ML20137H943
| ML20137H943 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/22/1997 |
| From: | Rogers K NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Dicus G, Shirley Ann Jackson, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137H924 | List: |
| References | |
| COMSECY-96-055, COMSECY-96-55, DSI-5, SECY-96-055-C, SECY-96-55-C, NUDOCS 9704030163 | |
| Download: ML20137H943 (1) | |
Text
. - . - . - . - - . . - _ - _ - _ . . . - _ _ _ _ -
i '# ,%' , UNITED STATES ***'**eoe.. ,,;
,* f.r p;
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 e I * *
- RELEASED *
- Alw wi
! %.....};E - me .
- e........, i.a
- - u
- OFnCE OF THE *******e
, COMWSSIONER January 22,1997 4
I i
- MEMORANDUM TO: Chairman Jackson Commissioner Dicus i Commissioner Diaz i Con =ssioner Mecanigan FROM: Commissioner Rogers b.
I l
SUBJECT:
COMSECY-g6-055: LOW-LEVEL WASTE - DSI-5
- After a review of the Phase il Stakeholder Interaction Report and after listening to the Steenng
' Committee bnefing on January 13, I believe the Commission's prehminary views on this DSI capture my position regarding the =;foy, role and scopo of the NRC's low level radioachve waste program. I think, however, that the Commission also should re emphasize its viete that timely development of low-level waste aapa==l facilities is important. I suggest that the followmg text be inserted at the beginning of the statement of the Commission's views-As a matter of Commission pohcy, The Commission has favored permanent disposal over temporary storage, at facilities not intended for that purpose, as the preferred method for managing LLW. The Commission bebeves that prolonged storage of LLW at such facilities, while ="+7-; protective of pubhc health and safety in the short term, does not provide the same degree of public health and safety as permanent disposal at a facekty that has been licensed for that purpose.
Consistent with this policy, the ...
I Consistent with this insert, the initial word "The" should be deleted from the existing text.
Public comment indicated significant interest in NRC's stance regardmg the concept of
" assured storage". I see no reason to e.er the Commission's current possbon of neutrality. I think that consistent with the posebon stated in the Commission's May g, 1996 letter to Mr. David Lercy, we should indicate that if a State were to come to the Commission directly for assistance regarding the feasibikty of assured storage in their State, the Commission would evaluate their request or proposal in accordance with its regulatory responsibilities. We might indicate also that we stand ready to consider a petibon for rulemaking under.10 CFR Part 2.802 which both could clarify the assured storage concept and propose the appropriate basis for licensing an assured storage facility. g cc: EDO OGC SECY i
l I
l 9704030163 970401 i PDR NRCSA I i 5 PM .
a