ML18232A153
| ML18232A153 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/22/2018 |
| From: | Christopher Markley Renewals and Materials Branch |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research |
| Karagiannis H | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18232A138 | List: |
| References | |
| RG-3.053 | |
| Download: ML18232A153 (1) | |
Text
Regulatory Guide Periodic Review Regulatory Guide Number: 3.53, Revision 0
Title:
Applicability of Existing Regulatory Guides to the Design and Operation of an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Office/Division/Branch: NMSS/DSFM/RMB Technical Lead: Christopher Markley Recommended Staff Action: Withdraw
- 1. What are the known technical or regulatory issues with the current version of the Regulatory Guide (RG)?
This RG was issued in July 1982 and identifies RGs that may be applicable, in whole or in part, to the design and operation of an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) based on the requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 72, "Licensing Requirements for the Storage of Spent Fuel in an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation."
Since 1982, however, some of these guides have been withdrawn and others revised and new RGs have been developed that may be applicable to RG 3.53.
- 2. What is the impact on internal and external stakeholders of not updating the RG for the known issues, in terms of anticipated numbers of licensing and inspection activities over the next several years?
The NRC staff continues to safely license and regulate the design and operation of independent spent fuel storage installations. The staff maintains appropriate guidance on its website that is available to applicants and staff related to the design and operation of an ISFSI. This RG is simply a list of RGs, which are outdated. However, it does not contain any new or additional guidance. Therefore, the NRC staff believes the impact of withdrawing this RG is insignificant.
- 3. What is an estimate of the level of effort needed to address identified issues in terms of full-time equivalent (FTE) and contract dollars?
An estimate of the effort needed to withdraw this RG is between 0.1 FTE and 0.2 FTE.
- 4. Based on the answers to the questions above, what is the recommended staff action for this RG (Revise, Review, Administrative Change, or Withdraw)?
Withdraw.
- 5. Provide a conceptual plan and timeframe to address the issues identified during the review.
The NRC staff is planning to withdraw this RG by the 4th quarter CY2018.
NOTE: This review was conducted in May 2018 and reflects the NRC staff plans as of that date. These plans are tentative and are subject to change.