ML24059A205

1997 Annual Report - Review of Federal Advisory Committee

ML24059A205
Person / Time
Issue date:	12/01/1997
From:	NRC/SECY
To:
References
Download: ML24059A205 (1)

Text

T-82OH I of2 http:l lwww. 8O2Odata.comlcms I 997arl RptAnnualReport.asp Annual Report: Review of Federal Advisory Committee 312198 3:53:26 PM I. Department or Agency Nuclear Regulatory Commission

3. Committee or SubCommittee Nuclear Safety Research Review Committee

4. ls this New During Fiscal Year?

No

5. Current Charter 219/96

6. Expected Renewal Date Sa. Was Terminated During FY?

No

'1_$

Sb. Specific Termination Authority 42 u.s.c. 2201

9. Agency Recommendation for Next FY Terminate I 0a.Legislation Req to Terminate?

11. Establishment Authority

12. Specific Establishment Authority 42 u.s.c. 2201 No Agency Authority STPA

13. Effective Date 219188

14. Committee Type Continuing

15. Description of Committee 16a. Total Number of Reports 2

I 6b. Report Titles and Dates REPORT OF THE NSRRC--MEETING OF APRIL 3-4, 1997 REPORT OF THE NSRRC--MEETING OF NOVEMBER 14-15, 1996 4/25197 1/15/97 17a0pen:

2 17b. Closed:

0 17c. Partially Closed: 0 REVIEW SUBCOMM. REPORTS & DISCUSS RESEARCH CORE COMPETENCIES AND COMMITTEE EFFECTIVENESS SELF-EVALUATION OF THE VALUE OF ITS CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE NRC 413/97 4/4197 11/14/96 11115196

2. Fiscal Year 1997 3b. GSA Committee No.

1105

7. Expected Term Date Sc.Actual Termination Date 919191 I Ob.Legislation Pending?

None 14c. Presidential?

No 17d. Total 2 Current Fiscal Year Next Fiscal Year l Sa(l) Personal Pmts to Non-Federal Members l Sa(2) Personal Pmts to Federal Members l Sa(3) Personal Pmts to Federal Staff l Sa(4) Personal Pmts to Non-member Consultants

!Sb(!) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Federal Members 1 Sb(2) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Members l Sb(3) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Staff 1Sb(4) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Member Consultants l Sc.Other(rents,user charges,graphics,printing,mail etc.)

!Sd Total

19. Federal Staff Support Years 20a. How does the Committee accomplish its purpose?

NIA 20b. How does the Committee balance its membership?

NIA 20c. How frequent and relevant are the Committee meetings?

NIA 20d. Why can't the advice or information this committee provides be obtained elsewhere?

NIA 20e. Why is it necessary to close and/or partially close committee meetings?

NIA

21. Remarks Committe was terminated in FY 1997

$44,521.00

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$58,617.00

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$17,165.00

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$3,749.00

$0.00

$124,052.00

$0.00 0.8 0

3/2/98 3:51 PM

T-820H 2 of2 Committee Members Bankoff, Dr. Seymour George Boulette, Dr. Thomas Golay, Professor Michael W Mayo, Professor Charles Mitchell, Professor Christine M Taylor, Mr. John J.

Yukawa, Dr. Sumio http://www.8020data.com/cms l 997ar/RptAnnua!Report.asp Occupation Prof. Emeritus, Northwestern Univ Sr. VP Nurclear-Pilgrim Station, Boston Edison Co.

Prof. Of Nuclear Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Assoc Prof. Of Nuclear Engineering North Carolina State Univ.

Georgia Institute of Technology Vice President Nuclear Power, EPRI General Electric Co.

3/2/93 3:51 PM

T-820H I of2 http://www.8020data.com/cms 1997ar/RptAnnualReport.asp Annual Report: Review of Federal Advisory Committee 3/2/98 4:00:33 PM I. Department or Agency Nuclear Regulatory Commission

3. Committee or SubCommittee Licensing Support System Advisory Review Panel

4. ls this New During Fiscal Year?

No Sa. Was Terminated During FY?

No

9. Agency Recommendation for Next FY Continuing

11. Establishment Authority

5. Current Charter 12/19/96

6. Expected Renewal Date 12/19/98 Sb. Specific Termination Authority 42 u.s.c. 2201 I0a.Legislation Req to Terminate?

No Agency Authority

12. Specific Establishment Authority 42 u.s.c. 2201

13. Effective Date 1/19/75

14. Committee Type Continuing

15. Description of Committee 16a. Total Number of Reports NSPA 0

17a Open:

3 17b. Closed:

0 Internet Electronic Forum For Committee Input on Proposed Changes to 10 CFR Part 2 16b. Report Titles and Dates 17c. Partially Closed: 0 10/31 /96 1/31/97 Phase Two Internet Forum To Provide Input to Possible 10 2125197 3131197 CFR Part 2 Rule Changes Phase Three of Internet Discussion of Proposed Rule Changes For The High Level Waste Proceeding

!Sa(!) Personal Pmts to Non-Federal Members I Sa(2) Personal Pmts to Federal Members l Sa(3) Personal Pmts to Federal Staff l Sa(4) Personal Pmts to Non-member Consultants I Sb(!) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Federal Members l Sb(2) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Members l Sb(3) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Staff 1Sb(4) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Member Consultants l Sc.Other(rents,user charges,graphics,printing,mail etc.)

!Sd Total

19. Federal Staff Support Years 20a. How does the Committee accomplish its purpose?

4/15/97 6/30/97 Current Fiscal Year

$0.00

$5,000.00

$1,500.00

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$1,000.00

$7,500.00 0.02

2. Fiscal Year 1997 3b. GSA Committee No.

1104

7. Expected Term Date 12/20/2005 Sc.Actual Termination Date I Ob.Legislation Pending?

None 14c. Presidential?

No 17d. Total 3 Next Fiscal Year

$0.00

$5,000.00

$1,500.00

$0.00

$0.00

$1,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

$1,000.00

$8,500.00 0.02 The Department of Energy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission continue to rely heavily upon the LSSARP for advice and recommendations on the design and operation of a searchable electronic database for documents pertinent to the licensing of a geologic repository for the storage of high level nuclear waste. During this reporting period, the panel's efforts were concentrated primarily on review of 10 CFR Part 2, Subpart J, of NRC's regulations to identify areas of the "LSS Rule" which could be changed to permit better utilization of technology advances. The NRC is particularly interested in LSSARP views on a modified LSS design using the Internet to search and retrieve appropriate documents in dispersed locations rather than in a centralized database.

20b. How does the Committee balance its membership?

The membership of the LSSARP is balanced by being drawn from among the full spectrum of potential parties to NRC's anticipated licensing proceeding for the bur.ial of high level radioactive waste. Since the burial site under review is in Nevada, the membership includes the State of Nevada, local county governments of both Nevada and California and Indian tribes, represented by the National Congress of American Indians. It also includes the nuclear industry, the potential licensee (DOE) and the licensing agency (NRC). During the reporting period membership was extended to include an environmental organization, the Nevada Waste Task Force. Input by these representatives into the design and operation process is essential to the success of the LSS project.

3/2/98 3:58 PM

T-820H 2 of2 http://www.8020data.com/cms l 997ar/RptAnnualReport.asp 20c. How frequent and relevant are the Committee meetings?

The NRC established three electronic forum sessions on the Internet for panel participation in discussions concerning advances in computer technology in the 1989-1997 time period and the impacts of the advances on the technical description of the LSS in Part 2 of the Commission's regulations. The "LSSNET" has provided an inexpensive way to maximize continuing interactions between NRC and the LSSARP, with public participation, on LSS rulemaking issues even though Federal funding for the state and local governmental representatives on the panel has been greatly reduced. The level of LSSARP activity is expected to remain at a moderate level, although NRC is currently seeking public comment on replacing the LSSARP with an informal users group making use of current LSSARP members with LSS knowledge and expertise.

20d. Why can't the advice or information this committee provides be obtained elsewhere?

The advice provided by the state, county and tribal governmental units, together with other potential users of the LSS, is unique to this particular computer application. It is not available from other existing committees or from NRC itself. NRC considers it essential that such advice should come from these entities which will be hands-on users of LSS. The NRC, however, is currently seeking public comment on establishing an alternative to this committee in connection with other LSS rulemaking amendments. NRC will evaluate responses to this proposal for an informal users group after the comment period expires in late January 1998. If an informal users group is established, the LSS Advisory Review Panel will be terminated during FY 1998.

20e. Why is it necessary to close and/or partially close committee meetings?

The LSSARP did not hold any closed meetings in FY 1997.

21. Remarks NIA Committee Members Copenhafer, David Bechtel, Dennis Bradshaw, Les Culverwell, Eve Cummings, Peter Funk, Ario Goichoechea, Pete J Henkel, Christopher Hoyle, John C Metoxen, Loretta Murphy, Malachy Newbury, Claudia Silberg, Jay Swainston, Harry Elquist, Bill Hoffman, Juanita Mettam, Brad Regan, James Cameron, Wayne Occupation U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Clark County, Nevada Nye County, Nevada Lincoln County, Nevada City of Los Vegas, Nevada Mineral County, Nevada Eureka County, Nevada Nuclear Energy Institute - Energy Coalition US Nuclear Regulatory Commission National Congress of American Indians Nye County, Nevada US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attorney - Industry Coalition State of Nevada Lander County, Nevada Esmeralda County, Nevada Inyo County, Nevada Churchill County, Nevada White Pine County, Nevada 3/2/98 3:58 PM

T-820H 1 of2 http://www.8020data.com/cms l 997ar/RptAnnualReport.asp Annual Report: Review of Federal Advisory Committee 3/2/98 3:59:50 PM I. Department or Agency Nuclear Regulatory Commission

3. Committee or SubCommittee Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes

4. ls this New During Fiscal Year?

No Sa. Was Terminated During FY?

No

9. Agency Recommendation for Next FY Continuing

11. Establishment Authority

5. Current Charter 4/4/96

6. Expected Renewal Date 4/4/98 Sb. Specific Termination Authority 42 u.s.c. 2201

!0a.Legislation Req to Terminate?

No Agency Authority

12. Specific Establishment Authority 42 u.s.c. 2201

13. Effective Date 7/1/58

14. Committee Type Continuing

15. Description of Committee 16a. Total Number of Reports 2

STPA Minutes of April 10-11, 1997 Meeting Minutes of November 14-15, 1996 Meeting 17a Open:

3 17b. Closed:

0 16b. Report Titles and Dates 4/22/97 1/13/97 17c. Partially Closed: 1 Preparation For Briefing of Commission on 10 CFR Part 35 Issues 5/8/97 5/8/97 4/10/97 4/11/97 9/25/97 9/26/97 11/14/96 11/15/96 To Provide advive to Commission on NRC's continued regulation of the medical use of isotopes To Provide advice on NRC Medical Regulatory Program To provide advice and recommendations to the NRC regarding 10 CFR Part 35 and the Medical Use of Iso I Sa(!) Personal Pmts to Non-Federal Members l Sa(2) Personal Pmts to Federal Members l Sa(3) Personal Pmts to Federal Staff 1Sa(4) Personal Pmts to Non-member Consultants

!Sb(!) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Federal Members l Sb(2) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Members I Sb(3) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Staff I Sb(4) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Member Consultants l 8c.Other(rents,user charges,graphics,printing,mail etc.)

!Sd Total

19. Federal Staff Support Years 20a. How does the Committee accomplish its purpose?

Current Fiscal Year

$26,555.00

$0.00

$88,000.00

$0.00

$11,010.00

$0.00

$0.00

$1,376.00

$0.00

$126,941.00 1.3

2. Fiscal Year 1997 3b. GSA Committee No.

1102

7. Expected Term Date 4/5/2004 Sc.Actual Termination Date I Ob.Legislation Pending?

None 14c. Presidential?

No 17d. Total 4 Next Fiscal Year

$46,200.00

$0.00

$92,000.00

$0.00

$21,666.00

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00

$159,866.00 1.3 The NRC Staff believes that both licensees and the general public benefit when recognized experts provide advice to the staff on medical issues in which NRC's standards may be unclear or inapplicable and when these experts can provide advice on rulemaking and other initives at critical stages throughout their development. The ACMUI generally meets semi-annually. The staff provides a summary of the issues to be addressed during the meeting. The ACMUI discusses the issues and makes recommendations to the Staff. In addition, working groups and subcommittees are formed to discuss certain issues in more depth than can be accomplished during a regular meeting.

3/2/98 3:58 PM

T-820H...

2 of2 http://www.8020data.com/cms l 997ar/RptAnnualReport.asp 20b. How does the Committee balance its membership?

As of October 1, 1996, the ACMUI membership consists of four practicing physicians; a physician representing the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration; a nuclear pharmacist; a medical physicist with expertise in nuclear medicine; a medical physicist with expertise in therapy, a certified medical dosimetrist; and a health care administrator. Presently, the specalities of the physicians on the ACMUI are; nuclear medicine (one), therapeutic radiology, with expertise in teletherapy and brachytheropy (two); and nuclear medicine research (one). The staff is in the process of selecting a nuclear medicine physician specalizing in cardiology, an individual with a State or local government perspective and a patient's right's advocate. These three positions are currently authorized for the ACMUI resulkting in a total of 13 members.

20c. How frequent and relevant are the Committee meetings?

The Committee generally meets semi-annually. The Commission may request the Committee to come in annually to brief the Commission. There is a need for subcommittee meetings periodically.

20d. Why can't the advice or information this committee provides be obtained elsewhere?

The Committee is composed of individuals with specalized degrees in the medical field such as physicians, medical physicists, and nuclear pharmacists. The necessary advice provided by the ACMUI cannot be obtained from other sources within the NRC. To develop and maintain an in-house capability to match the quality and quantity of expert advice embodied in the advisory committee would be difficult, if not impossible. There appear to be no other sources within the NRC or elsewhere which have the individual expertise capable of providing the in-depth advice needed.

20e. Why is it necessary to close and/or partially close committee meetings?

There was one partially closed meeting in FY 1997 to allow the Office of the General Counsel to provide a briefing on ethics for NRC special employees. The meeting was closed to the public to prevent the invasion of personal privacy of the members.

21. Remarks NIA Committee Members Swanson M.S.,BCNP, Mr. Dennis P.

Flynn M.D., Dr. Daniel F.

Graham, Mr. John Jones M.D., Dr. A. Eric Nelp M.D., Dr. Wit B.

Stitt M.D., Dr. Judith Anne Wagner Ph.D., Dr. Louis K.

Walkup, Ms. Theresa Williamson Ph.D., Dr. Jeffrey F.

Occupation Nuclear Pharmacist Radiation Oncologist Hospital Administrator Food and Drug Administration Representative Nuclear Medicine Physician - Research Radiation Oncologist Medical Physicist - Nuclear Medicine Certified Medical Dosimetrist Medical Physicist - Therapy 3/2/98 3:58 PM

T-820H I of3 http://www.8020data.com/cmsl 997ar/RptAnnualReport.asp Annual Report: Review of Federal Advisory Committee 3/2/98 3:55:23 PM I. Department or Agency Nuclear Regulatory Commission

3. Committee or Subcommittee Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste

4. Is this New During Fiscal Year?

No

5. Current Charter 5/30/96

6. Expected Renewal Date 5/30/98 8a. Was Terminated During FY?

No 8b. Specific Termination Authority 42 u.s.c. 2201

9. Agency Recommendation for Next FY Continuing I 0a.Legislation Req to Terminate?

No 11. Establishment Authority Agency Authority

12. Specific Establishment Authority 42 u.s.c. 2201

15. Description of Committee STP A

13. Effective Date 1/6/88

14. Committee Type Continuing 16a. Total Number of Reports 9

16b. Report Titles and Dates Comments on Coupled Processes in the NRC High-Level Waste Prelicensing Program A "Road Map" to the ACNW's Recommendation for Time Span for Compliance of the Proposed High-Level Waste Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada Screening Methodology for Assessing Prior Land Burials of Radioactive Waste Authorized Under Former 10 CFR 20.304 and 20.302 1997 Priority Issues for the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste Comments on Selected Direction-Setting Issues Identified in NRC's Strategic Assessment of Regulatory Activities Time of Compliance for Low-Level Nuclear Waste Disposal Facilities Comments on Flow and Radionuclide Transport at Yucca Mountain Reference Biosphere and Critical Group Issues and Their 11/8/96 11/14/96 11/20/96 11/20/97 1/30/97 2/11/97 2/13/97 Application to the Proposed High-Level Waste Repository at 4/3/97 Yucca Mountain, Nevada Comments on the NRC Program to Predict Risk From Igneous Activity at the Proposed High-Level Waste 8/7/97 Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada 17a Open:

7 17b. Closed:

0 17c. Partially Closed:

1 88th Full Committee Meeting 89th Full Committee Meeting 90th Full Committee Meeting 91st Full Committee Meeting 92nd Full Committee Meeting 93rd Full Committee Meeting 94th Full Committee Meeting 87th Full Committee Meeting 11/12/96 11/13/96 1/28/97 1/30/97 3/20/97 3/21/97 4/22/97 4/24/97 5/20/97 5/22/97 7 /23/97 7 /25/97 9/23/97 9/25/97 10/22/96 10/23/96

2. Fiscal Year 1997 3b. GSA Committee No.

1100

7. Expected Term Date Sc.Actual Termination Date I Ob.Legislation Pending?

None I 4c. Presidential?

No 17d. Total 8 3/2/98 3:53 PM

T-820H 2 of3 18a(I) Personal Pmts to Non-Federal Members I 8a(2) Personal Pmts to Federal Members I 8a(3) Personal Pmts to Federal Staff I 8a(4) Personal Pmts to Non-member Consultants I 8b(I) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Federal Members I 8b(2) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Members 18b(3) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Staff I 8b(4) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Member Consultants I 8c.Other(rents,user charges,graphics,printing,mail etc.)

18d Total

19. Federal Staff Support Years 20a. How does the Committee accomplish its purpose?

http://www.8020data.com/cms l 997ar/RptAnnualReport.asp Current Fiscal Year Next Fiscal Year

$99,540.00

$102,500.00

$0.00

$0.00

$319,373.00

$328,956.00

$14,774.00

$17,200.00

$45,062.00

$48,000.00

$0.00

$0.00

$16,691.00

$18,000.00

$5,454.00

$6,000.00

$48,563.00

$42,560.00

$549,457.00

$563,216.00 4

4 During FY 1997, the ACNW held eight meetings and wrote nine reports. In conducting its reviews, the ACNW meets regularly with the NRC staff, the industry, other government agencies, and interested members of the public and public interest groups. In addition, the Committee has periodic meetings with the NRC Commissioners to discuss issues of mutual interest. The Committee's work has had a significant impact on the NRC regulatory process. In the field of low-level waste, the ACNW advised the NRC. The ACNW advice concerning the low-level waste program included screnning methodology for assessing prior land burials of radioactive waste authorized under former 10 CFR 20.304 and 20.302 and the time of compliance for low-level waste disposal. In the high-level waste area, the ACNW advised the NRC on coupled processes in the NRC high-level waste prelicensing program, a "road map" to its recommendation for time span for compliance of the proposed high-level waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, flow and radionuclide transport at Yucca Mountain, reference biosphere and critical group issues and their application to the proposed high-level waste repository at Yucca Mountain, and the NRC program to predict risk form igneous activity at the proposed high-level waste respository at Yucca Mountain. The ACNW also commented on the selected direction-setting issues identified in NRC/s strategic assessment of regulatory activities. The ACNW also provided its 1997 priority issues to the NRC.

20b. How does the Committee balance its membership?

The NRC appoints ACNW members from scientific and engineering disciplines with three prerequisites in mind:

outstanding scientific and technical ability, balanced and mature judgment, and willingness to devote the time required to the demanding work involved. The pool of persons so qualified is limited. At the end of FY 1997, the Committee included two members from academia and two members from private industry. There has been a conscious effort to obtain members with backgrounds that can address the difficult and diverse questions associated with radioactive waste disposal. This permi'ts and fosters a concentration of scientific proficiency within the Committee, together with a diversity of viewpoints and perspectives, that provides assurance that adequate, independent, and open discussion and analysis of the potential hazards of nuclear waste can take place. During FY 1997, the ACNW included engineers and scientists experienced in radioactive waste management, chemistry, nuclear engineering, risk assessment, environmental engineering, performance assessment, geophysics, hydrology, mining engineering, research, and technical management. The diversity of viewpoints represented by current members is broadly based from the standpoint of special fields of interest, employment experience, and scientific or technical specialty. These characteristics provide the ACNW with a balance of highly qualified technical experts.

20c. How frequent and relevant are the Committee meetings?

The ACNW held eight Full Committee meetings during FY 1997. The number of meetings held is directly related to the review schedule and scope of efforts on the high-level waste geologic repository, issues involving low-level waste disposal, the number of criteria, guides, and technical positions referred for review and comment, the number of special reviews requested by the NRC, and topics of particular concern/interest to the Committee. The Full Committee plans to meet approximately eight times during FY 1998. Full Committee meetings generally run two to three days and cover a variety of topics (review of the site characterization plan and related NRC staff analysis, technical positions on high-level and low-level waste issues, briefings and reviews of rulemakings, etc.).

For particularly complex issues, the ACNW holds working group meetings where additional time and expertise can be brought to bear on an issue and the subject developed prior to Full Committee considerations. If the ACNW is to continue to meet the requirements of its charter, it needs to meet with at least a similar frequency in the future. There is a continuing need for the technical advice provided by the ACNW to the Commission, particularly in the following areas: (a) the viability assessment for the Yucca Mountain repository, (b) interim surface storage facilities, to the extent that programs are directed toward such facilities, (c) reassessment of regulatory standards for Yucca Mountain, (d) use of risk assessment and expert scientific judgment in the regulatory process, and (e) site decommissioning. The ACNW will provide advice to the Commission on issues related to NRC's oversight of DOE facilities.

3/2/98 3:53 PM

T-820H 3 of3 http://www.8020data.com/cms 1997 ar/RptAnnua!Report.asp 20d. Why can't the advice or information this committee provides be obtained elsewhere?

The ACNW is unique in that there exists no comparable body of acknowledged experts in the field of nuclear waste management whose mandate is to provide the Commission with independent advice in this area. The Commission necessarily has its own expert staff on whom it relies in its day-to-day operations. However, the Commission has no other advisory committee with the current, broadly based knowledge of the ACNW that could be called upon for independent assessment of safety issues related to high-and low-level waste management and disposal. In addition, since members are part-time advisors with other full-time interests and activities in related fields, they generate an organized synergistic approach to provide a breadth of experience, an independent perspective on issues, and state-of-the-art technical knowledge that would be difficult to duplicate with full-time government employees. A continuing committee such as the ACNW also remains current with respect to nuclear waste issues, including related safety research, and provides a collegial judgment regarding these issues that would be impossible to duplicate by use of individual, part-time consultants on a case-by-case basis. Through the ACNW, the public is provided assurance that an independent technical review and evaluation of nuclear waste safety issues is accomplished and an opportunity for public input is assured.

20e. Why is it necessary to close and/or partially close committee meetings?

During this period, the Committee held eight Full Committee meetings. Only a portion of one meeting was closed to discuss the selection of potential new members. Time spent in closed sessions occupied approximately 30 minutes. This portion was closed to discuss: - Information of a personal nature the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy 15 U.S.C. 552b(c)(6)).

21. Remarks NIA Committee Members Hornberger, Dr. George W Garrick, Dr. B. John Occupation Professor, Dept. of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia (Sabbatical 1997-98 -- Univ. of Colorado)

Consultant 3/2/98 3:53 PM

T-820H J

I of 5 http://www.8020data.com/cms 1997 ar/RptAnnualReport.asp Annual Report: Review of Federal Advisory Committee 3/2/98 3:57:41 PM I. Department or Agency Nuclear Regulatory Commission

3. Committee or SubCommittee Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards

4. Is this New During Fiscal Year?

5. Current Charter No 12/23/96

6. Expected Renewal Date 12/23/98 8a. Was Terminated During FY?

No

9. Agency Recommendation for Next FY Continuing 8b. Specific Termination Authority 42 U.S.C. Sect. 2039 & 2232

!Oa.Legislation Req to Terminate?

11. Establishment Authority

12. Specific Establishment Authority No Statutory(Congress Created) 42 U.S.C. Sect. 2039 & 2232

13. Effective Date 1/1/57

15. Description of Committee STP A

14. Committee Type Continuing 16a. Total Number of Reports 34 16b. Report Titles and Dates Capability of the NRC SCDAP/RELAP5 Code to Predict Temperatures and Flows in Steam Generators Under Severe-Accident Conditions Draft Update of Standard Review Plan, Chapter 7, "Instrumentation and Controls" Plant-Specific Application of Safety Goals Position on Direction-Setting Issue 22 -- Future Role of NRC Research 10/1/96 10/1/96 10/1/96 11/1/96 Proposed Rule on Steam Generator Integrity 11/20/96 NRC ~programs for Risk-Based Analysis of Reactor Operating 11122196 Experience ACRS Review of Generic Letters, Bulletins, and Information Requests Issued on an Expeditied Basis ACRS Questions on Human Performance Program Plan Human Performance Program Plan ACRS 1996 Report to Congress on the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Safety Research Program Publication of Proposed Journal Article Containing ROSA Test Data Proposed Standard Review Plan Sections and Regulatory Guides for Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Regulation NRC Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Program to Demonstrate the Adequacy of the RELAP/MOD3 Code To Analyze AP600 Passive Plant Behavior Proposed Regulatory Guidance Related to Implementation of 10 CFR 50.59 (Changes, Tests and Experiments)

Risk-Based Regulatory Acceptance Criteria for Plant-Specific Application of Safety Goals Establishing a Benchmark on Risk During Low-Power and Shutdown Operations Design Basis Verificaiton Proposed Final Policy Statement on the Restructuring and Economic Deregulation of the Electric Utility Industry The Policy Regarding Stockpiling of Potassim Iodide 12/13/96 12/30/96 2/13/97 2/21/97 3/17/97 3/17/97 3/19/97 4/8/97 4/11/97 4/18/97 5/7/97 5/8/97 6/9/97 Proposed Staff Position Regarding Inclusion of a Containment 6117197 Spray System in the AP600 Design Proposed Final Generic Letter, Assurance of Sufficient Net Positive Suction Head for Emergency Core Cooling and Containment Heat Removal Pumps" 6/17/97

2. Fiscal Year 1997 3b. GSA Committee No.

207

7. Expected Term Date Sc.Actual Termination Date I Ob.Legislation Pending?

None 14c. Presidential?

No 3/2/98 3:55 PM

T-820H 2 of 5 http://www.8020data.com/cms l 997ar/RptAnnualReport.asp Prop Generic Letter, "Potential for Degradation of the ECCS

& the Containment Spray Sys After a LOCA Because of Contruction & Protective Coating Deficien...

Proposed Regulatory Approach Associated with Steam Generator Integrity Regulatory Guidance for Implementation of Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems Proposed Regulatory Guide and Standard Review Plan Chapter for Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Inservice Inspection 6/18/97 6/20/97 6/23/97 7/14/97 Proposed Final Revisions to 10 CFR Part 26, Fitness-For-Duty 7114197 Program Requirements Staff Action Plan to Improve the Senior Management Meeting 9110197 Process Proposed Rulemaking for Shutdown and Final Storage Pool Operations at Nuclear Power Plants 9/10/97 Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1069, Fire Protection Program for Permanently Shutdown and Decommissioning Nuclear Power 9/10/97 Plants Boiling Water Reactor Pressure Vessel Shell Weld Inspection Recommendation (BWRVIP-05)

Reporting Reliability and Availability Information for Risk-Significant Systems and Equipment 9/10/97 9/11/97 Proposed Generic Letter and Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1074 9115197 Concerning Steam Generator Tube Integrity Site-to-Site Variation in Risk-Based Regulatory Acceptance Criteria for Plant-Specific Application of Safety Goals Thermal-Hydraulics Research Plan 9/19/97 10/1/96 17a Open:

22 17b. Closed:

0 17c. Partially Closed: 25 Joint Instrumentation & Control Systems and Computers/Electrical Power Systems Planning & Procedures 435th Full Committee Meeting Regulatory Policies & Practices Probabilistic Risk Assessment and Plant Operations Probabilistic Risk Assessment and Plant Operations Palnning and Procedures Joint Materials & Metallurgy and Severe Accidents Severe Accidents 436th Full Committe Meeting Probabilistic Risk Assessment Human Factors Planning & Procedures Westinghouse Standard Plant Designs 437th Full Committee Meeting Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena Joint Materials & Metallurgy and Severe Accidents Probabilistic Risk Assessment Planning & Procedures 438th Full Committee Meeting Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Probabilistic Risk Assessment Joint Materials & Metallurgy and Severe Accidents Planning & Procedures 439th Full Committee Meeting Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena 10/8/96 10/8/96 10/8/96 10/8/96 10/9/96 10/12/96 10/17 /96 10/19/96 10/30/96 10/30/96 10/31/96 11/1/96 11/5/96 11/5/96 11/5/96 11/6/96 11/6/96 11/6/96 11/7 /96 11/9/96 11/21/96 11/22/96 12/3/96 12/3/96 12/4/96 12/4/96 12/4/96 12/4/96 12/5/96 12/7 /96 12/18/96 12/19/96 1/9/97 1/9/97 1/9/97 1/9/97 2/5/97 2/5/97 2/6/97 2/8/97 2/12/97 2/14/97 2/19/97 2/19/97 2/20/97 2/21/97 3/4/97 3/5/97 3/5/97 3/5/97 3/6/97 3/8/97 3/28/97 3/28/97 17d. Total 47 3/2/98 3:55 PM

T-820H 3 of 5 http://www.8020data.com/cms 1997ar/RptAnnualReport.asp Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Planning & Procedures 440th Full Committee Meeting Materials & Metallurgy Planning & Procedures 441st Full Committee Meeting Instrumentation & Control Systems & Computers Human Factors Planning & Procedures 442nd Full Committee Meeting Probabilistic Risk Assessment Planning & Procedures 443rd Full Committee Meeting Plant Operations Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Materials & Metallurgy and Severe Accidents Planning & Procedures 3/28/97 3/28/97 4/2/97 4/2/97 4/3/97 4/4/97 4/15/97 4/16/97 5/1 /97 5/1/97 5/1 /97 5/3/97 5/28/97 5/29/97 6/3/97 6/3/97 6/10/97 6/10/97 6/11/97 6/14/97 7 /7/97 7 /8/97 7 /8/97 7 /8/97 7 /9/97 7 /11/97 7 /18/97 7 /18/97 7/29/97 7/30/97 8/26/97 8/27/97 8/27/97 8/27/97 Regulatory Policies & Practices 8/27/97 8/27/97 Joint P~obabilistic Risk Assessment, Plant Operations, and Fire 8128197 8129197 Protection 444th Full Committee Meeting 9/3/97 9/5/97 Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena 9/29/97 9/30/97 l 8a(l) Personal Pmts to Non-Federal Members l 8a(2) Personal Pmts to Federal Members l 8a(3) Personal Pmts to Federal Staff l 8a(4) Personal Pmts to Non-member Consultants l 8b( I) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Federal Members 18b(2) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Members l 8b(3) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Staff 18b(4) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Member Consultants l 8c.Other(rents,user charges,graphics,printing,mail etc.)

18d Total

19. Federal Staff Support Years 20a. How does the Committee accomplish its purpose?

Current Fiscal Year

$432,106.00

$0.00

$1,996,569.00

$24,866.00

$195,006.00

$0.00

$30,076.00

$17,040.00

$59,500.00

$2,755,163.00 22.3 Next Fiscal Year

$445,000.00

$0.00

$2,056,466.00

$25,200.00

$215,316.00

$0.00

$25,000.00

$18,000.00

$57,800.00

$2,842,782.00 20.3 As required by statute, the ACRS performs independent reviews of safety issues associated with the operating nuclear power plants, adequacy of new reactor designs, and safety-related technical and policy issues associated with new designs and provides valuable and timely advice to the NRC on these matters. During FY 1997, the ACRS completed 34 reports, which included its annual report to Congress on the NRC Safety Research Program and held ten Full Committee meetings and 37 Subcommittee meetings. In conducting its reviews, the ACRS meets regularly with the NRC staff, industry, other government agencies, public interest groups, and interested members of the public. The ACRS and NRC staff interact under procedures established by a Memorandum of Understanding, which gives the ACRS the opportunity to review a broad range of NRC regulatory actions. In addition, the ACRS has periodic meetings with the NRC Commissioners and with individual NRC office directors to discuss issues of mutual interest. The ACRS was particularly effective in providing timely advice to the Commission on the development of the review plan for probabilistic risk assessment and regulatory decision-making and on the use of risk-informed, performance based regulation. Other issues reviewed in FY 1997 include: thermal-hydraulic research plan, draft update of Standard Review Plan, Chapter 7, proposed rule on steam generator integrity, human performance program plan, proposed regulatory guidance related to implementation of 10 CFR 50.59, design basis verification, the proposed final policy statement on the restructuring and economic deregulation of the electric utility industry, the proposed NRC staff position regarding inclusion of containment spray system in the AP600 design, NRC staff action plan to improve the Senior Management Meeting Process, the proposed rulemaking for shutdown and final storage pool operations at nuclear power plants, draft Regulatory Guide DG-1069, Fire Protection Program for Permanently Shutdown and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants, and boiling water reactor pressure vessel shell weld inspection. The Committee's work has had a significant impact on the NRC regulatory process.

3/2/98 3:55 PM

T-820H 4 of5 http://www.8020data.com/cms l 997ar/RptAnnua!Report.asp 20b. How does the Committee balance its membership?

The NRC appoints ACRS members from the scientific and engineering disciplines with three prerequisites in mind: outstanding scientific and technical ability, balanced and mature judgment, and willingness to devote the time required to the demanding work involved. There has been a conscious effort to obtain members trained in both nuclear and nonnuclear disciplines who have had considerable experience in various fields needed to evaluate design, construction, and operation of nuclear power plants and related facilities. During FY 1997, the membership included those experienced in the areas of reactor operations; probabilistic risk assessment; analysis of severe reactor accident phenomena; design of nuclear power plant structures, systems, and components; mechanical, civil, and electrical engineering; materials and metallurgy; thermal-hydraulics; and digital instrumentation and control systems. The diversity of viewpoints represented by current members is broadly based from the standpoint of special fields of interest, employment experience, and scientific or technical specialty. These membership characteristics provide the Committee with a balance of highly qualified technical experts in the nuclear and nonnuclear fields necessary to carry out the Committee's statutory requirements.

20c. How frequent and relevant are the Committee meetings?

The ACRS and its Subcommittees held 47 meetings during FY 1997, of which 10 were Full Committee meetings.

The number of meetings held is directly related to the number of nuclear safety matters reviewed by the Committee that were referred to it by the NRC or required by statute; the number of generic issues that arose during the year; the number of rules, policy matters, and regulatory guidance referred to the Committee for review and comment; the number of special reviews requested by the NRC Commissioners and Congress; and areas of particular interest/concern to the Committee. The Full Committee meets ten times a year for two or three days to consider various safety-related nuclear issues, generic and special reviews, rules, policy matters, and regulatory guidance. ACRS Subcommittees meet as necessary with licensees, NRC staff, nuclear industry groups, other government agencies, and others to develop information for the Committee on the particular matters under review and to identify those matters warranting particular attention by the Full Committee. There is a continuing need for the technical advice provided by the ACRS to the Commission particularly in its transition from prescriptive to risk-informed and performance-based regulation and its need to review new reactor designs.

20d. Why can't the advice or information this committee provides be obtained elsewhere?

The ACRS is unique in that there exists no comparable body composed of acknowledged experts in the field of nuclear reactor safety whose Congressional mandate is to provide the Commission with independent advice in this area. Upon request, the ACRS also provides advice to the U.S. Navy, the Department of Energy, and the Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. This further demonstrates the unique qualifications of the ACRS within the Federal government. The Commission necessarily has its own expert staff on whom it relies in the day-to-day regulation of nuclear power facilities. However, no other advisory committee, either within the Commission or in other agencies, has the current, broadly based knowledge of the ACRS that can provide independent assessments of reactor safety issues. In addition, since ACRS members are primarily part-time advisors with other full-time interests and activities in related fields, they provide a breadth of experience, an independent perspective on issues, and state-of-the-art technical knowledge that would be difficult to duplicate with full-time government employees. A continuing committee such as the ACRS also remains current with respect to nuclear safety issues, including related reactor operating experience and safety research, and provides a collegial judgment regarding these issues that part-time consultants could not provide. Through the ACRS, the public and the Congress are assured of an independent technical review and evaluation of nuclear reactor projects and safety issues and of an opportunity for public input.

20e. Why is it necessary to close and/or partially close committee meetings?

During this period, the Committee held ten full Committee meetings during which Committee business of the usual nature was conducted. Portions of these meetings were closed and time spent in closed sessions occupied approximately 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />. These sessions were closed to discuss: Information of a personal nature the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(6)]. Information provided in confidence by a foreign source (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4) as implemented by 10 CFR 2.790(d)(2)). Trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4)].

Information the premature disclosure of which would be likely to significantly frustrate implementation of a proposed agency action 15 USC 552 b(c)(9)(B)].

21. Remarks NIA 3/2/98 3:55 PM

T-820H 5 of 5 Committee Members Uhrig, Dr. Robert E.

Apostolakis, Dr. George E Barton, Mr. John J Fontana, Dr. Mario H Kress, Dr. Thomas S Miller, Dr. Don W Powers, Dr. Dana A Seale, Dr. Robert L Shack, Dr. William J http://www.8020data.com/cms J 997ar/RptAnnualReport.asp Occupation Distinguished Professor, Nuclear Engineering Department, University of Tennessee Professor, Nuclear Engineering Department, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Retired Exec. General Public Utilities Corp Research Professor, University of Tennessee Retired Manager, Oak Ridge National Laboratory Professor and Chair, Nuclear Engineering Department, Ohio State University Manager, Nuclear Facilities Safety Department, Sandia National Laboratories Professor of Nuclear & Energy Engineering, University of Arizona Associate Director, Energy Technology Division, Argonne National Laboratory 3/2/98 3:55 PM