ML20197C519
| ML20197C519 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/02/1998 |
| From: | Mcgaffigan E NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Callan L NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20197C524 | List: |
| References | |
| SECY-98-084-C, SECY-98-84-C, NUDOCS 9809140067 | |
| Download: ML20197C519 (1) | |
Text
. _ _ _ _ _
/
o See Attached Memo d
/[~q
($ h
{
si Edward McGaffigan4/Jr)
]
1$
POLICY ISSUE (NEGATIVE CONSENT) gg
....-98-084 SECY
..................b FOR:
The Commissioners
~
RELEASED TO THE PDR FROM:
L. Joseph Callan k
Executive Director for Operations Wtids SU3 JECT:
STATUS OF EFFORTS TO FINALIZE REGULATIONS FOR
.-4 3.....
RADIOLOGICAL CRITERIA FOR LICENSE TERMINATION: URANIUM RECOVERY FACILITIES PURPOSE:
This paper provides information to the Commission and requests approval by negative consent of the staff's proposed alternative for proceeding with final rulemaking to amend criterion 6 of 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A in order to provide radiological criteria for termination of uranium recovery licenses.
SUMMARY
In a Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) on SECY-97-046A, dated Ma9 21,1997, the Commission instructed staff to develop a rule that addresses radiological criteria (decommissioning land and buildings) for license termination for uranium recovery facilities, i.e.,
uranium mills and in-situ leach facilities (ISLs), on an expedited basis. The staff has requested additional public comment on this issue, and is preparing a final rule for Commission approval.
If the Commission approves the staff's reco'mmended approach, the final rulemaking package will be forwarded to the Commission within 5 months after receiving approval. If the Commission selects an attemative approach, an additional opportunity for public comment may be necessary. A discussion of the attematives considered is in Attachment 1. Attachment 2 is a differing viewpoint (as allowed under Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Policy and Procedures Letter 1-8, Revision 4, December 1996) on the approach delineated in this Commission Paper, submitted by a staff member on April 8,1998. A differing viewpoint is an allowed alternative to a Differing Professional View (DPV) or a Differing Professional Opinion (DPO). This attemative allows employees to document their differing professional views and attach these views to proposed staff positions or other documents, to be foiwarded as the document moves through the management chain. Attachment 3 contains the dose model g
assumptions and results that support the staff's recommended approach.
l pyl/D 100004 s w; wm
, I CONTACT: Elaine Brummett, NMGS/DWM SECY NOTE:
IN THE ABSENCE OF M
(301)415-6606 INSTRUCTIONS TO THE CONTRARY,
\\
_\\q\\
NOTE: To be made publicly available SECY WILL NOTIFY THE STAFF ON when the' final SRM is made available FRIDAY, MAY 1. 1998, THAT THE COMMISSION, BY NEGATIVE CONSENT, ASSENTS TO THE ACTION PROPOSED 9809140067 990702 PDR COMMS NRCC IN THIS PAPER.
CORRESPONDENCE PDR MMMMMO/
J