ML20206S210
| ML20206S210 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/09/1998 |
| From: | Rathbun D NRC OFFICE OF CONGRESSIONAL AFFAIRS (OCA) |
| To: | Inhofe J, Schaefer D HOUSE OF REP., ENERGY & COMMERCE, SENATE, ENVIRONMENT & PUBLIC WORKS |
| References | |
| CCS, NUDOCS 9901280218 | |
| Download: ML20206S210 (3) | |
Text
...... _.- _ _.. _... _ _ _ _
- _ _ _. -... _. _. _. _., _ _ _ _. _. _ _ _ _.. _. _ _ _. _. - _. _ ~ _ - _. ~ _.. - _
0uaAL i
j
.Ng j
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WAsHmeToN, D.C. 30eBS40M
\\o,g December 9, 1998 The Honorable James M. Inhofe, Chairman Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property and Nuclear Safety Committee on Environment and Public Works United States Senate
- Washington, DC 20510 i
Dear Mr. Chairman:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has sent to the Office of the Federal Register, for publication, the enclosed five Federal Register notices announcing the Commission's.
withdrawal of two proposed rules and three advanced notices of proposed rulemakings that amend the following NRC's regulations: (1) 10 CFR Part 50, RIN 3150-AF33, " Reporting Reliability and Availability information for Risk-significant Systems and Equipment," published in the Federal Register on February 12,1996 (61 FR 5318); (2) 10 CFR Part 60, RIN 3150-AC03, i
" Elimination of inconsistencies Between NRC Regulations and EPA High-Level Waste l
Standards," published in the Federal Reaister on June 19,1986 (51 FR 22288);
(3) 10 CFR Parts 32 and 40, RIN 3150-AE33," Distribution of Source and Byproduct Material:
- Licensing and Reporting Requirements," published in the Federal Register on October 28,1992 (57 FR 48749); (4) 10 CFR Part 35, RIN 3150-AC42, " Comprehensive Quality Assurance in Medical Use and a Standard of Care," published in the Federal Reaister on October 2,1987 (52 FR 36949); and (5) 10 CFR Part 50, RIN 3150-AF04, " Steam Generator Tube Integrity for Operating Nuclear Power Plants" published in the Federal Reaister on September 19,1994 (59 FR 47817).
. At present, terminated rulemakings can only be removed from the NRC Regulatory Agenda (NUREG-0936) when a notice of withdrawalis published in the Federal Reaister. Subsequent to their notice of publication, rulemakings have either been superseded by other requirements, subsumed by another rulemaking, became outdated, are no longer necessary or the issues raised are being studied further in a larger centext. Accordingly, rules that have been terminated by prior Commission action are being withdrawn.
Sincerely,
\\
Dennis K. Rathbun, Director Office of Congressional Affairs
Enclosures:
Federal Register Notices (J.7 cc Senator Bob Granam 9901290218 981209 PDR ORG IWtCC e
,a c.,.><e
.,--.,n-
..m-.
--n
/a'*
r p
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REOULATORY COMMISSION l..
WAsNINeTON, D.C. Seges eem
\\,,,,,
l December 9, 1998 l
The Honorable Dan Schaefer, Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and Power i
Committee on Commerce United States House of Representatives l
Washington, DC 20515 i
Dear Mr. Chairman:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has sent to the Office of the Federal Register, for publication, the enclosed five Federal Register notices announcing the Commission's withdrawal of two proposed rules and three advanced notices of proposed rulemakings that i
I amend the following NRC's regulations: (1) 10 CFR Part 50, RIN 3150-AF33, " Reporting Reliability and Availability information for Risk-significant Systems and Equipment," published in the Federal Reaister on February 12,1996 (61 FR 5318); (2) 10 CFR Part 60, RIN 3150-ACO3, L
" Elimination of inconsistencies Between NRC Regulations and EPA High-Level Waste Standards," published in the Federal Register on June 19,1986 (51 FR 22288);
(
- (3) 10 CFR Parts 32 and 40, RIN 3150-AE33, " Distribution of Source and Byproduct Material:
l Licensing and Reporting Requirements," published in the Federal Rooister on October 28,1992 1
- (57 FR 48749); (4) 10 CFR Part 35, RIN 3150-AC42, " Comprehensive Quality Assurance in Medical Use and a Standard of Care," published in the Federal Register on October 2,1987 (52 FR 36949); and (5) 10 CFR Part 50, RIN 3150-AF04, " Steam Generator Tube integrity for l
Operating Nuclear Power Plants" published in the Federal Reaister on September 19,1994 (59 FR 47817).
At present, terminated rulemakings can only be removed from the NRC Regulatory Agenda (NUREG-0936) when a notice of withdrawal is published in the Federal Reatster. Subsequent to l
their notice of publication, rulemakings have either been superseded by other requirements, l
- been subsumed by another rulemaking, became outdated, are no longer necessary or the l
l issues raised are being studied further in a larger context. Accordingly, rules that have been g
terminatsd by prior Commission action are being withdrawn.
I Sincerely, I
05.X Dennis K. Rathbun, Director Office of Congressional Affairs I
l
Enclosures:
Federal Register Notices l
oc: Representative Ralph Hall I
\\
i 1
CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENCE SYSTEM DOCUMENT PREPARATION CHECKLIST This check list is to be submitted with each document (or group of Os/As) sent for processing into the CCS.
'1.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENT (S) 1 2.
TYPE OF DOCUMENT X CORRESPONDENCE HEARINGS (Os/As) 3.
DOCUMENT CONTROL SENSITIVE (NRC ONLY)
X NON-SENSITIVE 4.
CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE AND SUBCOMMITTEE (if applicable)
Congressional Committee Subcommittee 5.
SUBJECT CODES (A)
(B)
(C) 6.
SOURCE OF DOCUMENTS (A) 5520 (DOCUMENT NAME
)
(B)
SCAN (C)
ATTACHMENTS (D)
OTHER SYST{O/ fdATA OCA SENT DOCUMENT TO 7.
lpg DATES (A)/,/
(B)
DATE CCS RECEIVED DOCUMENT (C)
DATE RETURNED TO OCA FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (D)
DATE RESUBMITTED BY OCA TO CCS (E)
DATE ENTERED INTO CCS BY (F)
DATE OCA NOTIFIED THAT DOCUMENT IS IN CCS l
COMMENTS:
RELEASE TO PDR 200038 11/0298 - P:\\DISRTLIS.DMS
l
~T
[7590-01-P]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
10 CFR Part 50 RIN 3150-AF33 Reporting Reliability and Availability information for Risk-Significant Systems and Equipment j
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule: Withdrawal.
i
SUMMARY
- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is withdrawing a notice of proposed rulomaking that solicited comments on proposed amendments to its regulations that would have required licensees for commercial nuclear power reactors to report to the NRC, 1
plant-specific summary reliability and availability data for certain risk-significant systems and equipment. The proposed rule would have also required licensees to maintain onsite, and to make available for NRC inspection, records and documentation that provide the basis for the i
summary data reported to the NRC. The systems and equipment for which data would be provided are a subset of the systems and equipment within the scope of the NRC's maintenance rule. The Commission has decided to accept industry's proposed alternative to the rule to voluntarily provide reliability and availability information for risk significant systems and equipment and, therefore, withdraws this rulemaking.
ADDRESSES: The Commission paper, the staff requirement memoranda (SRM), and associated documents are available for public inspection, and copying for a fee, at the NRC Public Document Room located at 2120 L Street NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC 20012-7082, telephone: (202) 512-2249.
bTa6.oiuvbk y p f.
8 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dennis Allison, Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6835, e-mail dpa @ nrc. gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
On February 12,1996 (61 FR 5318), the NRC published in the Federal Register proposed amendments to 10 CFR Part 50 that would have required operating reactor licensees to report reliability and availability information for certain risk significant systems and equipment. The reporting requirements would have applied to the event-mitigating systems and equipment that have or could have a significant effect on risk in terms of avoiding core damage accidents or preserving containment integrity. The data that would have been reported would have included: the number of demands and the number of failures to start associated with those demands, along with additional descriptive information; the number of hours of operation following each successful start including whether or not the run was terminated by equipment failure, along with additional descriptive information; the number of hours equipment is unavailable, along with additional descriptive information; for each period equipment is unavailable due to component failure, descriptive information on that failure; and the number of hours when two or more trains from the same or different systems were concurrently unavailable, along with additional descriptive information.
The public comment period closed on June 11,1996. The NRC received 31 comment letters. One comment letter supported the rule, stating that the public and industry could expect significant benefits. Most of the remaining comments opposed the rule, stating that the 2
i
=
a proposed reporting requirements costs were underestimated, benefits were overestimated, the l
rule would be overly burdensome, the rule would be premature, and that the rule is not justified.
i l
The Commission SRM dated June 28,1995, issued in response to SECY-95-129, and the SRM on SECY-95-215 dated October 24,1995, directed the NRC staff to continue to work with industry on voluntary submittal of reliability data under a program that will meet the needs of all parties. On October 1,1996, the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) provided the NRC with a sample of data available from its Safety System Performance Indicator (S3PI) 1 system, as part of a voluntary nuclear industry data sharing initiative. A revised Memo'andum of Agreement (MOA) between INPO and the NRC was signed on December 24,1996, providing NRC with access to SSPI data. In addition, on March 21,1997, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) provided the NRC with a description of a new INPO data collection system, Equipment Performance and Information Exchange (EPIX). Based upon a review of data available in SSPl and EPIX, as well as the information available from Licensee Event Reports and Monthly Operating Reports, the Commission has determined that under the voluntary approach, the NRC can estimate risk parameters and construct a reliability database that reflects the parameters needed for effective use in risk-informed applications. Thus, the intended benefits of the proposed rule would be realized and the main advantages of the voluntary approach (i.e., the lower cost, schedule, and industry support) outweigh any disadvantages. The NRC will continue to work with industry representatives to improve the l
l 3
l l
l
O content of the voluntary data. Because of industry's voluntary alternative approach to the rule,
)
the Commission is withdrawing this proposed rulemaking.
1 Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this I day of November,1998.
i For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
[ h Joh C. Hoyle, '
retary of the Commission.
i j
4
. - ~. - - -.. -. - - -. -. -.. -. -. -.. - ~. - -.
l
. I.
i
[7590-01-P]
i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 60 i
RIN 3150-AC03 Elimination of Inconsistencies Between NRC Regulations and EPA High-Level Waste Standards AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
i ACTION: ' Proposed rule: Withdrawal.
t
SUMMARY
- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is withdrawing a notice of proposed j
rulemaking that'would have eliminated several inconsistencies with the generic Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards to be developed for the disposal of High-Level Waste (HLW) in deep geologic repositories. Because the NRC is developing site-specific disposal regulations for Yucca Mountain, Nevada, consistent with the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EnPA),
the proposed rule is being wdhdrawn.
! ADDRESSES: The Commission paper, the staff requirement memoranda (SRM), and associated documents are available for public inspection, and copying for a fee, at the NRC Public Document Room located at 2120 L' Street NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC 20012-
~
7082, telephone: (202) 512 2249.-
.7 fl
- O O
1 4
i l
l FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim McCartin, Office of Nuclear Material Safety I
?
and ' Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, i
' telephone (301) 415 6681,-e mail tjm3@nrc gov l
i l
l SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
l i
On June 19,1986 (51 FR 22288), the NRC published a notice of proposed rulemaking l
in the Federal Register that would have eliminated several inconsistencies with the EPA l
standards to be developed for the disposal of HLW in deep geologic repositories. The Nuclear f
Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA) directs NRC to issue criteria for the licensing of HLW i
geologic repositories. Section 121(c) of this Act states that the criteria for the licensing of HLW geologic repositories must be consistent with these standards. The proposed rule was necessary to eliminate several inconsistencies with the EPA standards, thus fulfilling the statutory requirement. However, since then, Congress passed the EnPA, which requires EPA to issue rcdiation standards for the proposed geologic repository at Yucca Mountain, based on and consistent with the findings and recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). Under EnPA, NRC is also required to develop site-specific disposal regulations that would apply solely to the proposed > geologic repository at Yucca Mountain. NAS published its findings and recommendations in 1995.
The NRC staff has considered and is implementing a strategy for developing site-specific disposal regulations that would apply solely to the proposed geologic repository at 1
Yucca Mountain, and is deferring tivs updating of 10 CFR Part 60 generic requirements to a j
i later date. These site-specific reg fations will be issued consistent with EnPA, which also requires the Environmental Protection Agency to issue radiation standards for a geologic 2
e 1
repository at Yucca Mountain, based on and consistent with the 1995 findings and rec 5mmendations of the NAS.
The NRC staff's strategy for developing the site-specific disposal regulations for Yucca Mountain can be found in a Commission paper, designated SECY-97-300, dated December 24,1997. This strategy was approved by the SRM dated March 6,1998. Because the NRC is developing site-specific disposal regulations for Yucca Mountain, Nevada, the proposed rulemaking is being withdrawn.
6 Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this N ' day of November,1998.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
b John [. Hoyle, /
Segr'etary of the Commission.
3
1
=
I t
[7590-01-P]
1 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Parts 32 and 40 RIN 3150-AE33 Distribution of Source and Byproduct Material:
Licensing and Reporting Requirements AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking: Withdrawal.
SUMMARY
- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is withdrawing an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) that had presented preliminary plans for updating the licensing of source material and mill tailings. The contemplated rulemaking would have improved the control of source material and updated the applicable requirements to conform with the revised
]
standards for protection against radiation. This ANPRM solicited comments and l
recommendations from interested parties on issues that were to be considered in the proposed rulemaking and a subsequent rulemaking,if needed. However, the comments received in response to this request did not provide any significant new information on the issues associated with the contemplated rulemaking. The NRC believes that additional information concerning the distribution of source material is needed before it is able to proceed with a rulemaking in this area. The NRC is performing the necessary research and evaluating L
A
[
additional sources of information to determine the best approach to address these issues in a proposed rulemaking. Therefore, pending completion of this research and the development of the required information, the ANPRM is being withdrawn.
ADDRESSES: The Commission paper, the staff requirement memoranda (SRM), and associated documents are available for public inspection, and copying for a fee, at the NRC Public Document Room located at 2120 L Street NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC 20012-7082, telephone: (202) 634-3273.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Catherine R. Mattsen, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, telephone (301) 415-6264, e-mail CRM @nrc. gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
On October 28,1992 (57 FR 48749), the Commission published an ANPRM that described contemplated amendments to the Commission's regulations governing the licensing of source material and mill tailings. The issues raised in the ANPRM concerned the possible need to update 10 CFR Part 40, parti ~rlarly because of recent changes to 10 CFR Part 20,
" Standards for Protection against Radiation." The ANPRM was issued to solicit comments from interested parties on issues that had been identified as candidates for consideration in rulemaking. The specific issues were--
(1) The level of control of source material being distributed for exempt use; (2) The adequacy of the generallicense in 10 CFR 40.22; (3) The usefulness of the general license in 10 CFR 40.25; 2
5 (4) The degree of specificity of the requirements for source material licensees; and (5) The need for clarification or consistency of the mill tailings requirements in Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 40 with respect to NRC staff regulatory positions in this area.
The ANPRM also included a specific request for information on how the exemptions in 10 CFR Part 40 and the general license in 6 40.22 are used. The questions raised in the ANPRM also included how the general license in 6 40.25 could be made more useful; and the benefits of various structure and format options, such as the creation of additional parts or subparts to the requirements governing source material. A contractor report prepared to support the ANPRM, NUREG/CR-5881, "An Examination of Source Material Requirements Contained in 10 CFR Part 40" (October 1992), was also made available.
The comment period for the ANPRM closed on January 26,1993. Fifteen comment letters were received. The commenters included the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, three States, and one public interest group. The remaining commenters were industry or industrial organizations, some of which were licensees, including four groups representing tho mining and milling industry. The comments received were generally in favor of l
revising the requirements governing the licensing of source material and mill tailings. The comments, however, provided little additional information in response to the specific 1
Commission requests.
l After further progress is achieved in obtaining the needed information, the NRC will reconsider changes to 10 CFR Parts 32 and 40 with respect to exemptions and requirements for the distribution of byproduct and source material to exempt persons. The NRC will also 3
l l
s.
consider appropriate actions in the other areas addresced in the ANPRM. In the interim, bec5use the NRC is not yet prepared to determine the best approach to rulemaking, the ANPRM is being withdrawn.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this day of December,1998.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
J C. Hoyle, '
retary of the Commission.
1 4
l - o l
3.
j
[7590-01-P]
l NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 35 L
RIN 3150 - AC42 l
Comprehensive Quality Assurance in Medical Use and a Standard of Care AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION:
Advance notice of proposed rulemaking: Withdrawal.
SUMMARY
- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is withdrawing an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) that requested public comments on questions related to comprehensive quality assurance and a standard of care in medical uses of byproduct material.
The Commission has decided to withdraw this ANPRM because of the effective implementation of the " Quality Management Program and Misadministrations" rule and the NRC's current efforts in revising the existing regulation for medical uses of byproduct materialinto a more risk-informed and performance-based regulation.
ADDRESSES: The Commission paper, the staff requirement memoranda (SRM), and associated documents are available for public inspection, and copying for a fee, at the NRC 1
Public Document Room located at 2120 L Street NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC 20012-7082, telephone: (202) 512-2249.
3 Q9'
1 a
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jayne M. McCausland, Office of Nuclear Material
~
Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, telephone (301) 415-6219, e-mail jmm2 @ nrc. gov.
i SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1 On October 2,1987, the Commission published two notices in the Federal Register regarding medical use of byproduct material. The first notice was the proposed rulemaking entitled " Basic Quality Assurance in Radiation Therapy" (52 FR 36942), that proposed a requirement for medical use licensees to implement some specific basic quality assurance
- practices to reduce the number of therapy misadministrations involving byproduct material. The second notice was an ANPRM entitled " Comprehensive Quality Assurance in Medical Use and a Standard of Care" (52 FR 36949), that requested public comments on the extent to which a comprehensive quality assurance program requirement was needed. The NRC believed that this two-pronged approach to the misadministrations problem would provide the best balance 1
between assuring public health and safety and avoiding inadvertent interference in the delivery of quality medical care.
On July 25,1991 (56 FR 34104), the NRC published a final rule entitled " Quality Management Program and Misadministrations" (the OM Rule) which was based on the above-mentioned 1987 proposed rule. During the implementation of the final rule, the NRC decided to assess the effectiveness of the rule and, based on the results of the assessment, to determine the need for a rulemaking on comprehensive quality management.
2
e e
l l
Subsequently, a Commission SRM on SECY-97-115 dated June 30,1937, approved subsuming several Part 35 rulemakings into one major revision to 10 CFR Part 35 rulemaking activity. The proposed rulemaking entitled " Medical Use of Byproduct Material," was published in the Federal Register (RIN 3150-AF74 ) (August 13,1998; 63 FR 43516). The NRC is in the process of developing the final ruie governing medical use of byproduct material into a more risk-informed and performance-based regulation. This overall revision includes a consideration as to whether or not the regulation on the quality management program should be revised to become more risk-informed and performance-based. For this reason, the Commission is withdrawing the ANPRM.
4 Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this _8/
day of November,1998.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
^~f John.. Hoyle, Se tary of the Commission.
i 3
1
1
[7590-01-P]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 50 RIN 3150-AF04' Steam Generator Tube integrity for Operating Nuclear Power Plants l
i AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
l ACTION: Proposed rufe: Withdrawal.
j 1
SUMMARY
- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is withdrawing an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) that was published to request public comment on the Commission's regulations pertaining to steam generator (SG) tube integrity. The proposed rule would have implemented a more flexible regulatory framework for steam generator surveillance and maintenance activities that would maintain adequate assurance of tube integrity while allowing a degradation-specific management approach. Because the NRC has concluded that the regulatory objectives set forth for this effod can be achieved by equally effective regulatory alternatives, the ANPR is being withdrawn.
ADDRESSES: The Commission paper, the staff requirement memoranda (SRM), and associated documents are available for public inspection, and copying for a fee, at the NRC Public Document Room located at 2120 L Street NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC 20012-l 7082, telephone: (202) 512-2249.
f FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Reed, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-1462, e-mail tar @ nrc. gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMAT!ON:
On September 19,1994 (59 FR 47817), the Commission published an ANPRM that requested comments, advice, and recommendations from interested parties on the proposed steam generator rule. In response to the ANPRM, two public comments were received. The primary comment was a coordinated industry response submitted by the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI). The remaining comment, submitted by Virginia Power, endorsed the NEl comment. Subsequently, the NRC staff developed a draft rule and draft regulatory guide intended to implement a performance-based regulatory structure that provides for the development and implementation of appropriate measures to ensure the consistency and quality of inspection methods, repair criteria, and tube condition assessment, while giving appropriate consideration to risk. As part of the rulemaking process, the NRC staff estimated the risk associated with SG tube degradation and used the results to provide the insights required for performing a regulatory analysis of the proposed rulemaking approach.
in COMSECY-97-013, dated May 23,1997, the NRC staff provided a risk assessment summary and major conclusions from a regulatory analysis. Based on these results, the NRC staff reassessed whether a rulemaking is the appropriate regulatory vehicle for addressing the problems associated with SG tube integrity. It should be recognized that the NRC staff found that the current regulations governing SG tube integrity provide an adequate basis to ensure public health and safety due to SG operation. However, the NRC staff concluded that further 2
l l
l I
f guidance is needed for the industry to continue to effectively meet these regulations. Issues involving a plant's technical specifications (TS) are amenable to a generic letter approach.
Given these considerations, the NRC staff informed the Commission that it planned to pursue the following approach in lieu of a new steam generator rulemaking: (1) complete development of a SG tube integrity regulatory guide which describes an acceptable performance based program for ensuring adequate tube inspection, monitoring, and assessment; (2) request licensees, through a generic letter, to propose performance-based technical specification changes to address the issues regarding inspection, monitoring, and assessment of SG tube condition to ensure that SG tube integrity is maintained consistent with the plant licensing basis; J
(3) provide licensees with an option to change current SG tube repair criteria and implement a degradation-specific management approach, if it can be demonstrated that risk will be maintained at an acceptable level. An application-specific regulatory guide would provide guidance on acceptable approaches for proposing changes to SG tube integrity criteria and assessing changes in risk associated with relaxation of tube integrity criteria. Licensees would not be able to implement alternate repair criteria until an appropriate risk assessment is submitted and found acceptable by the NRC staff; and (4) as part of the IPE follow-up program, -
the NRC staff will evaluate pressurized water reactors (PWRs) that appear to have a high potential for core damage sequences that can challenge SG tubes. Any additional requirements would be imposed consistent with the backfit requirements of 50.109.
The SRM on COMSECY-97-013, dated June 30,1997, approved the revised approach.
The SRM also directed the NRC staff to seek industry input, as appropriate,in developing the technical basis for the proposed TS changes to ensure that the proposed changes are consistent with current steam generator tube degradation modes. In support of this commitment, the NRC staff developed a proposed generic letter that: (1) informs PWR 3
l l.
i f
licensees that plant TSs for maintaining SG tube integrity do not alone provide the needed assurance that SG tube integrity is being adequately monitored and maintained in accordance i
l with NRC regulations and plant licensing bases; (2) advises licensees that they may request license amendments to their plant TSs to implement the model TSs attached to the generic letter for maintaining SG tube integrity, or justify alternate approaches for ensuring that SG tube integrity; and (3) requires that licensees submit to the NRC written responses that describe their l
ongoing or planned activities to monitor and maintain SG tube integrity. By letter dated December 16,1997, the NRC staff was informed that the industry, through the NEl Nuclear Strategic issues Advisory Committee, had voted to adopt NEl 97-06. The chief objective of the industry initiative is for PWR licensees to evaluate their existing SG programs and, where necessary, to revise or strengthen program attributes to meet the intent of the NEl 97-06 guidelines. The NEl 97 06 guidelines are intended to improve both the quality and the consistency of SG programs throughout the industry. Consistent with Direction Setting issue l
(DSI) 13, the NRC staff's preferred approach is to endorse an industry initiative that addresses all NRC staff and stakeholder concerns, rather than issue a generic letter. As a result, the NRC staff has temporarily deferred issuing the proposed generic letter for public comment while it works with industry to resolve issues associated with NEl 97-06, with the objective of endorsing NEl 97-06 in a regulatory guide.
Whether the NRC staff ultimately endorses the NEl 97-06 guidance or continues with its efforts to issue a generic letter addressing SG tube integrity, the NRC has concluded that l
4
l
-l1 L equally effective regulatory alternatives to rulemaking are available to address the issue of SG tube integrity. Therefore, the proposed rule is not required and is being withdrawn.
I l
n l
. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, thisI'/ - day of November,1998.
l i
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
i 1
s J
pn C. Hoyld, Secretary of the Commission.
i l
I.
l l
l-J r
i
)
l i
h i
9
- 4
'S 1
1 i
.