ML20133G982

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Summary of ACRS Subcommittee on Long-Range Plan for NRC 850301 Meeting in Washington,Dc Re Technical Issues Concerning Regulation of Nuclear Power Plant Safety Over Next 5-10 Yrs
ML20133G982
Person / Time
Issue date: 03/07/1985
From:
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
To:
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
References
ACRS-2288, NUDOCS 8508090144
Download: ML20133G982 (11)


Text

,

NAJ- $1&f NWG20rf5 W

.[] 1 3 D E ISSUED-3/7/85 hhiiih N N

  • COMBINED SUMMAPY AND MINUTES MARCH 1, 1985 MEETING OF THE ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE LONG RANGE PLAN FOR THE NRC A meeting was held by the ACRS Subcomittee on the Long Range Plan for the NRC at 1717 H St., N.W., Washington, D.C., Room 1046 The purpose of the meeting was to discuss technical issues related to the regulation of nuclear power plant safety over the next five to ten years. Notice of this reeting was published in the Federal Register on Tuesday, February 19, 1985 (Attachment A). The schedule of items covered at the meeting is Attachment B. The list of attendees is in Attachment C.

Attachnent 0 is a list of future topics to be addressed by the subcom-mittee, divided into an initial set of categories. The meeting was entirely open to the public. There were no written or oral statements from members of the public. Mr. Richard Major was the cognizant ACRS staff member present for the meeting.

Introduction:

Dr. Carbon explained the purpose of the meeting which was to plan a future course of action for the subcomittee and to discuss issues with the emphasis on technical issues relating to the regulation of nuclear safety over the next five to ten years. This was the initial meeting of the subcornittee.

Dr. Carbon informed the other subcommittee members that during the week of March 3, 1985, he and the Executive Director of the ACRS will meet with Chairran palladino to discuss his views on the scope of this project. During the same week the ACRS representatives mentioned above will also meet with J. Zerbe Director of the Office of Policy Eval-uation to discuss a parallel effort to be undertaken by that office.

0500090144 050307 0 PDR D2MCATD OMM Certified By_ N, A

, Sumary/ Minutes 2 Long Range Plan Mtg.

March 1, 1985 C

There was agreement among subcommittee members a Long Range Plan for the NRC should be developed. Currently the goal is to produce a report addressed to the Commissioners by October of 1985.

As the Subcommittee began to consider elements of the plan, it was agreed that the over riding goal would be to attempt to define what is best for the nation.

Highlights of Discussion:

The meeting consisted entirely of a round table discussion among the subcomittee. There were no presentations or discussions with parties aside frcm subcommittec members and ACRS staff.

The subcommittee believed a preamble to the report would be appropriate.

This section would be broad in nature. It would define the objective of nuclear regulation to protect the public health and safety. It should address the issue of whether or not the nation needs a viable nuclear power option. It should provide a justification for its conclusion. To be considered are the hazards of producing electric power from other alternative sources. The preamble should address future problems that may arise.

It was agreed the focus of the plan would be on the production of power from nuclear energy and issues relating to this. Research and test reactors, medical and industrial uses of nuclear materials will not be considered in any depth.

The subject of what new forms of regulations, if any, are needed to serve the public will be considered. By the same token, less regu-lations will be considered for a sense of the effect this will have on the public welfare.

Listed below is a first attempt to define primary goals the plan should address. This first cut at goals is subject to change as discussions continue.

Sumary/ Minutes 3 Long Ranga Plan Mtg.

March 1,1985 i

' Primary Goals

1. Prevention of Accidents that create a major impact on the public, f

i 2. Assure routine operation of NPPs so there is no undue impact on l

public health and safety.

3. Consistent with above objectives, provide adequate public health and safety at a total regulatory cost, if possible, which will permit development of nuclear power to the level where it is a viable option for the nation.

4 Determine what level of nuclear safety is appropriate in the public l

interest.

5. The NRC should clearly enunciate its nuclear safety objective and its confidence that its objectives are being met.

The subcomittee discussed the public acceptance of the nuclear fuel cycle. The thought was forward 6d that the NRC should not be dealing with public acceptance of nuclear power. That should be left for policy makers that have decided to pursue the nuclear power option. The role of public participation in the licensing process and its contribution to safety was discussed. The subcomittee was interested in the cost vs.

benefit of public participation. It was felt by subcomittee members that the NRC should explain the level of safety sought to the public and whether or not that level is being achieved. The idea of an annual report by the Comission on nuclear safety was suggested.

It was suggested that NRC should have a strong research program. This program should be directed at supporting the goals of the agency. Some method of assessing how cost beneficial research is should be devised.

The subcomittee also discussed the need for more quality control within j

the Commission Staff. There must be controls on the staff especially during plan reviews. There appears to be some lack of coordination during plant reviews.

As in setting primary goals, the subcomittee also discussed the issue of why have a long range plan. These impressions, listed below, are a i__-_-____-_____--__ _ _ _ _ _ - .

Summary / Minutes 4 Long Range Plan Mtg.

March 1, 1985

- first attempt to define the rationale for the plan. Other equally valid needs may be added.

Why a Long Range Plan?

1. What NRC is now doing is not optimum and a plan is needed to correct it.
2. In addition, we anticipate new problems in the future and need a plan to deal with those future problems.
3. What NRC does has a huge influence on the public interest. There is a great need on the part of industry / establishment to understand where the NRC is headed -- course of action -- so industry knows what to expect.

The subcommittee discussed the possible benefits from having performance oriented regulations as opposed to the present prescriptive regulations.

Performance oriented regulations would allow operators to accomplish regulatory goals in a manner most efficient for their organizati'on.

It was also noted there should be a change in the way the staff applies the regulations. Members felt more engineering judgment should be applied by the staff. Favorable experiences with SEP reviews were discussed as a example of how safety reviews could be improved.

The subcommittee believed it would be worthwhile to focus on the enmpo-sitien of the NRC Staff. Issues such as qualifications, training, and stability are expected to be explored. The size of the NRC may also deserve study. As the industry matures, should the size of NRC be reduced?

The question of the economics of nuclear power was discussed. It was stated that nuclear power would never have begun if it were not both safe and economical. Economics should be an issue in the plan. The 10 CFR 50 Appendix ! ALARA criterion of $1000/ man-REM was discussed. The subcommittee felt this ratio was high, but believed this criterion has served as a useful and important bench mark. This number could not be

Summary / Minutes 5

. Long Range Plan Mtg.

March I, 1985 l

6 easily altered without upsetting the conservative balance it strikes between costs and potential health effects from radiation.

l The subject of standardization was discussed. It was felt there would i also be a trade-off between standardization and inovation in the stan-dard plant approach. The question of whether or not standardization is really in the best interest of safety will be explored.

It was felt there is merit to a " sign as your go" approach to licensing.

As discreet stages of a plant's constructies are completed NRC would approve the job to that point.

The idea of self-regulations by the industry was discussed. Such

" positive regulation" could tap the expertise available in the industry.

t Could a group similar to INP0 (which focuses on plant operation) be established for plant design and construction to promote excellence?

Appendix D to these minutes lists a number of tentative topics to be considered in formulating a Long Range Flan for the NRC. The categori'es as well as topics (presently around 40) are subject to change.

List of Follow-up Actions:

1. The subcornmittee believed an employment profile on the agency would be of use and requested such information as turnover rates, age distribution, length of service for NRC managers, etc.
2. The subcommittee wanted some figures on how much time and money are spent on the licensing hearing process. What contribution to safety does the hearirg process make?

r

3. As in item 2 above, the role of the ACRS should also be considered on a cost / benefit basis.

t l

f

Sumary/ Minutes 6 Long Range Plan Mtg.

March 1, 1985

. 4. It was agreed that tentative positions reached by the subcommittee should be presented to the full ACR3 for approximately three hours at a time.

5. The subcommittee did not appoint any consultants to serve over the entire course of this review.
6. The subcommittee decided to seek input from a variety of sources to gather testimony and to explore needs that were not identified by the subcommittee. Both present and past Commissioners and Staff members were mentioned. Vendors, Congressional Aids and Selected Congressmen and selected public interest groups were mentioned as sources of input. Other sources of input include: State Public Service Commissions (or their national organization), other govern-ment bodies such as OMB, and GAO, (reports by these groups on the 3 NRC were requested), foreign groups will be contacted as a part of previously scheduled ACRS business, hearing board members, Depart-4 ment of Energy Representatives and other selected people.

J

Future Meetings

The Subcomittee set the date of April 5,1985 tentatively as the next meeting date. The Subcomittee also requested three hours of prime time to discuss preliminary planning and direction of this project with the full Comittee during the April 11-13, 1985 Comittee meeting.

l-NOTE: A complete transcript of the meeting is on file at the NRC Public Document Room at 1717 H St., N.W., Washington, D.C., or can be obtained at cost from ACE - Federal Reports, Inc.,'444 N. Capitol Street, Washington, D. C. 20001 (Telephone

. 202-347-3700).

W '7 W 47w&9[ T

- Fed;r:1 R: gist:r / V:1. 50. No. 33 / Tu;sd:y F;bruny 19, 1985 / Notices ' b17 bearing license for the Ibng Kong and recomme .da t. . on applications for other interested persons. Portions of this equivalents of U.S_Petent Application financial assistance ader the National meeting may be closed to discuss Foundation on th e Arts and the intemal management, organization, or 9

No. 706.425. " Power Factor Control o System for AC Induction Motors": U.S. liumanities Act if1965. es amended. personnel matters.

, Patent Application No.476.244."Three includmg discussiorf of chrmation - Further information regarding topics' Phase Power Factor Controller"; U.S. given in confidence to the agency by to be discussed, whether the meeting

. Patent Appbcation No. 310.714. " Motor grant applicanta. In accordance with the has been cancelled or reocheduled the Power Factor Controller with a Reduced determination of the Chairman Chairman's ruhng on requesta for the Voltage Starter"; U.S. Patent - . pubbshed in the Federal Register of opportunity to present oral statementa ~~

Appbcat:on No. 325.932. " Pulsed February 13.1980, these sessions will be and the time allotted therefor can be Thristor Trigger Control Circuit"; U.S. closed to the public pursuant to obtained by a prepaid telephone call to Patent Apphcation No.450.319 'Three subsections (c)(4) (6) and (9)(b) of - the cognizant ACRS staff member.Mr.

Phase Power Factor Controller with acetion 552b of Title 5. United States Richard Major (telephone 202/634-1414) lnduced EMF. Sensing"; and U.S. Patent Code.

- between 8.15 a.m. and 5 00 p.m EST.

Application No. 450.166. " Phase Detector Further information with reference to Persons planning to attend this meeting for Three Phase Power Factor this meeting can be obtained from Mr. are urged to contact the above ne.med

' Controller." The proposed exclusive John H. Clark. Advisory Committee indwidual one or two days before thc Management Officer. National scheduled meeting to be advised of an) license will be for a hmited number of years and will contain appropriate terms Endowment for the Arts.Wasington, ~

changes in schedule, etc., which may and conditions to be negotiated in D.C. 20506, or call (202) 6a2-5433 have occurred. .

accordance with the NASA Patent JohnH.Cark. Dated: February 12.1985.

Ucenalng Regulationa.14 CFR Part 1245, sir,ctor, offic, of counciland punel Mortoe W. ubarkin.

  • Subpart 2. NASA will negotiate the final ope ations.Notiono!EndoennentforLhe Arts. Assis tant Executive Directorf,ac Project terms and conditions and grar.t the i

Febnaary 11.1985. gg

[FR Doc. 85-4048 Filed s-154 eL45 am) o e t be tfc th trec or of p Doc.865-3968 Filed 7,-15-85, a 45 am)

  • 'oecosts m e = i = caos ras.4se a. +-

Patent Ucensing receives written objections to the grant. toFether with -

j ,

NUCLEAR REGULATORY Advisory Committee on Reactor o Pa en c  !! re 1 w al SaNguaMa. Mcomh on CO M SS M ,. . m i written reopenses to the Notice and then ReguWy Poucks W hahs; .,

a ry om n on ucW recommend to the Assistant General Muting , , , ,

Counsel for Patent Matters whether to Safeguards; Subcommittee on Long grant the exclusive license. Range Plan; Meeting De ACRS Subcommittee on Regulatory Policies and Practices will g oatt Comments to this Notice must be received by (nminsert 60 da)s from the The ACRS Subcommittee on long hold a meeting on March 6.1985. Room date of pubbcation in the Federal RanFe Plan for NRC will hold a meetina 1046.171711 Street. NW. Wa shtgnton.

Jtegister). on March 1,1985. Room 1046.1717 H DC.

Street. NW. Washington. DC. The entire meeting willbe open to aDontss: National Aeronautics and The agenda for subject meeting aball Space Admirustration. Code CP. public attendance.

be as follows: .

De agenda for subject meeting will WashinFton. D C. 20546.

Frida y. March 1.1985--8.30 a m. until be as follows:

Fon FURTNtm leeBonMaTION CONTACT:

Mr john C Mannn. (202) 453-2430 the conclusion of businese M*ednesdcy. Afarch 6. 2933--8 30 a.m The Subcommittee wnll plan untillAP Conclusion 0,#bC$lnPS$

D.te d FecNa'y 619F.3 subcommittee activities.

g t O Bner~

Oral statements may be presented b) The Subcommittee will cor' r. t to D,;ar) Genem/cconse! review the NRC report on the erd fo-members of the public w:it concurrence

[G Doc as-m Fded :-15-as a 4s a ' of tne Subcommittee Chairman: written an "NTSB-hke" board in the Nr '

Oral statements may be p:

  • b)

" ""'O to ' " ' *

  • statement
  • will be accrMed and made cc asadable 1: the Commm t. Kecoringt rnembt: cf the public with c of the Subccmmittee Chair- en will be pu .itted only c .ng tho,e Nt TlON AL FOUND ATIOw OL. .' tietements wi;l be accepte - -

portions c' tht meetmg v nen a a ARTS AND THE HUMAN' tie! transcript . being kept quer.cns asailable to the Committet k astam/ Advisory Pane!. Met may be aned only b) r < - ns t,' N d bM C do4 h Subcc* *~?.ee ite conn s.atJ Staf- portions of tr e met .mp wht Persons d<. nr.m to mak el ransenpt it beinF . ept an.

Ibrse.t to Sectier.10 G nay be a6 ed ord) by mem: t Federa hisor) Com n.tae / statemer.: y r.Jd notif) t i ACT ! staff t

Diaff L 9;-4M1 as amended, ncnct member a.c d below as I m cc ance Eubcomtr."tte. Its r ensultar -

as pract - so that er- nrig; it sens dr mr.g t; make c'.

pu en tha' r meeting of tt e Ma A dusory b .iel(Professe .cl arrar;e i. can be rn r aa,cr,* t . Md neufy th- 'rf

.s ba Dnelopment Section) to tb h Tnetu ; artion of r r.eetq will . ember as !st in advance a o that appropriate arranfer n b'-

Ccuncil o the Arts will be h: . consist cf dxussions be'. s en March 4 1985. frera is 00 ar 4 : ;r m 5;bcomm: Pet membert t .rd:n; the r .de Ruim 730 of the Nea lla:; > C, r. tr technicalimas relattd t. .e regalation Dunnp the initial portion e cf nucleP J rV.erph.r.' se #t ty os,cr the meetmg the Subcomruttee r 1W. Penns)hania As en t.. N W.. will exchange prehminar) w Wa s hingtcr.. D C nest fa e tc ter. ) cart Tru This meeting is for the p. pose cf Subcc-er.ittee me) also d3cun these regarding matters to be core /

Pe r.el review. discus sion. es ah.a tier., maners w11 s< r.io NEC cf.".cials ar.d during the balance of the rm c

4rreeMMcN7 S d

PROPOSED SCHEDULE ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE ON LONG RANGE PLAN FOR NRC MARCH 1, 1985 WASHINGTON, D.C.

8:30 a.m. 1. Chairman's Introduction (OPEN) 15 Min.

a) Objectives b) Discussion of Schedule 8:45 a.m. 2. General Discussion By the 7 Hrs. -

Subcommittee 45 Min.

t The Subcommittee will plan its activities including topics to be discussed at future meeting, who to meet with and time tables for producing ACRS Report on a Long Range Plan for NRC.

The majority of this meeting will consist -

of discussions between Subcommittee members regarding the technical issues related to the regulation of nuclear power plant safety over the next five to ten years.

3 22:00 N00t, ****** LUNCH

_'
frusitem2

! ' I f, . T . _

27 i

1

, -. _. '}- . . - .. -

1

>' ATTACHMENT C ,

ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE LONG RANGE PLAN FOR THE NRC MARCH 1,.1985 l ATTENDEE LIST 9

ACRS Others M. Carbon S. Seth, Mitre Corp.

j D. Moeller P. Docherty, Westinghouse F. Remick R. Borsum, Babcock & Wilcox D. Ward

C. Siess ACE Federal Reporters R. Major 5. Traylor R. Fraley
  • G. Walsh M. Libarkin
  • M. Simins-i.

4 .

s 1r i

I l r j

  • Part-tine a

i i

i i

ATTACHMENT D THE LICENSING PROCESS 35 One Stage Licensing 33 Siting /Early Site Approval 20 Specific Certification Points - final approval in stages step-by-step process 19 How Std. Plants will be certified thrcugh rulemaking Single Administrator for NRC Single Oversight entity (Executive or legislative branch) 21 Usefulness of ACRS New Reactor Designs Decocinissioning 9 Credit for a good containment 10 Develop new or improved safety systems /not done now 37 Automation of Plant Operations 28 Type of Std. Plants: smaller, shop fabricated, how many 7 Standardization vs. Inovation (Attitudes Adverse.to Safety)

The Role and Method of Regulation:

1. Excessive conservation (wastes money potentially less safe)

Note 1 Self-Regulation - real expertise lies with Industry 14 & 31 Positive Regulation: Should NRC let industry know what is working well; should credit be given (less regulation) for good performers?

Simplification Regulatory reforms -could less regulation produce a i safer situation l I

The Role of the Public 15 Allegations 21 Hearing Process cost A benefit l

r ATTACHMENT D - Page 2 2 Personnel Considerations Operating Organization:

23 An Operating Academy 36 Qualifications of plant personnel Regulatory Agency:

6 Size of the NRC 3 Pecple: qualifications, background, stability 7 Attitudes Adverse to Safety inertia towards new ideas backfits: hold up real improvements Economics / Cost

$1000/ man-REM 24 Whole subject of 0A Research Effort 22 Safety Research: aim at Long Range Goals 32 How Safe is a given Plant Performance Indications P

Besides Power Reactors:

17 Non-Power Reactors 18 Reprocessing NOTE:

- Numbers refer to Dr. Carbon's Draft Project Plan

- This is only a first cut, no subcommittee approval or input

  • yet.

,2_ , _ . 4