ML20236M020
Text
g
~ ~ ~ ~ -
ymy l
1 UNITED STATES
)
p s
,j NUCLEAR REEULATORY COMMISSIDN WASHINGTON D.C. - a=1
%...../'
August 23, 1996 l
MEMORANDUM TO:
Hubert J. Miller, Regional Administrator, Region I l
l Stewart D. Ebneter, Re ional Administrator, Region II A. Bill Beach, Regiona Administrator, Region III L. Joseph Callan, Regional Administrator, Region IV FROM:
Frank P. Gillespie, Director
[
Division of Inspection and Support Progr ms l
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
LICENSEE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (TS) INTERPRETATIONS l
Recent observations of licensee TS interpretations and some particular practices concerning their implementation have highlighted the need for staff clarification and guidance on this subject. For the purpose of this memorandum, " Licensee TS Interpretation" refers an interpretation developed by a licensee without consent or review by the NRC. Typically licensee's have a formalized process which governs the development and usage of their TS interpretations.
Although NRR recognizes that many licensees have established TS interpretations as an aid to their plant staff, the NRC staff does not endorse or recognize licensee TS interpretations. Since licensee TS interpretations are not legal documents and they do not have any legal authority rega'rding plant operations, licensee TS interpretations must never contradict or change the wording, the meaning, or the intent of a TS requirement. Many licensee TS interpretations provide clarification to a TS requirement in order for licensee personnel to more fully understand the requirements such that the TS are properly complied with. Licensees should be aware that their TS interpretation process, which does not have NRC acknowledgement, may not always be the optimum approach to resolving TS questions.
There are several preferred methods licensees can utilize for TS interpretations that the staff recognizes. Licensees are encouraged to pursue one of these options when they have a question concerning TS compliance and a desire to obtain formal NRC recognition of their position. These methods include (I) a license amendment to change the TS wording; (2) a change to the TS bases via 10 CFR 50.59 or 50.90 (when an unreviewed safety question is identified) which adds clarification to the TS requirement; or (3) a written interpretation from the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) regarding the intent of the TS requirement.
Contact:
R. Haag, PIPB/NRR (301) 415-1245, E-mail RCH I
9807t30270 980624 hxbnRa rprim
d g
1 2
When the staff has a question regarding TS compliance and an agency position is needed to ensure that a licensee properly complies with the TS, then the question should be resolved via the Task Interface Agreement (TIA) process.
For issues where it appears that the licensee is clearly not complying with TS requirements, yet the licensee disagrees with the inspector, then NRC management should be consulted for resolution of the issue through the inspection and enforcement process.
The inspection staff should nty.gr concur or become involved in the approval process for licensee TS interpretations.
Inspectors are encouraged to review licensee TS interpretations, once they are issued, to verify that the interpretations do not conflict with the TS wording or intent. An example of an inappropriate licensee TS interpretation involved a TS requirement for the main steam safety valves and changes to the Power Range Neutron Flux High Trip setpoints that are required for an inoperable valve (s). Analysis from the HSSS vendor identified that the neutron flux high trip setpoints specified in TS were nonconservative by as much as 3I percent of rated power.
The licensee issued a TS interpretation which specified the new setpoints values.
In this case the licensee clearly should have submitted a TS amendment request to incorporate the new neutron flux high trip setpoints into the TS requirements for an inoperable main steam safety valve (s). An example of an inappropriate licensee TS interpretation practice involved a NRC inspector's signature on the licensee TS interpretations which gave the appearance that NRC approval had been given to the interpretation. This practice is not acceptable.
Inspectors should be cautioned that any involvement they have with licensee TS interpretations (outside the three methods mentioned above) should not be construed as providing NRC endorsement of the interpretations.
The regions are requested to have the resident inspectors verify that there are no indications of NRC approval in the licensee TS interpretations other than through formal NRC documentation.
If indications are identified, then the licensee should be informed that this form of NRC involvement is not recognized by the Commission and is not an acceptable practice.
Licensees should be requested to remove any indications of previous NRC approval from their TS interpretations. The referencing of official NRC correspondence in a licensee TS interpretation is an acceptable practice.
The results of the resident inspector's reviews for indication of NRC approval in licensee TS interpretations should be forwarded to PIPB. This information will be utilized in determining if additional guidance on TS interpretations is needed. PIPB will also review the need for TS interpretation guidance to the industry. The results of resident inspector reviews and regional comments on the need for guidance to the industry should be forwarded to PIPB by September 30, 1996.
I l
_ _. _ _.