ML20217Q553
| ML20217Q553 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/07/1997 |
| From: | Mcgaffigan E NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Hoyle J NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20217Q499 | List: |
| References | |
| SECY-97-137-C, NUDOCS 9709030198 | |
| Download: ML20217Q553 (3) | |
Text
'
N OT ATIO N VOTE RESPONSE SHEET TO:
John C. Hoyle, Secretary FROM:
COMMISSIONER MCGAFFIGAN
SUBJECT:
SECY-97-137 - PROPOSED RESOLUTION TO PETITION FOR RULEMAKING FILED BY THE NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE
'N. A Approved d Disapproved Abstain Not Participating -
Request Discussion COMMENTS:
See attached comments.
aL)Il 9V/n:,
SIGNATURE f"'
O
'! 7 Release Vote / X/
DATE Withhold Vote /
/
Entered on "AS" Yes i No fa' 88ll?S 7J882 CORRESPONDENCE PDR-d
o e
COMMISSIONER McGAFFlGWS COMMENTS ON SECY-97-137,:
I approve, in concept, the staff's proposed resolution of the NEl petition for ruiemaking to revise Part 70, subject to the following concerns and comments:
1)
In the outline on the proposed rulemaking, the staff proposes to incorporate a 10 CFR 50.59-type provision that would allow fuel cycle licensees to make changes to facility operations without prior NRC approval provided that "the proposed changes do not decrease the effectiveness oT the program and do not involve unresolved safety issues," - While I support the use of a 50.59 type mechanism that would allow changes that do not decrease the overall effectiveness of a-licensee program or operations (such a mechanism allows substantial flexibility and the use of compensatory measures to avoid a decrease in the effectiveness of the licensee's overall program). I am concemea that the " unresolved safety issues" aspect of this standard is generally undefined and could lead to interpretive and implemcc,Lation problems such as those encountered in the application of the "unreviewed safety i
question" criterion of 10 CFR 50,59(c) which is currently applicable to power reactors, Since the Commission is currently struggling with this and other 50.59 issues and rulemaking on 50,59 issues is likely to go 1
forward in parallel with this rulemaking, it is essential that the two rulemaking efforts inform each other.
it is clear at this early point however, that defining an " unresolved safety issue" in detail will t'e a challenge to this rulemaking.
2)
In the outline of the proposed rulemaking, the staff does not giant NEI's request for a backfit provision that would apply to NRC-required modifications of structures, systems and compo_nents resulting from the mitial Integrated Safety Analysis, but holds out the possibility of j
considering a qualitative backfitting mechanism in:a' future rulemaking after safety bases are established and incorporated in the license and after further experience is gained.
In the short-time that I have been with the Commission, I have noted the substantial impediments to worthwhile rulemaking that 10 CFR 50.109 imposes in the reactor area and I am generally very reluctant to extend those sorts of impediments to e
the materials regime.
Even if we could clearly justify an extension of backfit considerations to Part 70. I would be very concerned if we were to impose the current requirement in 10 CFR 50.109 that any proposed backfit-must result in a " substantial increase in the overall protection of the public health and safety." This provision, more than any other, often prevents worthwhile changes, that would clearly pass a cost-
benefit test,_to our regulatory programs. Therefore if a Part 70 revision to add a backf1_t provision is proposed during my tenure, I-would in all: likelihood oppose it unless the current ~ infirmities that I see 1n.10 CFR 50-109 were eliminated-from such a provision.
~
3)
I agree with the comments of Commissioner Diaz regarding the need to develop regulatory guidance documents in parallel witn the rule.
l.-
l
[-
l 8
' saat:
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSI WASHINGTON, D.C. 20556-0001
- tk August 22, 1997
..... go OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY-Qw ep t
REVISED MEMORANDUM TO:
L. Joseph Callan Executive Director for Operati ns d
i FROM:
John C. Hoyle, Secretary
SUBJECT:
STAFF REQUIREMENTS - SECY-97-137 - PROPOSED RESOLUTICN TO PETITION FOR RULEMAKING FILED BY THE NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE l
The Commission has approved the staff's proposal to revise Part 70,-as requested by the Nuclear Energy-Institute's petition, with thelmodifications described in the subject paper.
Consistent with the final budget, the staff should plan to submit a draft proposed rule to the Commission by July 31,-_1998.
The supporting
. guidance documents and regulatory analysis should also'be submitted with the proposed rule.
(EDO)
(SECY Suspense:
7/31/98)
The staff should continue to keep the Commission informed of its rulemaking activities and provide the Commission with a set of milestones and an_ anticipated completion date for this rulemaking.
(EDO)-'
.(SECY Suspense:
9/26/97)
The "unreviewed safety question" criterion of 101CFR 50.59(c) 1 which is currently' applicable to power reactors has caused some
= interpretive and iTnplementation problems which are ~likely to be the subject of a rulemaking to clarify 10 CFR 50.59 and related i
regulations.
Careful consideration should be given as to whether 1
I
-the separate term " unresolved safety. issue" is needed, and i t' so, it-should be clearly defined.
The staff should ensure that the rulemaking effort on 10 CFR 50.59 is closely coordinated with this effort.
(EDO)
(SECY Suspense:
9/26/97)
SECY NOTE:
THIS-SRM,- SECY-97-137, AND THE COMMISSION VOTING RECORD CONAINING THE VOTE SHEETS OF ALL COMMISSIONERS WILL BE MADE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE 5
-WORKING DAYS FROM THE-DATE OF THIS SRM.
D 4 n:m%
s..
i 2-cc:
Chairman Jackson Commissioner-Dicus.
Commissioner-Diaz Commissioner-McGaffigan OGC
Office Directors, Regions, ACRS, ACIM, ASLBP (via E-Mail)
I l
.