ML20154L595
| ML20154L595 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/15/1998 |
| From: | Barrett R NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Holahan G NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9810200003 | |
| Download: ML20154L595 (12) | |
Text
pn uto p
4 UNITED STATES s
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 2066Ho01
- /
October 15, 1998 MEMORANDUM TO: Gary M. Holahan, Director Division of Systems Safety and Analysis l
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM:
Richard J. Barrett, Chief 4
Probabilistic Safety Assessment Br Division of Systems Safety and Analysis Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
PUBLIC MEETING ON CONSIDERATION OF RISK-INFORMED i
REVISION OF 10 CFR PART 50 REGULATIONS DATE AND TIME:
October 27-28,1998, (Tuesday & Wednesday), 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
LOCATION:
Two White Flint North Building,2nd Floor ACRS Meeting Room 11545 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 PURPOSE:
Discuss with the public and the nuclear industry the concept, feasibility.
scope, and approaches of streamlining 10 CFR Part 50 regulations by applying risk-informed concepts. Attached is a preliminary agenda for the meeting.
l PARTICIPANTS:*
NRC PUBLIC j
G. Holahan Interested Members of the Public T. King ~
NEl M. Cunningham INPO R. Barrett BWR, B&W, CE and Westinghouse M. Rubin Owners Groups M. Caruso G. Kelly G. Parry
/
Attachment:
Meeting Agenda ACRS Presentation Material CONTACT: Samuel S. Lee, 301-415-1061 (ssl@nrc. gov)
- Meetings between NRC technical staff and applicants or licensees are open for interested members of the public, petitioners, intervenors, or other parties to attend as observers pursuant to " Commission" Policy Statement on Staff Meetings Open to the Public" 59 Federal Register
l-
~E
- c L
1
- 48340,9/20/94. Individuals wishing to make a presentation at the workshop should contact-i Samuel Lee directly.
i 1
MeetingNotice E-Mail:
S. Collins /F Miraglia, NRR G. Holahan, NRR T, King, RES.
S. Newberry, NRR -
' J. Wiggins, Region I
)
8.' Mallett,' Region 'l j
' J. Grobe, Region lli
' A.. Howell, Region IV M. Cunningham, RES
'{
R. Barrett, NRR j
M. Rubin, NRR M.- Caruso, NRR G. Kelly, NRR G. Parry, NRR
- PMNS (Meeting Announcement Coordinator)
OPA1 (Office of Public Affairs)
Hard Copy S. Lee,0-8D1 Central File "a BLIC SPSB file OGC ACRS-Receptionist (OWFN and TWFN)
DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\ LEE \\PART50\\MEETNOT.1
4 PRELIMINARY AGENDA PUBLIC MEETING ON MODIFICATION OE PART 50 ACRS MEETING ROOM j
October 27-28,1998 October 27,1998 8:30 a.m.
INTRODUCTION 9:00 a.m.
NRC STAFF PRESENTATION - BACKGROUND
- 9:45 a.m.
OBJECTIVES OF MODIFYING 10 CFR 50 10:30 a.m.
BREAK 10:45 a.m.
IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEMS WITH CURRENT 10 CFR 50 12:00 p.m.
Lunch 1:00 p.m.
(Cont) IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEMS WITH CURRENT 10 CFR 50 2:45 p.m.
Break 3:00 p.m.
DISCUSSION OF SCOPE OF CHANGE TO 10 CFR 50 5:00 p.m.
Adjourn October 28,1998 8:30 a.m.
SUMMARY
OF PREVIOUS DAY 9:00 a.m.
DISCUSSION OF PRIORITY OF ELEMENTS TO BE MODIFIED 10:15 a.m.
Break 10:30 a.m.
(Cont) DISCUSSION OF PRIORITY OF ELEMENTS TO BE MODIFIED 12:00 p.m.
Lunch 1:00 p.m.
OPTIONS FOR APPROACHES TO RULE CHANGE l
2:30 p.m.
Break 2:45 p.m.
DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS OF AND BENEFITS TO PROPOSED CHANGES 4:00 p.m.
POLICY AND IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES 5:30 p.m.
ADJOURN 1
i l
EXAMPLE QUESTIONS TO BE ADDRESSED DURING PUBLIC MEETING What are the objectives of risk-informed reform of 10 CFR 507 j
What are the specific problems with the current 10 CFR 50 in the public's and industry's eyes?
1 If a phased approach is taken, what issues should receive the earliest attention? -
What key changes to specific regulations would be most effective?
Should Part 50 changes be voluntary or mandatory (or a mixture) fo' licensees? What are the r
implications of each option?
L What other initiatives need to be coordinated with Part 50 reform?
How will PRA quality be determined and factored into the modification to Part 50?
What happens to equipment that formerly was non-safety related, but is now identified as being safety related or safety important?
1-How do industry and the public see enforcement being affected by modifying Part 50?
l g:\\ agenda.wpd Author: Glenn Kelly (X1075) i i
l i
i l'
p"" """%c
\\N...)
Development of i
Options to Make 10 CFR 50 More Risk-informed t
4 October 1,1998 Thomas King, RES Gary Holahan, NRR i
f
Part 50 Rulemaking - Proposed Schedule to identifv Options 10/01/98 Discuss potential rule changes with NRC PRA steering i
committee.
10/02/98 Memorandum to Commission describing plan to assess rulemaking options and amending response to tasking memorandum.
mid-Oct Conduct meeting (s) with stakeholders to discuss potential rule changes and viable options 11/1/98 Complete draft Commission paper on options for rulemaking:
- objectives
- options for achieving objectives l
- assessment of options Commission paper with options for rulemaking.
l 11/15/98 1
I ACRS review of Commission paper l
12/03/98 Staff requirements memorandum (SRM) received 12/15/98 i !
i l
Making 10 CFR Part 50 Risk-Informed OXerall Ob_iectives -
Focus NRC and licensee resources on design and operational e
issues commensurate with their importance to health and safety; Provide NRC with the framework to use risk information to take action in all regulatory matters:
license amendments enforcement plant performance assessment e
Allow use of risk information to provide flexibility in plant design / licensing basis l
! I
6 i
DESIRED ATTRIBUTES IN 10 CFR 50 Address those design and operational characteristics most important to safety and necessary to meet the Commission's i
Safety Goals Allow accommodation of plant specific design and operational characteristics Provide a clear, consistent and coherent set of requirements l
Preserve the defense-in-depth philosophy Utilize a performance-oriented approach, where practical.
Practical to implement and regulate considering factors such as:
cost / benefit a
availability of risk and performance information inspection /enforcementlassessment i
n
Potential Elements for Constructing Options 1)
Re-define Scope of Requirements considering risk information:
- safety related" and "important to safety"
-Maintenance Rule
-QA (Appendix B) l 2)
Risk-inform 50.59 Change Process 3)
Allow Alternatives to Current Operations and Design / Licensing Requirements 4)
Add or Modify Specific Regulation (s) to Address the Use of Risk-Information in-
-license amendments (50.90,50.92...)
-all or selected parts of 10 CFR 50 i
5)
Utilize Changes to Process Rules (e.g.,50.12...)
j ;
2
L Policy issues
~
e Mandatory vs. Voluntary Operation of pilot plants under exemptions e
Categorization of SSCs with respect to safety (i.e., definition of safety related):
e one category graded approach l
Scope of what is to be risk-informed:
- plant design requirements (e.g., DBA description)
- operational requirements
- equipment pedigree requirements
- process requirements i
Relationship to other ongoing rulemakings or proposed changes e
Extent of NRC review and approval of implementation (e.g., design changes f
e only?)
i i
! [
I i
t I
4 Implem":ntatinn issues e
Selection of risk-informed set of SSCs:-
risk metrics and guidelines defense-in-depth safety margin PRA quality (e.g., standard) o inclusion of current "non-safety related" SSCs into the new safety-related l
e category Documentation:
- revised FSAR?
-PRA?
Need for R.G.s/SRPs
- i Need for pilot plant activities.
e e
impact on inspection Impact on Enforcement e
l e
impact on Plant Performance Assessment i.
i
I Making 10 CFR Part 50 Risk-Informed Factors for Assessing Options j
Are overall objectives met?
e Are plant specific considerations accommodated?
e e
Will the licensing basis be clear?
e is the option practical to implement:
cost to licensee cost to NRC is there a suitable base of risk analysis throughout the industry?
e Will the option be used?
Will the option be available for use in a timely fashion?
Can performance-based requirements be used for e
i implementation?
t
-