ML20062B711
| ML20062B711 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/02/1990 |
| From: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| To: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 9010260084 | |
| Download: ML20062B711 (4) | |
Text
_
- oooooooo.....oo,I_
X %,
RELEASEDTOTHE POR UMTED STATES E*
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIOff j
i e o
- ....W. ~.'.....
W ASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 0
\\;
/
u 0F FICE OF THt i
october 2, 1990 SECRETAHY I
l MEMORANDUM FOR:
James M. Taylor Executive Director of Operations iR William C.
Parler General Counsel FROM:
b5 f _ J. Chilk, Secretary j
lu
SUBJECT:
1 SUPPORT FOR. REVIEWS OF CANDU 3 AND PIUS i
DESIGNS _ (
Reference:
SECY-90-067, COMKR-90-004, COMJC-90-006, and Collegial Discussion of 8/16/90) s 3
I l
l This is to inform you that the Commission has considered the j
issue of authorizing resources for the initiation of staff reviews for the CANDU 3 and PIUS reactor designs and has reached the following decisions:
The Commission agreed to add' resources to-the.
q 1.
d FY1992-1993 budget request to OMB and the FY1992 -
1 FY1995 Five Year. Plan to support CANDU and PIUS review i
activities.
Subsequently,'the Commission. approved COMKC-90-016 regarding FY1992 - FY1995 funding and - FTE.
for these; reviews.
i In FY1991, the staff should: assign, as appropriate,mup<
to 2 FTE each to the CANDU and. PIUS design' reviews.
i The EDO should overhire, if necessary, rather than impact existing programs._ The purpose of this effort 1
~
would be to serve-as points of contact with the-vendors, coordinate the receipt and handling ~off preapplication submittals,. define as early as possible-significant. policy issues for Commission consideration, 4'
provide the vendor early input on potential:licensingi issues, and coordinate resolution of-the SECY NOTE:
THIS SRM, SECY-90-055cWITH THE: VOTE' SHEETS OF' COMMISSIONERS ROGERS, CURTISS AND REMICK,-AND ya SECY-90-067 WITH THE' VOTE SHEETS OF. COMMISSIONERS CURTISS AND REMICK WILL BE MADE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE.
i
- 10. WORKING" DAYS'FROM THE1DATE OF THIS.SRM 9010260084 901002
~j PDR 10CFR a
PT9.7 PNV
-l 2
.. goveennent-to government research and/or certification review funding questions.
This effort should also continue to assess what NRC resources v 11 be required to support the applicants' design certification programs in FY1992 and beyond.
(EDO)
(SECY Suspwnse:
10/26/90) 2.
To ensure there is mutual understanding on matters such as when, in what detail, and at what pace the vendors will be prepared to have their respective' designs reviewed, the staff should discuss with the vendors the assumptions that the staff has made in estimating the review process and confirm that those assumptions are consistent with the vendors' plans and schedules for design submittals requiring staff review.
(EDO)
(SECY Suspense:
10/26/90) 3.
The staff should continue to evaluate the need for a prototype in order to cortify the CANDU 3 design and provide the Commission with a recommendation when the staff has reached a final conclusion on this matter.
The staff should address the prototype issue for the SBWR, AP-600, and the PIUS designs in a similar manner.
(EDO)
(SECY Suspense:
11/16/90) 4.
a.
Once the Commission has made a decision on the level of detail, the staff is directed to identify the schedule and resources anticipated to be necessary to conduct the reviews of all submittals for advanced reactor dnsign certification.
(EDO)
(SECY Suspense:
11/30/90) b.
The General Counsel and the staff are directed to l
explore the possibility of obtaining. direct 4
funding from the Canadian government for retention by NRC without offset in appropriations to support CANDU 3 design; reviews. : If the staff and the General Counsel' conclude that funding from the Canadian government can be accepted directly by the NRC and applied without offset in appropriations, staff should present a recommendation as to whether and for what activities such direct funding might be considered.
Such recommendations should include-I I
.. J
9.
.3 considerations which assure that the design certification reviews of other vendors receive equitable treatment.
(EDO/OGC)
(SECY Suspense:
11/16/90)
After reviewing the responses in 4.a. through c.
4.c., the Commission will consider what further action it may take with regard to funding alternatives.
Commissioner Curtiss believes that, in addition to the actions specified in 4.b.
above, an opinion should be solicited from the comptroller General in ordar to definitively resolve the question of who'.her or not the NRC's appropriations.act permits the NRC to retain funds provided by foreign governments for NRC licensing review costs without any offset against the NRC's lump sum appropriations, as proposed in COMKR-90-004 and COMJC-90-006.
Commissioner Remick does not object to contacting the Comptroller General if the Commission is uncertain as to the bounds permitted by the NRC's appropriations act.
Upon completion of action on the above issues, no further action will be required on SECY-90-055, SECY-90-067, COMKR-90-004, and COMJC-90-006.
4 cc:
Chairman Carr Commissioner Rogers i
Commissioner Curtiss Commissioner Remick
~
j i
i TRANSMITTAL 10:
ja Document Control Desk, Pl.24 i
ADVANCE COPY TO:
Public Document Room
- DA1E:
/d //9 / 90 I
SECY,OperationsBranct[f.[.
FROM:
Attached are copies of SECY papers and related documents. They are being forwardad for entry on the Daily Accession List and placement in the Public Document Room.
No other distribution is i
requested or required.
&Elti /Lk h
- 1. k -fo-ors ~~
11.
n90-o 6 7 i
(ts. Ye~/S.r" V Y
l 0 - 04 7 N l0/oSh 12.
(0
- o2 W k/
'm ML W ~
g MllLLL k 90 *
- A 13, 90'ot ff dbl /0/G90 C-n, J
<.) W Wn 9 e..a ir 4
M A fo.arr' 14. dAA- /e/r/fo 4
L.W'M
%. kok ' A SM Ada LA n %-e.rJ~ 1s, % h Qo ot [ f s
. WM i
68 N fv-O d ~
16, i
4
%.hu 44
- 7. s4/t.LA W VG-0/T~~
l7.
8.
- (0 0 [o 7 18.
l
'W 9 M c 4 I14 2 A b 04/ 19.
bm. M M
- 10. M A 96-847
- 20. __
i l
i
- PDR is advanced two copies of each SECY paper and one copy of each.
related document.
.. X 2 G 1 D Fb1
.