ML20137T000

Submits Comments Re COMSECY-96-068, Power Reactor Decommissioning

ML20137T000
Person / Time
Issue date:	01/21/1997
From:	Rogers K NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:	Diaz N, Dicus G, Shirley Ann Jackson, Mcgaffigan E, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
COMSECY-96-068, COMSECY-96-68, DSI-24, NUDOCS 9704150292
Download: ML20137T000 (2)

Text

.,. - - -

- - - ~ ~ -

- ~ ' * ' " " ' ~ ~ ~ ~

UNITED $TATES

'y k

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSlod RELEASED TO THE PDR i

W ASHINGTON, D.C. 20655

%,.... * )

s d/g> /q9 52bo i

'date '

inmats

- OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER January 21, 1997 l

MEMORANDUM T0:

Chairman Jackson Commissioner Dieus Commissioner Diaz Commission McGaffigan FROM:

Commissioner Rogers C.

SUBJECT:

COMSECY 96 068:

DECOMMISSIONING POWER REACTORS DSI 24 1

After a review of Phase II of the Stakeholder Interaction Report and after listening to the Steering Committee briefing on January 13. I believe that we should revise the position taken in the Commission's preliminary views on this DSI. The preponderance of opinion seemed to be that the NRC should pursue the current direction more aggressively and to expedite rulemakings as much as possible. Comments were also made on possible innovative regulatory approaches and I believe that they should be accommodated.

I propose that the final Commission position be revised as follows:

From the o tions. presented, tion 42: Contine the current direction :nd apppe cur 16n"sndl approaches"more? aggressive y? is the recommended" option.rentEdi W staff Ltofaccelerateires uti6nTof deccanissioninfrulesaking Liss!should Tattueslandiconsi r;thei tionoficombiningLs5Veral

'culemakin!)slin;osaisin 1edntegratedTrulemaking!' plemsntition"guidan'ce 'in~

-50Fssihy";his~opti6n~~s)muldWespandid to"siplofe more innovative approach in line with the current Commission strategy in this area.

JhETitifftGl.dllid thisN5ticiligent!35Eilldied[is?ildecommissioni ~

sitel ifiCdecomm15sioning TleVel lit g g itt!apislassiC M stef ~isst 111ag

~!!i~ssie%f4onsigg~;fundistopagefof "

option E furthermore' '

lissue:

' stimateCshould bei

~ ' ~

e

~~~~~

~ ~^ " ~

The paper does provide a good discussion of rulemakings currently underway that outline the current Commission strategy in the power reactor j

decommissioning area:

1) that there should be assurance that decommissioning will be conducted in a safe and timely manner, 2) that adequate licensee funds will be-available for this purpose, and 3) recognition that risks associated with decommissioning reactor facilities are not the same as for operating i

reactor facilities.

In pursuing the[isc51EFitsdj current pace of rulemaking, the staff, as stated above, should considsF~nWand innovative regu tory a proaches. Examples of p00:ible approaches th:t =ight be censideredAgJitafish60ldJp6ijsided are 07 j

I 9704150292 970121 PDR COMMS NRCC 1

i CORRESPONDENCE PDR h#~

1. ~~

f wn w

2 4

1.

Transfer of nuclear power plants to Agreement State control after fuel stora or has been removed from the Part 50 site has been put into de ~.. _ilberstficialiby3hellj censeej andithe

~ "'

j sionidlbeiant MIS.t,_.

2. -

Placing a resident site inspector during all ph::c: cf &cc--10 ioniner o-ly iri g specific phases of decommissioning. cr et :t ell.

3.

Having NRC take an enhanced performance oriented approach by reducing oversight and performing a radiological assessment of the site when it is ready to be released.

e l

cc:

E00 g

l SECY 1

J f

W e