ML20150F999
Text
--
&--T f&
ACTION -
50/NMSS/NRR/ADM (Bill Miller)
J
.p%q UNITED STATES Cys: Acting 900
- ! Ng:.m. y%g.
NUCt. EAR REGULATORY CO.'1 MISSION Cornell
- , 4.
,a wAsancrow.o.c.:cscs Rchm f
'+$ * * * * *
.A,,'-
n er March 4, 1980 Donoghue CFFCE OF TME
$gg))g ggggjgg SECRETARY gy d.
Kerr MEMORANDUM FOR:
WiTliam J. Dircks, Acting E00 Shapar Leonard Bickwit, Jr., General Counsel Haller Carlton Kammerer, Director, OCA Singer Joseph Fouchard, Ofrector, A
Felton FROM:
Samuel J. Chilk, Secreta
SUBJECT:
STAFF REQUIREMENTS - AFFI N SESSION 80-8, 3:40 P.M.,
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 29, 1980 MMISSIONERS' CONFERENCE ROOM, D. C. OFFICE (OPEN TO PUBLIC ATTENDANCE)
I.
SECY-79-660 - Petition for Rulemaking (PRM) 50-17, "No Significant Hazards Consideration" l.
The Commission, by a vote of 4-0*, approved, as revised, a Notice I
of Proposed Rule Making to amend 10 CFR 50.58, 50.91, and 2.105(a)(3) to specify criteria for determining when a proposed amendment to-an operating license or to a construction permit involves no significant hazards consideration.
In approving the amendments, the Commission requested the following revisions to be incorporated in the text:
a.
the attached revised version of page 5, enclosure A should 9
be substituted for the existing page 5 in the text; 4
i b.
example (VI) on page 6 of enclosure A should be modified by inserting the word "significant" so that the example reads f
"significant unreviewed safety question";
~
l c.
the Statement of Considerations should reflect the NRC's l
intention to codify in a Regulatory Guide the examples associated with the criteria subsequent to resolution of any comments received on the proposed rule.
(SD) (SECY Suspense: 3/M/80) 20 2.
The Commission also requested that:
the proposed amendments be published in the Federal Register D a.
for a 60 day public comment period; (50) (SECY Suspense: 3/.1t/80) b.
the Federal Register notice of proposed rule making be distributed to the petitioner, individuals connenting on the petition, pcwcr reactor licensees / permit holders, fuel reprocessing facility licensees / permit holders applicants for either a construction-i.
permit for a pcwer reactor or fuel reprocessing facility, public interest groups, and nuclear steam system suppliers; (SD) (SECY Suspense: 3/13/00) After rule is published i
- Cocaissioner Gilinsky was not present but had indicated his prior approval 4'...'. c' 3 c; of the Fadar=1 Racister Notice as modified.
l o /023co(//
x4
.$/U y
- P.
I c.
in the event an amendment to an operating license or construction permit involves no significant hazards considerations, the staff will cause a notice of proposed action to be published in the Federal Register prior to action on the amendment when it is determined, pursuant to 2.105(a)(4) that an opportunity for a public hearing should be afforded; (NRR) (SECY Suspense: as required) d.
NRR procedures (00R #5 and pM0P 219) be revised to conform with the examples in the Federal Register; (NRR)(SECY Suspense: 3/18/80) the appropriate Congressional Committees be informed of this e.
action; (SO/0CA) (SECY Suspense:
3/p/80) f.
the proposed press release (Enclosure I to SECY-79-660) be revised by adding the following sentence to the end of the first paragraph of page 2: "The proposed changes, if adopted as a rule, would essentially formalize and clarify the criteria the staff has been using for the past few years."
The revised press release should be issued when the Federal Register Notice is filed with the Office of the Federal Register; (SD/0PA) (SECY Suspense: 3/g/80) g.
the examples associated with the criteria should be codified a
=-
j in a Regulatory Guide subsequent to resolution of comments in the proposed rule (see 1(c) above); (SD) (SECY Suspense: 12/15/80) h.
the staff present the rule in its final form to the Commission, j
with an analysis of the comments received, for their considera-tion prior to publication.
(50) (SECY Suspense: 12/15/80)
II. SECY-A-70 Duke Power Comoany (Transportation of Scent Fuel From Oconee to McGuire) -- Proposed Decision Dismissing the Petition for Review and Releasing the Routing Information 1.
The Commission by a vote of 4-0*, approved, subject to revisions on pages 2 & 3, a proposed Order denying the staff's petition for review of a Licensing Board decision requiring that the routes approved by the staff for transportation of spent fuel bet,een Oconee and McGuire be made public, and terminatir.g the interim protective Order issued on September 7,1979.
(OGC)
(Subsequently, the Secretary signed the revised Order on February 29,1980).
2.
The Commission alos requested that the staff be prepared to discuss its general position on protecting routing information at an early date.
(NMSS) (SECY Suspense: 3/25/80)
- Co:r:nissioner Gilinsky was not present, but had previously indicated his approval of the Order.
g 6
~
3-III. SECY-80 Performance Testing for Personnel Dosimetry 1.
The CoInmission, by a vote of 4-0*, approved an advance notice of rulemaking en the subject of improving the quality and consistency of personnel dosimetry services. The notice would solicit coments on alternatives presented and invite suggestions for additional j
alternatives.
(50) (SECY Suspense: 3/g/80) 2.
The Comission also requested that:
a.
the advance notice of rulemaking be published for a 60-day public coment period; (50) (SECY Suspense: 3/g80) b.
the appropriate Congressional Comittees be informed of.
this action; (SO/0CA)(SECYSuspense: 3/j0/80) c.
an appropriate press release be issued after the advance notice has been filed with the Federal Register; (SD/0PA) (SECY Suspense: 3/p/80) d.
copies of the advance notice be sent to all known personnel dosimetry processors in the United States and to other known interested persons.
(SD) (SECY Suspense: Ji/C4/80) After rule is published i
IV. SECY-80 Surry Steam Generator Repair - Order i
j The Comission, by a vote of 2-l**,
approved, as revised, a proposed Order which would direct the staff-to expeditiously prepare and issue an environmental-impact statement on the proposed repair of the Surry Unit 1 l
(NRR) (SECY Suspense: 4/22/80)
[
(Subsequently, the Secretary signed the Order on 3/4/S0)-
t Comissioner Gilinsky was not present, but had previously indicated his approval of this action.
Chairman Ahearne, in approving this item, had cemented that "unless the ' laboratory' is a part of an existing lab, it will not be possible to run it on S160K per year -- that would barely cover 2-3 people." Comissioner Kennedy, although approving this action as the appropriate next step in attaining a long-term solution to the problem of assuring adequate estimates of personnel doses, requested in his February 13, 1980 memorandum to the Acting EDO a staff briefing on alternatives for a
effecting improvements in this area in the interim.
Section 201 of the Energy Reorganization Act, 42 U.S.C.15841. provides that i
action of the Comission shall be determined by a " majority vote of the members present." Had Commissioner Gilinsky been present at the meeting i
he would have voted with the majority. To enable the Comission to proceed with this case without delay, Chaiman Ahearne, who was a member of the minority on the questian up for decision, did not participate in the formal vote. Accordingly, the formal vote of the Commission was two to one in favor of the decision.
t e
-l
=
g,. _
_.,,,,.-g
-+w-+
u..-,,-v-
g-*v-rewi-v---
y
,,.i.-my-w-yw w
w-ww-
+
+g----
m v"
w
e
[
V.
SECY-80 License Fees for Review of Part 71 Quality Assurance (QA)
Programs for Shipping Packages for Radioactive Material l
1.
The Comission, by a vote of 4-0*, approved publication of a Notice of Proposed Rule Making to revise 10 CFR Part 170 to include fees for the review of quality assurance programs for shipping packages.
(SECY Suspense: 3/g/80) 2.
The Commission also requested that:
a.
the amendment be published in the Federal Register for a 30-day public coment period; $0-) (SECY Suspense: 3/10/80) ttCM
.2d b.
the Office of Management & Budget be provided a copy of the Notice;
(,$0} (SECY Suspense: 3/10/800 S/.7c/fo and
/4dM the appropriate Congressional Comittees be. informed of this c.
SO/0CA)
(SECY Suspense: 3/10/80)
(Abm action.
.co J
l I
cc:
I Comissioners :-. <..:
Comission Staff Offices l
5 l
- Comissioner Gilinsky was not present but had previously indicated his i
approval of this item.
I i
1 6
9 I
+
ATTACHMENT,5.) ',
~~
f hb
. a I
[7590-01]
j l
r
+. -..
.,d j
c..... -
.~-l' v.
a to " major credible reactor accidents"'and their failure to include i t, *...'.
accidents of a type different from those previously evaluated.
.During the p,ast several years, the Staff has been guided in reaching 1
1
.s s
Its findings with respect 'to "no significant hazards consideratica"' by.
. staff, criteria'and examples of amendments likely to involve, and not
... ~,.
a.
~,
likely to involve, significant hazards considerations. These criteria
\\
I i
and examples have been promulgated within the Staff and have proven.use-fui to the Staff.- The Commission believes that it would be useful to consider incorporating these criteria into the Comission's regulations for
..p.
use.in determining whether a propose'd amendment to an operating license or to a' construction permit of any production or utilization facility involves :,
'~.
l "no significant haza'rds consideration."
J
. ',. c "
. -... c -
Examples of amendments that are considered likely to involve signif-
+.
'icant' hazards consideration are listed below.
f,
....g., (i) A significant relaxation of the criteria used to
^
s.
.j.
establ.ish safety limits.
s.
. (ii) A significant rela'xation of the bases for limiting sa'fety system settings or limiting conditions for operation.
l (iii) A'significant relaxation in limiting conditions for ope-I ration not accompanied by compensatory changes, conditions, o: actions that maintain a comensurate level of safety.
Q Y
s
~,
j I
j 5 (Revised) "
i
.__m._.
~
..I
W E C.
LO 6 M 60N ACTION -
SD/!; MSS /f;RR/ADM (Bill Miller) 6 UNITcD STATES Cys: Acting E00 3f{tb
! j,.f'j NUCl.E AR RiiGULATORY CO?.1..ilSSION Cornell wasa,NGTON. D C. NS55 Rchm ff
- .,i.4p/.c
(
.p e March 4, 1980 Donoghue i
OFFICE 0,F THE 3(g))g scenETARY BudnitZ d
Kerr MEMORANDUM FOR:
William J. Dircks, Acting EDO Shapar t.eonard Bickwit, Jr., General Counsel Haller Carlton Kammerer, Director, OCA Singer Joseph Fouchard, Director, OPA Felton FROM:
Samuel J. Cf. ilk, Secreta '
SUBJECT:
STAFF REQUIREMENTS - AFFI
{20NSESSION 80-8, 3:40 P.M.,
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 29, 1980 (01411SSIONERS' CONFERENCE ROOM, D. C. OFFICE (OPEN TO PUBLIC ATTENDAhCE)
I.
SECY-79-660 - Petition for Rul. making (PRM) 50-17, "No Significant Hazards Consideration" 1.
The Commission, by a vote oi 4-0*, approved, as revised, a Notice of Proposed Rule Making to amend 10 CFR 50.58, 50.91, and 2.105(a)(3) to specify criteria for determining when a proposed amendment to an operating license or to a construction permit involves no significant hazards consideration.
In approving the amendments, the Commission requested the following revisions to be incorporated in the text:
a.
the attached revised version of page 5, enclosure A should
,k be substituted for the existing page 5 in the text; b.
example (VI) on page 6 of enclosure A should be modified by g
inserting the word "significant" so that the example reads "significant unreviewed safety question";
b c.
the Statement of Considerations should reflect the NRC's a 2c#
intention to codify in a Regulatory Guide the examples j
g A[
associated with the criteria subsequent to resolution of v
any comments received on the proposed rule.
. ~
(SD) (SECY Suspense: 3/Jf/80) 20 2.
The Commission also requested that:
a.
the proposed amendments be published in the Federal Register.2o
- f-for a 60 day public comment period; (SD) (SECY Suspense: 3/.11/80) b.
the Federal Register notice of proposed rule making be distributed to the petitioner, individuals comienting on the petition, power f
reactor licensees / permit holders', fuel reprocessing facility
- r.
licensees / permit holders applicants for either a construction permit for a power reactor or fuel reprocessing facility, public interest groups, and nuclear steam system suppliers; (SD) (SECY Suspense: S/38/80) After rule is published
- Commissioner Gilinsky was not present but had indicated his prior approval of the Federal Register Motice as modified.
,g.,,g, g bo OlsJ s
1
(
%..g.
. /
c.
. in the event an amendment 'to an operating' license or construction permit involve,s no significant hazard:
considerations, the staff will.cause a notice of proposed action to be' published,in the Federal Register prior to action on the amendment when it is determined, pursuant to 2.105(a)(4).th
)portunity for. a public hearing should be afforded;.
(NRR) lSEC's Suspense:.as required) d.
NRR procedures.(00R #5 and PM0P 219).be r o conform
. yJol with the c:44mples in the Federal.Registe - (NRR)
ECY Suspense: 3/18/80) e.
the appropriate Congressional Committees. be informed of this N
action; (SD/0CA) (SECY Suspense:.3/p/80) f.
the proposed press release (Enclosure I to SECY-79-660) be revised by adding the following sentence to the.end of the first paragraph of page 2: "The proposed changes, if adopted-g as a rule, would essentially formalize. and clarify the criteria the staff has been.using for the past few years."
The revised press release should be issued when the Federal Register Notice is filed with the Office of the Federal Register; (SD/0PA) (SECY Suspense: 3/1-1/80).
20 s[
g.
the examples associated with' the criteria should be codified:
u.+
r in a Regulatory Guide subsequent to resolution of comments in the proposed rule (see 1(c) above); (50)-(SECY Suspense: 12/15/80) h.
the staff present the rule in its final form to the Commission, f
with an analysis of the comments received, for their considera-efz tion prior to publication.
(SD) (SECY Suspense: 12/15/80) i 1
II.
SECY4-70 Duke Power Company (Transportation of Spent Fuel From Oconee to McGuM -- Proposed Decision Dismissing the Petition for Review and Releasing tARouting Infermation
~
1.
The commissi
- r. vote of 4-0*, approved, subject to revisions on pages 2 & 3, a pr sed Order denying the staff's petition for review of a Licensing Bear cision requiring that the~ routes approved by the. staff for transpo tion of spent fuel between Oconee and McGuire be made public, and'teg(ninating the interim protective Order.
issued on September 7, 1979.
OGQ)
(Subsequently, the Secretary signed the vised Order on February 29,.1980).
2.
The Commission alos requested that the staff be pared to discuss its general position on protecting routing informat at an early date.
(NMSS)(SECYSuspense: 3/25/80)
- Conmissioner Gilin:dy was not present, but had previously indicated hi i
pproval of the Order.,
h 3f4 x d 6fEh
l
,' ^
.