ML031920077

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Topical Guidelines for the Licensing Support System
ML031920077
Person / Time
Site: WM-00011
Issue date: 07/13/1990
From: Bernero R
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
To: Hoyle J
NRC/SECY
References
NUDOCS 9007200322
Download: ML031920077 (28)
v • d • e


Text

8900 112 HOYLE/TOPICAL GUIDELINES MEMORANDUM FOR: John C. Hoyle, Chairman Licensing Support System Advisory Review Panel FROM: Robert M. Bernero, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

SUBJECT:

TOPICAL GUIDELINES FOR THE LICENSING SUPPORT SYSTEM The purpose of this memorandum is to transmit the proposed revision of the Interim topical guidelines for the Licensing Support System (LSS) to the LSS Advisory Review Panel (LSSARP) for consideration at the October 1990 LSSARP meeting. Enclosure 1 is the "Draft Regulatory Guide Topical Guidelines for the Licensing Support System" (Draft Regulatory Guide) which was prepared by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff and the Office of the General Counsel (OGC). Enclosure 2 is a copy of the interim topical guidelines. is a document which describes the disposition of the three lists which comprised the interim topical guidelines. The Commission has reviewed the Draft Regulatory Guide and has given the staff permission to forward it to the LSSARP.

Please address any questions on the enclosed material to Mark Delligatti, the project manager for the revision of the LSS topical guidelines, at extension 20430.

gn) Robtert M Berneo Robert M. Bernero, Director Offi-ce of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

Enclosures:

As stated DISTRIBUTION:

cc: RBrowning, HLWM STreby, OGC PDR, LPDR, CNWRA, LSS, ACNW LDonnelly, LSSA FCameron, LSSA Standard Distribution MSilberberg, RES JLinehan, HLPD

  • See previous Concurrence:

OFC :HLPD* :HLPD* :HLPD* :HLWM* :HLWM* :NMSw :NMSS jt

__- --- v- - -- - -1 /

NAME:MDelligatti:JHolonich:JLinehan:BYoungblood:RBrowning: :RBernero DATE:07/ /90 :07/ /90 :07/ /90:07/ /90 :07/ /90 :07/ W 90:07/0)/90 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY PEDR WASTE WM-1 PDC A//h 4

HOYLE/TOPICAL GUIDELINES MEMORANDUM FOR: John C.Hoyle, Chairman Licensing Support System Advisory Review Panel FROM: Robert M. Bernero, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

SUBJECT:

TOPICAL GUIDELINES FOR THE LICENSING SUPPORT SYSTEM The purpose of this memorandum is to transmit the proposed revision of the interim topical guidelines for the Licensing Support System (LSS) to the LSS Advisory Review Panel (LSSARP) for consideration at the October 1990 LSSARP meeting. Enclosure 1 is the "Draft Regulatory Guide Topical Guidelines for the Licensing Support System" (Draft Regulatory Guide) which was prepared by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff and the Office of the General Counsel (OGC). Enclosure 2 is a copy of the interim topical guidelines. is a document which describes the disposition of the three lists which comprised the interim topical guidelines. The Commission has reviewed the Draft Regulatory Guide and has given the staff permission to forward it to the LSSARP.

Please address any questions on the enclosed material to Mark Delligatti, the project manager for the revision of the LSS topical guidelines, at extension 20430.

Robert M. Bernero, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

Enclosures:

As Stated cc: RBrowning, HLWM STreby, OGC LDonnelly, LSSA FCameron, LSSA MSilberberg, RES JLinehan, HLPD

  • See previous Concurrence:

OFC :HLPD* :HLPD* :HLPD* :HLWM* :HLWM* :NMSS :NMSS NAME:MDelligatti:JHolonich:JLinehan:BYoungblood:RBrowning:GArlotto:RBernero DATE:07/ /90 :07/ /90 :07/ /90:07/ /90 :07/ /90 :07/ /90:07/ /90 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY y1^

r __

HOYLE/TOPICAL GUIDELINES MEMORANDUM FOR: John C.Hoyle, Chairman Licensing Support System Advisory Review Panel FROM: Robert M. Bernero, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safi and Safeguards -

SUBJECT:

TOPICAL GUIDELINES FOR THE ENSING SUPPORT SYSTEM The purpose of this memorandum is to tra mit the proposed revision of the interim topical guidelines for the Lice ing Support System (LSS) to the LSS Advisory Review Panel (LSSARP) for co ideration at the October 1990 LSSARP meeting. Enclosure 1 is the "Draft gulatory Guide Topical Guidelines for the Licensing Support System" (Draft Re ulatory Guide) which was prepared by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NR staff and the Office of the General Counsel (OGC). Enclosure 2 is a opy of the Interim topical guidelines.

Enclosure 3 is a document whic describes the disposition of the three lists which comprised the interim t ical guidelines. The NRC has reviewed the Draft Regulatory Guide and has giv n the staff permission to forward it to the LSSARP.

Please address any ques ons on the enclosed material to Mark Delligatti, the project manager for th revision of the LSS topical guidelines, at extension 20430.

Robert M. Bernero, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Enclosures As Stated cc: RB wning, HLWM STreby, OGC onnelly, LSSA FCameron, LSSA Silberberg, RES JLinehan, HLPD OFC :HLPD :HLP PD :HLWMiH2D:HLWM :NMSS :NMSS

__ __ __~~~~~~~----- ----- ---- -- -fo+----------_ _e__

NAME:MDelligatti:JH, th:J. an:BYoin b ood:R§qo;ning:GArlotto:RBernero DATE:074 0/90 :07A/90 90 /9 290 :07/

071100 /90:07/ /90

' -OFFICIAL REORD COPY

UNITED STATES

~vCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSI&2_

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

.AJ Iin MEMORANDUM FOR: John C. Hoyle, Chairman Licensing Support System Advisory Review Panel FROM: Robert M. Bernero, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

SUBJECT:

TOPICAL GUIDELINES FOR THE LICENSING SUPPORT SYSTEM The purpose of this memorandum is to transmit the proposed revision of the interim topical guidelines for the Licensing Support System (LSS) to the LSS Advisory Review Panel (LSSARP) for consideration at the October 1990 LSSARP meeting. Enclosure 1 is the "Draft Regulatory Guide Topical Guidelines for the Licensing Support System" (Draft Regulatory Guide) which was prepared by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff and the Office of the General Counsel (OGC). Enclosure 2 is a copy of the interim topical guidelines. is a document which describes the disposition of the three lists which comprised the interim topical guidelines. The Commission has reviewed the Draft Regulatory Guide and has given the staff permission to forward it to the LSSARP.

Please address any questions on the enclosed material to Mark Delligatti, the project manager for the revision of the LSS topical guidelines, at extension 20430.

Robert M. Bernero, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

Enclosures:

As stated cc: RBrowning, HLWM STreby, OGC LWonnelly, LSSA FCameron, LSSA MSilberberg, RES JLinehan, HLPD

K>

ENCLOSURE 1

( (

DRAFT REGULATORY GUIDE TOPICAL GUIDELINES FOR THE LICENSING SUPPORT SYSTEM

ABSTRACT guidelines for the Licensing This Regulatory Guide sets forth the topicalPractice in 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart J Support System established in the Rules of for a license to receive and for the adjudicatory proceeding on the application repository operations area possess high-level radioactive waste at a geologic pursuant to 10 CFR Part 60.

i

INTRODUCTION Subpart J of 10 CFR Part 2 (10 CFR 2.1000 to 2.1023) sets orth procedures for an adjudicatory proceeding on the application for a license tu receive and possess high-level nuclear waste at a geologic repository under 10 CFR Part 60. Pursuant to these regulations, the Licensing Support System (LSS), an electronic information management system, is being designed and implemented to provide for the entry of and access to potentially relevant licensing information.

The topical guidelines define the scope of documentary matorial which should be Included in the LSS. Interim topical guidelines, drafted by the High-Level Waste Licensing Support System Advisory Review Panel were adopted by the U.S Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) with the statement that the topical guidelines would later be revised and set forth as a regulatory guide by NRC staff (see 54 Fed.

Reg. 14925 (1989)). The interim topical guidelines were partially modeled after the Environmental Assessments prepared in connection with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE's) site selection process.

Document is defined in 10 CFR 2.1001 as "...any written, printed, recorded, magnetic, graphic matter, or other documentary material, regardless of form or characteristic." 10 CFR 2.1001 also defines documentary material as 1'... any Vaterial or other information that is relevant to, or likely to lead to the discovery of information that is relevant to the licensing of the likely candidate for a geologic repository. The scope of documentary material shall be guided by the topical guidelines in the applicable NRC regulatory guide."

The form which this material might take is included in Appendix A, a non-exhaustive list of types of documents which may be Included in the LSS.

This regulatory guide has been prepared using the interim topical guidelines in addition to the "Draft Format and Content Guide for the License Application for the High-Level Waste Repository" (FCRG), which sets forth the Information that the NRC staff suggests should be submitted in the license application.

Pursuant to section 114(f)(4) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 as amended, (42 U.S.C. 10134(f)(4)), the Commission is required "to the extent practicable," to adopt the environmental impact statement (EIS) prepared by DOE. The Commission's regulations have been amended to be in accord with this statutory provisions. See 10 CFR 51.26(c). Therefore, the environmental issues in the topical guidelines will be limited to those documents relevant to the Commission's adoption or modification of the DOE EIS.

1. Purpose of the Regulatory Guide The purpose of this regulatory guide is to provide a list of the topics for which LSS participants should submit documentary materials for entry into the LSS under 10 CFR § 2.1003. The topical guidelines are designed to be broad enough to encompass all potential licensing issues. This regulatory guide will also be used by the Pre-License Application Licensing Board for evaluating petitions for access to the LSS during the pre-license application period under 10 CFR 2.1008.

I

This regulatory guide will not be used as the detailed topical index for documentary evidence contained in the LSS. Neither will it serve to determine the scope of contentions that may be offered in The application proceeding under 10 CFR 2.1014.

2. Use of the Regulatory Guide To the extent practicable, the regulatory guide follows a repository systems-based format that conforms to the approach to be followed in other generic NRC licensing guidance documents for the high-level waste repository program.

Because the topical guidelines have been kept broad and at a fairly high level of detail, the user should consider each topic to be inclusive rather than exclusive.

For instance, 10 CFR Part 60 Subpart J requires a performance confirmation program for the various components of the repository system. However, performance confirmation is not a topic in this regulatory guide. Rather, information which is pertinent to performance confirmation for any particular component of the repository system would be considered to fall under the particular topic which designates that particular system (performance confirmation relevant to geologic processes would be considered topical information under the appropriate heading for the Natural System). The topical guidelines are presented at between one ard three levels of detail. Each guideline should be considered all inclusive with regard to all documents germane to that topic for the site. For example, much of the information which shall support the licensing proceedings will be based upon the use of methodologies, computer codes and models. It is appropriate for such information to be included in the LSS. As stated above, the FCRG sets forth the information that the NRC staff suggests should be submitted In the license application. The FCRG should be considered as another source of guidance regarding the types of information that could be included in the LSS.

2

TOPICAL GUIDELINES FOR INCLUSION OF DOCUMENTS IN THE LICENSING SUPPORT SYSTEM I. General Information

1. General Facility Description
2. Basis for Licensing Authority
3. Schedules Relevant to the NRC/DOE Repository Programs
4. Any Publicly Available Information on Certification of Safeguards
5. Any Publicly Available Information on the Physical Security Plan
6. Site Characterization
7. License Specifications (those variables, conditions, or other items which DOE determines to be probable subjects of license specifications)
8. Information Relevant to NRC Findings Regarding Compliance with Statutes Other than: The Atomic Energy Act, as amended; the Energy Reorganization Act; and the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, as amended for example, e.g+/-.

The Endangered Species Act of 1973.

9. Information Relevant to NRC Adoption or Modification of the DOE Environmental Impact Statement II. The Natural Systems of the Geologic Setting
1. Geologic System
a. Regional Geology
b. Regional Geology
c. Site Geology
d. Future Variations in Geologic Processes
2. Hydrologic System
a. Surface Water Hydrology
b. Regional Hydrogeology
c. Site Hydrogeology
3. Geochemical System
a. Regional Geochemistry
b. Site Geochemistry 3
3. Geochemical System
a. Regional Geochemistry
b. Site Geochemistry
4. Cilmatological and Meteorological Systems
a. Present Climate and Meteorology
b. Paleoclimatology
c. Future Climatic Variation
5. Integrated Natural System Response to the Maximum Design Thermal Loading
6. Processes and Events (anticipated and unanticipated, potentially disruptive)
7. Effectiveness of Natural Barriers Against the Release of Radioactive Material to the Environment (Information relevant to the performance objective of 10 CFR 60.113)

III. Geologic Repository Operations Area (GROA): Physical Facilities

1. Surface Facilities
a. Waste Handling System/Building(s)/Equipment (Including Hot Cell)
b. On-Site Radioactive Waste Management System
c. Fire and Explosion Protection System(s)
d. Emergency Systems
e. Communication Systems
f. Utility Systems
g. Instrumentation and Control Systems
h. On-Site Transportation-System
i. Ventilation System(s)

J. Operations Support System(s)

k. Plans for the Decommissioning System
1. Other Surface Systems
2. Shafts/Ramps
a. Waste Shaft/Ramp
b. Muck Shaft/Ramp
c. Ventilation Intake Shaft(s)
d. Ventilation Exhaust Shaft(s)
e. Men and Materials Shafts
f. Plans for the Decommissioning System
g. Other Shaft/Ramp Systems
3. Underground Facility
a. Excavation and Ground Support Systems
b. Muck Handling System
c. Ventilation System
d. Waste Emplacement System
e. Waste Retrieval System 4
f. Emergency System(s)
g. Communication System
h. Operations Support System
i. Plans for the Decommissioning System J. Other Underground Systems
4. Interface of Structures, Systems, and Components
5. Retrievability of Waste
6. Effectiveness of the GROA Against the Release of Radioactive Materials to the Environment (Information relevant to the performance objective of 10 CFR 60.111)

IV. Engineered Barrier Systems

1. Waste Package
2. Waste Form
3. Underground Facility
4. Engineered Barrier System Waste Package Emplacement Environment
5. Engineered Barrier System Alternate Design Features
6. Effectiveness of Engineered Barriers Against the Release of Radioactive Material to the Environment (Information relevant to the performance objective of 10 CFR 60.113).

V. Overall System Performance Assessment

1. Basic Approach
2. System Description
a. Conceptual Models
b. Processes and Events (Potentially Disruptive)
c. Processes and Events (Undisturbed Performance)
3. Cumulative Release of Radioactive Materials
a. Screening of Processes and Events
b. Scenario Development and Screening *
c. Consequence Analyses: Estimates of Cumulative Releases
d. Probability Estimates
e. Model and Code Validation
4. Undisturbed Performance
a. Individual Protection Requirements
b. Groundwater Protection Requirements
c. Model and Code Validation 5

VI. Conduct of Repository Operations

1. Maintenance
2. Organization
3. Personnel
4. Records/Reports
5. Training Programs
6. Schedules
7. Identification of Operating Controls and Limits
8. Preservation of Records
9. Site Markers UVJ. Land Ownership and Control
1. Plans for Restricting Controlled Area Access
a. Identification of Controlled Area
b. Identification of Existing Legal Interests
c. Identification of Legal Interests To Be Obtained
d. Water Rights
2. Plans for Regulating Land Use Outside the Controlled Area
a. Identification of Adjacent Areas of Concern
b. Identification of Existing Legal Interests
c. Identification of Legal Interests To Be Obtained
3. Plans for Regulating Land Use at the GROA
4. Other Types of Legal Interests VIII. Quality Assurance (QA) Records
1. QA Records for Site Characterization
2. QA Records for Design and Construction
3. QA Record. including records covering Operations, Permanent Closure; Decontamination and Decommissioning
4. QA Record. for all relevant research activities IX. Emergenc- P1I:.-ng 6

X. Radiation Protection Low As Reasonably

1. Ensuring that Radiation Exposures are As Achievable (ALARA)
2. Radiation Sources
3. Radiation Protection Design Features
4. Estimated Onsite Dose Assessment
5. Health Physics Program
6. Estimated Offsite Dose Assessment interpretations, models)

XI. Any Alternatives Considered (e.g., design 7

APPENDIX A EXAMPLES OF CATEGORIES OF DOCUMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE LICENSING SUPPORT SYSTEM

1. Technical Reports and Analyses by all participants (including those developed by contractors)
2. Quality Assurance Records
3. External Correspondence
4. Internal Memoranda
5. Meeting Minutes/Transcripts
6. Draft Documents on which a nonconcurrence has been registered 7, Congressional Questions and Answers (Q's and A's)
8. Other Documents (for a. through 1. include data bases and references):
a. Draft and Final Environmental Assessment for the Site Characterized
b. Site Characterization Plan
c. Site Characterization Study Plans
d. Site Characterization Progress Reports
e. Issue Resolution Reports
f. License Application
g. Topical Reports, Data, and Data Analyses
h. The DOE Environmental Impact Statement
i. Recommendation Report to the President of the United States (Notice of Disapproval, if submitted)

J. Any Publicly Available Information on Rulemakings

k. Public and Agency Comments on Documents
1. Response to Comments
m. NRC Technical Positions
n. NRC Regulatory Guides
o. The DOE Project Decision Schedules
p. DOE Program Management Documents 8

K>

ENCLOSURE 2 V4

Enclosure 2 eaOAGfl Federal Rerlat , VoL 64. No. 7S I Friday. April 14. 1i f Rules and RegBations I J-- - - - -

fty PO=

r i~~laAco *LSS during the pr-liCas application pologic media in which sites flo

.I1 phase under I LIODL repositories may be located.

J Cateroresof Documents 2. Any document related to repository 6*5 design. sltln& constrction OrOpfation.

Ode vim on wwedd -Tedhilcal reports and analysts ewtovo' *ft Wrf LS. or the transptation of spent uclear including those developed by fuel and !WIlevel nuclear waste not wV s IMWNCs WV -QA/QC contractors categorized as aus"-xchded document",

records Including generated by or in the possession of ny assI 2.1015(b) ft qP wuw V qualification and training records contractor of the Department of Energy, ft Cac'ovat On. S ternal correspondenc the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or

.- nternal memoranda any other party to the WLW licensing cee -Meeting minutes. including DOENRC proceedir*

£98 AS Wde n a~ -Vf meetings,Commission meetings S. All documents related to the 1.74 1ft) *=n &Id ftvraW4 -Drafts (ie.. those submitted for pbysical attributes of the Basin and Contwe. Orar decision beyond the first level of Range Province of the continentsl masnagement ot simlar criterion) United States.

Le) 720 V.49 .-. ongresslonal Q'e a A's 4. Any document listing and/or

-Regulatory" docu entatrelated to considering any site or location other W..W site selectionan licensing. than Yucca Mountain as a possible 749 La Ordw 401&W co such as: location for a high level nuclear waste 750 A~m% kom Ani ajwwry -Draft and final environmental uepository. or any alternative technology easeasnents to deep geologic disposal.

-Sitt characterization plans S.Any document analyzing the effect

?60

  • ASoS'onnou. WI

-Site charscterization study plans of the development of a repository at

-Site characterization proress Yucca Mountain on the rights of users of Avrv'Wsm" u' gig u reports 790 kWh &M u water in the Armagosa ground-water

-issue resolution reports basin in Nevada.

-Rulemnaldngs 6 Any document analyzing the health 5so fwvoavr IN66*4 Wd. -ublic and agency comments on and safety implications to the people 890 documents and environment of .e transportation of cars puppm & -Response to public comments spent fiel between locations where 21010161

-Environmental Impact Statement, spent fel Isgenerated or stored and 150 NAC slats VWOs~d &%id Comment Response Document. and Yucca Mountain. Nevada. or any other related references site nominated for repository 905 Abwrs id a0Po. -Ucens Application (IA) L data characterization on May za 1988

'95 - In base. and related references Including but not limited to:

I.7 5 (s )( $my nibr WAD Nat -Topicl reports, data, and data 1005 a. Any analysis of possible human analysis error In the manfactue of spent fuel 2.7S44a(IJ ROOihIDSW 0OtS -Recommendation Report to caslks; ASPAV anVSyawb President b. Any analysis of the actual lo's 2 7521a) Appslaiws brwta -Notice of DisapprovaL. t submitted 2.762(aSLOP population density along all of any StaysW VW WOW&m* LGceneral topics specific projected routes of travek 1035 toss c. Any analysis of releases from any Acohes t &W . OS 1.Any document pertaining to the 1070 NRC suff bw5. location and potential of valuable actual radioactive material 1095 natural rsoures. hydrology. transportation incidents; geophysics, tectonics (including d. Any analysis of Wte emergency 2.76m)(1 volcsnim. geomorphology. seismic response time in any actual radioactive toes WNWPA com"Iwv activity, atomic energy defense materials transportation incident 1.766(b)(3 activities proximity to water supplies. a.Any actual accident data on any proximity to populations, the ellect upon specific projected routes of travek Ow w9rVw On ac*&IL the rights of users of water. proximity to L Any calculations or projections on 1105 1165 AM"e So"U des components of the Natioral Park the probabilities of accidents on any

  • Ponbci Om CAWNTUrnSystem. the National Wildlife Refuge specific projected routes of travel System. the National Wildlife and B.Any data on the physical properties 1190 *am*% Scenic River System. the National or containment capabilities of spent fuel 1150 Wilderness Preservation System. cc casks which have been used or which National Forest Lands. proximity to sites are projected to be used at any where high-level radioactive waste and hypothetical or actual projected Topical Guideline spent Nuclear fuel is genated or repository.

Tne following topical guidelines ae to temporarily stored, spent fuel and h Any analysis of modeling of the be used for identifying the documentary nuclear waste tranportation. vafey containment capabilities ot spent fuel material that should be submitted by facton involved in moving rpent fuel or casks under a stress scenario LSS participants for entry into the ISS nuclear waste to a repository, the cost LAny analysis or comparison of spent under section L2ID= lhe topical and impact of trnsporting spent Ntel fuel cas projected to be used against guidelines will also be used by the Pre- and nuclear waste to a repoaito7 ste, the spent el cak certification License Application lUcensing Board for the advantaes of regional distti*tioa standards of the Nuclear Regulatory evaluating petitions for access to the in iting of repostoras, cid e CotnLSBO

Fedstral Reir I Vol -t No.71 n Friday. April 14. IM I RuzA and Regulatious 2 4941

'. IAny analysis of the cauinment C.PaintbruskTntf a. hnwi Cousty p~abiuties of qent (uet casks L Tuvffaceom beds c(Clice &6U d.Methodology containing spen fuel whic has been a.Crater Flat Tuff LaPopulation denity and &Aribulian burned ap ever an extended period. £ Older tuffs . Populations of the State of Nevada

7. Any document analyz or L 6edientary its b. Population of Nye County comparing Yucca Montatn. Nevada.
  • Structure L Populatisn ot C&la County with any other site in the ame di Population of incoln County
  • seismicity S. Comnity "vic peohydrologic setting. 4. Eney and =ineral e r

& Any document relafing to potential a. H sing

a. Energy resources b.Educaton interference or Incompatibility between b. Metals C.Water oply a Yucca Mountain. Nevada. bigh4eved C. Nonmetals d.WasteWater trestment muclear wute repository and atomc S.- a.Solid waste energy activities at the Nevada Tet Site 6. Mineralology L Energy tiles and Nellie Airforce base. s. Public safety services
0. Any document related tb the land L Tectonics Medical and social eences status. use or ownership of Yucca a. Faulting I. Ubrary bfcities
  • b. Stree

)Uontain. Nevada. c. Uplift/subsidenas l.?Azk and ,ceaStion

30. Any document considering or t Volcanism 4. Social conditions analyzing the attributes or detriments of C Hydrologic Conditions A.Existing social organizaon and stucture any engineered barrier upon the I. Surface water LRural social organization and social atuc-radionuclide isolation capability of 2*Ground water Wre Yucca Mountain. Nevada. or any other a.Gnund water tavmn it. Social eyanimation and structure in rban b, Ground water quality Car County site considered. b.Culture and lifestyle
11. Amy document evaluating the . Present and pmjected water we in the b Rural culture effect of extended fuel burn-up on Yucca 4. areaGroundwater resources i Urba Culture Mountain. Nevada's adequacy as a S. Climatology C.Community attributes repository site for dirposal of spent fue 6. Metearology d. Attitudes and perceptions toward the Is-or upon the design of any such DJGeocheristry pository theoretical repository. I. Rock chemistry of the overlying and un- . Fiscal and governmental structure t2 Any document analysing or derlying host units
  • Expected Effects of the Site laracterza-investigating the potential for discharge Water chemistry of vmeatcrated or saturst- tion Activities or radionuclides into the Death VaUey ad sone A. site Characterization Activities
3. Alteration 1.Field studies National Momument. a Exploratory drilling
23. Any docunent analyzing te J Retardation and transport L Environmental setting b. Geophysical smeys recharge of the underlying saturated 2. Ld use c. Geologic mapping ssae or the lydioconductivity of the a. Federal use d. Standard operating practices for fedma-unsaturated zone at Yucca Mountain. Ir.Agricultural bon of au diturbed by held atudies I4.Any document containing any data L Grazing land a. benching cr analysis of volcanism in the geologic AL Gopland S Exploratory shaft fciliy setting of which Yucca Mountain is a c.Mining a. Surface facilities part. 4 Recreation b. Exploratory shah and underground work-IS. Any document containi any data . Private and commercial dmopment Ings or analysis of tectonic events at Yncca t. Terrestrial and aquatic cosyrtems Secondary egr shaft S. Terrestrial vegetation L Exploratory sw testing pram Mountain. or pertaining to the tectonic a.Final disposition framework of the Yucca Mountain area L LArrea.Ambrosi iL arres-Ephedra or Lsara4qriw I Standard operating practice that would or any document containirg any data or W1.Coeogye uinimize poential environmental damage analysis of faults with or without i. Mixed transition 2 Other studies surface expression in the area of Yuta v. Grasslandbumn site a. Geodetic surveys Mountain. b.Terrestrial wildlife b. Horizontal core drilling
16. Any document containing i uammala c. Studies of put hydrologic conditions instuctions or other limitations on the S. Birds d; Studies of tectonic eismicity. and vol.

scope of work to be perforned by Ili. Reptiles canism Department of Energy personnel or c. Special-interert species e. Studies of seslmicity induced by weapons at Aquatic cosyvwm testing contractor's personnLel . ir quality and weather ontdieiaus Mr f Field experiments In G-Tunnel filities V7. Any document pertainig to 8. Laboratory studies quality pmventionr control of human intrusion 4. Noise i Wase pedke design. testing, and ansly-at t&e Yucca Moctain site. 5 Aesthetic sourves mis C ArchaeologicaL culturaL and historica re- 8 Expected Efects of Site Characterization fil. Specific Trps sources L Expected e5ects on tie e=vironmiet

7. Radiological ba*rmd a. Geology. hydrology, land use and surface
1. The Site a. Monitoring progtam A. Location. General Appearance end rer. b.Dose assessment L Geology rain, and Present DUe F. Trnisportatlon ii. Hydrology S. Geeo;cConditiom L %ighway tnfrastmehtre and current on tII. Land ue
2. Strai~ hy and vokank hilor of the L Raiiroad nfrastructe and acrrent wue Iv.Surface soiXl Yucca Mountain area C. Socioeconomic Conditions b. Fcorstemn a Caldera evolution and teness of ash I. Economic conditions C. ir qushity ftm r t a. Nye County 4.Uoise..t-h 71,ber Moun~tain Ttiff b.Clark County a.Aeshtiss

. 141W Federal Regislu I Vol. U. No. n1 / Friday. April 14. IM / Rules and Regulations

- Archaeological cultunl, and histonrcal r- I. National hipment and routing UL Potentially adverse conditions sources ILRegional shipment and muting hv. Evaluation and conclusion for the qualify-

2. Socioeconomic and tnnsportation condi- b. Radiological Impacts ing condition on the meteorology guideline tions I. National impacts a. Offslte installations and operations
a. Economic conditions U.Regional impacts L Data relevant to the evaluation J, Employment ii. Maximally exposed Individual impacts 1iLFavorable conditions ii. Mateials c. Nonradiological Impacts IL Potentially adverse conditions
b. Population density and distribution L National impacts Iv. Disqualifying conditions
c. Community services Ii. Regional impacts v. Evaluation and eonclusion for the qualify
d. Social conditions 4 Risk summary Ing condition on the oialste bstalltions
e. Fiscal and governmental structure L National risk sucmary operations guideline

. Transportation L Regional risk summary L Environmental quality a Worker safety a.Costs of nuclear waste tansportation L Data relevant to the evaluation

4. Irreversible and Irretrievable commitent f Emergency response IL Favorable conditions of reaoCcea D. Expected Effects an Socioeconomic Con. iIl. Potentially adverse conditions C Alternative site Chateterution Activi- ditions Iv. Disqualifying condition ties . Economnic conditions v. Evaluation and conclusion for the quafy.

a Regional and Local Effects of Locatins a a. Labor Ing condition on the environmental quality Repository at the Site b. Materials and m ourues guidelines A. 'Me Repository C.Cost g. SocioeconomIc Impacts 1.Construction 4 Income L Data relevant to the evaluation

,the surface facilities a. Land use U Favorable conditions

b. Access to the subsurface I Tourism MLL Potentially adverse conditions
c. The subsurface fcilities L Population density and distribution Iv. Disqualifying condition
d. Other construction a Community services v. Evaluation and conclusion for the qualify-L Access route A.Housing Ing condition on the socioeconomic guide-U.Railroad b. Education line ill Mined rock handling and Storage facili- c. Water supply h. Transportation ties . Waste-water teatment L Data relevant to the evaluation hv. Shafts and other facilities a.Public safety servtces L Favorable conditions
e. Utilities I. Medical services Mi. Potentially adverse conditions

£ Operations g. Transportation Iv. Evaluation and conclusion for the qualify-

  • Emplacement phase 4. Social conditions ing condition on the transportation guide.

L Waste receipt a. Social structure and social organiztion Ii Waste emplacement U Standard effects on social structure and 2. Preclosure System

t. Caretaker phase social organization a. Preclosure system: radiological safety 3 Retrievability II. Special effects on social structure and L Data relevant to the evaluation
4. D ssioning nd lure social oganiaation 11. Evaluation of the Yucca Mountain site
8. Schedule ad abor fore b. Culture and lifestyle Lt Conclusion for the qualifying condition on 8 Material and resource requirements c. Attitudes and perceptions the preclosure system quideline radiologi-BIExpected Effects on the Physical Environ- . Fiscal conditions and govertnent struc- Cal safety ment ture b. Pretosure system: envionment. socioe-1.Geologic impacts C Suitability of the Yucca Mountain Site for conomic. and transportation
2. Hydrologic impacts Site Characterization and for Development L Dats relevant to the evaluation S. Land use as a Repository IL Evaluation of the Yucca Mountain site 4.Ecosystems A. Suitability of the Yucca Mountain Site for li. Conclusion for the qualifying condition On S. Air quality Development as a Repository: Evaluation the preclosure system guideline: environ-
a. Ambient air-quality regulations Against the Guidelines That Do Not Re. ment. socioeconomics. and transportation
b. Construction quirt Site Characterization S. Postclosure technical C.Operthui 1. Technical guidelines a. Geohydrology 4 Decommissioning and closure a. Postclosure sIte ownership and control L Data relevant to the evaluation C.Noise L Data relevant to the evaluation U.Favorable conditions
a. Construction i. Favorable condition Ill Potentially adverse conditions
b. Operations ii. Potentially adverse condition Iv. Disqualifying condition
t. Decommislioning and closure Iv. Evaluation and conclusion for the qualify- v. Evaluation and conclusion for the qualify.

T. Aesthetic resources lng condition on the postdosure sit own- Ing condition on the postclosure geobydro.

5 Archaeological. cultural and historical se- ership and control guidelines logy guideline Sources b. Population density and distribution h. Geochemistry P. Radiological effects L Data relevant to the evaluation L Data relevant to the as-pluation

a. Construction U.Favorable condition U. Favorablt cjudidonr
b. Operation iii. Potentially advert condition Iil Potentially ;jdvei;e conditions
1. Worker exposure during normal operation Iv. Disqualifying condition Iv. Evaluation snd concluaion for thb slify ii. Public exposure during normal operation v. Evaluation and conclusion for the qualify. ing cbndition qn hia postclosure grxhem Mli.Accidental exposure duing operation Ing condition on the population density iltry guidelIoe C.Expected Effects of Transportation Activi- and distribution guideline v. Plans for sita chaiacterizaion ties C Preclosure rite ownership and control c. Rock characteratici
1. Transportation of people and materials L Data relevant to the evaluation L.Data relevant to the Qvsluation
a. Highway impacts ii Favorable condition iL Favorbla u^nd' 7 L Construction ilL Potentially adverse condition WiiPotentially adve-r.e conditlonw
l. Operations Iv. Evaluation and conclusion for the qualify- Iv. Evaluation .!nd :. aclusicn for tb^ tmallf Iii. Decommissioning Ing condition on the preclosure site owner- Ing coneite- :1 ostcio.-m soc
b. Railroad impacts ship and control guideline charaeltiiai - v i. e
3. Transportation of nuclear wastes d Meteorology d. Climatic i": qA
a. Shipment and routing nuclear waste skip- L Data relevant to the evaluation L Data rele -i  : *'

Ments iL Favomble conditions IL Favorin' '

W F Rtar s I Vol. 4. No. T1/ Friday. Apil 14. IM IRulea`f~d Regulations 14943.

lb. Potlesrtly Bar a&*=$ a. O4a aDmW toe lit tha g. ValI e rfor ct=tened t calculate tv. Evaluation and conceri ioor b.Sdks population Ssk$

chauns quallfying contition c. 066d= M SW .2 q aurtra o tiO Resulta of population sal analyses

a. Erosion e SC eone ond ct dF aling. w, rc. J Uncertainties L Data relevant to the _ oia li. 4erOot. ead dor quideline I lusts aasoclsted with defective cask con-di. Favorable sondts v. Cardes seterding OalW of dse stwtion. hbc of qcuaity ostdrare. inad-V. Potentimly adverse conditions Vocc ldowtte% Site for ishe charoteriz- equate iiwweanor ridman wror hv. Disqualifying condiltl Uon S Dissolution a. eforasace Alyses . Oitflne asGand

. Data takeeaw is the etaiausa 1. Preclosue m5ooical safity arsesametnt Z Assuzoas ii. Favorable mmlitia a. Predosure nidiaon protection atandsrds 3.Modes iL Sloarafly advecu Wdibi b. )ahods for predose radidlogica! as. 4. C estimates iv. Disqualiffiag mnd am asesment 5.lItationsato results

w. Evaluatwon and Conclusion for the qualify. LR aogical assessment ot cosvcton E Barge Transport to Irposaoris kyg condition on the postlosre and dinx. activities F. Effect of a Monitored Reievabit Stoage lution guideline kiaoasasuemar Zadiclolcal of normal oper- Faciity an Trimaportatlon Estimates
8. Tectonics stions G. Effect of At-Reactor Rod Comsolidation on L Dats relevant to ievaluation Ui Radiological assessment of accidental e.- Transportation Estimates
i. Favorable c=ntion H 0iteria A* AplWyl Tianspwraton tii Votern ally idvwers condtim L Preliminary analysis of postclom pr. Guideline
v. Disqrnlifylzg ffdition formance I. DOE Responslsbiits for Transportation te. Evaluation and conclusion for lh cqualily a. Subsystem description fnt condition on She postdonre teCtonics L Enginered barier rubsysten 1.P re ot k tl a guideline 2.Emergency response U.The satanrl tarrier subsystem 3.Insurance coverate for fraAsportatin ac-

.Human interfeeicrc snwal monrs and b. Peiminary performance analysw of gs site Cnersnhp and contol major opooents of the tystam cidets 5.Data televant to the evaluatio I Th waste package letime . Modal Mix ti. Favorable conditions ii. Release itafrom the engineered barrier 1.Train slDmewt Ui. Potentially ad...n toriftiora a. Ordinary subsstem b. Dedicated re tv. Disqualifying conditions c. Preliminary system pedormance iesorip-

v. Evaluation Wd conclusion for tbe qualify. 2.T r uckl p m u tion and analyis a. Legal weigh ing condition on the postclosure tuman 6. Comparisons with nrgatory rerfomance Interference and natral nmes trclud. o. Ovwweiht cmecives cal guideline e. Prelimbary evahation cd dirp w
4. Posiclosure system Envfrocmensta hpaw CalexackA esnts emptive aatul rcoes A. Evaluation CKUte Yusa MoUitain Site L Conclusions Exclusion L Quantitative analysis S.TinlorLortatof
b. Qualitative analysis A. Regulations Related so Sa£euards 'he NRC has determined that this
b. Summary end conclusion for Shequalify- 1. Safeguards Lial rule Is ie typ of action described n8g condition on the postelosure stem z Conclusion in categorical viusion 10 CFR Tuideline B. Packaging, SL2214)(1).Therelore, nelither an S.Preclosur teddical 1. ?ackqajg desig lesting. aa tanasis envirznmenW Impact statement nor an
a. Surface cWacterstilcs I Types of pSazkqlig environmental assessment has been J. DBaa "Ievart lothe evaluation prepared for tfisnal aule.
i. Favorable canditions a Spent fuel
1. Poteolially adverse conditions b. Casks lor defense kg-level waste and iv. Evaluation a= conclusi for the quaiify. 'West Valley WSS-leve! waste I'parwacd Widtom Acd Statement Ing condition on the postclwre surface c. Casks for use from an )RS to lbe Seposi.

lowy Thi rule does t coLain ilfomatlon characteristics guideline collectio requirements that are subject

b. Rock character is 3. Possible fture developmnents
i. Dots relevant Wo& evaluatios a. Mode-specific regulations to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 18so i6 Favorable coditions b. Overweight tuck casks (44 U.S.C. 350 e1 seq.).

iii. Polentihiy adverse ctdins c. Rod consolidation iv. Disqualiying condition d. Advanced branding toncept RegnlatMr Anullyms

r. Evaluation and conclusion tor the qualify. a.Combination atorageshipping casks The DOE atlysis of the costs and ln* condition On the postclosure rods sha- C. Potential Hazards of Transportation 1 Potea cnserqetncS ID un bXditIdual benefli of She LSS (US Departmant of ectaristics geine Enes. Senrsing Sapport System
e. Hydrokgy exposed to a maximum eitent a Normal transport &.rttCostlAnalysig" fuly. 1988) and A.Data relevant ts Ge evalatitm Bi.Favorable coudiis b. Accidents companion DOE reports ("Preliminary 11.Famtlafly adverse condition 2 Potential consequences to a large popule- Needs Analysigr '1Prelminary Data 1 iV. Disq uaidingcoadiwi 4aa kus eary severe g eportatin acci- Scope Analysis'. and -Conceptual
v. Evaiueton *ad atolwioo Tor the quai- dents Design Analysis;) are available for ing caudil anne oaIclasume hydrmI LiUsk assessmnt Iispaction In the NRC Public Document
a. outline of method tor estimating popula- Room. 212D L Steel NW..Washlngton.
g. Tectnisa sion thaks Sknge copies may be obtaied from J Data nievzm i the traluvtion b. Computational sodels and melmds Sor DC Frands X, Came . Office of General
i. Fcvoraet cndior popclilion islks
i. CUtT adverse odios c. ances to fie analytical moodch and CskeL U.S. NudetrRegulatory iv. Disqualifying coaditin methds for populion risks cmuion. Washington DC. 2055W a'.Evaluation and conclusion for the qualify. d r sapartaticomnas etiltuaod for Telephone-. (3Z1--Z4B23.

Iig condition on the pottclasure tonics hedk amahis Reglato:y fleibilty Ainalyasi gwidebbe . Aseumaptioa aut wastes IL Ease and most f sitift crwisuclon. oper- L Operational t aodeabons Loa ae In Alk In accordance with the Regulatory ation. &adclosawe analysis Flexiility Act of J1s t5 U.S.C. 05(b)).

I}

.Z ENCLOSURE 3

^, t -

DISPOSITION OF THE INTERIM TOPICAL GUIDELINES On April 14, 1989, the final rule amending the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) Rules of Practice in 10 CFR Part 2 for the adjudicatory proceeding on the application for a license to receive and possess high-level radioactive waste (HLW) at a geologic repository operations area, pursuant to 10 CFR Part 60, was published in the Federal Register [54FR14925 (1989)] under the title:

"Submission and Management of Records and Documents Related to the Licensing of a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Waste."

Topical guidelines identifying the information that should be submitted by the Licensing Support System (LSS) participants for entry into the LSS were recommended by all parties to the negotiated rulemaking. All of the recommendations werpublished as interim topical guidelines in the supplementary information on the tule, with the understanding that the list might be modified by the NRC after the rulemaking was completed. Subsequently, the NRC directed the staff to review, clarify, and modify the topical guidelines with the results being published as a regulatory guide. This document discusses the results of the NRC staff's review, clarification, and modification of the interim topical guidelines.

free lists were included in the interim topical guidelines. The first list, "Categories of Documents" was retained (with some additions) and is Appendix A to the proposed "Draft Regulatory Guide Topical Guidelines for the Licensing Support System" (the draft regulatory guide). The second list was comprised of 17 general topics. The staff's disposition of each of these general topics is discussed later in this document. In summary, it is the staff's position that all information relevant to the licensing proceeding, which was requested in the second list, has been included in the draft regulatory guide. The third list was comprised of specific topics. It covers a broad range of material, including some that is well outside the scope of information that would be needed in the proceedings to license the HLW repository.

The information in the third list, which Is outside the scope of what would be needed in the proceedings to license the HLW repository, generally deals with transportation and environmental issues. Requests for information on transportation of waste from reactor or temporary storage sites to the repository is clearly beyond the scope of the licensing requirements in 10 CFR Part 60. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NKPA) clearly states, in Sections 9 and 137, that it does not affect the regulation of transportation of spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste. The list of specific topics also includes requests for information on a range of environmental concerns which the staff assumes will have been resolved during the development and adoption by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) of the Environmental Impact Statement I

t.

(EIS) which must accompany an application to possess HLW at the repository.

Therefore environmental information required to be included In the LSS has been limited to that information needed for NRC's adoption or modification of the DOE EIS.

The remaining information from the third list fell into two areas: information directly related to the repository systems defined in 10 CFR Part 60 (i.e; the natural, geologic repository operations area, and engineered barrier systems) and other topics described in 10 CFR Part 60 for which information is required in order for DOE to submit a complete license application (e.g., quality assurance, repository operations, etc.). Since the staff had recently completed a proposed "Draft Format and Content Regulatory Guide for the License Application for the High-Level Waste Repository" (FCRG), it was decided to develop the topical guidelines such that they would parallel the approach taken In this document. Therefore, the draft regulatory guide follows, as closely as practicable, the repository systems-based approach used in the FCRG.

In cases where topical information crosses system boundaries in the FCRG, it has been redefined as a specific topic in the draft regulatory guide (e.g.,

Radiation Protection).

It should be noted that the FCRG contains an appendix that depicts the rvlationship of the 10 CFR Part 60 regulatory requirements to sections of the FCRG. Thus, the staff believed that patterning the topical guidelines after the FCRG would help ensure that the topical guidelines would be complete with regard to the information required for the HLW repository license application process.

In developing the topical guidelines included in the draft regulatory guide, the staff attempted to provide a list of the topics for which LSS participants should submit documentary materials for entry into the LSS under 10 CFR 2.1003.

As revised, the topical guidelines are designed to be broad enough to encompass all potential licensing issues. Most of the guidelines include several subheadings. In these cases, the higher level guideline is meant to cover any more detailed item that falls under it. The topical guidelines will not be used as the detailed topical index for locating documents within the LSS. This function will be served by the document header, whose fields are being developed by the LSS Administrator, with guidance from the LSS Advisory Review Panel. If such a document is developed, it will be developed separately by the LSS Administrator. The topical guidelines have been kept broad. Each guideline is all-inclusive, with regard to all documents germane to that topic, for the site.

As discussed above, a list of 17 general topics was included in the interim topical guidelines. Listed below are the 17 general topics and the staff's response (R) to each one.

2

1. Any document pertaining to the location and potential of valuable natural resources, hydrology, geophysics, tectonics (including volcanism),

geomorphology, seismic activity atomic energy defense activities, proximity to water supplies, proximity to populations, the effect upon the rights of users of water, proximity to components of the National Park System, the National Wildlife Refuge Systems, and the National Wildlife and Scenic River System, the National Wilderness Preservation System or National Forest Land, proximity to sites where high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel is generated or temporarily stored, spent fuel and nuclear waste transportation, safety factors involved in moving spent fuel or nuclear waste to repository, the cost and impact of transporting spent fuel and nuclear waste to a repository site, the advantages of regional distribution in siting of repositories, and various geologic media in which sites for repositories may be located.

R. It is NRC's position that the LSS should be limited to information relevant to licensing of the HLW repository. Information relevant to: natural resources, hydrology, geophysics, tectonics, volcanism, geomorphology, and seismic activity are covered under Topic II. Natural Systems of the Geologic Setting. The relevance of the rest of the information described in this general topic would seem to be primarily to development and

'* consideration of DOE's EIS. As stated on page one of the draft regulatory guide:

Pursuant to section 114(f)(4) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 as amended, (42 U.S.C. 10134(f)(4), the Commission is required "to the extent practicable," to adopt the environmental impact statement (EIS) prepared by the Department of Energy (DOE). The Commission's regulations have been amended to be in accord with this statutory provision. See 10 CFR § 51.26(c). Therefore, the environmental issues in the topical guidelines will be limited to those documents relevant to the Commission's adoption or modification of the DOE EIS.

2. Any document related to repository design, siting, construction, or operation, or the transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high-level nuclear'waste not categorized as an "excluded document," generated by or in the possession of any contractor of the Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, or any other party to the HLW licensing proceeding.

R. This general topic, with the exception of requirements for information on

ransportation which are beyond the scope of the LSS, is simply a requirement for all relevent information not considered to be excluded documents. Sections 9 and 137 of the NWPA state that it (the NWPA) does
  • ot affect regulation of transportation of spent nuclear fuel or igh-level radioactive waste. Since the inclusion of all relevent nformation is a requirement for participation in the LSS and the sensing procedings, this seems to be an unnecessary or redundant topic.

3

t. .
3. All documents related to the physical attributes of the Basin and Range Province of the continental United States.

R. The Basin and Range Province basically encompasses the entire western part of the United States. 10 CFR Part 60 defines the geologic setting at a more appropriate level for repository licensing. The draft regulatory guide is based on the information requirements of 10 CFR Part 60. The topic which speaks to the Geologic Setting is Topic II. Natural Systems of the Geologic Setting.

4. Any document listing and/or considering any site or location other than Yucca Mountain as possible location for a high level nuclear waste repository, or any alternative technology to deep geologic disposal.

R. The LSS will be used in the licensing procedings for the site being proposed in DOE's license application. The topical guidelines have been written to be as generic as 10 CFR Part 60 is. Any relevance other sites might have had was removed by the amendments to the NWPA. The NRC staff could not see the relevance of information about alternative technology to deep geologic disposal to the HLW licensing process as defined in 10 CFR Part 60.

S. Any document analyzing the effect of the development of a repository at Yucca Mountain on the rights of users of water in the Amargosa ground-water basin in Nevada.

R. The topic of water rights is included in the draft regulatory guide. Topic VII is Land Ownership and Control. Under this heading is subtopic Id, Plans for Restricting Access to the Controlled Area-Water Rights. To the extent that questions of radionuclide transport would be appropriate for discussion in the license application, they would be covered in Topic IT. Natural Systems of the Geologic Setting (11.2 Hydrologic System) and X. Radiation Protection (X.6 Estimated Offsite Dose Assessment). The draft regulatory guide makes it clear that each topic Is to be considered all inclusive in terms of information required for the HLW licensing process. In addition, it is assumed that environmental issues relevant to the Amargosa groundwater basin will have been considered in the development of DOE's EIS.

4

6. Any document analyzing the health and safety implications to the people and environment of the transportation of spent fuel between locations where spent fuel is generated or stored and Yucca Mountain, Nevada, or any other site nominated for repository characterization on May 28, 1986, including, but not limited to:
a. Any analysis of possible human error in the manufacture of spent fuel casks;
b. Any analysis of the actual population density along all of any specific projected routes of travel;
c. Any analysis of releases from any actual radioactive material transportation incidents;
d. Any analysis of the emergency response time in any actual radioactive materials transportation incident;
e. Any actual accident data on any specific projected routes of travel;
f. Any calculations or projections on the probabilities of accidents on any specific projected routes of travel;
g. Any data on the physical properties or containment capabilities of spent fuel are projected to be used at any any hypothetical or actual.

projected repository; Em h. Any analysis of modeling of the containment capabilities of spent fuel casks under a stress scenario;

1. Any analysis or comparison of spent fuel casks projected to be used against the spent fuel cask certification standards of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; J. Any analysis of the containment capabilities of spent fuel casks containing spent fuel which has been burned up over an extended period.

R. Transportation is beyond the scope of the licensing process for the HLW repository, as defined by 10 CFR Part 60 and the NWPA. Therefore, this topic has not been included in the draft regulatory guide.

7. Any document analyzing or comparing Yucca Mountain, Nevada, with any other site.in the same geohydrologic setting.

R. This topic was excluded because under the NWPA, as amended, no other site Is to be considered concurrently.

8. Any document relating to potential interference or incompatibility between a Yucca Mountain, Nevada, high-level nuclear waste repository 5

and atomic energy activities at the Nevada Test Site and Nellis Air force base.

R. It is the view of the NRC staff that this is primarily an issue which would be addressed in DOE's EIS. However, information about activities at Nellis Air Force Base or the Nevada Test Site which could affect the safety or performance of the repository would fall under several of the topics in the draft regulatory guide (e.g., II. Natural Systems of the Geologic Setting, III. Geologic Repository Operations Area, IV. Engineered Barrier Systems, VI. Conduct of Repository Operations, etc.).

9. Any document related to the land status, use or ownership of Yucca Mountain, Nevada.

R. This is covered under Topic VIII. Land Ownership and Control.

10.- Any document considering or analyzing the attributes or detriments of any engineered barrier upon the radionuclide isolation capability of Yucca Mountain, Nevada, or any other site considered.

R. This would be covered under Topic IV. Engineered Barrier Systems for the

,.* site proposed in the application.

11. Any document evaluating the effect of extended fuel burn-up on Yucca Mountain, Nevada's adequacy as a repository site for disposal of spent fuel or upon the design of any such theoretical repository.

R. Topic XI. is Any Alternatives Considered (e.g., design interpretations, models)

12. Any document analyzing or investigating the potential for discharge of radionuclides into the Death Valley National Monument.

R. This topic would be addressed in DOE's EIS.

13. Any document analyzing the recharge of the underlying saturated zone or the hydroconductivity of the unsaturated zone at Yucca Mountain.

R. This is covered under-Topic II., Natural Systems of the Geologic Setting (II.2 Hydrologic System).

14. Any document containing any data or analysis of volcanism in the geologic setting of which Yucca Mountain 4s A part.

R. This is covered in Topic II.. Hatural Systems of the Geologic Setting, (II.1 Geologic System).

'3.

15. Any document containing any data or analysis of tectonic events at Yucca Mountain, or pertaining to the tectonic framework of the Yucca Mountain area or any document containing any data or analysis of faults within or without surface expression in the area of Yucca Mountain.

R. This is covered in Topic II., Natural Systems of the Geologic Setting, (II.1 Geologic System).

16. Any document containing instructions or other limitations on the scope of work to be performed by Department of Energy personnel or contractor's personnel.

R. Appendix A to the draft regulatory guide contains a list of examples of categories of documents to be included In the LSS. Among the categories which apply here are: external correspondence, internal memoranda, and DOE program management documents. Specific documents would fall under various topical headings within the guide depending on subject matter.

17. Any document pertaining to prevention or control of human intrusion at the Yucca Mountain site.

R"t Depending on the focus of the document, it would fall under Topic I.

General Information (1.5 Any Publicly Available Information on the Physical Security Plan); VI. Conduct of Repository Operations (VI.9 Site Markers); or VII Land Ownership and Control (passim).

7

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML031920077&oldid=2652859"