ML20126G681
| ML20126G681 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/10/1984 |
| From: | Browning R NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Jennifer Davis NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20126G220 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-85-170 NUDOCS 8506180130 | |
| Download: ML20126G681 (3) | |
Text
-.-.._
DISTRIBUT101L_EMSS-840102 WM S/F, ' 3119' WMRP r/f NMSS r/f CF 119/HJM/84/02/10/0 REBrowning MJBell
,.cq JBunting PAltomare MRKnapp MEMORANDUM FOR:
John G. Davis, Director PSJustus Office of Nuclear Material JTGreeves JLinehan Safety and Safeguards LBHigginbotham JKennedy HJMiller & r/f fBR FROM:
Robert E. Browning, Director RRBoyl e Division of Waste Management RJWright SMCoplan
SUBJECT:
MEETING WITH DOE " BLUE RIBB0N" COMMITTEE Attached as requested in your January 30, 1984, memo is a proposed outline for a presentation to the Committee at its February 22, 1984, meeting.
~
Orivinn' R"$9 r _g --d. ;;:wmng Robert E. Browning, Director Division of Waste Management 85061%hOBNPDR hSEBS-170
~ _ - -
0FC :WMRP:
g
- D NAME :.
11er
- RE wning :
DATE :04"/02/10
$2/1/84 5
1 FORMAT FOR NRC BRIEFING OF 00E " BLUE RIBBON" COMMITTEE In addition to providing basic information regarding NRC's responsibilities in the National high-level waste managenent program, the presentations should implicitly convey the following messages which go directly to the kinds of concerns tnat have been voiced:
(a). Regulations which set the overall technical performance requirements for the program are virtually complete, and they are reasonable.
(NRC regs and EPA std's.)
(b) a regulatory process is in place within which DOE can reasonably plan, schedule and cost out their program; and (c) the repository' experience will not be like the reactor experience where estimated costs have been low by a factor of ten and project completion (e.g., $4+ billion instead of $330 million for Diablo Canyon), schedules have been low by a factor of two or more provided 00E takes needed steps.
HLW licensing process is fundamentally different than that whicn was followed for reactors.
PRESENTATIONS:
1.
Davis - Introduction (10-15 minutes)
Sets stage for more detailed talks which follow.
Establishes l
following points: (1) need for NRC in National program from public policy perspective; (2) what are NRC's regulatory resoonsibilities; (3) what are the statutory bases; and (4) at a very broad level, the hows and whys of the rulemaking process.
Davis introduces Browning l
and Miller.
2.
Browning - HLW Regulation (30-45 minutes)
Describes the major features of procedural and technical Part 60 (staged licensing process; early identification of issues through prelicensing consultation process; flexibility in technical criteria; etc.) to convey their reasonableness.
Describes dynamics and general requirements of the licensing hearing process a la l
l l
l l
l
2 previous briefing to Morgan and DOE management (e.g., need for completeness, quality assurance, etc.).
3.
Miller - NRC Guidance Program.-(30-45 minutes)
Describes the guidance mechanisms used by NRC -- technical positions, technical meetings, EA review, SCP reviews and further rulemaking on : elected important issue.
Establishes these as part of process that can and will come to closure, i.e., addresses question of "how much is enough?".
I e
i l
4 e
y
---e