ML20065H754

Comment Re Proposed Rules 10CFR2,50 & 54 on Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal.Commission Assessment of Four Alternatives Should Be Expanded to Include Not Only Safety Considerations But Other Atomic Energy Act Objectives

ML20065H754
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	10/15/1990
From:	Bram S CONSOLIDATED EDISON CO. OF NEW YORK, INC.
To:	Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
References
FRN-55FR29043, FRN-56FR64943, RULE-PR-2, RULE-PR-50, RULE-PR-54 55FR29043-00093, 55FR29043-93, AD04-2-146, AD4-2, AD4-2-146, NUDOCS 9010300349
Download: ML20065H754 (4)

Text

Stephen 8. Bram - a 4a;;;

j

,)

• ves rmoem q -

~~

Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.

Indian Pornt Station

~ (si ik M oy n

gpiQ[.

8 USNi!C Q

Broadway & Bleauoy Avenue Bwhanan. NY 10511 .

Telephone (914) 737 8116

% DCI 18 P5 :05 i October 15, 159Q ue "

i::.:. . ,

Mr. Samuel J. Chilk ,

Secretary of the Commission ,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 ,

Attention: Docketing and Service Branch Re: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: . l Huclear Power Plant License Renewal 55 Fed. Rea 29,043 (July 17, 1990) -

i

Dear Sir:

i Consolidated Edison Company of that York, . Inc. (" Con Edison"), licensee of Indian Point Unit No. 2,- welcomes the  ;

opportunity to express its views to'the Commission on the  ;

referenced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking . pertaining to nuclear plant license renewal. Several of the issuesLraised

• in the proposed rule were previously addressed by Con Edison  ;

in its letters to the Commission dated February 2,'1987 and October 28, 1988, responding to earlier Commission requests '

for comment on license renewal. . We respectfully. request '

that the Commission refer to those letters as well. as- our-current response in considering the comments- that it receives to the proposed rule. Con Edison,:however, wishes to reiterate and emphasize several matters of particular  ;

.importance.  ;

First, while- the proposed rule recognizes ..that l considerations pertaining to equipment-and component. aging _

are a major factor in determining the Commission's license j renewal policies, Con Edison' believes that aging issues are better addressed-by aging- management programs that rely primarily upon ongoing equipment and component surveillance and inspection, and industry-wide' data collection

. and- )

trending. Such programs- would- focus upon the actual- 1 condition. of safety-significant components determined I through screening criteriaLto: require. heightened oversight. '

to detect possible age-dependent failure mechanisms..

If aging management issues are-addressed by ongoing j programs, the Commission will have neither occasion nor-need l l

1 9010300349 901015 ?

PDR PR i -

1 2 55FR29043 PDRl ff/ d)

t to impart regulatory significance to the 40th anniversary of f a plant's initial operation, or to require a comprehensive.

plant reevaluation at that time. Thereafter, the basis for .

determining whether a plant can continue operating safely  !

will be sapplied by the plant's original licensing basis, as ,

amended, and its compliance with Commission aging management programs at the time of expiration of the initial license term.

With respect to the proposed use of. the current licensing basis ("CLB") for purposes of license renewal, it would not be appropriate for the CLB to be so broadly  :

defined to include licensee commitments beyond those which are necessary to comply with applicable NRC regulations and orders, and the terms and conditions of the license itself. l Voluntary commitments made by a licensee which exceed regulatory requirements may not properly be considered as part of a plant's CLB, since- in such inatances new regulatory requirements would in practical effect be ,

promulgated without the discipline of Commission _ rulemaking and compliance with the Administrative procedure Act, 5~

U.S.C. S 551 et seg. Accordingly, proposed Section 54.3, which in its present form states that commitments forming -l' the basis of the CLB " include, but are not limited to" compliance with the Commission's legally binding- I requirements, goes too far in defining the proper scope of a plant's CLB, Finally, Con Edison believes that the Commission's 1 assessment of the four alternative approaches to license renewal identified in the proposed rule should be expanded to include not only safety considerations but other Atomic Energy Act objectives as well. Although the Commission has made a meticulous effort to evaluate differences in postulated safety (e.g., core melt frequencies) among the-alternatives, it has evidently not yet. conducted a ~

comprehensive parallel analysis of the energy sources which would be needed to replace. reactors whose . licensees determined not to seek renewal based upon the Commission's choice of alternative. A complete and thorough consideration of the Commission's part-54 alternatives would appear to include an . analysis of' their incremental differences from the standpoints of the resulting. energy mix likely to result from designation of a given alternative,  :

and the effect of that alternative- on' national energy- '

policy, national security and the' cost' of replacement '

capacity for those nuclear plants which will terminate -

operation at the 40-year mark rather than pursue license

)

i

t

^* ~

renewal. This. analysis should identify whether and to what

- l extent licensees,can.be expected to eschew' renewal because  !

of the cost and uncertainties associated'with the license i renewal program ultimately selected: by the Commission, ~

compared to the other identified alternatives.  !

Con Edison again;-thanks the Commission for'the- l continuing opportunity to comment on this important topic.  ;

We.also endorse the comments on license renewal submitted in <

response to the proposed rule by the Nuclear Management and ,

Resources Council, and by the firm of Winston & Strawn.

.t

^

Very truly yours,-

7 s-  ;

- StephenI.Bram Vice President t

.i f

1,

.I t

t i

-i

'I

=

Y t

t , .

1 +

x

-,3:.

)

,(

j u

m

, l '

.{ -j

l c -

t Edb memorancum  !

Indian Point Station October 2, 1990

[

1 TO: All Officers PROM: Stephen B. Bram Vice President Nuclear Power i

SUBJECT:

Delegation of Authority Corporate Policy #000-1 In accordance with the above Corporate policy, during, my absence from the Station the responsibilities of the Vice President, Nuclear Power will be assumed by Mr. Michael Miele from Sunday, October 7, 1990, through Saturday, October 13, 1990, and by Mr. Stephen E. Quinn from Sunday, 14, 1990, . through Friday, October 19, 1990, in addition to their normal duties. '

and responsibilities. '

l

/ l l Al

,I.s t/ v s4.-- .

./ #

f .M -

F A Concurrence: //f/ / /

efs-w ~ 4[A  % )

Mptray Seym'an  ;

Executivp Vice President Central Operations i

k 5

i i

-, _ . , _ . _ . ,