ML20205L172

Summary of 990226 Meeting with NEI License Renewal Working Group Re Extent of Credit Given by NRC Staff for Existing Programs in Determining Scope & Depth of Review of License Renewal Application

ML20205L172
Person / Time
Issue date:	04/07/1999
From:	Hoffman S NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
References
PROJECT-690 NUDOCS 9904140165
Download: ML20205L172 (7)

Text

T gM b

UNITED STATES

-8 j

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 2055M001

\\,g April 7 1999 ORGANIZATION:

Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) i

SUMMARY

OF LICENSE RENEWAL STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING WITH THE NEl LICENSE RENEWAL WORKING GROUP The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) License Renewal Steering Committee (LRSC) met with the NEl License Renewal Working Group on February 26,1999, to discuss the extent of credit given by the NRC staff for existing programs in determining the scope and depth of its review of a license renewal application. Attendees are listed in Attachment 1. The NRC's objective for the meeting, as described in Attachment 2, was to clearly understand the industry's position regarding the scope and depth of the information requested by the staff to make its finding that an existing program manages aging for the period of extended operation.

The focus of this issue is to establish guidance for future license renewal applicants. Both Baltimore Gas and Electric (BGE) and Duke Energy Corporation (Duke) have addressed existing programs in their renewal applications for Calvert Cliffs and Oconee, respectively. The industry maintains that it was the Commission's intent when it revised the licease renewal rule (10 CFR Part 54) in 1995, to give credit, without re-review, for existing programs that manage aging and to review programs only for those components and structures that are not adequately managed by existing programs. By asking for information on existing programs, the industry believes that the staff is, in effect, asking the applicant to re-verify its current licensing basis (CLB) programs.

The LRSC responded that the NRC is not challenging the adequacy of existing CLB programs but is asking for information in the application that demonstrates that the program v il manage aging for the period of extended operation as required by the renewal rule. The sta f contends that if the Commission had intended that the staff accept existing programs without a demonstration in the application, the rule would likely have been constructed differently to reflect that credit rather than requiring the demonstration. Further, the staff views that the discussion in the Statements of Consideration for the 1995 rule regarding credit for existing programs was the basis by which the Commission eliminated active components from the scope of the rule, not passive.

The industry stated that it was preparing a " white paper" diseasing the industry's views on how existing plant programs and activities should be credited for license renewal. This paper was subsequently submiHed to the NRC by NEl letter dated March 3,1999. The staff indicated that it plans to send a memorandum to the Commission informing them of this issue and its plans for resolving it. The staff will include the industry's paper with its memorandum.

g The sta'i and industry's goal is to take the lessons-learned from the review of the first two k

applications and ongoing generic activities to create efficiencies in the review process and to reduce the information needed, where possible, in future applications. Both BGE and Duke 3

r believe that future applicants would need less information in their applications if the NRC wou;d jO give more credit for existing programs. The industry intends to evaluate the lessons ;t learned from the BGE and Duke applications and will provide feedback to the staff, similar to its comments on the Standard Review Plan for License Renewal.

gfy 9904140165 990407 f

b h

PDR REVGP ERGNUMRC Cepy um.

i April 7, 1999 The existing program most discussed regarding the extent of credit to be given for renewal is the environmental qualification program established to implement the requirements of 10 CFR 50.49.

The industry has questioned why compliance with $50.49 is not sufficient without further demonstration in a renewal application. The staff indicated that to accept only a statement of compliance without a demonstration may require a rule change. For their renewal applications, both BGE and Duke have both provided the information requested by the staff regarding their EQ programs to allow the staff to prepare its safety evaluation reports. BGE, Duke, NEl, and staff agreed to integrate the experience gained from these reviews to provide guidance for future applicants as to type and amount of information needed in application for EQ programs. The broader issue of whether continued compliance with @50.49 without further demonstration is sufficient for license renewal will be pursued separately.

@MUk Stephen T. Hoffman, Senior Project Manager License Renewal and Standardization Branch Division of Regulatory improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Project No. 690 Attachments: As stated cc: w/ Attachments: See next page Distribution:

See next page

• See orevious concurrence l

DOCUMENT NAME:G:\\HOFFMAN\\NEl226.WPD OFFICE LA RLS d7 RLSB DRIP:D NRR:DD fpb NAME EHylton SHofdlE CGrimes DBMatthews RPZimmerman DATE 4/5/99*

4/5/99*

4/5/09*

4/5/99*

4 /~7 /99 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

i

^j%~

Distribution:

r Hard coRY 4

~ PUBLIC Dettet File r; RCS'B RF"'

License Renewal Steering Committee N. Dudley, ACRS - T2E26 E. Hylton E-mail; D. Matthews -

S. Newberry C. Grimes C. Carpenter

- B. Zaleman-J. Strosnider R. Wessman E. Imbro W. Bateman J. Calvo H. Brammer l

T. Hiltz B. Boger G. Holahan T. Collins C. Gratton R. Correia R. Latta l

J. Moore J. Rutberg R. Weisman l

M. Zobier M. Mayfield S. Bahadur-A. Murphy D. Martin -

- W, McDowell S. Droggitis RLSB Staff l

G. Tracy i

A. Thadani j

D. Charaberlain L. Chandler-J. Craig.

C. Julian J. Wiggins 140048 4

p.

e-NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE (License Renewal Steering Committee)

Project No. 690 cc:

Mr. Dennis Harrison Mr. Robert Gill U.S. Department of Energy Duke Energy Corporation NE-42 Mail Stop EC-12R Washington, D.C. 20585 P.O. Box 1006 Charlotte, NC 28201-1006 Mr. Ricard P. Sedano, Commissioner Mr. Charles R. Pierce State Liason Officer Southem Nuclear Operating Co.

Department of Public Service 40 inverness Center Parkway 112 State Street.

BIN B064 Drawer 20 Birmingham, AL 35242 l

Montipelier, Vermont 05620-2601 l

Mr. Douglas J. Walters Mr. Barth Doroshuk Nuclear Energy Institute.

Baltimore Gas & Electric Company _

1776 l Street, N.W.

1650 Calvert Cliffs Parkway l

Washington, DC 20006 Lusby, Maryland 20657-47027 j

DJW@NEl.ORG National Whistleblower Center Chattooga River Watershed Coalition l

3233 P Street, N.W.

P. O. Box 2006 i

Washington, DC 20007 Clayton, GA 30525 Mr. William H. Mackay Entergy Operations, Inc.

.l Arkansas Nuclear One 1448 SR 333 GSB-2E Russellville, Arkansas 72802 j

\\

3

' ATTENDANCE LIST NRC LICENSE RENEWAL STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING l

WITH THE NEl LICENSE RENEWAL WORKING GROUP FEBRUARY 26.1999 NAME ORGANIZATION

1. Steve Hoffman NRC/NRR/ DRIP /PDLR

2. Lynn Connor.

DSA

3. Jerry Dozier NUS Information Services 4.

Margaret Federline -

NRC/RES

5. Brian Sheron.

NRC/NRR/ADPT

6. William Kane NRC/NRR/ ADIP

7. Roy Zimmerman NRC/NRR

8. Stephen Bums NRC/OGC

9. Chris Grimes NRC/NRR/ DRIP /PDLR

10. Richard Heibel '

Baltimore Gas & Electric (BGE)

11. Mike Tuckman Duke Energy (Duke)

12. Joseph Hagan PECO-Energy.

13. Randy Hutchinson.

Entergy-ANO

14. Doug Walters Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)

15. Greg Robison Duke

16. David Lewis Shaw Pittman

17. Barth Doroshuk BGE

18. Tony Pietrangelo -

NEl

19. Ben Rodill Virginia Power

20. Tom Snow Virginia Power

21. Noel Dudley ACRS

22. Alice C. Carson Bechtel

23. Raymond D, Baker Southem Company

24. Steve Hale Florida Power & Ught

25. Michael Henig ~

Virginia Power j

26. Dona!d Ferraro Winston & Strawn

27. ' Fred Polaski PECO Energy

28. Jim Lang EPRI

29. Garry Young '

Entergy Operations - ANO

30. Joe Sebrosky NRC/NRR/ DRIP /PDLR i

31. Winston W. C. Liu NRC/NRR/ DRIP /PDLR

32. Thomas Kenyon NRC/NRR/ DRIP /PGEB

33. Michael Mayfield NRC/RES/DET

34. Dale Thatcher NRC/NRR/DE/EELB

35. Sam Lee NRC/NRR/ DRIP /PDLR

36. Jose Calvo NRC/NRR/DE/EELB

37. Paul Shemanski NRC/NRR/DE/EELB i

l

P n

-2

- 38. Jit Vora NRC/RES/DET/EMMEB

39. Bob Weisman NRC/OGC

40. Janice Moore NRC/OGC

41. Marian Zobler-NRC/OGC

42. Jack Strosnider NRC/NRR/DE

43. David Matthews NRC/NRR/ DRIP

44. Caudie Julian*

Region 11

45. Ken Brookman*

Region IV

46. Tom Hiltz NRC/OEDO

47. Norihisa Yuki NRC/NRR/ DRIP /PDLR -

• Participated by telephone l

i

i 2

NRC LICENSE RENEWAL STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING WITH THE NEl LICENSE RENEWAL WORKING GROUP FEBRUARY 26,1999 1

NRC'S OBJECTIVES:

(1)

ESTABLISH A CLEAR STATEMENT AND UNDERSTANDING OF THE INDUSTRY'S POSITION REGARDING:

SCOPE AND DEPTH OF THE INFORMATION REQUESTED BY THE STAFF FOR DEMONSTRATING THAT EXISTING PROGRAMS MANAGE AGING FOR THE PERIOD OF EXTENDED OPERATION VS.

i RE-VERIFICATION OF THE CURRENT LICENSING BASIS (2)

IDENTIFY ANY SPECIFIC PROGRAMS OF CONCERN TO THE INDUSTRY

.