ML20044F274
| ML20044F274 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/11/1993 |
| From: | Hoyle J NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| To: | OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT & BUDGET |
| References | |
| NACGEN, NUDOCS 9305270278 | |
| Download: ML20044F274 (28) | |
Text
-
fbl0 om asc
,8 oq'o UNITED STATES g' "
.,,7 [,g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g i *j E
W ASHIN GT ON. D.C. 20555 f, V as,. m j OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY May, }gg3 MEMORANDUM FOR THE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
SUBJECT:
RESPONSE TO OMB BULLETIN NO. 93-10 on behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, I am pleased to submit the agency's response to Executive Order 12838, dated February 10, 1993, and OMB's implementing Bulletin No. 93-10. Enclosed are statements prepared for each of NRC's six Federal advisory committees. In summary, the Corrission recommends termination of one non-statutory committee, continuation of four non-statutory committees, and continuation of its only statutory committee. Joh C. oy Adv sory Cor.mittee Management Officer 9305270278 y PDR ORG PDR D, I \\f I
J w 2 w e' [ i P ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR REACTOR SAFEGUARDS i 9 r I I ( s l I s I
l I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccmmission Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Recommendation (onlY one): Terminate Merge X Continue Committee statutory authority. cost. staffino and identification: (a) " Required by statute"? Yes; specific authority: 42 U.S.C. 2039 (b) Committee Cost (FY 92 actual and FY 93 estimate) 52.523.311 52.781.793 (a detailed cost breakdown is attached) (c) Federal staff support years (FY 92 actual and FY 93 estimate) 21.1 21.1 (d) Committee identification number ZQ1 ASSESSMENT: The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS), established by statute in 1957, provides advice to the Commission on potential hazards of proposed or i existing reactor facilities and the adequacy of proposed safety standards. The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2039), as revised, requires that the ACRS advise the Commission with respect to the safety of operating reactors and perform such other duties as the Commission may request. Consistent with the Energy Reorganization.Act of 1974, as amended, the Committee reviews any matter related to the safety of nuclear facilities specifically requested by the Department of Energy (DOE) and will provide any assistance requested by the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. Also, in accordance with Public Law 95-209 (91 Stat. 1483), the ACRS is required to prepare an annual report to the U.S. Congress on the NRC Safety Research Program. The ACRS reviews requests for preapplication site and standard plant approvals, each application for a construction permit or an operating license for power reactors, applications for licenses to construct or operate test reactors, and substantive amendments to such licenses. Consistent with the statutory charter of the Committee, ACRS reports, except for classified reports, are made part of the public record. Activities of the Committee are conducted in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which provides for public attendance at and participation in Committee meetings. The ACRS membership, which is drawn from scientific and engineering disciplines, includes individuals experienced in reactor operations, nuclear reactor systems design, electrical engineering, chemical engineering, civil engineering, materials engineering, mechanical engineering, nuclear engineering, reactor design, heat transfer and fluid flow, thermodynamics, reactor physics, and probabilistic risk analysis. During FY 1992, the Committee issued 55 reports. Reports issued in FY 1992 include "The Consistent Use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment," " Interim Guidance - on Staff Implementation of the' Commission's Safety Goal Policy," " Requirements for
t _2_ t 4 Full-Height, Full-Pressure Integral System Testing of the Westinghouse AP600 Passive Plant Design," " Elimination of Requirements Marginal to Safety," " Proposed Regulatory Guide and Interim Standard Review Plan for License Renewal and A Related Branch Technical Position on Fatigue Evaluation Procedures," " Severe Accident Research Program Plan," and " Safety Research Report." The ACRS in conducting its reviews meets regularly with the NRC staff, the industry, other government agencies, and interested members of the public and public interest groups. The Committee and the NRC staff interact under procedures established by a Memorandum of Understanding, which gives the ACRS the opportunity to review a broad range of NRC regulatory actions. In addition, the Committee has periodic meetings with the NRC Commissioners and with individual NRC office directors to discuss issues of mutual interest. The Committee's work has had a significant impact on the NRC regulatory process. Examples of particular interest are the Committee's work on the development of requirements for and the licensing i of standard plant designs, safety issues associated with operating nuclear power plants, nuclear power plant license renewal, severe accident issues, nuclear safety research, and the implementation of the NRC Safety Goal Policy. The Commission recommends the continuation of this statutorily required Committee. l The ACRS and its subcommittees held 86 meetings during FY 1992. The number of meetings held is directly related to the number of reactor project reviews referred by the NRC to the Committee for review or required by statute; the number of generic issues that arose during the year; the number of criteria and guides referred to the Committee for review and comment; the number of special reviews requested by the NRC and Congress; and areas of particular interest / concern to the Committee. The full Committee normally meets once a month for a three-day session to consider projects, generic and special reviews, and criteria and regulatory guides that are ready for full Committee consideration. ACRS subcommittees meet as necessary with licensees, NRC staff, and others to develop information for the Committee on the particular matters under review and to identify those matters warranting particular attention by the full Committee. If the Committee is to l continue to meet the requirements of the statute that established it, and the later additions and amendments, it will need to continue to meet at a similar frequency in the future. I 1 The Committee is unique in that there exists no comparable body composed of acknowledged experts in the field of nuclear reactor safety whose Congressional mandate is to provide the Commission with indeoendent advice in this area. i The Commission necessarily has its own expert staff on whom it relies in the day-3 to-day regulation of nuclear power facilities. However, there is no other advisory committee, either within the Commission or in other agencies, with the current, broadly based knowledge of the ACRS that could be called upon to provide I advice to NRC for independent assessments of reactor safety issues. 2 In addition, since ACRS members are primarily part-time advisors with other full-time interests and activities in related fields, they generate an organized a
4 . synergistic approach to provide a breadth of experience and state-of-the-art technical knowledge that would be difficult to duplicate with full-time government employees. A continuing committee such as the ACRS also remains current with respect to nuclear safety issues, including related reactor operating experience and safety research, and provides a collegial judgment regarding these issues that would be impossible to duplicate by use of individual, part-time consultants on a case-by-case basis. Through the ACRS, the public and the Congress are provided assurance that an independent technical review and evaluation of nuclear reactor projects and safety issues is accomplished and an opportunity for public input during ACRS meetings is assured. It is critical that the ACRS continue to provide this service. There is essentially no other alternative that would provide a savings if this statutory and essentially operational committee is abolished. 1 l l 4
f U.S. Nxtear Regulatory Corimission Advisory Comittee on Reactor saferaards Breesout f or FY 92 ers193 Fiscal Year Fis. cal Year i' 1992 1993 CESCRIFTIDW (Estimate) A. Personnel (1) kon Feocrat mercers S 490,544 S 515,072 [ Fayments (2) Federal peacers (Frotated Salary) 0 0 (3) Feoeral Staf f (Prorated $stery) 1,505,186 1,712,762 (4) horcerh* Consultants 70,053 73,555 1 A. Travel and (1) Non-Feocral mencers 233,705 245,394 per ciem (2) Federal Mencers 0 0 (3) Feoerat staff 19,219 20,179 (4) Nonne-iner Consultants 49,704 52,189 154,897 162,642 C. 01HER.... - .......-~ %......,... D. Total 12,523,311 52,781,793 i LIST OF SUSC>u!TTEES: See attached 4 3 1 .6 3 't I r 6 d A P i
i ACRS SUBCOMMITTEES PART I - TOPICAL SUBCOMMITTEES Adopted Plants Activities Advanced Boiling Water Reactors Advanced Pressurized Water Reactors Advanced Reactor Designs Auxiliary & Secondary Systems Babcock & Wilcox Reactor Plants Co:puters in Nuclear Power Plant operations Containment Systems Control and Electrical Power Systems Core Perfor=ance Decay Heat Removal Systems Extreme External Phenomena General Electric Reactor Plants Generic Items Human Factors Improved Light Water Reactors Individual Plant Examinations International Activities Maintenance Practices and Procedures Materials & Metallurgy Mechanical Components Naval Reactors occupational and Environmental Protection Systems Onsite Fuel Storage and Decommissioning Planning and Procedures Plant License Renewal Plant Operations Probabilistic Risk Assessment Regional Programs Regulatory Policies and Practices Reliability and Quality Satsguards and Security Sa:ety Philosophy, Technology, and Criteria 2 Severe Accidents Structural Engineering Systematic Assessment of Experience Thermal Hydraulic Phenonena TVA Plant Licensing and Restart Westinghouse and Combustion Engineering Reactor Plants PART II - AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEE / WORKING GROUP Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Design Acceptance Criteria Ad Hoc Working Group on Multinational Meeting l l 1
a a 6 N 2 6 S n h i i i ? e i I i 9 4 l s b 1 4 f 1 ADVISORY COKMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE J 5 6 I f B ? J 1 ( 1 f e 4 i ? i i f 6 t 6 e P l e 1 e i p
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE Recommendation (oniv one): Terminate Merge X Continue Committee statutory authority. cost. staffina and identification: (a) "Raquired by statute"? No (b) Committee Cost (FY 92 actual and FY 93 estimate): $993.683/5822.833 (a detailed cost breakdown is attached) (c) Federal staff support years (FY 92 actual and FY 93 estimate): t 10.2/7.2 (d) Committee identification number: 1100 ASSESSMENT: The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) was established by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in June 1988. The ACNW is tasked in its ~ charter to, "... report to and advise the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) on nuclear waste management, as directed by the Commission on the basis of periodic reviews of ACNW proposals. This includes 10 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 72 (as applied to other than the site of production and utilization facilities) and other-applicable regulations and legislative mandates such as the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act, and the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act, as amended. The primary emphasis will be on disposal but will also include other activities off-site of production and utilization facilities, such as handling, processing, transportation, storage, and safeguarding of nuclear wastes including spent fuel, nuclear wastes mixed with other hazardous substances, and uranium mill tailings. In performing its work, the Committee will examine and report on those areas of concern referred to it by the Commission or its designated representatives..." ACNW reports (except any that may contain classified material) are made part of the public record. Activities of the Committee are conducted in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which provides for public attendance at and participation in Committee meetings. The ACNW membership, which is drawn from scientific and engineering disciplines, includes individuals experienced in geosciences, radiation protection, radioactive waste treatment, environmental engineering, nuclear engineering, and chemistry. During FY 1992, the Committee held 17 meetings and issued 27 reports. Reports issued in FY 1992 include "NRC Capabilities in Performance Assessment and Computer Modeling of High-level Waste Disposal Facilities," " Standard Review Plan for the , Review of a License Application for a Low-Level Radioactive Waste Facility,"
. " Proposed Rulemaking on EPA High-level Waste Standards," " Comprehensive Systems Analysis of the High-Level Radioactive Waste Research Program Plan," and " License Application for the High-Level Waste Repository." The ACNW in conducting its reviews meets regularly with the NRC staff, the industry, other government agencies, and interested members of the public and public interest groups. The Committee and the NRC staff interact under procedures established by a Memorandum of Understanding which gives the ACNW the opportunity to review a broad range of NRC staff regulatory actions. In addition, the Committee has periodic meetings with the NRC Comissioners to discuss issues of mutual interest. Examples of particular interest are in the Committee's work with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's High-Level Radioactive Waste Repository Standards, the regulation of mixed waste, groundwater protection at low-level waste disposal sites, and the review of the site characterization plans for the Yucca Mountain High-Level Waste Repository. The number of meetings held is directly related to the review schedule and scope of efforts on the high-level waste geologic repository, the number of criteria, guides, and technical positions referred for review and comment, the number of special reviews requested by the NRC, and topics of particular concern / interest to the Committee. The full Committee plans to reduce the number of meeting held during CY 1993. Full Committee meetings generally run two to three days and cover - a variety of topics (review of the site characterization plan and related NRC staff analysis, technical positions on high-level and low-level waste issues, briefings and reviews of rulemakings, etc.). For particularly complex issues, the ACNW holds working group meetings where additional time and expertise can be brought to bear on an issue and the subject developed prior to full Committee considerations. The Commission recommends continuation of the ACNW. The Commission necessarily has its own expert staff on whom it relies in the day-to-day regulation of nuclear waste. However, there is no other advisory committee, within the Commission, with the current, broadly based knowledge of the ACNW that could be called upon for independent assessment of safety issues related to high-and low-level waste management and disposal. The four ACNW members are part-time advisors with other full-time interests and activities in related fields, they generate an organized synergistic approach to provide a breadth of experience and state-of-the-art technical knowledge that would be difficult to duplicate with full-time government employees. A continuing committee such as the ACNW also remains current with respect to nuclear waste issues, including related safety research. Their collegial efforts would be difficult to duplicate by use of individual, part-time consultants on a case-by-case basis. Through the ACNW, the public is provided an independent technical review and evaluation of nuclear waste safety issues and an opportunity for public input during ACNW meetings is assured.
t k i i i U.S. haetesr Ergulatory Commission r Advisory Committee on Nuclear Weste j t Ereakout f or FY 92 and 93 l Fiscal Year fiscal tear 1992 1993 i DESCP1FTION (Est{ ante) 6 A. F er s onnel (1) kon-Federat receers S 120,097 $ 126,102 F a rment s (2) Federal Members (Prorated Satory) (3) Federat Staf f (Frorated Setary) 714,088 $?9,264 (4) honneceer Consultants 18,978 19,927 i B. Travet and (1) kon-Federal Members $2,125 54,794 per diem (2) Federal Members > ] (3) Federal Staf f 10,325 10,B41 (4) konreecer Consultants 14,216 14,927 I l ! C. Ct
- E E...
63,M4 66.9 8 i 2 I D. Total 5993,683 5822,E38 1 ,l FE0ERAL ST AFF SUFFORi YE ARS 10.2 7.2 i E*FEESS 1h FULL-T!"E EDU1 VALENT (FTE) YEARS US!h0 DECIMAL TO THE l kE A8EST TEhTH (e.g. 0.0) { i i 4 I LIST OF SJBCDMu!TTEES: j See Attached a W ? i k a l I ( J k 4 h f I f l l I i 4 9 4 l t'
w 2 ACNW WORKING GPOUPS AND STAFT ASSIGNMENTS NRC High-Level Waste: Rules, Regulations and Guidance l I EPA's High-Level Waste Standards Yucca Mountain: Site Characterization Plan / Site Characterization f Analysis j High-Level Waste Performance Assessment and Mathematical Modeling . i I NRC High-Level Waste Research and Center for Nuclear Maste Regulatory Analyses Monitored Retrievable Storage d Alternative Disposal Strategies Low-Level Waste: Rules, Regulations and Guidance i Licensing Low-Level Waste Facilities j NRC Low-Level Waste Research Progra l Low-Level Waste Performance Assessnent and Mathematical Modeling 4 Uraniu Recovery Issues Mcnitoring Progress on State Cenpacts - Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Sites occupational and Environnental Radiation Protection i i State Programs International Program 1 Decon=issioning and Decontamina' tion Activities at Nuclear Power Plants and Materials Licensees Chemistry and Materials Issues j Geochemistry I At=cspheric Phenomena Issues Quality control - Quality Assurance Earth Science Issues l Transportation Security and Safeguards of Waste Facilities i Societal Issues special Projects Waste Isolation Pilot Plant i a ? i J i 1 I i i l ~ - _. -,~
=. i 5 b I I f r i i f !t ? r a k r i t l l i 1 a ADVISORY PANEL FOR THE DECONTAMINATION OF THI-2 i ? I ? 'k i k F I I 4 i .i i 5 d I h k d I k f; 9 i I 4 h a t 1 1 d I i 1 5 I 'f i l M t
i l Nuclear Regulatory Commission ADVISORY PANEL FOR THE DECONTAMINATION OF TMI-2 Recommendation: X Terminate Merge Continue committee statutory authority, cost, staffino and identification: (a) " Required by Statute"? Yes; specific authority: No X (b) Committee cost (FY 92 actual and FY 93 estimate) $12.309/10.900 (a detailed cost breakdown is attached) (c) Federal staff support years (FY 92 actual and FY 93 estimate) FTE 0.1/0.1 (d) Committee identification number 45 ASSESSMENT: i The Advisory Panel for the D' contamination of Three Mile Island, Unit 2 (TMI-2) was established on November 10, 1980. It is made up of.0 local scientists and citizens from the local area of Harrisburg, PA, in the vicinity of the Three Mile Island nuclear electric generating plant, who serve independently to advise and consult with the Commission on major activities required to decontaminate and safsly clean up the THI-2 facility. It has also actea as a conduit conveying local public concerns and opinions to the Commission. Since its inception it has held 77 meetings, almost all in Harrisburg, PA, although a number of meetings were joint l meetings with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the Washington, D.C. trea. The current cleanup effort by the licensee at TMI-2, General Public Utilities Nuclear Corporation, is substantially completed and the licensee plans to place the facility into long term storage during the first er second quarter of fiscal year 1994. At the most recent joint meeting with the Commission on December 1, 1992, a majority of the members of the panel recommended that the panel remain i n existence until TMI-2 is placed into long term storage. ibe Commission therefore approved extension of the panel until March 31, 1994. The Commission has reevaluated the need to continue the Panel through March 1994 in response to the President's Executive Order. The Commission has determined that since only a limited number of topics concerning the cl.eanup effort at Three Mile Island remain, they could probably be handled in one additional meeting of the t f
4 panel. The Commission believes that meeting could be scheduled before the end of fiscal year 1993. Terminating the panel at that l time, several months prior to the actual commencement of long term storage at TMI-2, would not measurably affect the ability of the panel to fulfill its charter. In response to Executive Order 12838, the Commission recommends that the Advisory Panel for the Decontamination of Three Mile Island Unit 2 be terminated on September 30, 1993. d e i r l 4 N i f 6 9 ? e r i
~ k U.S. hetear Regulatory Commission Advisory Panet for the Decontamination of TMI 2 Ereatout for FY 92 and 93 FiscalYear]- ~ Fiscal Year 1992 1993 DESCRIPT10h (Estimate) i A. Fersonnet (1) hon-Federal Menters S S Pa cent s (2) Feoeral Mercers (Prorated Salary). i (3) Federat Staff (Prorated Salary) 7.600 7,853 (4) honmeetier Consultants. i
- 5. Trave 1 and (1) hon-Federal Meeters 1,279 1,400 per diem (2) Federal Meetiers i (3) Feoerat staf f 262 100 l
(4) Wonmember Consultants -[ - 0-3,168 1,600 C. CT*ER....... D. Total S 12,309 5 10,900 4 d k 11LT CF SUBCOMw!TTEES: hone N b 4 i
l i 1 t t i i t i ? k t ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON MEDICAL USES OF ISOTOPES i } }r y ) .s l 'l v i 1 ? ? T i t i I f I t I y. - ~
i Nuclear Regulatory Commission l ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON MEDICAL USE OF ISOTOPES f Recommendation: Terminate Merge X Continue (a) " Required by Statute"? No (b) Committee Cost: FY 92 (Actual) $67,551 FY 93 (Estimated) $90,022 5 (a det.siled cost breakdown is attached) (c) Federal staff support years: FY 92 -(Actual) 1.0+ FY 93 (Estimated) 1.0+ (d) Committee identification number: 1102 bSSESSMENT: The Commission believes that continuation of the Advisory i Committee on Medical Uses of Isotopes (ACMUI) is necessary and in [ the public interest. Since its establishment in 1958, this Committee has performed the extremely valuable service of advising this agency on rulemakings and other initiatives pertaining to the medical uses of byproduct material. ACMUI duties and responsibilities are to provide the NRC, through the Director, Division of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety, NMSS, with advice and recommendations on NRC proposals for the development and/or amendment of the standards and criteria utilized by the NRC to license and regulate the medical uses of radionuclides on human patients. The Committee also makes recommendations, upon NRC request, on the trainirag and experience of physicians and teletherapy physicists who do not meet the requirements described in 10 CFR Part 35. t In recent years, the Commission has significantly expanded the membership of the ACMUI to include not only physicians, medical physicists and pharmacists, but also medical researchers, practicing technologists, hospital administrators, state medical I regulators, Food and Drug Administration representatives and patient's rights representatives. The Commission believes that the ACMUI has served the Commission and the NRC staff well and should continue to do so. The Committee's role and function of providing sound technical and policy advice to the NRC are even more important now that medical use regulatory issues are under active, high-priority review. To help ensure continued high-quality support from the Committee, the Commission maintains direct access to the Committee and visibility of Committee activities. The Commission recently determined that certain 1 t I i
. _=. l l _2-adjustments were needed with respect to the Committee's_ role, size, composition, and operating procedures. The purpose of j these adjustments which are being developed by the staff, is to allow the Commission to take maximum advantage of the special 1 resources provided by the Committee at minimum cost to the government, in keeping with the President's general direction on the use of advisory com=ittees. This Committee meets three times a year in two-day sessions, including an annual meeting with the Commission. Current discussion topics have included reporting requirements for medical misadministrations, radiation doses to nursing mothers and training requirements for physicians who wish to become authorized users of byproduct material. The functions performed by the ACMUI cannot be performed by any other organization within this Agency, and the advice provided is not available from other sources within the Commission. Additionally, the cost of the Committee is small when compared to attempting to develop and maintain in-house capabilities to match the quality and quantity of expert knowledge embodied in this committee. i 4 } i r
U.S. Nuclear regulatory Ccamission Advisory Connittee on medical uses of isotopes Breshout f er FV 92 and 93 fiscal Year Fiscal Year 1992 1993 DESCRIPTION (Estimate) A. Fers:nnel (1) kon-Federal members S 13,372 S 25,000 F eynent s (2) Federat Members (Prorated Salary) 1 (3) Federal Staff (Prorated Satery) 33,425 34,428 (4) honmenter Consvitants 0-B. Travel and (1) kon Federat members 15,429 22,429 per eiem (2) Federal members (3) Federal Staf f 2,300 2,415 (4) honmenter consultants 0-3,025 5,750 c.CM8 ..........c............. .o D. Total S 67,551
- 90,022 LIST CF SUS; p !TTEES:
hone .j
i l t [ t i f LICENSING SUPPORT SYSTEM ADVISORY REVIEW PANEL f e L b b i k e b P
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION LICENSING SUPPORT SYSTEM ADVISORY REVIEW PANEL RECOMMENDATION: Terminate Merge X Continue COMMITTEE STATUTORY AUTHORITY, COST, STAFFING AND IDENTIFICATION: (a) " Required by Statue"? NO (b) Committee Cost: FY 1992 = $3,000 est FY 1993 = $28,000 (attached is a detailed cost breakdown) (c) Federal staff support years: FY 1992 = 0.05 est FY 1993 = 0.20 (d) Committee Identification Number: 1104 ASSESSMENT: Justification for Decision to Continue The Commission believes that the Licensing Support System Advisory Review Panel should be continued because it performs an essential role for the NRC and DOE in support of the licensing proceeding for disposal of high level radioactive wcste mandated by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) of 1982 (Public Law 97-425, 96 Stat. 2 2 0 ?.), as amended. The Panel provides advice on the development and operation of an electronic information system, the Licensing Support System (LSS), that will contain relevant documentary material and will facilitate a timely review and decision by the Commission on DOE's application for a license for a high level waste repository. The LSS is described in NRC regulations at 10CFR Part 2, Subpart J. This rule was developed utilizing negotiated rulemaking procedures. A point of negotiation agreed to by all participants was the establishment of the Licensing Support System Advisory Review Panel. ^ The Panel is relatively inactive at the present time because delays i in DOE's high level waste program have resulted in slippage of the schedule for final ISS development. The electronic system on which the Panel provides advice is expected to contain a database of more than 22 million pages at the time DOE submits its license application. It will provide a vehicle to all parties for early document discovery, for more timely submission of better focused contentions to the Hearing Board, and for electronic submission of filings between the Board and parties during the proceeding. If the LSS is to succeed in aiding the Commission in meeting its statutory three-year deadline for completing the repository licensing process, then it is essential that the system, l y
g as it is designed and developed, meets the needs of its potential 4 users. Therefore membership on the Panel is made up of representatives of the potential participants in the licensing proceeding. Since the potential site for the high level waste repository is now being characterized by DOE at Yucca Mountain, i Nevada, membership consists of the government of the State of Nevada, the local governmental entities in the immediate Yucca Mountain site area and in the counties adjacent to the site area, the National Congress of American Indians, the Department of Energy and the nuclear industry, all of whom are potential parties to the licensing proceeding and were participants in the negotiated rulemaking for the licensing proceeding. Also on the Panel are 1 representatives of other federal agencies that have large document-based systems of a similar nature. t Operating costs for the LSS Advisory Review Panel have been kept as low as possible from the time of its establishment in 1989. The Panel did not meet at all in FY 1992. Slippage in the schedule for DOE's site characterization program for Yucca Mountain gave DOE an opportunity to concentrate on a new internal records management system for its own high level waste program documents. During this period, the NRC has also used the opportunity to evaluate ways to refine responsibilities for system development and operation and to i lower costs for the project. The Panel will be briefed on these NRC and DOE activities in the near future. FY 1993 costs are expected to be under $30,000. When the Panel becomes more active in the future, the projected annual costs are expected to be only about S50,000 (ivsuming two meetings per year, one in Nevada and one in the DC arei If the LSS Advisory Review Panel were terminated as a FACA ) conmittee, the NRC would still require a mechanism for assuring that the design and functionality of the LSS, including the completeness of the database, will meet the needs of those who expect to rely on ) it to expedite their participation in the high level waste repository licensing proceeding. Without a reliable LSS that is developed with input from potential parties, compliance with the i NWPA's three-year licensing deadline will be difficult. Some forum 1 j for meeting with and obtaining advice from the potential users would t have to be developed. There will be a continuing need for coordination and interaction with the users to ensure their active involvement in developing the system throughout the entire process of design, development and operation. The cost of such a forum would probably be about the same as the cost of an advisory committee. The Commission wishes to retain the Panel even in its current relatively ina"tive status. Its membership is drawn primarily from the Nevada com.cunities which will b3 most affected by the outcome of the high level waste repository licensing proceeding. Many members i
4 2 ' 4 were participants in the negotiated rulemaking which established the basic procedures for the proceeding, including procedures for the LSS. They have retained a very active interest in plans and progress for the LSS. It is important to the Commisssion's regulatory program to retain this vehicle of communication with that segment of the public. The cost of operating this committee will continue to be kept to a minimal level. f I i i
i l U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission I Licensirs Support System Advisory Review Parel Breakout f or FY 92 and 93 Fiscal Year Ffscal Year t 1992 1993 DESCRIPTION (Estimate) A. Fersonnel (1) hon-Federal Mencers 5 S Payments (2) Federal Menbers (Prorated Satary) 500 5,000 f (3) Federal Staff (Prorated Satory) 2,464 10,000 i (4) Norvrencer Consattants 0- _ B, Travel and (1) hon-Federal Menbers 2,100 l per diem (2) Fede'st Menters 5,600 (3) Federal Staff 1,400 (4) Novecter Consuttants, 100 4,300 C. CT 4 R.. ,2.. ..re....we.a.......... D. Total l S 3,064 S 28,400 LIST OF SUSCOMMITTEES: hone i f
A O-_^ o -Jta a-,5 m p a j h t h + 4 a b I + NUCLEAR SAFETY RESEAROH REVIEW COMMITTEE I P s i + n i .l t l t 6 i f 9 3
Nuclear Regulatory Cor. mission i NUCLEAR SAFETY RESEARCH REVIEW COMMITTEE Recommendation: Terminate Merge X Continue i Committee statutory authority, cost, staffino and identification: (a) " Required by Statute"? Yes; specific authority No X f (b) Committee Cost (FY 92 actual and FY 93 estimate): $98.254; 112,060 (a detailed cost breakdown is attached) (c) Federal staff support years (FY 92 actual and FY 93 estimate): 0.7; 0.8 (FTE) (d) Committee identification number 1105 ASSESSMENT: The Nuclear Safety Research Review Committee (NSRRC) provides advice to the Commission through the Director of the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, on important management matters in the direction of the NRC's nuclear safety research program. Nuclear safety research encompasses technical investigations of the implications for public health and safety of the peaceful uses of atomic energy, including the presentation of the results for reduction of those investigations to regulatory practice. The Committee's activities include assessment of and recommendations concerning likelihood of the program meeting the needs of the regulatory users of the research; appropriateness of the longer range research programs and the correctness of their direction; 3 whether the best people are doing the work at the best places; whether the program is free of evident bias; and whether the research products have been given adequate, unbiased peer review. In addition, the Committee conducts specialized studies when requested by the Commission or the Director of the Office of Nuclcar Regulatory Research. The twelve members of the Committee represent the range of key technical disciplines and specialties involved in NRC's research mission, including reactors, nuclear waste, nuclear engineering, thermal-hydraulics, mechanical components, structures, earth sciences, nuclear plant operation, human factors. They have experience and accomplishments in conduct and management of research in universities, industry, and research institutions. Nuclear regulatory research is a continuing essential and integral function of the NRC, as mandated by statute. The NSRRC's independent review, utilizing its range of expertise and views, is i needed as a continuing contribution to assuring appropriate and effective response of the NRC's research efforts to evolving regulatory needs.
o V i U.S. hucteer Regulatory Commission Wuclear Safety Research Review Connittee sreenout for FY 92 and 93 Fiscet Year Flecal Year 1992 1993 t DESCRIPT10W (Estimate) A. Fersonnel (1) hon-Federal Meeers S 31,608 8 36,000 paynents (2) Federal Meeers (Prorated salary) (3) Federal Staf f (Prorated $ story) 40,000 45,000 (4) Nonnemner Consultants l B. 1 ravel and (1) Won-Federal Meeers 24,281 28,000 per diem (2) Federst renters 0- (3) Federst stoff 40 60 (4) bonmeeer Consultants 2,325 3,000 C. CTHER ..........m....--......... D. Total 5 98,254 $112,060 s t!st OF SUBCOMMITTEES: Advanced Instrwentation and Controls and MJr.an Factors Acvanced Reactcrs 6 Aging Severe Accidents i.aste l I e l I - -}}