ML20202G503
| ML20202G503 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/30/1986 |
| From: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| References | |
| ACRS-2416, NUDOCS 8607150406 | |
| Download: ML20202G503 (24) | |
Text
-
08 AS o? W h liS f9k bO
- dhyj
,j CERTIFIED COPY bEM'l Mbl M Mliiid DATE ISSUED:
May 30, 1986 MINUTES OF THE ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING ON WASTE MANAGEMENT, APRIL 24-25, 1986, WASHINGTON, D. C.
Time and Place:
The meeting was held on Thursday and Friday, April 24-25, 1986 in Room 1046 at 1717 H St. N.W., Washington, D. C.
The meeting commenced each day at 8:30 a.m. and adjourned at approximately 5:00 p.m. each day.
Purpose:
The purpose of this meeting was to review the following topics:
1.
The Salvaging of Contaminated Smelted Alloys.
II.
Several WM Research topics, including (a) Results of the NRC Workshop on the Validation of Mathematical Models for Waste Repository Perfor-mance Assessment, (b) Setting Priorities for HLW Research, (c) Interna-tional WM Research and Cooperative Programs, and (d) Natural Analogs.
The preliminary agenda and the Federal Register Notice stated that alternatives to Shallow Land Burial were also to be discussed at this meeting; however, it had been reviewed previously and was therefore not included.
8607150406 860530 PDR ACRS 2416 PDR III. The NRC Role in LLW disposal in compliance with the low-Level Radioac-tive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985.
y y
certified By [ /g
~
MINUTES / WASTE MANAGEMENT 2
MEETING, APRIL 24-25, 1986 IV. The NRC Modeling Strategy Document for HLW Performance Assessment.
V.
Quality Assurance Generic Technical Positions for HLW Geologic Repos-itories.
The Federal Register Notice for this meeting, the Presentation Schedule, and a list of documents distributed during the meeting are enclosed (Attachments 1,2and3,respectively). All of the documents listed are available in the ACRS files.
Attendees:
A total of 51 attendees were present at the meeting (Attachment 4). They are listed below by groups.
ACRS Members (5)
NRC Staff (26)
D. Moeller D. Hopkins, RES F. Remick D. Harmon, RES C. Mark J. Kotra, OCM r
J. Ebersole R. Kornasiewicz, RES P. Shewmon D. Cherry, RES X. Eccleston, NRR ACRS Consultants (4)
T. McCartin, RES M. Carter G. Birchard, RES W. Fauth K. Kim, RES R. Foster J. Randall, RES M. Steindler J. Forstrom, NMSS L. Saraka, NMSS ACRS Staff / Fellows (3)
L. Deering, NMSS
- 0. Merrill J. Libert, NMSS J. Parry S. Coplan, NMSS G. Brown F. Swanberg, RES J. Donnelly, IE Other Federal Agencies (6)
J. Larkins, OPE T. Morris, DOE W. Hill, IE V. Price, GA0 M. Bell, NMSS A. Wolbarst, EPA S. Bilhorn, NMSS N. Trask, USGS J. Kennedy, NMSS N. Glover, DOE T. Ankrum, IE M. Malloy, IE Others (7)
M. Knapp NMSS
MINUTES / WASTE MANAGEMENT 3
MEETING, APRIL 24-25, 1986 L. Lehman, Yakima Indian Nation D. Tousley, Yakima Indian Nation.
R. Eng, EBASCO D. Baker, PNL D. Hoffman, ACE Federal L. Peeters, SAIC J. Bergler, PG&E Summary and Highlights of Presentations:
I.
Salvaging of Contaminated Smelted Alloys In his memorandum to R. Fraley dated March 17, 1986, R. Minogue summarized the status of this topic and relayed Commissioner Bernthal's request that the ACRS provide its views on the general standards suggested in the original Draft Environmental Statement (DES) (NUREG-0518), and on EPA's comments and recommendations on this document.
A copy of Bernthal's questions and RES' responses regarding this topic were provided to the Subcommittee. Although the NRC is withdrawing the Proposed License Exemption for Smelted Alloys in view of the lack of EPA Standards, Commissioner Bernthal is concerned about the generic issues raised by the Staff's resulting review in denying DOE's petition.
l D. Hopkins of RES and D. Baker of PNL reviewed the chronology of events on J
this matter from February 1974 to the present. The principal highlights resulting from the presentation and the ensuing discussion were:
1.
The ACRS cannot provide a complete answer to Commissioner Bernthal j
without first reviewing with EPA their development of guidance on o
MINUTES / WASTE MANAGEMENT 4
MEETING, APRIL 24-25, 1986 the generic problem of recycling all types of radioactive mate-rials.
~
2.
What is needed is a generic approach with applicable standards.
3.
Approximately 3700 public comments were received following publica-tion of the DES in the Federal Register. Dr. Moeller indicated that the Subcommittee needs to review the updated or Final Environ-mental Statement (FES), which addresses these comments, before it can adequately respond to Commissioner Bernthal's request. Topics that need to be considered include:
(a) newer dose limits and risk coefficients now available, (b) better data on the effects of smelting on technetium-99 and (c) a full range of alternatives.
f 4.
Dr. M. Steindler suggested that if you can clean up the metals prior to recycling, this would be an acceptable approach. This may require research to improve the removal of the radioactive ele-ments.
5.
A letter was drafted for full Committee consideration at its 313th meeting, May 8-10, 1986.
II. Waste Management Research Topics - Dr. F. Costanzi Only three of the four topics were discussed; the scheduled discussion on International WM Research and Cooperative Programs was omitted due to a lack of time. The topics discussed follow:
1
MINUTES / WASTE MANAGEMENT 5
MEETING, APRIL 24-25, 1986 1.
Setting Priorities for HLW Research - F. Costanzi The HLW research budget for FY 86 is a " bare-bones" budget of only
$3 million. Hence all research is highly directed and prioritized.
The NRC Staff is addressing issues in three areas:
(1) Deep geologic disposal -- how to demonstrate that it will work
-- this work is being done with close interaction with D0E.
(2) Areas of concern -- natural environment, man-made structures and compliance assurance using models for validation.
(3) Prioritizing -- selecting what to do and in what order.
Representatives from the Division of WM and Office of Research meet every 3 or 4 weeks to coordinate the NRC total research effort.
Priorities are set jointly and on a continuing basis.
4 2.
Workshop on Model Validation -- Dr. J. Randall (1) The goal of the Modeling Workshop was to demonstrate that models are adequate and representative, both to identify research needs and to determine what experiments need to be done to validate them.
(2) Output -- groundwater flow, temperatures, pressures, radionuclide concentrations, etc.
MINUTES / WASTE MANAGEMENT 6
MEETING, APRIL 24-25, 1986 (3)
Key factor -- the model must be representative of the time period in question.
3.
Natural Analogs -- Dr. G. Birchard (1) The effort here is to locate, study, and conduct experiments in existing natural ore bodies to determine groundwater flows.
(2) NRC is using the SWIFT model to follow flow, and has compared its results to those of simpler analytical models. Thit has confirmed the results.
III. NRC's Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLW) Program - Dr. M. Knapp This discussion was presented in two parts:
1.
10 CFR 61 as it applies to LLW K. Dragonnette discussed this topic, the principal highlight of which was that agreement states must license in a manner compatible with 10 CFR 61, 2.
LLW Policy Amendments Act of 1985 Dr. M. Knapp discussed this topic, emphasizing NRC's role as mandated by the Act. Highlights were:
MINUTES / WASTE MANAGEMENT 7
MEETING, APRIL 24-25, 1986 (1) The Federal Government is responsible for all radioactive wastes greater than class C wastes. There 'is, therefore, an overlap of HLW and LLW -- it is a continuum.
(2) The time table stipulated by the Act will be difficult for the states to meet.
(3) Most states are members of compacts consisting of 2 or more states.
(4) Two topics were named which the DWM is currently working on, which they would like to have the ACRS review in a few months, viz.,
A Branch Technical Position on Licensing Alternative Methods of Disposal for LLW (Published in the Federal Register March 6, 1986, p. 7806 ff.)
A Policy Statement to provide guidance to petition-ers for waste streams below regulatory concern (BRC).
In this regard, the NRC Staff will be setting up a computer code which will cover all scenarios that will assist them in providing the named guidance to petitioners.
MINUTES / WASTE MANAGEMENT 8
MEETING, APRIL 24-25, 1986 (5)
M. W. Carter suggested that the recent amendments to the
~
LLW Policy Act give the NRC the responsibility to define (or redefine) low-level radioactive waste. This thereby presents the NRC with an excellent opportunity to bring within the LLW definition a category of wastes which heretofore has not been properly addressed or controlled, i.e., the " Naturally Occurring and Accelerator Produced Radioactive Materials," commonly referred to as NARM wastes.
(6) In view of (5), the subcommittee prepared a letter to V.
Stello on this topic for Committee consideration at its 313th meeting, May 8-10, 1986.
IV.
The NRC Modeling Strategy Document -- Dr. S. Caplan and Dr. J. Libert Highlights of this presentation were:
(1) 10 CFR 60 contains performance objectives for:
(1) Waste package -- complete containment for 300 - 1000 years.
(2) Groundwater travel time must be more than 1000 years.
(3) Limit on releases within 10,000 years.
Their effort is to develop models that will document the uncertainties so they can get a fix on assurance compli-ance.
MINUTES / WASTE MANAGEMENT 9
MEETING, APRIL 24-25, 1986 2.
The NRC Staff approach is to satisfy their own concerns, using a broad information base, viz:
Level 1 - Review - critical analysis Level 2 - Review - simple models Level 3 - Review - 3rd party codes Level 4 - Review - independent modeling A key decision to be made is the selection of levels of review needed, e.g., groundwater flow will use Levels 1 and 4.
The j
levels are discrete and separate.
Subcommittee members recommended that the levels be re-numbered in the sequence of detail.
j 3.
The scenarios chosen are the most important items, hence they should have the most thorough review of all; the weakest link in the scenarios should receive the most detailed review.
4.
The staff is proposing changes in 10 CFR 60 to:
(1) Make it conform to the EPA Standard s2) Establish a strategy for modeling during site charac-terization (3) Develop integrated, discipline-specific plans, and integrate models across disciplines.
i
MINUTES / WASTE MANAGEMENT 10 MEETING, APRIL 24-25, 1986 5.
M. Steindler suggested that the NRC Staff hold off on develop-ing models until they see what dependence DOE places on a given step, to which Dr. Coplan responded in the negative, stating that you need to scope it to see its importance.
6.
The NRC Staff agreed that they did not expect or need written comments on this topic from the ACRS. The oral coments and the transcript of this portion of the meeting will suffice.
V.
NRC Review of HLW Repository Quality Assurance (QA) Programs - J.
Kennedy (RES) and T. Ankrum (IE)
The highlights of this presentation follow:
1.
The definition of QA they use is the demonstration that quality has been achieved.
2.
NRC is helping DOE on how to initiate and conduct a QA program consistent with NRC licensing requirements (with which DOE is not familiar).
3.
Computer codes will be used to ensure QA implementation because of the extent of the effort needed to accomplish it.
4.
The QA program requires Peer Review including an examination of the adequacy and suitability of the data being collected.
5.
Quality Control (QC) is a part of QA. QC assumes that the collected data are accurate, whereas QA assures that correct data are being collected and that the site selection is proper.
x MINUTES / WASTE MANAGEMENT 11 MEETING, APRIL 24-25, 1986 6.
The basic efforts of the QA Program are:
(1) Guidance Dhvelopment (2) Reviews of DOE's Program Documents (3) Transfer of procedural lessons learned from nuclear power plants (NPP) to HLW repositories.
7.
The precursors for trouble at NPPs are present for DOE's HLW repository, i.e., the DOE QA program is already ill, 8.
The NRC QA review is process-oriented, not produc't-oriented, but NRC does not believe that DOE is hearing this message.
9.
QA audits should be technical, not just paper audits, hence the auditor must be technically competent.
- 10. The ACRS role in the NRC QA Program should be to look at and comment on precursors to help NRC/D0E avoid future major problems.
11.
DOE must carry the major burden of the QA Program including the implementation of DOE Review -- NRC can only do " spot" or " smart sampling."
13.
NRC cannot dictate a solution, but they want DOE to be alert to their concerns and recommendations.
J. Kennedy discussed the general concept of Generic Technical Positions (GTP) for the QA Program, indicating that their use is one of several methods for
MINUTES / WASTE MANAGEMENT 12 MEETING, APRIL 24-25, 1986 giving guidance to DOE on licensing issues -- similar to the Branch"Te'chnical Positions of the nuclear power plant regulatory program.. He identified four in-process GTPs and two possible future GTPs. The four in-process GTPs are 4
listed here and were discussed with the Subcommittee.
The possible future 1
GTPs are also listed but were not discussed.
o 1.
In-Process GTPs (1) Q-List, i.e., Items and Activities Subject to 10 CFR 60 QA Requirements (2) Peer Review (3) Qualification of Existing Data (4) Configuration Management
--~~-
2.
Possible Future GTPs (1) Endorsement of NQA-1 (2) Computer Code QA Comment Hichlights on the GTPs 1.
GTPs are published for public comment -- many will later be taken to rulemaking.
A Q-list GTP will be published this summer.
2.
A GTP covering emergency doses to workers involved in an accider.t will be considered later.
MINUTES / WASTE MANAGEMENT 13 MEETING, APRIL 24-25, 1986 3.
The Q-List pertains to public safety, not occupational safety.
4.
The NRC Staff plans to benefit from NPP QA exper'iences, but will not be locked into following the same path.
5.
The Staff recommends the PRA approach be employed in licensing the repository.
6.
A complete Q-List will be available at the time of the construction permit application, at which time repository design will'be final.
7.
T. Ankrum said that peer reviews are different from technical reviews and that minority opinions should be expressed in peer b
reviews.
M. W. Carter pointed out that peer review is a process in which knowledgeable people, having expertise and credentials in a given scientific or technical area, consider, evaluate and recommend (pertaining to the topic being reviewed) in a fair, impartial and objective manner. He continued, saying that if this process is biased (prejudiced) by selecting' individuals with a known or given point of view (whatever it may be), the process is destroyed. He added it is obligatory that people be selected for peer reviewers on the basis of their knowledge and expertise and not their specific points of view or professional positions on a given question.
8.
Regarding the Qualification of Existing Data, T. Ankrum said that it consisted of corroborating data by doing confirmatory testing.
9.
Configuration Management is equivalent to Performance Allocation, according to J. Kennedy.
For a HLW repository, there are no prescriptive requirements as there are for NPPs.
1
^
MINUTES / WASTE MANAGEMENT 14 MEETING, APRIL 24-25, 1986
- 10. NRC should be careful not to force (require) DOE to freeze their repository design earlier than necessary; configuration management can remove flexibility from DOE, which they need.
VI. Actions Taken By the Subcommittee The Subcommittee prepared the following letters for ACRS consideration during its 313th meeting, May 8-10, 1986.
1.
Letter to Chairman N. Palladino;
Subject:
ACRS Connents on Salvag-ing of Contaminated Smelted Alloys.
2.
Letter to V. Stello, EDO,
Subject:
Definition of Low-Level Radio-active Waste.
The letter addresses the question of NARM Waste responsibility.
3.
Letter to Chairman N. Palladino,
Subject:
ACRS Comments on Quality Assurance (QA) Programs for High-Level Waste Repository.
In addition, the Subcommittee reviewed and achieved a consensus on a D.
Moeller draft entitled, " Comment on the Disposal of High-and Low-Level Radioactive Wastes" which will be used as a basis for discussion during the May 9, 1986, meeting with the RSK delegation from the Federal Republic of Germany who are visiting various U. S. agencies concerned with Radioactive Waste Management.
- - ~ -
MINUTES / WASTE MANAGEMENT 15 MEETING, APRIL 24-25, 1986 None of the above 4 documents are included in these minutes because they do not yet have full ACRS approval.
NOTE:
Additional meeting details can be obtained from a transcript of this meeting available in the NRC Public Document Room, 1717 H St.,
NW., Washington, D. C. or can be purchased from ACE-Federal Report-ers, 444 North Capitol Street, Washington, D. C 10001,(202) 347-3700.
t i
i e
i d
l j
i I
i
1 l
l 11378 Fed:ral Rzgist:r / Vol. 51, No. 63 / Wednesday. April 2,1988 / N:tices V
V Advisary Committee on Reactor are irged to contact the above named Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 103.
Safeguards, Subcommittee on Waste individual one or two days before the
/.
161i.161o and 182 of the Atomic Energy Management; MeeUng scheduled meeting to be advised of any Act of 1954, as amended, and the The ACRS Subcommittee on Wasta avf g
Commission's regulations in to Cm Management wiH hold a meeting on Dared: Mardi z7.tsee.
2.204 and 10 CFR Part 50,it is hereby Apri! 24 and 25,1988, Room 1048,1717 H M*'t** W la*'kla-ordered. effective lmmediately, that Street, NW. Washington. DC.
Assistant Executive Directorfor project license NPF-1 modified to provide that The entire meeting will be open to A'"I'"-
the licensee shall:
public attendance.
Impfement the specific item described The agenda for the subject meeting (m Doc. es42ao Filed 4-1-ee, eL45 am)
In the Enclosure to this ORDER in the shall be as follows:
awns caos resoms tnanner described in the PGE submittal Thursday. April 24,1986-830 a m. until noted in Section IV herein no later than g3 "fj$,#"ohf3f n. untilthe dvison Commmee on Reay f -
the date in the Enclosure.
y,; goy 3gg Extension of time of completing this concfu,sion of business Safeguards; Meeting A0ende item may be granted by the Director.
The Subcommittee will review various in accordance with the purposes of Division of PWR bcensing. A, for good topics in the High Level Radioactive sectiona 29 and182b.of the Atomic cause shown.
Waste Programs. Topics currently Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2039. 2232b), the VI Identified for review at the April Advisory Committee on Reactor meeting are:(1) Modeling Strategy for Safeguards will hold a meeting on April The licensee or any other person with HLW performance assessment,(2) 10-12,1988,in Room 1048,1717 H Street, Quality Assurance (addressing safety NW., Washington,DC. Notice of this equ t ea i ont s re thin S C repositories). (3) the meeting was published in the Federal is8ue8 of ge I I
20 days of the date of publication of this NRC LLW program (4) several research Register on march 25,1988.
Orderin the Federal Register. Any e'f rts. Inckding international programs Thursday, April 20,1986 request for a hearing shall be addressed andc perative agreements, results of to the Director Office of Nuclear modeling workshop, setting priorities for d30'A.Af.-ad5 A.Af r Report ofACRS Reactor Regulation. U.S. Nuclear HLW research, and LLW shallow land Chairman (Open)--The ACRS Chairman Regulatory Commission, Washington, burial (SLB) alterna tives; and (5) the will report briefly regarding items of DC 2c555. A copy sha!! also be sent to Salvaging of Contaminated Smelted current interest to the Committee.
the Executive Legal Director at the same AUoys.
Nuclear Power Station (Open/ Closed)-
Ad5 A.Af-J0.15 A.Af.t AfcCuire address. A request for hearing shall not Oral statements may be presented by, The members will hear and discuss the stay the immediate effectiveness of this members of the pubh,c with the rder.
e neurtence f the Subcommittee proposed removal of the upper head
(
Commission willissue an Order If a hearing is to be held. the Chairman; wntten statements will be injection system. Representatives of the
" Pied and made available to the NRC Staff and the Licensee willmake designating the time and place of any Comm.ttee. Recordings will be permitted presentations and participate in the i
such hearing
^'Y those portions of the discussion, as appropriate.
If a hearing is held concernb g this muting w,ut a transcript is be
- kept, Portions of this session will be closed Order, the issue to be considered at the and questi ns may be asked only y as required to discuss Properietary hearing shall be whether the licensee membus of the Subcommittee,its Information applicable to this matter.
should comply with the requirements set c nsultants. and Staff. Persons desiring 10.30 A.Af-J2.30 P.Af.t Advanced forth in section V of this Order.
This Order is effective upon issuance.
'$e*ACR staff Reactor s gns (Open/ Closed}-The i
ember narned bel as
- ', *g d anc eacto s gn eing Dated in Bethesda. Man!and. this :.sth day far in advance as is practicable so that.
of March 1968.
appropriate arrangements can be made.
developed by DOE. Representatives of For the Lclear Rep!aton Commission.
Daring the intitial portion of the the NCR Staff and of DOE will make Thomas M. Novak, riteeting. the Subcommittee may presentations and participate in the Acting Dsrector. Division offWR Licensies. - exchange p*efiminary views regarding discussion, as appropriate.
A. Off<ce of&clect Reactor Ress/crion, atte :Io e cons! red uring the P tim oMis sh d b dosd as necessary to discuss applicable,
uctustt's Acomonn Couwrutut o% se. Subcommittee will then hear Proprietary information.
Pa wtNT 1 to NUAEG-C737 Pontuu.o presentations by and hold discussions 1:30 P.Af.-JmP.Af.t Reactor GE% tan Eactmc CoWPANY with representatives of the NRC Staff O erotors(Open/ Closed)-The P
and other interested persons regarding members will hear and discuss a report W
this review.
Further information regarding topics of its Subcommittee concerning recent ics to be discussed, whether the n'eeting incidents sind events at operating has been cancelled or rescheduled, the nuclear power plants.
a n.,4.w asww.we iser +,ene sua i 47-s==am er war ams Chsirman's ruling on requests for the Portions of this session may be closed 7"""
d
$7 '9
opportunity to present oral statements as necessary to discuss Proprietary.
e'w p-ry and the time allotted therefor can be Information or detailed security C
obtained by a prepaid telephone call to information pertaining to the facilities the cognizant ACRS staff members.M{.
being discussed.
Owen S. Merrill(telephone 202/634-3:15 P.Af.-3:15 P.Af.t Quantitative 4 R Doc. 86-7284 med 4-1-88 &45 am]
1413) between 815 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
Safety Cools (Open}-The members will Persons planning to attend this meeting ' discuss proposed methods of uso coo no ms NW/WkW
/
.me eme w g*e.p
y F
MEETING OF THE ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE ON WASTE MANAGEMENT WASHINGTON, D. C.
APRIL 24 25, 1986 TENTATIVE PRESENTATION SCHEDULE y
Thursday, April 24 I
8:30 a.m.
Introduction D. W. Moeller, Chaiman 8:45 a.m.
Salvaging of Smelted D. Hopkins, RES Alloys D. Baker, PNL BREAK 10:15 a.m.,
10:30 a.m.
Waste Management, RES F. Costanzi and RES Staff LUNCH 12:30 p.m.
1:30 p.m.
LLW Program M. Knapp, DWM BREAK 3:30 p.m.
3:45 p.m.
Executive Session 5:15 p.m.
RECESS Friday, April 25 8:30 a.m.
Introduction D. W. Moeller, Chaiman 8:35 a.m.
HLW Modeling Strategy S. Coplan, DWM and QA Ov?rview 9:00 a.m.
Modeling Strategy S. Coplan, DWM Document BREAK 10:00 10:15 a.m.
QA Overview J. Kennedy, DWM 11:15'a.m.
QA Lessons Learned IE Staff LUNCH 12:00 1:00 p.m.
QA Generic Technical J. Kennedy, DWM Positions 3:00 p.m.
Executive Session 4:00 p.m.
ADJOURN tfrG9c/M7E W T 2.
ATTACHMENT 3 l
LIST OF BRIEFING DOCUMENTS DISTRIBUTED DURING THE WASTE MANAGEMENT SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING, APRIL 24-25, 1986 i
1.
Smelted Alloys Chronology l
2.
HLW Research Program 3.
Workshop on " Validation of Mathematical Models for Waste Repository Performance Assessment,"
J. Randall 4.
Natural Analog j
5.
Low-level Wastes, 10 CFR Part 61 (Dragonette) 6.
Low-Level Wastes, Low-level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 (Knapp) 7.
Modeling Strategy Document, S. Caplan and J. Libert 8.
NRC Review of HLW Repository QA Programs 9.
Back-Up Slides for (8)
- 10. Generic Technical Positions 11.
Items and Activities Subject to 10 CFR 60 Quality Assurance Requirements (Q-List) 12.
Peer Review 4
13.
Qualification of Existing Data
- 14. Configuration Management for Conceptual Design ATTACHMENT 3 l
\\
j l
l l
4
O. MERRILL ACRS SUBCOMM1TTEE MEETING ON WASTE MWmmmw-.
ROOM 1046, 1717 H St.. W. WaShingen" D. C.
0WSUNW f LOCATIO:1:
DATE:
APRIL 24-75. 10 %
ATTENDANCE LIST Q u l2 3, 4 4 g,
\\
i PLEASE PRINT:
\\
NAME M
AFFILIATION AC/23
/fEmgcit b.
No EL L r/r kcR$
F.
REMicx ifCRS C. /H u x MhCES
- 3. Es resem inCRS P Sntwo w A C#.$ 8#. h 44.e w 7 "A *
- v
/as Coasusmar M. CArerre v
u/. A ara N. % eia M R
//
/e R.
V C 9 T E (t lCIES
[rTA F F O. N1 E 9MI L L 73 A 7 71LLG - A/at1H wdsr-bA kp A.
O AXEYL Dao / A4p6ds u3.02c - feze~ d V
//
N F YAfEMod
\\
05 b F) E
~TR A c c V r?prci5 5$A5'fi 0 S50 VKES R,1v d u;
<XNlr' A'c rn!
Os MN /ccM JtuoA 1 ENot A AJ YAksm A ~LNutAN NArtoN U.S.
GAo L/INetw7" P. -?k ue t U S NR c.
12 ESEA rt c M RosenT 16nursitweet no [/fb 0 th ri <J,.
u s nin vn seneen aus os s'ta
/
- 72. tJ e1s(
7 w,w c. w 4.
EPA Aurkuv Wei enerr (AJ 6J
- ewe //U. / rw /(
O. MERRILL t
ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING ON WASTE MWmmet. _
ROOM 1046, 1717 H St., Nh'. Wachingtnn
-D. C.
L0 CAT,10.1:
DATE:
APRIL 24-R loc 6 ATTENDANCE LIST PLEASE PRINT:
l NAME 6
AFFILIATION u usc-/usx/ ra.sa l
Ecc.Lrstoa s
l NEN NMc/RE s/OWSS
\\
7,% Mc Cwu 6,%bA
- e. \\ e \\ w s -
is o
KtVo Wten n cA s;/n m A m /w a s 1
JowC3be
/VS E lll$M.8$ / Di!M / VIfG7~
NwN Nf5Y%
%...b.,
IJ CC
//!nSs / Ot w / W Mt u l
l' c m..c-
^
NfC /f4Y-6/ ' hum,* l l0,416 7 Lynn DG*hr kG/h9 % //o w' 0 [3 r ow s I
l
)
i l
O. MERRILL A BCOMMITTEE MEETING ON WASTF MWV'AmW _ _
LOCAkl0:
1:
ROOM 1046, 1717 H St, Nw KacM nctnn D.C.
APRIh25,19S6 DATE:
ATTENDANCE LIST PLEASE PRINT:
NAME BADGE N0.
AFFILIATION 3(%1n 0, hnie n 2 O?OY h A T TGLLG - AiaiLTHWElT**
e j fd i t u A rn L.
i~A uw c- 09t9 FAum fessu.
ruc.
[d s I $ rd< Wh lee :
5 0974 Coutvuraav,'
C= o
- E 3 A-n kw]
}
H p - Fmw r
% sx r-r % cc Go9n as. Gao
-,., as,.../
E o 997 i)S hoe W.o n IU 04 AREA-5 D 7hL.
It A L kn/
bnq C e 171 Gli M C O
/
E - loco YA<t m A ~TIJDI A M $1ATiaA)
/ w N. LEncYa Arnrhuv WL6MW eoin-ef&
bu t k] lw)
E-Me?
(/S M fn Ecasy.
Bw7f W.sve hr sa v.. _ t um a.,
n nsi osNaL/pu41
'2f ' L.. c.c +- % -A.,
E-09/>4 VA 2IHAE ncao T6mW -
f
' ACR5 5UBCOMMITTEE MEETING ON WASTE MWmn w_ _
LOCAT10:1:
ROOM 1046, 1717 H St.. hW. Wayhingen" D. C.
(( h [
DATE:
APRR 24-7 5.1006 ATTENDANCE LIST St CrA/ !.
gjpg yg y i
PLEASE PRINT:
NAME M
AFFILIATION O. Ni ce I &
Ac2S N.em w
- 5. R e.m e k
'T.
E % s,e x ll II C.
An n en<
/-CES Cesisitaner R. Favra II It W. S 'r h i Al b Lf/2 t
's A4. C.A eiere N. ?AILTN NRC-S TAff-
- ~.
l-IRERT
>>K c /Did M K M. Calw I
J
'PA Niuv ACK$
SP.
f~sLLe su EKAsCb Ser&A R
E n9 bOE- /EW-33.
$. Gs.ok E A YAKIM 1NO/AM NATlW LINbA ((HMhU Le sllunn L +c-3 sA i c__
_ Abfro// E ne166 bd4~//?W D VA'c /Ra3*/W41 -
(RANK kWAkRERG vRc/zr/anB JAMES DOduetLY t>R sl6te J n T )AKWpu y/ c)I6)Gdd tu.4. Hi u_
sHEY Don M.Agtc i
AM c / a N r 7) 6IL/ pes!
l
- l. W r/r /7 t' k T Ancotvk NGC/IE n.nst cc4Ywas xen ms-
~
O. MERRILL I
ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING ON WASTE MWmmm ROOM 1046, 1717 H S t.. hW. Wa c'n i ngt nn ' D. C.
'Q
,, p {
1.0, CAT,10.'l:
/
h,'hM DATE:
APRIL 24-25. loc 6 ATTENDANCE LIST FNpAv nr m
[p./A gp p 4,( [
PLEASE PRINT:
I NAME 6
AFFILIATION b ),' d Als $oeV
^lAd,ll$
g h
I a
i a \\
l l
m osV -
0 l
O. MERRILL
~...
AC85 SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING ON KASTF MWmmVP --
LOCAT.10.1:
ROOM 1046, 1717 H St. hh'.. Wachinct nn - D.C.
APRIL 24-1986 DATE:
ATTENDANCE L75T PLEASE PRINT:
NAME BADGE ii0.
AFFILIATION k-6\\ c4 UL 7 OlY9 h6< (cd n ws a u c,r r - -
cc~
N,9l,- QAKTER 5t> 9 7~)
keAR i.Pe.e.+ w s F-0939 SAic NM L Nism w E-ofch %mn rooiAu /JA7iad
/
uu. %
r-om c -~ em o
- Nctv
/nnf 915 F - 67 %
OS 00h i
A -MW tG c.,Ik eeam M= f( m.
9c;e S. So n n-c ons r
l r
\\
O
, _. - -. -.. -, _... -. -