ML20041D299
| ML20041D299 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/02/1982 |
| From: | Seeman M NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | NRC |
| References | |
| FRN-46FR38081, REF-WM-4, RULE-PR-61 NUDOCS 8203050159 | |
| Download: ML20041D299 (2) | |
Text
___
PP.6Is
~ ' " -
ys pn sw DISTRIBUTION (M'
204.1/MJS/82/02/01/0
-WMPIrs/f,,
POfL WMPI r/f NMSS r/f (2vb
- FEB 2 1982 WM r/f g36J/, t,dn MJSeemann WMPI: 404d To'Z-6 9 7-S y JJSurmeier J0 Bunting REBrowning MEMORANDUM FOR: Working Group on 10 CFR Part 61 Rule JBMartin P.5mMb FR0!i:
Mary Jo Seemann
- p. to65 9
Policy Analysis Section no R.
Licensing Process and Integration Branch
'S pgCF"!EO
SUBJECT:
RESPONSIBILITIES FOR C0fiPLETING FINANCIAL P0RTION OF RULE g
cm 10 92* o f ygrmy]' /-(-
A am g Pursuant to the upcoming meetings on February 3 and 4, I have pre Med the following work outline on the financial assurance portion of th '(rq/
rulemaking.
1.
Staff Response To Public Contents I have drafted a response to the public comments on all I have received.
I still need to incorporate Fonner's suggestions on these comments and also draft comments on any further public comments received by the Commission since November.
2.
Revision To Proposed Rule and Statement of Considerations The proposed rules may need to be revised so that the States, and not the Commission are the named beneficiary for short-term financial assurances in the event of licensee default.
I have been told that Mr. Martin has questioned whether the Commission should have responsibility for using funds for closure in the event of licensee default. We need to resolve this issue and if necessary revise the regulations.
If we decide to change the draft regulations and require the State to hold the short-term financial assurances for closure, then we need to provide a rationale in the Statement of Considerations, since we did not receive any public comments supporting such a revision.
i DIST:
TICKET NO:
0FC :
NAME :j} h,____p y /
DATE.:8242/02
-~~ 8203050159 820202 PDR PR 61 46FR38081 PDR
v, o
204.1/MJS/82/02/01/0 FEB
- 1982 3.
Revision of EIS If we change the proposed rule to make the State the beneficiary of the short-term financial assurance, then we may need to amend the EIS.
Additionally, the EIS needs to be updated to reflect some of the changes at the existing LLW site, such as tne negotiations over the Hanford l-dse, and the changes to the trust fund for the Barnell site.
?,
lY =lb *^
l r
it KLDgw~t/
//
Mary Jo eemann Policy Analysis Section Licensing Process and Integration Branch DIST:
TICKET N0:
0FC
- WMPig ')
WMPI N AM E : MJ $g _g _ _ _ : _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ : _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ : _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ : _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
eh r
- JJSurmsier :
_ _ _ _ _ : _ _ _t '.'
DATE :82/0 2
- 82/02/d/: