FS 7
n f
2 e9 3t mn o OT 2
f l1 s eai N
f 2
9 X
8 a
p/ ee xl t
.A o
3 2
l 9
t m3 h u ep p OL u
1 S
t o
t q m
NP 9
i ce e re eR 1
t Y
P F
h mr as x t e t
nt o l e ex P.
nr cn e
e ry uh i
ai ei c
egf edt ed s
N l ur p
n.
bn h e rn nt hf ue O
Pqa ss aR i
i et o cot p
)
n ee em I
T a
rrl re l x veie s up d
d0 C
l a
c t
ol pi aet m 3 fA e
e-E P
esuthi tl md h m pi t n
t tI l t nat e
aon mt s, rf T
o s
sI O
g ci id rR ce sn e er oo i
e eI R
n u
nswei d
p li xe uef t
u u
Ndi m vf xerp a
eh qv G
S p
q q,
P i
t e
adl it oA t s t eel -
U i
e eJ E
a yvnreoedsf t yd rwaI R
r r o o gt sh ne f
ia en oiI A
cd R -
T r
R I
I e
r ri o a e t euso ml t e tl tI T
se s
sl I
F p
e pt rur pqm b e sv o n
S et n
nl O
f m c pl nnpea0 ud ei n eh Dt o) o i e auiArr-s ug
. tt i
i.
i,
s t nv g1 r q dR oi nm tG t r nnooeeddCo1 Ra eei pw gb p -
pe worieh enR r1 l
rb dx i u m1 mh o i pt rT vaNp xu i ae sS e1 et rs c
l d
id sl sd c
e x1 xO Dseee o8ern d etl t n sn D
E(~i(
l a
nh ni neia
. s 4. h i irt r t e ec awap i
smioese ps l l p el nf rwd r0, h J-
'A o p
r 5
t p
p y pA rp VCr sae n
I Ar e
em o4K87ho T
oeed rRoeI ef rineFitI ff 4
20 Tc th it awCt a o
at sfit iu,
s -
l ss0dl G st
,e nei n1d a-wn er5ihcd o( avl ea :
i7lTaei ei il s
f9 e f vt enet vpt 1d oalI r e
n rruu s
rma e
i.
h, u s e pl r on ol t2 gt wma
.t o
yrP i
rf D
2 noivn)
N g
dap eo0st a
2 U
nhnl eei5 ec ns7 i t O
icaprsrt ee R
wr ae cRsS S
ms e eh G
oasreh eeF n U
i K
lMt el t stC eh T
l u t C
l nwc eo ct A
eq T
ref A
aneouoh r 0. i i I
i i>n
- t i l
s i
2 I
i f
LICEt4 SING ACTierts Liccnsing Actions - FY82 2000'-
1600 t,
Completed Actions 1200 Incoming Actions 800-400-l I
l 0
I i
i i-l 1st
- 2nd, 3rd 4th
=
1 Backlog By Priority Priorities O' 0 -
0 Priority 1
- Required by Rule Order, or NRC letter; items related to safety 3',oo or hearing matters.
3000--
Estimated
~
Priority II
- Items which could result in IE enforcement actions and spent 2500 11 fuel expansions.
~
2000--
111 Priority 111
- Licensee request for amen <lments that have low significance but for 1500 which NRC action is not required during the next six months.
1000--
1 50&
Other
- No priority number has been assigned.
0 Other l
l 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th FY81 FY82 l
! ( l_ (_ { ( ( _, ( ( ( L I- ( ( ( ( l '(
(Tl ((((k(
((((
(((k((if
((T
(
D s=
TRANSMITTAL TO:
Document Control Desk, h
016 Phillips
-P ADVANCED COPY TO:
O The Public Document Room h
DATE:
November 19, 1981 g
B Attached are the PDR copies of a Commission meeting transcript /s/ and related meeting document /s/.
They are being forwarded for entry on the Daily Accession
- iP List and placement in the Public Document Room.
No 2"
other distribution is requested or required.
Existing DCS identification numbers are listed on the individual b-documents wherever possible.
1.
Transcript of:
Discussion of Policy and Planning Guid$nce, November 18, 1981.
(1 copy) a.
Memorandum dated Nov. 9.
81, to the Commissioners from Chairman Palladino, subject:
Draft Policy and Planning Guidance (PPG) with enclosures.
(1 copy)
/f lL Me town g
Offic9 of the Secretary
'e>N b.
/
3-y, 6
J. I $
d".
l.
NOV191981*
V..s. g f e i
9
/
6
~
/
\\
3::
.y-
- 5=
e:
..67MRNNNNNMNNMRNNNPNRPRMNNNNNM