ML031970065

Summary of Meeting with NEI to Discuss ITAAC for Operational Programs and 10 CFR Part 52 COL Issues

ML031970065
Person / Time
Site:	Nuclear Energy Institute
Issue date:	07/21/2003
From:	Joseph Sebrosky NRC/NRR/NRLPO
To:	Nuclear Energy Institute
Sebrosky J, NRR/DRIP/RNRP, 415-1132
Shared Package
ML031970037	List: ML031970065
References
Download: ML031970065 (12)

Text

July 21, 2003 ORGANIZATION:

Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)

SUMMARY

OF MEETING HELD ON MAY 22, 2003, TO DISCUSS INSPECTIONS, TESTS, ANALYSES AND ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA (ITAAC) FOR OPERATIONAL PROGRAMS AND 10 CFR PART 52 COMBINED LICENSE (COL) ISSUES The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) held a public meeting with NEI on May 22, 2003, at NRC Headquarters to discuss ITAAC for operational programs (programmatic ITAAC) and 10 CFR Part 52 combined license (COL) issues. A list of attendees is provided as. The meeting agenda is provided as Attachment 2.

Handouts were provided during the meeting by both the staff and NEI. The handouts can be accessed through the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) under Accession No. ML031420814. This system provides text and image files of NRCs public documents. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the handouts located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.

Highlights From Programmatic ITAAC Portion of the Meeting contains a description of the programmatic ITAAC issue and the staffs proposal to address the Commissions staff requirements memorandum (SRM) of September 11, 2002.

The staff and NEI disagreed on the interpretation of the second paragraph of the Commissions September 11, 2002, SRM which states the following:

Although the NRC inspection process does not replace a particular ITAAC, an ITAAC for a program should not be necessary if the program and its implementation are fully described in the application and found to be acceptable by the NRC at the COL stage. The burden is on the applicant to provide the necessary and sufficient information for approval of the COL without ITAAC.

The staff and NEI disagreed on what constitutes a fully described program. NEI stated that a COL application need only describe operational programs with the level of detail equivalent to what is provided in existing final safety analysis reports with respect to such programs. The staff believed that additional information regarding the implementation of the program would have to be furnished.

To address the issue, the staff and NEI agreed to pick a program listed in Footnote 2 of to be used to develop guidance to implement the Commissions SRM regarding programmatic ITAAC. The staff and NEI would then independently develop guidelines for the level of programmatic information that would be needed in order to issue a COL without ITAAC for that program. The information would be provided to each organization at least 10 days in advance of a public meeting to discuss the issue. The staff and NEI agreed to target mid-July

for the next meeting on the issue. Subsequent to the meeting, the fire protection program was identified as the candidate program, and the mid-July meeting was canceled in favor of an August 25, 2003, workshop.

Highlights From the COL Portion of the Meeting In their handouts NEI provided a revised list of COL process and construction inspection program (CIP) general discussion topics. NEI stated that they expect a business decision in the 2005 time frame on whether or not to pursue a COL application. NEI stated that if a COL application was pursued the time frame for a letter of intent could be submitted in late 2005 and the COL application itself could be submitted in mid-calendar year 2006. NEI stated that its overarching goal regarding COL and CIP issues was to support new plant business decisions by 2005.

NEI stated that the first eight items identified in their list would require near-term interactions in order to support new plant business decisions by 2005. For the majority of the eight issues, the staff and NEI have already begun discussions. NEI questioned the staff regarding COL-5, Establish a common understanding with NRC regarding the 10 CFR Part 52.103 ITAAC hearing process. The staff agreed to provide feedback to NEI regarding their proposal for the 52.103 hearing process. NEIs comments in this area are contained in Section 6, Preoperational Finding Process and Hearing Opportunity, of their letter dated November 20, 2001. The NRC did not provide a full set of comments in this area because some of the issues associated with how the hearing will be conducted will be determined by the presiding officer in a COL proceeding.

/RA/

Joseph M. Sebrosky, Senior Project Manager New Reactor Licensing Section New, Research and Test Reactors Program Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs, NRR Project No. 689

Enclosures:

As stated cc w/encls: See next page

ML031970037-Pkg.

OFFICE PM:RNRP (A)SC:RNRP NAME JSebrosky JWilliams DATE 7/18/03 7/18/03

Combination List:

cc:

Mr. Charles Brinkman Westinghouse Electric Co.

Washington Operations 12300 Twinbrook Pkwy., Suite 330 Rockville, MD 20852 Mr. David Lochbaum, Nuclear Safety Engineer Union of Concerned Scientists 1707 H Street, NW, Suite 600 Washington, DC 20006-3919 Dr. Gail H. Marcus U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy, Science

& Technology NE-1, Room 5A-143 1000 Independence Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20585 Mr. Paul Gunter Nuclear Information & Resource Service 1424 16th Street, NW, Suite 404 Washington, DC 20036 Mr. James Riccio Greenpeace 702 H Street, NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20001 Mr. Ron Simard Nuclear Energy Institute Suite 400 1776 I Street, NW Washington, DC 20006-3708 Mr. George Alan Zinke Project Manager Nuclear Business Development Entergy Nuclear M-ECH-683 1340 Echelon Parkway Jackson, MS 39213 Mr. Thomas P. Miller U.S. Department of Energy NE-20, Rm. A286 Headquarters-Germantown 19901 Germantown Road Germantown, MD 20874-1290 Ms. Marilyn Kray Vice President, Special Projects Exelon Generation 200 Exelon Way, KSA3-E Kennett Square, PA 19348 Mr. Laurence Parme Manager, GT-MHR Safety &

Licensing General Atomics Company P.O. Box 85608 San Diego, CA 92186-5608 Mr. Joseph D. Hegner Lead Engineer - Licensing Dominion Generation Early Site Permitting Project 5000 Dominion Boulevard Glen Allen, VA 23060 Mr. Edward L. Quinn MDM Services Corporations Utility Operations Division 28202 Cabot Road, Suite 205 Laguna Nigual, CA 92677 Lynn Connor Doc-Search Associates 2211 sw 1ST Ave - #1502 Portland, OR 97201 Mr. Ed Rodwell, Manager PWR Design Certification Electric Power Research Institute 3412 Hillview Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94304-1395 Mr. Paul Leventhal Nuclear Control Institute 1000 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 410 Washington, DC 20036 Mr. James F. Mallay, Director Regulatory Affairs FRAMATOME, ANP 3315 Old Forest Road Lynchburg, VA 24501 Patricia Campbell Winston & Strawn 1400 L St., NW Washington, DC 20005 Mr. W. Edward Cummins AP600 and AP1000 Projects Westinghouse Electric Company P.O. Box 355 Pittsburgh, PA 15230-0355 Mr. Kelly R. Fletcher, Manager Business Development and Advanced Technologies GE Nuclear Energy 175 Curtner Avenue, MC 784 San Jose, CA 95125 Mr. Jack W. Roe SCIENTECH, INC.

910 Clopper Road Gaithersburg, MD 20878 Mr. Stephen P. Frantz Morgan, Lewis, & Bockius, LLP 1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20004 Mr. Gary Wright, Manager Office of Nuclear Facility Safety Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety 1035 Outer Park Drive Springfield, IL 62704 Mr. David Ritter Research Associate on Nuclear Energy Public Citizens Critical Mass Energy and Environmental Program 215 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20003 Mr. Tom Clements 6703 Gude Avenue Takoma Park, MD 20912 Mr. Horace R. Hall, Commercial Manager Nuclear Business Team UCAR Carbon Company, Inc.

P.O. Box 2170 Clarksburg, West Virginia 26302-2170 Mr. James Blyth Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission 280 Slater Street, Station B P.O. Box 1046 Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5S9 Atambir Rao Project Manager, ESBWR GE Nuclear Energy 175 Curtner Avenue, MC 365 San Jose, CA 95125 USA Mr. Edward F. Sproat, III Vice President - Intl Projects Exelon Generation 200 Exelon Way Kennett Square, PA 19348 Mr. Vince Langman Licensing Manager Atomic Energy of Canada Limited 2251 Speakman Drive Mississauga, Ontario Canada L5K 1B2 Dr. Regis A. Matzie Senior Vice President and Chief Technology Officer Westinghouse Electric Company 2000 Day Hill Road Windsor, CT 06095-0500 Mr. Ed Wallace, General Manager Projects PBMR Pty LTD PO Box 9396 Centurion 0046 Republic of South Africa

Distribution for Meeting Summary dated July 21, 2003 Hard Copy RNRP R/F PUBLIC JSebrosky JWilliams E-Mail:

PUBLIC SCollins WBorchardt BSheron DMatthews RNRP Group DE Branch Chiefs DE Section Chiefs OGC ACRS/ACNW JLyons MKotzalas AThadani FEltawila JIsom JBlake RGardner CPaulk GMizuno RWeisman JMoore BSmith, OGC KBarber, OGC DBarss BMusico NIqmbal PQualls TKenyon DCoe MEl-Zeftway

Meeting With the Nuclear Energy Institute May 22, 2003 Attendance List NRC NEI James Lyons NRR/NRLPO Russ Bell Marsha Gamberoni NRR/NRLPO Ron Simard Joe Sebrosky NRR/NRLPO Jerry Wilson NRR/NRLPO Other Interested Attendees Naeem Iqbal NRR/DSSA/SPLB Mike Bourgeois Entergy Dan Barss NRR/DIPM/IEHB Marilyn Kray Exelon Bruce Musico NRR/DIPM/IEHB Joe Hegner Dominion Tom Kenyon NRR/DRIP/RLEP Larry Drbal Black and Veatch Jose Calvo NRR/DE/EEIB Lane Hay Serch Bechtel Matt Chiramal NRR/DE/EEIB Patricia Campbell Winston and Strawn Janice Moore OGC Charles Brinkman Westinghouse Geary Mizuno OGC Bob Coward MPR Kathryn Barber OGC J. Alan Beard GE Nuclear Energy Brooke Smith OGC Shinichi Hayadune Energy USA Mark Smith USEC Jack Roe Scientech Ryaji Imasaki Toshiba K. Kitamura Toshiba Deann Raleigh LIS, Scientech

Agenda May 22, 2003 Meeting with NEI 9:00 Introductory Comments NEI/NRC 9:10 Discussion of response to staff requirements memorandum (SRM) dated September 11, 2002, regarding programmatic ITAAC (The ADAMS Accession Number for the SRM is ML022540755.

Additional background is contained in attachment 2 to the announcement.)

NRC 9:30 Discussion of programmatic ITAAC response NRC/NEI 10:30 Identification and plans for addressing 10 CFR Part 52 combined license (COL) issues NRC/NEI 11:45 Public Comment 11:55 Summary 12:00 Adjourn

1 A principal issue for these categories is what constitutes a fully described program.

2 The following programs may fall into Category C or D depending on the information provided at the time of the COL: fire protection, radiation protection, security, fitness for duty, training, access authorization, reportability, licensed operator training.

Background Material for Programmatic Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria (ITAAC)

Description of the Issue In SECY-02-0067, Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria for Operational Programs (Programmatic ITAAC), the staff requested Commission approval for its position that combined licenses (COLs) for a nuclear power plant submitted in accordance with the requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 52 Subpart C contain ITAAC for operational programs required by regulations such as training and emergency planning (ADAMS Accession Number ML020700641). The Commission provided its response in a September 11, 2002, staff requirements memorandum (ADAMS Accession Number ML022540755).

Discussion Topics The staff would like to discuss a response to the staff requirements memorandum (SRM) including a discussion of the following option. A draft standard review plan (SRP) Section 14.3, Appendix E, Programmatic ITAAC would be developed for guidance. The staff is considering categorizing the 14 programs that it listed in SECY-02-0067 in the following manner as part of this guidance:

Category A:

Programmatic ITAAC are required. A program that falls into this category is emergency planning.

Category B:

Programmatic ITAAC are not necessary because hardware-related ITAAC address the results to which the program is directed. Examples of programs that may fall into this category are equipment qualification, quality assurance, and containment leak rate testing.

Category C:

An ITAAC for a program or elements of the program is not necessary because the program and its implementation can be fully described1 in the application and found to be acceptable at the COL stage.2 Category D:

An ITAAC for a program or elements of the program is necessary because the program and its implementation cannot be fully described1 in the application.

That is, the COL applicant cannot provide the necessary and sufficient programmatic information for approval of the COL without ITAAC.2 Category E:

An ITAAC for a program is not necessary because ITAAC will be dispositioned prior to fuel load and the program is not required to be implemented until after fuel load. Examples of programs that may fall into this category include the inservice inspection and inservice testing programs, and the maintenance rule program.