ML20210L489
| ML20210L489 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/02/1999 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20210L464 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9908090138 | |
| Download: ML20210L489 (64) | |
Text
6
\\
I STAFF RESPONSE TO TASKING MEMORANDUM AND STAKEHOLDER CONCERNS as of June 2.1999 9908090138 990726
~
PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR
June 2,1999 TABLE OF CONTENTS
- 1. TOPIC AREA: Risk Informed and Performance-Based Regulation................... 1 A.
Specific issue: Evaluation of Industry Proposals and Rulemaking........... 1 B.
Specific issue: Pilot Applications.................................... 4 C.
Specific Issue: Plant-Specific Licensing Reviews........................ 5 j
l D.
Specific issue: Guidance Documents................................ 7 1
i l
il Topic Area: Reactor Inspection and Enforcement............................... 9 i
A.
Specific Issue: Risk Informed Baseline Inspection Program............... 9 B.
Enforcement Program Initiatives................................... 11 C.
Escalated Enforcement Program Initiatives " Regulatory Significance"/ Risk.. 13 Ill. Topic Area: Reactor Licensee Performance Assessment........................ 14 i
A.
Specific issue: Performance Assessment Process Improvements (IRAP, Industry's Proposal, and Performance Indicators)....................... 14 IV. Topic Area: Reactor Licensing and Oversight................................. 17 A.
Specific issue: License Renewal (includes Calvert Cliffs, Oconee and Generic Process lmprovements).......................................... 17 B.
Specific issue: 50.59 Rulemaking.................................. 20 C.
Specific issue: FSAR Update Guidance.............................. 22 D.
. Specific issue: Define Design Basis................................. 23 E.
Specific issue: Improved Standard TS............................... 25 F.
Specific Issue: Generic Communications............................. 26 G.
Specific issue: CALs............................................ 27 H.
Specific Issue: Applicability of Backfit Rule to Decommissioning Activities... 28 1.
Specific Issue: Requests for Additional Information..................... 29 J.
Specific issue: 2.206 Petitions..................................... 30 K.
Specific issue: Application of the Backfit Rule......................... 31 V. Topic Area: NRC Organizational Structure and Resources....................... 32 A.
Specific Issue: Reorganization - Restructuring Line Organizations......... 33 B.
Specific issue: Achieving 1:8 Supervisor / Manager to-Employee Ratios...... 34 C.
Specific Issue: Increased Employee involvement...................... 35 V!. Topic Area: Other Agency Programs and Areas of Focus....................... 36 A.
Specific issue: License Transfers.................................. 36 B.
Specific Issue: AP600 Design Certification Rulemaking.................. 38 C1. Specific issue: TN-68 (Dual Purpose) Cask Review.................... 39 C2. Specific issue: BNFL/SNC TranStor (Dual Purpose) Cask Review......... 40 C3. Specific issue: Holtec HISTAR 100 (Dual-Purpose) Cask Review.......... 41 C4. Specific Issue: Westinghouse WESFLEX (Dual Purpose) Cask Review..... 42 C5. Specific Issue: NAC-STC/MPC (Dual Purpose) Cask Review............. 43 C6. Specific issue: NAC-UMS (Dual Purpose) Cask Review................ 44 C7. Specific issue: TN-West MP-187 (Dual-Purpose) Cask Review............ 46 D.
Specific issue: Decommissioning Decisions.......................... 47 E.
Specific issue: PGE-Trojan Reactor Vessel Shipment Application.......... 49
O June 2,1999 F.
Specific issue: Event Reporting Rulemaking.......................... 50 G.
Specific issue: Proposed Kl Rulemaking............................. 52 H.
Specific issue: NEl Petitions - Petition for modifying 50.54(a)............. 55 1.
Specific issue: Revised Source Term Rulemaking...................... 57 Vll. TOPIC AREA: Uranium Recovery issues................................... 59 A.
Specific issues: Uranium recovery concerns raised in Senate report........ 59 Vill. TOPIC AREA: Changes to NRC's Hearing Process '............................,61 A.
Use of Informal Adjudicatory Procedures............................. 61 l
1
)
i i
l hs
I 1
June 2,1999
- l. TOPIC AREA: Risk-informed and Performance-Based Reaulation SES Managers: Gary Holahan, Director, DSSA/NRR, and Thomas King, Director, DST /RES i
Aspecific issue: Evaluation of Industry Proposals and Rulemakina Objective: The objectives are enhancing safety decisions, efficiently utilizing NRC resources, reducing unnecessary conservatism, as well as soliciting industry insights.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Conduct discussions with ACRS on risk-informed, Ongoing R. Barrett, DSSA/
performance-based Regulation initiatives 4/8/99C M. Cunningham, RES
- 2. Public workshop to discuss risk-informed options for TBD M. Drouin, RES 10 CFR 50.59 (see note)
- 3. Final report to NRR with recommendations on TBD M. Drouin, RES approach to making 10 CFR 50.59 risk-informed (see note)
- 4. Develop Rulemaking Commission paper based on TBD R. Barrett, DSSA/
Commission response to options paper (SECY 98-300)
(see note)
M. Cunningham, (9800154) (NRR)
- 5. Repori 6 the Commission on the status of proposed 6/99 (see note)
J. Murphy, RES revision to Safety Goal Policy (9700262)
PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 6. Conduct meetings between Industry PRA Steering Ongoing T. King, RES Committee and NRC Steering Committee
- 7. Conduct meetir:gs between Industry R1 Licensing Ongoing G. Holahan, Panel and NRC RI Licensing Panel 2/17/99C
.DSSA
- 8. Meet with ACRS Subcommittee and request ACRS TBD R. Barrett, DSSA letter on views and recommendations on Rulemaking Commission Paper for modifying Part 50 to be risk-informed per SRM
r 2
June 2,1999 PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999
- 9. Conduct public meetings to discuss staff response to TBD G. Holahan, SRM on modifying Part 50 to be risk informed DSSA / T. King, RES
- 10. Proposed revision to Safety Goal Policy (9700262) 7/99 J. Murphy, RES RES BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
Guide 1.147, contingent upon ASME completing code S. Ali, DE, NRR l
case by 12/31/99.
Comments:
2 and 3. These tasks and their corresponding completion schedules may be modified or deleted depending on the Commission's response to the staff's paper identifying options for modifying Part 50 to be risk-informed. SRM for this paper was issued 6/8/99.
4 Schedule depends upon Commission response to options paper, SECY 98-300.
5.
Paper was provided to the EDO's office for review on 5/10/99. Staff discussions 'resulted in changes being required. Revised date reflects a realistic time for incorporating those changes.
- 11. The staff schedule to issue its safety evaluation report (SER) by 9/30/99 was based on presentation of its draft SER to the ACRS in August 1999. The ACRS presentation is now scheduled for September,1999,'since ACRS does not have a scheduled meeting in August.
Based on this change, the staff schedule to issue its SER has been revised to 10/31/99. This schedule is also contingent upon EPRI providing its revised Topical Report by April 15,1999.
The staff had a two-day meeting (March 2-3,1999) with EPRI to discuss EPRI's responses to NRC RAls related to the EPRI Topical Report.
- 12. The staff schedule to endorse ASME RI-ISI Code Cases via RG 1.147 was contingent upon ASME completing Code Cases by 6/31/99. The staff had a meeting with NEl and industry representatives on October 8,1998. In that meeting, the ASME representatives informed the staff that the ASME plans to complete revisions of the RI-ISI Code by 12/99. Based on this, the staff schedule to endorse ASME RI-ISI Code Cases via RG 1.147 has been revised to 9/00.
F l
l C
l l
3 June 2,1999 l
t I
l Additional Activities: The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) is conducting a l
study of the NRC regulatory process. Chairman Jackson and Commissioner McGaffigan are
- members of the Steering Committee. Ashok Thadani is on the working group. The CSIS final report is expected by mid-July.
I l
l l-l l
l i
l l
l 1
I i
I l
l l
l l
l t<
L.
4 June 2,1999
- 1. TOPIC AREA: Risk-informed and Performance-Based Reaulation SES Manager: Gary Holahan, Director, DSSA/NRR B. Specific lasue: Pilot Applications Objective: The goal of the pilot programs is to complete first of a kind risk-informed licensing reviews such that lessons leamed may be utilized for future staff reviews. The pilot applications have provided a forum for developing guidance documents for both the staff and the industry.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Risk-Informed Licensing Panel (RILP) Meetings -
Ongoing G. Holahan, assists in focusing management attention, as 2/17/99C DSSA necessary, to identify othe'r pilots and ensure lessons learned are developed from pilots
- 2. Issue safety evaluation on SONGS H2 Recombiner 6/30/99 M. Snodderly, (See note)
DSSA PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
Comments:
2 and 3. All licensing actions dates are contingent upon timely, technically acceptable industry responses to staff inquiries.
- 2. The staff held a public meeting with San Onofre on March 17,1999. The staff believes that although the recombiners and hydrogen purge is not a risk significant system they are needed to support the severe accident management guidelines but do not rise to the level of a maintenance rule risk significant system. The licensee is expected to develop an appropriate reliability and availability control which will provide justification for no longer including these systems in technical specifications.
I l
i 4
l 5
June 2,1999 i
l
- l. TOPIC AREA: Risk-informed and Performance-Based Regulation SES Manager: Gary Holahan, Director, DSSA, NRR C. Specific issue: Plant Specific Licensina Reviews Objective: The use of probabilistic risk assessment in risk-informed decision making for changes to plant-specific licensing basis is intended to enhance safety decisions, efficiently utilize NRC resources and reduce unnecessary conservatism. The goal is to complete first of a kind risk-informed licensing reviews such that lessons learned may be utilized for future staff l
reviews.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Risk-Informed Licensing Panel (RILP) Meetings -
Ongoing G. Holahan, assists in focusing management attention, as 2/17/99C DSSA necessary, on risk-informed licensing actions.
- 2. Issue safety evaluation on Sequoyah proposal on 12/18/98C O. Chopra, DE EDG AOT extension DSSA support
- 3. Issue reliefs from augmented examination Ongoing G. Carpenter, requirements for various licensees on BWR reactor DE pressure vessel circumferentialwelds
- 4. Issue safety evaluation on Browns Ferry 2/3 06/99 O. Chopra, DE proposal on EDG AOT extension DSSA support PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 5. SER to be issued on CE Owners Group Joint 9/99 W. Lyon Applications Report for HPSI system AOT extensions for 8 sites
- 6. SER to be issued on CE Owners Group Joint 8/99 R. Goel Applications Report for CS system AOT extensions for 8 sites l
l
- 7. SER to be issued on B&W Owners Group Topical 8/99 S. Brewer Report for LPl/RBS systems AOT extensions for 5 si'.es l
Comments:
I
F l
6 June 2,1999 l
l
- 3. The staff issued Generic Letter 98-05, dated November 11,1998, which informed BWR -
licensees that the staff had completed its review of the "BWR Vessel and internals Project, BWR Reactor Pressure Vessel Shell Weld Inspection Recommendations (BWRVIP-05)," and that BWR licensees may request relief from the inservice inspection requirements of 10 CFR 50.55a(g) for the volumetric examination of circumferential reactor pressure vessel (RPV) welds.
These reliefs will only be effective for the remaining term of operation under the current license.
The staff will continue to expeditiously review these requests as they are received.
' As stated in Generic Letter 98-05, " Boiling Water Reactor Licensees Use of the Bwrvip-05 Report to Request Relief From Augmented Examination Requirements on Reactor Pressure Vessel Circumferential Shell Welds," dated November 10,1998,"... licensees of BWRs may request permanent (i.e., for the remaining term of operation under the existing, initial, license) relief from the inservice inspection requirements of 10 CFR 50.55a(g) for the volumetric -
examination of circumferential reactor pressure vessel (RPV) welds." To date, the staff has issued about twelve reliefs, and may issue approximately two dozen more, if the remaining licensees request this relief. The change in the conclusion date reflects this expected additional work load.
3 and 4. Dates to be evaluated during prioritization of risk-informed licensing actions.
1 l
4 a
7 June 2,1999
- 1. TOPIC AREA: Risk-informed and Performance-Based Reaulation SES Manager: Gary Holahan, Director, DSSA, NRR and Thomas King, Director, DST /RES D. Specific issue: Guidance Documents
. Objective: To provide guidance for the staff and the industry which will enhance consistency and provide a infrastructure for use in risk-informed regulation.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
]
- 2. Issue GQA inspection procedure for use at the 6//99 J. Peralta, DIPM discretion of the Regions to verify the implementation (see note) of GOA on an as-needed basis.
- 4. Report to the Commission on development of risk TBD Dave Nelson, attributes for revising enforcement policies. Input to OE il.C. 6.
G. Kelly, DSSA PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 5. Integrate risk attributes into re'i; sed licensee 3/22/990 DISP performance assessment process (9700238)(NRR),
G. Parry, DSSA (SECY-99-007 and 99-007A) i BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
p 1
8 June 2,1999 Comments:'
2.
Issuance of the inspection procedure (IP) has been delayed by one month due to clarifications requested by the Associate Director for Project Licensing and Technical Analysis, on behalf of the Committee to Review Generic Requirements (CRGR), regarding the use of PRA-based analyses in conjunction with traditional engineering methods to establish safety classifications of plant SSCs.. The IP has been revised to satisfactorily address this and other issues previously identified by the CRGR.
- 4. Actions to be taken under review pending Commission feedback from Reg Significance / Risk Paper (SECY-99-087)
1 1,3,4,7, and 8. Phase 1 is a standard for full power operation, internal events only. Phase 2 is for external events and shutdown. Dates are tentative due to uncertainty associated with the number and nature of comments that may be received. This is an ASME initiative and, therefore, the schedules are set by ASME. ASME extended the review and comment period to 5/1/99.
Due to the number of comments anticipated, ASME anticipates resolution with final draft developed by 6/99 to start through the internal ASME consensus process. ASME anticipates l
issuance of Phase 1 standard at the latest by 12/99; however, believes it may be sooner.
1 and 8. Phase 2 of the PRA standard covers internal fire, external events-and low power shutdown. ANS will be developing a standard for low power shutdown conditions and external I
- events (i.e., seismic). ANS anticipates initiating work in early June 1999.
)
1 l
1 l
l i
l l
9 June 2,1999
. II. Tonic Area: Reactor inanection and Enforcement
- SES Manager: William M. Dean, PIPB/DIPM'NRR and J. Lieberman, Director, OE A. Specific issue: Risk informed Baseline in===dion Proaram i
Program Manager: Alan L. Madison, NRR and John Flack, RES Objective: To develop and implement a more risk informed, efficient, and effective baseline inspection program. By risk informed, it is meant that the inspection program's scope will be j
defined primarily by those areas that are significant from a risk perspective and that the
! inspection methods used to assess these areas will take advantage of both generic and plant specific risk insights.
Coordination: Issues ll.A. " Risk informed Baseline Inspection Program," ll.B. " Enforcement Program initiatives," ll.C. " Escalated Enforcement Program," lli.A. " Performance Assessment Process improvements," and VI. F " Event Reporting Rulemaking," require close coordination and the integration of specific tasks by the NRC staff. Responsible project managers are coordinating these activities by assessing the impact of proposed program changes with the other ongoing activities and ensuring that the overall objectives for each project are achieved.
, Examples include, intra-project task force participation, workshop attendance, concurrent review of projects and periodic senior management briefings. In addition, industry-developed initiatives such as the NEl New Regulatory Oversight Process are being reviewed by all project groups and evaluated for impact.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 i
i Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Begin drafting program changes and start.
2/99C A. Madison, conducting training of staff DIPM 2.a. Begin pilot implementation of new baseline inspection program 5/30/99C, W. Dean, DIPM PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead 2.b. Monitor pEot implementation of new baseline 7/99-9/99 A. Madison, inspection program and review results DIPM e
fl l.
- -^
10 June 2,1999 i
BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 l
Milestone '
Date Lead i
l
- 3. Complete pilot implementation of new baseline 12/99 A. Madison, l
inspection program DIPM l
- 4. Complete transition to risk informed baseline 1/00 W. Dean, DIPM inspection program t
l Comments:
Status: All milestones are on track, there are no schedule changes, and no expected delays. A Commission briefing was held on March 26,1999. The staff is looking at possibility of extending the start date for full implementation in consideration of various communication training, L
development, and program modification activities.
Deferrals and Susoensions:
SALP Program.
The SALP process suspension will be continued indefinitely.
RES and NRR work assessing the effectiveness of the station blackout and anticipated transient i
without scram rules and generic safety issue A-45 (decay heat removal) has been deicrred. The i
assessment of the Station Blackout Rule will be completed by 9/99, and the assessment of the ATWS Rule and resolution of USl A-45 (Decay Heat Removal) will be completed by 9/00.
1 l
L
l 11 June 2,1999 l
- 11. Reactor inspection and Enforcement SES Manager: James Lieberman, Director, Office of Enforcement
' B. Enforcement Proaram initiatives issues / Lead Individual:
- 1) NRC licensee documentation and disposition of non-risk significant violations (C)
Mark Satorius
- 2) Severity Level IV violations David Nelson
- 3) Industry Enforcement Process Proposals Renee Pedersen Due to the manner that these three issues are linked, all are being considered under one Plan of Action.
Objective: Reduce unnecessary licensee burdens associated with responding to non-risk significant violations (Issues Nos.1 and 2) utilizing initial stakeholder inputs and proposals and soliciting stakeholder feedback following implementation of Enforcement Program changes (Issue No.3), without losing the NRC's ability to detect licensee problems in'a timely manner.
Coordination: Issues li.A. " Risk informed Baseline Core Inspection Program," ll.B. " Enforcement Program initiatives," ll.C. " Escalated Enforcement Program," lli.A. " Performance Assessment Process improvements," and VI.F " Event Reporting Rulemaking," require close coordination and the integration of specific tasks by the NRC staff. Responsible project managers are coordinating these activities by assessing the impact of proposed program changes with the other ongoing activities and ensuring that the overall objectives for each project are achieved.
Examples include, intra-project task force participation, workshop attendance, concurrent review of projects and periodic senior management briefings, in addition, industry-developed initiatives such as the NEl New Regulatory Oversight Process are being reviewed by all project groups and evaluated for impact.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Following Commission approval of the staff's 2/9/99C M. Satorius Enforcement Policy revision, the Revised Policy is published in the Federal Register, with the message to stakeholders that six months after implementation of the Revised Policy, public meeting / workshops will be held for stakeholder feedback.
i 12 June 2,1999 PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999
- 2. Conduct video conferencing with Regional 2/22/99C M. Satorius managers to outline the changes to the Enforcement Policy and provide agency expectations.
- 3. Implement revised Enforcement Policy.
3/11/99C M. Satorius 4.' Collect enforcement data following the Monthly after D. Nelson implementation of the Revised Enforcement Policy, for 3/11/99 later use in determining the success of the changes in accomplishing the objectives.
PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone
'Date Lead
)
1
- 5. Solicit feedback from regional management, the 7/99 R. Pedersen y
inspection staff, and headquarters staff on the j
successes or failures of the Revised Enforcement Policy.
6". Conduct public meetings / workshops with 10/99 R. Pedersen stakeholders to solicit feedback on the successes and shortcomings of the Pevised Enforcement Policy.
- 7. Assemble the collective views of the staff and 11/99 R. Pedersen stakeholders to determine whether the Revised Enforcement Po: icy has accomplished the objectives, or whether further staff action is needed. Submit Commission paper. (9800159) (OE) i
(
13 June 2,1999 l
l l
il. Reactor inspection and Enforcement j
SES Manager: James Lieberman, Director, Office of Enforcement C. Escalated Enforcement Proaram initiatives "Reau!Ltory Slanificance"/ Risk Objective: Incorporate clearer risk-informed enforcement guidance in the treatment of escalated violations.
l l
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 1
Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Conduct a second public meeting with stakeholders 2/9/99C M. Satorius to discuss application of regulatory significance.
- 2. Conduct a public meeting with stakeholders to 2/9/99C M. Satorius discuss application of risk informed enforcement.
- 3. Submit a Commission Paper that addresses the use 3/24/99C M. Satorius of " regulatory significance." (9800069) (OE)
- 4. Develop (proposed) risk-informed (revisions to) the 3/24/99C M. Satorius Enforcement Policy.
- 5.. Discuss (revisions) with stakeholders and solicit 3/11/99C M. Satorius feedback
- 6. Submit a Commission Paper utilizing the input from TBD D. Nelson issue I.D. 4, the revisions developed above, and (see note) lessons learned from the performance assessment trial to revise the Enforcement Policy. (9800155)(OE)
- 7. Develop revised enforcement policy for use during 3/22/99C B. Westreich trialimplementation of Performance Assessment Program.
=.e PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead None Comments:
- 6. Action pending Commission feedback from Reg Significance / Risk paper (SECY-99-087),
submitted 3/24/99 (See Milestones ll.C.3 and ll.C.4)
4 i
14 June 2,1999 111. Topic Area: Reactor Licensee Performance Assessment i
l SES Manager: William M. Dean, PIPB/DIPM/NRR 1
A. Specific issue: Forformance Assessment Process improvements flRAP. Industrv's Proposal. and Performance Indicators)
Piogram Manager: Alan L. Madison, PIPB/DIPM/NRR Objective: The objective of this task is to develop and implement improvements to the NRC plant performance assessment process (and tile overall reactor oversight process) to make it i
more risk-informed, efficient, and effective while combining the best attributes of the IRAP effort, the regulatory oversight approach proposed by NEl, and the staff efforts designed to develop-risk-informed performance indicators.
Coordination: Issues ll.A. " Risk informed Baseline inspection Program," II.B.
- Enforcement j
Program Initiatives," II.C. " Escalated Enforcement Program," lli.A. " Performance Assessment Process improvementa," and VI. F " Event Reporting Rulemaking," require close coordination and th'e integration of specific tasks by the NRC staff. Responsible project managers are coordinating these activities by assessing the impact of proposed program changes with the other ongoing activities and ensuring that the overall objectives for each project are achieved.
Examples include, intra-project task force participation, workshop attendance, concurrent review of projects and periodic senior management briefings. In addition, industry-developed initiatives such as the NEl New Regulatory Oversight Process are being reviewed by all prcject groups and l
evaluated for impact.
l l
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 l
Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Obtain Commission approval for implementation of TBD (see W. Dean, DIPM recommended changes note)
- 2. Obtain industry approval to make public the data 6/99 T. Wolf, RES l
used in inaustry's proposed Indicators for monitoring plant performance. Begin phase out of current Performance Indicator Program.
- 3. Complete development of implementation plan.
6/99 A. Madison, Start phase-in (pilot) of the revised reactor oversight DIPM process.
- 4. Begin trial application of risk-based performance 6/99 T. Wolf, RES indicators.
L
['
]
{
.~
)
15 June 2,1999 PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead l
S. Continue pilot implementation of new reactor 7/99-9/99 A. Madison,
,, oversight process DIPM BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone' Date Lead
- 6. Complete NRC and licensee training on new reactor 10/99-12/99 A. Madison, oversight process in preparation for full implementation DIPM
- 7. Complete trial application, brief Commission, and 11/99 T. Wolf, RES l
publish candidate risk-based indicators for public -
comment. (9800160)(RES)
- 8. Commence fullimplementation of new reactor 1/00 W. Dean, DIPM oversight process
- 9. Publish last Performance Indicator Report using 1/00 T. Wolf, RES current Pls
- 10. Hold publ5 workshop on candidate risk-based 2/00 T. Wolf, RES performance indicators.
- 11. Brief commission on proposed risk-based 10/00 T. Wolf, RES performance indicators developed cooperatively by NRC and industry (9800161)(RES)
- 12. Implement Commission approved risk-based 1/01 T. Wolf, RES performance indicators developed cooperatively by M. Johnson, NRC and industry DIPM i
- 13. Complete evaluation of implementation and 6/01 M. Johnson, 1
effectiveness of the revised assessment process DIPM Comments:
- 1. The SRM for SECY 007A is pending.
I i
l
- 2. A Commission briefing was held on March 26,1999, to discuss Recommendations for l.
Oversight Process improvement (Follow-up to SECY 99-007).
- 3. A performance Indicator (PI) public..orhhop was held on April 12-15,1999, to discuss Pts to be used during the pilot program for the revised over, ght process.
j
- 4.. A public workshop was held on May 17-20,1999, to discuss the oversight processes and pilot program.
I
g:
16 June 2,1999
- 5. In conjur'ction with the above, a utility management public workshop to provide an overview of the oversight processes and pilot program was held on May 20,1999.
f Deferrals and Suspensions:
t The SALP process suspension will be continued indefinitely.
l i
i i
i l
I
e l
l 17 June 2,1999 IV.Toolc Area: Reactor Licensino and Overslaht SES Manager. Chris Grimes, Director, RLSB/ DRIP /NRR A. Specific issue: License Renewa (includes Calvert Cliffs, Oconee and Generic Process Improvements)
Objective: Demonstrate that license renewal applications submitted under 10 CFR Parts 54 & 51 can be reviewed effectively, efficiently and promptly.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Maintain Calvert Cliffs and Oconee schedules Ongoing C. Grimes, DRIP
- 2. Conduct mana0ement meetings with license Monthly C. Grimes, DRIP renewal applicants
- 3. Steering Committee bimonthly meeting with NEl 2/26/99C C. Grimes, DRIP Working Group 3/30/99C 5/12/99C 7/28/99
- 4. ACRS subcommittee meeting on renewal process Ongoing C. Grimes, DRIP
- 5. Increased emphasis on renewal with EC and LRSC Ongoing C. Grimes, DRIP
- 6. Issue $51.53 rule change to designate HLW 2/99C D. Cleary, DRIP transportation as a generic environmentalimpact for 60-day public comment (9800003)
- 7. Issue Draft Environmental Statement for comment -
2/24/99C C. Grimes, DRIP Calvert Cliffs
- 8. Complete Safety Evaluation Report (SER) and 3/21/99C C. Grimes, DRIP identify open items - Calvert Cliffs
- 11. Issue Draft Environmental Statement - Oconee 5/20/99 C C. Grimes, DRIP
(
- 12. Complete SER and identify open items - Oconee 6/17/99 C. Grimes, DRIP L
l 18 June 2,1999 PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999
- 13. Complete 651.53 final rule change to designate 6/99 D. Cleary, DRIP HLW transportation as a generic environmental impact for Commission approval (9800003)
PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 15. Upon Commission approval, publish $51.53 rule 8/99 D. Cleary, DRIP change designating HLW transportation as a generic environmental impact, to be effective in 30 days l
BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 l
l Milestone Date Lead
- 17. Issue Supplemental SER and Final Environmental 11/16/99 C. Grimes, DRIP Statement - Calvert Cliffs
- 20. Issue Supplemental SER and Final Environmental 2/12/00 C. Grimes, DRIP Statement - Oconee l
- 21. ACRS subcommittee meeting on Oconee 3/00 C. Grimes, DRIP I
Supplemental SER
- 22. ACRS full committee meeting on Oconee 5/00 C. Grimes, DRIP i
l Supplemental SER
- 23. License renewal decision complete for Calvert 5/00 C. Grimes, DRIP Cliffs j
- 24. License renewal decision complete for Oconee 8/00 C. Grimes, DRIP l
I I
j June.1999 r
19 BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 25. License renewal decision completed within 30-36 Ongoing C. Grimes, DRIP months of initial applications
- 26. Hearing (if request granted)
Per Comm.
Sched.
i I
Comments:
3 & 4. Steering Committee meetings with industry and ACRS subcommittee meetings with staff will continue periodically to ensure effective resolution of technical and process issues. The Steering Committee will periodically report progress to the Executive Council in accordance with the memo to Chairman Jackson dated 3/6/98.
- 25. Next (third) application expected in 12/99 (ANO-1). Fourth application is expected in early 2000 (Hatch) and the fifth application by the end of December 2000 (Turkey Point).
4
l o.
I 20 June 2,1999 l
IV. Toolc Area: Reactor Licensina and Oversicht SES Manager: Cynthia Carpenter, Branch Chief, RGEB/ DRIP /NRR B. Specific issue: 50.59 Rulemaking Objective: To provide clarity and flexibility in existing requirements PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Paper to Commission (SECY-99-054) summarizing 2/22/99C E. McKenna, public comments and forwarding recommendations on DRIP final rule language for Commission decision and providing recommendation on scope of 10 CFR 50.59 (9700191) and (9800044)
- 2. Commission feedback received at briefing on 3/2/99 3/31/99C E.McKenna, and in subsequent SRM on the briefing DRIP
- 3. ACRS review of final rulemaking package 5/5/99C E.McKenna, DRIP
- 4. CRGR review of final rulemaking package 5/6/990 E. McKenna, DRIP
- 5. Issue paper containing final 10 CFR 50.59 rule to 5/12/99C E.McKenna, the Commission (9700191) SECY-99-130 (NRR)
DRIP PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 6. - Publish final rule change 10 CFR 50.59 SRM date +
E.McKenna, 1 month DRIP
- 7. Meeting with industry / staff on guidance SRM date +
E.McKenna, development plans.
1 month DRIP l
- 8. Issue inspection guidance for internal review SRM date +
E.McKenna, 2 months DRIP i
i L
B 21 June 2,1999 i
l BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 9. Initiate review of NEl 96-07 revision SRM date +
E.McKenna, j
3 months DRIP l
- 10. Issue finalinspection guidance SRM date +
E.McKenna, 5 months DRIP
- 11. Conduct training for NRC staff on rule and SRM date +
E.McKenna, inspection guidance 6 months DRIP
- 12. Draft Regulatory Guide for comment SRM date +
E.McKenna, 7 months DRIP Comments:
- 6. Schedule is contingent on the nature and schedn'e of Commission review and action on final rulemaking package. The need for OMB review of final rule may also affect schedule of publication of final rule.
7-12 Milestones added to identify follow on activities after the rule is published. Schedules will be established when the rule is issued. NEl is assumed to provide the revised guidance document within the expected time frames. Additional time may be needed for CRGR review of inspection guidance.
L
22 June 2,1999 IV. Toolc Area: Reactor Licensina arld Oversiaht SES Manager: Cynthia Carpenter, Branch Chief, RGEB/ DRIP /NRR 1
C. Specific issue: FSAR Update Guidance Objective: To provide consistent guidance on information to be contained in FSAR PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Publish draft regulatory guide endorsing NEl 98-03 3/17/99C T. Bergman, for comment (ends 4/30/99)
DRIP
- 2. Resolve issues identified during public comment 5/24/99 C T. Bergman, period DRIP
- 3. Receive and review revised NEl 98-03 6/99 T. Bergman, DRIP PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 4. ACRS review of final regulatory guide 7/14-16/99 T. Bergman, DRIP
- 5. CRGR review of final regulatory guide 7/13/99 T. Bergman, DRIP
- 6. Submit paper and final regulatory guide to 8/1/99 T. Bergman, Commission (9700198) (NRR)
DRIP
- 7. Publish final regulatory guide 9/99 T. Bergman, DRIP Comments:
- 2. The staff h:Id a public meeting with NEl on 5/11/99 to discuss public comments (12 comment letters). On the basis of this meeting, it appears that NEl will address all the appropriate public comments in NEl 98-03, Revision 1, which NEl expects to submit to the staff in early June 1999 for endorsecnent in the final regulatory guide.
I 23 June 2,1999 l
IV. Topic Area: Reactor Licensina and Oversicht SES Manager: Cynthia Carpenter, Branch Chief, RGEB/ DRIP /NRR D. Specific issue: Define Desian Basis Objective: To provide a clear definition of what constitutes design bases information.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Meet with NEl Task Force to discuss draft criteria 4/16/99C S. Magruder, and additional examples DRIP
- 2. Send letter to NEl with staff position 5/14/99C S. Magruder, DRIP
- 3. NEI submits revised guidance for review and,
6/99 S. Magruder, endorsement DRIP
- 4. Resolve final staff comments and develop draft 7/99 S. Magruder, reaulatory auide DR;P PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 6. Submit paper with draft regulatory guide to 9/99 S. Magruder, Commission (9800044)(NRR)
DRIP
- 7. SRM to direct staff to publish draft regulatory guide 10/99 S. Magruder, for public comment (60 days)
DRIP BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 8. Resolve issues identified during public comment 2/00 S. Magruder, DRIP '
period
l 24 June 2,1999 BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead l
- 10. Submit paper and final regulatory guide (9800044) 4/00 S. Magruder, DRIP (NRR)
Comments:
3-10. On June 2,1999, NEl informed the NRC that they would delay submission of their guidance document for approximately two to three weeks to allow further industry review. This delay precludes the staff from being able to make a presentation to the ACRS in July (ACRS does not meet in August). Subsequent milestones have been extended to reflect this impact.
l l
p I
25 June 2,1999 l..
i IV. Topic Area: Reactor Licensing and Oversicht SES Manager: William Beckner, RTSB/ DRIP /NRR E. Specific issue: Improved Standard TS L
Lead: RTSB Lead PM for each facility conversion Objective: Conversion of facility technical specifications to the appropriate improved standard technical specifications will promote more consistent interpretation and application of technical
. specification requirements, thereby reducing the need for interpretations and frequent changes to the technical specifications. The goal for each milestone listed below is to complete the '
conversions currently under review such that the above objectives are met for the affected facilities.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999*
Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Issue ISTS Amendments for Comanche Peak 1&2 2/26/99C DRIP
- 2. llssue ISTS Amendments for:
DRIP
. a. Wolf Creek 3/31/99C
- b. Diablo Canyon 1&2 5/28/99C
- c. Callaway 5/28/99C PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999*
Milestone Date Lead
- 3. Issue iSTS Amendments for Farley 1&2 8/99 DRIP l
- 4. Issue ISTS Amendment for Fermi 2 9/99 DRIP
- 5. Issue ISTS Amendment for Palisades 8/99 DRIP Comments:
1
- 2. Review of Diablo Canyon and Calloway amendments is complete and issuance is imminent..
I As of 5/27/99, the amecdments have not been issued and last minute logistical problems may delay issuance of the actual amendments by one or two working days. There is no impact on the licensees since implementation is over a year away.
i 1,2,3,4,5. Completion of the milestones as listed depends upon the quality of the licensees' submittals and timeliness of responses to staff RAls.
l f
26 June 2,1999 IV. Toolc Area: Reactor Licensina and Overslaht l
SES Manager: Tad Marsh, Branch Chief, REXB/ DRIP /NRR F. Specific issue: Generic Commup_ications Objective: Ensure the appropriate use of generic communications, increasing the efficiency of issuance, and utilizing the rulemaking process when appropriate.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. (a) Review policy of not taking credit for INPO 2/24/99C R. Dennig, DRIP SEE-IN products (b) Prepare and issue Commission paper 4/19/99 C J. Lyons, DRIP l
(9900001) (SECY 99-117)
- 2. Review relationship of generic communications to 2/25/99C R. Dennig, DRIP the backfit rule (coordinate with CRGR) l
- 3. Draft Commission information paper incorporating 3/19/990 R. Dennig, DRIP review of basis for invoking 50.54(f), definition / purpose of generic communication products, and relationship of generic communications to backot rule.
- 4. Meeting with ACRS
.4/7/99 C J. Lyons, DRIP
- 5. Meet with NEl to discuss comments on draft 4/22/99 C J. Lyons, DRlP Commission paper
- 6. Issue Commission information paper (9900020) 5/26/99 C J. Lyons, DRIP (NRR) (SECY 99-143)
PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead l 7. Disseminate auidance to staff 7/99 J. Lyons. DRIP j
Comments:
27 June 2,1999 IV. Toolc Area: Reactor Licensina and Overslaht SES Manager: Bruce Boger, Acting Associate Director for Projects, NRR G. Specific issue: CALs Objective: Confirmatory Action Letters (CALs) are issued to emphasize and confirm a licensee's or vendor's agreement to take certain actions in response to specific issues. The NRC expects licensees / vendors to adhere to any obligations and ccmmitments addressed in a CAL and will issue appropriate orders to ensure that the obligations and commitments are met. The goal of the milestones listed.below is to ensure that staff guidance on the use of CALs is appropriate and that the staff exerciser appropriate discipline in the development and issuance of CALs.
Comments:
All actions associated with this task are complete as denoted on earlier updates of the CTM.
l l
l l
F 28 June 2,1999 IV. Toolc Area: Reactor Licensina and Overslaht SES Manager: Stuart Richards, Director, LPD4/DLPM/NRR H.' Specific issue: Anolicability of Backfit Rule to Decommissionina Activities Objective: Resolve issue regarding proper interpretation and application of the Backfit Rule to j
decommissioning activities.
4 i
Comments:
All actions associated with this task are complete as denoted on earlier updates of the CTM.
l l
I l
29 June 2,1999 l
IV. Toolc Area: Reactor Licensina and Overslaht SES Manager: Suzanne Black, Deputy Director, Division of Licensing Project Management, NRR
- 1. Specific issue: Reauests for AdditionalInformation Objective: To refine / define RAI process and ensure that staff RAl's are adding value to the regulatory process.
1 PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 i
Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Discuss issue of ensuring appropriateness of RAl's 8/20/98C Suzanne Black, with management and staff (including content, quality 1/5/99C DLPM and continued oversight). Conduct training on revised 1/6/99C Office Letter 803 (milestone 9) when issued.
1/14/99C f
Ongoing
[NRR licensing action steering group formed to work 10/98C Suzanne Black,
.with industry steering group on improvements to the 11/23/980 DLPM license amendment process - conducting periodic 12/10/980 meetings.
1/13/99C j
3/18/99C 4/14/99C Ongoing
- 3. Obtain feedback from industry licensing action task 6/99 and 9/99 S. Black, DLPM force on RAls and develop metrics for RAls
- 4. Train staff on management expectations regarding Periodic S. Black, DLPM RAls l
PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead l
- 5. Revise Office Letter 803 to incorporate staff and 12/99 S. Black, DLPM l
industry feedback l
Comments:
1 i
New item 4 adds continuing training of staff on management expectations regarding RAls.
l Item 5 schedule deferred to incorporate industry comments which will be submitted 9/99.
r a
30 June 2,1999 IV. Toolc Area: Reactor Licensina and Oversicht SES Manager: Brian Sheron, Associate Director for Project Licensing and Technical Analysis, NRR J. Specific issue: 2.206 Petitions Objective: The objectives of the 2.206 Petition review process include ensuring the public health and safety through the prompt and thorough evaluation of any potential safety problem addressed by a petition filed under 10 CFR 2.206 and to ensure effective, timely communication with the petitioner (Management Directive 8.11). The objective of the actions listed below is to identify and implement measures to improve the timeliness of staff response to petitions.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Show measured improvement in timeliness of H. Berkow, resolution of 2.206 petitions 1/28/99C DLPM i
- 2. Revise MD 8.11 and implement additional process 6/99 H. Berkow, improvements.
DLPM PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead None Comments:
- 2. A revision to Management Directive 8.11 to address stakeholder issues and to incorporate additional process improvements is scheduled for 6/99.. Revised MD 8.11 is in concurrence review chain for issuance and this milestone is on course.
6
=
l t
31 June 2,1999 I
IV. Toolc Area: Reactor Licensino and Oversiaht i
SES Manager: Tad Marsh, Branch Chlef, REXB/ DRIP /NRR K. Specific issue: Application of the Backfit Rule Objective: Ensure that the staff closely adheres to the backfit rule,10 CFR 50.109,in evaluating all additional requirements, expansion in scope, or unique interpretations against actual impact on public health and safety. Focus will be directed on risk-informed, performance-based regulation; also coordinating with backfit-related concerns on Generic Communications (IV.F);
and Decommissioning (IV.H), and Evaluation of Industry Proposals and Rulemaking (l.A).
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. CRGR Yearly Meetinq with Nuclear Utility CRGR Backfitting and Reform e roup (NUBARG) on Backfit TBD issues PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
on Effectiveness of Backfitting Process
- 3. Backfit trainina at Headauarters and Reaions FY99 RES/NRR/HR Comments:
- 1. Dates for meeting are still being negotiated. Probably in June or July.
l t
l i
l i
f
32 June 2,1999 l
l V. Toolc Area: NRC Organizational Structure and Resources SES MANAGER:
Paul E. Bird, Director, HR A. Specific issue: Reorganization - Restructuring Line Organizations Objective: To improve organizational effectiveness and align resources required to carry out NRC planned activities through intemal functional realignments and human resource re-allocations.
l PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Partnering process completed for reorganization 2/12/99C M. Fox; Office packages Directors &
Regional i
Administrators
- 2. Reorganization plans finalized 3/18/99C J. McDermott; Office Directors &
Regional Administrators
- 3. Reorganization implementation begins 3/18/99C J. McDermott-Office Directors &
Regional Administrators
- 4. Reorganizations effective 3/28/99C J. McDermott; Office Directors &
Regional Administrators Comments:
6.
All office partnerships have agreed that the reorganization proposals may proceed subject in some cases to further discussion of issues following implementation of reorganization plans. Post-reorganization implementation activities, such as personnel actions, physical moves, position description and performance plan updates, will occur between April-August 1999.
2&3. All pending reorganization / staffing plans were reviewed and accepted by HR as of 3/18/99.
4.
All Commission-approved reorganizations became effective on 3/28/99.
1 1
j 33 June 2,1999 l
l V. Topic Area: NRC Organizational Structure and Resources SES MANAGER:
Paul E. Bird, Director, HR B. Specific issue: Achievina 1:8 supervisor /manaaer-to-emplovee ratios Objective: To reduce supervisory and SES positions to achieve an agency-wide supervisor / manager-to-employee ratio target of one supervisor / manager for every eight NRC employees.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Continue existing supervisor / manager-to-employee Ongoing J. McDermott; ratio reduction efforts Office Directors &
Regional 4
Administrators
- 2. Complete implementation of reorganizations 3/31/99C J. McDermott; i
developed to achieve streamlining goals Office Directors &
Regional Administrators
- 3. Implement strategies to achieve supervisory ratio J. McDermott; targets Office Directors &
4/30/99C Regional Administrators
'4. Quarterly assessment of supervisor / manager-to-J. McDermott employee ratio 4/30/99C PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestones Date Lead
- 5. Quarterly assessment of supervisor / manager-to-7/99 J. McDermott employee ratio
- 6. Implement strategies to achieve supervisory ratio 7/15/99 J. McDermott; targets Office Directors &
Regional Administrators
p' l
l l-1 34 June 2,1999 Comments:
l The milestones in the table above focus only on those aspects of the streamlining effort that address the supervisor / manager-to-employee ratio. Activity extends beyond the March 31, 1999, deadline established for the structural changes contained in issue A to accommodate implementation of personnel placements.
3&4. HR memorandum to the EDO dated 4/30/99.
l I
4 e
i i
d e
r l
35 June 2,1999 V. Toolc Area: NRC Oraanizational Structure and Resources SES MANAGER:
Paul E. Bird, Director, HR C. Specific Issue: Increased Emploves involvement Objective: To enhance organizational effectiveness under the specific conditions imposed by the agency-wide streamlining effort --including functional realignments, reductions in supervisory / managerial personnel, and increased spans of management control -- by delegating greater responsibility and accountability to individual employees and fostering greater interactive communications between employees and management.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Continue previous general efforts to foster Ongoing J. McDermott; delegations of responsibility and accountability to Office Directors &
employees and more interactive communications Regional between employees and managers. Monitor office Administrators progress.
- 2. Provide guidance to managers and supervisors on 3/25/99C J. McDermott employee involvement concepts, including direction and assignment of work, delegation of authority, quality control, and responsibility and accountability for outputs and outcomes.
- 3. Begin interactive meetings between office 3/30/99C J. McDermott; managers / supervisors and staff consistent with EDO Office Directors &
memorandum on employee involvement dated 3/25/99.
Regional Administrators; supervisors &
managers Comments:
The milestones for this issue establish a time period, consistent with the schedule for restructuring provided in Issue A, for beginning the office / region process of increasing employee involvement and engaging staff in the transformation process to a new culture.
- 3. The 3/25/99 EDO memorandum (see item 3 above) requests managers and supervisors in each office and organizational unit that have not already done so to initiate interactive meetings with employees by June 30,1999.
i l
36 June 2.1999 VI. Toolc Area: Other Anency Proarams and Areas of Focus SLS: Robert Wood, RGEB/ DRIP /NRR SES Manager: Lawrence Chandler, OGC A. Specific issue: License Transfers Objective: To ensure that license transfers are conducted in a timely and technically correct manner and that review and submittal guidance is appropriately disseminated, j
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Commission provides comments on foreign 2/17/99C S. Hom, OGC ownership SRP through issuance of SRM
- 2. Revised foreign ownership SRP sent to Federal 2/24/99C S. Hom, OGC Register for solicitation of public comments
- 3. Complete technical review of TMl-1 transfer 3/4/99C R. Wood, DRIP
- 5. Provide Commission with proposed final criteria for 6/25/99 R. Wood, DRIP triggering a review under 10 CFR 50.80 regarding the transfer of operating authority to non-owner operators (i.e., use of contract service operating companies)
(9800015) (NRR)
- 6. Issue lessons learned from AmerGen TMI-1 transfer 6/99 R. Wood, DRIP PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
37 June 2,1999 BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 9. Develop SRP on technical qualifications 12/99 DIPM
- 10. Develop integrated SRP on license transfer 12/99 R. Wood, DRIP process reflecting lessons learned and process S. Hom, OGC improvements (9800195)
Comments:
- 3. The technical review of the TMI-1 transfer application was completed and sent to AmerGen on 3/4/99. AmerGen's comments on the proposed license conditions were provided to the NRC on 3/15/99. The final order approving the license transfer was signed on April 12,1999.
- 10. SRP will integrate all license transfer review criteria ( financial qualifications, decomrnissioning funding assurance, technical qualifications, foreign ownership, and antitrust).
l l
38 June 2,1999 VI. Toolc Area: Other Acency Proarams and Areas of Focus SES Manager: Chris Grimes, Director, RLSB/ DRIP /NRR B. Specific Issue: AP600 Deslan Certification Rulemakina Objective: Issue final design approval (FDA) and design certification rule for AP600.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Submit proposed rule (PRM] to Commission 3/31/99C J.N. Wilson, (9200142) (SECY-99-101)
DRIP
- 2. Issue PRM for public comment and hearing 05/20/99C J.N. Wilson, opportunity DRIP PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 4. Submit final rule to Commission (9200142) 10/99 J.N. Wilson, DRIP
- 5. Issue final rule (NRR) 12/99 J.N. Wilson, DRIP Comments:
f '.
l l,
l 39 June 2,1999 1
VI. Topic Area: Other Aaency Proarams and Areas of Focus SES Manager: Susan F. Shankman, Dep. Director, Licensing and inspection Directorate, SFPO C1. Specific issue: Transnuclear TN-68 (Dual Purpose) Cask Review Objective: To issue a Part 72 (storage) SER and certificate of compliance (through rulemaking) and a Part 71 (transportation) certificate of compliance for the TN-68 dual purpose cask system PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Staff issues user need memorandum /rulemaking 03/09/99C E. Easton, SFPO
- 3. Receive application for transportation cask 05/21/99C M. Ross-Lee, SFPO PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead None BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 4. Staff completes rulemaking; issues CoC for use 04/00 P.Eng, SFPO under Part 72 P. Holahan, IMNS Comments:
- 2. Milestone 3. The applicant submitted the transportation application on schedule. The staff has initiated the acceptance review.
l l.
40 June 2,1999 VI. Topic Area: Other Aaency Proarams and Areas of Focus SES Manager: Susan F. Shankman, Dep. Director, Licensing and Inspection Directorate, SFPO C2. Specific issue: BNFL Fuel Solutions (BFS) TranStor (Dual Purpose) Cask Review Objective: To issue a Part 72 (storage) SER and certificate of compliance (through rulemaking) and a Part 71 (transportation) certificate of compliance for the BFS dual purpose cask system PRIOR JO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Staff issues user need memorandum /rulemaking 05/27/99C P.Eng. SFPO PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Hilestone Date Lead
- 2. Staff receives updated SAR from applicant 09/99 T. Kobetz, SFPO BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 4. Staff issues Part 71 (transportation) CoC 02/00 T. Kobetz, SFPO
- 5. Staff completes rulemaking; issues CoC for use 09/00 P.Eng, SFPO under Part 72 P. Holahan, IMNS Comments:
General: On March 22,1999, BNFL completed the purchase of the commercial nuclear power business of Westinghouse Electric Company. As a result, BFS will combine with Westinghouse Spent Nuclear Fuel Programs to form a single company that will oversee the design and licensing of the TranStor and Westflex dual purpose cask applications.
41 June 2,1999 VI. Toolc Area: Other Aaency Proarams and Areas of Focus SES Manager: Susan F. Shankman, Dep. Director, Licensing and inspection Directorate, SFPO C3. Specific issue: Holtec HISTAR 100 (Dual-Purpose) Cask Revi_e_q Objective: To issue a Part 72 (storage) SER and certificate of compliance (through rulemaking) and a Part 71 (transportation) certificate of compliance for the Holtec HISTAR 100 dual purpose cask system PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Staff issues transportation (Part 71) CoC 03/31/99C M. Delligatti, SFPO i
PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999
, Milestone Date Lead
- 2. Staff completes rulemaking; issues CoC for use 08/99 P.Eng, SFPO under Part 72 P. Holahan, IMNS l
l l
l i
n
42' June 2,1999 VI. Tonic $ ea: Other Aaency Procrams and Areas of Focus SES Manager: Susan F. Shankman, Dep. Director, Licensing and inspection Directorate, SFPO C4. Specific issue: Westinghouse WESFLEX (Dual Purpose) Cask Review Objective: To issue a Part 72 (storage) SER and certificate of compliance (through rulemaking) and a Part 71 (transportation) certificate of compliance for the Westinghouse WESFLEX dual purpose cask system PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Staff receives responses to RAls 03/29/99C M. Bailey, SFPO PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 2. Staff issues final RAI, if necessary 09/99 M. Bailey, SFPO BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 3. Staff receives response to RAI,if necessary 11/99 M. Bailey, SFPO
- 4. Staff issues user need rrmoorandum/rulemaking 02/00 P.Eng, SFPO
- 6. Staff complete rulemaking; issues CoC for use under 02/01 P.Eng, SFPO Part 72 P. Holahan, IMNS Comments:
General: On March 22,1999, BNFL completed the purchase of the commercial nuclear power business of Westinghouse Electric Company. As a result, BFS will combine with Westinghouse Spent Nuclear Fuel Programs to form a single company that will oversee the design and licensing of the TranStor and Wesflex dual purpose cask applications.
- 1. Due to a 3-week delay by Westinghouse to respond to the RAl, staff did not resume review of the Wesfiex application until April 30,1999 (a 7-week delay from the original date of March 9 1999). This allowed the staff to conduct other high-priority work during that period.
43 June 2,1999 l
VI. Topic Area: Other Agency Programs and Areas of Focus SES Manager: Susan F. Shankman, Dep. Director, Licensing and Inspection Directorate, SFPO C5. Specific issue: NAC-STC/MPC (Dual Purpose) Cesk Review 1
i Objective: To issue a Part 72 (storage) SER and certificate of compliance (through rulemaking) and a Part 71 (transportation) certificate of compliance for the NAC-STC/MPC dual purpose cask system PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 i
Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Staff issues Part 71 (transportation) CoC 03/25/99C T. McGinty, SFPO
PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Niilestone Date Lead None BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 3. Staff complete rulemaking; issue CoC for use under 02/00 P.Eng, SFPO Part 72 -
P. Holahan, SFPO Comments:
l l
L
F,-'
44 June 2,1999 L
l l
VI. Topic Area: Other Agency Programs and Areas of Focus SES Manager: Susan F. Shankman, Dep. Director, Licensing and Inspection Directorate, SFPO C6. Specific issue: NAC-UMS (Dual Purpose) Cask Review Objective: To issue a Part 72 (storage) SER and certificate of compliance (through rulemaking) and a Part 71 (transportation) certificate of compliance for the NAC-UMS dual purpose cask system PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Staff issues second storage RAI, if necessary 06/99 T. McGinty, SFPO PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 2. Staff receives second storage RAI response 08/99 T. McGinty, SFPO
- 3. Staff issues user need memorandum /rul6 making 08/99 P.Eng, SFPO
- 4. Staff issues first transportation RAI 09/99 T. McGinty, SFPO BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
rulemaking SFPO
- 6. Staff completes rulemaking; issues CoC for use 10/00 P.Eng, SFPO under Pad 72 P. Holahan, IMNS
- 7. Staff issues second transportation RAI, if necessary 4/00 T. McGinty, or staff issues CoC and SER SFPO
- 8. Staff receives second transportation RAI response, if 6/00 T. McGinty, necessary SFPO
I 45 June 2,1999 Comments:
- 1. Review of the transportation package started on May 20,1999.
t i
46 June 2,1999 VI. Topic Area: Other Agency Programs and Areas of Focus SES Manager: Susan F. Shankman, Dep. Director, Licensing and inspection Directorate, SFPO C7. Specific lasue: TN-West MP-187 (Dual-Purpose) Cask Review Objective: To issue Part 71 (transportation) certificate of ccmpliance for MP-187 transportation cask system Comments:
All actions associated with this task are completed, as denoted on earlier updates of the CTM.
l i
i 4
I.
47 June 2,1999 i
VI. Toolc Area: Other Acency Proarams ano Area of Focus j
SES Manager: Stuart Richards, Director, LPD4/DLPM/NRR l
D. Specific lasue: Decommissionina Decisiong Objective: Provide timely decisions on current issues and provide framework for decommissioning activities.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead i
- 1. Meeting with NEl and industry to present Commission integrated milestones for 4/13/99 C S. Richards, LPD4 decommissioning initiatives necessary for above rules and existing rules
- 2. Complete the following pending licensing actions:
h s[$hYU 2a. Haddam Neck 4/28/99C T. Fredrichs, Technical Specification change to seismic LPD4 monitoring 2b. Maine Yankee 3/16/99C M. Webb, LPD4 Technical Specification change to spent fuel pool water level 2c. Maine Yankee M. Webb, LPD4 Exemption from 10 CFR 70.24 Criticality Accident Monitoring Requirements 3/24/99 C 2d. Zion T. Markley, DRIP Exemption from 10 CFR 70.24 Criticality Accident Monitoring requirements 2/9/99C l
1 PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 i
Milestone Date Lead
- 3. Complete the following pending licensing action:
h N iih M M ME$N#M$@{
1 t
"e m 4
48 June 2,1999 PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead Maine Yankee M. Webb, LPD4 Modification of License Conditions 5/5/99 (C)
Technical Specifications change to liquid and gaseous release limits 5/3/99 (C)
See note BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 l
Milestone Date Lead
- 4. Complete the following pending licensing action:
Haddam Neck 9/30/99 T. Fredrichs, Technical Specification change to refueling and LPD4 admin requirements Comments:
- 3. Amendment 163 (liquid and gaseous release limits) to the Maine Yankee operating license was issued 5/3/99. Amendment 164 (updating license conditions to reflect decommissioning status) was issued 5/5/99. This completes both actions.
1 t
0
1 4
49 June 2,1999 VI Toolc Area: Other Aaency Proorams and Areas of Focus
- SES Manager: Susan F. Shankman, Dep. Director, Licensing and Inspection Directorate, SFPO E. Specific issue: PGE-Troian Reactor Vessel Shipment Application Objective: To issue Part 71 (transportation) approval to ship the Trojan reactor vessel, with internals, for disposal in the State of Washington PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead None PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Inspection follow-up prior to and during shipment 08/99 B. Spitzberg, RIV Comments:
Part 71 approval to ship the Trojan reactor vessel was completed in October 1998. Inspection follow-up is scheduled for August 1999.
1 e
e o
r e
l 50 June 2,1999 1
l VI. Toolc Area: Other Aaency Proarams and Areas of Focus SES Manager: Cynthia Carpenter, Branch Chief, RGEB/ DRIP /NRR F. Specific issue: Event Reportina Rulemakin_g Objective: Revise event reporting requirements to reduce the reporting burden associated with events of little or no risk significance, obtain information better related to risk, and extend reporting time limits consistent with the need for prompt NRC action.
Coordination: Issues ll.A, " Risk Informed Baseline Core Inspection Program," ll.B, " Enforcement Program initiatives,"ll.C," Escalated Enforcement Program,"lli.A," Performance Assessment Process improvements," and VI.F, " Event Reporting Rulemaking," require close coordination and the integration of specific tasks by the NRC staff. Responsible project managers are coordinating these activities by assessing the impact of proposed program changes with the other ongoing activities and ensuring that the overall objectives for each project are achieved.
Examples include, intra-project task force participation, workshop attendance, concurrent review of projects and periodic senior management briefings. In addition, industry-developed initiatives such as the NEl New Regulatory Oversight Process are being reviewed by all project groups and evaluated for impact.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 1. CRGR Briefing 3/11/99C D. Allison, DRIP
- 2. ACRS Briefing 3/23/990 D. Allison, DRIP
- 3. Proposed rule to the Commission including 4/19/99C D. Allison, DRIP proposed enforcement policy changes (9800096)
R. Borchardt, OE (NRR) (SECY 99-119)
- 4. Publish proposed rule (10 CFR 50.72 and 50.73) 4 weeks after DRIP Commission approval
- 5. Conduct a public workshop 4 weeks after D. Allison, DRlP publication of proposed rule PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead l
None
~
. o l
l l
51 June 2,1999 l
BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 6. Brief CRGR About 6 months D. Allison, DRIP after publication of proposed rule
- 7. Brief ACRS About 7 months D. Allison, DRIP after publication of proposed rule
- 8. Final rule to Commission (9800096) (NRR)
About 8 months D. Allison, DRIP after publication of proposed rule
- 9. Publish final rule About 9 months DRlP after publication of proposed rule.
Comments:
- 3. The proposed rulemaking package was provided to the Commission on 4/19/99. This was 10 days behind schedule because the time required to resolve comments and issues was greater than anticipated.
i
- 4. Additional time will be required to address the Commission's directions for the Federal Register notice.
5-9. Schedule is contingent on publication of proposed rule following Commission review.
l 4
i 1
52 June 2,1999 VI. Topic Area: Other Aaency Procrams and Areas of Focus SFS Mangers: Cynthia Carpenter, Branch Chief, RGEB/ DRIP /NRR
' lemaking); Frank Congel, Director, IRO (Other Activities)
G. Specific issue: ProDosed Kl Rulemakin_g Objective: To implement Commission decision regarding the use of Kl as a protective measure for the general public after a severe reactor accident. In addition, to work with other Federal agencies to revise the Federal policy on the use of Ki in the event of a severe nuclear power plant emergency and to develop aids to assist the states in applying the revised Federal policy.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Miiestone Date Lead
- 1. Publish Proposed Rule (9800173) (NRR)
M. Jamgochian, 6/14/99C DRIP PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 2. Revise Kl technical paper (NUREG-1633) to 9/99 A. Mohseni, IRO address public comments and provide to Commission (9700193) (IRO)
BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 3. Final brochure on use of KI provided to Commission 10/99 A. Mohseni, IRO for review (9700193) (IRO) 4.
Brief CRGR and ACRS 10/99 M.Jamgochian, DRIP
- 5. Develop final Kl Federal policy FRN reflecting 10/99 A. Mohseni, IRO FRPCC review and send to Commission (9700193)
(IRO) 6.
Publish final technical paper (NUREG-1633) 12/99 A. Mohseni, IRO 7.
Finalize the public brochure on use of Ki and 1/00 A. Mohseni, IRO provide to FEMA for publication i
i
53 June 2,1999
- 8. Publish Kl Federal Policy FRN 12/99 A. Mohseni, IRO l
(see note)
- 9. Publish Final Rule (9800173) (NRR) 12/30/99 M.
Jamgochian,DRI P
- 10. Establish procedures to access Federal stockpiles 5/00 A. Mohseni, IRO with FEMA -
(see note)
Comments:
l
- 1. SECY-98-264, Proposed Amendments to 10 CFR 50.47, sent to the Commission on 4
11/10/98. The SRM was issued on 4/22/99. The Kl Rulemaking package was delivered to ADM on 5/18/99 for publication in the Federal Register.
- 2. SRM directed the staff to withdraw the draft NUREG-1633 and substantially revise and reissue it. Staff issued FRN withdrawing the draft NUREG on 10/16/98 and removed it from' the NRC WebSite. Staff formed a KI Core Group to review and address the comments received on the draft NUREG and add new sections on U.S. and foreign experiences in logistics of Kl distribution. The core group members include representatives from: AL, TN, AZ, CT, Waterford (CT), NEMA, CRCPD-6, FDA, EPA, FEMA and NRC. The Kl Core Group met publicly 12/1/98-12/4/98 at the NRC. Issues were identified based on public comments and resolutions identified. The U.S. experience was discussed and examined. The members were tasked for follow-up activities. The most sigrdficant development in this area has been the FDA's decision to revisit its 1082 policy. On February 12,1999, the staff provided the executive summary of a draft report prepared by CDC on a nine-year study of thyroid disease in persons exposed to radiolodines from Hanford Nuclear Site between 1944 and 1957. The Kl Core Group met again publicly in Tempe, Arizona, on March 1-5,1999. In response to Commissioner McGaffigan's request, the staff provided a briefing to him and to the Commission technical assistante on May 18,1999. The three developments ( FDA's efforts to revisit its 1978'82 position, the NRC decision not to fund the purchase of Kl for States that request it, and the FEMA's opposition to regional stockpiles) are important factors that need to be considered in the revised guidance.
Accordingly, the schedule for completion of this task may be affected.
- 5. The FRPCC expected to receive comments on the NRC proposed FRN from other Federal agencies during 1/99. Only one or two agencies have provided corr:ments to date. Moreover, FDA is revisiting its 1982 KI policy. The FDA's comments are essential for the completion of a revised Federal Ki policy. In addition to any FDA policy changes, the FRPCC Subcom'mittee on Kl will evaluate the comments received from other Federal agencies and make its recommendations to the FRPCC. The NRC funding for Kl will also have to be resolved. If there is a change in the NRC's funding position, more discussions with other federal agencies will be needed. Due to the above, the schedule has been changed to TBD, consistent with the l
rulemaking schedule. The Commission directed the staff on April 22,1999, to amend the draft Federal Register Notice on the Federal KI policy provided to FEMA to conform to this SRM, particularly with respect to the Commission's decision not to fund State stockpiles. The staff I
l
7 l,.
l 54 June 2,1999 i
l Intends to amend the draft FRN accordingly to submit to FEMA for FRPCC review and approval.
j l
However, FEMA Director's letter dated April 29,1999, to the Commission presented FEMA's l
opposition to regional stockpiles. This requires negotiation with FEMA on the changes that affect FEMA prior to resubmission to the FRPCC for full committee review. The three l
developments ( FDA's efforts to revisit its 1978/82 position, the NRC decision not to fund the i
purchase of Kl for States that request it, and the FEMA's opposition to regional stockpiles) are important factors that need to be integrated into any revised Federal policy. Accordingly, the l
schedule for completion of this task may be affected.
4
- 6. The staff expects to issue the technical paper for public comment before being finalized i
3,7 The public brochure will be based on the technical paper referred to in item 2 and 6 and will l
have to be developed after the technical paper. Accordingly the schedule for the completion of the brochure will be 30 days after the completion of the technical paper. Dates for the brochures were changed to indicate that they lag the development of the technical paper by approximately I
30 days.
- 8. The Commission decision of April 22,1999, not to fund State Stockpiles requires more negotiations with other federal agencies, particularly FEMA. This schedule will need to be negotiated, current best estimate is 12/99.
t l-
- 10. Based on the Commission SRM dated April 22,1999, the staff is directed to work with FEMA to establish and maintain regional Kl stockpiles to be used in the event of a severe nuclear power plant accident. This is a new initiative and will have to be negotiated with FEMA.
Best estin, ate is 5/00, subject to future revision.
i l
l l
r.
l l
55 June 2,1999 I
VI. Toolc Area: Other Aaency Proarams and Areas of Focus SES Manager: Bill Kane, Associate Director for Inspection and Programs, NRR H. Specific Issue: NEl Petitions - Petition for modifyina 50.54fa)
Objective: Complete the NEl Petition, accepting in part to modify 10 CFR Part 50.54(a), as it 1
pertains to Quality Assurance Program Change Control and is intended to reduce burdens on industry.
PFilOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
]
1.
Publication of a Federal Register Notice to 02/99C R. Gramm, accept in part the NEl petition for rulemaking DRCH and proposing a Direct Final Rule (9800166)
(NRR) (SECY 98-279) l 2.
Direct Final Rule effective if no significant 04/26/99C D. Dorman, DIPM adverse comments received.
3.
Coordinate a workshop with NEl to discuss TBD D. Dorman, DIPM implementation aspects of Direct Final Rule.
4.
Issue Voluntary Option rule for public comment TBD D. Dorman, DIPM via Federal reaister Notice.
i PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestones Dato Lead i
None 3
l 1
BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestones Lead S.
Hold meetings and workshops with 1/00 D. Dorman, DIPM stakeholders to fully develop voluntary option rulemaking. (9900004) 6.
Evaluate public comments on Voluntary Option 1/01 D. Dorman, DIPM Rule and prepare Final Rule. (9900004) 7.
Issue Voluntary Option Rule in Federal Register TBD D. Dorman, DIPM Notice.
i l
l l
L
l
\\
56 June 2,1999 BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 8.
Hold a workshop to discuss implementation TBD D. Dorman, DIPM aspects of Voluntary Option Rule.
Comments:
The Direct Final Rule was published on 2/23/99 and became effective on 4/26/99 based on a determination that no significant adverse comment was received by 3/25/99. Six comment letters were received. NEl and two licensees provided favorable comme its on the Direct Final Rule. Other letters (from a licensee and members of the public) requested clarification of certain provisions of the rule. The staff determined that none of the comments constituted significant adverse comments, therefore the Direct Final Rule became effectivo 4/26/99.
OA plan change control, and 50.54(a), was a topic of a panel discussion during the Regulatory Information Conference.
SECY-98-279 stated that the voluntary option proposed rule will be developed one year after j
receipt of the SRM, and a final rule the following year. WITS item 9900004 was assigned to the proposed rule development, and it will then be assigned for the voluntary option final rule.
O
.e e.
57 June 2,1999 VI. Toolc Area: Other Aaency Proarams and Areas of Focus SES Manager: Gary Holahan, Director, DSSA/NRR)
- 1. Specific lasue: Revised Source Term Rulemakina Objective: To revise Part 50 to allow holders of operating power reactor licensees to voluntarily amend the facility design basis to use revised source terms in design basis accident radiological analyses. This action would allow these facilities to pursue risk-informed licensing actions made possible through the use of the revised source term.
PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead 1.
Publish in Federal Register 3/99C T. Essig, DIPM 2.
Complete draft guide; draft SRP section 5/28/99C R. Barrett, DSSA 3.
End of Public Comment Period 5/22/99C R. Barrett, DSSA PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead 4.
Office concurrence on final rule; draft guide; draft 7/23 R. Barrett, DSSA SRP 5.
ACRS review 9/99 R. Barrett, DSSA 6.
CRGR review 8/99 R. Barrett, DSSA 7.
Final rule; draft guide; draft SRP to EDO 8/99 R. Barrett, DSSA (9700025) (NRR) 8.
Final rule; draft guide; draft SRP to Commission 8/27/99 R. Barrett, DSSA BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead 9.
End of public comment period 12/99 R. Barrett, DSSA
- 10. Office concurrence on final guide; final SRP 1/00 R. Barrett, DSSA
r e
b 58 June 2,1999 BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999
- 14. Final guide; final SRP to Commission 3/3/00 R. Barrett, DSSA Staff scheduled to make made presentation on source term issues at March 1999 R.I.C. Staff conducted a public meeting with NEl and Industry on 4/20/99.
- 1. As a result of the slippage in milestone #1, the t,taff requested that milestone #8 be revised to 8/27/99. This change in milestone #8 was approved in the SRM. Other intervening and subsequent milestones have been updated to reflect the new due date.
- 3. Public comment period ended on 5/25/99. As of 5/24/99, on!y one public comment had been received.
S. The rulemaking package is on the agenda for an ACRS subcommittee rneeting tentatively scheduled for 8/9-11. The full ACRS meeting is tentatively scheduled for the first week in September. The staff does not expect the change to milestone #5 to affect remaining l
milestones.
a r.
'Jg 59 June 2,1999 Vll. TOPIC AREA: Uranium Recovery lasues SES Manager: King Stablein, Acting Branch Chief, Uranium Recovery Branch l_
A. Smlf;c Issues: Uranium recovery concerns raised in Senate report Dual regulation of ground water at in situ leach (ISL) facilities Expanded use'of mill tailings impoundments to dispose of other material Eliminate consideration of economics in the processing of alternate feedstock i
l Objective: To look for ways to:
- 1. eliminate dual regulation of ISLs facilities; L
- 2. reduce the regulatory burden on uranium mill wanting to expand the use of impoundments for disposal of other materials besides mill tailings; and
- 3. encourage uranium mills who want to engage in recycling of materials for their E
uranium content l
THROUGH JUNE 30,1999 l
Milestone Date Lead
- 1. Commission paper on ways to eliminate dual 3/12/99C Charlotte Abrams, regulation at ISL facilities (9800176) (NMSS)
NMSS I
l (SECY 99-013) 1
- 2. Commission paper on revising guidance for 4/8/99C Charlotse Abrams, NMSS expanding disposal capability of uranium mill tailings impoundments, and ask for Commission policy on hearing orders concoming need to consider economics in attemate feedstock evaluations (9800180)(NMSS)(SECY 99-012)
- 3. Implement any changes in review of a! ternate Charlotte Abrams, feedstock that result from hearing and Commission 7/99 NMSS review of previous hearing orders
- 4. Complete hearing on alternate feedstock-02/09/99C P. Block, ASLBP amendment to see how State of Utah concerns about staff not applying appropriate economics criteria is determined.
- 5. Complete Part 41 rulemaking plan, including Mark Haisfield j
recommendations on regulatory changes to address 10/99 Mike Fliegel, NMSS the three issues (9800177) (NMSS)
- 6. - Revise ISL Standard Review Plan to implement 06/99 Bill Ford, NMSS staff recommendations if approved by Commission Am
o j.
60 June 2,1999 j
)
THROUGH JUNE 30,1999
- 7. Issue revised draft guidance on disposal capability 06/99 Charlotte Abrams, with~ Commission-approved revisions NMSS PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead None i
BEYOND SEPTEMBER 23,1999
]
Milestone Date Lead
- 8. Publish proposed Part 41 for public comment, 10/00 Mark Haysfield/
including regulatory changes to address three Mike Fliegel, NMSS issues (9800177) (NMSS) i
- 9. Publish final Part 41 codifying agency policy on 08/01 Mark Hayrfield/
resolution of three issues. (9800177) (NMSS)
Mike Fliegel, NMSS Comments:
General comment re: obiective stated above: Three issues raised in the Senate report are presented in the National Mining Association white paper that was presented to the Commission in April 1998.
The disposal paper was sent to the Commission on April 8,1999.
- 3. The most recent alternate feedstock amendment issued by the staff is being contested by the State of Utah and Envirocare. One of the contentions is that the staff failed to conduct the i appropriate economics test in accepting the amendment application. A decision from the presiding Officer in this hearing was received on February 9,1999. The decision provides guidance that the staff factored into the portions of the Commission Paper (item 2 above) dealing with attemate feedstock. Utah appealed the presiding officer's decision to the Commission on April 26,1999. The Commission agreed to review the decision. The staff will proceed after the Commission has ruled.
5,8,9 A draft of the Part 41 rulemaking plan and accompanying Commission paper was sent to the Ccmmission on 1/15/99, SECY 99-011. After the Commission meeting on the uranium recovery program on June 14,1999, the Commission should provide direction to the staff on Part
- 41. The staff will use that direction in proceeding with rulemaking on Part 41.
F l
9 t
61 June 2,1999 Vill. TOPIC AREA: Chanoes to NRC's Hearina Process SES Manager: Joe Gray, OGC A: Use of informal Adiudicatory Procedures PRIOR TO JUNE 30,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 7. Prepare legislation for Commissioner review.
PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 23,1999 Milestone Date Lead
- 5. Briefings will be scheduled when requested.
__._-