ML003759130

Meeting Summary with Nuclear Energy Institute and Public Re Power Reactor Decommissioning Issues

ML003759130
Person / Time
Site:	Nuclear Energy Institute
Issue date:	10/11/2000
From:	David Wrona NRC/NRR/DLPM
To:	Nuclear Energy Institute
Wrona D, NRR/DLPM, 415-1924
Shared Package
ML003761299	List: ML003759130
References
-nr
Download: ML003759130 (8)

Text

October 11, 2000 ORGANIZATION: Nuclear Energy Institute

SUMMARY

OF PUBLIC MEETING WITH THE NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE (NEI) AND THE PUBLIC REGARDING POWER REACTOR DECOMMISSIONING ISSUES On September 27, 2000, the NRC staff met with representatives of NEI and members of the public to inform and receive feedback about ongoing NRC efforts to determine the risk posed by permanently shutdown nuclear power plants and the status of NRC efforts to amend its regulations to properly reflect the risk posed by these facilities. The meeting agenda is provided in Enclosure 1. A list of attendees is provided in Enclosure 2.

NRC began the meeting by discussing the status of the spent fuel pool risk study (the draft version was issued February 2000, and is in ADAMS under Accession No. ML003683371).

The NRC staff stated that the work on the spent fuel pool risk study continues. The current schedule is to complete the study and submit it to the Commission on October 31, 2000.

Issues being addressed by the NRC that could affect the study conclusions include NEIs seismic frequency concern, a comment regarding the release of ruthenium, and consideration of a partial spent fuel pool draindown. To address the above concerns, seismic hazard curves for nuclear power plants generated by the Electric Power Research Institute and by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory will be included in the evaluation of spent fuel pool failure probabilities, ruthenium will be considered in postulated releases, and partial draindown of the spent fuel pool will be addressed. NEI and members of the public were given an opportunity to ask questions regarding the spent fuel pool risk study. The NRC staff responded to the questions.

Next, NRC presented the status of the integrated rulemaking initiative, as described in SECY-00-145, Integrated Rulemaking Plan for Nuclear Power Plant Decommissioning (ADAMS Accession No. ML003721626). The NRC staff stated that SECY-00-145 was submitted to the Commission on June 28, 2000. The rulemaking plan addresses emergency preparedness, insurance, security, staffing and training, and backfit. The rulemaking plan was based on conclusions of the draft spent fuel pool risk study, previously issued exemptions to NRC requirements, and codification of current Technical Specification requirements. The staff indicated that changes in the spent fuel pool risk study could result in changes to the proposed rulemaking plan which would be revised as necessary and resubmitted to the Commission. NEI and members of the public were given an opportunity to ask questions regarding the rulemaking plan. NEI stated that the proposed rulemaking plan was based on deterministic methods and did not consider reducing requirements based on risk. The NRC staff disagreed, stating that risk insights had been carefully considered in the plan. NEI mentioned that this may be a policy issue that will have to be decided on by the Commission.

Then, NEI presented comments on the Brookhaven National Laboratory report (ADAMS Accession No. ML003730203) which reviewed regulations to determine applicability to decommissioning. NEI stated that it was a thorough evaluation of the regulations applicable to decommissioning power reactors. NEI indicated that the Commission or Office of the General Counsel should determine which regulations are subject to misinterpretation and that the NRC should use the spent fuel pool risk study as a basis for modifying the regulations. NEI stated

that the regulations that needed to be changed are identified in the white paper it submitted on May 17, 2000 (ADAMS Accession No. ML003718357). NRC asked if regulations were to be changed by a few at a time, should the NRC focus on the regulations identified in the NEI white paper? NEI agreed.

Next, NRC summarized the regulatory improvement initiative rulemaking options currently under consideration. The staff has identified six options on how to proceed in the area of rulemaking once the spent fuel pool risk study is completed. The options range from no rulemaking activity to adding an entire new section to the regulations. The options were presented in a handout provided in Enclosure 3. The NRC staff explained that it is seeking comments on the proposed options from interested stakeholders, and is particularly looking for options not addressed. Persons or organizations that have comments on the options can contact Richard Dudley (301-415-1116; rfd@NRC.gov). The NRC staff stated that the regulatory improvement initiative will be submitted to the Commission 3 months after the spent fuel pool risk study is finalized. NEI and members of the public were given an opportunity to ask questions regarding the spent fuel pool risk study. The NRC staff responded to the questions.

Mr. Lochbaum, of the Union of Concerned Scientists, hand delivered a letter from Mr. Shadis, Friends of the Coast, to Dr. Masnik, Section Chief, Project Directorate IV & Decommissioning, Division of Licensing Project Management, on Request for USNRC/Public Interest Stakeholder Meeting to Discuss Risk Informing Power Reactor Decommissioning Issues, dated September 27, 2000 (ADAMS Accession No. ML003755946). The meeting was then concluded.

/RA/

David J. Wrona, Project Manager Decommissioning Section Project Directorate IV & Decommissioning Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Project No. 689

Enclosures:

1. Agenda

2. Attendees

3. Regulatory Improvement rulemaking options cc w/encls: See next page

ML003718357). NRC asked if regulations were to be changed by a few at a time, should the NRC focus on the regulations identified in the NEI white paper? NEI agreed.

Next, NRC summarized the regulatory improvement initiative rulemaking options currently under consideration. The staff has identified six options on how to proceed in the area of rulemaking once the spent fuel pool risk study is completed. The options range from no rulemaking activity to adding an entire new section to the regulations. The options were presented in a handout provided in Enclosure 3. The NRC staff explained that it is seeking comments on the proposed options from interested stakeholders, and is particularly looking for options not addressed. Persons or organizations that have comments on the options can contact Richard Dudley (301-415-1116; rfd@NRC.gov). The NRC staff stated that the regulatory improvement initiative will be submitted to the Commission 3 months after the spent fuel pool risk study is finalized. NEI and members of the public were given an opportunity to ask questions regarding the spent fuel pool risk study. The NRC staff responded to the questions.

Mr. Lochbaum, of the Union of Concerned Scientists, hand delivered a letter from Mr. Shadis, Friends of the Coast, to Dr. Masnik, Section Chief, Project Directorate IV & Decommissioning, Division of Licensing Project Management, on Request for USNRC/Public Interest Stakeholder Meeting to Discuss Risk Informing Power Reactor Decommissioning Issues, dated September 27, 2000 (ADAMS Accession No. ML003755946). The meeting was then concluded.

/RA/

David J. Wrona, Project Manager Decommissioning Section Project Directorate IV & Decommissioning Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Project No. 689

Enclosures:

1. Agenda

2. Attendees

3. Regulatory Improvement rulemaking options cc w/encls: See next page DISTRIBUTION:

PUBLIC JShea RidsNrrPMMRipley PDIV-D r/f CACarpenter (RidsDripRgeb) RidsNrrPMDWrona RidsOgcMailCenter JHannon (RidsDssaSplb) GKelly RidsAcrsAcnwMailCenter BJorgensen (RidsRgn3MailCenter) RSavio SCollins (RidsNrrOd) DBSpitzberg (RidsRgn4MailCenter) MEl-Zeftawy BSheron (RidsNrrAdpt) AMarkley DBarss JZwolinski/SBlack (RidsNrrDlpm) MCase CFeldman GHolahan (RidsNrrDssa) MSatorius KLandis SRichards (RidsNrrDlpmLpdiv) RidsNrrPMJBirmingham TCollins MMasnik (RidsNrrDlpmLpdiv3) LPittiglio FKantor RidsNrrPMRDudley RidsNmssPMSBrown GBagchi RidsNrrPMWHuffman CPoslusny GMencinsky RidsNrrPMJMinns RBellamy (RidsRgn1MailCenter) JBeall RidsNrrPMLWheeler LCamper RidsNrrPMJHickman RidsNrrPMPRay GHubbard RidsNrrPMDScaletti RidsNrrPMMWebb RidsNmssPMRNelson RidsNrrPMPHarris RidsNrrLACJamerson MMalloy SLewis ACCESSION NUMBER: ML003759130 Pkg: ML003761299 NRC-001 NEI/Public Meeting on Decommissioning Rulemaking September 27, 2000

Purpose:

To inform and receive feedback from interested industry representatives and members of the public about ongoing NRC efforts to determine the risk posed by permanently shutdown nuclear power plants and the status of NRC efforts to amend its regulations to properly reflect the risk posed by these facilities.

Outcomes:

• The NRC will inform the industry and public stakeholders of the status of NRC risk quantification and rulemaking efforts

• Industry and public stakeholders will provide their comments on the above topics to the NRC

• Industry will provide comments to NRC on the Brookhaven National Laboratory review of NRC regulations for proper applicability to permanently shutdown power reactors

• Industry and public stakeholders will comment on NRC rulemaking options for the decommissioning regulatory improvement initiative Process:

1. Introductions and review of purpose/agenda 5 min

2. NRC discussion of status of spent fuel pool risk study (T. Collins) 15 min

3. Industry/public stakeholder comments/questions 15 min

4. NRC discussion of status of Integrated Rulemaking effort (W. Huffman) 5 min

5. Industry/public stakeholder comments/questions 10 min

6. Industry comments on Brookhaven report (NEI) 20 min

7. NRC/public stakeholder comments/questions 15 min

8. NRC summary of Regulatory Improvement Initiative rulemaking options (R. Dudley) 10 min

9. Industry/public stakeholder comments/questions 20 min

10. Summary of commitments/ Adjourn 5 min Enclosure 1

POWER REACTOR DECOMMISSIONING ISSUES MEETING September 27, 2000 NRC Headquarters Rockville, MD ATTENDEES NAME ORGANIZATION Brian Sheron NRC/NRR John Zwolinski NRC/NRR/DLPM Timothy E. Collins NRC/NRR/DSSA Stuart Richards NRC/NRR/DLPM Michael Masnik NRC/NRR/DLPM Richard Dudley NRC/NRR/DLPM Bill Huffman NRC/NRR/DLPM Mike Ripley NRC/NRR/DLPM David Wrona NRC/NRR/DLPM Carl Feldman NRC/NRR/DLPM Duke Wheeler NRC/NRR/DLPM Goutam Bagchi NRC/NRR/DE Falk Kantor NRC/NRR/DIPM George Mencinsky NRC/NRR/DRIP Dan Barss NRC/NRR/DIPM Med El-Zeftawy NRC/ACRS Stephen Lewis NRC/OGC J. E. Beall NRC/OCM/EM Scott Dam BNFL Dave Lochbaum Union of Concerned Scientists Altheia Wyche SERCH Licensing/Bechtel Ed Wenzinger NUS Jenny Weil McGraw-Hill P. J. Atherton Public A. J. Michaels EPRI Hugh Thompson Scientech Lynette Hendricks NEI Alan Nelson NEI Mike Meisner MYAPC A. E. Scherer SCE J. T. Reilly SCE Jerry Delezenski Rancho Seco Enclosure 2

Regulatory Improvement Initiative Options For Options 1 - 3 below, the Integrated Rulemaking plan would not be pursued.

ÿOption 1: In the absence of any anticipated nuclear power plant decommissionings in the near term, suspend any further decommissioning rulemaking efforts at this time and divert the associated decommissioning section resources to higher priority agency needs. A regulatory guide discussing applicability of regulations and guidance for exemptions would be considered.

ÿOption 2: Pursue the NEI "clean slate" approach that is predicated on the risk of decommissioning nuclear power plants being so low that most regulations are not applicable. The minimum set of regulations necessary to preserve the assumptions of the TWG risk study would be identified and developed into prescriptive, predictable requirements.

ÿOption 3: Pursue a "performance-based, clean slate" approach that would develop a new performance-based regulatory framework for decommissioning that captures the seven cornerstones of good licensee performance. The upper-tier decommissioning regulations would be the minimum needed to preserve the conclusions of the TWG report (similar to the NEI approach) but would be oriented more towards performance measuring indicators and inspections.

The following Options (4 - 6) assume that the Integrated Rulemaking plan is implemented (although some modifications to the plan may be necessary depending upon the final results of the TWG risk study)

ÿOption 4: Proceed with the integrated rulemaking plan and discontinue any additional broad-scoped decommissioning regulatory improvement efforts.

ÿOption 5: Proceed with the integrated rulemaking plan, but for subsequent decommissioning regulatory improvement rulemaking, adopt an incremental approach. Develop a broad-scope plan of action over a multi-year time frame that identifies the regulations to be modified and Enclosure 3

prioritizes them based on a combination of industry input and assessment against the four NRC pillars. Subsequent rulemaking will be accomplished sequentially in manageable increments based on the availability of staff resources and contract funds.

ÿOption 6: Modify, as necessary, all the regulations in 10 CFR applicable to decommissioning nuclear power plants (based on the BNL study and as otherwise necessary based on recent decommissioning experience) in one large rulemaking effort.

Nuclear Energy Institute Project No. 689/+decom cc:

Mr. Ralph Beedle Mr. Michael Meisner Senior Vice President Maine Yankee Atomic Power Co.

and Chief Nuclear Officer 321 Old Ferry Road Nuclear Energy Institute Wiscassett, ME 04578-4922 1776 I Street, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20006-3708 Mr. Paul Blanch Energy Consultant Mr. Alex Marion, Director 135 Hyde Road Programs West Hartford, CT 06117 Nuclear Energy Institute 1776 I Street, Suite 400 New England Coalition on Nuclear Washington, DC 20006-3708 Pollution P. O. Box 545 Mr. David Modeen, Director Brattleboro, VT 05302 Engineering Nuclear Energy Institute Mr. Ray Shadis 1776 I Street, NW, Suite 400 Friends of the Coast Washington, DC 20006-3708 P. O. Box 98 Edgecomb, ME 04556 Mr. Anthony Pietrangelo, Director Licensing Mr. David Lochbaum Nuclear Energy Institute Nuclear Safety Engineer 1776 I Street, NW, Suite 400 Union of Concerned Scientists Washington, DC 20006-3708 1707 H Street, NW, Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20006 Mr. Jim Davis, Director Operations Mr. Paul Gunter Nuclear Energy Institute Nuclear Information Resource Service 1776 I Street, NW, Suite 400 1424 16th St. NW, Suite 404 Washington, DC 20006-3708 Washington, DC 20036 Ms. Lynnette Hendricks, Director Mr. Peter James Atherton Plant Support P.O. Box 2337 Nuclear Energy Institute Washington, DC 20013 1776 I Street, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20006-3708 Mr. H. G. Brack Center for Biological Monitoring Mr. H. A. Sepp, Manager P.O. Box 144 Regulatory and Licensing Engineering Hulls Cove, ME 04644 Westinghouse Electric Company P.O. Box 355 Ms. Deborah B. Katz Pittsburgh, PA 15230-0355 Citizens Awareness Network P. O. Box 3023 Mr. Charles B. Brinkman, Director Charlemont, MA 01339-3023 Washington Operations ABB-Combustion Engineering, Inc. Mr. Robert Holden 12300 Twinbrook Parkway, Suite 330 National Congress of American Indians Rockville, MD 20852 Suite 200 1301 Connecticut Ave, NW Washington DC, 20036 September 2000