ML18232A374
| ML18232A374 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/22/2018 |
| From: | Mollie Semmes NRC/NMSS/DFCSE/ECB |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research |
| Karagiannis H | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18232A138 | List: |
| References | |
| RG-3.055 | |
| Download: ML18232A374 (2) | |
Text
Regulatory Guide Periodic Review Regulatory Guide Number: 3.55, Revision 0 Title: Standard Format and Content for the Health and Safety Sections of License Renewal Applications for Uranium Hexafluoride Production Office/Division/Branch: NMSS/FCSE/ECB Technical Lead: Mollie Semmes Staff Action Decided: Reviewed with issues identified for future consideration
- 1. What are the known technical or regulatory issues with the current version of the Regulatory Guide (RG)?
This RG was issued in April 1985, and provides guidance on how to prepare and submit the health and safety sections of renewal applications for uranium hexafluoride processing facilities.
There is currently only one operating facility for which this RG is applicable. The facility has submitted a renewal application in an updated and more informative format than the one used in this RG. This RG should be updated to incorporate the improved format.
Guidance exists in NUREG 1520, Standard Review Plan for Fuel Cycle Facilities License Applications, and NUREG-1513, Integrated Safety Analysis Guidance Document, on how to implement the ISA requirements. This guidance should be referenced in the RG.
- 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?
There is no impact on internal and external stakeholders or licensing and inspection for the known issues, since the only facility for which this RG is applicable recently submitted a license renewal application in 2017.
- 3. What is an estimate of the level of effort needed to address identified issues in terms of full-time equivalent (FTE) and contractor resources?
The estimate level of effort needed to address the identified issues is between 0.1 and 0.2 FTE.
- 4. Based on the answers to the questions above, what is the staff action for this guide (Reviewed with no issues identified, Reviewed with issues identified for future consideration, Revise, or Withdraw)?
Reviewed with issues identified for future consideration.
Regulatory Guide Periodic Review
- 5. Provide a conceptual plan and timeframe to address the issues identified during the review.
The staff will consider the identified issues at the next periodic review. Also, if another uranium hexafluoride processing facility would apply for a license, then the staff would re-evaluate whether a revision to this RG would be necessary.
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.