ML20248H823
| ML20248H823 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/07/1989 |
| From: | Thomas C Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Butcher E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8910120100 | |
| Download: ML20248H823 (1) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:__ September 7, 1989 4 ] .1 MEMORANDUf1 FOR: Edward J. Butcher, Jr. Chief Inspection and Licensing Program Branch I Program management, Policy Development and Analysis Staff i Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation I i FROM: Cecil 0. Thomas, Chief 1 Policy Development and Technical f Support Branch i Program flanagement, Policy Development and Analysis Staff j Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l
SUBJECT:
LICENSING AND INSPECTION GUIDANCE NEEDED IN RESPONSE TO COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A RECENT STAFF PROPOSAL (SECY 89-138) The Commission recently approved the enclosed stuff proposal concerning the resolution of " Generic Issues" (including USIs). Pages 5, 6 and 7 of to the Staff Proposal concern the plant-specific imposition, implementation and verification of NRC approved requirements, guidance and policies resulting frem the resolution of these issues. The enclosure is provided for prompt incorporation in NRR licensing and inspection guidance as appropriate. Questions concerning this matter should be referred to Walt Schwink (21292). Original signed by Walter Schwink for Cecil 0. Thomas, Chief Policy Development and Technical Support Branch Program fianagement, Policy Development and Analysis Staff Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
As stated DISTRIBUTION cc: T. Murley "CentraltFile* WSchwink J. Sniezek NRC PDR CThomas J. Partlow Local PDR [EB] r 0)b ,, gj /) D. Crutchfield PTSB Staff F. iiiraglia GHolahan l, l) l. r F. Gillespie SVarga PTSIjthS b j l,%.- f I C:PTSB:PMA WSc Nink/bj CThomas 'T /7 /85 1 / 7/89 4i" enoaot* gyi 'c ne su n [no ub,.; m.z ", ~ ;. w, p, _g, P ETR nr m
jm f $) ij$') M / \\ *% Scu+w K POLICY ISSUE April 27, 1989 (Notation Vote) SECY-89-138 For: The Commissioners From: Victor Stello, Jr. Executive Director for Operations
Subject:
WITHDRAWAL OF 1978 NRC POLICY STATEMENT ON THE PROGRAM FOR RESOLUTION OF GENERIC ISSUES RELATED TO NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS.
Purpose:
To seek approval for the withdrawal of the NRC Policy Statement Progrem for Resolution of Generic Issues Related to Nuclear Power Plants," which was published in the Federal Register on January 10, 1978. Discussion: The Generic Issues Management Program described in the 1978 NRC Policy statement has undergone numerous changes as a result of continuing experience with the program and numerous internal as well as external program reviews. As a result, there are significant differences between the program described in the 1978 NRC Policy Statement and the Generic Issues Management Program currently in effect. In addition, separate documentation has been developed with widespread distribution, describing the Generic Issues Management Program and the status and disposition of all issues in the system. A summary of the current Generic Issues Management Program, including the identification of existing staff documents which describe the conduct of the program and provide requirements s for the reporting of status information, is provided as, "NRC Generic Issues Management Program." The major differences between the plan described in the 1978 NRC Policy Sthtement and the ct:rrent plan make it necessary for the Policy Statement to be either updated or withdrawn. These major differences are summarized in Enclosure 2. Since the generic issue program is highly visible without the 1978 Policy Statement, within the NRC as well as to members of the nuclear industry, the public, members of Congress and the Government Accounting Office, the need for a separate Policy Statement appears to have passed. In addition, following the 1987 reorganization, responsibilities for the execution of the generic issues program have been realigned CONTACT: W. Milstead, RES '492-3742 0 ?C 4? '! pp.
'The Cosnissioners 2 such that the lead responsibility for the identification, prioritization, and resolution of generic issues resides almost exclusively with RES, and the responsibility for the imposition, implementation, and verification of generic issues { resides exclusively with NRR. RES and NRR office letters have been or are now nearly developed which clearly delineate 1 organizational responsibilities. 1 -{
== Conclusion:== The staff no longer sees any need for a separate Policy Statement for the management of generic issues. Therefore, unless otherwise instructed, the staff intends to publish a notice (Enclosure 3)intheFederalRecisterwithdrawingthe1978NRC Policy Statement, " Program for Resolution of Generic Issues Related to Nuclear Power Plants" (43 FR 1565; January 10, 1978). This notice will be released to the Federal Register no sooner than 10 working days from the date of this paper. Coordination: The Office of the General Counsel has reviewed this paper and has no legal objections to it. O /, 1 victor S e 10, J Executive Direc or _for Operations j
Enclosures:
{ 2. NRC Generic Issue Management Program ) 2. Summary of Differences Between 1978 Policy and Current Generic Issues Management Program. 3. Federal Register Notice: Policy Statement " Program for the Resolution of Generic Issues Related to Nuclear Power Plants" J 4. 1978 NRC Policy Statement
I 1 [.. - p ' Commissioners' comments or consent should be.provided dir'ectly L- ._to SECY by c.o.b. Monday, May 15, 1989. commission staff office comments,:if any,.-should be submitted 'to the Commissioners NLT~ Monday, May 8, 1989, with an information
- copy to SECY.
If the paper is of such a nature that it requires additional time for analytical review and comment, the Commissioners ';i and the Secretariat should be apprised of when comments may be' expected. . DISTRIBUTION:- Commissioners j OGC IG 1 GPA REGIONAL OFFICES I EDO .l ACRS .ACNW ASLBP ASLAP SECY i i J i j i l ) ____ ____ ______._._________j
NRC Generic Issue Management Program
Background:
The NRC program for management of generic issues (authorized by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended) is considerably broader than the requirements of Section 210 of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, relating to Unresolved Safety Issues (USIs). The NRC Generic Issue Management Program provides for the pursuit and completion of all generic issues, including USIs, concerning nuclear reactor facilities. The program is divided into six distinct stages: Identification, Prioritization, Resolution, Imposition, Implementation and Verification. The Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research is responsible for the identification, prioritization and resolution stages and the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation is responsible for the i plant specific imposition, implementation and verification stages. (NRR no longer has lead responsibility for the resolution of any generic issue.) Any organizational unit or individual can participate in the identification of a generic issue. The program as described herein is responsive to past Congressional, GA0 and public concerns about the need to improve NRC's procedures for management of generic issues. The following discussion describes the NRC's Generic Issue Management Program and identifies the staff documents which establish procedures for the conduct of the program, provide for management control of the program, and establish the status information reporting requirements for generic issues. Discussion: The program for management of generic issues is divided in six distinct stages: Identification, Prioritization, Resolution, Imposition, Implementation, and Verification. Each of these stages is discussed below along with a brief discussion on the tracking of generic issues. Identification: Generic concerns may be suggested by individuals or organizations within the NRC staff, the ACRS, the nuclear power industry, or the public. RES Office Letter I (0L - 1), " Procedure for Identification, Prioritization, and Tracking of the Resolution of Generic Issues," provides a procedure and suggested content for individuals or organizations within NRC to request consideration of a concern as a new generic issue. This office letter procedure may also be used by parties outside of HRC to suggest concerns as candidates for new generic issues. Sources of potential generic issues are many and varied and include, but are not limited to, the following: evaluation of safety-related research, risk assessment analyses, and public and industry J concerns. The current scope of the generic issues program includes issues that are related to safety (Generic Safety Issues) as well as other non-safety related issues that can be classified as Regulatory Impact (RI), Environmental Issues (EI) or Licensing Issues (LI). A Generic Safety Issue (GSI) is a generic issue that involves a safety concern that may affect the design, construction or operation of all, several or a class of reactors or facilities. Its resolution may have a potential for safety improvements and promulgation of new or revised requirements or guidance. It should be noted that GSIs concern enhancement of safety. An adequate level of protection of public health and safety currently is believed to exist at all operating nuclear power plants. Regulatory Impact Issues (RI) are generic issues not related to improving safety, but to modifying 1
L current requirements or guidance, with the primary purpose of reducing the J impact, usually cost, of requirements / guidance on NRC, licensees or applicants. Environmental Issues (EI) involve. impacts on those items protected by the. National Environmental Policy Act. Licensing Issues (LI) are related to increasing knowledge, certainty, and understanding of Safety Issues in order to identify actions the NRC staff should take to increase confidence in assessing levels of safety; improving or maintaining the NRC capability to make independent assessments of safety; establishing, revising, and carrying out programs to identify and resolve Safety Issues; documenting, clarifying, or correcting current requirements and guidance; and improving the effectiveness or efficiency of the review of applications. All requests for consideration of a concern as a new generic issue are screened for adequate content provided by the originating individual or organization. The description of a proposed issue provided by the originator is compared to the description of all active, inactive, and completed generic issues to assure that the proposed issue or elements of the proposed issue have not been previously addressed. When it is verified that a new generic issue has been identified, a description of the issue is prepared that defines the scope of the issue. The issue is given a descriptive title and is assigned a control number. After their acceptance, generic issues are subjected to an evaluation to determine if there is any aspect of the concern which has so severe an impact upon the protection of the public health and safety that imediate remedial action maybe warranted (i.e. an immediate action determination). Generic issues are also screened for identification of overlap or duplication of already imposed or completed Multi-Plant Actions (MPAs). RES Office Letter 1 describes the procedures used for the classification and screening of newly identified generic issues and the organizational responsibilities for those activities. Prioritization: The method used to prioritize Generic Safety Issues is described in NUREG-0933, "A*Prioritization of Generic Safety Issues." The indices used in determining the priority ranking of Generic Safety Issues are: (1) the estimated public risk reduction potential (value) of the issue; and (2) as a secondary consideration, the value/ impact ratio, which is the risk reduction divided by the estimated cost (impact) of developing and implementing the resolution of the issue. Risk reduction is expressed in man-rem while cost estimates, which include costs both to the industry and the NRC, are expressed in millions of dollars. Using criteria which are identified in Table I of NUREG-0933 (estimated public dose reduction in man-rem, estimated core melt frequency reduction in events / reactor year, and estimated licensee and NRC costs in millions of dollars), Safety Issues are tentatively categorized into four priority rankings: HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW, and DROP. The safety priority rankings are then adjusted, where appropriate, based on other relevant significant considerations. When other considerations are used, they are explicitly stated. These other considerations are listed in Paragraph II.E. of the Introduction to NUREG-0933 and include: (1) Factors related to uncertainties stemming from an incomplete or imprecise database; (2) Special risks and costs 2 i
not in or masked by the numerical formulas (i.e., occupational exposure - both averted and that expected in the course of implementing the anticipated plant ections necessary to resolve the issue and averted modifications and insp(3) Perceptions or judgments that cannot readily be plant-damage costs); quantified; and (4) Changes with respect to time. The prioritization is completed in consultation with NRC staff knowledgeable of the issues or the technical areas involved. Assistance in some instances is obtained from I outside contractors. In other instances, additional information is obtained from industry and other outside sources. Separate evaluations are prepared for each issue and circulated for internal peer review and comment. Comments resulting from this process are resolved and the issues are finalized for ) publication and inclusion in NUREG-0933. j The issues are periodically discussed with NRC senior management and the ACRS. NUREG-0933 is updated (revised) semiannually, and its revisions are placed in j the Public Document Room (PDR). Publication of each prioritization in NUREG-0933 makes it available to anyone who may be interested. Additional coments received from the ACRS, industry, or the public are reviewed to determine if reassessment of the prioritization of generic issues or reclassification of issues are needed. The documentation of generic issues in NUREG-0933 serves as a guide for future reference, should similar issues be raised again. As the prioritization process continues, new Generic Safety Issues identified are prioritized along with reprioritizations of previously prioritized issues if new~information becomes available which could affect the priority. As indicated above, four priority rankings are used in the prioritization of Generic Safety Issues: HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW, and DROP. These rankings, which represent safety significance, are used in determining the allocation of HRC resources and scheduling of efforts to resolve the various issues in conjunction with other pertinent factors (such as the nature, extent, and availability of manpower and material resources estimated to be required; length of time needed to resolve; conflicts in resources allocation and scheduling among items of comparable priority; status of affected reactors; and budget constraints). ThehighestpriorityonstaffresourcesisafforfedtotheresolutionofUSIs, followed by HIGH-priority Generic Safety Issues MEDIUM-priority Generic Safety Issues are afforded remaining available staff resources for resolution following allocation of resources to USIs and HIGH-priority generic safety issues. Staff resources are not allocated to the resolution of Generic Safety Issues which are assigned a LOW or DROP priority. Because they have very little or no potential to result in any new requirements / guidance, Generic Safety Issues assigned a LOW or DROP priority are not pursued and, therefore, are essentially completed, unless new information is discovered or comments are received during the review process which indicate that the issue might deserve a higher priority. In those instances, the issue is then reprioritized. 1 There have been no new USI designated by the Commission since December 1981. Therefore, there currently is no real distinction between USIs and HIGH-priority generic Safety Issues with regard to the allocation of staff resources for resolution. 3 i J
s-Issues given a HIGH-priority are candidates for possible designation as USIs. and'are screened against the criteria specified in NUREG-0705, " Identification of New Unresolved Safety Issues Relating to Nuclear Power Plants." Those - Generic Safety Issues that meet the screening criteria are forwarded to the Commission for consideration as USIs. Decisions to pursue the resolution of Environmental Issues (EI), Licensing Issues (LI), and Regulatory Impact Issues (RI) are made by qualitative judgment . and the availability of staff resources. The procedure for the prioritization of generic issues and the organizational responsibility for those activities are prescribed in RES Office Letter 1. Resolution: USIs and HIGH-and MEDIUM-ari~ority Generic Safety Issues are usuany assigned to one of three brancies specifically organized for the resolution of Generic Safety Issues. Assignment is made on the basis of the equipment, des.ign principles, and/or disciplines affected by the specific issues. Schedule demands and availability of cpecific resources or staff may dictate other assignments in unusual circumstances. Decisions to work on RI's, EI's and LI's are made by qualitative judgments, dependent on the availability i of staff resources. i The first step in the resolution process is the development of a plan to delineate the work to be done, assign major responsibilities, and identify project resource needs and schedule milestone dates. These plans vary in scope and depth in accordance with issue priority and the depth of information on a given issue. The second step involves developnient of a technical solution. The Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.is responsible for resolving.almost. all generic issues using their technical staffs and/or contractors to carry out the necessary work to resolve the issues. The scope of effort varies from issue to issue. Typically, however, the information used to resolve an issue comes from experience data, experiments, tests, analysis, and probabilistic risk assessment. The results of such work or the technical findings may be published in contractor and staff NUREG reports which are made available through the Public Document Room. In the final step of resolution, the technical findings are used as a basis to develop a proposed resolution for the issue involving a change to NRC requirements or guidance. Several alternatives may be considered. A regulatory analysis, including a detailed cost benefit analysis of each practical alternative, and consideration of the best methods of imposition, implementation, and verification are used in selecting a proposed resolution. If a backfit is proposed, first, a determination is made as to whether the backfit is required to provide adequate protection to the health and safety of the public, or sim>1y provides for enhancement of public health and safety. If it is determined tlat the backfit is necessary to provide an adequate level of protection, the backfit will be imposed regardless of the costs to achieve it. If it is determined that the backfit provides for enhancement of public health and safety, a generic analy(c)s is required that treats the nine factors j si specified in 10 CFR 50.109 Various NRC groups review and approve the proposed solution. Once the cognizant NRC Office Directors have agreed to a i proposed resolution, it is forwarded for consideration by the CRGR, the ACRS, the EDO, and the Commission, as appropriate. When change to the Regulations, 4
M I En' closure 1 Policies,1 the Standard Review Plan, and/or a Regulatory Guide is necessary, the ) proposed-change is published in the Federal Register for public comment. Comments received are then incorporated,-as appropriate. Resolution of a generic issue can take from several months to a few years depending on the. length of time required by the deliberations involved at each step. USIs, HIGH-and MEDIUM-priority Generic Safety Issues and any Licensing Issues, Environmental Issues, and Regulatory Impact Issues which have been comnitted to - resolution are tracked through the resolution process by the Generic Issues Management Control' System (GIMCS), a subset of the Safety Issue Management System (SIMS). : For each active issue, the GIMCS' includes a. synopsis of the ~ action plan, work scope, contractor work status, and program milestones. GIMCS information is updated quarterly and is~placed in the.PDR. RES Office Letter 3, " Procedure and Guidance for the Resolution of Generic Issues," prescribes the procedure to be followed in the' resolution of a generic. issue, denotes.the required elements of the resolution plan and resolution j '~ package and identifies review procedures and organizational responsibilities j for the approval of.the resolution of a generic issue. Guidance for the preparation, review, and' required content of the Regulatory Analysis portion of l the resolution package is provided by RES Office Letter 2, " Procedures for Obtaining Regulatory Impact Analysis Review and Support." Milestone information and reporting requirements as well as organizational responsibilities for the tracking of generic issue resolution are provided in RES Office Letter 1.
- Imposition
- Plant specific imposition is the step in the generic issues process where individual-applicants and/or licensees are required to implement the generic issue resolution consistent with a rule, policy, Regulatory Guide, generic letter, bulletin an'd/or. licensing guidance developed during the resolution stage. Licensees of operating plants and/or new plants in the licensing process are required to take actions to enhance plant safety.
Normally, NRC requirements, policies and/or guidance will not provide for NRC . consideration of a licensee's plant modifications prior to completion of their ' implementation at an affected facility. This facilitates completion of plant inodifications to enhance safety) within two (2) refueling outages (not to exceed three ( ) years after issuance of NRC requirements, policies and/or submit (normally for NRC approval)ptional cases, licensees may be required tothe + guidance). However, in a few exce modifications prior to their implementation. In all cases, licensees will be ' required to certify in writing to the NRC, that plant modifications have been completed. For the exceptional cases, the staff reviews each applicant's and/or licensee's submittal with regard to proposed modifications to site, equipment, structures, procedures, technical specifications, operating instructions, etc. and schedules proposed for the accomplishment of the modifications. For backfit requirements, imposition is complete when each Offected licensee is committed to compliance actions and schedules for accomplishment of those actions. For new forward fit requirements, the imposition of a generic issue resolution is completed when the new requirement (s) becomes effective as an integral part of NRC regulations, $olicies and/or guidance. During the imposition stage, licensee actions for a resolved generic issue are identified as Multiplant Actions (MPA). A lead project manager (LPM), is 5
I s assigned for each MPA to assist the PMs of affected plants with facilitating licensee implementation of generic issue resolutions. The imposition status of a specific generic issue resolution is tracked in the Safety Issue Management System (SIMS). Procedures for the management of the imposition of generic issue resolution as well as organizational responsibilities though the imposition stage are found in NRR Office Letter 25, " Procedure for Research Coordination." (To be revised.) Implementation: Implementation is the step in the generic issue process where each attected licensec performs the actions on existing plants to satisfy the commitments made during the imposition stage. These may include modifications / additions to equipment, structures, procedures, technical specifications, operating instructions, etc. No later than 30 days after each affected licensee has completed all of the actions required for a particular generic issue resolution, and the modified / additional system is fully operational, the licensee is required to certify in writing to the NRC that plant modifications have been completed, in accordance with NRC requirements, policies and/or guidance. When all affected licensees have officially notified the NRC of completion of all required / committed actions, the implementation stage is complete, unless subsequent verification inspection determines additional licensee actions are needed for compliance. Each affected plant PM monitors licensee implementation of each backfit and provides implementation status information to update the SIMS. Procedures for the monitoring of licensee implementation progress and the reporting of implementation status as well as organizational responsibilities are defined in NRR Office Letter 25, " Procedure for Research Coordination." (To be revised.) Verification: The verification process consists of three parts. First, the portions of the licensee's actions, if any, that warrant NRC staff inspection must be determined. This decision is made during the issue resolution stage based on a judgment of the safety significance of the issue relative to other matters in the inspection program, licensee performance, and the resources needed to accomplish a meaningful inspection. Next, as necessary, inspection instructions are prepared to ensure that the inspection ic performed in a consistent and appropriate manner at all affected plants. The inspection, by its very nature, is an audit. Therefore, carefully thought out instructions must be provided to the inspectors so that the maximum safety benefit is achieved for the limited resources devoted to this effort. The third part of the verification process is the actual inspection and documentation of the results in an inspection report. Physical inspections are performed on an audit basis in a manner consistent with general inspection procedures which involve a sampling of changes made by licensees or applicants as opposed to a 100 percent inspection of all actions. Inspection of licensee implementation of generic issue resolution is reported by SIMS. Procedures and organizational responsibilities for the development and execution of the verification as well as reporting requirements are given in NRR Office Letter 25, " Procedure for Research Coordination." (To be revised.) 6 i I
Generic Issue Tracking: The Safety Issue Management System (SIMS) is used to report the progress of generic issues. The SIMS was developed to provide NRC . management and staff a single reliable source of information concerning the identification, prioritization, resolution, imposition, implementation and verification of generic issues affecting power reactors. The SIMS is a computerized system. Some of the status information reported by SIMS is updated quarterly, while other input is updated monthly. Specifically, identification, prioritization and resolution stage inputs are updated quarterly; imposition and implementation stage inputs are updated monthly. Verification inputs are updated as inspections are completed. Although NUREG-0933 and GIMCS have been retained as office level in-house management control systems for the prioritization and resolution stages of generic issue development, all necessary data from both of the systems are input to SIMS quarterly. SIMS requirements are defined in NRCs " Safety Issues Management System (SIMS) Procedures." O + 4 7
1 Sumary of Differences Between 1978 Policy and Current Generic Issues Management Program
Background
In accordance with the reporting requirements of Section 210 of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, the Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC) published and issued a report to Congress entitled "NRC Program for the Resolution of Generic Issues Related to Nuclear Power Plants," NUREG-0410, on January 1, 1978. The report served as the basis for the Policy Statement which was published in the Federal Register on January 10, 1978 (43FR1365). Over the years, the generic issues program has been subjected to many internal and external reviews, including a critical review by the Government Accounting Office (GAO) in 1984, and as a result, the program has undergone a series of changes to expand and improve the program. Accordingly, there are significant differences between the 1978 program and the current Generic Issues Management Program. Discussion The major differences between the current Generic Issues Management Program and the program described in the 1978 policy statement are as follows: 1. The generic issues management plan reported in the 1978 policy statement had not yet defined a separate category of Unresolved Safety Issues (USIs) (whose specification is required by Section 210 of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended on December 12, 1977) and tentatively concluded that all Generic Safety Issues were { USIs. Current practice utilizes a precise definition for a USI and i definitive screening criteria for their identification. All high ) priority Generic Safety Issues are screened for compliance with definitive characteristics that define a USI. All new Generic Safety Issues which pass this screening process are reported to the i Comission for their consideration for designation as new USIs. I 2. Under the 1978 plan, priority assignments for the application of i staff resources for the resolution of generic issues were assigned by a select comittee based on quantitative judgments regarding the merits of each generic issue. The current program provides for the application of staff resources for the resolution of Generic Safety Issues in accordance with priorities assigned primarily on the basis of estimates of the potential public risk reducticn which might be afforded by the issues and secondarily by the possible impact (primarily cost) which would be expected on both the nuclear industry and the NRC, although other factors are also considered. I 1
c i a 9 ~ 3.
- Under the 1978 plan, decisions on whether to impose new requirements as the result of'the resolution of a generic issue were made by a select committee within NRR on the basis of qualitative judgments of i
-the committee' members. -Under the current generic issue management program, new requirements must now be reviewed by the Comittee to . Review Generic Requirements (CRGR) and approved by the cognizant Office Director. EDO and/or the Comission.. Decisions on imposing new requirements are based primarily on analysis of the benefits and' secondarily on costs. associated with the proposed requirement (Regulatory Analysis and/or~ Backfit Analysis). 4. The prerogative to identify new generic issues has been extended to the public. Under the 1978 plan, generic issues were identified from operation and research experience, NRC and ACRS safety reviews and-vendor, architect / engineer, utility design review. Thus, the identification of new generic issues was limited to members of the NRC staff, the ACRS, and the nuclear power industry. Currently, a - definitive procedure has been established (RES Office Letter 1) for .the identification of new generic issues, and the procedure may be used by individuals or organizations within the NRC staff, the ACRS, the nuclear power industry, and the public. ' 5. 'Since the 1978 generic issues management plan, the staff has devoted significant additional resources and management attention to the tracking of generic issues through the completion of required and committed actions at affected plants and verification by the NRC staff. The Safety Issues Management System (SIMS) represents a new management tool to provide a single reliable source of information for generic issues af.fecting. power reactors through all six stages of their existence. O 2
- T
[7590-01] j q NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Program for Resolution of Generic Issues Related to Nuclear Power Plants; POLICY STATEMENT. AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Comission. ACTION: ' Policy Statement: Withdrawal
SUMMARY
- The Nuclear Regulatory Comission is hereby revoking the 1978 Policy Statement, " Program for Resolution of Generic Issues Related to Nuclear Power Plants" (43FR1565; January 10,1978).
EFFECTIVE DATE: (Effective upon publication in the Federal Register). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:.. William Milstead, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, D.C. 20555, extension 492-3742. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Policy Statements have generally been issued by the Comission to provide the staff, the industry and the public with guidance on new issues, programs, or concerns prior to formally implementing regulations or other actions to address these. Such was the case in 1978 when the Comission issued the Policy Statement " Program for Resolution of Generic Issues Related to Nuclear Powerplants"(43FR1565,1/10/78). Since the issuance of this Policy Statement, the Comission's program to resolve generic issues has undergone many reviews and changes. These changes and the current program are described in the following documents: RES Office Letter 1, Revision 1, " Procedure for Identification, Prioritization, and Tracking of the Resolution of Generic Issues," March 22, 1989. 1 b
-[7590-01]' r' .,',1 - RES Office Letter 2, " Procedure for Obtaining Regulatory Impact Analysis Review and Support," November 18, 1988. I RES Office. Letter.3, " Revision 2,, Procedure and Guidance for the Resolution of Generic Issues,". March 27, 1989. NRR Office Letter 25. Revision 2, " Procedure for Research Coordination,"-(not yet published). NUREG-0933, "A Prioritization of Generic Safety Issues," revised semiannually. " Generic Issues Management Control System (GIMCS)," published quarterly. " Safety Issues Management System (SIMS) Procedures" June 8, 1988. "US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Annual Report to Congress," published annually.. Each of these documents is available for public inspection and copying at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L St. NW., Washington, D.C. Accordingly, the 1978 Policy Statement no longer reflects the current Generic Issues Management Program and the Commission has elected to withdraw the 1978 Policy Statement from the public record. Dated at Rockville, MD this day of , 1989. FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Samuel J. Chilk Secretary of the Commission 2
,m_--__._ c e..o..... reCotAM 70e StSOLUfeON Of C(NtsiC o risult ettAtto TD NUCLlaa POwra L rtANf 8 eeren en Ceee.e ss .e Nodce is hereby given that in a.ecor. darice w!Lh the reporting requirements of Section 210 of the Energy Reorganh nuon Act of 1974, as amended. the Nuclear Regul6 tory Commluton hu WWI published and issued a report to Con. tress entitled "NRC Program for the Resolution of Generic !ssues Related to Nuclear Power Plants.* The refeue date b January 1.1978. The Energy Reorts.ntation Act of 1974 wu amended by Pub. I. 95 209 on December 12. 1977, to include a new section 210 as fo!!cws: uns Unassoavus 8Arrrir Issets Ptan Sec. Sat. The Commlasion shall develoo a plan providing for specificauen and analysts A of unresolved safetr tasueJ relattne to nucle. ar reactors and shaJ1 Lake such actJon as O mar be piectasary to imoterment corrective measuiu 7.;th res!*ct to sveh lasuca. Such plan shat! be submitted to the Conercas on I, ..l or before January 1.1978. and proersas re. b' ' ' ". a.o i .on.,..., ports shall be theluded in the annual report ' " t l" -.*i. ...c. i "c ,i ; of the CommLssion thereafter, In October 1976, the Commlaston dj. rected the NRC staff to deve!Jp the ~ generic lasues program described in the report, and development and im. plementauon of the progra.m has pro. ce ded over the put year. The NRC program, as developed by the staff is considerably broader than the "Unre. f' solved Safety Issues Plan" required by
- + " ~.
seedon 310. It includes plans for'the resolution of generic environmental issues for the Beveloprnent of Im. provements in the reactor IJcensing j process, and for consideration of less I conservauve design criteria or operat. . ~ p........._,.. @ Hig;g@ l-ing limitations in areu where present Of!dllIiiiii[llJilii.iiiiiiillii.iiijii'"DJ"H"H"lH"D"!PQ";i.it,i,r,);;g-- l,g.a.-..--.a..............ig g g,44R.@ requirements may be ttnnecessarily re. ! @ $ lHHpglU 2, gy.. i mlum"ne..n.m...n. n.;..u..m n, inn ;,,,,, striedre cr oosuy. Weh4%44, g,yinnuq nonon.nninn," H 1 ~ The NRC program described in the e m. .a.. ..m....o report provides for the idenuticauon of generic issues, the assignrnent of prtorides, the development of detafled Ts.sk Acco4 Plans, projetLions of t i dollar and manpower costs,m t t nuous ie" f'f high level snanagement ove.1 sight of (ask prtgress, and public dl&semlna. hdiW f f,[,5,;h,,, f m Pf.7m. 2_ ~ 924,,%.J.:g :d*l*lf*(,gggg'jr;;g.' g'M'.y y .n. r n., g. uon of informauen related to the .m.....L $Q
e.-.u - U.;
tasks u they prorreu. The report in. fmH Pffuntri.frugtg. igg.iggi. Ema:mmun..$7""PtTimir ir,n,,,,,r[" 'f*"W'"wmmm. o efeates that the program is, expected t? tse fully epersuonal by the end of February 1978 and that afx of the hiehest priority (Category A). generic ~ ta.skJ are currently scheduled for com. pletion in flacal yes.r 1978. One of the. Category A ta.sks wa,s completed in De. q i ocmber 1977. Interested persons may review the \\ report at the NRC s Pubtle Document floom.1717 !! Street NW., Washing. D.C. The report, designated ton. NUREC-oslo. may be purchued from i the Hattonal Technical Information i Service. Springfleid. Va. 22181, at l l $1430 a copy on or about January 17.. f i 1878. E l i ) Ef4C.LOS#A t _}}