ML20140B788

Discusses Procedural Mechanisms for Backfitting.Survey of Mechanisms,Used as Input to Tables I,Ii & III of Attachment to CRGR Charter Encl

ML20140B788
Person / Time
Issue date:	06/16/1983
From:	Dircks W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To:	Ahearne J NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20140B793	List: ML20140B788 ML20140C897 ML20140C927
References
FOIA-85-759 NUDOCS 8307130003
Download: ML20140B788 (1)

Text

'

/'p uam*o, UNITED STATES 8 3 c. ~% NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION '

{ ,"; g (j, : , W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 N;7, JUN 161983 SECRETAfff RECORD C0h'

. P -

'O MEMORANDUM FOR: Comissioner Ahearne FROM: William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations

SUBJECT:

PROCEDURAL MECHANISMS FOR BACKFITTING In your memorandum of June 3,1983, you cited certain draft DOE testimony stating that NRC has identified 87 different procedures by which backfitting can be effected. You stated that DOE had identified me as the source of the qucte related to the 87 different- procedures. Apparently this was based on an article in a July 1982 issue of Nuclear Industry. '

The issue of communicating requirements to licensees and the procedural means by which that had been accomplished by the staff was studied at length in late 1981 when CRGR was formed. The survey of mechanisms was conducted by the DEDR0GR staff with the assistance of MPA and is contained in a memorandum dated November 25, 1981 from V. Stello to distribution (enclosed).

This survey contains 81 line items, some of which contain more than one mechanism.

This survey was used as an input to Tables I, II and III of the attachment to the CRGR Charter that deals with procedures to control communication of generic requirements to reactor licensees. These tables were included in the CRGR Charter in order to' identify the procedural mechanisms used to establish, comunicate or interpret generic requirements that were to be controlled by Office procedures. The 44 line items in these tables are a more general listing of the 81 line items in the original survey.

, )-

liiam J. Dircks Executive Director -

for Operations

Enclosure:

Memo V. Stello to ..

Distribution dtd November 25, 1981 s

cc: Chairman Palladino Comissioner Gilinsky

• Comissioner Roberts Comissioner Asselstine @

SECY I OPE OGC p

d 8AoMl3 ooc 3 4 ,

o O)/ ,

. [f .

NOV 2 51981 .

iS DRANDUM FOR: Those On Attached List FROM: - Vi_ctor Stello, Jr., Deputy Executive Director .

Regional Operations and Generic Requirements -

SUSJECT: SURVEY OF MECHANISMS USED TO COPMJNICATE REQUIREMENTS TO LICENSEES In accordance with the functions assigned to it by the EDO, sqy Office has, with the assistance of HPA, carried out a survey of mchanisms used to corr.unicate requirements to licensees. We have categorized the various mchanisms and identified a group of mchanisms which should be reviewed by CRGR before they are imposed and a group which ~~

should be controlled at the office level to assur'e that they are not used to impose new generic staff requiremnts (unless these new

_ generic requiremnts have been approved by CRGR).

~ We would like your co::ments on the survey, the categorizations, and the groupings of mechanisms which should be controlled by CRGRJ s.

It should be recognized that procedures for control and review of generic requirements are not intended to apply to emergency actions.

We would like your coc=ents by December 1,19Dl.

Original Signed by

. , if. Stello / - . ,

Victor Stello, Jr.

Deputy Executive Director Regional Operations and ,

Generic Requirements ~

l

Enclosure:

Survey of Mechanisms CC: CRGR Members DISTRIBUTION -

V. Stello -

T. Murley -

l DEDROGR/ Staff / File .

Central Files /PDR Qm

,I .\ ? c _r :,z _ " , ~.?

o,,M . DEDROGR

% ,................. ~ ' . ~ ~

S te13 ald . . . . . :.h . . . . . . . :=. . . . . . M:. . . . :. . .. ?. . . . . . . . :. . .; :. . . . . . . . ::. . . . h . . . . . . . . . . : . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

+* -'

m ni im -2' - * ' ~ ' ' -." '

• W .

ADDRESSEES Harold R. Denton, Director, NRR

~

John G. Davis, Director, NMSS- -

~

Richard C. DeYoung; Director IE '

Robert B. Minogue, Director, RES Caryle Michelson, director, AEOD ,

Daniel J. .Donoghue, Director, ADM Ronald C. Haynes, Regional Admin'istrator, R-I James P. O'Reilly, Regional Administrator, R-II James G. Keppler, R4gional Administrator, R-III John T.' Collins, Regional Administrator, R-I'Y

~' ~~

Robert H. Engelken, Regional Administrator, R-V e

.c - .

.J.

:.. -

. ,. .e.g.;,:*L,

.: . .,. : . w~ . . g +. . -. -.. ...,.. .

. . .. . ;. . :t. r:. . - - - . . . .. , .

a. .. .- ...m:c., . . a.~.v.. p. q ,

n:=.n ..a w 1.:._. m m ._. , . - - - .

a.,,-....; ~ . _ . . _

TABLE I. MECHANISMS USED TO COMMUNICATE REQQIREMENTS TO LICENSEES

. Notes on Table .

Notes on Categories ,

Staff Doc. - NRC staff documents and communications, including those of branches, task forces, working groups, etc., and of individual staff members Generic - . - Mechanisns used to communicate generic requirements

~

Formal Req. - Requirements 'which have been imposed in a manner w ich of itself , imposes a legal requirement, e.g., regulations, license conditions, orders .

Proposed Formal - Mechanisus used to propose a formal . requirement Req.

Staff Req. - Mechanisns which reflect staff positions which, unless complied with, the staff would impose (or seek to have imposed) by a formal requirement. It includes matters which "for practical purposes" are requirements (e4ter-natives are acceptable but it is usually very difficult to demonstrate that they are satisfactory). Items approved at the Division or Office or Agency level are identified with the letter D. It includes those which reflect the position of a branch or some members of a branch, sections, task forces, working groups, steering

- committees, or cognizant individual staff members which have not been reviewed or approved at the Division or Office level.. These are .

identified with the letter B.

Control - How should the communication be controlled? Those which should be r.eviewed by the CRGR before becoming

" requirements " are identified as C. Those which are

'. only occasionally generic should be controlled when . .

they are generic. Th'ese'are niahked1Cg. Those:whii:h i should be controlled by ' office procedures to assure that such items reflect only previously approved

- " requirements," are' identified as..P. or are submitted ,

. to CRGR. - v .

' i Letter Notations ~ l N - No .

Y- Yes 0 - Often, but not in all cases.

(Cont'd. on next page) ,

--.s:e ip-

. .~ -

.. y 6 . k @ % ~i-

.d.fiim.M . ; ; ; g; J:_ c;.s., , ,* .

m. .. _ . , ,.

' Letter . Notations _ (Cont'd.)

S - Seldom does this document impose or result in a new generic position, but it is not rare for some element to b.e an initial use or inter-pretation ,of another generic requirement which subsequently is treated ,

as precedent for other cases.

B - See Staf f Requirements (above).

D - See Staff Requirements (above). -

C - See Control (above). .

Cg - See Control (above).

cc.

"~ '

- P - See Control (abo've).

Numbered Notes '.

1 - Although,most proposed rules are (for formal purposes) Commission documents, often the principal sponsor of Commission rulemaking action is a staff office. -

2 - Although these are not the type of item which should be reviewed, the item may be reviewed by CRGR on request.

3 - Reg Guides,'although not regulations, are developed in a somewhat more.fomal fashion than other non-formal . requirements.

4 - Some BTP's are incorporated in the SRP and are. approved at the .

Division or-Office level. -

5 - Code committee documents which are covered by 50.55a do result in imposition of formal requirements by virtue of 50.55a. ~

6 - Show cause order and 50.54f impose a requirement for information; they also constitute as a practical matter the requirement to do the job.

7 - The response to the 2.206 granted does not.itself impose a requirement, but would, if granted, start a process to seek formal requirements

• from a Board (or the Director).

8 - The " requirements" in other NUREG.'s are seldom adopted by the Commission, but often become incporated into other " practical" requirements, sdch as SRP's, BTP's, or generic letters.

9 - USI .NUREG's when adopted by the Commission are seldom,new regulations or orders, but become requirements as a practicalsmatter (by virtue of

~

a generic letter). . ,

s 10 - Many actions," which are plant specific requirements only, in fact, often ~<

carry a. generic " message" to other licensees. .

11 - SER's propose requirements whi,ch are made formal by Board actions or otherwise by issuance of license or license amendments.

~

f.- g ,,,j 7 ..,.r . .. ._ % - . .: ..

5.- . . ,

".' 2.',l: . , !.WTF.u.' 'E : ..' .

-@$id.( . .s ETA: 0 .T,~.'IE C9WW.:'E'. .. '.72:!499Md' *;.

m u. L- m x,,m; 'as . . _ ,, n . .

- ~

.. .s Numbered Notes (Cont'd.) -

12 - Although the amendment itself does not have generic effects, the SER -

supporting it may either impose a generic requirement developed elsewhere, or be the initial use of a new generic requirement.

13 - When a position or recomendation is to be made to a Code group as - -

reflecting the position 6r recomendations.of the NRC, or any office, division, branch, working group, task force, etc., of NRC, the position or recomendation should be submitted to CRGR for review before such position or recomendation is made.

~

14 - These including various transmittal letters.

15 - Including action or such licensees and amendments, such as denials, and deficiency letters. ,

• e.

• emuu8 W

w -

I W G .

. e .s. W.

e .*

• e I g

. . ~ .  ::L . 7 . . - . . . . .3 -.* .- .

.: .?. . * - 'ks:;.%'~.O.RG-9;.,*?., 2,*L.:ii;'. m '*[i"~*

i.: . . , . ' ;,.

1y

• l; ,. . .'

.. .;, .:.6 :: : Ms.cg.g .g#:. - .' - f; :.l_.

. . . . . . , . . , s,

. . iga .4y.-

6; . '

TABLE I. MECHANISMS USED TO Pmp; sed Staff . '

f, 7-l}bt

• Sta ff Fomal

/ Cintml COMMUNICATE REQUIREMENTS TO LICENSEES Req. Formal Req.

' Doc. Generic Req.

, , . y -

G.

• I N Y -- C -

d'j Advanced Notices N Y I

'. Y -- C

' '.::2 - NI Y N Proposed Notices . ,

g m, . ,

.4l ! -

C N Y Y Final Rules

-- Y

- Cg

, j,'j. . . Petitions for Rul'emaking N Y '

r .t . '

N 2'

N Y Y lsi.f G Polic,y Statements Y N3 N .D C P$y.i V- .-

Regulatory Guides Y

1.< l N D C

- Y Y N i'i. ' SRP '

P ;. '

Branch Technical Positions , Y 'Y. N N B4 C f 31.

NI3 Y N5 35 -- N13 E :' Code Comittee Docu'mentsi ,.

f: 8 Cg

')

9;.

Staff Approval of Topicals Y

Y Y

Y N

N N

N U Cg I&E Manual l

[f.

m W'

Y N N D Cg I&E (HQ) Position .

s. ,

N N. D Cg Y S

/l[ Plant Specific Letted 14'

.0. ..

S S D C

I Generic Letters 14 ', Y Y

-- -- D Cg

" Y Y

h. ,

TMI Action Plan Letters N: . -- -- Cg Y 0 Y -

Orders (including Confirmatory Orders) ll .]

S Y6 y6 D' Cg

- Y k.-. .

Show Cause Order .

y6 C V6 D 50.54f Letters Y .b .

I Cg Y S -- V Response to 2.206 Requests

t. . . '. .

,j , '

.3 TABLE I. - p. 2. ,

~

Prop::std Sta ff Formal Staff . .

1[- Doc. Generic Req. Formal Req. C ntrol -

• u Reg.

Y Y N 5 80 'Cg

> NUREG Reports N D C Circulars .' Y Y N Y N N D 'N2

[ 'f '.5- Information Notices

• Y f,5 fe

.!- Special Reports Y Y N N B, P N D P

}. Operator Examination Result Reports Y a Y Y N S D9 C

': U$1 NUREG's n.. -

y Consultant Reports - N .Y N N N.' N DES, FES .

Y N 10 N Y D P .

N 10 p y

,N Technical Specifiedtions- '

Y ACRS Meeting and Letters N 0 N 8/D N

.n, ,,,  :. 4 , ' ll I

• Y 0 N Y D P tfc SER f

l5 y N Y P Facility Licenses Facility License AmeddneAts l5'- y i

N12 y p

. r, p

Operator (Senior Ope,rator) Licenscs l5 E 4 y y y

15 Y N Y P O;. . Operator (Senior Operator) Amendments ,

S Y N Decisions and Orders of Licensing Boards Y 0 Y N Decisions and Orders of Appeal,8oards Y

N

,IY Y

,;' Decisions and Orders of the Commission Y Y D Pg Y 0 N

k, . ,

Pleadings .

• s

\

i}:';

'p.

' ~~

. J, .'- TA8LE I. - 3 Prop:ssd Staff -

Sta ff Formal * ' '

Req. Formal Req. Centml .

o ' : .- Doc. Generic

(

• Req.

1 . ,' ,

S N Y N D

..k

. : ,-'

• Proposed Fisidings Y

f

(. ,

.Y S P Y 0 N Testimony , -

g.;i.p; m

Y D. P Y Y N J '.p. PDA's

• Y Y N Y Dc -

P 5 FDA's .

c, 0 C 1

Standard Technical Specifications Y Y 'N Y t'f. /.

1. f. l. : N N B P Y N

{J,WQ. . Inspection Reports Y N N ,N '8 P StNy Performance Appraisal Team peports .

~

Yp..? Y N N N B P

.hp Investigation Reports .

N N 8 P Y S

,,,",kIi Entry. Exit & Management Meettbgs I ,-

N D P

'" Y 0 N

.. SALP Reports y1, * $

Y N N- Cg Y

i Orders . l, .

. Ij' * -

Y ./ (See above)

Show Causes (See above)

...

• N -. D C

- ' Y Y

,y Bulletin's

'if.

Y N N D P Immediate Action Letters N N N P

,#. Y N

.. Notices of Violation N Y D P Y N Notices of Proposed Enforcement Action 10 Y -- D P

• ' - Y N

. Imposition of Civil Penalties . $

Y ,k N -4, D C Ci rculars 2 1

-- S N Y Y N .

I-Information Notices

~

jlfi- ,. .

l '. - TABLE I. - p. 4 Formal Prnpssed Staff - ..

• Staff Req. Con trol

s. Do c .- Generic Req. Formal -

/ Req.

4 ~

1: .

Miscellaneous ,

o,. N -- P Public Meetings ' Y 0 N ,

S N N N P

'l Preliminary Notifications . Y

&' l ., . g Telephone Reports of Occurrences Licensee Event Report; N N S P Construction Deficiency Reports N S -

.mp . *

q. (Sent to other licensees)

Tn.-

Conferences, Meetings Telephone Calls to Licensees '

Y S N N B/D P r License-Requested M, NRC-Requested . .

r, -

? 'NRC Participation in and Connent o'n N S 8 P Y N Licensee Drills Q& *

, t. r - - Meetings Between NRC/ Licensee {Public

1. Y N N N N P

- Affairs People N S P Y 0 N h-[ Press Releases ,

f .

N -- P 0 N

. Public Meetings (held Marterly) Y S N 0 8 N2 Y

'- Resident Inspector Day-to-Day Contact c;n.

NRC Operator Licensing People Contact 0 N -- 8 P Y

Licensees on a Continuing Basfs -

f- . '

Periodic Visits to Some License'es by N N; N P

" Y lt ,

HQ Staff such as ELD or other offices's staff J' li Conferences Meetings Telephone Calls Y N 5 B/D 'P -

' Y with Vendors' -

e- . ,

i : .. .l 0

TABLE I..~- p. 5 -

Staff Formal Propusof Staff *-

Req. Formal Req. Cen tml -

' ' Doc. Generic Req.

I NRC Discussions with Local Officials on Matters Affecting Licensees 'Y  ! N N N N P-

.. / =

IF .

b";, - Speeches to Local Gmups or Industry Y .Y N N N P

.'- Associations yl3 3,' Cg l 3>'

N' Y N S,( .

. j. Code Committee Working Group k"' Phone Calls or Site Visits by NRC Staff E* or Commission to: Y N N N B/D P

- Interpret Fonnal Requirements z.

0,N - - Obtain Information (i.e.', Corrective B/D P, Actions, Schedules, Conduct Surveys, etc.) Y .O N -

S

. ',9

- Precede a Fonnal, Action (i.ei. Immediate N N D P N

e ,.

Action Letter, Notice of Civil Penalty, Y etc.)

.4 i'M' - Discuss Proposed Requiremen.ts (i .e. *New Y N N N 8 P

. Security Plans, Proposed Tqch Specs, etc.)

Meetings with Owners' Groups (i.e., Y N

~

S D P Y

Unresolved Safety Is, sues & Generic Matters) l 1,

,i Other Information Exch4nge (i.e., Workshops, N. N -- P Y 'Y Public Meetings, Technical Discussions)

SECY Papers (some utilities apparently sent Y Y 'N Y

-- P operators to college based on recent SECY

( ' '-

paper on operator qualificatio'ns)

E Contractors (National Labs) - Obtaining N N, N P N

information from utillties for spect fic ,f

• projects (i.e., plant-spect fic risk C,

assessment, human factors, etc.)- "

e *

~~~ __

((- t t

f

],(' ' TABLE I. - p. 6 Staff ' , ~.."' !

Formal Propssed Staff Req. Formal Req. Control

./s . Do c .,- Generic j f- Req.

f

' i 1

i:

[. Meetings with Industry Representatives .

Y N N N P l:

Y (i.e.. AIF. INPO) on N,atters Affecting i-Licensees 6-r...

1,

,- Discussions Between NRC and Utility .

N N N P 8

Y N Legal Representatives during Hearing Process

~

i-

',c, O N N N, N Media Coverage (TV. Newsletters. Periodicals) N

.l!

s s .

b' ni; *

. =

'*I 78, ,

!- M' j O I

'..}9

} ?

f, ,

t s

e e

S 9

9 mI-

. ,I . .

e

• e l ,, 9 $ '

• __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _