ML20247F116
| ML20247F116 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/25/1998 |
| From: | Dicus G NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Cotter B Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9805190149 | |
| Download: ML20247F116 (2) | |
Text
L)dJo Y
L
'o,,
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION COMSECY-98-010
[
g 3
p ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD PANEL "S"'"'"-
\\*****fl;gl y~y I approve Judge Cotter's April 7,1998 proposal to hire a materials specialist on a full or part-time basis.
Chairman Jackson #
fNa 'r D
MEMORANDUM TO:
G h 'E~
t Og{.
FROM:
B. Paul Cotter, Jr. P
- )
Chief Administrative Judge EXPERTS NEEDED FOR PLANT LIFE EXTENSh0N CAR BNd
SUBJECT:
dato '
initials
.eeeeeeeeeeeeeieeeeeeee Pursuant to our April 3,1998 discussion, I asked three technical members of the Panel, Judges Kline, Kelber and Murphy, to consider whether the ASLBP needs additional expert members to adjudicate the technical issues that could arise in the upcoming plant life extension cases.
They concluded that:
1.
The existing members of either the full-time or part-time groups have sufficient expertise to resolve the majority of potentialissues; 2.
Resolution of one class of issues, those related to material aging, such as polymers, and corrosion, could benefit from assistance in such disciplines as materials science or materials engineering; and 3.
A materials scientist would be of important assistance in the forthcoming high-level waste (HLW) case because of the recent developing interest in the long term integrity of waste packages under corrosive conditions.
In reaching their conclusions, the judges consulted all of the full-time technical members, reviewed the expertise available from the full-time and part-time rosters, reviewed issues in the Diablo Canyon license recapture ca,e, and reviewed applicable portions of the regulations goveming plant life extension.
All of the technical members believe that our existing capabilities are adequate to handle plant l
life extension cases because of their similarity to reactor licensing cases. However, none j
i disagreed that a materials scientist could be useful in these cases and would be helpful in the HLW case. The expertise currently available from full-time panel members is probably adequate to adjudicate license extension cases, but the absence of any one of several members would lead to a serious gap. Broad scale engineering expertise resides as well within several part-time members.' -
\\o
'In addition, there are individuals on our Register of candidates qualified for appointment to the Panel with chemical engineering expertise which might include corrosion chemistry and y
engineering.
/a
]
^
5 g51 5
CORRESPONDENCE PDR
_____-______a
1 i
s i
1 2
The Diablo Canyon license recapture case represents our most recent experience with these l
issues. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2) 3 l
LBP-94-35,40 NRC 180 (1994). In Diablo Canyon the applicant sought to extend its license for l
13 and 15 years, respectively, for Units 1 and 2 to recapture the time lost between the grant of
)
a construction permit and the issuance of an operating licent.e. The issue raised was whether the plant maintenance program was adequate to assure safe operation for an additional 13 to 15 years. This is an issue that could arise repeatedly in plant life extension cases. However l
none of the issues in this case fell outside the technical capabilities of the Board members.
Consequently, the experience in this case does not support the recruitment of part-time members.
The controlling regulation,10 C.F.R. Part 54, " Requirements for renewal of operating licenses for nuclear power plants," emphasizes aging. It requires an application for license extension to contain an integrated plant assessment; current licensing basis changes; a time limited aging analysis; and an FSAR supplement detailing the programs for managing the effects of aging for l
the period of the license extension. Other regulations expected to be of significance to aging during these reviews include 9 50.48 fire protection; 9 50.49 environmental qualification; 9 50.61 pressurized thermal shock events; 9 50.62 A1WS; 9 50.63 station blackout; and 9 50.65 maintenance rule. These requirements generally support the value of having a specialist in materials science available for service.2 CONCLUSION l
it appears that the Panel has the disciplines necessary to handle the issues in license renewal 8
cases. If a more specialized discipline is needed, Licensing Boards have the authority to hire J
their own expert.
lt is equally clear that materials expertise will be needed for the HLW Repository case.
Accordingly, I recommend that the Commission authorize me to hire either a full-time or a j
part-time materials scientist.
j
\\
cc: Commissioner Dicus j
Commissioner Diaz l
Commissioner McGaffigan
'While thermal annealing of the reactor pressure vessel (9 50.66), may also be associated with license extension, it will be addressed in a separate licensing proceeding l
apparently not subject to an ASLB hearing it should be noted, however, that in terms of specific disciplines, we are thinly staffed S
and have littW backup. In addition, five of the six full-time technical judges are eligible to retire.
...