ML24059A213

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
2005 Annual Report - Review of Federal Advisory Committee
ML24059A213
Person / Time
Issue date: 12/01/2005
From:
NRC/SECY
To:
References
Download: ML24059A213 (1)
v • d • e


Text

Annual Kepon 2005 Current FY Report: Review of Federal Advisory Committee 1/9/2006 3:31:02 PM I. Depanment or Agency Nuclear Regulatory Commission

3. Committee or SubCommittee Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes
4. Is this New During Fiscal Year?
5. Current Chaner
6. Expected Renewal Date No 3/18/2004 3/18/2006 8a. Was Terminated During FY?

8b. Specific Termination Authority No 42 u.s.c. 2201 Page l ot J Committee Menu

2. Fiscal Year 2005 3b. GSA Committee No.

1102

7. Expected Term Date 9/30/2012 Sc.Actual Termination Date
9. Agency Recommendation for Next FY Continue

!0a.Legislation Req to Terminate?

!Ob.Legislation Pending?

No 11. Establishment Authority Agency Authority

12. Specific Establishment Authority 42 u.s.c. 2201
13. Effective Date 7/1/1958 Scientific Technical Program Advisory Board
14. Committee Type Continuing
15. Description of Committee 16a. Total Number of Repons 5

I 6b. Repon Titles and Dates Summary of October 5, 2004 Telephone Conference Transcript of ACMUI Meeting Oct 13-14, 2004 Transcript of Jan 18, 2005 Telephone Conference Transcript of June 28, 2005 Telephone Conference.

Transcript of April 20, 2005 Committee meeting 17a Open:

3 17b. Closed:

Meeting Purposes and Dates 0

To Discuss required hours of training under 10CFR Part 35 (1) Use of 1-125 Brachytherapy Seeds as Markers; (2)

Proposed Changes to Abnormal Occurrence Criteria; (3)

Discussion of Medical Event Criteria; and, (4) Update on St.

Joseph Mercy Hospital Dose Reconstruction Case.

17c. Panially Closed:

10/5/2004 10/5/2004 10/13/2004 10/14/2004 Develop recommendations regarding revision of the medical 111812005 1/l8/2005 event criteria definition in Pt. 35 Discussion of (1) Status of Rulemaking: Pt. 35 Training and Experience; (2) Status and Update: Redefining Medical Events; (3) Case Experience in Using 1-125 Seeds as Markers; (4) FDA Radiation Dose Limits for Human Research Subjects Using Certain Radiolabeled Drugs, and (5) Establishing Guidance on Exceeding Dose Limits for Members of the Public who would serve as Caregivers to Persons undergoing Radiopharmeceutical Therapy.

Develop recommendations regarding the definition in 10CFR Part 35 on Medical Event Criteria.

18a( I) Personnel Pmts to Non-Federal Members I 8a(2) Personnel Pmts to Federal Members I 8a(3) Personnel Pmts to Federal Staff

! 8a(4) Personnel Pmts to Non-member Consultants http://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/rptannualreport.asp 4/20/2005 4/21/2005 6/28/2005 6/28/2005 Current Fiscal Year

$0

$122,000

$0 2

14c. Presidential?

No 10/5/2004 10/14/2004 1/18/2005

  • 1/28/2005 4/20/2005 17d. Total Meetings 5 Next Fiscal Year

$0

$130,000

$0 01/09/2006

Annual Keport 18b(l) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Federal Members l 8b(2) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Members 18b(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 Commi11ee accomplish its purpose?

$0

$17,500

$2,100

$0

$0

$0

$141,600 1.5

$0

$22,000

$2,500

$0

$0

$0

$154,500 1.5 The NRC staff believes that licensees, the general public, and medical professionals benefit when recognized experts provide advice to the staff. This advice enables staff to develop rules that will maintain public safety, while not inappropriately intruding upon the practice of medicine. The Staff provides a summary of issues to be addressed during meetings, and the ACMUI discusses the issues and gives advice and makes recommendations to the Staff. Furthermore, the A CMUI keeps staff abreast of new developments. This ongoing communication helps ensure that staff is aware of important issues during critical stages rule development. When issues that need special emphasis arise, working groups and subcommittees are formed.

20b. How does the Committee balance its membership?

Membership is balanced by placing individuals of diverse specialty on the committee. For instance, there are members who represent both diagnostic and therapeutic applications of medicine. There are members who have a regulatory function within their specialties. There is a member who represents medicine from an administrative standpoint, and there is a patient advocate member, who represents patients' interests. ACMUI members also perform regular self-evaluations, in which they give feedback on the appropriateness of the committee's composition.

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

Committee meetings are generally held semi-annually. The committee will hold more frequent meetings when important issues emerge, or when issues need timely resolution.

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

NRC continues to strive to achieve its goal of creating risk-informed, performance-based regulations that provide for the health and safety of the public while imposing no unnecessary burden on licensees. Furthermore, the medical profession continues to see regular advances that create unique regulatory challenges. The advice and recommendations from medical professionals who are exposed to these advances is crucial to the NRC staffs ability to continue to regulate effectively.

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

Meetings are closed to conduct annual ethics briefings, conduct reviews of paperwork of a personal and confidential nature, and to discuss administrative matters that are purely internal to Committee business. It would be inappropriate to conduct these types of meetings openly. They must be conducted privately to allow Committee members the freedom to ask and answer personal questions and to protect individuals' privacy.

21. Remarks Designated Federal Official: Mr. Thomas H Essig DFO Committee Members Start Bailey, Mr. Edgar D.

10/1/2004 Diamond M.D., Dr. David A.

11/8/2000 Eggli M.D., Dr. Douglas F.

4/11/2002 Kinsey, Ms. Vikki 1/1/2003 Lieto, Mr. Ralph P.

5/20/2002 Malmud M.D., Dr. Leon S.

5/20/2002 Nag M.D., Dr. Subir 11/8/2000 Schenter Ph.D., Dr. Robert 6/21/2004 Schwarz M.S., Ms. Sally W.

11/8/2000 Vetter Ph.D., Dr. Richard J.

11/8/2000 End Occupation 9/30/2007 State Representative 9/30/2006 Radiation Oncologist 9/30/2009 Nuclear Medicine Physician 1/1/2009 Food and Drug Administration Representative 9/29/2007 Medical Physicist-Nuclear Medicine 9/30/2008 Health Care Administrator 9/30/2009 Radiation Oncologist 9/30/2007 Patient Advocate 9/30/2008 Nuclear Pharmacist 9/30/2009 Radiation Safety Officer http://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/rptannualreport.asp Page '2 ot 3 01/09/2006

Annual Report Williamson Ph.D., Dr. Jeffrey F.

Total Count of Committee Members 11/8/2000 9/29/2007 Therapy Physicist 11 http://www. fi do. gov /facadatabase/rptann ualreport. asp Page jot j 01/09/2006

Annual Kepon Pagel of 6 2005 Current FY Report: Review of Federal Advisory Committee 11/30/2005 10:55:57 AM Committee Menu I. Depanment or Agency

2. Fiscal Year 2005 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
3. Committee or SubCommittee 3b. GSA Committee No.

Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards 207

4. Is this New During Fiscal Year?
5. Current Chaner
6. Expected Renewal Date
7. Expected Term Date No 12/14/2004 12/14/2006 8a. Was Terminated During FY?

8b. Specific Tem1ination Authority Sc.Actual Tennination Date No

9. Agency Recommendation for Next FY Continue IOa.Legislation Reg to Tem1inate?

!Ob.Legislation Pending?

No

11. Establishment Authority
12. Specific Establishment Authority Statutory(Congress Created)
13. Effective Date
14. Committee Type Continuing 14c. Presidential?

42 U.S.C. Sect. 2039 & 2232 1/1/1957

15. Description of Committee 16a. Total Number of Repons 38 16b. Repon Titles and Dates Scientific Technical Program Advisory Board DRAFT NUREG-XXXX, The Report on the Independent Verification of the Mitigating Systems Performance Index (MSPI) Results for the Pilot Plants Review of ACR-700 Pre-Application Safety Assessment Report No 10/14/2004 10/14/2004 Safety Evaluation of the Industry Guidelines Related to Pressurized Water Reactor Sump Performance 10/18/2004 Proposed Resolution of Generic Safety Issue 185, Control of Recriticality Following Small-Break LOCAs in PWRs Report on An Overview of Differences in Nuclear Safety Regulatory Approaches and Requirements Between United States and Other Countries Resolution of Certain Items Identified by the ACRS in NUREG-1740, Voltage-Based Alternative Repair Criteria Lessons Learned from the A CRS Review of the APIO00 Design ACRS Assessment of the Quality of Selected NRC Research Projects Draft Proposed Rule on Post-Fire Operator Manual Actions Interim Letter - Regulatory Structure for New Plant Licensing: Technology-Neutral Framework Estimating Loss-of-Coolant Accident Frequencies Through the Elicitation Process 10/22/2004 11/2/2004 11/17/2004 11/18/2004 11/18/2004 11/19/2004 12/9/2004 12/10/2004 Safety Evaluation of the Industry Guidelines Related to Pressurized Water Reactor Sump Performance 12/10/2004 Risk-Informing 10 CFR 50.46, Acceptance Criteria for Emergency Core Cooling Systems for Light-Water Nuclear Power Reactors Review of the Final Safety Evaluation Report for the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility Construction Authorization Request 12/17/2004 2/24/2005 Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 - Extended Power Uprate 2/24/2005 R~v!se~ Draft NUREG Report, Estimating Loss-of-Coolant Accident (LOCA) Frequencies Through the 311112005 Ehc1tatton Process Pressurized Thermal Shock (PTS) Reevaluation Project: Technical Basis for Revision of the PTS Screening Criterion in the PTS Rule Interim Letter: Draft Safety Evaluation Report on North Anna Early Site Permit Application Proposed Rulemaking to Modify 10 CFR 50.46, Risk-Informed Changes to Loss-of-Coolant Accident Technical Requirements Report on the Safety Aspects of the License Renewal Application for the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear http://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/rptannualreport.asp 3/11/2005 3/11/2005 3/14/2005 4/14/2005 l l/30/2005

Annual.Kepon Plant, Units 1 and 2 Report on the Safety Aspects of the License Renewal Application for Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2 Guidance for Assessing Exemption Requests from Nuclear Power Plant Licensed Operator Staffing Requirements Interim Report on the Safety Aspects of the License Renewal Application for the Point Beach Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2 Draft Commission Paper on Risk-Informed Alternatives to the Single Failure Criterion Draft Final NUREG/CR-6850, EPRI/NRC-RES Fire PRA Methodology for Nuclear Power Facilities Interim Letter: Draft Safety Evaluation Report on Grand Gulf Early Site Permit Application Draft Final Regulatory Guide, Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Fire Protection for Existing Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants Assessment of the Quality of the NRC Research Projects Proposed Revision 2 to RG 1.152, Criteria for Use of Computers in Safety Systems of Nuclear Power Plants Draft Final Regulatory Guide DG-1137, Guidelines for Lightning Protection of Nuclear Power Plants Report on the Safety Aspects of the License Renewal Application for the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 Dominion Nuclear North Anna, LLC, Early Site Permit Application and the Associated NRC Final SER Proposed Revision 4 to Regulatory Guide 1.82, Water Sources for Long-Term Recirculation Cooling Following a Loss-of-Coolant Accident Report on Two Policy Issues Related to New Plant Licensing Report on the Safety Aspects of the License Renewal Applications for the Millstone Power Station, Units 2 and 3 Draft Final Revisions to Generic License Renewal Guidance Documents Interim Letter: Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Application for Early Site Permit and the Associated NRC Staff's Draft Safety Evaluation Report Report on a Proposed Technical Basis for Revision of the Embrittlement Criteria in 10 CFR 50.46 5/13/2005 5/13/2005 6/9/2005 6/10/2005 6/10/2005 6/14/2005 6/14/2005 7/15/2005 7/15/2005 7/18/2005 7/18/2005 7/18/2005 9/20/2005 9/21/2005 9/22/2005 9/22/2005 9/22/2005 9/23/2005 17a Open:

44 17b. Closed:

1 I 7c. Partially Closed:

1 17d. Total Meetings 46 Meeting Purposes and Dates Planning & Procedures Subcommittee 516th Full Committee Fire Protection Subcommittee Regulatory Policies and Practices Subcommittee Planning & Procedures Subcommittee Safeguards and Security Subcommittee Plant License Renewal Subcommittee 517th Full Committee Reliability and Probabilistic Risk Assessment Subcommittee Regulatory Policies and Practices Subcommittee Joint Materials & Metallurgy, Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena, and Reliability & Probabilistic Risk Assessment Subcommittees Plant License Renewal Subcommittee Planning & Procedures Subcommittee 518th Full Committee Reactor Fuels Subcommittee Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Subcommittee Planning & Procedures Subcommittee and Retreat http://www. fido. gov /facadatabase/rptann ual report. asp 10/6/2004 10/6/2004 10/7/2004 10/9/2004 10/27/2004 10/27/2004 10/28/2004 10/29/2004 11/3/2004 11/3/2004 11/3/2004 11/3/2004 11/3/2004 11/3/2004 11/4/2004 11/6/2004 11/16/2004 11/16/2004 11/16/200411/16/2004 11/30/2004 12/1/2004 12/1/2004 12/1/2004 12/1/2004 12/1/2004 12/2/2004 12/4/2004 12/15/2004 12/16/2004 1/26/2005 1/26/2005 1/27/2005 1/28/2005 Page 2 of 6 11/30/2005

Annual Keport Plant License Renewal Subcommittee Planning & Procedures Subcommittee 519th Full Committee Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Subcommittee Early Site Permits Subcommittee Planning & Procedures Subcommittee 520th Full Committee Plant License Renewal Subcommittee Planning & Procedures Subcommittee 521st Full Committee Planning & Procedures Subcommittee Fire Protection Subcommittee 522nd Full Committee Fire Protection Subcommittee Early Site Permits Subcommittee Plant License Renewal Subcommittee Planning & Procedures Subcommittee 523rd Full Committee Digital Instrumentation & Control Systems Subcommittee Joint Reliability & Probabilistic Risk Assessment and Plant Operations Subcommittees Planning & Procedures Subcommittee 524th Full Committee Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Subcommittee Reactor Fuels Subcommittee Plant Operations Subcommittee Early Site Permits Subcommittee Planning & Procedures Subcommittee 525th Full Committee Joint Plant License Renewal and Plant Operations Subcommittees 18a( 1) Personnel Pmts to Non-Federal Members 18a(2) Personnel Pmts to Federal Members l 8a(3) Personnel Pmts to Federal Staff l 8a( 4) Personnel Pmts to Non-member Consultants I Sb( I) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Federal Members l 8b(2) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Members 18b(3) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Staff 18b(4) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Member Consultants 18c.Other(rents,user charges,graphics.printing,mail etc.)

18d Total I 9. Federal Staff Support Years 20a. How does the Committee accomplish its purpose?

2/9/2005 2/9/2005 2/9/2005 2/9/2005 2/10/2005 2/11/2005 2/15/2005 2/15/2005 3/2/2005 3/2/2005 3/2/2005 3/2/2005 3/3/2005 3/5/2005 4/6/2005 4/6/2005 4/6/2005 4/6/2005 4/7/2005 4/9/2005 5/4/2005 5/4/2005 5/4/2005 5/4/2005 5/5/2005 5/6/2005 5/16/2005 5/17/2005 5/16/2005 5/16/2005 5/31/2005 5/31/2005 5/31/2005 5/31/2005 6/1/2005 6/3/2005 6/14/2005 6/15/2005 6/15/2005 6/15/2005 7/5/2005 7/5/2005 7/6/2005 7/8/2005 7/19/2005 7/20/2005 7/27/2005 7/29/2005 8/24/2005 8/25/2005 9/7/2005 9/7/2005 9/7/2005 9/7/2005 9/8/2005 9/10/2005 9/21/2005 9/21/2005 Current Fiscal Year

$472,172

$0

$2,465,811

$24,913

$226,445

$0

$24,401

$6,079

$383,364

$3,603,185 25.5 Next Fiscal Year

$488,273

$0

$2,549,895

$27,404

$249,090

$0

$26,841

$6,687

$233,364

$3,581,554 26.5 The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) reports to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and provides the Commission with independent reviews of, and advice on, the safety of proposed or existing NRC-licensed reactor facilities and the adequacy of applicable safety standards. The ACRS was established as a statutory committee by a 1957 amendment to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. With the enactment of the Energy http://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/rptannualreport.asp Page 3 of 6 11/30/2005

Annual Keport Reorganization Act of 1974, the licensing functions of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) were transferred intact from the AEC to the NRC. The ACRS has continued in the same advisory role to the NRC with its responsibilities changing with the needs of the Commission. Some A CRS tasks are mandated by statute or regulation, some are in response to direction by the Commission, or requests from the NRC staff, or other stakeholders, and some are self initiated in response to ACRS concerns on important regulatory and safety-related matters. The ACRS, upon request from the Department of Energy (DOE), provides advice on the safety of U.S.

naval reactor designs. Upon request, the ACRS also provides technical advice to the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. The ACRS and its Subcommittees meet regularly in public, Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA)-regulated meetings, to review matters within the scope of its responsibilities. ACRS meeting agenda, meeting transcripts, and letter reports are available for downloading or viewing on the Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html or http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/. The ACRS and its Subcommittees held 46 meetings during FY 2005, including 10 Full Committee meetings that were attended by all ACRS members. The ACRS members are chosen for their technical expertise relevant to the safety issues important to the Commission. Consultants are used on occasion to augment the expertise of the ACRS members.

The Committee has a full-time staff that provides technical support and administrative services in compliance with FACA requirements. ACRS Subcommittees normally consist of three to six ACRS members with the expertise needed to review in detail the regulatory and safety issues and to formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the Full Committee. Stakeholder participation in ACRS meetings is encouraged and routinely occurs. The Committee's advice, in the form of written reports, is only produced by the Full Committee and reports on significant regulatory matters are discussed with the Commission in public meetings.

The ACRS conducts an ongoing review of its priorities and schedules to ensure that regulatory matters within its scope of responsibilities are being properly addressed and within its resources, and timely advice is provided to the Commission. Input from the Commission, the NRC staff, and affected stakeholders is used in this process. A Memorandum of Understanding with the NRC Executive Director for Operations (EDO) provides a framework for NRC staff interaction with the ACRS. The ACRS conducts formal self-assessments to improve its effectiveness and efficiency. A report is provided to the Commission on the outcome of those assessments. The focus of the ACRS work during FY 2005 was on risk-informed and performance-based regulatory initiatives, license renewal applications, technology-neutral framework for advanced reactor licensing, early site permit applications, pre-application review of the Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor design, fire protection issues, human factors, steam generator tube integrity, resolution of certain generic safety issues, quality assessment of selected NRC research projects, mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility, regulatory guidance, pressurized water reactor sump performance, safeguards and security matters, thermal-hydraulic codes, and the NRC safety research program.

20b. How does the Committee balance its membership?

The Commission appoints ACRS members with the scientific and engineering expertise needed to address the safety issues of importance to the Commission. Members are sought who can provide an independent perspective on nuclear safety issues, outstanding scientific and technical ability, balanced and mature judgment, and a willingness to devote the time required to the demanding work involved. Members are appointed for 4-year terms and, absent unusual circumstances, do not serve more than three terms. Members are reappointed at the end of a 4-year term only if there is a compelling continuing need for their expertise. Vacancies in the ACRS membership are filled from the pool of applicants which exists after solicitations of interest are published in the Federal Register, trade and professional society publications, and the press. Recommendations to the Commission as to the selection of qualified candidates from this pool are made by the ACRS Member Candidate Screening Panel. The ACRS normally provides input to this Panel. During FY 2005, the membership was comprised of individuals with diverse employment backgrounds and included those with expertise in the areas of nuclear power plant operations; probabilistic risk assessment; analysis of severe reactor accident phenomena; design of nuclear power plant structures, systems, and components; chemical engineering; materials and metallurgy; and thermal-hydraulics and computational fluid dynamics. The diversity of viewpoints represented by current members is based on special fields of interest, employment experience, and technical expertise. These member attributes provide the Committee with the balance of highly qualified technical expertise and diverse safety perspectives necessary to carry out the Committee's statutory responsibilities effectively.

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

The ACRS and its Subcommittees held 46 meetings during FY 2005, of which 10 were Full Committee meetings.

The number of meetings held in a reporting period is directly related to the number of nuclear safety matters to be reviewed as required by statute; the number of rules and regulatory guidance referred to the Committee for review and comment; the number of special reviews requested by the Commission, EDO, or other Federal Government organizations; and other safety issues of particular concern to the Committee and its stakeholders.

All of the Committee members normally meet 10 times a year for 3 or 4 days in Full Committee meetings, to consider important safety-related nuclear issues, generic issues, significant regulatory matters, rules, and regulatory guidance. The ACRS Subcommittees, which are normally comprised of three to six members with the relevant expertise, meet as necessary with stakeholders to conduct in-depth reviews of particular matters for later http://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/rptannualreport.asp Page 4 of 6 11/30/2005

Annual Report consideration by the full membership during Full Committee meetings. Although not required by the revised FACA, Subcommittee meetings are conducted under the same FACA procedures as the Full Committee meetings to facilitate public participation and to provide a forum for stakeholders to express their views on regulatory matters being considered by the ACRS. These meetings are utilized to make efficient use of Committee resources.

Reviews are conducted during each Full Committee meeting to assess the relevance of proposed review topics, resource needs, and the priority of each activity. These assessments have the benefit of input from the Commission, EDO, and other stakeholders. The self-assessment conducted by the ACRS for its CY 2003 and CY 2004 activities involved collection of input from a variety of stakeholders. This information was used to assess the relevance of ACRS activities. All ACRS meetings for this reporting period addressed either matters for which ACRS review was required by statute or regulation, specific requests from either the Commission or the EDO, or other important regulatory matters within the scope of ACRS responsibilities.

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

The ACRS is an independent body of recognized experts in the field of nuclear reactor safety whose Congressional mandate is to provide the Commission with independent advice. Particular duties of the ACRS (e.g., review of operating reactor license renewal applications, extended core power uprates, advanced reactor designs, safeguards and security issues, and rules and regulations) are dictated by statute or regulation. In addition, functional arrangements exist wherein, upon request, the ACRS provides advice to the U.S. Navy, the Department of Energy, and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. The Commission has its own expert staff on whom it relies in the day-to-day regulation of nuclear power facilities. The ACRS provides the Commission and the NRC staff with an independent, critical review of high-level regulatory issues under consideration by the NRC and independent technical insights as to important matters needing Commission attention. The ACRS members are part-time special government employees with other full-time interests and activities in related fields, and provide a breadth of experience, an independent perspective on issues, and technical knowledge that is not duplicated by the NRC's full-time government employees. A standing committee such as the ACRS remains current with respect to nuclear safety issues of importance to the NRC, including those related to reactor operating experience, regulatory reform, and NRC's needs for safety research, and provides an independent, collegial judgment regarding these issues that other part-time consultants could not provide. The ACRS meetings provide an important forum to stakeholders to express freely their concerns on safety issues and regulatory process. A number of important safety initiatives have had their origins in ACRS deliberations. Through the ACRS, the public and the Congress are ensured of an independent technical review and evaluation of the safety of NRC-licensed reactor facilities, proposed reactor designs, significant regulatory issues, and other significant safety issues, and of an opportunity for stakeholder input.

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

During this period, the Committee held 10 full Committee meetings. Of these 10 meetings, 1 meeting was partially closed to discuss information classified as national security information and safeguards information 5 U.S.C. 552b (c)(l) and (3).

21. Remarks None Designated Federal Official: Michele S Kelton DFO Committee Members Start Apostolakis, Dr.

6/4/1995 George E.

Bonaca, Dr.

1/6/1999 Mario V.

End 6/3/2007 1/5/2007 Occupation Professor of Nuclear Engineering, Professor of Engineering Systems, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Retired, Director, Nuclear Engineering Department, Northeast Utilities Denning, Dr.

9/29/2004 9/28/2008 Senior Research Leader, Battelle Memorial Institute, and Adjunct Richard S.

Professor, the Ohio State University Ford, Dr. Peter F. 3/23/2001 3/22/2005 Retired Program Manager, General Electric Research and Development Center Kress, Dr.

Thomas S.

9/4/1991 9/3/2007 Retired, Head of Applied Systems Technology Section, Oak Ridge National Laboratory Powers, Dr. Dana 6/6/1994 A.

6/5/2006 Senior Scientist, Nuclear Facilities Safety Department, Sandia National Laboratories Ransom, Dr.

Victor H.

Rosen, Mr.

3/2/2002 3/6/2006 Professor Emeritus, Purdue School of Nuclear Engineering 6/12/2001 6/11/2005 Retired Vice President of Nuclear Engineering and Manager of Risk http://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/rptannualreport.asp Page 5 of 6 11/30/2005

Annual Report Stephen L.

Shack, Dr.

William J.

Sieber, Mr. John D.

Wallis, Dr.

Graham B.

Management, STP Nuclear Operating Company at South Texas Project Electric Generating Station 8/1/1993 7/31/2009 Associate Director, Energy Technology Division, Argonne National Laboratory 7/12/1999 7/11/2007 Retired Senior Vice-President, Nuclear Power Division, Duquesne Light Company 1/23/1998 1/22/2006 Retired, Sherman Fairchild Professor Emeritus, Thayer School of Engineering, Dartmouth College Total Count of Committee Members 11 http://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/rptann ualreport.asp Page b orb 11/30/2005

Annua1 Kepon Pagel of 2 2005 Current FY Report: Review of Federal Advisory Committee 12/21/2005 2:47:06 PM Committee Menu I. Department or Agency Nuclear Regulatory Commission

3. Committee or SubCommittee Licensing Support System Advisory Review Panel
4. Is this New During Fiscal Year?
5. Current Charter
6. Ex peeled Renewal Date No 8a. Was Tem1inated During FY?

No

9. Agency Recommendation for Next FY Continue 11. Establishment Authority
12. Specific Establishment Authority 42 u.s.c. 2201
15. Description of Committee 12/9/2004 12/9/2006 8b. Specific Termination Authority 42 u.s.c. 2201 I0a. Legislation Req to Tem1inate?

No Agency Authority

13. Effective Date 1/19/1975 Non Scientific Program Advisory Board
14. Committee Type Continuing
2. Fiscal Year 2005 3b. GSA Committee No.

1104

7. Expected Term Date 12/1/2010 Sc.Actual Termination Date

!Ob.Legislation Pending?

14c. Presidential?

No 16a. Total Number of Reports 17d. Total Meetings No Reports for this Fiscal Year.

I 8a(I) Personnel Pmts to Non-Federal Members I 8a(2) Personnel Pmts to Federal Members I 8a(3) Personnel Pmts to Federal Staff No Meetings for this Fiscal Year.

18a(4) Personnel 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 I 8b(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 I 9. Federal Staff Support Years 20a. How does the Committee accomplish its purpose?

Current Fiscal Year Next Fiscal Year

$0

$0

$0

$8,000

$1,000

$8,000

$0

$0

$0

$1,000

$0

$7,000

$0

$2,000

$0

$0

$0

$3,000

$1,000

$29,000 0.0 0.0 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission relies on the Licensing Support Network Advisory Review Panel (LSNARP) for advice and recommendations on the design and operation of the searchable electronic database (Licensing Support Network (LSN)) for documents that are relevant to the licensing of a geologic repository for the storage of high level nuclear waste as defined in 10 CFR 2.1003. The document collection contains electronic copies of all of the material that will be used by parties in the NRC's licensing proceeding for a high level radioactive waste repository. The LSN is in operation, was loaded with more than 1 million documents during FY-2004, and has continued to have documents loaded in FY-2005. While documents were added to the LSN during FY -2005, no committee meetings were held. The HL W licensing proceeding on DOE's application was and continues to be delayed by several factors. DO E's originally announced December 2004 date for submittal of the License Application was not met, the NRC's Pre-License Application Presiding Officer (PAPO) ruled that DOE's initial certification of its LSN document completness was invalid, and the EPA and NRC environmental standards for a HLW repository are under going revisions in response to the DC Circuit Court's decision in 2004 to strike down portions of the EPA and NRC regulations.

20b. How does the Committee balance its membership?

The membership of the LSNARP is balanced by being drawn from among the full spectrum of potential parties to NRC's anticipated licensing proceeding for the burial 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 http://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/rptann ualreport.asp 12/21/2005

Annual Kepon:

California, Indian tribes (represented by the National Congress of American Indians), and an environmental group (the Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force). It also includes the nuclear industry, the potential licensee (DOE) and the licensing agency (NRC). Input by these representatives is essential to the success of the LSN project.

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

The full LSNARP did not meet during FY-2005. The LSN Administrator held several training sessions for users of the LSN and met with individual representatives of the potential parties to the HL W proceeding to assist in their setting up local document repositories that could be accessed by the LSN. The need for additional meetings of the full LSNARP will be determined when it becomes clear what DOE's schedule will be for submission of an application for the HL W facility. An additional driver for meetings will be the need to upgrade the LSN software in the FY -2007 - FY -2008 time frame.

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 LSN, is unique to this particular computer application. It is not available from other existing committees or within the NRC itself. NRC considers it essential that advice on the design of the software and hardware should come from representatives of the future hands-on users of the LSN.

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

The LSSARP did not hold any closed meetings in FY 2005.

21. Remarks NONE Designated Federal Official: Dr. Andrew L Bates DFO Committee Members Start End Bates, Andrew L 6/15/2000 9/30/2006 Bradshaw, Les 1/15/1993 9/30/2006 Brandt, Joy 10/1/2000 9/30/2006 Clark, Ray 7/1/1999 9/30/2006 Frishman, Steve 7/1/1999 9/30/2006 Holden, Robert 7/1/1999 9/30/2006 Johnson, Abby 10/15/2003 9/30/2006 Kall, Alan 7/1/1999 9/30/2006 Kraft, Steven 1/1/1998 9/30/2006 Leake, Harry 6/1/2002 9/30/2006 Linehan,John 6/1/2003 9/30/2006 Mathias, Linda 10/1/2001 9/30/2006 McCorkell, George 10/1/2000 9/30/2006 Murphy, Malachy 12/18/1989 9/30/2006 Pitts, Jason 10/1/2001 9/30/2006 Remus, Andrew 10/1/2001 9/30/2006 Simom, Mike 10/15/2003 9/30/2006 Treichel, Judy 1/1/1998 9/30/2006 von Tresenhausen, Engelbrech 7/1/2001 9/30/2006 Total Count of Committee Members 19 http://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/rptannualreport.asp Occupation US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nye County, Nevada '<--

Lander County, Nevada "-

US EPA State Of Nevada 4;,

National Congress of American Indians ~

Eureka County~

Churchill County, Nevada \\ii Nuclear Energy Institute - Energy Coalition fl US Departmant of Energy

  • U S Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mineral County, Nevada e, Esmeralda County, Nevada'-

Nye County, Nevada.

Lincoln County, Nevada t.. c, Inyo County, Nevada,:--

White Pine County Nevada _,'v Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force.:41 Clark County Nevada \\ u.

Page 2 of 2 12/21/2005

Annual Kepon Page 1 of 4 2005 Current FY Report: Review of Federal Advisory Committee 11/30/2005 10:30:40 AM Committee Menu I. Department or Agency

2. Fiscal Year 2005 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
3. Committee or SubCommittee 3b. GSA Committee No.

Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste 1100

4. ls this New During Fiscal Year?
5. Current Charter
6. Expected Renewal Date
7. Expected Tem1 Date No 7/15/2004 7/15/2006 8a. Was Terminated During FY?

Sb. Specific Termination Authority Sc.Actual Termination Date No 42 u.s.c. 2201

9. Agency Recommendation for Next FY Continue 10a.Legislation Req to Terminate?

I Ob.Legislation Pending?

No

11. Establishment Authority Agency Authority
12. Specific Establishment Authority
13. Effective Date
14. Committee Type Continuing 14c. Presidential?

42 u.s.c. 2201 1/6/1988 Scientific Technical Program Advisory Board No

15. Description of Committee 16a. Total Number of Reports 14 16b. Report Titles and Dates Working Group on the Evaluation of Igneous Activity and Its Consequences for a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada The 2005 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection Status of the Agreement State Program and the Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program Status of High-Significance Agreements Associated with the Proposed High-Level Waste Repository at Yucca Mountain Briefing on RES-USDA Research: Estimating Ground Water Recharge and Evaluating Model Abstraction Techniques Proposed Role on National Source Tracking of Sealed Sources Definition of a Timespan of Regulatory Compliance for a Geological Repository at Yucca Mountain 11/3/2004 11/3/2004 3/11/2005 3/25/2005 4/27/2005 6/24/2005 6/28/2005 Department of Energy Plans for Transporting Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste 6/28/2005 Comments on ICRP Foundation Documents -A Followup to the ACNW's November 3, 2004 Comments 7/1/2005 Response to the Occupational Safety and Health Agency Request for Information on Ionizing Radiation 7/27/2005 Report on Selected NRC-Sponsored Technical Assistance Program at the Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analysis Draft Revised Decommissioning Guidance to Implement the License Termination Rule Review of Statrs Preclosure Review Preparations for the Proposed Yucca Mountain Repository Comments on USNRC Staff Recommendation of the Use of Collective Dose 8/3/2005 8/12/2005 9/29/2005 9/30/2005 17a Open:

19 17b. Closed:

0 17c. Partially Closed:

1 17d. Total Meetings 25 Meeting Purposes and Dates 154th Full Committee Planning & Procedures 155th Full Committee Planning & Procedures 156th Full Committee Planning and Procedures 157th Full Committee 10/19/2004 10/21/2004 10/19/2004 10/19/2004 11/16/2004 11/17/2004 11/16/2004 11/16/2004 12/13/2004 12/1/2004 12/13/2004 12/13/2004 2/23/2005 2/24/2005 http://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/rptannualreport.asp 11/30/2005

Annual Kepon Planning & Procedures 158th Full Committee Planning & Procedures Planning & Procedures 159th Full Committee Technical Exchange and Site Tours with Japanese Regulators and Officials 160th Full Committee Planning & Procedures 161st Full Committee Planning & Procedures Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Units 1 and 2 Site Visit 162nd Full Committee Savannah River Site Visit Barnwell Site Visit Yucca Mountain Site Tour Planning & Procedures 163rd Full Committee Planning & Procedures and ACNW Retreat 18a(l) Personnel Pmts to Non-Federal Members l 8a(2) Personnel Pmts to Federal Members 18a(3) Personnel Pmts to Federal Staff 18a(4) Personnel Pmts to Non-member Consultants 18b(l) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Federal Members l 8b(2) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Members 18b(3) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Staff l 8b(4) Travel and Per Diem 10 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?

2/23/2005 2/23/2005 3/15/2005 3/17/2005 3/15/2005 3/15/2005 4/18/2005 4/18/2005 4/18/2005 4/19/2005 5/14/2005 5/21/2005 6/15/2005 11/17/2005 6/16/2005 6/16/2005 7/19/2005 7/21/2005 7/19/2005 7/19/2005 8/1/2005 8/1/2005 8/2/2005 8/4/2005 8/10/2005 8/10/2005 8/11/2005 8/11/2005 9/19/2005 9/19/2005 9/20/2005 9/20/2005 9/20/2005 9/21/2005 9/22/2005 9/22/2005 Current Fiscal Year

$212,544

$0

$695,535

$8,758

$54,157

$0

$42,392

$6,431

$113,127

$1,132,944 5.5 Next Fiscal Year

$219,792

$0

$719,253

$9,057

$59,573

$0

$46,631

$6,431

$113,127

$1,173,864 5.5 The Committee reports to and provides the Commission independent review of and advice on technical matters related to nuclear waste management. The bases of ACNW reviews include 10 CFR Parts 20, 40, 50, 60, 61, 63, 71, and 72, and other applicable regulations and legislative mandates. The ACNW undertakes studies and activities related to the transportation, storage, and disposal of high-and low-level radioactive waste, including the interim storage of spent nuclear fuel; materials safety; decommissioning; application of risk-informed and performance-based regulations; and evaluation of licensing documents, rules, regulatory guidance, and other issues, as requested by the Commission. The Committee interacts with representatives of the public, NRC, the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, other Federal agencies, State and local agencies, Native American Nations, and private, international, and other affected organizations as appropriate to fulfill its responsibilities. The Committee issues written reports, providing advice to the Commission on matters within its scope of responsibilities and meets periodically with the Commissioners in public meetings to discuss issues of mutual interest. The focus of the ACNW work during FY 2005 has been on the proposed high-level waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, on issues related to the decommissioning of nuclear facilities, and on waste determinations in accordance with the National Defense Authorization Act of 2005. The ACNW members are chosen for their technical expertise relevant to waste management issues important to the Commission. Consultants are used on occasion to augment the expertise of the ACNW members in specific areas. The Committee has a full-time staff that provides technical support, administrative services, and assures compliance with FACA requirements. ACNW working groups, comprised of ACNW members and consultants with the appropriate expertise, are used on occasion to address http://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/rptannualreport.asp Page 2 ot 4 11/30/2005

Annual t<.epon specific technical issues in depth. These working groups hold public meetings, and their activities are also conducted under FACA requirements. Stakeholder participation in ACNW meetings is encouraged and routinely occurs. ACNW meeting agenda, meeting transcripts, and letter reports are available for downloading or viewing on the Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html or http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/.

The ACNW issues an Action Plan for Commission approval and conducts a self-assessment which includes the use of extensive stakeholder input. The ACNW conducts ongoing reviews of its plans and schedules to ensure that it properly addresses regulatory matters within its scope of responsibilities and that its schedules are consistent with the needs of its stakeholders. Input from the Commission, the NRC staff, and affected stakeholders is used in this process. A Memorandum of Understanding with the NRC staff provides a framework for interactions between the A CNW and the staff.

20b. How does the Committee balance its membership?

The Commission appoints ACNW members with the scientific and engineering expertise needed to address the waste management issues of importance to the Commission. Members are sought who can provide an independent perspective on waste management issues, and who possess outstanding scientific and technical ability, balanced and mature judgment, and a willingness to devote the time required to carry out the timely completion of the Committee's work. Members are appointed for 4-year terms and, absent unusual circumstances, do not serve more than two terms. Members are reappointed at the end of a 4-year term only if there is a compelling continuing need for their expertise. Vacancies in the ACNW membership are filled from the pool of applicants which exists after solicitations of interest are published in the Federal Register, trade and professional society publications, and the press. Recommendations to the Commission as to the selection of qualified candidates from this pool are made by the ACNW Member Candidate Screening Panel. The ACNW members normally provide input to this Panel. The diversity of viewpoints represented by current members is based on special fields of interest, professional experience, and technical expertise. These member attributes provide the Committee with the balance of highly qualified technical expertise and diverse perspectives necessary to effectively carry out the Committee's statutory requirements. At the end of FY 2005, the Committee included two members from academia (one retired), two members from a national laboratory (one retired), and one member from private industry. During FY 2005, the ACNW included members experienced in radioactive waste management, chemistry, health physics, nuclear engineering, risk assessment, environmental engineering, performance assessment, research, and technical management. There has been a systematic effort to obtain members with backgrounds that can address the difficult and diverse questions associated with radioactive waste management. This concentration of the relevant scientific proficiency within the Committee, together with a diversity of viewpoints and perspectives, provides assurance that adequate, independent, and open discussion and analysis of the potential hazards associated with the management of nuclear waste can take place.

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

Normally, all ACNW members meet 8 times a year for 2-3 days in Committee meetings. In FY 2005, the ACNW held 10 Committee meetings. The number of meetings held is directly related to the scope of NRC's efforts on the high-level waste geologic repository and other issues involving waste management; the number of criteria, guides, and technical positions referred to the ACNW for review and comment; the number of special reviews requested by the NRC staff; and the number of important topics of concern to the Committee and its stakeholders. The ACNW Action Plan for Fiscal Years 2005 and 2006 formed the basis for the selection of issues to be addressed during its 2005 meetings. The Committee intends to meet once each year in the vicinity of Yucca Mountain in Nevada to provide an opportunity for local stakeholders to participate in its meetings. Such a meeting was held on September 20 and 21, 2005. The written reports that contain the ACNW's advice are issued during Committee meetings. When resources are available, the ACNW holds working group meetings on particularly complex issues.

At these meetings, additional time and expertise can be brought to bear on an issue and the subject much more technically developed for Committee consideration. Reviews are conducted during each Committee meeting to assess the relevance of proposed meetings and review topics, resource needs, and the priority of each activity.

These assessments have the benefit of input from the Commission, NRC's Executive Director for Operations (EDO), and other stakeholders. The ACNW also conducts a self-assessment once every 2 years. These self assessments involve collection of input from a variety of stakeholders. This information is used to assess the relevance of ACNW activities. All ACNW meetings for this reporting period addressed matters delineated in the ACNW's Action Plan, specific requests from either the Commission or the EDO, or other important regulatory matters within the scope of the responsibilities.

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

The A CNW is a body of recognized experts in the field of nuclear waste management whose mandate is to provide independent advice to the Commission. The ACNW provides the public assurance that an independent technical review and evaluation of nuclear waste safety issues is accomplished and that there will be an opportunity for public input. Decisions relating to waste management that are expected to be before the Commission include the licensing of the proposed Yucca Mountain high-level waste repository, the West Valley Demonstration Project and West Valley Site and other site decommissionings, nuclear reactor decommissioning, and low-level waste http://www. fi do. gov /facadatabase/rptan n ual report. asp Page 3 of 4 11/30/2005

Annual Keport management. The Commission has its own expert staff of NRC employees on whom it relies in its day-to-day operations. However, the Commission has no other advisory committee with the broadly based expertise of the ACNW that could be called upon for independent and informed assessment of safety issues related to high-and low-level waste management. In addition, since members are part-time advisors with other interests and activities in related fields, they provide a breadth of experience, an independent perspective on issues, and technical knowledge that is not duplicated by the NRC staff. The ACNW provides the Commission independent, critical review of high-level regulatory issues under consideration by the NRC and independent technical insights on important matters needing Commission attention. In addition, a standing committee such as the ACNW, supported by a technical staff, remains currently informed with respect to nuclear waste issues of importance to the Commission, including NRC-sponsored safety research. It provides an informed, collegial judgment regarding these issues that would not be obtained by use of individual part-time consultants on a case-by-case basis.

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

During FY 2005, the Committee held 10 Full Committee meetings. Of these 10 meetings, one meeting was partially closed to discuss information that involves internal personnel rules and/or practices (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2)]. As a practice, almost all Committee meetings are open.

21. Remarks NONE Designated Federal Official: Michele Kelton DFO Committee Members Clarke, Dr. James H.

Croff, Mr. Allen G.

Hinze, Dr. William J.

Ryan, Dr. Michael T.

Weiner, Dr. Ruth F.

Total Count of Committee Members Start 1/25/2005 7/12/2004 1/11/2005 6/26/2002 9/15/2003 End 1/24/2009 7/12/2008 1/12/2009 6/25/2006 9/14/2007 5

http://www. fi do. gov /facadatabase/rptan n ualreport. asp Occupation Professor, Vanderbilt University Consultant

Retired, Consultant Consultant Page 4 of 4 11/30/2005

Annuat 1<.epon Pagel of 4 2005 Current FY Report: Review of Federal Advisory Committee 11/30/2005 10:30:40 AM Committee Menu I. Department or Agency

2. Fiscal Year 2005 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
3. Committee or SubCommittee 3b. GSA Committee No.

Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste 1100

4. Is this New During Fiscal Year?
5. Current Charter
6. Expected Renewal Date
7. Expected Term Date No 7/15/2004 7/15/2006 8a. Was Tenninated During FY?

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

9. Agency Recommendation for Next FY Continue

!0a.Legislation Req to Terminate?

!Ob.Legislation Pending?

No

11. Establishment Authority Agency Authority I 2. Specific Establishment Authority
13. Effective Date
14. Corrunittee Type Continuing I 4c. Presidential?

42 u.s.c. 2201 1/6/1988 Scientific Technical Program Advisory Board No

15. Description of Committee 16a. Total Number of Reports 14 16b. Report Titles and Dates Working Group on the Evaluation of Igneous Activity and Its Consequences for a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada The 2005 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection Status of the Agreement State Program and the Integrated Materials Performance Evaluation Program Status of High-Significance Agreements Associated with the Proposed High-Level Waste Repository at Yucca Mountain Briefing on RES-USDA Research: Estimating Ground Water Recharge and Evaluating Model Abstraction Techniques Proposed Role on National Source Tracking of Sealed Sources Definition of a Timespan of Regulatory Compliance for a Geological Repository at Yucca Mountain 11/3/2004 11/3/2004 3/11/2005 3/25/2005 4/27/2005 6/24/2005 6/28/2005 Department of Energy Plans for Transporting Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste 6/28/2005 Comments on ICRP Foundation Documents -A Followup to the ACNW's November 3, 2004 Comments 7/1/2005 Response to the Occupational Safety and Health Agency Request for Information on Ionizing Radiation 7/27/2005 Report on Selected NRC-Sponsored Technical Assistance Program at the Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analysis Draft Revised Decommissioning Guidance to Implement the License Termination Rule Review of Staff's Preclosure Review Preparations for the Proposed Yucca Mountain Repository Comments on USNRC Staff Recommendation of the Use of Collective Dose 8/3/2005 8/12/2005 9/29/2005 9/30/2005 17a Open:

19 17b. Closed:

0 17c. Partially Closed:

1 17d. Total Meetings 25 Meeting Purposes and Dates 154th Full Committee Planning & Procedures 155th Full Committee Planning & Procedures 156th Full Committee Planning and Procedures 157th Full Committee 10/19/2004 10/21/2004 10/19/2004 10/19/2004 11/16/2004 11/17/2004 11/16/2004 11/16/2004 12/13/2004 12/1/2004 12/13/2004 12/13/2004 2/23/2005 2/24/2005 http://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/rptann ualreport.asp 11/30/2005

Annual Keport Planning & Procedures 158th Full Committee Planning & Procedures Planning & Procedures 159th Full Committee Technical Exchange and Site Tours with Japanese Regulators and Officials 160th Full Committee Planning & Procedures 161st Full Committee Planning & Procedures Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Units 1 and 2 Site Visit 162nd Full Committee Savannah River Site Visit Barnwell Site Visit Yucca Mountain Site Tour Planning & Procedures 163rd Full Committee Planning & Procedures and ACNW Retreat I 8a(l) Personnel Pmts lo Non-Federal Members I 8a(2) Personnel Pmts to Federal Members I 8a(3) Personnel Pmts to Federal Staff

!8a(4) Personnel Pmts to Non-member Consultants 18b(I) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Federal Members I 8b(2) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Members I 8b(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?

2/23/2005 2/23/2005 3/15/2005 3/17/2005 3/15/2005 3/15/2005 4/18/2005 4/18/2005 4/18/2005 4/19/2005 5/14/2005 5/21/2005 6/15/2005 11/17/2005 6/16/2005 6/16/2005 7/19/2005 7/21/2005 7/19/2005 7/19/2005 8/1/2005 8/1/2005 8/2/2005 8/4/2005 8/10/2005 8/10/2005 8/11/2005 8/11/2005 9/19/2005 9/19/2005 9/20/2005 9/20/2005 9/20/2005 9/21/2005 9/22/2005 9/22/2005 Current Fiscal Year

$212,544

$0

$695,535

$8,758

$54,157

$0

$42,392

$6,431

$113,127

$1,132,944 5.5 Next Fiscal Year

$219,792

$0

$719,253

$9,057

$59,573

$0

$46,631

$6,431

$113,127

$1,173,864 5.5 The Committee reports to and provides the Commission independent review of and advice on technical matters related to nuclear waste management. The bases of ACNW reviews include 10 CFR Parts 20, 40, SO, 60, 61, 63, 71, and 72, and other applicable regulations and legislative mandates. The A CNW undertakes studies and activities related to the transportation, storage, and disposal of high-and low-level radioactive waste, including the interim storage of spent nuclear fuel; materials safety; decommissioning; application of risk-informed and performance-based regulations; and evaluation of licensing documents, rules, regulatory guidance, and other issues, as requested by the Commission. The Committee interacts with representatives of the public, NRC, the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, other Federal agencies, State and local agencies, Native American Nations, and private, international, and other affected organizations as appropriate to fulfill its responsibilities. The Committee issues written reports, providing advice to the Commission on matters within its scope of responsibilities and meets periodically with the Commissioners in public meetings to discuss issues of mutual interest. The focus of the ACNW work during FY 2005 has been on the proposed high-level waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, on issues related to the decommissioning of nuclear facilities, and on waste determinations in accordance with the National Defense Authorization Act of 2005. The ACNW members are chosen for their technical expertise relevant to waste management issues important to the Commission. Consultants are used on occasion to augment the expertise of the ACNW members in specific areas. The Committee has a full-time staff that provides technical support, administrative services, and assures compliance with FACA requirements. ACNW working groups, comprised of ACNW members and consultants with the appropriate expertise, are used on occasion to address http://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/rptannualreport.asp Page 2 of 4 11/30/2005

Annual Keport specific technical issues in depth. These working groups hold public meetings, and their activities are also conducted under FACA requirements. Stakeholder participation in ACNW meetings is encouraged and routinely occurs. ACNW meeting agenda, meeting transcripts, and letter reports are available for downloading or viewing on the Internet at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html or http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/.

The ACNW issues an Action Plan for Commission approval and conducts a self-assessment which includes the use of extensive stakeholder input. The ACNW conducts ongoing reviews of its plans and schedules to ensure that it properly addresses regulatory matters within its scope of responsibilities and that its schedules are consistent with the needs of its stakeholders. Input from the Commission, the NRC staff, and affected stakeholders is used in this process. A Memorandum of Understanding with the NRC staff provides a framework for interactions between the A CNW and the staff.

20b. How does the Committee balance its membership 0 The Commission appoints ACNW members with the scientific and engineering expertise needed to address the waste management issues of importance to the Commission. Members are sought who can provide an independent perspective on waste management issues, and who possess outstanding scientific and technical ability, balanced and mature judgment, and a willingness to devote the time required to carry out the timely completion of the Committee's work. Members are appointed for 4-year terms and, absent unusual circumstances, do not serve more than two terms. Members are reappointed at the end of a 4-year term only if there is a compelling continuing need for their expertise. Vacancies in the ACNW membership are filled from the pool of applicants which exists after solicitations of interest are published in the Federal Register, trade and professional society publications, and the press. Recommendations to the Commission as to the selection of qualified candidates from this pool are made by the ACNW Member Candidate Screening Panel. The ACNW members normally provide input to this Panel. The diversity of viewpoints represented by current members is based on special fields of interest, professional experience, and technical expertise. These member attributes provide the Committee with the balance of highly qualified technical expertise and diverse perspectives necessary to effectively carry out the Committee's statutory requirements. At the end of FY 2005, the Committee included two members from academia (one retired), two members from a national laboratory (one retired), and one member from private industry. During FY 2005, the ACNW included members experienced in radioactive waste management, chemistry, health physics, nuclear engineering, risk assessment, environmental engineering, performance assessment, research, and technical management. There has been a systematic effort to obtain members with backgrounds that can address the difficult and diverse questions associated with radioactive waste management. This concentration of the relevant scientific proficiency within the Committee, together with a diversity of viewpoints and perspectives, provides assurance that adequate, independent, and open discussion and analysis of the potential hazards associated with the management of nuclear waste can take place.

20c. How frequent and relevant are the Committee meetings 0 Normally, all ACNW members meet 8 times a year for 2-3 days in Committee meetings. In FY 2005, the ACNW held 10 Committee meetings. The number of meetings held is directly related to the scope of NRC's efforts on the high-level waste geologic repository and other issues involving waste management; the number of criteria, guides, and technical positions referred to the ACNW for review and comment; the number of special reviews requested by the NRC staff; and the number of important topics of concern to the Committee and its stakeholders. The A CNW Action Plan for Fiscal Years 2005 and 2006 formed the basis for the selection of issues to be addressed during its 2005 meetings. The Committee intends to meet once each year in the vicinity of Yucca Mountain in Nevada to provide an opportunity for local stakeholders to participate in its meetings. Such a meeting was held on September 20 and 21, 2005. The written reports that contain the ACNW's advice are issued during Committee meetings. When resources are available, the ACNW holds working group meetings on particularly complex issues.

At these meetings, additional time and expertise can be brought to bear on an issue and the subject much more technically developed for Committee consideration. Reviews are conducted during each Committee meeting to assess the relevance of proposed meetings and review topics, resource needs, and the priority of each activity.

These assessments have the benefit of input from the Commission, NRC's Executive Director for Operations (EDO), and other stakeholders. The ACNW also conducts a self-assessment once every 2 years. These self assessments involve collection of input from a variety of stakeholders. This information is used to assess the relevance of ACNW activities. All ACNW meetings for this reporting period addressed matters delineated in the ACNW's Action Plan, specific requests from either the Commission or the EDO, or other important regulatory matters within the scope of the responsibilities.

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

The ACNW is a body of recognized experts in the field of nuclear waste management whose mandate is to provide independent advice to the Commission. The ACNW provides the public assurance that an independent technical review and evaluation of nuclear waste safety issues is accomplished and that there will be an opportunity for public input. Decisions relating to waste management that are expected to be before the Commission include the licensing of the proposed Yucca Mountain high-level waste repository, the West Valley Demonstration Project and West Valley Site and other site decommissionings, nuclear reactor decommissioning, and low-level waste http://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/rptannualreport.asp Page 3 of 4 11/30/2005

Annual 1<.eport management. The Commission has its own expert staff of NRC employees on whom it relies in its day-to-day operations. However, the Commission has no other advisory committee with the broadly based expertise of the ACNW that could be called upon for independent and informed assessment of safety issues related to high-and low-level waste management. In addition, since members are part-time advisors with other interests and activities in related fields, they provide a breadth of experience, an independent perspective on issues, and technical knowledge that is not duplicated by the NRC staff. The ACNW provides the Commission independent, critical review of high-level regulatory issues under consideration by the NRC and independent technical insights on important matters needing Commission attention. In addition, a standing committee such as the ACNW, supported by a technical staff, remains currently informed with respect to nuclear waste issues of importance to the Commission, including NRC-sponsored safety research. It provides an informed, collegial judgment regarding these issues that would not be obtained by use of individual part-time consultants on a case-by-case basis.

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

During FY 2005, the Committee held 10 Full Committee meetings. Of these 10 meetings, one meeting was partially closed to discuss information that involves internal personnel rules and/or practices [5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2)]. As a practice, almost all Committee meetings are open.

21. Remarks NONE Designated Federal Official: Michele Kelton DFO Committee Members Clarke, Dr. James H.

Croff, Mr. Allen G.

Hinze, Dr. William J.

Ryan, Dr. Michael T.

Weiner, Dr. Ruth F.

Total Count of Committee Members Start 1/25/2005 7/12/2004 1/11/2005 6/26/2002 9/15/2003 End 1/24/2009 7/12/2008 1/12/2009 6/25/2006 9/14/2007 5

http://www.fido.gov/facadatabase/rptannualreport.asp Occupation Professor, Vanderbilt University Consultant

Retired, Consultant Consultant Page 4 of 4 11/30/2005
Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML24059A213&oldid=3761383"