ML20206U557

Summary of 981216 Meeting with NEI License Renewal Working Group Re Resolution of Generic License Renewal Issues.List of Meeting Attendees & Meeting Topics Encl

ML20206U557
Person / Time
Issue date:	02/09/1999
From:	Hoffman S NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
References
PROJECT-690 NUDOCS 9902160162
Download: ML20206U557 (8)

Text

%

=

p 4

UNITED STATES j

j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i

^t WASHINGTON, D.C. 20665-0001

.....,o February 9,1999 ORGANIZATION:

Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)

SUMMARY

OF LICENSE RENEWAL STEERING COMMIT MEETING WITH THE NEl LICENSE RENEWAL WORK The Nuclear Regu!atory Commission's (NRC's) License Renewal Ste met with the NEl License Renewal Working Group on December 16,1998, to disc resolution of generic license renewalissues. Attendees are listed in Attachme topics discussed at the meeting is contained in Attachment 2. Following is discussions at the meeting:

Credit for Existino Procrams and Environmental Qualification Manaaem industry representatives and NEl continue to question the c.aed for a renewcl i

demonstrate the adequacy of aging management programs where well-establish that 10 CFR Part 54 requires that the staff make an e provided the demonstration required by $54.21 for all aging management prog continuing to pursue ways to graduate the level of detail needed to demonstrate the effectiveness of current programs that are relied upon for aging managem well-established and consistently managed those programs are. The industry cons (TLAAs), as aHowed by S54.21(c)(1)(iii), to be the p program.

The industry maintains that continued compliance with the requirements of 1 be sufficient without furtherjustification for meeting the demonstration requirements exists by the NRC and that no additional demonstr license renewat should be required. To support this position, industry refers to inspections, ongoing regulatory oversight, and the requirements of $50.49 to m program.

The EQ issue has been discussed extensively in past NRC management meet and Duke and in meetings between the LRSC and the NEl Working Group. The NR provided guidance to the industry on addressing EQ TLAAs in a letter to NEl da 23,1998.

NEl responded in a letter dated November 16,1998, disagreeing with the staffs guidance. Additionally, requests for additionalinformation have been sent to bo discussions have been held on a plant-specific basis. In order to meet the schedule fo completing the review of the Calvert Cliffs and Oconee applications and issuing evaluation reports (SERs), resolution of this issue is needed. This experience will

'D ;g7d

• <.._ nooy

~

\\

9902160162 990209 PDR RCVCP ERCNUMRC G I; PDR

\\

______L...____-

' February 9,1999 to develop tne generic guidance to be incorporated into the License Renewal Standard Review Plan and Regulatory Guide.

The staff stated that it is not questioning the adequacy of an applicant's current program for maintaining electrical equipment qualification in accordance with $50.49. This program, if properly implemented, should be adequate for managing the effects of aging of electrical equipment for the current operating license. However, a statement by itself that an applicant is in compliance with 550.49 does not provide the derr.onstration required by S64.21. The NRC staff stated its intent is that an applicant need only provide in its application a description of its EQ program to demonstrate the effective implementation of the program and to establish a basis in the application and on the docket for the staff's required finding.

Based on the discussions at the meeting, the industry stated that it better understood the staff's position. The industry will consider this issue further and decide whether to make an additional industry submittal on this issue. This topic will also be discussed at the next meeting oetween the LRSC and the NEl Working Group.

Plant-Specific Fatiaue Solutions and Reactor Vessel Internals These issues were discussed as emerging issues affecting license renewal. Fatigue (GSI-190) and reactor vesselinternals are technicalissues that are under evaluation by the staff and are not expected to be resolved prior to the staff issuing its safety evaluation reports for the first two applications. The staff does not intend that an applicant resolve these issues generically.

Rather, an applicant is expected to describe in its application why for its plant, the functionality of the affected components, as defined by the current licensing basis, will be maintained pending the resolution of the generic issue. This description will form the basis for the staffs review and finding that is required to issue a renewed license.

Timino of One-Time Inspections One-time inspections are normally proposed by an applicant to verify that an aging effect is not occurring and that an aging management program is not needed. The staff indicated that an applicant needs to provide sufficient information to establish a basis for the staffs acceptance.

This information would include the timing of the inspection and its bases, the inspection method, acceptance criteria, and methodology used to determine whether further action is required.

Additional discussions between the staff and the applicant are needed to determine when the time appropriate is to perform the inspection.

Evaluation Bases for New Proarams in some cases, applicants are developing new programs for license renewal for which the staff has no experience. Additional discussions are ne9ded between the staff and the industry to identify the information required in an application u describe these programs.

.I w

.m

3, February 9,1999 The next meeting between the LRSC and the NEl Working Group was scheduled for January 14,1999.

MUOf Stephen T. Hoffman, Senior Project Manager License Renewal Project Directorate Division of Reactor Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Project No. 690 Attachments: As stated cc w/atts: See next page License Renewal Steering Committee Distribution: See next page DOCUMENT NAME:GAHOFFMAN\\MTG12B16.WPD a n Jg LA j PDLR 4.gf PGEB y #

OFFICE PDLR:D

%on STHoffm'an' JStroshier CIGrimes %

NAME DATE

/ gh/99 l /2,t/gg l /11/99 L/ Q /98 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY y3'7

~

L Distribution:

Hard cooy PUBLIC Docket FeeJ PDLR RF M. El Zeftawy, ACRS - T2E26 I

\\

4 E-mail; R. Zimmerman W. Kane D. Matthews S. Newberry C. Grimes F. Akstulewicz J. Strosnider R. Wessman G. Bagchi H. Brammer T. Hiltz G. Holahan C. Gratton R. Correia i

R. Latta J. Moore R. Weisman M. Zobler G Mizuno

. Cherny E. Hackett A. Murphy D. Martin W.McDoweX S. Droggitis PDLR Staff G. Tracy A. Thadani

NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE (License Renewal Steering Committee)

Project No. 690 cc:

Mr. Denis 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 Montipelier, Vermont 05620-2601 Mr. Douglas J. Walters Mr. Barth Doroshuk Nuclear Energy Institute Baltimore Gas & Electric Company 1776 i Street, N.W.

1650 Calvert Cliffs Parkway Washington, DC 20006 Lusby, Maryland 20657-47027 National Whistleblower Center Chattooga River Watershed Coalition 3233 P Street, N.W.

P. O. Box 2006 Washington, DC 20007 Clayton, GA 30525 l

i i

y e tww+eQ_ esrev...

N

-e m ---- -

4 ATTENDANCE LIST NRC MANAGEMENT MEETING WITH THE NUCLEAR ENERG DECEMBER 16.1998 NAME ORGANIZATION

1. Steve Hoffman

2. Jack Strosnider NRC/NRR/DRPM/PDLR

3. Chris Grimes NRC/NRR/DE 4.

Brian Eheron NRC/NRR/DRPM/PDLR 5, RoyZimmerman NRC/ADT

6. Doug Walters NRC/NRR

7. Greg Robison NEl

8. Robert Gill Duke Energy 9.

David Lewis Duke Energy

10. Barth Doroshuk Shaw Pittman

11. M. Tuckman BGE

12. R. Kundalkar Duke Energy

13. Chuck Pierce FPG j

14. Rick Edwards Southern Nuclear

{

FTG

(

15. MichaelHenig

16. WillKenworthy Virginia Power GSI

17. Ralph Architzel

18. James Bennet NRR/PGEB

19. Juan Peralta BGE

20. Steven Vias NRC/NRR

21. Goutam Bagchi NRC/NRR/DRPM/PDLR

)

22. Paul Shemanski NRC/NRR/DE/ECGB

23. Dan Fouts NRC/NRR/DE/EELB

]

t

24. Steve Hale Entergy (ANO)

25. Mike Neal FPL

26. Marvin Bowman NUSIS

27. Don Shaw BGE BGE

28. Claudia Craig

29. Richard Correia NRC/NRR/PGEB

30. Edmund Sullivan NRC/NRR/DRCH/HQMB

31. Thomas O. Martin NRC/NRR/DE/EMCB 32.P.T.Kuo NRC/ REST 3 SIB

33. David Repra NRC/R/DF.PM/PDLR

34. Mike Schoppman Winston & Strawn/ Duke

35. Alice Carson FPL Washington Representative Bechtel

36. Donald Ferraro

37. Lorisa Helfer Winston & Strawn

38. Joe Sebrosky Winstin & Strawn

39. David Solorio NRC/NRR/DRPM/PDLR NRC/NRR/DRPM/PDLR

s 2-

40. Robert Weisman NRCIOGC

41. Stephanie Martz NRC/OGC

42. Marian Zobler NRC/OGC

43. Chuck Rayburn BGE

44. Dwight Chamberlain NRC/ Region IV (Via video conference) l l

1

- _ = -

4 a

GENERIC LICENSE RENEWAL DISCUSSION TOPICS NRC - NEl MANAGEMENT MEETING DECEMBER 16,1998

1. Environmental qualification management i

2. Plant-specific fatigue solutions pending generic resolution

3. Reactor vesselintemals including radiation effects on fracture toughness stainless steel

4. Credit for existing programs versus demonstration of the effectiveness o programs (e.g., maintenance rule where experience is limited)

5. Timing of one-time inspections to verify that effects do not warrant agin for the period of extended operation and provisions for followup inspections if results of one-time inspections are not acceptable

6. Evaluation bases for new programs not fully developed and which lack expenence Attachroent 2

,- -