ML20210A502

Responds to ,Expressing Support for Renewal of Operating Licenses for Calvert Cliffs Plant & to Concerns Re Lack of Specificity for License Renewal Regulations & Length of Time Set Aside for Public Comment

ML20210A502
Person / Time
Site:	Calvert Cliffs
Issue date:	07/20/1999
From:	Collins S NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Batton W AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
References
NUDOCS 9907220120
Download: ML20210A502 (4)

Text

-

p ur O  %. UNITED STATES j

[ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

' o, '2 WASHINGTON, D.C. enana nnnt s...../ July 20, 1999 l Mr. William C. Batton, President The New 7* Democratic Civic Club, Inc.

1936 Merritt Boulevard Baltimore, MD 21222-4628

Dear Mr. Batton:

I am responding to your letter to Chairman JMson of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), of June 24,1999, in which you expr o vour support for the renewal of the operating i licenses for Baltimore Gas and Electric Cr "'s (BG&E) Calvert Cliffs plants. In your letter. l you also voice your belief that the Comnn -. regulations for license renewal lack specificity and state your concem about the length t ~.ne set aside for public comment.

BG&E submitted a license renewal application for its two Calvert Cliffs plants, which is the first ,

such application, in April 1998. The NRC staff issued a safety evaluation report on the l application in March 1999. The safety evaluation report contained a number of open and '

confirmatory items that BG&E responded to in a letter to the NRC dated July 2,1999. The staff is reviewing BG&E's response and plans to issue a final safety evaluation in November 1999.

On February 24,1999, the staff also issued a draft plant-specific supplement to NUREG-1437,

" Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants (GEIS) for the Calvert ViMuclear Power Plant." The staff is now considering public comments received by May 20, .#9, and plans to issue a final supplemental environmental impact statement in mid-November 1939.

Regarding your belief that the Commission's regulations for license renewal lack specificity, Part 54, " Requirements for Renewal of Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants," of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 54) sets forth the requirements applicants for license renewal must meet and the standards by which the NRC evaluates their applications.

Part 54 defines what types of plant structures and equipment fall within the scope of license

. renewal. The regulations next set forth the criteria for determining which structures and components within the scope of license renewal require aging management. The applicant must demonstrate that it will manage the aging of these structures and components so that they will continue to function as intended for the license rentswal period.

In reviewing the applications, the NRC staff follows Part 54 and the guidance provided in a draft standard review plan (SRP), " Standard Review Plan for the Review of License Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants," and a draft environmental standard review plan, NUREG-1555, " Environmental Standard Review Plan," both of which par,ide sufficiently clear, specific, and measurable review criteria. The license renewal SRP is available to the public on 9907220120 990720 ge PDR ADOCK 05000317 P PDR a

Mr. William C. Batton -2 July 20,1999 the NRC's web site (http://www.rc gov), and both SRPs can be obtained from the NRC Public Document Room (2120 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20555) and the local public document rooms located near each plant site. The staff is confident that the standards set forth in Part 54 and the SRPs, and which the staff applies in its review, are specific and objective.

'Regarding your concem about the length of time (30 days) set aside for public comments, this period, specified in the Federal Register notice that provided the opportunity for a hearing -

- regarding the renewal of the Calvert Cliffs operating licenses, was not a public comment period.

Rather, it is a time limit generally provided in connection with licensing actions, within which an interested member of the public may request a formal hearing pursuant to 10 CFR Section

- 2.714 of the Commission's regulations. After this period, the regulations afford a petitioner an additional period in which to identify the technical issues he or she wishes to litigate. The Commission's objectives are to provide a fair hearing process, to avoid unnecessary delays in the NRC's review and hearing processes, and to produce a complete record that supports agency decision making on matters related to the NRC's responsibilities for protecting public health and safety. We believe the current process achieves these goals.

There is also a formal process for providing input into the staffs environmental review of a license renewal application. The Commission's regulations in 10 CFR Part 51 allow for an opportunity to provide comments on the scope of the environmental review, and in 10 CFR Section 51.73, require a minimum 45-day period for an opportunity to comment on the staffs preliminary environmertal conclusions, set forth in the plant-specific supplement to the GEIS. Sixty and seventy-five day periods were provided, respectively, for these purposes with respect to Calvert Cliffs.

Finally, there are opportunities to raise questions on individuallicense renewal applications at public meetings, which are held in the NRC offices in Rockville, Maryland and in the vicinity of the facility applying for license renewal. Information provided by the license renewal applicants, as well as NRC evaluations, findings, and recommendations, are made available to the public in such meetings. The purpose of these meetings is to discuss questions which arise during the staffs review of the application and an applicant's responses to these questions. And, of course, members of the public are free to correspond with the staff in writing.

Because the license renewal process is new, the staff expects to make improvements in the effectiveness and efficiency of reviews and will take your request as encouragement to look for E_1_ _ -

i

. Mr. William C. Batton July 20,1999 additional ways to provide for even greater public involvement. I trust the information set forth above addresses your concems. I appreciate your comments, and you may rest assured that the Commission will continue to seek improvements in its license renewal review process.

Sincerely, Onginaisignedby OsmuelJ. COBS Samuel J. Collins, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Distribution: See next page

• See previous concurrence A:\ Letter to WCBatton 7th Democratic Civic club.wpd OFFICE Tech Ed RLSB RLSB RLSB:BC NAME BCalure JWAndersen DLSolorio CIGrimes DATE 7/14/99* 7/15/99* 7/15/99*

7/K OFFICE DRIP;D ADIP OGC MRh NAME DBMatthews WFKane RWeisman hollins -

JDATE 07/19/99* 07/19/99* 07/19/99* 'I/20/99 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY ga

• * . = 1 - -

TICKET NUMBER: G19990335 Distribution:

RLSB RF PDR Central Filej Travers Knapp Miraglia Norry Blaha Burns Thadani, RES Miller, RI Mitchell, OEDO ACRS File Collins /Zimmerman Kane Sheron Matthews Grimes Solorio l NRR Mailroom l Manahan l EDO File l 1

l 2.'.'0035

_ . - . _ _ _