ML20137H959
| ML20137H959 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/24/1997 |
| From: | Mcgaffigan E NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Shirley Ann Jackson, Rogers K, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137H924 | List: |
| References | |
| COMSECY-96-055, COMSECY-96-55, DSI-5, FACA, SECY-96-055-C, SECY-96-55-C, NUDOCS 9704030167 | |
| Download: ML20137H959 (1) | |
Text
--
o UNITED STATES
- eeoee6*0000
[
k NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION RELEASED TO THE PDR ?
e-E WASHIN GTON. D.C. 20555 i
g..... *o[
I/!M M2J date in!tials OrriceOrTHe January 24. 199'7' ' ' * * * * * * *
- i COMMi$SIONER i
MEMORANDUM T0:
Chairman Jackson Comissioner Rogers 4
Comissioner Dicus i
i Commissioner Diaz l
FROM:
Edward McGaffigan. Jr.
k p
SUBJECT:
COMSECY-96-055: DSI 5 - LOW-LEVEL WASTE i
r In light of the overall budget constraints of the agency. I do not l
support the Comission's preliminary view on this paper (Option 2).
Instead.
I support Option 3 (maintain the current program) for the reasons discussed below.
t The incremental improvement in safety of Option 2 com)ared to Option 3.
according to the paper, derives from "the expectation that 1RC's larger involvement would ultimately ensure that new disposal facilities come on line sooner than if NRC had not been involved."
I find that safety benefit speculative at best. The fact is that we' expect no license applications from non-Agreement St&tes for at least five years and that we have little influence over the course of Agreement State licensing efforts for LLW sites. The
- 0) tion 3 program allows NRC to respond to requests from States for assistance, w11ch have been modest, and to carry out other ongoing functions, such'as reviewing Agreement State LLW programs.
It would also provide sufficient resources to address technical concerns raised by the Department of Interior on the proposed Ward Val'ey tacility, should the NRC be asked to do so.
I do not believe that the possible assumption by NRC of regulatory oversight over DOE nuclear facilities, including DOE LLW sites, the subject of DSI-2. should be a basis for sizing the current NRC LLW program. Additional resources to carry out that potential responsibility should be provided after a statute to implement such a regulatory role for NRC is enacted.
Finally I am concerned about the comments received regarding the draft branch technical position (BTP) on performance assessment of LLW sites from Agreement States reviewing LLW license applications. to the effect that the BTP is " unnecessary and disruptive." Unless the staff sees a way to resolve these comments, consideration should be given to withdrawing the document and ceasing efforts to complete it.
I also agree with Comissioner Rogers that there is no reason to alter the Commission's current position of neutrality on assured storage.
cc:
DEDO OGC SECY 9704030167 970401'
~