ML20247G981
| ML20247G981 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/03/1998 |
| From: | NRC ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE (ACNW) |
| To: | NRC ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE (ACNW) |
| References | |
| NACNUCLE-0118, NACNUCLE-118, NUDOCS 9805210033 | |
| Download: ML20247G981 (41) | |
Text
.
' lN(j)'0lW MINUTES OF THE 97TH ACNW HEETING DECEM8ER 16-18, 1997 ##
TABLE OF CONTENTS EA92
- 1. Chairman's Report (0 pen) ..................... 2 II. Health Effects from Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation (0 pen) . . .. 3 III. Meeting with the Deputy Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Task Force on the External Regulation of Department of Energy Facilities (0 pen) ..................... 8 IV. Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste (0 pen) 9 V. Yucca Mountain Site Characterization (0 pen) . . . . . . . .. .. 18 VI. High-Level Waste Issue Resolution Status Reports and Acceptance Criteria (0 pen) .............................. 19 VII. Executive Session (0 pen) ..................... 23 A. Future Meeting Agenda (0 pen) . . . . . . . . .. .. 23 B. Future Committee Activities (0 pen) . . ... . . . . 23 APPENDICES I. Federal Register Notice II. Meeting Schedule and Outline III. Meeting Attendees IV. Future Agenda and Working Group Activities V. List of Documents Provided to the Committee l
jb j
. v i DESIGNATED ORIGINAL ,,
n?
c
__ _ Ceitified By _
9905210033 980203 E PDR ADVCM NAC 0118 l
,, s ..
I CERTIFIED 2/20/98
- 12 L y a p Issued: 2/3/98
/' ,
P -
BY B. JOHN GARRICK = l1 I LE MINUTES OF THE 97TH MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE DECEMBER 16-18, 1997 ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND {
l I
J The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) held its 97th meeting December 16-18. 1997, at Two White Flint North, Room T-283, 11545 Rockville Pike.
Rockville. Maryland. The ACNW met to discuss and take appropriate action on the items listed in the attached agenda. The entire meeting was open to i
\
public attendance.
A transcript of selected portions of the meeting is available in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Public Document Room at the Gelman Building. 2I20 i L Street. NW.. Washington, DC. Copies of the transcript are available for purchase from Ann Riley & Associates. Ltd., 1250 I Street. NW.. Suite 300, Washington, DC 20005. Transcripts are also available for downloading or reviewing on the Internet at http://www.nrc. gov /ACRSACNW.
Dr. B. John Garrick. ACNW Chairman, convened the meeting at 8:30 a.m. and I
explained the purpose of this session. ACNW members Drs. Charles Fairhurst.
Raymond G. Wymer, and George M. Hornberger were also present. For a list of other attendees, see Appendix III.
I i
,, y 97th ACNW Meeting 2 Decomtar 16-18,1997 4
I. Chairman's Reoort (0 pen) l
[ Richard K. Major was the Designated Federal Official for this part'of the meeting.)
Dr. Garrick noted a number of items that he believed to be of interest regarding the drift scale heater test which began on December 3,1997, at the Yucca Mountcin Project. He also stated that the former Westinghouse Electric Corporation, now known as CBS Corporation, is seeking buyers for both its Savannah River site operating contract and its commercial nuclear fuel plant near Columbia, South Carolina. He stated that the Southeast Low-Level Compact Commission voted to suspend funding for development of a proposed low-level waste (LLW) site in the state of North Carolina. Dr. Garrick said that the NRC is concerned because $7 million spending shortfall is projected for May 1999. Another item of interest was that 26 utilities have petitioned a Federal appeals court to permit them to stop making payments to the Department of Energy (DOE) for the Federal Nuclear Waste Fund because DOE has not honored a legal requirements to begtn taking spent commercial nuclear fuel.
I i
l l
{ 97th ACNW Meeting 3 December 16-18,1997 II. Health Effects from Low Levels of Ionizino Radiation (Oceni
[Mr. Howard J. Larson was the Designated Federal Official for this part of the meeting.]
Dr. Wymer introduced this topic by noting that it had been presented to l several members of the Committee during a joint ACNW-ACRS meeting held in March 1996. As a result of that meeting, the Committee issued a letter to the Commission dated July 10, 1996. After noting that this session was scheduled to take the entire morning, he introduced the first speaker Dr. Myron Pollycove, Visiting Medical Fellow. Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards (NMSS).
Dr. Pollycove's presentation, entitled " Molecular Biology Epidemiology, and the Demise of the Linear No-Threshold (LNT) Hypothesis." covered the follow-ing:
- 1. the November 17-21, 1997, international conference held in Seville.
Spain, titled " Low Doses of Ionizing Radiation: Biological Effects and Regulatory Control":
- 2. the August 1-3, 1997. Wingspread conference in Racine, Wisconsin.
which discussed " Cancer Risk from Radiation Exposures" [Dr. Pollycove noted that neither conference had attained a consensus]:
- 3. studies of exposures to various populations, namely:
., Y 97th ACNW Meeting 4
. December 16-18,1997
- a. a study of the Eastern Urals villagers,
- b. a study of Japanese radon baths,
- c. a U.S. residential radon study,
- d. a U.S. nuclear shipyard worker study,
- e. the Canadian breast fluoroscopy study,
- f. the Japanese life span study (1950-1990), and
- g. the Rocketdyne worker study; and
- 4. technical molecular biology considerations relating these studies to DNA damage and repair systems and the response of the immune system to radiation.
f In summarizing his presentation, Dr. Pollycove cited the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) as stating very correctly that the LNT is a bio-physical presumption, not a biological one, and that 'ulti-mately, confidence in the linear, no-threshold (LNT) dose-response relation-ship at low doses is based on our understanding of the basic mechanisms involved."
Dr. Hornberger asked whether 20r could be considered an acceptable threshold level, to which Dr. Polixove responded that although at the Wingspread conference it was stated that no significant damage was observed below 20r, he personally would be quite content with a ir threshold level.
Dr. Holahan provided an update on the status of two NRC-sponsored projects:
the NCRP Subcommittee SC 1-6 study on the LNT theory, and the study in progress by the National Academy of Sciences on the potential efficacy of l
97th ACNW Meeting 5
- December 16-18,1997 producing a BEIR VII study on the effects of low levels of ionizing radiation.
He noted that the SC 1-6 group had met five times thus far. Scientists on both study groups have expressed a need for more data indicating that there is insufficient data on the epidemiological side and that "it's beyond the envelope" of currently available relevant cellular and molecular biology studies.
The SC 1-6 subcommittee members have individual work assignments. In addition, the subcommittee has received input from some 42 individuals in response to a call for information from the scientific community. SC 1-6 has met four times and has held a public workshop in which 20-25 individuals were invited to address the group. There will also be an opportunity for a finite group from the public to provide input to the subcommittee next spring. It is anticipated that the draft report will be available by the end of 1998. with the final report expected in the 1999 time frame.
Dr. Holahan also provided additional information on the National Research Council / National Academy of Sciences report, stating that the study seeks to determine whether sufficient new data has been generated in the last decade to permit a reassessment of the BEIR V report data. New data has been generated by the Russian Techna River and Mayak production worker studies, followups to the atomic bomb study, and the potential dosimetry changes associated with the Hiroshima bomb. The study group is doing a scoping study, with several points stressed, viz., low-dose exposures (in the range of 1 to 100 millirem above background), and the potential for decreasing the uncertainty in the estima- H tion of the dose and dose-rate reduction factors. The group is interested not only in organism thresholds but also in organ thresholds and recognizes that 1
j
I k., ,,
l 97th ACNW Meeting 6 December 16-18,1997 among other things. it must consider genetic predisposition, the influence of adaptive response, and the potential for radiation hormesis.
l Subsequent to their last meeting, the BEIR VII group met to discuss its preliminary recommendations and conclusions. Two reports are relatively imminent: the first is a letter report, expected to be issued in the next few weeks. in response to questions from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). EPA asked: if a recommendation were to be made to develop a BEIR VII.
what should the scope of work be? What type of issues should the committee address? What type of expertise would be needed? The second report is the final recommendation and should be available, perhaps, in the mid-February time frame.
Dr. Garrick asked why sufficient exposure data had not been generated over the years. In his opinion. it would appear that a sufficiently large database for resolving the question of the biological effects of low levels of ionizing radiation should have been generated by now. In response. Dr. Holahan noted toat there are many who believe that there are too many questions to permit obtaining an answer from the epidemiology, and currently the molecular tools are not sensitive enough.
Dr. Shlomo Yaniv. Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, provided information on several of the studies underway in the former Soviet Union, such as on the 1 effects among the workers in Mayak on the population along the Techna River, and on the 1957 waste tank explosion. Results of those studies are not expected for another 5 years. He also noted the studies of thyroid cancer among children exposed during the Chernobyl accident and the feasibility study 1
_ ____ ___ _ _ ______ _ - ____ __-_ A
f.
., o,
- 97th ACNW Meeting 7 ll December 16-18,1997 l
of leukemia among the liquidators (the cleanup workers) Dr. Yaniv stated that these studies in Russia are opportunistic in that they are based on human data, as opposed to many of the current models in use today, which are based on animal experiments and extrapolations.
Dr. Carl Paperiello, Director, NMSS, discussed several aspects of the regula-tory perspective of the LNT theory. He expressed concern with the current polarization of opinion of those in the health effects field as to the applicability or nonapplicability of the current LNT theory. The question he posed was how to get those concerned with the issue to quit debating it and focus on getting the needed answers. He believed epidemiology, for the very low doses, would not prove the linear model. He also thought that the data based on the Russian experiences might help better define the dose rate effectiveness factor. Dr. Paperiello expects that the answer to the efficacy of the LNT model may very well be provided by molecular biology.
Dr. Paperiello also expressed an opinion that the public's acceptance of risk is not a constant and varies with their perception of the consequences.
Several examples of public risk acceptance were provided.
Dr. Wymer raised the question as to the time dependency with respect to cost and the need for establishment of an acceptable risk level. Dr. Paperiello replied that he believed the issue of acceptable institutional control is related to the answer, also noting that there are two d1fferent levels of institutional control: one is an ability to intervene and the other, the ability not to intervene, but having the ability to keep people away from the j risk. He also discussed the cost-benefit approach, but stated that a serious l
[
\
't
. 97th ACNW Meeting 8
!- December 16-18,1997 consideration is who pays and who benefits and perhaps, also, who undergoes the risk. It-is his belief that institutional controls will work for a long time and perhaps one should have more confidence in them.
The Committee indicated its intent to sponsor a future working group on the topic as the results of several of the current studies become available. The purpose of such a working group would be to facilitate a technical exchange between several experts in the field, with a particular emphasis on the field of molecular biology.
III. Meetina with the Deoutv Chairman of the Nuclear Reaulatory Commis-sion's Task Force on the External Reaulation of Deoartment of Enerav Facilities (Ocen)
Dr. John Austin. Deputy Chairman. Task Force on the External Regulation of DOE Facilities, stated that DOE has traditionally been a self-regulating govern-ment agency. Starting several years ago a number of studies were commissioned I to explore whether value would be added by external regulation of certain DOE facilities. The NRC has been suggested as the external regulator. A pilot program is underway to measure the added value of external regulation. Some of the expected benefits from external regulation by NRC are the use of an 1 open, public process: greater discipline and accountability; and the increased stability of the process. Three pilot programs are underway. These include a multipurpose license (similar to a university license) at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, the radiochemistry hot cells at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and a spent fuel storage facility at Savannah River. The cost of this year's pilot project for NRC will be about $1 million and involve six employees. In
97th ACNW Meeting 9
- December 16-18,1997, FY 1999 five additional projects will be proposed. Decisions on whether or not to have external regulation of DOE will be made in calendar year 1999.
IV. Licensino Requirements for Land Disoosal of Radioactive Waste .
Dr. Andrew Campbell. ACNW staff gave the Committee an overview of the licensing requirements in 10 CFR Part 61 for the disposal of LLW in the near-surface environment. Next Dr. Campblell gave a tutorial. Dr. Campbell discussed the background and applicability of 10 CFR Part 61 described the j structure of the regulation, reviewed its key technical requirenants and performance objectives, and concluded with a discussion of some of the supporting guidance documents for the rule.
In his discussion of the background and development of 10 CFR Part 61. Dr.
Campbell described the available commercial LLW disposal facilities in the 1960s and 1970s, including sites at Barnwell. South Carolina: Beatty, Nevada Virginia: Maxey Flats. Kentucky: Richland. Washington: West Valley New York; and Sheffield. Illinois. He stated that many of these sites experienced !
problems such as cover stability, mixing of different types of waste, water infiltration, and offsite releases. He noted that the Low-Level Waste Policy Act of 1980 and the Low-Level Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 established State responsibility for disposal capacity of commercially generated LLW. The NRC conducted an environmental impact analysis and issued the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements for 10 CFR Part 61 in 1980-1981. The final i regulation was promulgated in December 1982.
l i
l
! 97th ACNW Meeting 10
'l December 16-18,1997 Dr. Campbell described LLW disposal under 10 CFR Part 61. He noted that the regulation applies to all types of LLW disposal technologies for the upper 30 meters of the near-surface environment. He added that shallow land burial (SLB), which was previously used for commercial LLW disposal. is currently banned in many States. Possible disposal system designs under 10 CFR Part 61 l
include above grade vaults (AGVs), with no earthen cover: earth mounded concrete bunkers (EMCBs); and below grade vaults (BGVs). He added that most States and Compacts are developing engineered disposal systems including SLB with an engineered cover at two arid sites and concrete vaults at humid sites (mostly EMCBs and BGVs). All proposed designs will use multilayer covers to keep water from infiltrating into the waste.
He also discussed application of Part 61 to different disposal technologies.
He noted that most parts of the regulation (e.g., licensing, administrative.
and procedural sections; performance objectives: environmental monitoring: and institutional control) apply to all forms of land disposal (for LLW). In contrast. the technical requirements under Subpart D apply only to disposal below the ground surface and do not apply to AGVs or to disposal deeper than 30 meters (e.g., mined cavities). For these other disposal technologies, technical requirements would have to be established on a case-by-case basis.
He described Subpart B requirements for specific technical information, including site characteristics: design features and their relation to the performance objectives: design basis natural events: construction and opera-tions plans: description of exploitable natural resources at the site:
descriptions of the material to be disposed: establishment of quality, safety, and monitoring programs: and administrative procedures to be followed.
b ., *)
97th ACNW Meeting 11 December 16-18,1997 Dr. Campbell said Subpart B also contains requirements in S61.13a. b. c. & d that technical analyses be done to provide " reasonable assurance" that performance objectives will be met. These include performance objectives in S61.41 (protection of general public - dose limits), in S61.42 (protection for the inadvertent intruder). S61.43 (protection of workers and general public during operations), and S61.44 (assuring long-term stability of the site).
Other information requirements concern institutional, financial, special nuclear material (SNM), and criticality issues. The Commission may also impose additional requirements for the license.
Dr. Campbell described the 10 CFR 61.41 performance objective for protection of the general population from releases of radioactivity in Subpart C. He defined LLW performance assessment (PA) as the technical analyses required in 10 CFR 61.13(a) that are used to demonstrate compliance. The analyses must clearly demonstrate " reasonable assurance' that the exposure to humans from the release of radioactivity will not exceed the limits set forth in $61.41.
He also said that LLW PA is cor.cerned with analyses of long-term (post-closure) performance. He noted that the regulation specifies that the pathways analyzed must include air, soil, ground water, surface water, plant uptake, and exhumation by burrowing animals. He also said that the rule requires that the analyses clearly identify and differentiate between roles performed by the natural disposal site characteristics and the design fea-tures.
I Dr. Campbell said that the 10 CFR Part 61.42 performance objective provides j for intruder protection after the end of institutional controls. He said that l the 10 CFR 561.13(b) technical analyses require the applicant to demonstrate
.. . . . .....J
i l
, 97th ACNW Meeting 12
. December 16-18,1997 that the facility will meet the waste classification requirements in S61.55, that the waste segregation requirements in S61.7(b)(2) & $61.55 will be met, and that the facility will provide adequate barriers to inadvertent intrusion l
as per $61.7(b)(3) & (5). He added that separate intruder dose analyses for
$61.42 are generally not done for LLW PA. However, an intruder analysis might be required if an anomalous " waste spectrum" includes sufficiently large quantities of long-lived radionuclides such that the intruder cannot reason-ably be protected by the waste classification and intruder barrier require-ments of 10 CFR Part 61.
Dr. Campbell noted that the S61.43 performance objective for protection of individuals during operations requires that worker doses conform to the 10 CFR Part 20 limits and that offsite doses to the general public conform to the 551.41 dose limits. He briefly discussed the S61.44 performance objectives for long-term stability after closure. He said that stability is addressed separately from PA in the license application, except as it has an impact on meeting the performance objectives in S61.41 Dr. Campbell then discussed the site suitability requirements of S61.50, in Subpart D. These requirements focus on isolation of waste and long-term performance. He said the requirement that the site shall be capable of being characterized and modeled often leads to confusion. He said that the intent was to promote the selection of sites with relatively simple geologic and hydrologic features. Other site suitability requirements include the following: l l
l 1
l l
___._ _ _ _____.______________ _ ________ _ ___J
97th ACNW Meeting 13
. December 16--18,1997 >
avoiding areas of future development or with exploitable natural re-sources:
requiring the site to be well drained, to be free of flooding or ponding, and to have minimum upstream drainage; and l
1 precluding selection of sites where groundwater intrusion into waste could occur or where surface discharge on the site could occur from the hydrogeologic unit (s) containing waste. !
)
The rule also specifies avoiding areas where the frequency, rate, or extent of tectonic activity (e.g., seismic and volcanic) or of surface geological !
processes (e.g.. erosion) may affect the ability to meet the performance objectives or preclude defensible modeling and predictions of long-term impacts.
Dr. Campbell discussed the design requirements in S61.51. This part of the ,
rule specifies that design features be directed to long-term isolation of waste, avoiding maintenance, and requires that design and operations be I compatible with the closure plan and long-term stability: that the design complement natural site features to achieve the performance objectives: that covers be designed to minimize infiltration and resist degradation; that surface features be designed to resist erosion, and that the site be designed 1 to minimize water contact with waste.
Dr. Campbell then discussed the technical requirements for operation and closure in S61.52. He noted that the regulations require that unstabilized i
t
97th ACNW Meeting 14
. December 16-18,1997 Class A waste be segregated from Class B and C wastes, that Class C waste have a minimum cover of 5 meters or be put behind a 500-year intruder barrier, that the package integrity be maintained during disposal, and that void spaces be filled to reduce subsidence. He noted that these requirements are focused on concerns from problems that developed for trench disposal systems. The regulation also limits surface exposure levels to Part 20 iimits, requires that boundaries and locations be known, and that a buffer zone be established that is adequate for monitoring and remediation. He also discussed the requirements for environmental monitoring in $61.53, including pre-operational monitoring, plans for correcting migration, and monitoring conducted during operations and after closure.
Dr. Campbell next discussed the waste classification system in $61.55. He noted that the rule is concerned with both long-lived radionuclides, which are hazardous long past the effectiveness of institutional controls, waste forms, etc., and short-lived isotopes, for which institutional controls and other measures can effectively limit doses. He said that Class A waste must meet the waste characteristic requirements in S61.56 and needs to be segregated from B and C wastes if it is not stabilized. He noted that the concentration limits for Class A waste are such that it will not present an unacceptable hazard to the intruder after the 100-year institutional control period. Dr.
Campbell said that Class B & C wastes also must meet the waste characteristic requirements in S61.56, and must be stabilized (i.e. must be shown to meet the 300-year stability requirement). He noted that Tables 1 and 2 and the illustrative calculations are used to determine waste class.
Ib a - a,
- 97th ACNW Meeting 15 December 16-18,1997 Dr. Campbell also discussed the land ownership requirements in S61.59. The rule requires land ownership by the State or Federal Government, but has a provision for exemptions (561.6) on a case-by-case basis. He noted that Utah, an Agreement State, granted an exemption to the Envirocare facility. He also discussed institutional control provisions of the rule. These require that the owner or custodial agency control access, fcrbid reliance on active institutional control for more than 100 years post closure, and assume
" passive institutional control" after 100 years.
Dr. Campbell noted the availability of the following guidance documents:
the Technical Position on Site Suitability:
NUREG-0902. Selection and Characterization:
the Technical Position on Waste Classification:
{
. Regulatory Guide 4.19. Site Selection:
NUREG-1199. Standard Format and Content Guide:
NUREG-1200. Standard Review Plan (SRP):
NUREG-1300. Environmental Standard Review Plan:
the Waste Form Technical Position (Rev. 1. 1991):
the Revised Technical Position on Concentration Averaging (1995); and the Draft Branch Technical Position (BTP) on LLW Performance Assessment (issued for public comment in May 1997). l 1
4 1
l
97th ACNW Meeting 16
. December 16-18,1997 He discussed some of the pertinent parts of the SRP NUREG-1200. He noted that SRP 56.1 provides general guidance on LLW PA but is not very specific.
It identifies release scenarios and transport pathways; specifies the numeri-cal performance assessment to determine compliance; addresses three fundamen-tal parts of the analysis: release, transfer, and dose; and identifies the ground water pathway as the most important. He noted that the SRP emphasizes
{
site-specific analyses throughout PA. It also states that the purpose of PA is to bound potential impacts for the purpose of making a regulatory decision: j PA is not a prediction of actual impacts. The SRP specifies that the regula-tory authority may impose waste form and packaging requirements and inventory limits. He said that the approaches used in State regulatory reviews are
]
generally consistent with the SRP.
Dr. Campbell discussed the need for additional LLW PA guidance to address aspects of PA not addressed in the SRP. He said that such guidance should explain the overall PA process and establish the relationship between site characterization and design and the PA process. It should discuss using generic data in PA resolving key regulatory issues (e.g., time frame) and !
using uncertainty and sensitivity analyses. It should explain model confirma-tion (" validation") and code verification. It should describe and provide !
ways to resolve key technical issues in infiltration, concrete degradation. ;
source term, and transport of radionuclides.
Dr. Campbell described the Draft Branch Technical Position on a Performance Assessment Methodology for Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facilities (NUREG-1573, issued for public comment in May 1997). He discussed the goals of the guidance and its relationship to the regulation. He described the
1 97th ACNW Meeting 17 December 16-18,1997 overall performance assessment methodology for LLW developed for the NRC by Sandia National Laboratory and its application via a PA process described in the BTP. He discussed some of the key technical policy issues, including consideration of future site conditions, processes, and events: the perfor-mance of engineered barriers: the time frame for LLW PA: the treatment of sensitivity and uncertainty in LLW PA: and the role of PA during operations and closure. In conclusion, he discussed some specific modeling issues for the subsystem modules in the LLW PA approach.
The Committee members asked a number of questions. One line of questioning concerned the types of long-lived radionuclides going into LLW sites and whether these types were anticipated when 10 CFR Part 61 was developed. Dr.
Campbell said that the amounts of uranium, especially depleted uranium, were not anticipated. For example, he noted that the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for 10 CFR Part 61 considered only about 20 curies total uranium, whereas some LLW sites have more than 2,000 curies of uranium. He noted that the main issue for uranium was the dose potential of the daughter products that grow in over long time frames. He also noted that concentration limits
, for uranium were included in the draft rule, but dropped from the final rule in response to comments and because it was not anticipated that significant uranium would be going to LLW sites. The Committee members also asked about the form of intruder analyses achieved for a 10 CFR Part 61 site. Dr.
Campbell noted that such analyses are not generally done and that compliance with the S61.42 performance objectives is achieved by showing compliance with the waste classification system and the waste segregation and intruder barrier requirements.
1
l 97th ACNW Meeting 18 December 16-18,1997 V. Yucca Mountain Site Characterization (Ocen) l l
[Mr. Richard Major was the Designated Federal Official for this part of the meeting.]
Mr. Richard Major. ACNW staff, summarized a status report on the Yucca Mountain project sent to the Committee by Ms. Carol Hanlon of DOE's Yucca l
Mountain Project Office. Among the t.;ms of interest were the following:
Preparation of the viability assessment (VA) is on target. The VA is
, scheduled for delivery by September 15. 1998. It will consist of five volumes: (1) summary introduction. (2) design. (3) performance assess-l ment. (4) license application plan, and (5) cost estimate.
The waste isolation and containment strategy is in final review before publication. This document will reflect the current view that engineered barriers should be used to compensate for uncertainties in natural
, barriers. The uncertainties may lead to enhanced engineered barriers such as drip shields or ceramic coatings on the waste package.
. The drift scale heater test began on December 3.1997. This test is designed to acquire a more in-depth understanding of the coupled thermal-mechanical-hydrological-chemical processes occurring in the rock mass surrounding the proposed repository. This test will last approximately 10 years.
I l
l l
97th ACNW Meeting - 19
,- December 16-18,1997 Work on the east-west-transect began on December 5, 1997, with blasting on a starter tunnel off the exploratory studies facility. The drift will be mined with a 5 meter tunnel boring machine. The drif* will be 2,815 meters in length.
. Work has begun at Busted Butte to study the Calico Hills formation. The Calico Hills formation surfaces at Busted Butte .
I VI. Hiah-Level Waste Issue Resolution Status Reoorts and Accentance Criteria (0 pen)
[L, Deering was the Designated Federal Official for this part of the meet-ing.]
Mr. King Stablein, Acting Chief. Engineering and Geosciences Branch, NMSS, briefed the Committee on the progress made to date and expected in 1998 in the high-level waste (HLW) issue resolution process. Mr. Stablein discussed the purpose and context of Issue Resolution Status Reports (IRSRs), the structure and content of the IRSRs, the IRSRs issued to date or to be issued in FY 1998, and progress toward issue resolution documented in IRSRs already issued.
Mr. Stablein discussed the following recently issued IRSRs: Unsaturated.and Saturated Flow Under Isothermal Conditions. Thermal Effects on Flow, Evolution of the Near-Field Environment, Structural Deformation and Seismicity, and Repository Design and Thermal-Mechanical Effects. For each IRSR, Mr. Stablein described the issue and associated subissues, summarized progress toward
., a, 97th ACNW Meeting 20
- December 16-18,1997 i
I resolution and gave examples of acceptance criteria for the subissues )
addressed. ;
Issue resolution. Mr. Stablein said. is focused on the 10 most important 1
issues to repository performance (key technical issues. or KTIs) providing. I early feedback to DOE on issues (avoiding surprises) and demonstrating measurable progress. The IRSRs are used to document the status of NRC's position on various issues.
)
Issue resolution is achieved when the staff has no more questions on an issue or subissue, and, as such, occurs at the staff level only. IRSRs are based on information gained through NRC-D0E technical exchanges, less formal Appendix 7 meetings, and written correspondences.
Each IRSR contains an introduction, a description of the issue or subissue, the importance of issue to repository performance, acceptance criteria review methods and technical bases, status of progress toward resolution, and references.
The staff is currently using the Total System Performance Assessment-3 code to conduct sensitivity analyses and is in the early stages of documenting the results. The results of sensitivity analyses will be used to reevaluate the importance to performance of the subissues within KTIs and of the KTIs l themselves. The ACNW encouraged the staff to be flexible in selecting KTIs !
and subissues in response to new information from the sensitivity analyses, and suggested that the staff may be surprised by some of the results, given i
I l
l
o, 97th ACNW Meeting 21 l
,' December 16-18,1997 I that the existing KTIs and subissues were only based in part on the results of PA.
The acceptance criteria for each IRSR are aimed at methods for testing, modeling, and PA. The staff is now working toward making the acceptance criteria consistent with one another.
IRSRs are developed by a team from the NRC and the Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses staffs. The ACNW asked how the staff plans to manage complex. multidisciplinary issues, such as coupled processes and other issues that are closely linked. in the IRSRs. Dr. Brett Leslie. NMSS, described how sensitivity analyses are being conducted on each issue or subissue within a KTI. such as coupled effects in the evolution of the near-field environment.
The results are abstracted and passed along as input to the container life and sourc'e term KTI. Dr. Leslie indicated that the impacts of man-made materials on the near-field chemical environment will not be handled until Rev. 2 of the IRSR on Evolution of the Near Field. It was also noted that mechanical coupled effects will be considered in a separate IRSR under the KTI on Repository Design. Mr. Stablein noted that the KTI teams stay in continual contact with one another to integrate the information. The ACNW noted that using PA to evaluate the KTIs and subissues may lead to a totally different structure for characterizing the issues and information.
i The staff plans to conduct sensitivity analyses at the process and total system level in FY 1998. Mr. Tim McCartin, NMSS, said that it is difficult to know what specific information and coupling of information at the process level must be included in the PA. The staff is in the process of determining )
97th ACNW Meeting 22 December 16-18,1997 this. He noted that it must be done in an iterative fashion starting with the results of early sensitivity analyses, then evaluating the importance of various coupled effects.
The ACNW was impressed with the staff's IRSR activities, but expressed concerned about how the staff will comprehensively evaluate complex issues, such as coupled effects, and write IRSRs before the fall of 1998, when the Viability Assessment (VA) is scheduled for delivery.
(
DOE is expected to respond to the five IRSRs rec.atly issued by early 1998.
Although DOE's initial verbal response to some of the IRSRs has been favor-able, NRC anticipates that DOE will not respond favorably on some of the more contentious issues.
The staff believes that significant progress toward issue resolution has been made on issues most significant to performance. The staff expects that progress on issue resolution should facilitate the staff's review of the VA and limit the likelihood of NRC's identifying unanticipated problems in the VA.
The ACNW plans to begin working on a report on this subject at its next meeting.
I i
l l
97th ACNW Meeting 23
- l. December 16-18,1997 l
l VII. Executive Session (0 pen)
[ Richard Major was the Designated Federal Official for this part of the meeting.] l A. Future Meetina Aoenda (0 pen) 1 Appendix IV sumarizes the proposed items endorsed by the Comittee '
for the 98th ACNW Meeting. February 24-26, 1998.
B. Future Comittee Activities (0 pen)
The ACNW will hold its 99th meeting March 24-26. 1998.
t
j wtrtMyuu U Federal Register / Vol. 62 No. 232 / Wednesday, December 3,1997 / Notices 63969
!* efluent releases. Thus, they will not Effective dote:The amendment to performance mana= ament capability in a5 set any efDuents that may be released Certincate of Compliance GDP-1 the NRC high-level radioactive waste eEsite, becomes effective 30 days after bein program, application of probabilistic 2.The proposed amendment will not result in a sign 15 cant increase in signed by the Director, Office of Nuc ear risk assessment methods to performance Material Safety and Safeguards. assessment in the NRC high-level waste individual or cumulative occupational sediation exposure. Cert /Acote of Compliance No. GDP-2: program,and theimplementation of the The Amendment will provide cross defense in-depth concept in the revised i The proposed changes do not change references for two Tachle=1 Safety I
or add any new requirements.W to CFR Part 60. N meeting is currently Requirements for the Criticality scheduled for December 13,1997 from changes provide a cross reference Accident Alarm System in Building C- 10:00 a.m. until 11:30 a.m.
between TSRs to ensure au required 310. D. low-levels of Jordsing Radiation--
l actions are performed when necessary. ZacolPublicDocument Room The Committee will review the latest i
,no changes do not relate to controls Jocotton: Paducah Public Library,555 developments in the biological e5ects of used to minimise occupational radiation Washington Street, Paducah, Kentucky low levols ofionizing radiation with exposures; therefore, the changes will 42003. members of the NRC sisEnnd other not increase exposure.
IHeSaryland,&ls see day interested individuals.
- 3. The proposed amendment will not N*d ,* E. Yucco Mountain Site rueult in a significant construction impact. Fw the Nuclur Regulatory h-w Characterization-The Committee wiu
& proposed discuss site characterization activities at will not result CarlJ.Paperteus, b Yucca Mountain h with a in any construction, fore, there wilj mector, office ofNesimerMeerdal sefsty andAefsguards. reprteentative of the Department of be no construction impacts. Energy.
4.N proposed amendment wiu not (FR Dec. e7-31F31 Filed 13-3-er; a4s aus) F. 20 CFR part 82,IJcensing result in a signincent increase in the essase sees mus.e w Requirements ForLandDisposalof potential for, or todialogical or chemical Radioactis Weste.-b Committee's '
consequences from, previously analy sta5 will present a short tutorial on the accidents. UC1. EAR REOU1.A70RY Commission's low-level weste N proposed changes are MIS $40N regulations to the Committee.
administrative and arve only to relate C. Papomuon ofACNWAe the components of the CAAS in C-310. Advloory Committee 9n Nuoleer The Committw will discuss y ed The changes do not change b curmat Westo Notice of Meegn0 reports, including comments on ACNW TSRs, only link separate sections more The Advisory Committee on Nuclear Priorities and strategic pl ,and learly. Therefore, the proposed changes Waste (ACNW) will hold its 97th other topics discussed during a not represent an increase in the meeting on December 16.-18.1997,in souting as the need arises.
potential for, or radiological or chemical Room T-283, et 11545 Rockville Pike
- H. Committee Activities / Future i consequences from, previously Rockville, Maryland. Agendo-The Committee will consider
) cvaluated accidents. top ics posed for future consideration j 5.N proposed amendment will not public N entire meeting will be open to attendanca. by the Commines and Working result in the possibility of a new or Groups. N Committee will discuss N schedule for this meetingis as different kind of accident. g g.,,'. ACNW.related -activities ofindividual -
N members.
tot edfreposed or changechanges any TSR to the TSRs do Tuesday, December it,4997.4J0 AK 8888 8#PM I. Misce #eneous.-N Committee wiu requirements. Therefore, the changes discu.s miscellaneous matters related to would not create new operating Wednesday, &cember 27,199Nm AX unulsmFK the conduct of Committee activities and conditions or new plant con 5 .
organizadonal activities and complete that could lead to a new or t diburation cember 28,2997-420 MAM rsday,d
""8 N P M discussion of matters and speciSc issues ofaccident. that were not completed d hp smendment will not A Meet /ng with NRC's Direefar, previous meetiogs, as time i soeult in a s ficant reduction in any Division of Weste Management Office availability of information permit.
I margin of . ofNuclearMaterialSafetyand Procedures for the conduct of and
- The pro changes etteimpt to Safeguarde-b Committee will,mest participation in ACNW meetings wess rectify the Ituation in which an with the Dusctor to discuss . published in the Federal Register on sperstor could overlook the linkage developments at the Yucca Mountain September 2,1997 (62 FR 46382). In .
between b two TSRs that both contain Project, moources, rules under accordance with bee procedures, oral required actions related to b CAAS. By development, a pilot program for , or written statements may be presented including a ross nference, the changes regulating certain Department of Energy by members of the public, electronic try to ensure all utred sedons eso faciliues, and obr items of mutual . - recordings will be permitted only performed.Thue ses do not interest. . during those portions of the meeting decmase the margins of safety. B.HI.Wlssue Resolut/om Statue that are open to the public,and
- 7.N proposed amendment will not . Reports and Acceptance Criterfo-N questions may be asked only by result in an overall decrease in the NRC staff will update the Committee on members of the Committee,its effectiveness of the lant's safety, the progress of staEreviews related to consultants, and staff. Parsons desiring safeguards, or sec regrams, the high. level waste key technical to make oral statements should notify implementation of proposed lasues. . the Chief, Nuclear Weste Branch, Mr.
nges do not change the safety, C. Meet with the Commission-b Richard K. Major, as far in advance as sguards, or acurity programs. Committee will prepare for and meet praedcable so that appropriate
.oerefon, the effectiveness of the with the Commission on items of anangements can be made to schedule safety, safeguards, and security mutualinterut. These issues will the necessary time during the meeting pro 5 rams is not decreased. - include: ACNW priorides for FY es, for such statements. Use of still, motion
1
. 83970 Federal Register / Vcl. 62. No. 232 / Wcdnesdey . December 3,1997 / Notices l
, t l i picture, and enlevisio2 carneras during of the Atomic 2nergy Act of1954,as take this action. it will publish la the 1 this meeting will be limited to eslected amended (the Act), to twpin the Federal Register a notice ofissuance ons of the meeting as determined en-mi..ian to publish notics of any and arovide for.,rr.,; ity for a hear {ng mRetissuance.no em- a.atan the AQ4W Chairman. laformation ===nd==ts issued, or proposed to be regarding the time to be set aside for this issued, under a new provision of section that the nood to take this action '
i purpose may be obtained by contacting 189 of the Act.This revision grants the occur very inbequently.
the Chief, Nuclear Waste Branch, prior Commisalon the authority to issue and Written comments may be subudtted I
to the meo In view of the possibility make immediately eSective any by mall to the Chief, Rules and that the ule for ACNW meetings amendment to an operatingliosase Dimetives Branch. Division of Freedom may be adjusted by the Chairman as - upon a determination by the ofInformation and Publications nar===a'y to facilitata the conduct of the Commission that such ===d=-p> Services,015ce of Administration U.S.
meeting, persons planning to attend involves no signiScant hasards Nuclear Regulatory em--i i-shculd notify Mr. Major as to their consideration, notwl9- dh- the . - Washington, DC 20555-0001, and particular needs. pdadency befom thee m-me ian of a abould cite the publication date and Further information regarding topics request sur a hearina bom anyperson. page number of this Federal Register (
to be discussed, whether the meeting. . This biweekly noBee a nchets a ll .. notice. Written cominents may also be has been canceled or rescheduled, the motices of amendments lasued.or deUvered to Rooms sD22.Two Whles Chairman's ruling on requests for the Proposed to be lasued from November 7 Flint North 11545 Rockville Pike, 1997, throu .Rockville. Maryland basa F:30 a.aL to opportunity to present oral statements lastbiweekpNovember20,1997 De 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Copies of and the time allotted therefoi een be . y notice was published on-November 19,1997 (62 FR sis 36). written comments received may be -
obtained by contacting Mr. Richard K.
Major, Chief NuclearWastaBranch examined at the NRC Public Docesamt Notice of Consideration ofIssmance of .. Room, the Gelman Bul 2120 L (telephone 301/415-7266),between 8:00 Amendments 2 Fmaty Operadag .
Stut, NW., Washington, The S11ag A.M. and 5:00 P.M. EST. Licenses, Proposed No SigniScant of mquwts for a hearing and peddons ACNW mm agenda.mdag Hazards Consideration Deter-i==el==
d w to intemne is discumed 3fhdh" f h on the internet at httpJ/www. arc.
and Opportunity for a Hearing The Commission has made a By }anuary 2,190s, thelicensee may proposed determination that the ille a request for a hearing with respect -
ACRSACNW. following amendment requests involve . to lasuance of the amendment to the The ACNW meeting dates for Calendar Year 1998 are provided below: no signi6 cant hazards consideration. subject facility operating license and Under the Commission's regulations in an personwhoseinterestmaybe )
l 10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation af!ected by this proceeding and who ACNW in the mestne test ACNW meetn0 dele of the facility in accordance with the wishes to participate as a No. proposed amendment would not (1) proceeding must file a tien request l
involve a significant increase in the for a hearing and a petition for leave to
" *J Probability or consequences of an intervene. Requests for a hearing and a se 4 2s""'I accident previously evaluated; or (2)* petition for leave to intervene shall be se Me 24-29. tees. create the possibility of a new or Blod in accordance with the too Apra 21-,73, tees.
No Mestq in May Commission's " Rules of Practice for 101 June 10-12,1998. different kind of accident accident previously evaluated;fromor (3 any ) Domestic Licensing Proceedings"in to 102 _ Juy21-23,1998. involve a sign 16 cant reduction in a CFR Part 2. Interested persons should No Meeting in August. Inargin of safety.The basis for this consult a current copy of 10 CFR 2.714 103 _ september 22-24, 1998 (Las proposed determination for each which is available at the Commina!an's
' amendment request is shown below. Pub!!c Document Room.the Gelman 104"'""" one 1998 The Commission is seeking public Building,2120 L Street, NW.,
No Meetg m M comments on this proposed Washington, DC and at the local public 106 December 15-17, itse, ,
determination. Any comments received document room for the particular Deted: November as 1997, within 30 days after the date of facility involved. lf a requmt for a Publication of this notice willbe hearing or petition for leave to intervene Andrew L Betoa.
considered in making any Saal is filed by the above date, b Mrisory comm/ tree Menogement ofpeer. Commission or an Atomic Safety and IFR Doc. 97-3t730 Filed 13-3-47; a:45 am) determination.
Normally, the Commisalon will not Licensing Board, designated by the
"""'**"*** issue the aroendment until the Commission or by the Chairman of the expiration of the 30. day notice period. Atomic Safety and Licensing Board However, should circumstances change Panel, will rule on the request and/or NUCLEAR REGULATORY during b notice period such that pedtion; and the Secretary or the COMMIS4WN failure to act in a timely way would designated Atomic Safety and Licensing rwult, for example,in derating or Board will issue a notice of a hearing or Blweekly Notice; Appilcations and Amendments to Facility Operating shutdown of the facility,the an appropriate order.
Commission may issue the license As required'by 10 CFR 2.714, a
- Licenses involving No Signifloant Hazards Considerations amendment before b expiration of b petition for leave to intervens shall set 30-day notice period, provided that its forth with particularity the ir orest of L Background final determination is that the the petitioner in the procer ding, and Pursuant to Public Law 97-415, the amendment involves no significant how that interest may be effected by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission hazards consideration. The final results of theyroceeding.The petition determination will consider all public should specincally explain b reasons (the Commission or NRC staff)is why intervention should be permitted publishing this regular b! weekly notice. and State comments received before action is taken. Should the Commission with particular reference to the Public law 97-415 revised section 189
l 8 1*r C6V10@ftY COMMITTEE CN NUCLEAR kh 55 l
., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20EE6
~
December 4, 1997 SCHEDULE AND OUTLINE FOR DISCUSSION 97TE ACNW MEETING DECEMBER 16-18, 1997 Tuesday. Dec-her 16. 1997. Two Whita Flint North. Ramm T-2B1, 11545 Rockvilla Pike. Rockv111a. MarvinnA
- 1) 8:30 - 8:45 A.M. Onenine Remarks by the AcNW chairman (Open) j 1.1) Opening Statement (BJG/RKM) 1.2) Items of current interest (BJG/RKM) 3:35
- 2) (H45 - 12:00 NOON -Health Effects of Low-Level Tenirine Radiatien (Open)
Review the latest developments in the I biological effects of low-levels of i ionizing radiation with the NRC staff t o t.1o - /0 ; so (RGW/HJL)
BREAK 29100-14-r4-5 2.1) Myron Pollycove es v.ro xo 2.2) Carl Paperiello s/tAe - /t:oo j 2.3) Shlomo Yaniv - //:os - ft:mo 2.4) Vince Holohan /o w -/f:0:I 12:00 - 1:00 P.M. ***LUNCE***
I4f
- 3) 1:00 - N P.M. y Meetino with the Director. MRc's Division of Waste Manacement. NMEE (Open) (BJG/RKM)
A current events session with the Director, topics might include:
3.1) Status of Yucca Mountain specific standards and regulations 3.2) Status of the Yucca Mountain Project 3.3) Update on the Pilot Program for the regulation of certain DOE facilities IF- (San 4.ste.afma) 3.4) Other topics
[. b eu h d Scs5l N l
' ' 2
/ty.f .7f 4 f
- 4) 4,4G - -3 ; 0 0 -P . M . Licensino Requirements for Land Diseosal of Radioactive Waste (Open) (BJG/ACC)
The ACNW staff will present a short tutorial on the Commission's Low-Level Waste regulations in 10CFR Part 61 and supporting guidance documents
.3.s.0.0. - G a 15 P .M. *** BREAK ***
- 5) ";15 - 9720 P.M.
Preparation of ACNW Reecrts (Open) 3 oo - 4' 'Y Discuss a possible report on the following topics:
5.1) ACNW Strategic Plan and Priorities (BJG/LGD) 5.2) Low-Levels of Ionizing Radiation (RGW/HJL) 5.3) High-Level Waste IRSRs
- / :sf 9'lfD commt &4ce Ac+tW4tc.s/ FJo e. A 5 '^d*
4+34 P.M. *** RECESS ***
4354 Wednesday, Dec==her 17. 1997. Two White Flint North. Room T-2B3.
11545 Rockville Pike. Reckville. Maryland
- 6) 8:30.- 8:35 A.M. ' Onenine Remarks by ACNW Chairman (Open) i (BJG/RKM) 2: 0
- 7) 8:35 - 9.e44 A.M. F" Yucca Mountain site Characterization (Open)
The committee will discuss current site characterization activities at the Yucca Mountain site with a representative of L the DOE - Carol Hanlon g'V3 - /v"2 3
- 8) -t:94 - AO:30 A.M. p HLW Tssue Resolution Status Reports and Acceptance criteria (Open) (GMH/LGD)
The NRC staff will update the Committee on the progress of staff reviews related to the HLW key technical issues - K.
(Stablein ,
44r90 - 10:45 A.M. *** BREAK ***
10'93 ~letto
3
/ o s 50
, 9) 10.05 - 12:00 NOON committee Activities / Future Acenda (Open) (BJG/RKM)
Il 9.1) Set agenda for 98th ACNW Meeting February 24-26, 1998 9.2) Review topics for out months 9.3) Review EDO response to recent ACNW
$50 - 5:00 pm reports and status of ACRS report to congress on NRC research 9.4) Recent and planned attendance at outside meetings 12:0s -
44+G6 - 1: 00 P.M. ***LUNCE***
- 10) 1:00 -3.30 P.M. Prepare for next meetine with the l $l5D comm4mmien (Open) (BJG/ACC)
Discuss topics and presentations for the next meeting with the Commission on i
December 18, 1997 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m., topics include:
10.1) Application of Probabilistic '
Risk Assessment Methods to Performance Assessment in the NRC High-Level Waste Program (BJG/ACC) 10.2) Comments on Performance Assessment Capability in NRC High-Level Radioactive Waste Program (RGW/ACC) 10.3) Recommendations regarding the Implementation of the Defense-in-Depth Concept in the revised 10CFR Part 60 (GMH/LGD) 10.4) Priority issues for the upcoming year (BJG/LGD)
Dl50 3'06 E434 - W P.M. *** BREAK ***
- 11) ->rts - STt7 P.M. continue preparation of AcNW Renorts 3:a5 if156 (open)
Continue preparation of ACNW reports as noted in item 5 i
4 I** (',/D
, -0. 0 0 P.M. *** RECESS ***
Thursday. Dec==her 18',
1997. Two White Flint North. Room T-2B3.
11545 Rockville Pika. Rockville. Maryland
- 12) 4t90 .6 A . M . Onensne Remarks by ACNW chairman (Open)
(BJG/RKM) 9:so e 9:vr
- 13) -S:35 - 9+EO A.M. Centinue preparation for meetina with the commismien (Open)
Continue preparation of those topics listed in item 10 9:45 4+34 - 10:00 A.M. Break and walk to Commission's Conference Room located in the OWFN Building II : + f
- 14) 10:00 - h ;30 A.M. Meetino wdr.b the Nuclear Reculaterv comminnien. Discussion topics are listed in item 10 n:wi - /A:fs 44t44 - Et49 P.M. *** LUNCH ***
l2 .75 - I; a o 9. M Fo ned-up % Comm.s s: 0^ N r.'O 'aj
- 15) h.00 - t.00 P.M. complete Dreparatien of ACNW Renerts
/: 20 - 1,' 8J D (Open)
Continue preparation of ACNW reports as noted in item 5.
I t 4D 4 ; 00 P.M. *** ADJOURN ***
NOTE:
- Presentation time should not exceed 50 percent of the total time allocated for a specific item. The remaining 50 percent of the time is reserved for discussion.
i e Number of copies of the presentation materials to be provided to the ACNW - 35.
, APPENDIXlil: MEETING ATTENDEES 97TH ACNW MEETING DECEMBER 16-18,1997 ACNW MEMBERS ist Day 2nd Day 3rd Day Dr. B. John Garrick X X X Dr. Charles Fairhurst X X X i Dr. George W. Homberger X X X Dr. Raymond G. Wymer X X X ACNW STAFF 1st Day 2nd Day 3rd Day Dr. Andrew Campbell X X X Ms. Lynn Deering X X X Mr. Howard J. Larson X X , X Mr. Richard K. Major X X X Dr. John T. Larkins X X X Ms. Michele S. Kelton X X X 1
i
Appendix ill 2
- 97th ACNW Meeting AbkES FROM THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DECEMBER 16..1997 M. Adjodha NMSS B. Meck RES M. R. Byme NMSS J. Firth NMSS C. Jones NMSS C. Paperiello NMSS C. Trottier RES S. Yaniv RES V. Holahan RES R. Johnson NMSS DECEMBER 17.1997 P. Justus NMSS B. Leslie NMSS M. Nataraja NMSS L. Haurdan NMSS E. O'Donnell RES J. Kotra NMSS J. Firth NMSS S. Wastler NMSS M. Bell NMSS M. Lee NMSS C. Lui NMSS K. Stablein NMSS N. Coleman NMSS ATTENDEES FROM OTHER AGENCIES AND GENERAL PUBLIC DECEMBER 16.1997 R. Wallace .USGS J. Russell CNWRA B. Gamble MTS/ BAH F. Rodgers DOE P. Phibbs Nuclear Waste News J. York Booz Allen & Hamilton S. Crawford Self R. Andersen NEl
Appendix lll 3
- , 97th ACNW Meeting AYTENDEES FROM OTHER AGENCIES AND GENERAL PUBLIC (CONTD)
DECEMBER 16.1997 (Cont'd)
P. LaPlante CNWRA F. Galpin Rogers & Associates Eng.
L. Fairobent The Environmental Co.
DECEMBER 17.1997 B. Gamble MTS/ BAH R. Wallace USGS P. Phibbs Nuclear Waste News L. Fairobent The Environmental Co. I J. York Booz Allen & Hamilton R. Fitzgerald Winston & Strawn
)
S. Crawford Self R. Andersen NEl DECEMBER 18.1997 F. Rodgers DOE B. Gamble MTS/ BAH C. Pearson Navy l
1
- APPENDIXIV
- FUTURE AGENDA Thp Comrpittee agreed to consider the following during the 98th ACNW Meeting, February 24-26, 1998:
Meetino with NRC's Director. Division of Waste Manaamment. Office of Nudmar Material Safety and Safeauards - The Committee will meet with the Director to discuss recent developments such as developments at the Yucca Mountain project, rules and guidance being developed, available resources, and other items of mutual interest.
Viability Assessment - Representatives of DOE's Yucca Mountain project office will discuss the status of the viability assessment being performed for the proposed HLW repository. This effort will make an informed assessment of the viability of licensing and constructing a repository at Yucca Mountain.
Decommissioning Guidance - The Committee will review proposed guidance for implementing the recent final rule on radiological criteria for license termination. Topics to be discussed will include criteria for license termination under restricted conditions and the application of the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) goal.
Risk-Informed. Performance-Based Raoulation - The Committee will review a proposed Commission paper on the use of risk-informed, performance-based, and less prescriptive regulation by NMSS.
Imolementino Rule for the Prooosed Yucca Moun'tain Renonitorv - The Committee will review the NRC staff's proposed strategy for development of regulations goveming disposal of HLW at the proposed HLW repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.
Nuclear Waste Related Research -The Committee will review various aspects of waste- ,
related research that is underway or planned in preparation for sending a report to the l Commission.
Preparation of ACNW Reoorts - The Committee will discuss planned reports, including comments on the staff's HLW lssue Resolution Status Report, nuclear waste research activities, and other topics discussed during this and previous meetings as the need arises.
Committee Activities / Future Amanda - The Committee will consider topics proposed for future consideration by the full Committee and Working Groups. The Committee will discuss ACNW-related activities of individual members. !
Miscellaneous -The Committee will discuss miscellaneous matters related to the conduct of Committee activities and organizational activities and complete discussion of matters and l specific issues that were not completed during previous meetings, as time and availability of information permit.
a
,,?,
APPENDIX V l LIST OF DOCUMENTS PROVIDED TO THE COMMITTEE
[Npte: Some documents listed below may have been provided or prepared for Committee use only. These documents must be reviewed prior to release to the public.)
MEETING HANDOUTS AGENDA DOCUMENTS ITEM NO.
2 Health Effects of Low Levels of lonizing Radiation
- 1. " Molecular Biology, Epidemiology, and the Demise of the Linear No-Threshold Hypothesis," by Myron Pollycove, M.D., Visiting Medical Fellow, NRC, presented to ACNW, December 16,1997 [ Handout]
- 2. " Molecular Biology, Epidemiology, and the Demise of the Linear No.
Threshold (LNT) Hypothesis," by Myron Pollycove, M.D., Visiting Medical Fellow, NRC, presented to ACNW, December 16,1997
[Viewgraphs]
- 3. Rocketdyne/ Atomics Intemational Worker Occupational Study, Critique by Myron Pollycove, M.D., Visiting Medical Fellow, NRC, presented to ACNW, December 16,1997 [ Handout]
- 4. Critical Evaluation of the Linear- No-Threshold Assumption (SC 16)
[Viewgraphs]
- 5. Low Doses of lonizing Radiation: Biological Effects and Regulatory Control, Conference Summary Session - Introductory Remarks, by The Honorable Greta Joy Dieus, NRC Commissioner, presented at IAEA/WHO/UNSCEAR Intemational Conference, Seville, Spain, November 21,1997 [ Handout]
- 6. " Creating a Strategy for Science-Based National Policy: Addressing l Conflicting Scientific Views on the Health Risks of Low-Level lonizing l Radiation," PERSPECTIVES, Preconference Edition, Wingspread Conference Center, Racine, Wisconsin, July 21 - August 3,1997
[ Handout]
7 Health Effects of Low-Level Radiation, information provided by Howard Larson, ACNW [ Agenda item 2, Handout #1]
Appendix V 2 97th ACNW Meeting i
MEETING HANDOUTS (Cont'd)
AGENDA DOCUMENTS ITEM NO.
l 2 (cont'd) Health Effects of Low Levels ofionizing Radiation
- 8. Presentation at the Round Table on
- Regulatory Control and Scientific Research,
- IAEA Intemational Conference on " Low Doses j
of lonizing Radiation; Biological Effects and Regulatory Control,"
presented by Carl J. Paperiello, Ph.D., Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, NRC, in Seville, Spain, November 21,1997 [ Handout)
Subject:
Radiation Health Risk Assessment," C.
B. Meinhold, Brookhaven National Laboratory, an October 22-23, course presentation, dated November 2,1997 [ Handout]
4 Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Wasta
- 10. Overview of 10 CFR Part 61, " Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste," Low-Level Waste Disposal Regulation, tutorial by Andrew C. Campbell, Senior Staff Scientist, ACNW, dated December 16,1997 [Viewgraphs) 7 Yucca Mountain Site Characterization i I
Subject:
Notes on YMP Progress and Status for Briefing to ACNW, December Meeting, dated December 16,1997 [ Facsimile]
8 High-Level Waste issue Resolution Status Reports and Acceptance Criteria i
- 12. Status of HLW lasue Resolution Process, presented to ACNW by King Stablein, Acting Branch Chief, Engineering and Geosciences Branch, Division of Waste Management, NMSS, dated December 17,1997 [Viewgraphs]
- 13. Draft, Issue Resolution Status Reports by KTl (Schedule as of December 1997)[ Handout]
, " . ?,
Appendix V 3 e 97th ACNW Meeting MEETING HANDOUTS (Cont'd)
AGENDA DOCUMENTS ITEM NO.
l l
8 (cont'd) High-Level Waste issue Resolution Status Reports and Accep-tance Criteria
- 14. Letter from Stephan J. Brocoum, Assistant Manager for Licensing, DOE, to Newton K. Stablein, Acting Chief, Engineering and Geosciences Branch, Division of Waste Management, NMSS,
Subject:
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Response to U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Issue Resolution Status Report on Methods to Evaluate Climate change and Associated Effects at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, (Key Technical issue:
Unsaturated and Saturated Flow Under Isothermal Conditions),
dated October 8,1997 [ Handout) l I
l l
Appendix V 4
,- 97th ACNW Meeting MEETING NOTEBOOK AGENDA DOCUMENTS ITEM NO.
1 Opening Remarks by ACNW Chairman
- 1. Schedule and Outline for Discussion,97th ACNW Meeting
- 2. Introductory Statement by the ACNW Chairman, December 16-18, 1997
- 3. Items ofinterest 2 Health Effects of Low Levels of lonizing Radiation
- 4. Status Report, Low Levels of lonizing Radiation
- 5. Memorandum to B.J. Garrick from Commissioner Diaz, dated 10/16/97,
Subject:
Health Effects of Low-Levellonizing Radiation
- 6. Memorandum to Commissioner Diaz from B.J. Garrick, dated 12/2/97,
Subject:
Health Effects of Low-Level lonizing Radiation 2 (cont'd) Health Effects of Low Levels of lonizing Radiation (Cont'd)
- 7. Letter to Chairman Jackson from Chairman Pomeroy, dated 7/10/96,
Subject:
Health Effects of Low Levels ofionizing Radiation
- 8. Letter to Dr. Pomeroy from J. M. Taylor, EDO, dated 8/9/96,
Subject:
Health Effects of Low Levels of lonizing Radiation
- 9. Several articles from Nucleonics Week dated 12/4/97
- 10. Program, Intemational Conference, Low Doses of lonizing Radiation:
Biological Effects and Regulatory Control, Seville, Spain,11/17-21/97
- 11. Press Release, dated 8/6/97, Experts Hold Conference to Discuss Cancer Risk from Radiation Exposure 3 Meeting with the Director, Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Division of Waste Management, NMSS
- 12. Status Report dated 12/16/97 4 Licensing Requiremerits for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste
- 13. Status Report dated 12/16/97, Tutorial on 10 CFR Part 61
- 14. Topical Outline of Provisions in Part 61 that Affect Licensing 15, 10 CFR Part 61, " Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste"
. '[,Io Appendix V 5
% 97th ACNW Meeting MEETING NOTEBOOK (CONT'D)
AGENDA DOCUMENTS ITEM NO.
5 Preparation of ACNW Reports
- 16. Draft Predecisional Letter to Chairman Jackson,
Subject:
1998 Strategic Plan and Priority lasues for the Advisory Committee on NuclearWaste 7 Yucca Mountain Site Characterization
- 17. Status Report, Meeting with a Representative from the DOE, dated 12/17/97 8 High-Level Waste issue Resolution Status Reports and Acceptance Criteria
- 18. Status Report dated 12/17/97
- 19. *NRC High-Level Radioactive Waste Program Annual Progress Report: Fiscal Year 1996, NUREG/CR-6513, No. 1, excerpts
- 20.
- Draft Guidance for NRC's Review of DOE's Viability Assessment, dated 8/26/97
- 21. *lssue Resolution Status Report (Key Technical issue: Repository Design and Thermal Me:hanical Effects) by Mysore Nataraja
- 22. *lssue Resolution Status Report (Key Technical lasue: Thermal Effects on Flow) by Jeffrey Pohle
- 23. *lssue Resolution Status Report (Key Technical issue: Evolution of the Near-Field Environment) by Bret Leslie
- 24. Issue Resolution Status Report (Key Technical lasue: Unsaturated and Saturated Flow Under Isothermal Conditions) by Neil Coleman
- 25. Issue Resolution Status Repor1 (Key Technical lasue: Structural Deformation and Seismicity) Lead Staff Member: Philip Justus
- The above enclosures were sent out under separate cover. There will be a copy retained in the office for perusal.
9 Committee Activities / Future Agenda
- 26. Discuss agenda for 98th ACNW Meeting, February 24-26,1998
- 27. Discuss agenda for out months through April 1998
- 29. Discuss EDO's list of future meeting topice !
- 30. OCRWM/M&O meeting list and ACNW 1998 calendar l l
f
- l. t, t .
Appendix V 6
- 97th ACNW Meeting MEETING NOTEBOOK (CONT'D)
AGENDA DOCUMENTS ITEM NO.
9.3 Review EDO Responses to Recent ACNW Reports and Status of ACRS Report to Congress on NRC Research
- 31. Status Report dated 12/17/98
- 35. Questions related to the ACNW review of NRC's Research Program
- 36. Paper prepared by NRC/RES waste management staff on Radionu-clide Transport in the Environment: A Generic Research Program
- 37. Revised Scoping Document 10 Prepare for Next Meeting the Commission
- 38. Memorandum to J. Hoyle, SECY, from J. T. Larkins, ACNW, dated 12/11/97,
Subject:
ACNW Meeting with NRC Commissioner, December 18,1997 - Schedule and Background Information Tab 1 -
Slides, Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste Strategic Planning and Priorities for 1998 j Tab 2 -
Slides, Applications of Probabilistic Risk Assessment Methods to Performance As-sessment in the NRC High-Level Waste Program Tab 3 - Slides, Comments on Performance Assess-ment Capability in the NRC High-Level Radio-active Waste Program Tab 4 -
Slides, Recommendations Regarding the implementation of the Defense-in-Depth !
Concept in the Revised 10 CFR 60 l l
l 1