ML20034B282

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Advises That Commission Approved Proposed Program Plan & Schedule for License Renewal Rulemaking,Per SECY-90-021
ML20034B282
Person / Time
Issue date: 04/06/1990
From: Chilk S
NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
To: Taylor J
NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
References
FRN-55FR29043, REF-10CFR9.7 AD04-1-086, AD4-1-86, NUDOCS 9004260303
Download: ML20034B282 (4)


Text

..

k a

f"%*k UNITED STATES i

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION -

[,J

    • < (

o 1

W ASHINGT oN, D.C. 20S$5

\\..s...f April 6, 199o-l RELEASED TO THE PDR:

8 eeeeeeeesese..seesse.e.o; e

o,,m o, m SECR ETAFlY

  1. p. Mo 1

e

.e 7

e eeeeeeeeeeesseeeeeeeeeee MEMORANDUM FOR:

James M. Taylor l

Executive Director.for Operations h_ m J.

Chilk, Secretary l

FROM:

SUBJECT:

SECY-90-021 - REPORT ON-LICENSE RENEWAL WORKSHOP AND PROPOSED REVISIONS.TO THE-PROGRAM PLAN.AND SCHEDULE FOR RULEMAKING i

This is to advise you that the Commission (with all' Commissioners agreeing except as noted below); has approved the' proposed program plan and schedule for the license renewal rulemaking subject-to the following:

1.

The Commission has agreed that'the Current Licensing:

Basis (CLB) will provide an adequate level of safety t

for continued operation during the-renewal period, y

however,=the Commission does not-believe.that licensees should be required to include'the CLBias a.part of the license renewalLapplication.. The Commission believes the rule should provide:an alternate:means of ensuring' i

the current licensing. basis is enforceable'for the term' of the renewed license (e.g., by(license condition in'a renewed license that:the. licensee will comply withithe CLB in the renewal term).

If.there are reasons, other than ensuring enforceability, whygwe should: require licensees to1 document their current licensing-basis the l

staff should provide a discussion of those reasons.-

l The staff should' evaluate.whetherLwe should request the l

two pilot' plants to document their7 current licensing basis for the purpose of verifying that'the screening 1 methodology is adequately performed.

2.

With respect'to the applicability of.the Backfit Rule:

a.

The Commission believes that-the backfit rule should not apply to this procedural' license a

renewal rulemaking.

b.

The commission believes that'10 CFR 50.109 should-apply to backfits imposed as-conditions for?

license renewal, whether through rulemakingsor in SECY NOTE:

THIS SRM WILL BE MADE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE IN 10 WORKING DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THE MEMORANDUM.

l k

& fl 900406 7

pfQ).

u PT9.7 l

PDC 1ld.

]

i 0

2 l

)

the individual plant renewal proceedings.- This would lead to'the'following approach: -Any age related requirements that'are necessary~to ensure 4

" adequate protection"-during-the extended-life would be imposed-without respect to cost.

Application of the " compliance' exemption" of the 1

Backfit Rulel(10 CFR 50.109 (a) (4) (1)) in those a

circumstances where a. clear showing can be made-that proposed requirements to address age-related degradation are_necessary.to ensure that the. plant o

will operate in accordance with-the CLB.during the i

license renewal term would permit the staff-to 1

impose such requirements without, regard.to. cost as well. -Any proposed requirements addressing-age-related degradationfissues that go'beyond what.

is necessary to ensure-that the facility will-operate inLconformity withithe CLB during the renewal term.would be subject to a backfit analysis, including the cost-benefit analysis and justification provisions of the backfit rule.

Chairman Carr believes 1that it~is not appropriate.to-apply the backfit rule to the establishment of age.-

related requirements.

Neither, should it'be applied'in the review of individual license renewal applications:

1 prior to-incorporating these requirements into the license renewal rule.

As yet, standards:for addressing age related degradation beyond the current 40; year l

operating license have not been established by-the-staff and incorporated into our regulations.: After age l

related standards are incorporated in the license-q renewal rule, the backfit rule should apply in the i

review of individual license renewal-applications.

3.

In regard to the scope of the individual license l-renewal proceedings, the Commission believes they should be limited to matters' pertaining to-age-related degradation over the license' renewal term.. Issues unrelated to age-related degradation should be-L addressed outside the scope of the-individual license-i renewal proceedings. -In the event'that staff.should identify non-age-related. safety enhancements during the y course of the license: renewal process that the staff i

desires to pursue, there.should be a process for H

distinguishing these safety enhancements from the' R

age-related matters that will be the subjectLof the i

license renewal proceeding.. OGC should explore how.

l best to codify such a distinction, so as to ensure.thatl 1

it is understood at the outset that non-age-related issues are not properly within the scope of individual li'ense renewal proceedings.

c Also, the suggestion that the Commission highlight its interest in seeing timely resolution of severe accident j

- --E

3:

f issues in the Statement of Considerations seems to' confuse the important distinction between age-related and non-age-related issues by implying a relationship i

L of some sort between license renewal proceedings and.

i severe accident issues.

Clearly, timely resolution of-severe accident issues is something that the Commission has endorsed.

But in view of the statement already-made to date by;the Commission on this subject (e.a.,-

" Policy Statement on Severe Reactor Accidents Regarding Future Designs and Existing Plants"), it is unnecessary

'i to' state once again-the Commission interest in seeing '

i severe accident issues resolved in a timely manner, particularly if it might be. read to imply that the

. Commission intends.to entertain non-age-related issues in. license renewal proceedings.

Accordingly, the' ci discussion of severe accidents should be deleted from the Statement of Considerations.

t 4.

In regard to further development of the proposed rule, staff should seek to' incorporate as much of the screening methodology'as possible in the rule itself.

When the proposed rule is submitted to the Commission for consideration, the staff should discuss the extent-to which this has been accomplished.

Following review of the two pilot applications, the staff should incorporate the standards for addressing 4

age related degradation in an amended license ' renewal rule to the extent possible given the. existing-knowledge base on age related degradation.

l 5.

The staff should evaluate the schedule for completion l

of the regulatory guide and safety evaluation reports j

on the industry technical. reports, to determine if we can make improvements in providing this important regulatory guidance to the early renewal applicants..

l In addition, the. staff should incorporate the schedule' for completion of the industry technical 1 reports-and the staff's issuance of safety evaluation reports in the overall' schedule for license renewal activities.

6.

Finally, the Commission places great importance on this L

program and strongly. stresses the need for, adequate L

resource allocation, high caliber technicalLreviews,.

and timely resolution of the technical issues.

The-

. staff:should periodically monitor the resource requirements for this program and within the-Five. Year-Plan ~ clearly identify this program, the resources required to develop and implement this program, and the i

coordination-and review responsibilities between NRR and RES.

In view of the magnitude: of the task and the ambitious schedule which confront the staff, the need for ongoing high-level NRC management involvement in L

coordinating the activities of both NRR and RES in the l

l.

L i

O f"

4

(,

license renewal effort cannot be overenphasized.

Any difficulties encountered in this regard, including any uncertainties which may arise concerning the scope of each office's respcnsibilities, should be raised to appropriate levels of management for prompt resolution.

cc:

Chairman Carr Commissioner Roberts Commissioner Rogers commissioner Cartiss Commissioner Remick OGC GPA 4