ML20034G163
| ML20034G163 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/01/1993 |
| From: | Marcus G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Vanduser K NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20034G164 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9303090140 | |
| Download: ML20034G163 (18) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:y ~
- g.
r m;, UNITED STATES 8-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n. I h h WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 ' E ok / March 1,'1993 MEMORANDUM FOR: Karen M. VanDuser, Chief Document Management Branch Division of Information Support Services Office of Information Resources Management FROM: Gail H. Marcus, Chief Generic ~ Communications Branch Division of Operating Reactor Support Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
DOCUMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED GENERIC LETTER. REGARDING THE AVAILABILITY AND ADEQUACY OF DESIGN BASES INFORMATION-The Special Inspection Branch has prepared a draft generic letter regarding tiie availability and adequacy of design bases information. The Committee to Review Generic Requirements (CRGR) has reviewed and concurred in this draft generic letter.' The Generic Commanications Branch (0GCB) is preparing to publish the draft generic letter in the Federal Reaister for public comment. This memorandum provides a compilation of the background material relevant to the subject generic letter that should be made available to the public! By copy of this memorandum we are providing the enclosed documents to the Public-L Document Room. The enclosures are (1) the draft generic letter as approved by the CRGR, (2) the CRGR Review Package and the Generic Backfit Requirements L Reporting form, (3) the Federal Reaister. notice containing the policy statement on the availability and adequacy of design bases information, (4) the Nuclear Management and Resources Council (NUMARC) Design Basis Program Guidelines of October, 1990, (5) the NRC comments to NUMARC on the Design Basis Program Guidelines, (6) a staff memorandum to the-Commission, " Design Bases Reconstitution," SECY-92-193, 'of May 26,1992, and (7) a staff requirements memorandum from the Secretary of the Commission on design bases reconstitution of June 24, 1992. CONTACT: Andrew J. Kugler, NRR < hh '[. h
- 504-2828 i-y, 300047 il g
[;, e EUh T0 REGidiDilY CEM N fd, iks u?
L Karen M. VanDuser March 1,1993 We request that you provide us with the Nuclear Documents System accession number for this memorandum so that we can include this information in the Federal Reaister notice. This information can be provided by telephone or by E-Mail. original signed by Gail H. Marcus, Chief Generic Communications Branch Division of Operating Reactor Support [ Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
As Stated l CONTACT: Andrew J. Kugler 504-2828 Distribution w/
Enclosures:
AJKugler, NRR OGCB R/F Central Files ) PDR Distribution w/o
Enclosures:
BKGrimes, NRR GHMarcus, NRR AChaffee, NRR CGrimes, fit SWeiss, NkE l DPNorkin, NRR JDWilcox, NRR DLWigginton, NRR DORS R/F AJKugler R/F DOCUMENT NAME: DBGLACC.MEM OGCB: DORS:NRR C/0GCB: DORS:NRR t AJKugler GHMarcus 03/1/93 03/3/93 } r e I e
Karen M. VanDuser March 1, 1993 i We request that you provide us with the Nuclear Documents System accession number for this memorandum so that we can include this information in the Federal Reaister notice. This information can be provided by telephone or by 7-l E-Mail. ~ r original signed by l t Gail H. Marcus, Chief Generic Communi: stions Branch Division of Operating Reactor Support Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation )
Enclosures:
As Stated l CONTACT: Andrew J. Kugler 504-2828 i Distribution w/
Enclosures:
AJKugler, NRR OGCB R/F ' Central Files: PDR Distribution w/o Enclosures-BKGrimes, NRR GHMarcus, NRR AChaffee, NRR CGrimes, NRR -SWeiss, NRR DPNorkin, NRR i JDWilcox, NRR DLWigginton, NRR DORS R/F i AJKugler R/F l DOCUMENT HAME: DBGLACC.MEM OGCB: DORS:NRR C/0GCB: DORS:NRR AJKugler g GHMarcus 03/j./93 y 03/1/93 j l 1 l l.
i i DRAFT 1 T0: ALL HOLDERS OF OPERATING LICENSES FOR NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS
SUBJECT:
AVAILABILITY AND ADEQUACY OF DESIGN BASES INFORMATION The Commission recently issued a policy statement' describing its expectations and the Agency's future actions to verify the availability and adequacy of design information. In the policy statement, the Commission { concluded that maintaining current and accessible design documentation is [ important to ensure that (1) plant physical and functional characteristics are maintained and are consistent with the design bases as required by U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations; (2) systems, structures, and components can perform their intended functions; and (3) the plant is operated in a manner consistent with the design bases. In October 1990, the Nuclear Management and Resources Council (NUMARC) issued i NUMARC 90-12, " Design Basis Program Guidelines," containing guidance for organizing and collating the design bases for each nuclear power plant in a I manner consistent with the definition of design bases information in Section i 50.2 of Title 10 of the Code _o_f Federal Reaulations (10 CFR 50.2). NUMARC issued this document for voluntary use by NUMARC member organizations as a basis against which they could review their existing or planned efforts to i collate supporting design information. On November 9, 1990, the NRC staff i 2 l sent comments on the guidelines to NUMARC, 1 i '" Availability and Adequacy of Design Bases Information at Nuclear Power Plants," Federal Reaister, Volume 57, Number 154, page 35455, August 10, 1992. 4 2Letter from W.T. Russell, NRC, to W H. Rasin, NUMARC, November 9, 1990. i
J DRAFT i To ensure that the NRC is apprised of the industry's activities, the NRC j hereby requests power reactor licensees to describe the programs that are I implemented or planned to ensure design information is correct, accessible, and maintained. i To assist the staff in prioritizing its inspection program, the NRC requests that each addressee voluntarily submit the following information which would be particularly useful if submitted within 120 days: c 1. Submit a description of any programs already completed, planned, or being conducted to ensure the correctness and accessibility of the design bases information for your facility and to ensure that it is maintained current. 1 i 4 2. If you are not implementing a design reconstitution program at your facility, submit your rationale for not implementing such a program and submit a description of the extent of the design information you have obtained from the nuclear steam supply system (NSSS) vendor and t architect-engineer (A/E). Describe the extent of any information not obtained from the NSSS vendor or A/E, but which is accessible at the ] NSSS vendor or A/E offices. 3. If your design reconstitution program is planned or being conducted but has not been completed, submit your schedule for implementation and the i expected completion date. t
J DRAFT This generic letter does not impose any new requirements or modify any exirting regulatory requirements. ] h Please address your response to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, i ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, D.C. 20555 and a copy to Mr. Eugene V. Imbro, Chief, Special Inspection Branch, 0WFN 9A1, U.S. Nuclear R:3alatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555. This request is covered by the Office of Management and Budget Clearance Number 3150-0011, which expires June 30, 1994. The estimated average number of burden hours is 200 person hours for each licensee response. Send comments j regarding this bu:Jen estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to the I Information and Records Management Branch, (MNBB-7714) Division of Information i Support Services, Office of Information Resources Management, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555; and to the Paperwork Reduction + i Project (3150-0011), Office of Management and Budget, Washington, D.C. 20503. j i J e
- ^ DRAFT Backfit Discussion This generic letter is a request to submit information voluntarily. This letter does not require modifications or additions to systems, structures, or components of a facility, the design of a facility, or the procedures or organization to design, construct, or operate a facility. Therefore, this letter does not impose any backfits, as defined in 10 CFR 50.109(a). The l staff evaluated this letter in accordance with the charter of the Committee to i Review Generic Requirements (CRGR) and will place a copy of that evaluation in the public document room with the minutes of the CRGR meeting 229 at which this letter was considered. i If you have any questions about this matter, please contact the NRC project-manager or the technical contact listed below. j Sincerely, DRAFT James G. Partlow Associate Director for Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation TECHNICAL CONTACT: Eugene V. Imbro, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, telephone (301) 504-2967. i a 1 r
CRGR REVIEW PACKAGE PROPOSED ACTION: Issue a generic letter as requested by SRM 92-193, June 24, 1992, to gather information regarding the status of the licensee's self-initiated design bases reconstitution programs. CATEGORY: 2 RESPONSE TO REOUIREMENTS FOR CONTENT OF PACKAGE SUBMITTED FOR CPGR REVIEW t (i) The proposed generic requirement or staff position as it is proposed to be sent out to licensees. l Pesponse The staff position is as follows: ) Licensees should submit information on the status of l self-initiated design bases reconstitution programs. The i information gathered will include (1) the availability I and accessibility of design bases information, (2) whether a design bases reconstitution program is-completed or in progress, (3) the measures taken to. ensure that the plant configuration conforms to the design
- bases, and (4) completion schedules for reconstitution programs underway.
The information will be used by the staff in prioritizing~ performance-based engineering inspections. (ii) Draft staff papers or other underlying staff documents supporting the requirements or staff positions.
Response
Availability and Adecuacy of Desian Bases Information at i Nuclear Power Plants
- Policv Statement The Commission recently issued a policy statement on availability and adequacy of design bases inf ormation at nuclear power plants. This policy statement supports the staff's position on design bases reconstitution and the issuance of this ger.er ic letter.
The following are pertinent excerpts from the policy statement: l 3 The Commission has concluded that maintaining current and accessible design documentation is important to ensure that (1) the plant physical and functional characteristics are maintained and are consistent with the design 1 i i )
1 bases as required by NRC regulations, (2) [
- systems, structures, and components can perform their_ intended functions, and (3) the plant is operated in a manner consistent with the design bases.
The Commission believes the regulatory framework already exists to address the need for accessible design bases and control of design information. e e e e In order to ensure the Commission is apprised of industry's activities the NRC will take the following actions. (1) The staff will issue a generic letter requesting all licensees to describe the prograns that are in place to ensure design information is
- correct, accessible, and maintained current.
Those licensees that are not implementing a design reconstitution program will be requested to provide.their rationale for not doing so. If a reconstitution program is under way, the schedule for implementation and completion will be requested. (2) The staff will prioritize NRC inspections t of licensee's management of design and configuration using SSFI-type techniques based upon responses to the generic letter and other plant specific information known to the NRC. Additional staff guidance will be developed, where needed, for the design bases aspects of these inspections. (iii) Each proposed requirement or staff position shall contain the sponsoring office's position as to whether the proposal would increase requirements or staff positions, implement existing requirements or staf f positions, or would relax or reduce existing requirements or staff positions.
Response
In the proposed generic letter, the staff would request information with which to assess the licensees' implementation of existing requirements. An excerpt from the policy statement is as follows: 2 P
t l I b f The Commission believes the regulatory framework already exists to address the need for accessible design bases and control of design information.- t (iv) The proposed method of implementation with the concurrence of OGC on the methods proposed.
Response
The method of implementation will be the proposed generic letter requesting information. The of fice of the General Counsel has reviewed a copy of this proposed generic letter, and the staff has incorporated the comments [ received from it. (v) Regulatory analyses generally conforming to the directives and guidance of NUREG/BR-0058 and NUREG/CR-3568. pesponse This is not applicable because the proposed generic j letter does not increase the staff's requirements or -l positions. The purpose of the proposed generic letter is I to gather information regarding licensees' implementation i of existing staff requirements to maintain accessible l design bases and control design information. (vi) Identification of the category of reactor plants to which the generic requirement or staff position-is to apply.
Response
l The proposed generi. letter will request information from each holder of an cperating license. (vii) For backfits other than compliance or adequate protection backfits, a backfit analysis as defined in 10 CFR 50.109. the backfit analysis shall include, for each category of reactor plants, an evsluation which demonstrates how action should be prioritized and scheduled in light of other ongoing regulatory activities. The backfit analysis shall document for consideration information available concerning any of the following factors as may be appropriate and any other information relevant and material to the proposed action: (a) Statement of the specific objectives that the proposed action is designed to achieve; 3 i
i f (b) General description of the activity that would be l required by the licensee or applicant in order to complete the action; { (c) Potential change in the risk to the public from the accidental release of radioactive material; (d) Potential impact on radiological exposure of facility employees and other onsite workers; } r (e) Installation and continuing costs associated with the action, including the cost of facility downtime or the cost of construction delay; (f) The potential safety impact of changes in plant or i operational complexity, including the relationship of proposed and existing regulatory requirements and staff positions (g) The estimated resource burden on the NRC associated f with the proposed action and the availability of resources; (h) The potential impact of differences in facility I
- type, design or age on the relevancy and practicality of the proposed action; (i)
Whether the proposed action is interim or' final, and if interim, the justification for imposing the proposed action on an interim basis; (j) How the action should be prioritized and scheduled in light of other ongoing regulatory activities: ( 1. The proposed priority or' schedule, 2. A summary of the current backlog of existing requirements awaiting implementation, 3. An assessment of whether implementation of i existing requirements should be deferred as a [ result, and 4. Any other information that may be considered l appropriate with regard to priority, schedule or cumulative impact. For example, could implementation be delayed pending public corrent?
Response
i In requesting this information, the staff will not i recorrend changes to hardware or procedures and will not change its requirements or positions. Rather the staff is requesting information to ' determine how licensees are [ 4 4 ~
1 -J I co= plying with the NRC's regulations related to the availability of. design documentation. The staff is not i establishing a new position regarding compliance in this. ) generic letter. Therefore, this generic letter does not constitute a backfit. 10 CFR 50.109 does not apply, and ) no backfit analysis need be prepared. The staff will publish this generic letter for public comment prior to j issuance. (viii) For each backfit analyzed pursuant to 10 CFR 50.109(a) (2) the proposing office director's determination,-together l with the rationale for the determinetion based on the considerations of paragraphs (i) thiaugh (vii) above, that (a) that there is a substantial increase in the overall protection of public health and safety or the common defense and security to be derived from the j proposal; and (b) the direct and indirect costs of implementation, l for-the facilities affected, are justified in view of this increased protection.
Response
This is not applicable. l (ix) For adequate protection or compliance backfits evaluated pursuant to 10 CFR 50.109 (a) (4) (a) a documents evaluation consisting of: (1) the objectives of the modification j (2) the reasons for the modification l 1 (3) the basis for invoking the compliance or adequate protection exemption. j (b) In addition, for actions that were immediately effective the evaluation shall document the safety i significance and appropriateness of the action taken and consideration of how costs contributed to selecting the solution among various acceptable alternatives.
Response
This is not applicable. 5 i
.1 ? r (x) For each evaluation conducted for proposed relaxations or decreases in current requirements or staff positions, the proposed office director's determination, together with the rationale for the determination based on the considerations of l paragraphs (i) through (vii) above, that I (a) the public health and safety and the common defense and security would be adequately protected if the proposed reduction in requirements or positions were implemented, and e i (b) the cost savings attributed to the action would be substantial enough to justify taking the action.
Response
4 i i The proposed generic letter does not contain relaxations j or decreases in current requirements or staff positions. - Therefore, this is not applicable. I i' (xi) For each request for information under 10 CFR 50.54(f) an evaluation that includes at least the following elements: i (a) A problem statement that describes the need for the information in terms of potential safety benefit. l (b) The licensee actions required and the cost to develop a response to the information request.. [ (c) An anticipated schedule for NRC use-of the s information. 4 (d) A statement affirming that the request does not impose new requirements on the licensee, other than' for the requested information. l 4
Response
[ t l s ) The purpose of the proposed generic letter is to verify 1 that licensees are complying with tl.2 current licensing bases for their facilities. Therefore, this question is j not applicable under the exemption stated in Section III. A of Appendix I to NRR Office Letter No. 500, Revision 1, " Procedures for Controlling the Development of New and j Revised Generic Requirements." l f (xii) An assessment of how the proposed action relates to the [ Commission's Safety Goal Policy Statement. i 6 1 l i e
~
- i i
t i f l Response-I The guidance from the Regulatory Analysis Steering Group (Memorandum C. J.
- Heltenes, Jr.,
to J. M.
- Taylor, j
i " Commission Paper on Saf ety Goal Implementation," August 20, 1991), indicates that the staff need not. address r safety goals in this proposed generic communication i because the staff's positions and/or guidance in-the communication are based on' compliance with existing regulations and licensee commitments. I i I t I f i i i I l l l 7 J
i L CRGR PAcrAGE GENERIC BACKFIT REPORTING-REOUIREMENTS FORM Please respond to all items 1. Is a report to be submitted for staff approval before plant restart or (for CP holders) befora OL issuance? X i N i If "Yes", is there need for review guidance? Provide reason if review guidance is not needed. X T N M If review guidance is needed, does it accompany the CRGR package? Provide reason if guidance does not accompany package. X i h N7% Reason: 11. Is a report to be submitted - but no affect on operation: X I h i (a) Staff inter.d5 to review all submittals h If "Yes", is there need for review guidance? Provide reason if review guicance is not needed. Responses will be compiled and a proposal rade to NRR ranagement for inspection prioritization based on the res;nnses received. X i T E7K If review guidance is needeo, does it accompany the CRGR package? Provice reason if guidance does not accompany package. X 1 h EIK
(b) Staff does not intend to review all submittals, but reports required for other reasons t Y h Reason: i Ill. No report need be submitted, but quality records to be maintained for audit or inspection by the staff. Reporting requirements is only to provide notification of completion of requested actions. / y _3 If "Yes", is there need for inspection guidance? Provide reason if inspection guidance is not needed. ) 4 / l Y N F/K 1 If inspection guidance is needed, does it accompany the CRGR package? l Provide reason if guidance coes not accompany package. 1 1 h Reason: IV. No quality records for staft audit required. Reporting requirement is i only to provide notification of completion of requested actions. / 1 N l Feason: i V. No response of any type is required. t N Feason:
w ~ .CCIDSURE 3 m ss r" *~ Rules and Regulations Vol s?. No 164 W May. Amtrast 10.19R2 he section of tSe FEDERAL REGtSTER Pmg sm Ccidelbes." NUMARC lo-12. functions! characteristic an comans r,patory oocumems hewng While developmg these pidelbes. maintained and an conrittent with the genes > anca:w'y am *W emet. most NUMARC disecued them at several desip bases as required by NRC of e'ch e' ker'd to *N cN4*8 8' publie meetmgs held with the NRC.%e regdation. (!) rystems. structures and the Cooe of Feoral Repasons, m*uch a. staff has coochded the NUMARC cxrmponents can perform their 6 tended pidehnes provide a utful standard f:metfons, and (3) the plant is operated
- ** P framewo:t foe implementing design in a manw censiste=t wi6 the derip 51 p,e Cooe of Fm F.epeam a sod econstitudan progams.ne staff also bases.Re CoMrion bcBeves the ty tw W ce Docueiwa Pnces of new tiooAs are asud h tw specs no empW rpproach would enable regn! story fra2cewod aheady exists to fest FEDERAL REGISTER mese of encti utdities to best awphsh the address the need for se::essible design
=*s*. reconstitut on task.The NUMARC ba es and centrol cf derly information. puhe appeared to provide sufEcient m availability of et:rrent design and Lex 2bnity for bdMdual utihties to licensing bases wi!! also expe6te the NUCt. EAR REGULATORY struct=re their prepcms to rerpend most license renewal process. COKWISStON efLciently to their tmigoe needs and ne Comm!:rien beheres, as a result l d NRC inspeedes and W d-ms 10 CFR Part 50 m ria5 sent ecements on the assestments, that all power reactor guidehnes to NUMARC on November 9. 11ceraces abe-Jd essess the accerrib!Hty Availabety and Adestracy of DesV,, IEm Commitrim paper SECY-W-365 and edequacy of their derign beses Beses intcmation et Nucsear Power informed the Com:.issioners in advance doct:mentath W results cf this relf-Ptents, Possey etaternent about the staff response to NUMARC. assessment abon}d form the basis for s l ACEwev:Nndear Regulatory The staff requested NUMARC licensee's decinon whether a derign Com:n.ssion. cxmrider Mi :g the derign bases effort reculatitutbn pmpam is necessary and a NUMARC initiative. NUMARC the attributes to le inchded in the ' AcTioec Pobey stateme t. concbded they would not y=-rne a pmpam.h Cc'mminion re<xignizes - suum:ne Nudear ReplatorY formal initiatfre, but would forward the the need for a decrp recenstitanon Com=ussion ta issuing ilus poucy guidelines to their members to are on a propam to be tailond to snect the statement on avaJabdity and adequacy vohmtary basis.netr n.noen for not tmique needs of a par:6cular stihty.N 3 of destp in6: nation at naclear pcrwer pursuing an initletive was thei teost ef structure and content of the design plants. This policy statement desenbes their members were already conducun8 doc - m reconstitution program wul be the Co-resion a expectations and or evaluating the need to conduct desip inDuenced by various factors. such a future a::noss with nprd to the bases reconstitution propsms. the utiuty's orpnizational structure, the avaJability cf desip mformation and ne Co==!ssion's evaluation of the avanabihtv or unavailabihty of design emphssizes the Ccm=ussion a view that :tatus of reconet:!ut!on programs clearly documentition, and the intended users fact!! ties shodd nct be modied without indicates the licensees
- rubstantial of the donientation.m C-Mon a clear undmtar. ding of the applicable t= vestment 6 these programs ahon!d expects that after completing a engmeenng dcap bases.
yield posithre safety teneBis for a reconstitution program, or as a basis for UrtCTTvt DaTc August 23,1922 mejonty of sitea.h NRC commends concloding thet each a pmgram is FoR FVRTMER prF080dAT30si COA (TACT". those hcensees that are ecting to enrurf urmecessary, the hcznsee will here Eugene V.lchro.OfLce of Nudcar technically adequate and accessible current design dacuments and adequate Reactor EerJetien. U.S.Nudoar design bases docummtation is technical beees to de:nonstrate that the Regulatery Com:rJssion. Wuhington,
- eintained.
plant phyrical and fimcdonal DC 23:55 telephone p31)Sc4-W. However, the Ce ; Moct is characteristics are cecisittent with the concerned some satuatior.s exist when desip basis, the rystema, structcres, susnruortany turosnaATioec NRC Uccues have not crioca!!y exa=fned and components can perforin their inspection f.nd gs have demonstrated that scoe licensees have not ad;quately their design control and configuration intended functions and the plant is being maneEement procenes to MentifY operated 6 a manner consistent with mamramed their design bues nqcMe meestres to enren the plant is the destp basis, inferrianon s required by N'.C regulations. Boi the problems identiLed operating wMb the derip bases NUMARC has developed guidance for dunng the NRC bepections and those '"*rICpe Thenfors, the Comm!rrion is the co xbet d deskn bues ident6ed by licerseea have prompted arnculatmg its npectations with regard reconstitution propams.ns rh* to desip infortne $on and elaborating on oathnes a framework to orEarae and mes! pow er reector licensees to initiate, over the past several years. design its planned actmties to confirm the collate trxlaar power plant desip bases integrity of the me.co=Sg: red plant with informadon. nis infore st$on pmvides bases reconst: tut!on propama. To rerpect to the plant desip bues. the rador. ale for the destp bases imple= cat a recenstitution propam. consistent with the deft xmon of design i licensees seek to identify missmg desip PoBcy Statement documentaneo and to selectively bases contabed in 10 CTR 50 L M..0" ' NUMARC 90-11"Desip Be sis Program regnerate missmg de~ntation sa required. The Commission has conchxied that Guidehnes.* was issued in October 1990 In 1989. Nuc!e a Utilities Mana gement rnaintaining current and accessible for voluntary see by NUMARC -her .ad Res.ources Ccwl Inc [NUMARC) desip documentation is impo-tant to orgm+ =tions as a reference potst from bepn.levelop:r.g their ** Design Buis ensure that (1) the plant physical and which tfremaces wooM renew their
I l 3S456 Tederal Register / Vol. 57. No.154 / Monday. August 10.199: / Rules and Regulations existing or planned efforts to collate ensure their validity for the life of the DEPARTWENT OF THE TREASURY l supportmg design mformation.The facihty. including any renewal period. Commission believes NUMARC's in order to ensure the Commission is Office of hrtti Supervialon approach provides a useful framework appraised of industry's activities. the 12 CFR Part &&4 j and worthwhile msights to those utilities NRC will take the following actions. undertaking design basis programs. (1)The staff willissue a genericletter 192-1951 The Commission beheses a licensee requestmg aillicensees to desenbe the } should be able to show that it has programs that are in place to ensure RIN 1550-AA38 j sufficient documentation. mcluding design information is correct, accessible. calculations or pre-operational startup and maintained current. nose licensees Registration, Examination and I or survet!!ance test data to conclude the that are not implementing a design Reporta; Statementa, Applications, Reporta and Notices To Be Filed current facility configuration is reconstitution program will be requested i consistent with its design bases.The to provide their rationale for not doing Aopeev: Office of Thrift Supervision. Comm:ssion further beheves the design so. lf a reconstitution program is under Treasury. bases must be understood and way, the schedule for implementation Actio,c: Final rule. l documented to support operability and completion will be requested. determmations and 10 CFR 50.59 SuestaAny:ne Office of Thnft . (2) The staff will pn.oritize NRC evaluations that may need to be made quickly in respondmg to plant events. snspections oflicensee s management of Supervision (OTS) is hereby amending l its regulations pertaining to holding { The design bases related information design and configuration using SSG company reporting requirements. In should be retnevable within a type techniques based upon responses updating existing forms to reflect reasonable pened of time,however. itis to the generic letter and other plant changes necessitated by the Financial not necessary 3r al! design basis specific infonnstion known to the NRC. Institutions Reform. Recovery, and documentation to be orgaruzed in one Additional staff guidance will be Enforcement Act of1989, the On has place. The infonnation used solely to developed, where needed, for the design combined several forms to streamlme l support the development of a bases aspects of these inspections, the reporting process and esse the -l modification package would not need to regulatory burden on savings and loan be able to be retrieved as expeditiously (3me NRC systemade assessmd as.nfonnation needed to support an licensee performance (SALp) process holding companies. In particular, the reportmg nquirements set for'.h in operabihty determination. will be moddied to explicitly address Fonns H4b)3. H-{b)4. H4b)5 and H. assessment of licensee programs to . (b)10 Registration Statements are now l in the event the design bases control design bases information that contained in one body of instructions for f information is found technically reflect NRC inspection activity in this all Registrants. the H-{b)10. In addition. inadequate or not accessible. licensees area and assure consistent evaluations, the H-{bils Annual Report and the H-i j should consider whether remedial action is warranted A methodology should be (4) he staff will continue to (b)12 Current Report have been merged j g 3, developed and implemented to ensure encourage self. identification of design q heensee resources are focused on design bases issues through application of the annual filing with quarterly updates mformation regeneration in a timeframe provisions of the Commission a informing the On of any changes.The commensurate with the safety enforcement policy. The staff will, H-(f) Dividend Notification has been q symficance of the missicg or erroneous however, pursue enforcement actions for rescinded. since the requirements contained in the Capital Distnbutions information. engineenng deficiencies whose root regulation are sufficient for the OTS's The Commission also emphasizes it is cause lies in the inadequacy or monitoring and supervision purposes, very important that modifications to a unavailability of design bases, uncTin catt: September 9.1991. facility be made after a thorough review information and which are identified 3 has been conducted and an during NRC inspections. y Michael P. Scott. Program Manager. understaning of the apphcable j underlymg design bases has been Paperwork Reduction Act Statement (202) 906-5748. Supervision Policy. Office of Thnft Supervision.1700 C ] gamed in order to ensure appropriate This final policy statement does not Street. NW., Washington. DC 20552. i j design margins are preserved. contain a new or amended information SUPPLE.sAENTARY pdORed AT)O*C l collection requirement subject to the } paperwork Reduction Act of1980(44 Ba@und { j future Actions The Commission will continue to U.S.C.3501 et seg ). Existing The OTS is today issuing a final rule inspect routmely the adequacy of design requirements were approved by the amending its holding company reporting i Office of Management and Budget requirements.This amendment affects q control program effectiveness. n? approval number 3150-0011. the registra tion. annual, and current j Commission concludes that ensurmg the q design bases and configuration of a reportmg requirements. l Dated at Rockville. Maryland, this 4th day B#8 ####i#"$##!###"## [ facibty are well understood and of A p st.1992. i i controlled in plant documents will also l As previously structured. holding ensure that those parts of the current For the Nuclear Rep!atory Commissien-companies were required to choose from hcensmg bases of most safety four separate registration statements. l signdicance are understood and Samuell. CM. These separate statements we,re I s controlled. Other aspects of the current Secretaryof zAc Commission. onginally deemed necessary to 1 heensing bsses, such as emergency accommodate specialtypes of holdmg preparedness and secunty plans, should TR Dac. 92-18895 Tiled r-7-42. 8 45 am] companies (i.e companies that became also be appropnately exammed to
- Co** *****
savmgs and loan holding companies as 1 1 ) 0 I
l mewsuar 4 NUMARC 90-12 ~l /.=. n.+ n.- x n= n u..+ x
- v i
f i Design Basis Proc ram Guidelines l i October 1990 i 1 i 1 Nuclear Management and Resources Council, Inc. 1776 Eye Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006-2496 '}}