ML20129G808

Summary of ACRS Planning & Procedures Subcommittee Meeting on 960611 in Rockville,Md to Discuss Matters Re Conduct of ACRS Business

ML20129G808
Person / Time
Issue date:	06/11/1996
From:	Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
To:	Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
Shared Package
ML20129G812	List: ML20129G808 ML20129G981 ML20129G998 ML20129H021
References
ACRS-3019, NUDOCS 9610070299
Download: ML20129G808 (5)

Text

CERTIF1ED 6

d, .

T. S. Kress June 14, 1996 g g3-3d/f ; '

H Ppp tom 6 June 11, 1996

SUMMARY

/ MINUTES OF THE ACRS PLANNING AND PROCEDURES SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING JUNE 11, 1996 i

I The ACRS Subcommittee on Planning and Procedures held a meeting on June 11, 1996, in Room 2 B1, Two White Flint North Building, Rockville, Maryland. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss matters related to the conduct of ACRS business. The meeting was convened at 1:30 P.M. and adjourned at 2:30 P.M.

ATTENDEES T. S. Kress, Chairman W. J. Shack ACRS Staff J. T. Larkins, ACRS Executive Director R. P. Savio C. A. Harris  !

C. A. Rowe, Recorder i

1. OUADRIPARTITE MEETING (Follow-up discussion from last meeting)

A letter has been sent to the Japanese Nuclear Safety Commis-sion (with copies sent to the Germans and French) referring to a fall 1997 Quadripartite Meeting and included proposed agenda items for them to consider. (p.1) ,

RECOMMENDATION l l

The Subcommittee recommends that the Committee wait for a reply from the Japanese Safety Commission before proceeding any further. It was mentioned that the agenda may dictate which ACRS members attend this meeting. j

2. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY /NRC MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING The NRC and DOE have signed an MOU (pp. 2-8) to establish the protocol (basis for review and consultation) with respect to l possible DOE acquisition of commercial light-water reactors )

for tritium production. The NRC would have to review and li-cense such a facility and process. -

RECOMMENDATIQH This material was provided for information only. No action is needed., ,

T_{f'] ggl, GOO 9 960611 - - - . ~ , - - ,

m 3019 ppg AcR.s

% h.. 9 P.anud C.  ;

e

, a, ,

2

3. ACRS RETREAT A retreat for ACRS Members and ACRS Senior Management is being scheduled for October 17-18, 1996 in Annapolis, Maryland. Dr.

Seale has been assigned with the responsibility for developing an agenda for the retreat and assignments for the Members.

Hotel accommodations are being sought.

RECOMMENDATION The Committee had previously agreed to a retreat in September l 1996, but there were no accommodations available at that time in Annapolis or Baltimore. Every ACRS member was polled on alternative dates and, except for one member, the dates of October 17-18, 1996, were agreed to. The Marriott is already booked, so we are looking into the possibility of Loews Annapolis hotel. Should Loews not be available, the retreat will be held in Baltimore.

Dr. Kress suggested that we keep the agenda to only a few (2 ,

or 3 at most) items, such as Regulatory Philosophy and ACRS '

Activities, with several subtopics.

Dr. Kress suggested that members r.hould suggest subissues and '

develop a strawman position to establish the points of discus-sion. Dr. Larkins suggested that the Committee take a look at I the Bylaws again. Issues proposed for discussion should be l forwarded to Dr. Seale prior to the August 1996 full Committee meeting.

4. SUMMER EMPLOYEES Three new summer employees have joined or will be joining the ACRS/ACNW staff. Ms. Cindy Hsu and Ms. Chris Lootens have worked for ACRS previously. Mr. Dennis Garcia is a former Navy reactor operator and is a student at the University of Maryland pursuing a degree in nuclear engineering. Cindy began work on June 3. We expect Chris and Dennis to begin on June 17.

RECOMMENDATION This material was provided for information only. No action is needed.

5. IMPLEMENTATION OF CWS PILOT PROGRAM (Open) (CAH)

The Office of Personnel approved for one year the request by the Executive Director, ACRS/ACNW, to implement a compressed work schedule (CWS) pilot program. This program will provide the staff more flexibility in scheduling their hours during the pay periods in which full Committee meetings occur. Under

i e

1 3

the CWS pilot program, staff members have the option to schedule their hours to coincide with the extended week day

and Saturday hours on which the Committees meet, so that they are paid for the actual hours worked. Participation in this program should alleviate the regular and recurring unpaid 4

, ovartime worked by engineers and staff scientists. To i implement the program, we negotiated with the Union that future ACRS and ACNW full Committee meetings will be scheduled during the first week of the pay period, where practicable.

RECOMMENDATION i

Dr. Kress and Dr. Shack thought this was a good idea. Dr.

Larkins said it was not final yet, there will be another i meeting with the union. He also mentioned that there were a lot of restrictions such as not splitting pay periods. To 1 the extent practical, meetings should be scheduled for the j

first full week of the month so we can meet this criteria.

! This will prohibit us from changing meeting dates once they

! are set.

l

6. CONSULTANT PERFORMANCE EVALUATION To provide enhanced accountability on the use of consultants, i

a systematic process should be established for evaluating the

, performance of ACRS consultants. As a follow-on to each

Subcommittee meeting, a written evaluation would be made of i the consultant's performance at the meeting and the quality of 1 l the consultant's reports. This would be based on the input

from members participating in the meeting.

i RECOMMENDATION l^ It was suggested that a form be developed. Dr. Kress thought it should be signed by the subcommittee Chairman, who can l solicit comments from the Subcommittee members if he so

! desires. He also wanted to know who would be responsible for

! filling the form out and getting it signed. Dr. Larkins i thought the engineer could do this. Dr. Kress did not believe ,

l that this was an appropriate function for the engineers and '

that only the members were qualified to make such assessments.

i Using this process will help us decide which consultants the

! Committee should continue using and will provide account-1 ability.

l 7. DINNER WITH CHAIRMAN JACKSON i

i Chairman Jackson invited Drs. Kress, catton, Apostolakis and j Larkins to a dinner meeting on June 11, 1996.

1 A

4 RECOMMENDATION This material was provided for information only. No action is needed. Information will be provided to the other Committee members during the meeting.

8. TRAVEL (Open) (CH)

A request was received from Dr. Catton (p. 9) to attend an international meeting in Park City, Utah, where he will be giving a paper on lower cavity flooding.

RECOMMENDATION  !

The Planning and Procedures Subcommittee recommends that the trip be approved. I

9. MEMBERS' ISSUES (Issues may be brought up by members]

e In a recent memorandum, Jay Carroll recommends that the Committee streamline its discussion of administrative and procedural matters and spend more time on policy issues and strategic planning.

e In a second memorandum, Jay Carroll comments on the memos from Dana Powers concerning the health effects of low levels of ionizing radiation (p. 10).

e Mr. Lindblad requested that the ACRS Executive Director confer with the Office of the General Counsel on whether there is a statutory requirement for the ACRS to review the design changes submitted by GENE for the ABWR design.

Martin Malsch, Deputy General Counsel for the NRC, noted in a conversation that his opinion was that a statutory requirement exists, particularly if the changes are safety significant. Subsequently, the Commission has, as part of the SRM on the recent meeting with the ACRS (p.11-12), requested the Committee to review GENE's recent submittal containing safety significant design changes prior to a commission briefing on this subject in late August 1996.

e Mr. Lindblad's comments on the issue of the proposed joint letter with the ACNW were reviewed.

RECOMMENDATION Regarding the first bullet, the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee thought that the May meeting was an unusual

1 5

meeting, however, some of Jay Carroll's comments on streamlin-ing the prolonged discussions are reasonable.

It was generally agreed that a firm meeting schedule should be i

established in october or November for the coming year and not be changed.

The ACRS should vote on whether there is enough support to have a joint letter on the health effects of low-level radiation or not. Also there should be a discussion of a j joint letter where the Committee had additional comments. ,

Regarding the third bullet, the Planning and Procedures j Subcommittee felt that the issue had been addressed.

9. 3:10 - 3:30 P.M. FUTURE ACTIVITIES (Open) (SD) l [See separate handout) 1 l

l .

I J

f 4

J a