|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20210E5881999-06-30030 June 1999 Comment Supporting Draft Reg Guide DG-1074, Steam Generator Tube Integrity. Northern States Power Endorses Comments Transmitted by NEI Ltr ML20216C1841998-03-0202 March 1998 Comment Opposing Proposed GL Addressing Issue of Yr 2000 Readiness as Published in FR,980129,volume 63,number 19,pp 4498 Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment.Nsp Suggests That Draft Ltr Not Be Issued ML20199C2721997-10-27027 October 1997 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 73, Proposed Amends to NRC Requirements for Emergency Preparedness & Security ML20216H8611997-09-10010 September 1997 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR50,Appendix E,Section IV.F.2.c to Exercise Plant Offsite EP Plans W/State & Local Govt Authorities within Plant Plume Exposure Pathway Emergency Planning Zone ML20216G2821997-08-26026 August 1997 Petition for Rulemaking PRM-72-4 to Suspend for Cause Northern Station Power Co Matl License SNM-2506 Needed to Operate Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation at Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant ML20148Q5641997-06-23023 June 1997 Order Prohibiting Involvement in NRC Licensed Activities (Effective Immediately).Prohibits Jl Barnhart from Any Involvement in NRC-licensed Activities for Period of 5 Yrs from Date of Order ML20140E4721997-05-28028 May 1997 Petition by Prairie Island Indian Community,Per 10CFR2.206, Requesting That NRC Determine That NSP Violated Requirements of 10CFR72.122(I) by Using License SNM-2506 for ISFSI Prior to Establishing Conditions for Safely Unloading TN-40 ML20138K1511997-05-0606 May 1997 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR73 Re Changes to Nuclear Power Plant Security Requirements ML20148R2451997-04-24024 April 1997 Demand for Info Re Jl Barnhart Contract Employee at NSP, Working Under Temporary Unescorted Access Authorization. NRC Needs Info to Determine Whether Enforcement Action Should Be Taken to Ensure Future Compliance W/Requirements ML20134P6241996-11-26026 November 1996 NRC Staff Response to Florence Township Motion for Dismissal & Request for Hearing.Concludes That Motion Should Be Denied for Reasons Set Forth.W/Certificate of Svc ML20129D4771996-10-15015 October 1996 NRC Response to Petition for Leave to Intervene of Minnesota Dept of Public Svc.* Dept Should Be Permitted to Participate as Interested State,If Another Petition Granted. W/Certificate of Svc & Notice of Appearance ML20117E4051996-08-0909 August 1996 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Rule ML20117K0031996-05-0101 May 1996 Order,Granting Dismissal of Motions by Nsp,Public Utilities Commission & Environ Quality Board for Protective Orders Per Discovery & Plaintiff Motion for Temporary Injunction ML20094J0471995-10-11011 October 1995 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR60,72,73 & 75 Re Safeguards for Spent Fuel or High Level Radwaste ML20086T3861995-07-20020 July 1995 Comment Opposing Proposed NRC GL on Testing of safety- Related Logic Circuits ML20085E5261995-06-0606 June 1995 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR73 Re Changes to NPP Security Requirements Associated W/Containment Access Control ML20083K2731995-04-28028 April 1995 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for water-cooled Power Reactors. Urges NRC to Support Rev to NEI 94-01 Which Will Allow Use of Two Reduced Pressure Type a Tests as Prerequisites ML20087H0331995-04-12012 April 1995 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR50,App J,Re Delay of Performance of Type a Leakage Rate Test Until May 1997 Refueling Outage ML20080N4731995-02-21021 February 1995 Exemption from Requirements of Section III.G.1 of App R to 10CFR50 to Allow Removal of Fuses from PORV Control Circuit in Event of Control Room Fire ML20077M6181994-12-30030 December 1994 Comment Re Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Low Power Operations for Np Reactors.Util Believes That Pr Will Have Higher Impact than Described in Regulatory Analysis,As Pr Will Extend Refueling Outages at All Plants ML20071H4161994-06-30030 June 1994 Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-20-23 Re Reduction of Radioactive Emission from 100 Mrems to 1 Mrem/Yr ML20059K5201994-01-26026 January 1994 Demand for Info to Determine Whether Commission Can Have Reasonable Assurance That Other Burns Employees & Managers Will Carry Out Licensed Activities W/O Discriminating Against Individuals Re Safety Issues ML20062M4001993-12-30030 December 1993 Comment Supporting NUMARC Position on Proposed Rule 10CFR73 Re Protection Against Malevolent Use of Vehicles at NPPs ML20045G0941993-04-21021 April 1993 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR50,52 & 100 Re Nuclear Power Plant Instrumentation for Earthquakes.Nothing Exists Between Monitor Recording Time & CAV Methodology ML20101F6861992-06-0909 June 1992 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR19 & 20 to Extend Implementation Date of Revised 10CFR20 ML20090J9581992-03-12012 March 1992 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR51 Re Environ Review of Applications to Renew Operating Licenses for Nuclear Plants. Licensee Endorses NUMARC Comments ML20087F7221992-01-14014 January 1992 Comments on Draft Reg Guide DG-8005, Assessing External Doses from Airborne Radioactive Matls. Disagrees W/Statement That Airborne Concentration Measurements Unreliable ML20086R7431991-12-12012 December 1991 Comment on Draft Reg Guide DG-8006, Control of Access to High & Very High Radiation Areas in Nuclear Power Plants ELV-01267, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR71 Re Compatibility of Pu Air Transport Regulations W/Iaea Stds.Supports EEI-UWASTE/NUMARC Comments to Be Provided to NRC by 9002091990-02-0707 February 1990 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR71 Re Compatibility of Pu Air Transport Regulations W/Iaea Stds.Supports EEI-UWASTE/NUMARC Comments to Be Provided to NRC by 900209 ML20011E4861990-02-0707 February 1990 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR71 Re Compatibility of Pu Air Transport Regulations W/Iaea Stds.Supports EEI-UWASTE/NUMARC Comments to Be Provided to NRC by 900209 ML20248D2831989-09-28028 September 1989 Notice of Appearance.* Advises That Author Will Enter Appearance in Proceeding on Behalf of Nrc.W/Certificate of Svc ML20247Q2661989-09-26026 September 1989 Establishment of Aslb.* Board Will Comprise of Mb Margulies, Chairman & Oh Paris & Fj Shon,Members.W/Certificate of Svc. Served on 890926 B13367, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR30,40,50,60,70,72 & 150 Re Preserving Free Flow of Info to Commission.Nrc Made Wise Choice to Not Impose Any Obligation on Private Parties to Include Affirmative Statement in Employment Agreements1989-09-20020 September 1989 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR30,40,50,60,70,72 & 150 Re Preserving Free Flow of Info to Commission.Nrc Made Wise Choice to Not Impose Any Obligation on Private Parties to Include Affirmative Statement in Employment Agreements ML20248C8751989-09-13013 September 1989 Response to Order Modifying Licenses & Order to Show Cause Why Licenses Should Not Be Revoked.* Requests Hearing on Issues,Including Funds for Equipment.Supporting Info Encl ML20246C7141989-08-18018 August 1989 Order to Show Cause Why CPs CPEP-1 & CPEP-2 Should Not Be Revoked & Requiring Licensee to Notify Commission at Least 30 Days Before Taking Possession of Any Classified Equipment ML20245G0721989-08-0303 August 1989 Comment on Draft Reg Guide, Assuring Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors. Recommends That NRC Recommendation on Trust Agreement Wording Be Deleted or NRC Should Grandfather Existing Trusts Such as for Plants ML20248B6201989-08-0202 August 1989 Comments on Draft Reg Guide, Assuring Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors. NRC Should Permit Use of Potential Tax Refund as Source of Decommissioning Funds ELV-00674, Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. 10CFR72.6(c) Should Be Revised to Provide for Storage W/O ISFSI Requirement1989-07-0707 July 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. 10CFR72.6(c) Should Be Revised to Provide for Storage W/O ISFSI Requirement ELV-00679, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Agrees W/Numarc Comments Provided to NRC on 8906261989-07-0505 July 1989 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Agrees W/Numarc Comments Provided to NRC on 890626 ML20246K4801989-07-0505 July 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components ML20246D8811989-06-30030 June 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components ML20245D2481989-06-16016 June 1989 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. NRC Must Consider Provision in Rule to Permit Indiscriminate Storage of Spent Fuel at Reactors ML20246Q2971989-05-15015 May 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20245J0191989-04-14014 April 1989 Comment Re Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20244B3241989-04-10010 April 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20247A2971989-04-0404 April 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20246M2771989-03-20020 March 1989 Decision.* Affirms Board Decision LBP-89-05 Granting CP & OL to Licensee.Certificate of Svc Encl.Served on 890321 ML20246N9471989-03-0808 March 1989 Comment on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9 Re Selection Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Sys at Nuclear Power Plants B13113, Comments on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Sys at Nuclear Power Plants. Reg Guide Does Not Provide Flexibility1989-03-0808 March 1989 Comments on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Sys at Nuclear Power Plants. Reg Guide Does Not Provide Flexibility ML20235T3581989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Util Endorses Comments Filed by NUMARC & Nuclear Util Backfitting & Reform Group.Rule Fails to Provide Basis for Determining Effective Maint Program 1999-06-30
[Table view] Category:PUBLIC COMMENTS ON PROPOSED RULES & PETITIONS FOR
MONTHYEARML20210E5881999-06-30030 June 1999 Comment Supporting Draft Reg Guide DG-1074, Steam Generator Tube Integrity. Northern States Power Endorses Comments Transmitted by NEI Ltr ML20216C1841998-03-0202 March 1998 Comment Opposing Proposed GL Addressing Issue of Yr 2000 Readiness as Published in FR,980129,volume 63,number 19,pp 4498 Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment.Nsp Suggests That Draft Ltr Not Be Issued ML20199C2721997-10-27027 October 1997 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 73, Proposed Amends to NRC Requirements for Emergency Preparedness & Security ML20138K1511997-05-0606 May 1997 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR73 Re Changes to Nuclear Power Plant Security Requirements ML20117E4051996-08-0909 August 1996 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Rule ML20094J0471995-10-11011 October 1995 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR60,72,73 & 75 Re Safeguards for Spent Fuel or High Level Radwaste ML20086T3861995-07-20020 July 1995 Comment Opposing Proposed NRC GL on Testing of safety- Related Logic Circuits ML20085E5261995-06-0606 June 1995 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR73 Re Changes to NPP Security Requirements Associated W/Containment Access Control ML20083K2731995-04-28028 April 1995 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for water-cooled Power Reactors. Urges NRC to Support Rev to NEI 94-01 Which Will Allow Use of Two Reduced Pressure Type a Tests as Prerequisites ML20077M6181994-12-30030 December 1994 Comment Re Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Low Power Operations for Np Reactors.Util Believes That Pr Will Have Higher Impact than Described in Regulatory Analysis,As Pr Will Extend Refueling Outages at All Plants ML20071H4161994-06-30030 June 1994 Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-20-23 Re Reduction of Radioactive Emission from 100 Mrems to 1 Mrem/Yr ML20062M4001993-12-30030 December 1993 Comment Supporting NUMARC Position on Proposed Rule 10CFR73 Re Protection Against Malevolent Use of Vehicles at NPPs ML20045G0941993-04-21021 April 1993 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR50,52 & 100 Re Nuclear Power Plant Instrumentation for Earthquakes.Nothing Exists Between Monitor Recording Time & CAV Methodology ML20101F6861992-06-0909 June 1992 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR19 & 20 to Extend Implementation Date of Revised 10CFR20 ML20090J9581992-03-12012 March 1992 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR51 Re Environ Review of Applications to Renew Operating Licenses for Nuclear Plants. Licensee Endorses NUMARC Comments ML20087F7221992-01-14014 January 1992 Comments on Draft Reg Guide DG-8005, Assessing External Doses from Airborne Radioactive Matls. Disagrees W/Statement That Airborne Concentration Measurements Unreliable ML20086R7431991-12-12012 December 1991 Comment on Draft Reg Guide DG-8006, Control of Access to High & Very High Radiation Areas in Nuclear Power Plants ELV-01267, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR71 Re Compatibility of Pu Air Transport Regulations W/Iaea Stds.Supports EEI-UWASTE/NUMARC Comments to Be Provided to NRC by 9002091990-02-0707 February 1990 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR71 Re Compatibility of Pu Air Transport Regulations W/Iaea Stds.Supports EEI-UWASTE/NUMARC Comments to Be Provided to NRC by 900209 ML20011E4861990-02-0707 February 1990 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR71 Re Compatibility of Pu Air Transport Regulations W/Iaea Stds.Supports EEI-UWASTE/NUMARC Comments to Be Provided to NRC by 900209 B13367, Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR30,40,50,60,70,72 & 150 Re Preserving Free Flow of Info to Commission.Nrc Made Wise Choice to Not Impose Any Obligation on Private Parties to Include Affirmative Statement in Employment Agreements1989-09-20020 September 1989 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR30,40,50,60,70,72 & 150 Re Preserving Free Flow of Info to Commission.Nrc Made Wise Choice to Not Impose Any Obligation on Private Parties to Include Affirmative Statement in Employment Agreements ML20245G0721989-08-0303 August 1989 Comment on Draft Reg Guide, Assuring Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors. Recommends That NRC Recommendation on Trust Agreement Wording Be Deleted or NRC Should Grandfather Existing Trusts Such as for Plants ML20248B6201989-08-0202 August 1989 Comments on Draft Reg Guide, Assuring Availability of Funds for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors. NRC Should Permit Use of Potential Tax Refund as Source of Decommissioning Funds ELV-00674, Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. 10CFR72.6(c) Should Be Revised to Provide for Storage W/O ISFSI Requirement1989-07-0707 July 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. 10CFR72.6(c) Should Be Revised to Provide for Storage W/O ISFSI Requirement ELV-00679, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Agrees W/Numarc Comments Provided to NRC on 8906261989-07-0505 July 1989 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components. Agrees W/Numarc Comments Provided to NRC on 890626 ML20246K4801989-07-0505 July 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components ML20246D8811989-06-30030 June 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50, Acceptance of Products Purchased for Use in Nuclear Power Plant Structures,Sys & Components ML20245D2481989-06-16016 June 1989 Comment on Proposed Rules 10CFR50,72 & 170 Re Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. NRC Must Consider Provision in Rule to Permit Indiscriminate Storage of Spent Fuel at Reactors ML20246Q2971989-05-15015 May 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20245J0191989-04-14014 April 1989 Comment Re Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20244B3241989-04-10010 April 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20247A2971989-04-0404 April 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants B13113, Comments on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Sys at Nuclear Power Plants. Reg Guide Does Not Provide Flexibility1989-03-0808 March 1989 Comments on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9, Selection, Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Sys at Nuclear Power Plants. Reg Guide Does Not Provide Flexibility ML20246N9471989-03-0808 March 1989 Comment on Proposed Rev 3 to Reg Guide 1.9 Re Selection Design,Qualification,Testing & Reliability of Diesel Generator Units Used as Onsite Electric Power Sys at Nuclear Power Plants JPN-89-008, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants1989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants B13136, Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Proposed Rule on Maint Will Not Improve Maint in Plants Nor Improve Safety or Reliability of Plants.Proposed Rule Much Too Vague1989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Proposed Rule on Maint Will Not Improve Maint in Plants Nor Improve Safety or Reliability of Plants.Proposed Rule Much Too Vague ML20235T3581989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants.Util Endorses Comments Filed by NUMARC & Nuclear Util Backfitting & Reform Group.Rule Fails to Provide Basis for Determining Effective Maint Program ML20235V8541989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants. Util Committed to Goal of Achieving Improved Reliability & Safety Through Better Maint ML20235T1861989-02-24024 February 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants, Extension of NRC Authority to BOP Portion of Plant & Misapplication of Adequate Protection Std of Backfit Rule ML20235T7391989-02-23023 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors at Nuclear Power Plants ML20235N8531989-02-14014 February 1989 Comment Supporting Chapter 1 Re Policy Statement on Exemptions Below Regulatory Concern.Policy Development for Criteria for Release of Radioactive Matl Needed for Development of Consistent Waste Mgt Practices ML20235L5921989-02-0606 February 1989 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule on Chapter 1 Re Proposed Policy Statement Exemptions from Regulatory Control.Extreme Care Will Be Needed in Establishing State Role Both in Developing Rule & in Subsequent Implementation ML20206M5321988-11-21021 November 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re fitness-for-duty Program ML20195H0331988-11-21021 November 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program Which Includes Random Drug Testing.Util Strongly Favors 180- Day Period for Implementation of Rule & 360-day Implementation Period for Random Drug Testing ML20195H4211988-11-18018 November 1988 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program Which Includes Random Drug Testing JPN-88-063, Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program.Util Has Constitutional Concerns Re Proposed Random Testing Which Should Be Fully Addressed Prior to Rule Being Promulgated.Endorses NUMARC & EEI Comments1988-11-18018 November 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program.Util Has Constitutional Concerns Re Proposed Random Testing Which Should Be Fully Addressed Prior to Rule Being Promulgated.Endorses NUMARC & EEI Comments ML20195H0111988-11-18018 November 1988 Comment Supporting NUMARC Comments on Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re NRC Fitness for Duty Program Which Includes Random Drug Testing ML20205Q1501988-10-28028 October 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re NUREG-1317, Regulatory Options for Nuclear Plant License Renewal. Safety Sys Functional Insps & Configuration Mgt Programs Support Renewal Basis as Opposed to Relicensing Process ML20205Q2061988-10-28028 October 1988 Comment Opposing Petition for Rulemaking PRM 50-52 Re Exemption of Financial Qualifications of Applicants from Review of OL Applications.Petition Presents No Compelling Reason to Amend Current Rules ML20205Q6661988-10-27027 October 1988 Comment on Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re NUREG-1317, Regulatory Options for Nuclear Plant License Renewal. Endorses NUMARC Nuplex Working Group Comments,Including Use of Licensing Basis at Facility When Renewal Application Submitted ML20205P9691988-10-26026 October 1988 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re NUREG-1317, Regulatory Options for Nuclear License Renewal. Supports Contents of NUREG-1317 & Endorses NUMARC Comments on Rulemaking & Position Paper by NUMARC Nuplex Working Group 1999-06-30
[Table view] |
Text
-
EE$uTPRWM g u
J (S 3 FRU7/Cs Northem States Power Company 414 Nicollet Mall
(
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-1927
[
February 23, 1989 es ne @ 2 9 3 s m e
a
\\
k fc
- c07 T~~
V gp k Mr Samuel J Chilk 7
Secretary of the Commission h@E*n
'S !
Attention:
Docketing and Services. Branch k
DOCrrnNG 6
./
SNM$
f(ch '
.U S Nuclear Regulatory Commission
\\'Q)g
\\/
Washington, DC 20555 g~ij ", M (N i
j Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Docket No. 50-263 License No. DPR-22 Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant Docket Nos. 50-282 License Nos. DPR-42 50-306 DPR-60 Comments on Proposed NRC Rule on Education and Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators and Supervisors
Reference:
Federal Register, Volume 53, No. 250, December 29, 1989 l
Proposed NRC Rule, " Education and Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators and Supervisors at Nuclear Power Plants" Northern States Power Company appreciates the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed NRC rule related to education and ex-perience requirements for senior reactor operators and supervisors at nuclear power plants published in the Federal Register on December 29, 1988. We have the following comments to offer:
Need for Proposed Rule The proposed rule is not needed. As many commentors noted in response to the Comrnission's advanced notice of proposed ruie-making on this iuue, many a.spects of the rule will have a nega-tive impact on overall plant reliability and safety of operation.
j The vast majority of the negative comments offered in response to the advanced notice of proposed rulemaking remain valid and have not been fully addressed in the proposed ruie.
Alternative 2 - The Preferred Option if a Final Rule is Issued If the Commission concludes that a Rule ic necessary, and specifies one acceptable method for upgrading education i
I 8903080450 890203 PDR PR 50 53FR52716 PDR 3
m
-o
- C t 2,.
Sscretary of,tha Crmmisaicn
- February 23, 1989-Northem States Power Company y
Page'2:
experience requirements, then Northern States' Power Company be-
-lieves;that Alternative 2,Las described in the notice accompany-ing thefproposed' rule,- is the' preferred alternative.'-
We have two.relatively m'inor suggestions for improving Alterna-tive 2, however, which will add. flexibility to the new rule.
.First Proposed Change to Alternative 2
- J Revise a' portion of paragraph 50.54(m)(ii)(C) to read:
...A bachelor's degree in engineering or science from an accredited. college or. university; a' professional engineer-license issued.by a state government; or a bachelor's degree
'in a non-scientific field from.an accredited' collegeor university and an Engineer-in-Training (EIT)' certificate that indicates one has passed an examination administered by a state or other recognized authority....
i Reason-for Proposed Change:
This change would clarify the-language and allow a-bachelor's degree in science to meet the degree requirement of the rule.
We believe that a degree in any scientific discipline, combined.
.with'the intensive training in engineering fundamentals included in the. Senior Reactor Operator Training Program, is' reasonably equivalent to a bachelor's degree in engineering or the knowledge necessary to obtain an EIT certificate.
This is also consistent-with the degree requirements for engineering watch officers'in the. naval' nuclear propulsion program.
To implement this new requirement, utilities will seek to provide-degree opportunities for employees on site, or at nearby colleges and universities.. Engineering degree programs are generally limited.to on-campus programs at large institutions which are-remote from the plant sites. On-site programs that result in a degree in' science are feasible, however, and severel utilities
~
already have such programs.
Second Proposed' Change to Alternative 2' Revise portions of paragraph 50.54(m)(ii)(D) to read:
must have at least three years of experience at a nuc-lear power plant, of which at least one year must be as a licensed control room operator cr. senior licensed member of the plant engineering and technical support staff, for a power reactor operating at greater than twenty percent power....
4-am-.
___=._: __
m_, _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ = _. _ _ _ -,. _ _ _. _ _. _ _ _ _ _. _ _
uu_._
_m-_
--_____.s.__um__-_____
.___m-_-_-
s.
E i.
Szerstcry of th2 C mmincien February 23, 1989 Northem States Power Company Page'3~
' Reason'for. Proposed Change:
This change will. permit members of the plant engineering and technical support staff who hold Senior Reactor Operator Licenses to hold the position of senior site manager.
At many sites, - the position of control room operator; is not
'available to members of utility' management or.the site engineer-
~
ing and' technical support = staff. This. change will permit highly.
qualified management and technical support personnel to qualify for the position of' senior site manger.
Senior site. managers will,be, carefully seleeted by utility man-agement. Having earned an NRC. license, and having served in a plant management or technical. support role, provides assurance j.
that~an individual possesses the experience needed to fill the role of senior site manager.
-Please contact us if you have-any questions related to our comments on the proposed NRC~ rule on education and experience requirements for -
-senior operators:and supervisors.
i
/
l C E Larson-Vice President Nuclear Ceneration c: Members of.the-Commission Chairman Lando W Zech, Jr Commissioner Kenneth M Car l
Commissioner James P.Curtiss Commissioner Thomas M Robertu Cotamissioner Kenneth C Rogers Nuclear Management and Reserarces Council Attn: Mr Byron 14ra, Jr.
..__--m