nei lawyers committee meetingresources.nei.org/documents/legal/masterslidesformarch... ·...
TRANSCRIPT
NEI LAWYERS COMMITTEE MEETING
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman Conference Center
Washington, DC March 12, 2012
Introduction and Welcome
Administrative Matters
Ellen Ginsberg Vice President , General Counsel and
Secretary Nuclear Energy Institute
Keynote Address
Stephen G. Burns General Counsel
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Keynote Address
Marvin S. Fertel President & CEO
Nuclear Energy Institute
BREAK
Update on Developments in Whistleblower Law
Donn Meindertsma Partner
Connor & Winters
Copyright 2012 by Conner & Winters, LLP. All rights reserved 8
UNLAWFUL HARASSMENT
IN THE WORKPLACE
Whistleblower Legal Trends
NEI Lawyers Committee March 12,
2012
Presented by Donn C. Meindertsma, Conner & Winters, LLP
Copyright 2012 by Conner & Winters, LLP. All rights reserved 9
Whistleblower Legal Trends
• More laws • More bad law • Section 211
Copyright 2012 by Conner & Winters, LLP. All rights reserved 10
Whistleblower Legal Trends
• Bounty Provisions • SEC Whistleblowers • CFTC
Whistleblowers • Tax Whistleblowers
X
More laws
Copyright 2012 by Conner & Winters, LLP. All rights reserved 11
Whistleblower Legal Trends
• New Employment Protections • Dodd-Frank • Enhanced SOX • “Best practices” or
“gold standard” model
More laws
Copyright 2012 by Conner & Winters, LLP. All rights reserved 12
Whistleblower Legal Trends
DOL ARB Changing the Law Paul M. Igasaki
E. Cooper Brown Joanne Royce Luis A. Corchado Lisa Wilson Edwards
More bad law
Copyright 2012 by Conner & Winters, LLP. All rights reserved 13
Whistleblower Legal Trends
Expanding Procedural Protection
• Discouraging pre-trial dismissals • Looking beyond the trial record • Reaching out to address issues • More protective of pro se
complainants
More bad law
Copyright 2012 by Conner & Winters, LLP. All rights reserved 14
Whistleblower Legal Trends
Expanding Substantive Protection
• Broadening SOX Coverage
More bad law
Copyright 2012 by Conner & Winters, LLP. All rights reserved 15
Whistleblower Legal Trends
Expanding Substantive Protection
• Stretching “Protected Activity” • Expanding “Adverse Action” • Curbing “Legitimate” Reasons
for Personnel Action
More bad law
Copyright 2012 by Conner & Winters, LLP. All rights reserved 16
Whistleblower Legal Trends
Expanding Substantive Protection
• Discarding “retaliatory animus” requirement • Menendez (SOX) • DeFrancesco (FRSA)
More bad law
Copyright 2012 by Conner & Winters, LLP. All rights reserved 17
Whistleblower Legal Trends
RICO Retaliation Revival
• 18 USC § 1513(e) (SOX provision)
• DeGuelle v. Camilli (7th Cir.)
More bad law
Copyright 2012 by Conner & Winters, LLP. All rights reserved 18
Whistleblower Legal Trends
Section 211 Siemaszko v. FENOC (211(g))
“Acting without direction from” employer: “[T]he overriding consideration is whether the employer was sufficiently involved such that a reasonable factfinder could conclude that there was expressed or implied ‘direction’ or ‘pressure’ on the complainant to commit the acts that led to the violation of the ERA or AEA.”
Copyright 2012 by Conner & Winters, LLP. All rights reserved 19
Whistleblower Legal Trends
Section 211
Copyright 2012 by Conner & Winters, LLP. All rights reserved 20
Questions?
Commission Voting Process
Darani Reddick Legal Counsel
Commissioner Kristine Svinicki U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Darani Reddick Deputy Chief of Staff
& Legal Counsel Office of Commissioner Svinicki
Topics
Legal & procedural framework What is a vote? Why the process matters The process Issues
23
Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 “…a quorum for the transaction of business
shall consist of at least three members present.”
“Action of the Commission shall be determined by a majority of the members present.”
Government in the Sunshine Act Internal Commission Procedures
24
25
Hearing of the House Energy & Commerce Committee Subcommittee on Energy & Power
March 16, 2011
Response to Staff or Commissioner- generated document (written notation vote)
26
Votes at meetings Affirmation sessions When are votes “final”?
Mandatory Hearing for Vogtle Combined Operating License, Sept. 27, 2011
27
Commission makes decisions and issues direction to NRC Staff through voting
Transparency of decision-making Process can have substantive impacts
28
- non-adjudicatory & non-rulemaking items
29
Each Commissioner votes
Office of the Secretary tallies votes and circulates a draft Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM)
Commissioners approve/disapprove/ modify draft SRM
Secretary circulates subsequent versions of draft SRM, if necessary, until majority position reached
Secretary issues final SRM
30
- adjudicatory items
Each Commissioner votes
Office of Commission Appellate Adjudication (OCAA) circulates draft final order reflecting votes
Commissioners approve/disapprove/ modify draft final order
OCAA circulates subsequent versions of draft final order, if necessary, until majority position reached
Commission affirms final order in public meeting & final order issued
- Rulemaking items
Proposed Rule Notation vote SRM process No affirmation
required
Final Rule Notation vote SRM-like
process Requires
affirmation Final “SRM”
issued upon affirmation
31
- Affirmation session
Affirmation of the Vogtle Mandatory Hearing Order, Feb. 9, 2012 Commission Meeting 1.avi
32
Timing How long do you have to vote? Extensions of time Procedural mechanisms to compel votes
When is a vote “final”? Scrutability of votes “Secret” voting
33
What happens when there is no quorum?
Tied votes
34
Many procedural nuances Room for interpretation Process matters Questions?
Contact Info: [email protected]
(t) 301.415.1855
35
Fuel Cycle Developments
Donald Silverman Partner
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP
www.morganlewis.com
US Fuel Cycle Industry Status Report
Donald J. Silverman
March 12, 2012
© Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP
US Fuel Cycle Industry Status Report
• Revised Regulatory Structure – How Is It Going?
• Uranium Hexafluoride Conversion • Enrichment • Fuel Fabrication • Uranium Deconversion • Recycling (Reprocessing)
38
© Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP
Revised Regulatory Structure
• Significant Revisions to Part 70 in 2000 – Performance-Based/Risk Informed
• NEI Early Involvement Paid Dividends – ISA Requirement
– High Consequence Events – Highly Unlikely; Intermediate Consequence Events – Unlikely
– “IROFS”, “Management Measures”
– 50.59 “Like” Change Process
39
© Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP
Uranium Hexafluoride Conversion
• Honeywell International Inc., – Metropolis, Illinois
• Sequoyah Fuels – Gore, Oklahoma
40
© Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP
Enrichment
• USEC – Piketon, Ohio GDP
– Paducah, Kentucky GDP
– ACP, Piketon
• URENCO USA (LES) – Eunice, New Mexico NEF
• AREVA Enrichment Services (Eagle Rock) – Bonneville County, Idaho
• GE- Hitachi Global Laser Enrichment – Wilmington, NC
41
© Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP
Fuel Fabrication
• Global Nuclear Fuel-Americas – Wilmington, North Carolina
• Westinghouse – Columbia, South Carolina
• NFS – Erwin, Tennessee
• AREVA NP – Richland, Washington
– Lynchburg, Virginia
• B&W Nuclear Operations Group – Lynchburg, Virginia
• Shaw AREVAMOX Services – Aiken, South Carolina
42
© Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP
Uranium Deconversion
• Uranium Disposition Services – Piketon, Ohio (DOE)
– Paducah, Kentucky (DOE)
• International Isotopes – Hobbs, NM
43
© Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP
Recycling (Reprocessing)
• Industry Initiative • NEI Activities • NRC Priorities • “BRC” Recommendations
44
© Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 45
international presence Beijing Boston Brussels Chicago Dallas Frankfurt Harrisburg Houston Irvine London Los Angeles Miami New York Palo Alto Paris Philadelphia Pittsburgh Princeton San Francisco Tokyo Washington Wilmington
LUNCH
Fukushima Update First Hand Experience with Mother Nature: Fukushima, Other Natural
Phenomena, and the Industry’s Regulatory Response
David Heacock President & Chief Nuclear Officer
Dominion Nuclear
© Dominion 2012
© 2012 Dominion
First Hand Experience with Mother Nature
Mr. David A. Heacock President, Chief Nuclear Officer
NEI Lawyers Committee Meeting March 12, 2012
© 2012 Dominion
Dominion Overview
50
© 2012 Dominion
Dominion Generation - Utility
Mt. Storm
Remington Possum Point
Gordonsville Bath County North Anna
Bremo
Pittsylvania Clover
Roanoke Rapids
Chesterfield
Surry
Ladysmith
Yorktown
Elizabeth River Chesapeake
Mecklenburg
Rosemary Gaston
PJM Current ~ 19,000 MW
Altavista
Southampton
Bellemeade
Hopewell
Coal
Natural Gas
Nuclear Hydro Oil-Gas Capacity Biomass
Coal and Oil
Future VA City Hybrid Energy Center
Bear Garden
Future Warren County Power Station
© 2012 Dominion
Dominion Generation - Merchant
MISO market effective 4/1/2005. State Line and Kincaid are physically located in MISO but operate in PJM.
.
MISO
NYPP
NE-ISO
PJM
NedPower
Millstone
Manchester Brayton Point
Current ~ 9,200 MW
State Line
Fairless
Kincaid Coal
Natural Gas
Nuclear
Coal and Oil
Wind
Under LT Contract
Fowler Ridge
Kewaunee
Elwood
MISO market effective 4/1/2005. State Line and Kincaid are physically located in MISO but operate in PJM.
Salem Harbor
52
© 2012 Dominion
Our Core Values
Safety
Ethics
Excellence
1 Dominion
53
© 2012 Dominion
MARCH 11, 2011
54
© 2012 Dominion
Nuclear Energy in Japan 54 nuclear reactors (49
gigawatts) Two nuclear units
under construction Tokyo Electric Power
Co. produces 27% of Japan’s electricity
12,000 MW of nuclear energy capacity shut down as a result of the earthquake and tsunami
55
© 2012 Dominion
Fukushima - Initial Response
More waves approach Fukushima Daiichi station immediately after a tsunami struck following a magnitude 9 earthquake in the Tomioka, Fukushima prefecture . This still image is from a video taken on March 11, 2011.
56
© 2012 Dominion
Tsunami Inundation at Fukushima Daiichi
Source: TEPCO
57
© 2012 Dominion 58
© 2012 Dominion
Fukushima - Industry Response
NEI, INPO, EPRI – leading U.S. nuclear organizations team up to create a communications focal point
Industry CEOs/CNOs participates in daily phone with Japan to stay abreast of latest developments
Several utilities, including Dominion, send personnel to Washington to assist in providing 24 hr coverage
Meanwhile 36 days later 7,379 miles away…..
59
© 2012 Dominion
Surry Station – Tornado Path
Switchyard
60
© 2012 Dominion
Surry Station Switchyard
61
© 2012 Dominion
Surry Station – Fuel Oil Transfer Truck
62
© 2012 Dominion
THEN 165 DAYS AFTER FUKUSHIMA….
63
© 2012 Dominion
8/23/11 13:51
Earthquake Epicenter
North Anna Power Station
64
© 2012 Dominion
North Anna Station – Spent Fuel Storage
65
© 2012 Dominion
North Anna – TN-32.21 Cask Movement
66
© 2012 Dominion
Cracks
North Anna Station – Containment, Seal Table Room
67
© 2012 Dominion
Powdex Demineralizer Tanks and Base Pedestal
(Non-safety Related)
North Anna Station – Turbine Building
68
© 2012 Dominion
North Anna - Timeline Governors Staff called Nuclear Operations Senior VP
at home Amount of media attention was greater than expected
News media went directly to the site instead of reporting to their emergency response facilities
CNN called CNO within 72 mins of the event Engineering VP leaves Corporate Emergency Facility,
for 30 mins is out of communication, arrives at site is immediately sequestered into a press conference without the chance of catching up on status
Governor and House Majority Leader on site within 24 hours Reality didn’t conform to the plan…..
69
© 2012 Dominion
North Anna – Unchartered Territory NRC Reg. Guides and an EPRI* document No one had used the path We cleared the path, focused on that path Restart 110,000 hrs and $21M+ Four public meetings
September 7, 2011 October 3, 2011 October 21, 2011 November 1, 2011
*Electric Power Research Institute 70
© 2012 Dominion
North Anna - Dominion’s Strategy
Create clear success path Open communication with NRC and other
stakeholders Create project management team Communicated with the NRC at all levels Commission briefing strategy – basis for
restart - “Why the Plant is Safe”
71
© 2012 Dominion
Present Day – NRC Fukushima Recommendations Seismic and flood hazard re-evaluations Seismic and flood walkdowns Station blackout (SBO) regulatory actions Equipment covered under 50.54(hh)(2) Reliable hardened vents for Mark I and Mark II
containments Spent Fuel Pool instrumentation Strengthening and integration of emergency
operating procedures, Severe Accident Management Guidelines (SAMGs), and extensive damage mitigation guidelines
Emergency preparedness regulatory actions (staffing and communications)
72
© 2012 Dominion
Thoughts / Questions
Fukushima Update Industry Strategic Response Plan to
Fukushima
Joseph Pollock Executive Director Nuclear Operations
Nuclear Energy Institute
Fukushima Strategic Response Plan
03/12/2012
76 76
Strategic Response Plan Update
What it is:
• Activity based snapshot of SECY 0137 Tier one actions and those impacts to the U.S. nuclear fleet
• Dates/ tasks/ durations provided by task force leads performing frequent engagement with the NRC staff in order to establish key milestones
• Included are assumptions and issues pertaining to the Tier one actions
•Will be updated after final orders and 50.54f letters issued
77
Licensee Activities (perspective) 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th
2.1 Flooding analysis 1st 20 sites1st 20 sites
2nd 20 sites2nd 20 sites
2.1 Seismic analysis1st 12 sites
2nd 12 sites
2.1 Other events analysis
2.3 Flooding walkdowns
2.3 Seismic walkdowns
4.1 SBO
4.2 Flex Equipment
5.1 Hardened Vents
7.1 SFP Instrumentation
8 SAMG/EOP/EDMG
9.3 EP Staffing
9.3 EP Communications
NRC Actions
Acceptance, Review, SubmittalImplement Modifications
2016 2017
Guidance DevelopmentPerform analysis and design
2012 2013 2014 2015
78
NEI Guidance development and NRC endorsement
Mar-12 Apr-12 May-12 Jun-12 Jul-12 Aug-12 Sep-12 Oct-12 Nov-12 Dec-12 Jan-13
2.1 Flooding analysis
2.1 Seismic analysis
2.1 Other events analysis
2.3 Flooding walkdowns
2.3 Seismic walkdowns
4.1 SBO
4.2 Flex Equipment
5.1 Hardened Vents
7.1 SFP Instrumentation
8 SAMG/EOP/EDMG
9.3 EP Staffing
9.3 EP Communications
NEI development NRC endorsement
79
Site 50.54(f) and Order responses 2012 responses
2.1 Analysis All Sep Risk Assessment Approach/ Acceptance Criteria
2.3 Walkdowns Flood Jun Confirm walkdown procedures or alternative Seismic Jul Confirm walkdown procedures or alternative
4.1 ELAP May Industry comments to ANPR
5.1 HV Jun Plan and schedule
9.3 EP Staffing Jun Dates for completion of assessment and initial questions Staffing Jul Initial questions Staffing Dec NEI10-05 (Single Unit) Comm May Dates for completion of assessment and initial questions Comm Jun Initial questions Comm NLT Oct Remaining questions
2013 responses
2.3 Walkdowns All Mar Results of walkdowns
4.2 FLEX Feb 180 day response every 6 mos After initiation of implementation
5.1 Hardened Vents Feb Plans and schedules
7.1 SFP Instrumentation Feb Plans and schedules
9.3 EP Staffing Apr Remaining questions
80
2.1 Flood Hazard Analyses
Assumptions • Analysis to New Plant Criteria
• EPRI supporting FFTF development of screening criteria for plant prioritization with input from PWROG and BWROG
• Additional time will be required for implementation of any plant mods
• Implementation by 6 years from 9 Mar 12
Issues
• Development of Std Assumptions and Terminology
• Low water levels not part of Flooding Eval
• Integrated Assessment Plan (180 day Site Response)
NEI TF- Fukushima Flooding (FFTF) – Jim Riley
9-Mar-12 May-12
NEI develop guidanceAug-12
Jun-1490 days
Mar-12 Apr-12 Jun-12 Aug-12
Jun-12 Aug-1290 days
Aug-12
Sep-12
90 days50.54(f) response
18 monthsImplementation of any plant mods
6 to 18 mos
2nd 20 sites
Aug-14
Screen hazards and establish necessary contracts
Nov-14
Site response -50.54 (f)
Utility eval of analysis
Analyses by vendor
Aug-14
Nov-14
60 daysJan-15
6 to 18 mos
60 days
NLT
50.54(f)
Analyses by vendor
120 day - 180 days
Eval Preparations
1st 20 sites
Screen hazards and establish necessary contracts
NRC endorsement of guidance
120 day - 180 daysEval Preparations
Nov-12
Feb-13
TF develop screening criteria and perform plant prioritization
NSIAC acceptance of screening criteria and
prioritization
NRC acceptance of prioritization
81
2.1 Seismic Hazard Analyses
Assumptions • Analysis to new plant methodology
• 4 far west plants performing independent evaluations
• Seismic industry can support 10-12 plants per 2 yr period
• NRC to prioritize sites based on GMRS > SSE
Issues
• Development of Std Assumptions and Terminology
• Implementation will exceed Mar 2016
• Limited margin in initial 180 days
NEI TF- Seismic – Kimberly Keithline
9-Mar-12 Sep-12 Nov-1260 daysNRC endorsement
Jul-13 Sep-13Mar-12
Sep-1318 months Oct-13
1st 12 Sep-12 sites
Oct-1524 months
50.54(f) response 2nd 1250.54(f) sitesresponse
24 months
Jul-12Prioritization by EPRI/ Utilities
50.54(f) Develop NEI guidance and Implementation details
Site collection of ground data
Risk Assessment
180 days
Risk Assessment
Sites/ EPRI develop Ground Motion Response Spectra NRC accept prioritization
82
2.3 Flood Walkdowns
Assumptions • Current Design Basis/ Criteria
• FLEX equipment used in mitigation
• Implementation by Mar 2016
Issues
• Development of Std Assumptions and Terminology
• Development of training requirements for walkdown teams
NEI TF- Fukushima Flooding (FFTF) – Jim Riley
9-Mar-12 Apr-12
NEI develop guidance Jun-12
NRC Endorsement Jul-1230 days
Site develop WD plan Sep-12
90 days
Nov-12
Perform walkdownsJan-13
Jun-12 Sep-12 60 days90 days Evaluate Mar-13
results 60 daysSite issue
Jun-12 50.54 (f)
50.54(f) response
NLT
NLT
50.54(f)
60 days
Site WD preparations90 days
Initial 50.54(f) response by sites
NRC review site plans
83
2.3 Seismic Walkdowns
Assumptions • Walkdown performed to current design basis
• Sampling of equipment only
• With the exception of inspections requiring planned outages, it may be possible to perform walkdowns in six months
Issues
• Development of Std Assumptions and Terminology
NEI TF- Seismic – Kimberly Keithline
9-Mar-12 Jul-12 Sep-1260 daysNRC endorsement
60 days
Nov-1260 days
Jul-12 Jan-1260 days
Evaluate50.54(f) response results Mar-13
Site issue 50.54(f)
120 days50.54(f)
Develop guidance and walkdown criteria
EPRI and sites train walkdown teams
Perform walkdowns
60 days
84
4.1 Extended Loss of All AC Power Rulemaking
Assumptions • Rename to Extended Loss of all AC Power (ELAP)
• 4.2 Guidance is input to 4.1 Rule
• 4.1 ELAP Rule will codify 4.2 Order
• Rule effective Dec 2016
Issues
• Development of Std Assumptions and Terminology
• Regional sites must be operational to be included in site coping strategy
NEI TF- Extended Loss of All AC Power (ELAP) – Scott Bauer
15-Mar-12 1-May-12 mid 2014 Dec-1645 daysIndustry comments final Rulemaking Effective date
4.1 ANPR issued
Jan-13
Proposed Rule issued
85
4.2 FLEX
Assumptions
• BDB event resulting in loss of AC and/or UHS
• Owners Groups complete coping analyses by Jun 2013
• 4.1 Rule will codify 4.2 Order
• ELAP TF/ 4.2 TF TF ELAP
• Implementation by Dec 2016
Issues
• Development of Std Assumptions and Terminology
• Regional sites must be operational to be included in site coping strategy
NEI TF- Extended Loss of All AC Power (ELAP) – Scott Bauer
9-Mar-12 Jul-12Dec-16
Guidance developed
Aug-12
Feb-13180 days
Site Strategy/ Eval Dec-16developed NLTPhases1. Coping w/ installed equip w/ 6 mos updates to NRC2. Coping with Site FLEX equip Plant Mods for tie-ins3. Coping with Regional equip
Flex equipent ordered
4.2 Order
regional sites established
Site implementation
NRC endorsement
Sep-12
Prepare site response
ISG issued
Order on-site FLEX gear, delivered by 31 Dec 2012
NLT
31-Mar-12
86
5.1 Hardened Vents
Assumptions • 1st 24 months = scoping outage
• 2nd 24 months = installation outage
• White papers being developed by BWROG/ PWROG to address filtered vents
• Mark I / Mark II mods initial focus
• Implementation by Dec 2016
Issues
• Development of Std Assumptions and Terminology
• Filter decision may pass from NRC to EPA
• Pro-filter decision will drive re-design of on-going mods
BWROG/ PWROG
9-Mar-12 Apr-12
BWROG develop response Aug-12template
BWROG develop design ISG issued Feb-13principles
Sites develop response,plan, schedule Site submit plan to NRC Dec-16
NLT
Sep-12Jul-12
Develop white papers on filtered vents NRC filter decision
30 days
Implementation
Order released
No Later Than (NLT) two refueling cycles after submittal of the site plan or 31 Dec
2016, whichever comes first
87
7.1 SFP Instrumentation
Assumptions
• Not Safety Related • Seismic Mounting
• One permanent install/ One portable or permanent install
• No feed to Control Room required
• Power back up, portable or installed
• Implementation by Dec 2016
Issues
• Portable components part of FLEX
NEI TF- Used Fuel Fukushima Response – Steven Kraft
9-Mar-12 May-12
Provide NEI GuidanceAug-12
NRC issue ISG
Feb-13NLT
Site submit plan to NRCDec-16
NLT
No Later Than (NLT) two refueling cycles after submittal of the site plan or 31 Dec
2016, whichever comes first
NLT
Implementation
7.1 Order
Site Response- Plans and Schedule for Compliance
88
8 Strengthen and Integrate SAMG/EOP/EDMG
Assumptions • All PWR SAMGs on same format NLT Dec 2015
• Plant specific SAMG training developed by Dec 2013
• Include FLEX Equip in SAMGs/ EOPs/ EDMGs when available
• Implementation by Dec 2015
Issues
• Development of Std Assumptions and Terminology
SAMG Action Plan Working Group (APWG) – Biff Bradley
Jul-11 Dec-15
Jul-11 Dec-13
TBR enhancement and supportJan-12 Dec-12
Dec-1560 days NLT
Sites incorporateDec-12 TBR changes Dec-15
60 days NLTSites incorporate
into SAMGs TBR changes Dec-13TBD
SAMG formatANPR issued
EPRI/ BWROG/PWROG SAMG program planning/ interaction with NRC for Rule development
into SAMGs
PWR site specific training and implementation of SAMGs
BWR site specific training and implementation of SAMGs
Owner's Groups perform coping analyses for FLEX
BWROG incorporate TBR changes
PWROG incorporate TBR changes
PWROG develop single
89
9.3 EP Staffing
Assumptions
• Prolonged ELAP at all units
• Use NEI 12-01 as guidance
• Site access limitations
• Phase 1 multi-unit staff assessment
• Implementation by Mar 2016
Issues
• Development of Std Assumptions and Terminology
• Phase II staff assessment of ELAP strategies adequate staff in place to support ELAP strategies
NEI TF- EP Staffing Study – Susan Perkins-Grew/ David Young
9-Mar-12 Apr-12 Dec-1250.54(f)NEI 12-01 developed NRC Endorse Guidance (12-01) Jun-12
60 days
Jul-1290 days
TBD 2014NLT
Mar-13NLT
Apr-13NLT
Apr-13 Mar-16
NLT
Site complete FLEX staffing assessment
30 days
Site response-- Dates for completion of Staffing assessment and question(s)
Site response-- initial question(s)
Implementation
Site NEI 10-05 response
Feb-13
FLEX 180 day submission
Site complete multi-unit Staffing Assessment
Site response to remaining questions
90
9.3 EP Communications
Assumptions
• Use NEI 12-01 as guidance
• Damage to communication infrastructure
• Equipment availability and storage assumptions need to be consistent with other task force work
• Phase approach to access
• Implementation by Mar 2016
NEI TF- Communications during a Prolonged Station Blackout – Susan Perkins-Grew/ David Young
Issues
• Development of Std Assumptions and Terminology
• Completion of EP communications implementation tied to ELAP strategies
9-Mar-12 Apr-1250.54(f)NEI 12-01 developed NRC Endorse Guidance (12-01) May-12
60 days
Jun-12
30-Sep-12NLT
31-Oct-12NLT
Mar-16NLT
30 days
Implementation
90 daysSite response-- Answer initial question(s)
Site complete EP Communication Assessment
Site response-- Provide dates for completion of EP Communication assessment and questions
Site response to remaining questions
Summary
The results of Guidance development will impact cost and schedule
Over a dozen regulatory action occurring concurrently requiring multiple responses
Short Cycle modification design and installation
Cost Impacts not clear at this point
91
92
Going Forward Recommendation
Update Strategic Plan to reflect current schedule after issuance of 50.54f letters and orders – Perform periodic updates on a semi annually basis
on progress including Tier 2 & 3 – NEI Develop Common Reporting Template – Establish Major Milestones for Reporting – Updates would follow the Spring and Fall Outage
seasons
93
Going Forward Recommendation
Modify the Fukushima Regulatory Response Committee charter to include Implementation Oversight – Form a Sub Group to monitor and identify
progress and trends during implementation – Coordinate implementation regulatory issues
interfaces – Development of Std Assumptions and
Terminology – Coordinate Tier 2 & 3 development
Fukushima Update Review of Industry’s FLEX Approach
Scott Bauer Senior Project Manager
Engineering & Operations Support Nuclear Energy Institute
Fukushima Update International Response to Fukushima
Lady Barbara Judge Chairman Emeritus, UK Atomic Energy Authority
UK Business Ambassador, UK Trade & Investment Chairman, Pension Protection Fund
BREAK
Other Business
NEI LAWYERS COMMITTEE MEETING
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman Conference Center
Washington, DC March 12, 2012