ML20056D951
| ML20056D951 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/09/1993 |
| From: | Sniezek J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Murley T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| FRN-59FR46574 AF05-1-011, AF5-1, AF5-1-11, NUDOCS 9308190055 | |
| Download: ML20056D951 (4) | |
Text
..:
'bcs pu l
c y
4 UNITED STATES.
E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION M
5 iI wAsmucrow, o.c.noessan
\\**.**/
JUL 9 1993 1
MEMORANDUM FOR: Thomas E. Murley, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation j
FROM:
James H. Sniezek.
Deputy Executive Director for Nuclear Reactor Regulation, l
Regional Operations and Research
SUBJECT:
LICENSE RENEWAL RULE y
Having been closely involved in the genesis of the license renewal rule as well as in the recent staff and OGC deliberations on its implementation (SECY-t 93-049, SECY-93-113, COMSECY-93-029, June 2, 1993 memo from OGC to the EDO, and Commission SRM), I believe it is time for the staff to develop a substantially revised rule taking into account the issues raised regarding the proposed approach to implementation of the existing rule.
j First, let me state that the staff made exceptional progress in defining the issues and developing creative approaches associated with the implenientation of license renewal.
I believe that the staff approaches as described in SECY-93-049 and refined in SECY-93-113 could work acceptably within the constraints of the current license renewal rule.
However, therein lies the fundamental problem with the current course of the license renewal program. We have taken a very complex rule with:ill-defined requirements, as well as open-ended issues, and worked hard at developing words that describe nuances that will allon a reasonable approach to implementation within the constraints of the rule as it is currently written.
The development of these words has been a difficult and evolving process that has required a great deal-of continuing discussion to ensure understanding by.
all NRC parties.
Even today I am not sure.that the key NRC participants, muchless the industry, have the same understanding of the staff' approach (as evidenced by the June 2, 1993 OGC memo).
I believe that the current rule interpretations have become too confusing and thus will not provide for a stable nor predictable regulatory process.
While I believe that these difficulties can be overcome in the present, I am I
more concerned about the future when a real application for renewai will be made. At that time the'NRC will likely have a different Commission, different senior management and, to some extent, a' new staff responsible ft,r license -
renewal. We will have lost to a significant extent the corporate history on the derivation and subtleties of the current staff approach to implementation of license renewal requirements. Since the staff approach is not an obvious 1
conclusion from reading the rule or its associated statement of consideration, loss of this history could significantly complicate the. staff technical-review and OGC legal analysis of the renewal applications.
1 03nns-
)
$090[ b
/.
ggg
E Thomas E. Murley For these reasons, I believe the time has come to propose a relatively uncomplicated approach to license renewal. At its core, license renewal is a simple. concept: ensuring the continuing functionality of. structures, systems and components important to license renewal throughout the renewal period.
The current rule lost that focus and the recent staff efforts to work around the rule have not been entirely successful in recapturing it.
I believe that an approach to a new rule, which I have enclosed, recaptures the basic premise of license renewal and also fosters compatibility with the maintenance rule while simultaneous dealing with the issues raised by OGC and the industry.
I believe that if we do not take this step at this time, we and the industry will ultimately pay a higher price in lost time, confusion and an overly complicated product.
I believe that the enclosed draft rule is consistent with the Principle of Good Regulation regarding clarity:
" Regulations should be coherent, logical and practical. There should be a clear uxus between regulations and agency goals and objectives whether explicitly or implicitly stated. Agency positions should be readily understood and easily applied."
Given the importance of this issue, I recommend that the enclosed draft rule be thoroughly ventilated within the staff such that it or a similar rule, simple in concept, can be published for consideration _at the upcoming Workshop on License Renewal.
Originc.) signed by Jem:0 H. Snk:rek James H. Sniezek Deputy Executive Director.
for Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Regional Operations'and Research
Enclosure:
Draft Revision to 10 CFR 54 cc:
J. Taylor J. Scinto document name:o:\\11crenew. sam p_ISTRIBUTION:
EDO rf
- DEDR rf JSniezek WBateman JMitchell NRC PDR 1
l' R$
zek 07p 93 L_
6 DRAFT REVISION TO 10CFR54 r
5
4.1 Purpose and Scope
--same 54.3 Definitions Current Licensing Basis--same Effective Program. Effective program is a documented program which ensures that a structure, system, or component important to license renewal will continue to perform its required safety function as set forth in the Current Licensing Basis. Effective programs must contain acceptance criteria against which the need for corrective action will be evaluated, and ensure that timely corrective action will be taken when these acceptance criteria are not met.
The effective program must be implemented by the facility procedures and reviewed and approved using the process set forth in the facility Technical-Specifications.
Structures, Systems, and Components important to license renewal are:
(insert paragraph 50.65(b)(1) and (b)(2) from the maintenance rule.
Nuclear Power plant--same Renewal Term--same NOTE: ALL OTHER DEFINITIONS ARE DELETED.
54.5 Interpretations--same 54.7 Written Communications--same 54.9 Information Collection Requirements--same 54.11 Public Inspections of Applications--same 54.13 Completeness and accuracy of information--same 54.15 Specific Exemptions--same t
54.17 Filing of Application--same 54.19 Contents of application-General Information--same 54.21 Contents of Application-Technical Information.
Each application must include a supplement to the final safety analysis report (FSAR) that presents the information required by this part. The FSAR t
supplement shall contain the following information:
(a) A description of the effective program that ensures that structures, systems, or components (SSC) important to license renewal will continue to perform their required safety functions during the renewal term. The description shall include:
(1) the significant general performance characteristics of the SSC important to license renewal necessary for the SSC to carry out their required functions, i
(2) the type of parameters, and monitoring techniques and processes to be used for monitoring the performance and/or condition of SSC important to license renewal.
(b) A commitment that the described effective program will be implemented prior to the renewal term.
54.23 Contents of Application-environmental information--same 54.24 Licensee Certification. Prior to issuance of the renewed license the licensee shall certify to the NRC that the effective program has been implemented.
54.25 Report of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards--sarne 54.27 Hearings--same 54.29 Standards for Issuance of a Renewed License--same 54.31 Issuance of a Renewed License--same 54.33 Continuation of current licensing basis and conditions of renewed license (a) same (b) Each renewed license will be issued in such form and contain such conditions and limitations, including technical specifications, as the Commission deems appropriate and necessary to ensure that SSC important to license renewal will perform their required safety functions during the renewal period.
(c) same (d) the provisions of 10CFR50.59 will apply to changes to the effective program as described in the application for license renewal.
(e) same 54.35 Requirements during term of renewed license--same 54.37 Additional records and recordkeeping requirements.
(a) same (b) and (c) deleted.
t