ML22112A112

NMP Future Working Group Charter Final

ML22112A112
Person / Time
Issue date:	04/20/2022
From:	Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
To:
References
Download: ML22112A112 (5)

Text

CHARTER - FUTURE OF NATIONAL MATERIALS PROGRAM WORKING GROUP PURPOSE The Future of the National Materials Program (NMP) Working Group (WG) has been established as a Management Directive 5.3 working group. Its purpose is to evaluate and make recommendations on the future structure and function of the NMP based on the expected number of Agreement State and NRC licensees. The WGs evaluations and recommendations will be documented in a standalone report and/or notation vote (or informational) paper to be provided to the Commission in March 2023.

BACKGROUND The NRC and the Agreement States continue to successfully implement the NMP through their partnership efforts. Currently, the Agreement States regulate approximately 88% of the nations total licensees. Connecticut and Indiana have submitted letters of intent to become an Agreement State. If a state with a more significant number of licensees, such as Michigan, also pursues an agreement, the Agreement States would regulate approximately 91% of the nations total licensees. This increase in Agreement States would decrease the number of NRC licensees by at least 30%.

Number of NRC Licensees Number of Agreement  % of Licensees that are State Licensees Agreement State Licensees (total of 18,079 licensees) 2,187 16,040 88%

Number of NRC Licensees Number of Agreement  % of Licensees that would after Connecticut1, State Licensees after be Agreement State Indiana 1, and in the event Connecticut1, Indiana1, and Licensees (total of 18,079 Michigan 2 become in the event Michigan2 licensees)

Agreement States become Agreement States 1,491 16,736 91%

Minimum Number of NRC Maximum Number of  % of Licensees that are Licensees Assuming All Agreement State Licensees Agreement State Licensees States become Agreement Assuming All States (total of 18,079 licensees)

States (excludes Territories become Agreement States and Washington, D.C.) (excludes Territories and Washington, D.C.)

~737 3 ~17,500 96%

1 Connecticut and Indiana have submitted letters of intent to become Agreement States.

2 Michigan has not submitted a letter of intent to become an Agreement State, this is a hypothetical assumption.

3 This value is an estimate of the number of federal licensees.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission/Agreement State Working Group Future of the National Materials Program In 1999, the NRC formed a working group consisting of Regional, Headquarters, and Agreement State staff to address the then increase in the number of agreement states and its impact on the NMP (SECY-99-250 ML993330109). The working group issued their report in SECY-01-0112 (ML011590431).

Now over 20 years later, it is prudent for NRC Regional, NRC Headquarters, and Agreement State staff to assess the current NMP. Until those changes would be enacted, it is necessary for staff to assess and identify areas for increased efficiency and effectiveness provided the decreasing number of NRC licensees.

WORKING GROUP AND STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP The working group and steering committee will operate as an NRC/Agreement State working group as described in Management Directive 5.3, Agreement State Participation in Working Groups. The working group and steering committee will be co-chaired by an NRC staff member and an Agreement State representative from the Organization of Agreement States.

Organization Working Group Steering Committee Office of Nuclear Huda Akhavannik, Co-Chair Kevin Williams, Co-Chair Material Safety Michelle Beardsley, Alternate Co- Mary Muessle, Alternate Co-Chair and Safeguards Chair (NMSS) Leira Cuadrado, member Advisor Duncan White, NMSS Agreement Auggie Ong (NH), Co-Chair Alex Damiani (NYDOH), Co-Chair States Keisha Cornelius (OK), member Steve Seeger (TN), Alternate Co-Chair Tracy Jue (CA), member Zubaida Gulshan (CA), member Office of the Brian Harris, attorney Mary Spencer General Counsel Regional Offices Farrah Gaskins, Region 1 Tammy Bloomer, Region I Jenni Dalzell, Region 3 Sara Forster, Region 3 Randy Erickson, Region 4 Allyce Bolger, Region 4 Other NRC and Agreement State staff may serve as resources to the Working Group at the request of the Co-Chairs and with the support of their management. For example, the Working Group may consider coordinating with Region II staff and NRR staff involved with the transformation signposts/markers initiative. Administrative support for the working group will be provided by the Division of Material Safety, Security, State, and Tribal Programs (MSST) in NMSS.

2

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission/Agreement State Working Group Future of the National Materials Program ACTIVITIES AND SCHEDULE The Working Group should identify current and potential future scenarios and assess key indicators to develop recommendations that would lead to the increased efficiency and effectiveness of the NMPs structure and function. As part of identifying future scenarios, the Working Group will include indicators already developed by the NRCs Signposts and Markers initiative. The recommendations should consider programmatic changes depending on the scenario and appropriate end points that lead to greater efficiencies and provide a more consistent application of the program across the nation. While developing these options, the WG should solicit feedback from Headquarters, Regions, Licensees, and Agreement States, in addition to the Steering Committee. The table below describes the activities to be conducted:

Activity Lead Completion Date Activity 1: Current and Potential Future Scenarios NMSS February 2022 Assess the current and potential future scenarios of the NMP including evaluating the number of licensees, number of Agreement States, and the expected types of licensees.

Activity 2: Develop key indicators which are used to evaluate NMSS March 2022 each scenario.

Perform an assessment to identify high impact key areas in the NMP for the NRC and Agreement States. These indicators should be inclusive of the indicators highlighted in the NRCs Signposts & Markers initiative.

Activity 3: Develop recommendations for each scenarios NMSS July 2022 indicator. Depending on nature of recommendations, decide on report type: informational or notational vote paper to Commission or office level report.

Recommendations should evaluate how/if an indicator would change for an Agreement State and the NRC considering the scenario. Recommendations should concisely discuss considerations and include a background discussion, milestones, and pros/cons for each recommendation.

Activity 4: Outreach activities. NMSS As appropriate Agreement In parallel, regularly solicit feedback through communication States and outreach efforts from NRC regional and headquarters offices, the Agreement States, and licensees. Consider how proposed changes will be communicated to ensure a smooth transition. Communication activities could include public meetings to have discussions only during the meeting.

3

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission/Agreement State Working Group Future of the National Materials Program Activity Lead Completion Date Activity 5: Identify final recommendations NMSS October 2022 Consolidate comments from working group members and comments received during outreach activities into the proposed recommendations. These proposed recommendations should be presented for comment to the Steering Committee. After consolidating comments, identify final recommendations.

Activity 6: Documentation. NMSS December 2022 Develop draft Commission paper with final recommendations for SC review, and put into concurrence.

Submit paper to SECY March 2023 The products from each of the activities by the working group will be used as input to either a standalone report or as input to a Commission notation vote or informational paper. Upon completion of each activity, the working group will meet with the steering committee to obtain their endorsement of the product. Activities associated with the development and review of certain work products, such as performing assessments of the NRC and Agreement State programs, may be limited to those with a need to know, consistent with NRC information security requirements.

MSST, with assistance from members of the working group, will be responsible for preparation of either a standalone report or a SECY paper to the Commission (either notation vote or information) that will be reviewed and concurred on by NRC management. The following are the major milestones and tentative dates for the development and submittal of the notation vote paper:

Milestone Date (Tentative)

Development of standalone report or a SECY Paper to December 2022 the Commission information or notation vote paper Office concurrence on standalone report or Commission January 2023 information or notation vote paper OEDO approval of Commission information or notation February 2023 vote paper Submittal of Commission informational or notation vote March 2023 paper LEVEL OF EFFORT EXPECTED OF PARTICIPANTS 4

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission/Agreement State Working Group Future of the National Materials Program To support the schedule and activities listed above, the following level of effort is expected from the working group participants:

1. Attendance at weekly meetings (1 to 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> per week);

2. Attendance at stakeholder outreach events (approximately 15 hours1.736111e-4 days <br />0.00417 hours <br />2.480159e-5 weeks <br />5.7075e-6 months <br /> total);

3. Development and/or review of working group products, such as analyses (10 to 15 hours1.736111e-4 days <br />0.00417 hours <br />2.480159e-5 weeks <br />5.7075e-6 months <br /> per week);

4. Attendance at 2 to 3 Steering Committee meetings (2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> per meeting);

5. Periodic briefings with interested managers on the working group activities to solicit feedback and comments (1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> per briefing).

NRC members should charge time associated with working group activities identified in this charter to Charge Accounting Code: A34018 EPID M-2022-OTH-0000; Agreement State members should charge to their respective codes.

MEETINGS Meetings are pre-decisional and will be closed to the public.

Working group members may delegate an alternative representative for a specific meeting. The working group may also invite individual(s) to a meeting to participate as a resource to assist the working group with a particular issue. However, at least one of the named Co-Chairs must be present during any working group meetings.

Available technology will be used to facilitate interaction with the working group members.

Face-to-face meetings, if necessary, will generally be held in the Washington, D.C., area unless alternate locations are agreed upon by working group members. If travel is necessary, travel and per diem expenses for Agreement State members of the working group will be covered by MSST. Regions are responsible for the travel expenses of their staff.

APPROVED Digitally signed by Kevin Kevin Williams Date: 2022.04.19 Williams 15:25:28 -04'00' Kevin Williams, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Date Digitally signed by Augustinus Augustinus Ong Date: 2022.04.20 Ong 14:25:10 -04'00' Auggie Ong, Chair, Organization of Agreement States Date 5