ML20153D237
| ML20153D237 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/17/1998 |
| From: | Shirley Ann Jackson, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Bryan R SENATE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20153D241 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9809240384 | |
| Download: ML20153D237 (2) | |
Text
f[k' p[
%r i
UNITED STATES o
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20665-0001
%*****e September 17, 1998 CHAMMAN l
The Honorable Richard H. Bryan United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510-2804
Dear Senator Bryan:
I am responding to your letter dated July 21,1998, expressing concern about public perception in Nevada regarding standards used to judge the safety of high-level radioactive waste (HLW) disposal at Yucca Mountain (YM). Your letter also indicates that evaluations of the'" suitability" of the proposed repository should be fair, independent, and objective. I address these _
concerns in the context of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) activities below.
In response to your concems, the fundamental goal of NRC's HLW activities is the protection of the public health and safety. We will accomplish this goal by condue:ing a comprehensive program that includes: (1) adopting implementable, performance-based, site-specific regulations that ensure that the public health and safety are clearly protected; (2) evaluating the performance of the geologic repository against those regulations and ensurir.g the evaluations are defensible; and (3) providing ample opportunity for stakeholders to participate in NRC's rulemakings and review processes.
With respect to developing performance-based regulations for YM, NRC is required by the Energy Policy Act of 1992 to modify its technical requirements and criteria under Section 121(b) of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act to be consistent with the U.S. Environmental Protection I
Agency's (EPA) yet-to-be-released site-specific YM standard. NRC staff continues to work with j
EPA to set standards for the proposed repository at YM that are both implementable and yj l adequately protective of public health and safety and the environment. Although NRC and EPA
.[
1 have discussed the need for pathway-specific requirements, such as separate criteria for ground water, NRC continues to believe that protection of the public is fully afforded by an all-pathways dose limit. Ground water protection is considered in such a limit, because ground water tiansport is the dominant route of potential exposure to members of the public.
On behalf of the Commission, I noted NRC's position in my July 30,1998 testimony before the Senate Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Pmperty, and Nuclear Safety. NRC fundamentally disagrees with the need for a separate grc. 1d water standard, because there is no public health and safety reason to single out one paths ay for a separate dose limit.
Accordingly, the Commission directed the staff to develop a dose-based, all-pathways standard, not to include a separate ground water limit in its site-specific regulations. The proposed rule is scheduled for Commission review in the fail of this year and will subsequently be issued for public comment.
9909240384 990917 PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE P
'y er i
=_-
2 NRC is also firmly committed to ensuring a fair and objective evaluation of the YM site as a possible repository. NRC believes its licensing process, which assures a thorough and independent review of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) license application, will ensure a fair and defensible consideration of allissues relevant to repository performance. To this end, NRC has focused its HLW program on resolving the ten key technical issues considered to be l
most critical to determining the repository's ability to protect the public health and safety. Issue resolution status reports (IRSRs) document NRC's views on DOE's progress toward resolving these key issues for the proposed repository at YM. IRSRs are provided to all interested parties, including the State of Nevada, to promote an open discussion of the scientific and engineering issues important to protecting the public. I also encourage Nevadans and other stakeholders to submit comments on NRC's proposed rule for YM.
I trust this reply responds to your concerns. NRC appreciates and welcomes your comments as well as comments from others in the State of Nevada on the effectiveness of these activities.
Sincerely,
,l
}[