Search Options
Index | Site Map | FAQ | Facility Info | Reading Rm | New | Help | Glossary | Contact Us

SECY-98-258

November 4, 1998

PURPOSE:

To provide the Commission with the staff's plan for addressing the standardization of decommissioning licensing actions and priorities and milestones for rulemaking and guidance development, as requested in the Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM), dated June 30, 1998, associated with SECY-98-075.

BACKGROUND:

The SRM requested that the staff consider development of a standardized template to expedite processing of routine decommissioning actions under current rules, similar to the template eventually developed for the improved standard technical specifications program, if such a template would speed the process, and to take regulatory action to address specific licensing actions and exemption requests without waiting for formal rulemakings to resolve issues generically. The SRM also requested that the staff provide the Commission with an overall plan and an integrated set of milestones for addressing initiatives under development or contemplated in the decommissioning area. Further, the staff was requested to include within the plan a prioritization scheme for the various initiatives and specific timeliness goals for licensing actions for the plants in active decommissioning, the level of effort needed to implement the plan, and to identify any policy guidance needed from the Commission to expedite licensing reviews and rulemaking. The prioritization scheme should take into account not only risk information but also cost-beneficial considerations for both the NRC and its licensees.

DISCUSSION:

Standardized Templates for Decommissioning Licensing Actions

The staff has developed several standardized templates for licensing actions concerning decommissioning and the decommissioning process. First, templates were developed that describe the expected order of such licensing actions and the timing of their submittal. Second, the staff has publicly available draft standard technical specifications for some permanently shutdown reactor facilities and continues to prepare standards for other types of shutdown reactor facilities. Lastly, the staff has accumulated a portfolio of previously approved decommissioning licensing actions, exemptions, and amendments, such as technical specifications for defueled facilities, certified fuel handler training programs, and insurance exemptions that serve as examples for licensing actions. To the extent practicable, the staff has referred licensees of recently shutdown plants to these licensing actions to use for guidance and as models for future regulatory submittals. Each of these categories of templates are discussed below.

The standardized template describing an expected order of licensing submittals is expected to facilitate expeditious completion of licensing actions associated with the decommissioning of a power reactor facility. In addition to following a standard template, the staff encourages the licensee to communicate with the NRC approximately 6 months preceding the intended date of shutdown. This coordination is recommended so that the staff can gain a better understanding of the licensee's priorities and schedules and can provide realistic regulatory schedules to the licensee and other affected organizations. In general, most licensees have not provided the NRC with advance notification of their intent to permanently shutdown. The Oyster Creek facility is currently working with the NRR staff to plan for submittal of actions that can be implemented prior to a potential shutdown in 2000.

Attachment 1 provides an overview of the decommissioning time horizon and the sequencing of major events. This chart was provided to licensees in draft Regulatory Guide DG-1067, "Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors," in June 1997 for comment. NEI and numerous industry stakeholders have provided comments on this draft regulatory guide. Attachment 2, Decommissioning Licensing and Regulatory Actions Template, provides a summary listing of licensing actions and expected decommissioning submittals. This table summarizes typical decommissioning licensing and regulatory actions. In addition, the staff in discussions with licensees has identified those items that could be submitted for staff action prior to permanent shutdown.

With respect to standard templates for technical specifications for permanently defueled facilities, the staff developed and published for comment NUREG-1625, "Proposed Standard Technical Specifications for Permanently Defueled Westinghouse Plants," in March 1998. Comments from NEI and numerous industry stakeholders have been received by the staff and will be addressed in the final standard technical specifications which are expected to be finalized by the end of FY 1999. Efforts are continuing to prepare a similar document for permanently shutdown boiling water reactors; the draft is scheduled to be issued for comment in FY 1999.

For guidance on preparing other routine decommissioning licensing actions, the staff refers licensees to recently issued licensing actions, exemptions, and technical specification amendments for defueled facilities. Although this is not a complete alternative to pre-defined licensing action templates, the staff and licensees have found this approach to be both efficient and effective in providing "templates" for licensing actions. NEI and EPRI have also published a report that describes the "Regulatory Process for Decommissioning Nuclear Reactors," (EPRI TR-109032/NEI 98-02) that provides guidance to licensees regarding the decommissioning process and licensing actions. The staff in the near term proposes not to expend resources to develop additional standardized decommissioning licensing action documents beyond standard technical specifications, regulatory guides, NUREGs, and standard review plans as identified in this paper. Since some of the most significant actions involve exemptions to NRC regulations, the staff has focused on expediting the rulemaking activities, which would eliminate the need for exemptions for decommissioning plants. The staff has conducted public meetings in the vicinity of decommissioning plants to ensure that both licensees and the public are informed of both the regulatory program for decommissioning and the expectation for the safe conduct of decommissioning activities. Eleven public meetings have been conducted over the last year.

In summary, the staff intends to continue to provide licensees with information regarding the nature and time frame for decommissioning licensing submittals, including the development of standardized decommissioning technical specifications. The staff intends to remain open to licensee communication regarding decommissioning regulatory needs and licensee fiscal and safety concerns. The staff also intends to continue to refer licensees of newly permanently shutdown plants and those licensees planning permanent shutdown to previously completed licensing actions to facilitate their regulatory submittals. The staff is pursuing a number of rulemaking activities that will eliminate or streamline many of the licensing actions associated with decommissioning. The staff will continue to hold public meetings in the vicinity of decommissioning plants to describe to the public the regulatory process and present the licensees' decommissioning plans.

Taking Regulatory Action and Timeliness Goals

The Commission's June 30, 1998, SRM on DSI-24 directed the staff to take regulatory action to address specific licensing actions and exemption requests without waiting for formal rulemakings to resolve issues generically. The SRM also directed the staff to include specific timeliness goals for licensing actions for plants in active decommissioning.

Although numerous rulemaking and guidance initiatives are taking place or are in the planning phases, the staff continues to focus on accomplishing licensing casework for permanently shutdown reactor licensees in a timely manner. This includes processing exemptions and other regulatory reliefs that reduce unnecessary regulatory burdens, reduce licensee and agency costs, and, most importantly, realign regulatory oversight and requirements consistent with the level of safety concerns and risks associated with a decommissioning facility.

In response to the Commission's directive concerning timeliness goals, the staff performed a detailed analysis of all decommissioning licensing actions received for plants that entered the decommissioning process during the last five years: Haddam Neck, Big Rock Point, Maine Yankee, and Zion Units 1 and 2. Millstone 1 is not included in this analysis because it has just recently permanently ceased operation and has not submitted any decommissioning licensing requests. The staff reviewed the age of all completed and uncompleted licensing actions and created the following tables.

Most decommissioning licensing actions involve requests for reduction of NRC requirements to coincide with the reduced risk associated with permanently shutdown reactor facilities. The NRC staff must review these requests carefully to ensure that requirements are not reduced too rapidly since the potential for significant offsite radioactive releases may remain for up to several years after permanent shutdown. Although the staff has achieved the above agency established goals for licensing action timeliness in this area, the staff continues striving to make further improvements in timeliness. These efforts will be necessary in order to achieve the Commission's recently revised licensing action timeliness goals. Decommissioning plants may incur significant costs until the NRC grants relief from some regulations. The staff has assigned a high priority to these efforts to further reduce the time to process these actions and meet the dates requested by the licensee. The staff recognizes that timeliness issues as well as an increasing decommissioning workload presents a significant challenge to the staff. In response to these concerns, NRC resources to support decommissioning have been increased.

The staff recognizes the need to remain sensitive to safety and financial considerations of decommissioning and the impacts of economic deregulation on the electric utility industry. Because of this sensitivity, the staff will not delay taking regulatory action on decommissioning licensing actions while waiting for formal rulemaking to resolve issues generically. It is important to note that NRC approvals and licensing actions are not required before a licensee may proceed with decommissioning activities such as active dismantlement. Although licensing actions frequently result in individual licensee savings, the promulgation of risk-informed decommissioning rulemakings has the greatest potential for providing the largest benefit to all licensees. For example, the staff promulgated the 1996 decommissioning rule, which revised the regulatory process for reactor decommissioning. This rulemaking initiative resulted in an estimated licensee savings of $1.63 million per decommissioning facility due to the reduction of paperwork and reporting requirements alone. Other rulemakings, such as the one involving emergency preparedness (discussed later in this paper), will also result in significant licensee and agency savings.

Decommissioning Rulemakings

The Commission's June 30, 1998, SRM also requested that the staff provide the Commission with an overall plan and an integrated set of milestones for addressing initiatives under development or contemplated in the decommissioning area. Further, the staff was asked to include within the plan a prioritization scheme for the various initiatives, the level of effort needed to implement the plan, and to identify any policy guidance needed from the Commission to expedite licensing reviews and rulemaking. The prioritization scheme should take into account not only risk information but also cost-beneficial considerations for both the NRC and its licensees.

The staff has been engaged in a number of ongoing dialogues with the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI). These have included industry and staff meetings and have addressed numerous issues affecting decommissioning, including: maintenance rule implementation, waste burial costs, indemnity, etc. The staff has utilized the input from these interactions to assist in identifying and determine the relative priority for resolving decommissioning issues.

Since the issuance of SECY-98-075 in April 1998, the staff has continued its efforts on the rulemaking activities described in that document. Revised final rules for decommissioning financial assurance related to deregulation issues were sent to the Commission for approval in SECY-98-164, "Final Rule on Financial Assurance Requirements for Decommissioning Nuclear Power Reactors," on July 2, 1998. The Commission approved this rule on September 2, 1998, and it was subsequently published on September 22, 1998. The staff is now working on five other decommissioning rulemakings, which will be discussed next in order of relative priority, based on risk information and cost-benefit considerations. The resources noted below have been refined since the previous response to DSI-24 and are reflected in the current budget. A rulemaking schedule summary is provided in Attachment 3.

Emergency Preparedness Requirements for Permanently Shutdown Reactors

This rule is considered to be the highest in priority since the elimination of offsite emergency preparedness (EP) requirements when plant conditions no longer necessitate EP may save licensees up to $300,000 per month. Prompt completion of rulemaking for emergency preparedness during decommissioning is needed to reduce unnecessary burden on licensees and the NRC staff (which is now handling this issue on a plant-specific basis by processing individual licensee exemption requests).

The recent issuance of emergency preparedness exemptions for Haddam Neck, Maine Yankee, and Big Rock Point has identified some additional considerations for this proposed rule. While this effort has been impacted by a concern with the possible interaction between safeguards and emergency preparedness requirements, the staff is currently working on a proposed rule in this area and expects to submit it to the Commission for approval in February 1999. The final EP rule is scheduled for promulgation in early FY 2000. Current NRR resource estimates for completing this rulemaking are about 1.2 FTE in FY 1999 and 0.6 FTE in FY 2000.

Physical Security/Safeguards Requirements for Permanently Shutdown Power Reactors

The promulgation of this rule is of high priority since reducing security requirements to compensate for the reduced risk at permanently shutdown plants can reduce licensee costs significantly. As with EP, issuance of this rule will reduce the licensing burden on licensees and the NRC staff (which is also handling this issue on a plant-specific basis by processing individual licensee exemption requests). The staff is now working to develop the technical basis for a rule in this area and expects to submit a rulemaking plan in November 1998 to the Commission for approval. Current NRR resource estimates for completing this rulemaking are 1.0 FTE in FY 1999 and 1.3 FTE in FY 2000.

Financial Protection (Insurance) Requirements for Permanently Shutdown Reactors

A proposed rule was published on October 30, 1997. The public comment period closed on January 13, 1998; however, some late public comments were received and are being considered by the staff. The staff has recently published a Federal Register notice seeking additional public comments and input regarding appropriate levels of insurance coverage for certain reactor conditions discussed in the proposed rule. After additional comments are received and analyzed, the staff expects to submit the proposed final rule by April 1999. Although additional public comment may be needed for the criteria for reducing financial protection requirements to be consistent with the approach being developed in the EP and safeguards decommissioning rulemakings, the staff is reviewing rule finalization options to avoid a schedule impact. Current NRR resource estimates for completing this rulemaking are 0.4 FTE in FY 1999.

Use of Site-Specific Decommissioning Cost Estimates for Funding Decommissioning

This rulemaking effort was intended to allow power reactor licensees to use site-specific decommissioning cost estimates as goals for accrual of decommissioning funds as an alternative to the generic formula amounts currently specified by the regulations. The Commission requested that the effort be delayed until the staff had obtained and examined actual decommissioning cost data from the licensee of the Trojan reactor facility. After discussions with the licensee of the Trojan facility, the staff has determined that the Trojan data will not be representative of the majority of NRC licensees due to the unique nature of the decommissioning activities at this site. For example, Trojan does not plan to emphasize waste reduction techniques prior to shipment to Hanford because the low rates available to them will not make it cost-beneficial. Unlike other facilities, this licensee has proposed to ship a reactor vessel that may contain greater than Class C waste intact to Hanford. In addition, the licensee's time frame would not support timely use of their decommissioning data as decommissioning will not be completed until 2002, and only 30 percent of the decommissioning activities have been completed at this time.

The Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) has pursued various mechanisms to ensure that the decommissioning cost estimates developed by licensees are realistic. As a first step, RES will publish a revision to NUREG-1307, Report on Waste Burial Charges, that provides licensees with updated information on how to estimate decommissioning waste disposal costs at low-level waste burial facilities. To achieve a more realistic estimate of radioactive waste disposal costs, the staff will include options where a percentage of the waste disposal costs could be assumed to go to a waste processing contractor or a lower cost waste disposal facility that accepts very low activity waste. The staff will also consider revising, through rulemaking, the formulas for calculating waste volumes and basic decommissioning costs using cost data provided by NEI.

The second effort underway in RES is to finalize a report that re-evaluates decommissioning cost estimates. In discussions with industry the staff has learned that the major contributor to a lowering of the decommissioning cost estimates is the current practice of waste reduction. The report being prepared by the staff will use information from other recent decommissioned sites, as well as data on waste reduction from operating sites. The staff expects to complete this report by February 1999. The staff will submit to the Commission recommendations on possible approaches for calculating the minimum required decommissioning funding based on the results of this re-evaluation by June 1999, consistent with Commission direction in the SRM associated with SECY-97-251, dated February 5, 1998. The staff expects to publish a proposed rule by February 2000. Current resource estimates for this effort are 0.4 FTE in FY 1999 (NRR: 0.2; RES: 0.2) and 0.7 FTE in FY 2000 (NRR: 0.2; RES: 0.5).

Unit Staffing for Permanently Shutdown Plants

The staff is currently preparing a rulemaking plan to obtain Commission approval to undertake rulemaking to clarify the shift staffing and training requirements at permanently shutdown power reactors. This plan is expected to be presented by March 1999. A proposed rule is scheduled for September 1999 with a final rule in April 2000. Current NRR resource estimates for completing this rulemaking are 0.5 FTE in FY 1999 and 0.8 FTE in FY 2000.

In addition to the FTE requirements estimated above, the current NRR budget provides $455K in FY 1999 and $500K in FY 2000 to support completion of the preceding rulemakings in accordance with the estimated schedules.

Decommissioning Guidance

Since the issuance of SECY-98-075 in April 1998, the staff has also continued its efforts on the guidance development activities described in that document. NUREG-1628, "Staff Responses to Frequently Asked Questions Concerning Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors," and draft Regulatory Guide DG-1078, "Standard Format and Content of License Termination Plans for Nuclear Power Reactors," were published in April 1998. Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1069, "Fire Protection Program for Nuclear Power Plants During Decommissioning and Permanent Shutdown," was issued in July 1998. Also, the staff presented SECY-98-153 containing the final "Standard Review Plan on Power Reactor Licensee Financial Qualifications and Decommissioning Funding Assurance" to the Commission for consideration on June 29, 1998. In addition, Regulatory Guide DG-4006, "Demonstrating Compliance with Radiological Criteria for License Termination," was issued for use and comment in August 1998.

Ongoing staff activities in the area of decommissioning guidance are extensive. During FY 1999, the staff has 19 different guidance documents scheduled for issuance. During FY 2000, the staff plans to issue 11 different decommissioning guidance documents. A listing of these planned documents, in order of expected completion, for each fiscal year is provided in Attachment 4. Detailed schedules for individual items are addressed in the operating plan. Estimated resource requirements for preparing this guidance are 2.8 FTE and $475K in FY 1999 and 2.1 FTE and $450K in FY 2000. These resources are included in the current budget.

Decommissioning Initiatives

As discussed in SECY-98-075, the staff continues to monitor licensee usage of the 10 CFR 50.59 process to make changes to their facilities without prior NRC review and approval. The staff noted that using 10 CFR 50.59 to maintain the original operating reactor design- basis envelope as a reference for evaluation might not be the optimum evaluation criteria to use throughout the decommissioning process. The decommissioning staff continues to monitor ongoing efforts to revise 10 CFR 50.59 and to make 10 CFR Part 50 more risk-informed. As these efforts mature, the staff is planning a review to determine if different criteria should be developed for reactor decommissioning. The results of this review are expected to lead to a rulemaking effort and one or more guidance documents. The initial review is scheduled for completion in FY 2000, and any needed rulemaking and guidance documents will be initiated in FY 2001. The reevaluation of the decommissioning safety review (10 CFR 50.59) process will require about 0.2 FTE and $130K in FY 1999 and 0.3 FTE and $50K in FY 2000. These resources are included in the current budget.

CONCLUSIONS:

In summary, the staff has prepared and provided numerous templates both in the form of time lines and the portfolio of recently completed licensing actions for reference to licensees in support of decommissioning licensing actions. The staff continues to develop standardized technical specifications for decommissioning to provide guidance for licensees that are in the decommissioning phase of reactor life and those entering it. The staff has taken timely regulatory action to address decommissioning licensing actions and continues to seek licensee input on licensee priorities and concerns. The staff will continue to monitor licensing action progress to ensure that staff activities will not cause undue delays and to ensure that an acceptable level of safety is maintained at decommissioning facilities.

This paper provides the Commission with the staff's plan and an integrated set of milestones for addressing initiatives under development or contemplated in the decommissioning area. This plan contains a prioritization scheme for the various initiatives and the level of effort needed to implement the plan, and takes into account not only risk information but also cost-beneficial considerations for both the NRC and its licensees. The schedules discussed in this paper are dependent on maintaining the existing level of planned resource commitments in the agency's current budget. Alteration of resource allocations will have a corresponding impact upon rulemaking and guidance development activities with the requisite revisiting of schedules for operating plan products.

COORDINATION:

The Office of the General Counsel has reviewed this Commission paper and has no legal objection. The Office of the Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this Commission paper for resource implications and has no objections. The Office of the Chief Information Officer has reviewed this Commission paper for information technology and information management implications and concurs in it.

RECOMMENDATION:

Unless otherwise directed by the Commission, the staff will proceed as described in this paper. Staff requests action within 10 days. Action will not be taken until the SRM is received.

ATTACHMENT 2

DECOMMISSIONING LICENSING AND
REGULATORY ACTIONS TEMPLATE

ATTACHMENT 3

Rulemaking Schedule Summary

ATTACHMENT 4

Ongoing Decommissioning Guidance Activities

FY 1999:

Draft Standard Permanently Defueled Technical Specifications for BWRs

Final Regulatory Guide, DG-1067, "Decommissioning of Nuclear Power Reactors"

Preparation of a Decommissioning Project Manager's Handbook

Draft Standard Review Plan on Decommissioning of Power Reactors

Final Regulatory Guide, DG-1071, "Standard Format and Content for a Post-Shutdown

Decommissioning Activities Report"

Issue Final NUREG-1628, "Decommissioning Questions and Answers"

Update/Revision to IMC 2561, "Decommissioning Inspection Program"; Issue Draft Revision for Comment

Develop Draft guidance on Maintenance Rule compliance for decommissioning power reactors

Issue decommissioning inspection procedures on occupational radiation exposure and radioactive waste handling

Evaluation of design-basis accidents for decommissioning power reactors

Decommissioning resident inspector training

Issue information notice on release of licensed material during decommissioning

Final Standard Permanently Defueled Technical Specifications for PWRs

Final Standard Review Plan on Decommissioning Power Reactors

Final Regulatory Guide, DG-1069, "Fire Protection Program for Permanently Shutdown and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants"

Issue Final Revision to IMC 2561, "Decommissioning Inspection Program"

Issue Inspection Procedure on Decommissioning Safeguards and Physical Security

Final Regulatory Guide, DG-1078, "Standard Format and Content of License Termination Plans for Nuclear Power Reactors"

Final Standard Review Plan for Evaluating License Termination Plans for Power Reactors

FY 2000:

Final Standard Permanently Defueled Technical Specifications for BWRs

Development of draft SRP and draft regulatory guide for cost estimates required by 10 CFR 50.82

Issue final decommissioning maintenance rule guidance

Draft guidance on FSAR conversion after permanently ceasing power operations

Draft guidance on incremental site release at facilities undergoing decommissioning

Evaluation of safety reviews (similar to 10 CFR 50.59) at permanently shutdown reactors

Development of final SRP and final regulatory guide for cost estimates required by 10 CFR 50.82

Draft regulatory guide and inspection manual chapter on 10 CFR 50.75 (g) spills and records related to decommissioning

Final guidance on FSAR conversion after permanently ceasing power operations

Evaluation and possible development of a NUREG/CR-XXXX for the "Protection Against Malevolent Use of Vehicles at Permanently Shutdown Power Reactor Sites."

Final guidance on "Demonstrating Compliance with Radiological Criteria for License Termination"

1. The staff notes, however, that additional public comment may be needed for the criteria for reducing financial protection requirements to be consistent with the approach being developed in the EP and safeguards decommissioning rulemakings. This could affect the ultimate date for finalization of this rule.

2. The staff notes, however, that additional public comment may be needed for the criteria for reducing financial protection requirements to be consistent with the approach being developed in the EP and safeguards decommissioning rulemakings. This could affect the ultimate date for finalization of this rule.

3. By September 1999, the staff will make a recommendation to the Commission regarding minimum funding requirements for decommissioning, which could include rulemaking.