ML20196J320
| ML20196J320 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/13/1998 |
| From: | Mcgaffigan E NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Hoyle J NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20196J293 | List: |
| References | |
| SECY-98-239-C, NUDOCS 9812100021 | |
| Download: ML20196J320 (2) | |
Text
._
NOTATION VOTE RESPONSE SHEnT TO:
John C. Hoyle, Secretary FROM:
COMMISSIONER MCGAFFIG'AN
SUBJECT:
SECY-98-239 - POST-DISPOSAL CRITICALITY RESEARCH Approved x
Disapproved Abstain i
Not Participating COMMENTS:
See attached comments.
i i
SIGNATUi3E I / ' '
V i
).' l i } SW
-DATE Entered on "AS" Yes K
No 9812100021 981200 PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR
$$49JO608I
~_
l Commissioner McGaffican's Comments on SECY-98-239:
I approve the staff's recommendation (Option 1) to cease further review of post-disposal criticality and fully agree with the comments of Chairman Jackson and Commissioner Diaz.
1 In approving Option 1, I carefully considered the Differing Professional View (DPV) attached to i
the paper; however, in my view, it does not make a persuasive case for Option 2. At the Envirocare site, the contractor's study found that the probability of criticality is "vanishingly small." At the Parks Township site, the staff's analysis indicates that the potential for criticality was so unlikely that it need not be considered further and the draft contractor's analysis attached i
to the DPV quantifies this extremely remote risk. Finally, at the Barnwell site, while one trench warranted further evaluation by the contractor and staff, I see no value in demonstrating yet i -
another extremely small risk value when quantifying criticality at a low-level waste (LLW) disposal site. That said, I do not believe that a Commission decision to cease further research on post disposal criticality will send a negative message to the LLW community. On the contrary, without any further research, it is my belief that the staff has adequate information on which to base highly conservative emplacement criteria and disposal guidance for LLW rites consistent with current industry practice which has long ensured that criticality is prevented. In her vote, the Chairman has reiterated previous Commission direction to the staff to develop disposal I
guidance and emplacement criteria for LLW sites, and I heartily agree.
4