ML20149L488

Summary of 89th Meeting on 970128-30 in Rockville,Md Re Priorities for Respective Divisions & Highlight Issues for Commission to Consider Next Yr

ML20149L488
Person / Time
Issue date:	02/28/1997
From:	NRC ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE (ACNW)
To:	NRC ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE (ACNW)
References
NACNUCLE-0110, NACNUCLE-110, NUDOCS 9708010231
Download: ML20149L488 (35)

Text

.. - . .- -- - - _ .

~

OaAlW-o i10 '

fDA 7/sl{f'7 MINUTES OF THE 89TH ACNW MEETING g JANUARY 28-30,1997 /

- TABLE OF CONTENTS -

W

l. Chairman's Recort (Open) . . .. .. . . ............... ..... ... 2 il. Kev Technical lssues Status (Open) . ..... ... ..... ..... ... ........ 4 Ill. Discussion with the Director. Division of Waste Manaaement. NMSS (Open) . . . . . . . 15 IV. Defense-in-Depth (Open) . ...... ...... .. . ....... ..... ...... . 17 i

V. Executive Session (Open) ..... ..... ... .. ... . .. .. ......... 18

- A. Repods:

4

" Comments on Selected Direction-Setting issues identified in NRC's . .

Strategic Assessment of Regulatory Activities" . . . ... . . 18

" Time of Compliance for Low-Level Nuclear Waste Disposal Facilities" 18

" Comments on Flow and Radionuclide Transport at Yucca Mountain" 18 B. Future Meeting Agenda (Open) . .... .... .. . ... 18 C. Future Committee Activities (Open) . . . . . . . ....... 19

- APPENDICES -

1. Federal Register Notice

11. Meeting Schedule and Outline Ill. Meeting Attendees IV. Future Agenda and Working Group Activities V. List of Documents Provided to the Committee O\ RbOb cx;w J Ataa

)( 08 & G nect DE'JiC!; A !E3 CEIGI;aL I sd h

, og lill llilll llllllllllllllllllll!!lll 9708010231 970228 "

- \/(f} PDR ADVCPf NACNUCLE PDR

_ _ m_. -_ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ ._. - _ _ _ ._. _- . ._

t CERTIFIED - -

. ..._ . . .'/ Issued: 2/28/97 b'y Paul W. Pomeroy 3/21/97 PROPOSED MINUTES OF THE 89TH MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE JANUARY 28-30,1997 ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND

, The 89th meeting of the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) was held January 28-30,1997, at the Two White Flint North Building,11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The purpose of this meeting was to discuss and take appropriate actions on the items listed in the i attached agenda. The entire meeting was open to public attendance.

4 A transcript of selected portions of the meeting was kept and is available in the NRC Public

Document Room at the Gelman Building,2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC [ Copies of the j transcript are available for purchase from Neal R. Gross and Co. Inc., Court Reporters and i

Transcribers,1323 Rhode Island Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20005. Transcripts are also available on FedWorld from the "NRC MAIN MENU." The Direct Dial Access number for FedWorld is (800) 303-9672; the local Direct Dial Access number is (703) 321-3339.)

Dr. Paul W. Pomeroy, Committee Chairman, convened the meeting at 8:30 a.m. and briefly reviewed the schedule for the meeting. He stated that the meeting was being conducted in conformance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act. He also stated that the Committee had j not received any requests from persons or organizations desiring to make an oral statement i during the meeting. However, he did ask that members of the public who were present and had

something to contribute inform the ACNW staff so that time could be allocated for them to make l oral statements.

ACNW members Drs. B. John Garrick, William J. Hinze, and George M. Homberger were present. [For a list of other attendees, see Appendix 111.)

4 d

4 e

1

. _ .~._._._._.__. _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . . . _ . . . - - _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . .__ _.. _ ._._.___.

i

l 4

1 2 l 89th ACNW Meeting -

January 28-30,1997  ;

l. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT (Open) 4 1

! [ Note: Mr. Richard K. Major was the Designated Federal Official for this part of the

)

meeting.]

4 Dr. Pomeroy identified a number of iteras that he believed to be of interest to the Commit-i tee, including the following:

=

On December 3,1996, Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman, Nuclear Regulatory i

Commission (NRC), announced several significant management changes, namely:

The retirements of Mr. James Taylor, Executive Director for Operations (EDO); Mr. James Milhoan, Deputy Executive Director for Operations (DEDO) for Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Regional Operations and Re-search; and Mr. Stewart Ebneter, Regional Administrator, Region 11.

The appointments of Mr. Leonard Callan as EDO and of Mr. Samuel Collins as Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. At the same time, the following DEDO appointments were announced: Mr. Edward Jordan, DEDO for Regulatory Effectiveness, Program Oversight, Investiga-tions and Enforcement; Mr. Hugh Thompson, DEDO for Regulatory l Programs; and Ms. Patricia Norry, DEDO for Management Services.

Subsequently, Mr. Luis Reyes was announced as Regional Administrator, Region 11. Mr. William Kane was appointed as Director, Spent Fuel Project Office. These appointments were phased in, commencing in early Janu-ary.

. Dr. Daniel Dreyfus, Director, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM), Department of Energy (DOE), resigned effective January 20. There was no indication as to whom the DOE Secretary-designate, Frederico Pena, will name as acting Director.

l

.; 89th ACNW Meeting 3 January 28-30,1997 i

+ In December DOE announced a plan to transfer oversight of its nuclear facilities l to the NRC. DOE also announced that it cannot meet a court and congressionally I l imposed deadline to accept nuclear power plant spent fuel rods by January 31, 1998. In that announcement DOE sought advice on "how the delay can be best accommodated."

i

+ NRC has received DOE's application for the transfer of the Pub 3 Service Com-pany of Colorado's license for the Fort St. Vrain independent Spent Fuel Storage installation in accordance with 10 CFR 72.50. This is the third application recently received by the NRC staff from DOE. Previous applications concemed the l licensing of the Three Mile Island fuel debris interim storage system and the licensing of a spent fuel dry transfer system for use at nuclear power plants with cask handling limitations.

+ In a letter to tbs NRC dated December 20.1996, Chem-Nuclear Systems, Inc. ,

(CNSI), requested termination of its NRC-issued special nuclear material (SNM) license for the Bamwell facility. CNSI simultaneously submitted a license amend-ment request to the State of South Carolina requesting the imposition of the 10 CFR 150.11 SNM limits. CNSI stated cost-effectiveness as the motivation behind l these requests.

+ In a December 30,1996, Federal Register Notice, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a final rule rescinding 40 CFR Part 61 Subpart I as it applied to NRC or NRC-Agreement State licensed facilities other than commercial l nuclear power reactors. By this rule EPA had determined that the NRC program protects public health with an ample margin of safety, the same level of protection that would be afforded by the continued implementation of Subpart 1. The effective date was immediate.

' r

d 89th ACNW Meeting 4 i

January 28-30,1997

]

11. Kev Technical lasues Status (Open)

{ [Dr. Andrew C. Campbell was the Designated Federal Official for this part of the meeting.]

i l Ms. Margaret Federline, Deputy Director, Division of Waste Management (DWM),

discussed what the division was trying to accomplish in developing the annual progress j- report,"NRC High-Level Radioactive Waste Program Annual Report Fiscal Year 1996," j j NUREG/CR-6513 (draft completed November 1996). She noted that the ACNW letter to Chairman Jackson dated February 16,1996, " Comments on the High-Level Waste

Prelicensing Program Strategy and Key Technical issues," had urged the staff to produce I 7

an annual report and that the draft copy of this report had been made available to the

! public. The final report will be published in February 1997. Ms. Federline noted that the j- goal of the NRC program is to provide early feedback to DOE on NRC's current thinking on high-level waste (HLW) repository issues. This annual report is not a license review i

document and DOE may choose different paths to issue resolution than the DWM staff's

! approaches. The purposes of the document are to allow the NRC to come to closure at  ;

j the staff level, to address issues before licensing, to document staff progress, and to help l

f facilitate dialog between NRC and DOE. Ms. Federline summarized the NRC's Reposi-i tory Program, which has been refocused and reorganized to improve integration so that i there are no loose ends when it comes time for licensing. The NRC key technicalissues (KTis) are closely related to DOE's Waste Containment and Isolation Strategy (WCIS).

[ Part of the ef fort is to bring new information on licensing vulnerabilities to DOE's atten-q tion. The iterative aspect of the program recognizes that the DWM staff may overlook j significant issues. Subssquent iterations will allow for revisions in the KTis. The

, objective is to develop review criteria for DOE's license submittal and to establish NRC's l

acceptance criteria.

1 Dr. Hinze asked if these were generic crit 6ria and what would happen if there was disagreement with DOE. Ms. Federline stated that the staff may continue to work on a

topic or topics and that they want to get to the point where they can resolve all the KTis,

! including subissues. Dr. Pomeroy noted that defining methodologies before licensing is important and cited the expert judgment branch technical position (BTP) as an example.

He also asked whether the phrase " define acceptable methodology" indicated that the

1 89th ACNW Meeting 5 January 28-30,1997 DWM staff will define the methodology? Ms. Federline replied, "Yes," and added that the Commission will make judgments later. Ms. Federline cited volcanology and climate as examples where issue resolution is being achieved. Dr. Hinze asked if " issue resolution" was equivalent to agreement. Ms. Federline replied that the DWM staff may have i ongoing differences with DOE and there is a need to define those areas of agreement and disagreement for the DOE Viability Assessment (VA). Dr. Garrick noted that he liked l a systems approach because it focuses en results at the system level. Ms. Federline replied that that is the DWM staff's approach. Ms. Federline discussed the NRC Reposi-tory Program's future activities. She stated that the issue Resolution Status Reports (IRSRs) and the Annual Progress Reports are two key documents that will provide DOE with NRC's current thinking. The NRC Management has already met with DOE on the FY 1996 Annual Report, and it will continue these meetings in the future. In FY 1997 and FY 1998 the DWM staff will conduct sensitivity analyses to evaluate the impact of different KTl areas on pe'formance. Another important goal is translating from process level models to system models. Finally, she noted that reduced funding in FY 1997 eliminated the Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses (CNWRA) activities for three KTis.

Dr. Mike Bell, Branch Chief, Engineering and Geosciences Branch, DWM, discussed the eight KTl areas that are within his responsibility. He noted that his presentation would cover the relationships between the NRC's KTis and DOE's WCIS elements; the path to resolution for the KTls; NRC staff accomplishments in FY 1996; and integration and information flow among the KTl elements. He also noted that his presentation would concem the physical and chemical relationships in repository performance. He described the sequence of presses that would affect the release and transport of radionuclides from the repository to the critical group for an undisturbed performance scenario. He also stated he would deal with disruptive events for disturbed performance scenarios. He stated that integration in the HLW program involves interlocking teams and he described how these teams function in the KTl interactions. Dr. Garrick asked if the team leaders were designated. Dr. Bell replied that all are identified in the report.

Dr. Bell described the relationship between the DOE WCIS and the NRC KTl for Unsatu-rated and Saturated Flow Under Isothermal Conditions (natural conditions). He said that the DOE WCIS elements include the following assumptions: percolation is less than

4 i

j .- 89th ACNW Meeting 6 j January 28-30,1997 infiltration, rapid fracture flow only affects a small part of the repository, capillary effects

! strongly influence water flow, and climatic impacts can be bounded. He also described i

the NRC's KTl subissues, including climate, infiltration, deep percolation under both j current conditions and anticipated conditions for the ,erformance period, and dilution. He

discussed the path to resolution for these subissues, including the development of an IRSR, with acceptance criteria, on future climates. He noted that the U.S. Geological i l

j Survey (USGS) estimates of infiltration were now approaching the NRC estimates, so 1

'! they anticipate developing an IRSR on this topic in FY 1997. )

i 0

l Dr. Hinze asked if there is sufficient data from DOE to understand dilution in the saturated i zone. Dr. Bell said this is a shared issue between two KTl teams. Mr. Timothy McCartin, l team leader for Performance Assessment (PA) KTI, noted that there are two aspects to j the problem: (1) dilution in the saturated zone and (2) dilution from pumping water j through a well. The staff is looking at both of these. Mr. Neil Coleman, team leader for j

the Unsaturated and Saturated Flow KTl, stated that all the site data that is available will l be described and discussed in the issue resolution report. He also stated that a major factor they did not consider previously is how the well is pumped. Partial penetration of

{ the aquifer by the well and pumping of large volumes may maximize dilution factors. Dr.

! Hinze asked how far out did they place the well. Mr. Coleman responded,5 to 10 km.

] Dr. Garrick asked to what extent they were using iterative PA to determine if climate changes make a difference. Mr. McCartin stated that the staff is looking at a number of issues in its Phase 3 iterative PA activities. One issue is the sensitivity of the result to climate change. They are also looking at a well 20-30 km from the site. They are looking at all aspects of well pumping and discharge and how these affect the dilution of contami-nants. Dr. Bell described the FY 1996 accomplishments for the Unsaturated and Saturated Flow KTI, including a draft IRSR on Climate Change. They are also attempting l

to build pieces of the HLW License Application Review Plan (LARP) with these issue

resolution status reports.

Dr. Bell next discussed the Thermal Effects on Flow KTl and its relationship to ine DOE

{

WCIS elements. In the DOE scenario, the heated repository keeps water away from waste packages for a long time. The NRC is looking at gravity-driven flow and two-phase

)

i i

1

l- .

R9th ACNW Meeting 7 January 28-30,1997 flow (refluxing) and the adequacy of DOE tests and models. The staff is mainly examin-ing the DOE heater tests in Alcove 5 and the large block and other tests. They recently issued a letter to Mr. Steve Brocoum, DOE, on thermal testing. Although they have no objection to DOE's approach, they commented on three issues. One important issue was that the test may not be representative of the repository conditions because the accelerated heating procedure dries things out more than would be the case under realistic disposal conditions. They also agreed with the DOE peer review panel com-ments on the heater tests.

Dr. Bell then discussed evolution of the near-field environment. The DOE WCIS relies on low seepage into the repository, low releases from the waste packages, and slow transport of any contaminants. The NRC is evaluating chemical effects in the near-field e67! : mant, how these affect containment, and subsequent mobilization and transport to the far-field environment.

The NRC staff is examining DOE geochemical models and the interactions of natural and manmade materials in the repository. Dr. Hornberger asked how much DOE has already .

l accomplished in this area. Dr. Bell responded that DOE reduced this area when their )

budget was cut. Dr. Bret Leslie, NRC staff, stated that DOE has done some work, but has not brought it into modeling or integrated it into PA. In response to a question from Dr. Hinze, Dr. Bell noted that the NRC staff is getting the DOE Data Synthesis Reports. 1 Dr. Hinze requested that copies of these reports be given to the ACNW. The staff will l

publish an IRSR on the effects of manmade materials on repository performance and will l attempt to bound the effects and impact of microorganisms on releases. Dr. Bell also l stated that the NRC staff was concemed with the equivalent continuum model for modeling fracture flow and with the uncertainty in the estimated effects of cementitious l

materials.

In the Repository Design and Thermal Mechanical Effects KTI, Dr. Bell compared the DOE WCIS hypotheses and the NRC KTl subissues. This work is being phased out at the CNWRA. He described the loss of CNWRA support and its effect on the KTI. The CNWRA was evaluating how moisture gets to the waste packages and the effect on I release, and they are also reviewing thermal effects and impacts on repository design.

1 1

1

l

! i 1

89th ACNW Meeting 8 1-January 28-30,1997 4

l The NRC eliminated contractor work in FY 1997 and will complete the IRSR on design

control process and review design documents from DOE. Completing a future IRSR i

depends on restoration of the budget. Dr. Bell discussed the staff accomplishments in j FY 1996, including progress in meetings with DOE. He noted that in this fiscal year l Exploratory Studies Facility (ESF) discussions will be brought to closure, drift stability work will be completed and closed cut in the Total System Performance Assessment

(TSPA) KTI, and other work will be deferred until the budget changes. Dr. Hinze asked if I 1

j changes in the budget had an effect on the IRSRs. Dr. Bell stated that the TSPA IRSR will be completed in FY 1997, but that overall there have been impacts. Dr. Hinze noted j that the footprint of the repository had changed and wanted to know if this has been 1 l formally conveyed to NRC. Dr. Bell said that no new design document had yet been received by the staff. Dr. Hinze asked for a copy when official notice is received. Dr.

Hinze asked how the change in the footprint affects NRC work. Dr. Bell .eplied that no effects had been identified at the moment.

4 i

l j

Dr. Bell next addressed the KTl on Container Life and Source Term. He described the DOE WCIS elements, including container design. He also described the NRC's KTl j subissues, including corrosion mechanisms, efficiency of galvanic protection design,

! extrapolation of short term data to long-term performance, and other areas of review. He l noted that work at CNWRA has been cut. The NRC still has 2.5 FTE (full-time equiva-lent) in-house and some of the work has been transferred to other KTis, but overall, there has been a significant reduction in activities for this KTI. The NRC staff issued a NUREG and will issue an IRSR on dry oxidation in FY 1997, but future work is resource limited.

He also described partially completing the EBSPAC code in FY 1996. It doesn't have all modules originally intended and will be used either as part of total performance analyses (TPA) or as an offline code to do detailed calculations to be abstracted into the TPA code. One important area to focus on is the contribution of waste package performance to total system performance. He noted areas that will be restored if new funding is obtained.

The next KTl discussed was radionuclide transport. Dr. Bell enumerated the DOE WCIS elements and the NRC subissues. A key subissue for this KTlis the transport of contaminants through a fracture flow system rather than through a porus medium. Dr.

, 89th ACNW Meeting 9 January 28-30,1997 Bell described the key areas of concem and discussion with DOE, including scrption of key radionuclides, models to evaluate sensitivity, matrix diffusion, and the use of site data to bound mixing and dilution. Because of budget cuts, all CNWRA work has been cut.

Dr. Garrick asked if the key radionuclides had been cut to Np and a few others? Mr.

McCartin replied that Np and Tc are important, but they are looking at 20-28 radionu-clides; the importance depends on what assumptions are made for Ke values. The staff accomplishments in FY 1996 include the following: publishing an article on Np sorption, developing of a " Smart Ko" approach to sorption modeling, following the work on Cl-36 in l the ESF, which indicates fracture flow, and using hydro geochemical data for mixing l

calculations. John Bradbury is the staff lead for this KTl and is engaged in ongoing work under the TSPA KTI.

l Dr. Bell discussed the Igneous Activity KTl, including DOE actions on the issue. He said this was ripe for resolution; although there are different viewpoints, both DOE and NRC are coming up with a similar range of probabi'ity. He described CNWRA's development of modeling to assess the consequences of volcanism. These and otherissues will be l discussed in a technical exchange with DOE in February at the NRC. He noted that DOE has focussed on probability and had not done consequence modeling. He discussed the l status of NRC's review of DOE synthesis reports, which has been delayed. Dr. Pomeroy asked if DOE is working on this area. Dr. Bell stated they would probe this issue next  ;

month in the Igneous Activity technical exchange. He described staff accomplishments for FY 1996: an estimate of the probability of volcanism disrupting the repository, an assessment of the dose to the critical group, sensitivity studies of the effect on total system performance (taking particle size and particle dispersion into consideration), and an update of the NRC data base.

Dr. Bell next discussed the KTl on Structural Deformation and Seismicity, including the DOE WCIS alements, NRC subissues, the DOE seismic hazard probability model, and DOE expert elicitations. He noted that the seismic hazard methodology and design methodology are areas where agreement is achievable. The staff is also trying to j understand the geology of Yucca Mountain and to evaluate attemative conceptual models and impacts. There was an 10 CFR Appendix 7 meeting with DOE, which narrowed the range of viable altemative models. Dr. Bell described the staff IRSRs planned for FY

89th ACNW Meeting 10 January 28-30,1997 1997 and FY 1998, including an IRSR on conceptual models, an IRSR on the Probabilis-tic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA), an IRSR on fault control of magma in FY 1998, an IRSR on the fault disruption of waste packages, one on fracture models and effects on flow, and continuing GIS (geographic information system) development. He invited the ACNW to see a demonstration in the computer center. He also described FY 1996 accomplishments, including narrowing the number of viable tectonic models, identifying Type 1 faults, and studying historical seismic activity. The modeling results indicate that empirical attenuation functions underestimate possible ground motion effects. ,

, Dr. Garrick asked if the uncertainty in the thermalload is due to interactions between the repository and the natural system or to inventory. If the latter, can one then control the

" feed"? Dr. Bell said the former: the thermal load is mainly due to natural system interactions with the heat pulse. He added that DOE has selected a heat load now and NRC is looking at it. Jeff Poole, NRC staff, discussed the DOE Abstraction Workshop on Thermal Hydrology Modeling. At present DOE is looking at the lack of control on how waste is put into the repository and the effects of different scenarios on loading. He said that DOE assumes much uncertainty in the waste stream heat load. Dr. Garrick stated that there are many opportunities for fixing any problems with the way waste is loaded into the repository. Rick Weller, NRC staff, made two points: (1) since the period of operation is 150 years, it is possible to dirsipate heat for a long time with the ventilation system; and (2) because the use of backfill has an insulating effect on waste heat, DOE is trying to minimize that impact. Dr. Hinze asked if NRC staff anticipate issue resolution on all or any of the KTis in the next year. Dr. Bell noted that the matters the staff has discussed are important and are doable by the time of the VA. Allissues are back on the table in licensing. The issues have not gone away. There isn't any funding at the moment. Dr. Hinze asked if there is new information that would lead to an additional KTI.

Dr. Bell said that they followed a systematic process to identify these 10. Ms. Federline added that the staff concluded that the 10 KTis were the big-picture issues; as things develop there may be changes in vertical slices, but no major changes in the KTis are anticipated. Dr. Hinze asked about lessons teamed and other issues. Dr. Bell:: aid that John Thoma will E,nswer these in his discussion.

.. 89th ACNW Meeting 11 January 28-30,1997 j Dr. Budhi Sagar, CNWRA, presented the last two KTis. The EPA Standard KTlis not

directly related to DOE's WCIS, but requires defining a compliance period, selecting a critical group, evaluating human intrusion, and considering disruptive events. He said j that there are four main subissues. One is continuing staff interactions with the EPA on f the Yucca Mountain Standard. Dr. Sagar said that the NRC staff will provide formal comments on the draft standard. A second issue to be resolved is the time period of compliance. A third issue is developing guidance on reference biosphere and critical i

groups. And a fourth issue is taking a position on human intrusion. Mr. McCartin, NRC l l

staff, said that the standard has not gone to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) yet and is still being discussed at EPA. There is no date on when it might go to OMB.

Dr. Sagar noted there are four factors that may affect the choice of a time frame

the

! relative hazard compared to a "U" ore body, the time of peak dose as a function of I location of the critical group, the influence of disruptive events over long time periods, I j and policy issues. He said that the accomplishments in FY 1996 include evaluating the j repository waste hazard relative to c.) ore body. He noted that the relative hazard is j about a factor of 10 higher at 10,000 years. He said the staff also looked at the effect of j moving the critical group. Peak dose may occur from 100,000 to 1,000,000 years, j depending on location. The NRC staff, which favors a fixed compliance period, will support the 10,000 years specified in the current regulations and standard. The si:ff

]

4 conducted a stylized human intrusion analysis and concluded that it doesn't need to be j

included as part of overall system performance. They also analyzed the magnitude and l

! relative importance of disruptive events. The choice of time frame influences which i disruptive events to consider and the likelihood of occurrence during the performance j period.

. Dr. Sagar next discussed the TSPA and Integration KTI. He stated that TSPA would j examine the big picture and determine which aspects of the system are most important to j performance. He noted that all DOE WCIS elements and hypotheses apply to the integration issues KTI He stated that DOE must show that these hypotheses hold. Dr.

( Sagar noted that the assumed containment of radionuclides for thousands of years depends on a specific heat load and low water flux. He added that there is also an l optimum heat load for container life. The NRC staff will also examine the abstraction j process to determine if it is acceptable. The NRC staff will determine if 15 hypotheses i

i 4

7 - - - - - - .-

-<e., -. - - , n

i 89th ACNW Meeting 12 l

January 28-30,1997 have been adequately examined and confirmed in the DOE TSPA methodology and  !

testing activities. NRC will also evaluate the importance to performance among and within the KTis in order to better allocate resources. The NRC staff will develop an IRSR on model abstraction in DOE's TSPA; the IRSR will include acceptance criteria and means of resolving issues. One area in particular that is a major issue is the model  !

abstraction process. Here the concem is to determine how simplification has an impact on the model and whether the simplification is a reasonable and conservative representa-l tion of overall performance. Dr. Sagar also stated that an audit review approach, which l- was done for TSPA '95, will be followed by NRC staff in reviewing TSPA VA. The NRC l staff will use the DOE sensitivity analyses to check a few critical areas independently.

~

NRC will also maintain PA capability to conduct separate analyses. The NRC staff will develop IRSRs on the relative importance of KTl and WCIS elements and an IRSR on the l documentation of TSPA. Dr. Sagar discussed staff accomplishments in FY 1996, including a technical exchange on TSPA '95 with DOE, which focussed on areas of concem to NRC staff. Some of the staff conclusions were as follows: low percolation rates used in TSPA '95 are nonconservative, the dilution approach used by DOE is optimistic, the temperature and humidity information are not documented but appear

]

conservative, the waste package failure model is limited to corrosion and may not be conservative due to lack of consideration of disruptive events, and the subsystem abstraction for transport results in lower cumulative releases.

Dr. Homberger asked why being " conservative" is a concem if they are attempting to do a probabilistic analysis. Dr. Sagar noted that DOE used a distribution that does not cover all the data and this causes the mean to be skewed to a nonconservative value. Dr.

Homberger responded that the issue is really that they used a wrong distribution that does not cover the range of data. Dr..Sagar said he hesitated to say it was wrong, only that it is nonconservative.

Dr. Sagar also talked about the FY 1996 accomplishments in the TSPA KTI. These included improving the total performance analysis (TPA) code; developing the BTP on Expert Elicitation; and setting up a " test bed" for the Licensing Support System (LSS) at the CNWRA, which is accessible on the Intemet. Dr. Pomeroy asked if the Committee

l

, 89th ACNW Meeting 13 January 28-30,1997 could have instructions on gaining access to the system. Dr. Sagar responded affirmatively.

In summary, Dr. Sagar noted the NRC had refocused and reorganized the HLW program in FY 1996 and will further refocus the program in FY 1997 by not working on three of the

, KTis. The NRC staff has correlated the KTis to the DOE WCIS hypotheses and identified ,

l the path to resolution for each KTI. He continued that the NRC staff willlet DOE know what its thinking is in IRSRs. He added that these will be short reports of 5 to10 pages.

t Dr. Pomeroy asked for questions from the Committee. Dr. Hinze asked if the issuance of -

an IRSR means the issue is closed at the staff level. Dr. Sagar said that if they can come to resolution at the staff level, then they could dedicate resources to other activities. Ms.

Federline added that the definition of issue resolution is that the staff has no further

! questions at this time. The staff is trying to analyze the importance of each issue in PA, and if the analysis changes the staff's understanding of an issue, then the staff would go back and deal with it because the Memorandum of Understanding with DOE allows the l staff to do so if new information comes to light. Dr. Sagar added that DOE may choose i

another method for resolution than NRC, but the NRC staff would determine if the method is acceptable.

Ms. Federline stated that because of shrinking budgets, the multi disciplinary nature of the HLW program, and the long time periods being discussed, the HLW Management Board wanted to be more introspective and questioning so they set up a small group to talk to staff in the HLW program and see if things could be improved. Mr. John Thoma, chairman of the HLW Integration Task Group, stated that in late July the HLW Manage-l ment Board raised questions about the effectiveness of integration among the KTis. The task group set up to investigate included Budhi Sagar of CNWRA and Norm Eisenberg, Keith McConnell, Robert Johnson, Sandy Wastler, and himself from NRC. Mr. Thoma noted that they conducted a series of interviews with team leads and the CNWRA counterparts to gather information and he described the information-gathering process.

l The task group made a number of observations. The positive observations were that the program was focusing more on significant issues and that the KTl teams were aware of the need for focusing or the important issues. The task group noted that TSPA '95

, review was a well-integrated effort and the KTl team's effort for the EPA standard also l . - . - . .. -

- ~ . - . . . - - - - _ . . . .

1 .

1 j .. 89th ACNW Meeting 14 j January 28-30,1997 1

i - was well integrated across all KTis. The KTl operation plans showed good integration in j the input / output tables, which provide links between the KTis. The task group thought l that the linking of the KTis to the DOE WCIS elements was beneficial. Mr. Thoma stated l that the task group identified areas that need improvements. One area needing improve-l ment was followthrough on the input / output tables. He provided two specific examples of i

where this was a problem. He also cited a need for improved coordination and integra-a tion between the different KTls and the PA KTI. Mr. Thoma noted that the individual KTl f teams need to understand (1) why PA was telling them that a certain result was impor-l tant, and (2) if they agreed or disagreed and why. Mr. Thoma said that the HLW program j undertook a number of short-term actions to help remedy problems. These included the

! following: updating the KTl activity tables by providing better integration of dates products

! are needed, specifying the format for the output to other KTls, and tying the KTl a

j implementation plans to the HLW operating plan. In addition, he noted that the Yucca l Mountain Team meetings are now focusing on improving dialogue among the KTl teams j and that members of the management board are attending the team meetings. The KTl

} teams also brought in an outside consultant to evaluate team building. The consultant's i

l report identified a number of areas needing improvement, but it also noted that compared l to other Federal agencies and outside entities, the NRC team-building effort is doing well.

l Mr. Thoma added that 16-18 recommendations were made by the HLW Management i

Board. He discussed three major long-term recommendations: an evaluation of how the f HLW program can better integrate itself in future, a need for management to support a  ;

team approach, and improved staff participation and communication.

4 Dr. Hinze asked if there were any lessons leamed from interactions with DOE. Mr.

Thoma replied that both NRC and DOE now have specific objectives for each meeting and what each side wishes to accomplish. The purpose of these meetings is no longer j just to provide status reports. Ms. Federline added that they now will not let an issue l

" languish." There is a specific hierarchy of interactions with DOE for dealing with and resolving issues.

J G

i i

J l

l

}

89th ACNW Meeting 15 l- January 28-30,1997 lll. Discussion with the Director. Division of Waste Manaaement. NMSC (Open) l (Mr. Richard K. Major was the Designated Federal Off cial for this part of the meeting.]

Mr. John T. Greeves, Director, Division of Waste Management, Office Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS), held one of his periodic, current events sessions with the l Committee. During these sessions, Mr. Greeves discusses current issues that are of interest to the Committee.

l l Mr. Greeves discussed the budget cutbacks that are affecting the NRC HLW program.

Work on 3 of the 10 KTis has been reduced or stopped. There is some chance that work on the three curtailed KTis_ may be renewed in upcoming fiscal years.

l When asked about NRC's role in responding to the DOE Yucca Mountain Viability j Assessment (VA), he responded by saying the NRC has no formal role nor is the NRC required to offer comments. He did say that if NRC perceives a problem, the staff will l

comment on the issues regardless of DOE's place in the prelicensing or licensing process. In all likelihood the staff will comment on the VA, although currently there is no formal outline or structure for how these comments will be made. It is likely the vertical-slice approach will be used in structuring a response to the VA.

Mr. Greeves mentioned pending legislation. Senate Bill 104 has just been put forward.

This bill, entitled " Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1997," reintroduces the text of S1936 from the 104th Congress. This bill was passed by the Senate last summer. The bill provides for the construction and operation of a temporary storage center for spent commercial fuel and HLW from DOE's nuclear weapons facilities.

The development of the staff's revised HLW regulations,10 CFR Part 60, was discussed.

The EPA HLW standards have not yet been drafted in final form, although the NRC staff has been interacting with the EPA staff as the draft standard has evolved. Currently the staff is developing a strategy for compiling a new Part 60 HLW regulation. The new standard will likely be Yucca Mountain specific. It is also likely that the new regulation would be a dose standard, rather than a radionuclide release type approach. The new i

l l

- - - - - . - - - . _ . - . - . _ . . - - . - - =

89th ACNW Meeting 16 ,

January 28-30,1997 regulation would account for a stylized human intrusion scenario. The staff expects to draft an options paper for the Commission on a new Part 60 by this spring.

Mr. Greeves discussed tae status of DOE's revised HLW Repository Siting Guidelines,10 CFR Part 960. A draft of Part 960 was issued on December 16,1996, for public com-ment. NRC believes DOE will ask the NRC staff for reconcurrence on these guidelines.

The principal change to the guidelines is a new subpart which is Yucca Mountain specific.

A TSPA would be performed and the results compared to the applicable EPA and NRC standards. The staff will be preparing an options paper for the Commission providing the staff's insights on the guidelines. The paper will be ready in the spring.

Mr. Greeves turned to progress in characterizing the Yucca Mountain site. The tunnel boring machine (TBM) has cut 4.4 out of 5 miles for the ESF. It is currently in poor rock, so progress is slow. The TBM is expected to bore out of the mountain in April. Heater tests are underway in Alcove 5. Bore holes from Alcove 6 have reached the Ghost Dance Fault and investigations are underway. A pad is under construction at the south portal of the ESF where the TBM will daylight.

The current situation at Envirocare of Utah was briefly discussed. It is troubling anytime there are allegativ..s of extortion and of regulators' taking money for decisions. News accounts of the controversies were offered to the Committee. NRC has notified the appropriate Federal officials of the situation and is in contact with officials from the state of Utah. The state of Utah regulates five separate types of licenses, including mixed waste, mixed waste processing, and naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM).

NRC continues to regulate mill tailings in Utah. The NRC staff has conducted inspections at the facility and made a recent, November 1996 inspection report available to the Committee. To date there have been no safety-significant problems found at the site.

The possible regulation of DOE nuclear facilities by the NRC was discussed. A current plan proposed by DOE will transfer oversight of DOE nuclear safety to the NRC over 10 years. Before NRC's regulation of DOE can take place, legislation must be passed which could take several years.

l

, .l, 89th ACNW Meeting 17 January 28-30,1997 Mr. Greeves will discuss DWM priorities during the Committee's next meeting in March 1997.

IV. Defense-in-Depth (Open)

! (Ms. Lynn G. Deering was the Designated Federal Official for this part of the meeting.)

I Dr. Hinze introduced the topic of defense-in-depth for intemal discussion by the Commit- l I tee. Ms. Lynn Deering, ACNW staff, provided a summary of her understanding of the

! issue, and Janet Kotra and Tim McCartin, NRC staff, provided input on the staffs plan and schedule for developing an options paper on subsystem requirements and modifica- l tion of 10 CFR Part 60. The Committee members noted that they agree with the concept of defense-in-depth, but question how to interpret the subsystem requirements.

I Members telso discussed the need to distinguish between the concepts of the multiple l barrier approach and defense-in-depth and stated that their focus should be both generic l as well as site specific.

Ms. Deering noted that the subsystem criteria have been criticized for not being risk based and for being overly prescriptive and uncertain in their implementation. She noted j critics of the subsystem requirements include Commissioner Curtiss. In his 1990 speech to the National Academy of Sciences, he pointed out that a nexus is lacking between the i requirements and the EPA standard, and argued that tradeoffs between the subsystem requirements should be allowed. She also noted that the NRC staffs position has been that the subsystem criteria are sufficiently flexible to allow the Commission to select some other criteria based on site-specific conditions, and that the subsystem criteria act independently of the overall repository performance to provide confidence that the waste will be isolated.

The NRC staff agreed to brief the Committee on the history of the basis for the subsys-tem requirements at the March meeting. Ms. Kotra noted that the staffs presentation would focus more on the history of the subsystem requirements rather than on where the staff is going in the future with this issue, because the staff is not very far along yet in its thinking.

I

l 89th ACNW Meeting 18 l January 28-30,1997 l

In addition to a planned briefing from the NRC/NMSS staff, the Committee discussed inviting in the CNWRA (to discuss its work on groundwater travel time and substantially complete containment), representatives from the nuclear weapons industries, DOE (to l discuss how the multiple barrier concept fits into the Waste Isolation Strategy and how defense-in-depth is addressed in its proposed 10 CFR Part 960), and EPA (to discuss how the subsystem requirements may interfere with the new high-level waste standard, l 40 CFR Part 197).

i i

V. Executive Session (Open) l A. Reports Comments on Selected Direction-Settina Issues identified in NRC's Strateoic Assessment of Reau!atory Activities (Report to Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman, NRC, from Paul W. Pomeroy, Chairman, ACNW, dated January 30,1997) i I

. Time of Compliance for Low-Level Nuclear Waste Disposal Facilities (Report to Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman, NRC, from Paul W. Pomeroy, Chairman, ACNW, dated February 11,1997)

Comments on Flow and Radionuclide Transoort at Yucca Mountain 1 (Report to Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman, NRC, from Paul W. Pomeroy,  ;

Chairman, ACNW, dated February 13,1997) l B. Future Meetina Amenda Appendix IV summarizes the proposed items endorsed by the Committee for the 90th ACNW Meeting, Rockville, Maryland, March 20-21,1997.

I l

89th ACNW Meeting 19 I

January 28-30,1997 1

C. Future Committee Activities (Open)

)

The Committee agreed to cancel the ACNW meeting scheduled for February 25-27,1997.

The Committee changed the dates for the 90th ACNW meeting to March 20-21,1997.

4 f

J

}

l l l I

6

~

' ^

APPENDIXI ,

69118 Fed rd Regist:r / Vcl. 61, No. 252 / Tu:sday, December 31, 1996 / Notices License No. NPF-57, issued to the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste additional travel is required to other .

licensee for operatfortof the Hope Cree Seeking Ouallfled Candidates .' sites. .

5 g Generating Station located in Lower - * .

^ - AcaNCY: Nuclear Regulatory " NRC regulations and pouclegrestrict Alloways Creek Township, Salem - ' the participation of men)bers in areas County, New Jersey. Notice of ' .

,, Commission.

• where these members have conflicts of Consideration ofIssuance of this ,\ ACDON: Request for resum.4s. Interest. The degree to which an amendment was not published in the individual's participation in ACNW :'

Federal Register . 88 mm RY:The Nuclear Regulatory The purpose of the licensee's " activities will be restricted is considered

, ' Commission (NRC)is seeking qualified in the selection prqpess. Each qualified amendment request was to revise the candidates for possible appointment to Hope Cmek Generating Station (HCGS)

• its Advisory Committee on Nuclear candidate's financialinterests must be .

reconciled with applicable Federal and Updated Final Safet Analysis Report. Weste (ACNW).One opening is

' NRC rules and regulations prior to final .

Section 9.2.5,'regar ng the Station - 8xPected on the cernmittee in mid!!99/. appointment.This might require -

Servir, Water System and Ultimate Heat' AponEssss: Submit rdsum6s to: Ms. n divestiture of securities issued by . 4 Sink. .

Jude Himmel berg, Office of Personnel, ' nuclear industry entitles, or -

I The NRC staff has concluded that the . U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, discontinuance ofindustry-funded licensee's request cannot be granted. Washington, DC 20555-0001, , research contracts or grants.

1 The licensee was notified of the .

Pon FuRYHEn INFonh4ADON, CAL.t.: 1-8002 A r6 sum 6 describing the educational '

Commission's denial of the proposed . 952-9678. Please refer to ,

and professional background of the change by a letter dated Decemtaer 24, Announcement Number 97-1002, candidate, including special 1996.

. SMARY NFons4ADON* The accomplishments, professional -

references, and current address and demand a hearing with respect to theBy January in 1988 to 30,1997, thenumber Hcensee may . ACNW is a $ art established y the NRC telephone should be provided.

.' denialdescribed above. Any penon All

' provide independent technical review lified condidates will receive whose interest may be affected by this care [c nsideradon. Appointment will

} proceeding may file a written petition and advim on the disposal of nuclear 4

all aspects of nuclear - * * * * " "E*# " ""

!* waste, includinfaculdes, as dimcmd religion, by national origin, sex,"ag'e, or '

? for' leave to intervene $ r etidori for A uest for hearir W88t* dl8Posal disabilities. Candidates must be citizens.

' leave o intervene mus be filed with the the Comm'asion. This advice cows of the United States. Applications will Secretary of the Commission, U.S. 8 Nuclear Regulatory Commission- d os of le el il fe be accepted until February 20,1997.

Deted: Decernber 24,1996.

, ', Washington, DC 20555, Attentavu. radioactive waste disposal facilities and 6

associated rulemakings, regulatory Andrew 1. Bates, Docketing and Services Branch, or may

[ be delivered to the Commission's Public guides and NRC staff technical positions. ~fte ACNW also reviews Advisory comm!rsee Management ofpcer.

IFR Doc. W33246 Filed 12-30-96; 8.45 aml

EE20T's"tM*ndvMo"n$"Iy Perfwm .,

nm ' * ' " ' " '

pu ct d e the above date. .

A copy of any petitions should also be. The committee interacts with representatives of the NEC,the - -

, sent to the Office of the General . Proposed Generic Communication; Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Advisory Committee on Reactor Degradation of Steam Generator Safeguards,6e Depanmutif Engy, Internels ,

! .. t ! , $ squire, other Federal, State, and local agencies, gagney. Nudear Regulatory -

Winston & Strewn,1400 L Street, NW., s Indian Nations,and private . Commission.

s Washington, DC 20005-3502, attomey ACD N:N N PPonunhy fa puk

.f r 6e Hanses, $ y,"'g*g*y o7e n ring and

, For further details with respect to this scientific skills are needed to conduct the broad-based reviews required in the submAARY:The Nuclear Regulatory -

amendm n a u8" t 30, I 96, and c mmittee's work. Engineers and Commission (NRC) is proposing to issue (2) the Commission,a letter to the ' scientiste are needed with work a generic letter conceming the Uc m

• experience in the high level and low. d dation of steam generator internals

. seeja 2*'labl a1 f'w level radioactive weste disposal - at reign pmssurized water reactor public inspection at the Cornmission's - Programs coupled with broad facilities. The purpose of the pro sed -

Public Document Roo'm, the Celman 8xPerfence in a pertinent technical field, generic letter is to (1) re-alert ad sees Building 2120 L Street NW to the previously communicated Washington, DC, and at the IIcal public mdmdogy, such as nuclear nudearengineering fuel leana and . is, findings of damage to steam generator '

5 document room located at the ge science, chemistry, an matori - internals, namely, tube support plates-P 11 bl science. - .

... and tube bundle wrappers, at foreign Broe way, n ville e'w r y A PPl icar PWR facilities:(2) emphasize to 08070* of 20 years}ts should have work experience in related a minimumaddressees the importance of fields, or fields that can be applied performing comprehensive l

of Dated December at Rockville, 1996, Of and, thtm 24th day directly to the work of thecommittee, examinations of steam generator including graduate level education. In ' internals to ensure steam generator tube For the Nuclear Regulatory Commissioni leba F,sesta, addition to the length of the work structural integrity is maintained in arperience, applicants should haire accordance with the requirements of Director. PmJect Dinctomte h2, Division of achieved a level of distinction in their ReMor Pmjects-M.O/pce o(Nuclear Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50; and (3) discipline and must be able to devote request all addressees to submit RwtarRegulation. , 4 , .

approximately 50100 days per year td information that will enable the NRC (FR Doc. W33253 Filed 12-30-96; a:45 aml committee business. Most meetings are staff to verify whether or not tLe .

satssa coes nese-a -

bold in Rockville, Maryland. Some . cmdition cf addressees' steam generator -

6 4

me wu6 w;. wvT w CW71Cntr EE.lM3 8 Motices

' . y

=

Pai . - ' Reduction Act of1995 (44 - hbo are located outside cf M U.$.C Qimpter 35). Advloory Committee Cn Nuclear -

Washington, DC, ama can dial Jafamanon pertaining u the FedWorld,1-800-303-9672, or une the Wac; Notfoe of Meeting.

, seguirement to be submitted:

PodWorld Internet address 'fbe Advisory Committee on Nuclear 1.W title of b information ledworld. gov (Telnet). The document

, collection: 10 CFR Part 62 " Criteria . Waste (ACNW) wiu hold its 89th .

i and Promdums for will be avallable ao b buDetin board amoeting on January 28,29 and 30.1997, Non-lederal and Regi cy Acosas to for 30 days ahar b signature date of . Room T-2B3, at 11545 Rockville Pike, Iow-level Rockville, Maryland.

Weste Disposal Facilities." this nodes. U ===i=#=n= is needed in

2. Curmat OMB approval number:- annaaming b document, plem contact entire meeting will be open to -,

3150-0143' the FedWorld ha!Pdesk at 703-487- Public attendance, with the exception of a portion that may be closed to discuss

3. How oAen the collection is 4608. Additional assistance in locating required: Requests are made on) when e document is avaDable from the NRC inimmation the release of which would '

access to a non. federal low-levefwaste Public Document Room, nationally at 1- constitute a clearl unwarranted

~ disposal facility is riantari, which neults 800-397-4209, or within the invasion of privacy pu suant to in a threat to public health and safety Washington, DC, ams at 202-434-3273, & U.S.C. 55 (c)(6). '

and/or common defense and security. h schedule for this meeting is as Comments and questions about the follows:

• 4. Who is required or asked to report: Information collection requirements Tussday, January 28,1997--4:30 AR y Generators oflow-level waste who am may be directed to the NRC Clearance

. until 6:00 PX denied waste facility.access to a non-joderal low. level OfBeer, Brenda Jo. Shelton, U.S. Nuclear Wednesday,fonuary29,1997--a Regulatory r==taaion.T-4 F33, AR until6:00PR

~ 5.b number of annualree pondents: Washington.DC,20555-0001, No requests for emergency Thursday, January 30,2997-6:30 AM have telephone at (301) 415-7233, or been received to date. It is estimated until4:00PX  ;

that up to one request would be made intemet electronic mail at During this meWng, the r-mittee

• , ev BJSteNRC.COV. .

Pl ans to consider h following: i 8 three years'ofhours e number needed Dwed at M. Maryland, tMs 3rd day A. Key Techtdcolissue Status-The .

annually to complete b req.droment or 'I *1 " remittee willreview the status of I,l request:It is estimated that 680 hours0.00787 days <br />0.189 hours <br />0.00112 weeks <br />2.5874e-4 months <br /> For the Nuclear Regulatory r==ta=len. NRC staff key technicallasue efforts would be aquired to review the request, Gerald F.Deadurd. relating to high-level waste and the staf integration task force work. '

l or approximately 227 hours0.00263 days <br />0.0631 hours <br />3.753307e-4 weeks <br />8.63735e-5 months <br /> per year, Designosed SenAar oficialfar Jnfareistion

7. Abstract: 10 CFR Pan 62 swts out B. Meeting with the Director, Division assources Management, the information which will have to be of Waste Management--The Committee ,

provided to the NRC by any low level yR Doc. es-as uo Fund 12-to-es; s.45 am) wiD meet with the Din.ctor of NRC's saussa ones - Division of Weste Management.OfEco -y

' waste generator seeking emergency acx)ess to an operating low-level waste of Nuclear Meterials Safety and disposal facility. The information is Safeguards to discuss items of current required to allow NRC to determine if ID'*h*N 78-ME' AE8M*JT- intemst, such as progress at the Yucca denial of disposal constitutes a askious IIE"O1"38F80 Mountain project.

. and immediate threat to public health C. DefenseIn-Depth-The remittee and safety or common delsnee and -# will discuss with an NMSS I ' security. . . Nor m Power Compen. MPresentadvs the history d the defense Submit, by February 10,1997 (Independent Spent FuelStorage . in depth philosophy and subsystem comments tnat addreas the following notamnh Cene W monts in to CFR 60.

. Planningfor Comadssion questions: Prohearing Conference -

1. ls the pmposed collection of. Meeting--The Committee will prepare

,.=

information necessary for the NRC to n==m u s,a m lor their February 1997 meeting with the properly perform its functions? Does b Notice is hereby given that, as a neult Commission. Sessetion of topics and the Information have practical utility? - preparation of background material will of the suspension of the proceeding be Awa -A

2. Is the burden estimate accurate? Eranted by the Atomic Safety and j

3. la there a way to =4an= the .. Licensing Board's Memorandum and E. Preparation of 4CNWJiepode 3 quality, utility, and clarity of the Order (Motion to Suspend Proceeding), b Committee wiu discuss prcNW information to be collected? LBP-96-26, December 3,1996 the reports, including: (1) radionuchde~

i{' . 4. How can the burden of the transport at Yucca Mountain,(2)

Prehearing conference announc,ed by speciBcation of a critical group and infonnation collection be minimi. A, . our Notice of Prohoaring Conference, including the use of automated afennce biosphere to be used in the  !

dated November 1,1996,61 FK 0,7721 performance assessment for a nuclear coDection techniques u other fanns of .

' information technology? (Novembet 1.1996), has been cancelled. waste disposal facility,(3) time of  !

l A copy of the draft sup b conference wiD be roscheduled at a ' compliance in low level waste disposal, statement may be viewed free o char later date following resumption of the pra-aA7 and (4) comments on selected NRC ]

9 at the NRC Pub!!c h=-at Room ge Strategic Assessment and Rebaselining =

! 2120 L Street NW,(lower level),

Deted: n.=mw s, sees Rockville, ers.

Washington, DC. Members of the public Maryland.

Decision F. Committee Setting lesue Activities pap / Future ! i t

who are in the Washington, DC, area can 3,,,g For the Atomic SalWy and Uconsing Agenda /Appointthenf ofNew i access this document via modem on the Members-ne Committee will consider 1 i

' Public Document Room Bulletin Board ggu%* topics propsed for future consideration  ;

(NRC's Advance Copy Document Oofrman, AdmirdstatheJudge. by the fu14mmittee and Working ,

Library), NRC subsystem at FedWorld, Groups. T..e Committee will discus: 1 PR Doc. e6-31441 Filed 12-10-ee; a;45 aml ACNW-nlated activities of fadividual *

, 703-321-3339. Members of the public suaso coos esse +w .

members.b cmmtetse will also o f . '

s -

• - - gggy gg gg,go, OMTWednesday, December 11, 1996_/ Noticis

- - - - 45247 - U consider the qualiScations ef potential AONW mee.

new ACNWmembers. A portion Cf this hg No. 1W7 ACM meseng hu The NRC Commission Meeting

• • sessi n may be closed to pubuc Schedule can be found on thilnt:rnit

, attendance to discuss information the goth - at:

February 25-27.1997 e release of which would constitute a Stat Apf 22-24,1997 hup 1/www.mgov/SECY/sm)/

lently unwarranted invasion of .

Personal rivacypursuant to 5 U.S.C.

p _

g y ,3,%, schedule.htm

,nis notice is distributed by mail to 552b(cM6 . M- p 2F25.1997 98th October 21-23,1997 mvnalhundred subcdhm if you no G. Miscellaneous-b rammitte . tem - Noenter 1b20,1997 longer wislh to receive it, or would like wiH discuss miscellanmus matters s7th - Deconeer wis,1997 to be added to it, please contact the plated to the conduct of Committee OfEce of the Secretary, Attn: Operati ns

. activities and organizational activities Deted; rw h.is, seos.

and comple's discussion of matters and , fg ,'6 And,ew g. 3.em, '

c issues that were not completed , .

In addition, distribution of this

• " W comminee 7-- - t @ce.

. gy%g ,g"g,gorr on pe c. W31H2 FDed 12-to ee*H am1 is available. If meeting notice over the intemet system auan ones now , are interested in a m eidag&ls Procedures for the unduct of and - .

asion madng particiublishtion in ACNW sneetings were schedululoctronicaDy, please send an in the Federal Register on ..

electronic message to wmhenrc. gov or ober 8,1996 (61 FR 52J14). In " ,ct Meeting dkwGntc. gov.

accordance with these procedums, oral SATE: Weeks of Der =mbe 9,16,23, and Dened; December 8,1996. '

. or written statements may be presented 30,1966. -

, ' by members of the pubbe, electronic Wallem M. Hill. )r.,

mondings wiH be permined only pt.Act:Mmtmioners' Confwenm SECY 7r' ocking Officer, office of the during those portions of the meeting Room 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, secmeary

- c Maryland. , IFR Doc. W31535 Filed 12-be6; 10:20 aml 1

• "",, , Pen to oaly STATUS:Public and Closed. euse caos mom members o t e Committee,its asATTans To at 00eselDEFIED: .

. consultants, and staff. Persons desirfag Week ofDscomber 9 -

is make oral statements should notify . Thunday, December 22 Draft NUMEG/CR Report; Availability the Chief. Nuclear Waste Branch, Mr. 3:30 p.m., AfErmation Session (Puhuc .b Nuclear Regulatt.ry Commission Richard K. Major, as far in advance as .

Meeting)(if needed) has made available, a draA NUREG/CR-practicable so that appropdate '

Week ofDecember 26--Tentative 6412. " Aging and Imso-of. Coolant arrangements can be made to schedule Monday, December 26 Accident (LOCA) Testing of Electrical the necessary time during the meeting 2:00 p.m., Briefing on hispection Connections." About 12 different typw for such statements. Use of still, motion Criteria, Evolution of Assessment, of connecti na commnly und in victure, and television amoras during and SALP System (Public Meeting) nuclear power plants were tested by the his muting will be limited to selected Tuesday, December 27 ons of the meeting as detamined Sandia Nationallaboratorin and the 2:00 p.m., Meeting with Chairman of test asults am mporud in &e drah of the ACNWChairman.Information .

Nuclear Safety Research Review NUREG/CR-4412.b connecdons

• regarding the time to be set aside for this were aged for 6 months under purpose may be obtained by contacting Committee (NSRRC)(Public- .

Meedng)(Contact: Jose Cortez,301- simultaneous thermal (99 dogma C) the Chief Nuclear Waste Branch, prior 415-6596) and radiation (45 GY/hr) conditions to to the meetin6. In view of the possibility 3:00 p.m., AfErmation Session (Public simulaw 60 yesm in a nuclear power ,

. that the schedule for ACNW meetings Mating) Pl ant environment. b objective of this may be adjusted by the Chairman as necessary to facilitate the conduct of the Week ofDecember23--Tentative was toinvestigate the meeting, persons There are no meetings scheduledfor Pgormance Pe of connections aged to a -

ahov.ld notify Mr. planning as to theirto attend the Week ofDecember23. 60 Major Week ofDecember 30-Tentative for epar life to determine extension beyond thetheir suitability current

- Particular nwds. . - . .

There are no meetings scheduledfor a minal 4& year quaBBed We.N Further information regarding topics to be discussed, whether the mating the Week ofDecember30. nsults show that 50% of the connection ,

has been canceDed or rucheduled, the

, , , types were unabb to successfuDy pass Chairmas's ruling on requwts for the By a vote of 5-0 on Decembw B,the the submerged dislictric test following a simulated life of 60 year and LOCA opbrtunity to t l Commluton determined pursuant to

'an the timea lfresen ora statements otted therefor can be U.S.C. 552b(e) and to CFR Soc. 9.107(a) exposure. The problems were not limited to any one family of electrical otf .ined by contacting Mr. Richard K. of the Commission's rula &at Major. Chief. Nuclear Weste Branch connections.

"AfBrmation of Cleveland Electric b pmliminuy review of this drah (telephone 301/415-7366), between 6:00 IUuminaung Co.--Commi= ton Review . NUREC/CR by the NRC staffindicates A.M. and 5:00 P.M. EST, . of1.BP-95-17 be held os December 6 ACNW meeting notices, mee+ing that the test asults are inconclusive and and on less than one week's notice to. . that the additionalinvestigation is

, ' transcripts, and letter reports are now

.th e ubhc. warmnted. Howevn, the NRC staff cvailable on FedWorld from the "NRC

• Sch'd"I' IO' r==61on -

believw that this drah sport will be of MAIN MENL ' Direct Dial Access . Meetings Is Sub to Change on Short interest to the nuclear industry, number to FedWorld is (600) 303-9672: Notice. To Ve the Status of Meetings Comments, if submitted by February 28, the local direct dial number is 703-321- Call (Reco, ding)-(301) 415-1292.

3339 1997, would be considered by the NRC Conta:t Person For More Information: staff. Written comments may be TN ACNW meeting dates for Bill Hill (301) 415-1661..

'alendar Year 1997 are provided below: * * * *

• submitted to the Rules Review and Directivn Branch, Division of Freedom S

9

. ., . i .'

e 8

. - Y .. b .

• ,;, s r^

py j " e ,-* _

=,*

,jo

+

noogo APPENDIX II g UNITED STATES

[

g g

.r NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ADVISO".Y COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE

- e WASHINGTON, D.C. 20565

. . *s***

Revised January 23, 1997 SCHEDULE AND OUTLINE FOR DISCUSSION 89TH ACNW MEETING JANUARY 28-30, 1997 Tuesday, January 28, 1997. Two White Flint North, Room T-2B1 (Subcommittee Room) 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland

1) 8:30 -

8:40 A.M. Openino Remarks by the ACNW Chairman (Open) 1.1) Opening Statement 'PWP/RKM) 1.2) Items of Current Intere:t (PWP/HKM)

, 2) 8:40 - 12:00 NOON Precaration of ACNW Reoorts (Oper.)

Discuss possible reports on the I following topics:

2.1) Radionuclide Transport at Yucca

. 9;6"O-'8:05 Mountain (GMH/ACC)

BREAK iSTOO A.M. 2.2) Critical Group and Reference Biosphere (BJG/HJL) 2.3) Time of Compliance in Low-Level Waste Disposal (WJH/ACC) 2.4) Comments on select Direction Setting Issue Papers as a part of the Commission's Strategic Assessment and Rebaselining process (WJH, et.al/LGD, et.al) ll' 05 - /#'##

km.m 12:00 - 1:00 P.M. * *

• LUNCH * * *

3) h40 - 1.00'P.M. Prepare for the next Meetino with the Commission (Open) (PWP/RKM) f h4d 4O Discuss possible topics and prepare background material, including Il3D slides for the next meeting with the Commission. Reports completed since the last meeting with the Commissioners include:

}l50 - 3lH BREAK 344G==P-rM. a) Elements of an adequate URC Low-Level Radioactive Waste Program, Jely 24, 1996 b) Comments on Coupled Processes in the NRC High-Level Waste i

Prelicensing Program, November 1996

\

1 ACNW 89TH MEETING 2 c) 1997 Priority Issues for the Advisory Committee on Nuclear I Waste, November 20, 1997 d) Works in progress:

- Radionuclide Transport at  ;

Yucca Mountain  !

- Critical Group and Reference  ;

Biosphere for a Waste Disposal Facility Performance Assessment

- Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Regulations

- Time of Compliance for a LLW l disposal facility

{ 4) +r&& - frdhi P . M . Committee Activities / Future Acenda 4 4

(Open) (PWP/RKM)

M 30 ' 5'/? 4.1) Set Agenda for 90th ACNW Meeting February 25-2'/, 1997 4

i 4.2) Review Items for the Out Months 4.3) Future Working Group Topics / Dates 4.4) Reconcile EDO Responses to Committee Reports 4.5) Other topics 2

-5rT P . M . RECESS 1 ,

Wednesday, January 29, 1997. Two White Flint North, Room T-2B3 i (Main Meetina Room) 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland

, /5) 8:30 - 8:35 A.M. Openine Remarks by ACNW Chairman (Open)

(PWP/RKM) g' 3 9 LI'D3 ,

! 6) Es40 -

10:30 A.M. Kev Technical Issues Status (Open)

(PWP/ACC) f6.1) Annual KTI Progress Report

, 6.2) Status Report on the Integration i

Task Force l

L.6.3) Round Table discussion ll : 93 II: / c 104-3 0 - -10 d5' A.M. * *

• BREAK * * *

7) 2f:45 - 11:45  ?..M.' Discussion with the Director, Division ll,, j g , j g , 7g of Waste Manacement, NMSS (Open)

(PWP/RKM)

A current events session with the Director, topic might include:

7.1) The status of site characterization at the proposed Yucca Mountain Repository 6.AOk6.6 kro.n$Cr 4d f 0 f~ h o n ,

ACNW 89TH MEETING 3

^ '

7.2) Status of staff's efforts on revising Part 60 7.3) Status of Part 960 options paper 7.4) Status of EPA HLW Standards 7.5) Status of activities at Envirocare 7.6) Outside regulation of DOE

( 7.7) Other topics 11445 - 13:45 P.M. * *

• LUNCH * * *

, 8) 12 . 4 Er - 4 2 4 5 -P . M . Defense In-Death (Open) (WJH/LGD) 1

/ l /O - 2; LR) A discussion among the Committee members of the defense in-depth philosophy as it i

applies to nuclear waste disposal 8.1) History of defense in-depth philosophy the rationale behind HLW subsystems requirements 8.2) Assurance future versions of Part 60 (Risk-informed Performance-2.' 90 ~ 2:30 based) reflect adequate safety M S - ?.no D.M. * *

• BREAK * *

• i

9) -acOO - 230-P.M. Continue Preoaration of ACNW Reports 1

O!3d - ,, /5 (OPen) l~

Discussion of potentit] ACNW reports listed in item 2 and topics reviewed i earlier during this meeting.

10) An &r70 P . M . New Members (Closed)

Discussion of potential new ACNW members

('s.n' dC k \ L. Ca

! (Note: A portion of this session may be closed to discuss matters the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal Privacy.)

. -5 ; 3 0 - P . M . RECESS 1

Thursday, January 30, 1997, Two White Flint North, Room T-2B1 11545 Rockville Pike, RockyiDe, Maryland p/ 11) 8:30 - 8:35 ODenino Remarks by ACNW Chairman (Open)

(PWP/RKM)

%;3f- Pop sec, T+cm 3

12) 0.35 - 12:00 NOON Continue Precaration of ACNW Reoorts 9: 00 - l A. 66 (Open)

Discussion of potential ACNW reports listed in item 2 and topics reviewed earlier during this meeting

[ g(sokc.5 hrcAsc, rih <3 { Orb'CA'

l ACNW 89TH MEETING 4

> ) ; t !.S - 1 I I.5 13+94 - 1:00--P.M. * *

• LUNCH * * *

13) --h40 - 2.30 P.M. Additional time to orepare for the next canCC,\\,J meetina with_the Commission (Open)

14) M - + P . M . Continue orecaration of ACNW reports (Open)

/;5'S

+ tee- P . M . ADJOURN 1 e Presentation time should not exceed 50 percent of the total time allocated for a specific item. The remaining 50 percent of the time is reserved for discussion.

1 e Number of copies of the presentation materials to l be provided to the ACNW - 35 I

1 1

I l

l I

I

-. - = . .- - -__ . - . _ - . - . . .

d 1

J, ',

, APPENDIX lil: MEETING ATTENDEES 89TH ACNW MEETING JANUARY 28-30,1997 ATTENDEES FROM THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION JANUARY 28,1997 l J. Mitchell, EDO JANUARY 29.1997 A. K. Ibraaim, NMSS J. O. Thoma, NMSS J. R. Firth. NMSS T. M. Ahn, NMSS K. Gruss, NMSS C. Lui, NMSS P. Justus, NMSS .

R. Johnson, NMSS l C. Raddatz, OCM/ND N. Coleman, NMSS B. Leslie, NMSS ,

K. Chang, NMSS l J. Bradbury, NMSS C. Abbott, OC V. Colten-Bradley, DWM/PAHL P. Sibel, NMSS R. Jagannath, NMSS J. Kotra, NMSS J. Pohle, NMSS J. Holonich, NMSS M. Lee, NMSS JANUARY 30.1997 F. Ross, NMSS 1

i I

i Appendix III 2 l 49th ACNW Meeting January 28-30, 1997 l ATTENDF.ES FROM OTHER AGENCIES AND GENERAL PUBLIC l JANUARY 28.1997 i M. Wisenburg, CRWMS M&O(TRW) -

J. Linhart, Lookheed Martin, Idaho R. Long, Self F. Rodgers, DOE C. McKenney, NMSS D. Bryan, DOE /YMSCO

. S. Echols, Winston & Strawn )

l

)

JANUARY 29.1997 -

J. Linhart, Lookheed Martin, Idaho l M. Wisenburg, CRWMS M&O S. Crawford, SAIC R. Andersen, NEl W. C. Patrick, CNWRA R. Sagar, CNWRA j F. Rodgers, DOE P. Krishna, M&O/TRW C. Hanlon, DOE H. B. Finger, Self G. Roseboom, USGS D. Bryan, DOE S. Echols, Winston & Strawn i

l APPENDIX IV: FUTURE AGENDA The Committee agreed to consider the following during the 90th ACNW Meeting, March 20-21, 1997: l l

A. Meetino with the Directors of the Division of Waste Manaoement and the Spent Fuel Projects Office- The Directors will discuss priorities for their respective divisions and highlight issues they may wish the Committee to cotisider over the next year.

B. Defense in-Depth Philosophy- The NRC staff will discuss this philosophy and how it applies j to nuclearwaste. This discussion will revisit the history of the defense in-depth philosophy '

and the rationt le behind the high-level waste subsystem requirements in the Commission's 10 CFR Part 60.

C. Plannino for Commission Meetino - The Committee will prepare for their April 1997 meeting l with the Commission.

D. BIOMOVS II- The Committee will be briefied by the NRC staff on the current status of the Biosphere Model Validation Study, Phase ll. Central to this work is defining the reference biosphere and critical group.

E. 10 CFR Part 960 - The Committee will review an options paper prepared by the NRC staff for commenting on DOE's recently revised Siting Guidelines in 10 CFR Part 960. These guidelines are now Yucca Mountain specific.

F. Preparation of ACNW Reports - The Committee will discuss proposed reports, including the specification of a critical group and reference biosphere to be used in the performance assessment for a nuclear waste disposal facility, and possibly other topics discussed during the meeting. -

G. Committee Activities / Future Aoenda/ Appointment of New Members - The Committee will consider topics proposed for future consideration by the full Committee and Working Groups.

The Committee will discuss ACNW related activities of individual members. The Committee will also consider the qualifications of potential new ACNW members. A portion of this session may be closed to public attendance to discuss information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy pursuant to 5 U.S.C.

552b(c)(6).

H. Miscellaneous - The Committee w!!I discuss miscellaneous matters related to the conduct of Committee activities and organizational activities and complete discussion of matters and specific issues that were not completed during previous meetings, as time and availability of information permit.

,i .

4 f , APPENDIX V LIST OF DOCUMENTS PROVIDED TO THE COMMITTEE l

l [ Note: Some doc 1ments listed below may have been provided or prepared for Committee use -

only. These docJments must be reviewed prior to release to the public.)  !

! MEETING HANDOUTS i

l AGENDA DOCUMENTS j ITEM NO.

]

5 Kev Technicalissues Status

1. High Level Waste Program FY 96 Annual Progress Report, presented by Margaret

! Federline, Deputy Director, Division of Waste Management (DWM), NMSS, dated

{ January 29,1997 [Viewgraphs) l 2. High-Level Waste Program FY 96 Progress Report Summary of Technical Activities, j presented by M. Bell, Branch Chief, Division of Waste Management, and B. Sagar, i Technical Director, Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses, dated January 29, 1997 (Viawgrapiis]

! 3. Letter dated January 23,1997, Michael J. Bell, Chief, Engineering and Geosciences >

l Branch, Division of Waste Management, NMSS, to Dr. Stephen Brocoum, Assistant

! Manager for Suitability and Licensing, DOE,

Subject:

Comments on the Department of f Energy Thermohydrology Testing and Modeling Program [ Handout) i i

4. HLW Integration Task Group Report, presented by John O. Thoma, Section Leader, Performance Assessment & HLW Integration Branch, Division of Waste Management, NMSS, dated January 29,1997 (Viewgraphs)

5. Note dated January 29,1997, Robert L. Johnson, Division of Waste Management, NMSS, to Rich Major, ACNW, re transmittal of GAO report entitled, " Nuclear Waste Impediments to Completing the Yucca Mountain Repository Project" (Handout]

6. 105th Congress,1st session, S.104, January 1997, titled " Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1997," (A Bill to amend the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1992) (Handout]

i 7 Discussion with the Director, Division of Waste Management, NMSS j

7. Letter dated January 27,1997, Robert R. Loux, Executive Director, Agency for Nuclear Projects, Nuclear Waste Project Office, State of Nevada, to John Greeves, Director, Division of Waste Management, NRC, re issue resolution (Handout) 4 1

1

a .

1 f,  ;

Appendix V 2 89th ACNW Meeting

, January 28-30,1997 MEETING NOTEBOOK CONTENTS  !

! .TA.E NUMBER DOCUMENTS 2.1 Radionuclide Transport at Yucca Mountain

! 1. Draft 2 of ACNW letter report to Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman, NRC, from Paul W.

Fomeroy, Chairman, ACNW,

Subject:

Comments on Flow and Radionuclide Transport at Yucca Mountain, dated January 7,1997 2.2 Critical Group and Reference Biosphere i l l l 2. Draft of ACNW letter report to Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman, NRC, from Paul W.

Pomeroy, Chairman, ACNW,

Subject:

Reference Biosphere and Critical Group issues l Associated with the Proposed High-Level Waste Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, dated January 13,1997 (Facsimile) j

\

l 2.3 - Time of Compliance in Low-Level Waste Disposal  !

i 3. Draft of ACNW letter report to Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman, NRC, from Paul W.  !

Pomeroy, Chairman, ACNW,

Subject:

Time of Compliance for Low-Level Nuclear '

Waste Disposal Facilities, dated December 13,1996

4. Memorandum for the Commissioners, from James M. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations,

Subject:

Regulatory Issues in Low-Level Radioactive Waste Performance Assessment, SECY-96-103, dated May 17,1996 2.4 Comments on Select Direction-Settina issue Papers as Part of the Commission's i Stratenic Assessment and Rebaselinino Process

5. Table of Contents

6. Status Report

7. B. John Garrick, ACNW, Comments on Direction Setting initiative 12, dated January 6,1997 (Facsimile)

8. Letter from George M. Homberger, ACNW, to William J. Hinze, ACNW, re comments on DSis related to " Agreement States" and "LLW", dated December 13,1996

9. Memorandum from Martin Steindler, ACNW consultant, to Distribution,

Subject:

Comments on Selected Sections of the Direction-Setting issues Paper, Part I - DSI 5, LLW, dated December 1,1996 (Facsimile)

10. Memorandum from Martin Steindler, ACNW consultant, to Distribution,

Subject:

Comments on Selected Sections of the Direction-Setting issues Paper, Part II-- DSI 6, HLW, dated December 3,1996 (Facsimile)

? ,

i

, ' Appendix V 3

'* i 89th ACNW Meeting

January 28-30,1997 1

4

11. Memorandum from Martin Steindler, ACNW consultant, to Distribution,

Subject:

j Comments on Selected Sections of the Direction-Setting issues Paper, Part 111 - DSI i- 2, DOE Oversight, dated December 4,1996 (Facsimile)  ;

i

12. Memorandum from Martin Steindler, ACNW consultant, to Distribution,

Subject:

l Comments on Selected Sections of the Direction-Setting issues Paper, Part IV - DSI j 4, Agreement States, dated December 13,1996 (Facsimile) l

13. Memorandum from Martin Steindler, ACNW consultant, to Distribution,

Subject:

Comments on Selected Sections of the Direction-Setting issues Paper, Part V - DSI 22, Research, dated December 3,1996 (Facsimile)

14. Memorandum from Martin Steindler, ACNW consultant, to~ Distribution,

Subject:

)

i Comments on Selected Sections of the Direction-Setting issues Paper, Part VI- DSI 9, Decommissioning -- Non-Reactor Facilities, dated December 30,1996 (Facsimile) J l 15. Memorandum from Martin Steindler, ACNW consultant, to Distribution,

Subject:

l Comments on Selected Sections of the Direction-Setting issues Paper, Part Vil - DSI i 12, Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Regulations and Other Topics, dated January 2

5,1997 (Facsimile)

16. Letter from Mel Silberberg, to The Honorable Shirley A. Jackson, Chairman, NRC, re j request NRC reconsider its apparent position pertaining to HLW and LLW research in j Direction-Settbg issue 22, dated December 12,1996

17. Letter from Mel Silberberg, to Dr. Paul W. Pomeroy, Chairman, ACNW, re letter to NRC re de facto termination of NRC HLW and LLW programs, dated January 2,1997 3 Prepare for Next Meetina with the Commission

18. Status Report, January 28,1997 - 1:00 - 4:00 pm and January 30,1997 - 1:00 - 2:30 pm 4 Committee Activities / Future Aaenda l

19. Table of Contents

20. Set Agenda for 90th ACNW Meeting, February 25-27,1997

21. Review items for the Out Months

22. Future Working Group Topics / Dates

23. Discuss Outside Meetings Attended by Members and Staff

24. Reconcile EDO Responses to Committee Reports

25. EDO's List of Future Meeting Topics (Handout)

26. CRWMS/M&O Meeting Status

27. One-Year Calendar of Events 4.4 Reconcile EDO Responses to Committee Reports l

28. Priority issues

a. Status Report

b. ACNW Report on 1997 Priorities

c. EDO Response dated December 19,1996 4

m

Appendix V 4 89th ACNW Meeting January 28-30,1997 4

29. Shallow Land Burials

a. Status Report

b. ACNW Report on Shallow Land Burials

c. EDO Response dated December 23,1996

, 30. Road Map

a. Status Report

b. ACNW Report on A " Road Map" to the ACNW's Recommendation for Time Span for Compliance of the Proposed Hign-Level Waste Repository at Yucca Mountain, NV

, c. EDO Response dated December 31,1996

31. Coupled Processes

a. Status Report

b. ACNW Report on Coupled Processes in the NRC High-Level Weste Prelicensing Program

c. EDO Response dated December 19,1996 6 Kev Technical issues Status

32. Table of Contents

33. Status Report

34. Letter from Paul W. Pomert;, Chairman, AONW, to Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman, NRC,

Subject:

' Comments on High-Level Waste Prelicensing Program Strategy and Key Technical issues, dated February 16,1996

35. Letter from James M. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations, NRC, to Dr. Paul W.

Pomeroy, Chairman, ACNW, re responds to ACNW letter dated February 16,1996, to Chairman Jackson on " Comments on High-Leve' Prelicensing Strategy and Key Technical Issues," dated March 25,1996

36. Memorandum from James M. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations, to The Commissioners, NRC,

Subject:

Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Refocused Prelicensing High-Level Waste Repository Program, SECY-96-120, dated June 3,1996

37. " Highlights of the U.S. Department of Energy's Updated Waste Containment and Isolation Strategy for the Yucca Mountain Site, Draft, dated July 1996

38. "NRC High-Level Radioactive Waste Program Annual Progress Report Fiscal Year 1996," Draft, NUREG/CR-6513, No.1, CNWRA 96-01 A, B. Sagar, Editor, CNWRA, dated November 1996 { Note: Only the Executive Summary and Chapter 1 are provided in the notebook. }

39. Memorandum from John H. Austin, Chief, Performance Assessment and HLW Integration Branch, Division of Waste Management, NMSS, to DWM Staff involved in HLW Activities,

Subject:

Hight-Level Waste Integration, dated November 29,1996, with Attachment 7 Discussion with the Director, Division of Waste Management, NMSS

40. Status Report

+_.,

Appendix V 5 l

89th ACNW Meeting January 28-30,1997 8 Defense-in-Death

41. Table of Contents

42. Status Report, Discussion on 10 CFR 60 Subsystem Requirements

43. Press Release, S-1-90, Remarks by James R. Curtiss, Commissioner, NRC, at the Symposium on Radioactive Waste Repository Licensing, National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, September 17,1990, " Repository Performance -

The Regulatory Challenge"

44. Letter from Dade W. Moeller, Chairman, ACNW, to Kenneth M. Carr, Chairman, NRC,

Subject:

Comments on 10 CFR Part 60.113, Subsystem Requirements, dated March l 1,1990 .

45. Memorandum from Lynn G. Deering, Senior Staff Scientist, ACNW, to ACNW l Members,

Subject:

March 3,1993 Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board Briefing onto the Commission, dated March 10,1993

46. "A Study of the Isolation System for Geologic Disposal of Radioactive Wastes," Waste isolation Systems Panel, Board on Radioactive Waste Managemer t, Commission on )

Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Resources, National Research Council-

47. Memorandom from James M. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations, NRC, to Commissioner Rogers,

Subject:

Summary of National Research Council Symposium on Radioactive Waste Repository Licensing, dated October 23,1990

48. Status Report, Discussion of Proposed Implementation and Relevance of the Groundweter Travel Time Requirement in 10 CFR 60.113(a) and (b), March 16,1995

49. Federal Register Notice, Vol. 46, No.130, Nuclear Regulatory Commission,10 CFR {

Part 60, Proposed Rule, " Disposal of High Level Radioactive Wastes in Geologic 1 Repositories," dated July 8,1981

50. Federal Register Notice, Vol. 48, No.120, Nuclear Regulatory Commission,10 CFR Part 60, " Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in Geologic Repositories Technical Criteria," Final Rule, dated June 21,1983

51. Handout, Multiple Barrier Concept, GWTT, and Tota! System Performance, from Paul Davis, SNL, NRC Meeting on Groundwater Travel Time, March 16,1995

52. Memorandum from H. J. Larson, Senior Staff Engineer, ACNW, to ACNW Members,  ;

Subject:

General Guidelines for the Recommendation of Sites for Nuclear Waste Repositories," 10 CFR Part 960, Federal Register, Vol. 61, No. 242, December 16, 1996, dated December 19,1996

53. Note from L Deering, ACNW, to Dr. Hinze, ACNW,

Subject:

Thoughts on Time Frame of Regulatory Compliance, dated April 9,1996 i

_