ML20199J256

Informs That During ACNW 102nd Meeting on 980720-20,NMSS Staff Presented Plan to Develop SRP for Use in Reviewing & Evaluating Submittals by Licensees to Support Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities

ML20199J256
Person / Time
Issue date:	01/11/1999
From:	Garrick B NRC ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE (ACNW)
To:	Shirley Ann Jackson, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
FACA, NACNUCLE-R-0139, NACNUCLE-R-139, NUDOCS 9901260106
Download: ML20199J256 (2)

Text

-

• ,, y#ourg[of ACNWR-0139 UNITED STATES F

A NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PDR U

*I ADvlSoRY COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE Y

WASHINGTON, D.c. 20055-0001

...../.

January 11,1999 The Honorable Shirley Ann Jackson Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

SUBJECT:

DEVELOPMENT OF A STANDARD REVIEW PLAN FOR DECOMMISSIONING

Dear Chairman Jackson:

During its 102nd meeting on July 20-22,1998, the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) heard a presentation from the NMSS staff on its plans to develop a Standard Review Plan (SRP) for use in reviewing and evaluating submittals by licensees to support the decommissioning of nuclear facilities. At its 103rd meeting on August 27-28,1998, the Committee heard additiona! information on the selection of parameters for the DandD screening code and an update on the associated default parameter table. At its 105th meeting on December 15-17,1998, the Committee received an overview of the staffs decommissioning plans for fiscal year 1999.

We found the staffs plans to date to be well thought-out. We applaud the increased interaction among the NRR, RES, and NMSS staffs. We view the institution of the Decornmissioning Management Board as a welcomed step in ensuring agency consistency in the development of license termination requirements applicable to all facilities.

The Committee has the following observations on decommissioning that it believes are useful and timely to the development of the SRP.

1.

We recommend that the staff continue to develop review criteria to provide a proper and consistent level of protection of public health and safety across a variety of sites.

//

fo 2.

We support the staffs plans to test the DandD code together with more s,ite-specific alternative codes at a variety of sites. Results of these tests will add much to the understanding of the advantages of DandD as a screening tool. ACNWlooks forward to j gL hearing about the results.

3.

We believe that it will be important to provide guidance to potential users on the appropriate selection of screening and site-specific codes for decommissioning.

9901260106 990111 ADVCMNACgEj g/g}pgf PDR R-0139 a

L a

1 o

.g 2

4.

The staff has instituted an effective program of licensee / stakeholder involvement. We support continuation of this effort.

5.

We recognize that an efficient license termination process, coupled with a properly established standard for release of materials, could go far toward ensuring safe disposal of low-level waste and limiting decommissioning costs. We concur with the staffs l

posi' tion that the establishment and subsequent use of clearance criteria for l

decontamination and decommissioning activities should be a priority goal.

In closing, we have observed considerable progress in the development of the staffs plans and the necessairy associated acceptance criteria. We recognize the magnitude and importance of J

the effort to develop the SRP and other relevant documents and analytical tools. The Committee intends to maintain an active awareness and participation in this activity as it evolves.

Sincerely, I

P

1. O u.

L.

B. John Garrick Chairman l

l l

i