ML25246C232
| ML25246C232 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/22/1980 |
| From: | Hoyle J NRC/SECY |
| To: | Clancy J US National Archives & Records Admin (NARA) |
| References | |
| Download: ML25246C232 (1) | |
Text
e,'-~P.-P. REG<,1/4 t.,;i_..:,~\\.
,:**1 0
,t;
~.
~o" UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D'.C.. 20555 May 22, 1980 Jt-***..
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY The Honorable John F. Clancy, Jr.
Director Committee Management Secretariat National Archives and Records Service Washington, D. c.
20408
Dear.Mr. Clancy:
In accordance with Section 7(b) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (P.L.92-463) and the guidance provided in 0MB Circular A-63, as revised, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission hereby submits the annual comprehensive review of its advisory committees in existence on December 31, 1979.
Based upon this review, the NRC believes that the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards and the Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes continue to serve the public interest and should be continµed.
- I am also taking this opportunity to provide for your records ari up~ated Standaid Form 250 which contains revised figures for meetings of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards for the year 1979.
Our earlier submission of that information on January 15, 1980 was correct in terms of the total number
- of meetings, but had incorrect entries for "total 6pen" and "total partially closed" for the ACRS.
The correct entries are 84 and 13, respectively, for the ACRS, and 99 and 13 for the agency total.
Sincerely, ohn c.
Advisory Committee Enclo*sures:
- 1.
Review Coversheet and Justification Statement for Advisory Committee on M~dical Uses of Isotopes
- 2.
Review Coversheet and Justification Statement for Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
- 3.
SF 250 Management Officer
- :i FEDERAL. ADVISORY COMMITTEE REVIEW COVERSBEET Calendar Year 1979 Transmittal Memorandum No. S EXHIB!T I*
- l. Department or Agency:
Nuclear Regu.latory Cmmission 2*.
Name* of committee ( and subcommittee, if appropriate):
Adviso:t:Y Ccr.rn:i.ttee on the M:rlical Uses of Isotopes
- 3. Date of establishrre..~t,
- 4.
For closed or partially closed or lase reestablishrrent or meetings, list for each meeting the ren~-ral (mst recent):
date
- and number { s) of all 1'Gove.n:c:ent in. the Sunshine Act11 exe:a:pticns used:
- January 22, 1979 NONE
- 5.
Agency recommendation for this committee:
- a.
D Termination.
If this is a committee established by
- statute, attach a *brief explanatory statement for the recommendation and indicate whether legislation is* required to carry out the recommendation and whether such legislation i~ con.templat~d or pending. (include bill nu:tl:>er and proposed or ez:fecti ve da.teJ.
- b.
mcontinuation.
Attach a justification statement describing what this committee
- does, why there is a
compelling need for its continuation, and ho~ it has a truly balanced membership.
The statement should be on numbered oond sheets with the name of the agency and the com..tlittee on each.
The justification should include details on the following and any-other relevant factors:
(1) The number *of times the committee has met in the past year and. the relevance of that number to its continuation.
(2) The number of reports submitted by the committee in the past year.
(3) A des6ription of how the committee's
- reoorts, re-commendations, or advice have been used in agency policy formulation, program
- planning, decision-making, achieving economies, etc.
( 4) An explanation of why *the recommendations or*
infor~ation cannot be obtained from other sources, elsewhere within the
- agency, from other agencies or* existing committees, *public hearings, consultants; etc.
(5) An explanation of any degree of duplication of functions,
- purpose, etc., with other committees, or within the agency, or with other agencies.
( 6) The rel a.ti on.ship of the cost of the com.mi t tee to the reports, recommendations, or inforrnatio~ provided.
(7) In consideration of (a) the functions to be performed and
{b) the points of view to be represented, specifically how the membership is balanced--the
- views, areas of expertise, etc., included.
AS A ZERO BASE REVIEW, THE JUSTIFICATION SBOULD BE BASED ON TEE PREMISE THAT THE COMMITTEE IS NOT GOING TO BE CONTINUED.
Page 2 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT
- 5.
Agency recorranendation for this eorranittee:
- b.
Continuati.on.
Continuation of this Committee is necessary to provide the Nuc1ear Regulatory Commission with an expert resource from which to obtain advice and consultatioh on ficense applications relating to physicians' qualifications and the human use of radiation sources.
The Commission receives for action approximately 20 to 30 such license applications* per year involving the use of radioactive substances in the diagnosis and treatment of disease.
There are no p'hysicians or other personnel on NRC's staff with the qualifications and expertise of the Committee members to render the required medical judgments and advice necessary for the NRC to make decisions regarding the regulation and.
licensing of the clinical uses of radioisotopes.
The staff must depend on the advice and consultation of qualified physicians and scientists in these matters. These activities require a committee composed of indiv.iduals who have expert knowledge and extensive experience in therapeutic and diagnostic radiology, pathology, internal medicine, nuclear medicine, and medical. physics.
The membership of the Committee covers these disciplines.
The following is submitted in support of the request for the continuation of* the Committee.
(1)
The Committee did not meet in CY 1979.
The NRC staff plans to conduct an opent public meeting of the Committee at least once a year.
The most recent meetings were held on* December 14, 1978 and January 18, 1980.
The formal meeting procedure, however, is not the primary mode by'w.hich the Committee members formulate their advice on license applications. This is normally done through the reviev1 of pending applications by mail ori.a continuing basis by individual Committee members.
In addition, the NRC staff is frequently in contact with the Committee members by telephone for* advice and recommendations.
(2)
No formal reports were submitted.
In 1979 the Committee provided advice and consultation on approximately 19 applications relating to physicians' qualifications and the human use of radiation sources.
In each case, individual members submitted written comments which are included in the license file for each case.
Page 3 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes (3) -The NRC relied on the advice and recor11111endations of the Collll1li ttee in connection with:*
- a Approximately 19 applications relating to physicians' qualifications and the human use of radiation sources; b
Development of training and experience criteria for physicians who wish to limit their use of byproduct material to performance of nuclear cardiology studies.
c Review of the Final Generic Environmental Statement on Routine Use of Plutonium-Powered Cardiac Pacemakers (NUREG-0060 and Supplement 1 to NUREG-0060} and comments on proposed rule to authorize routine use of these devices.
d Review of proposed policy to authorize qualified non-physicians to use licensed material for in vitro studies.
e Review of literature submitted by manufacturer on use of iodine-125 seeds for therapeutic purposes.
f Review of proposal to amend Section 40.22 of 10 CFR 40*to (i) delete authorization for certain persons to receive, compound or use source material (e.g;, uranium, thoriu~) in medicinals or drugs and (ii) prohibit human use of source material.
.9.
Review of model program for medical licensees for maintaining occupational radiation exposure ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable}.
( 4). The functi ans of the Cammi ttee cannot be performed by any other organization within this agency and the necessary advice this Comm1ttee provides is not available from _other sources within the Commission.
It would be difficult, if not impossible, for this agency to develop and maintain an in-house capability to match the quality and quantity of expert knowledge embodied in this advisory committee.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is not aware of any sources outside the Commission, including other agencies, that have the necessary expertise to provide the advice being sought.
Similarly, the type of expert review and advisory role performed by this Committee could not be matched through the use of consultants alone or t~rough the public hearing process.
Page 4 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
'Advisory Committee on the Medical Uses of Isotopes (5)
- There is no duplication of the work or functions of this Committee with other parts of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission or any other existing advisory committee.
(6)
The cost of the Committee for 1979 was approximately.
$18,000.
The cost of the Committee is small compared to the services rendered to this agency.
{7)
The membership of the Committee is balanced among the various scientific and technical disciplines directly related to the functions to be performed and the points of view to be presented.
At the present time diagnostic and therapeutic radiology, internal medicine, pathology, nuclear medicine and medical physics are the primary disciplines making up the broad spectrum of fields related directly to the use of radioisotopes in medicine.
They are all represented in the Committee membership at this time.
EXHIBIT I
. FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE REVIEW COVERSHEET Calendar Ye.a= 1979
- 1. Department or Agency:
Nuclear Regul,a:td"cy carmission
- 2. *. Name of committee (and subcommittee, if appropriate):
- AT.riso!y O::mnitt:ee on Reactor Safequards
- 3. Date of establish:re..~t,
- 4.
For closed or partiall~ closed or last reestablish::!E:nt or meetings, list for each meeting the renewal (uost recent):
~fate and* number ( s) of all 11~1; in. the Sunsh:ine kt" *exs:r:iptions used:
- De~ 22, 1978 See Attachment 1
- 5.
Agency recommendation for this committee:
- a.
Termination. If this is
- a committee established by statute, attach a brief explanat~ry state~ent for the.
recommendation and indicate whether legislation is required to carry out the recommendation and whether such legislation is_con.ternplat~d or pending (include bill nUiber.s:nd proposed or efrect~ve cate;.
- b.
00 Continuation.* Attach a justification statement des er ibi ng. what this commit tee
- does, why there is
. a compelling need for its continuation, and how it has a truly balanced membership.
The statement should be on numbered oond sheets with the name of the agency and the committee on each.
The* justification should include details on the following and any other relevant factors:
(1) The number of times the committee has met in the past year and the relevance of that number to its continuation.
(2) The number of reports submitted by the committee in the past year.
(3) A description of how the committee's
- reports, recommendations, or advice have been used in agency policy formulation, p;ogram planiing, decision-making, achieving economies, etc.
(4) An explanation of why the recommendations or information cannot be obtained from other sources, elsewhere within the agency,* from other agencies or.existing committees, public hear~ngs, consultants, etc.
(5) An explanation of ~ny degree of duplication of functions, purpose, etc., with other committees, or within the agency, or with other.agencies..
(6) The relationship of the cost of the committee to the reports, recommendations, or information provided.
(7) In consideratlon.of (a) the f~nctions to be performed and (0) the points of view to be represented, s pecifically how the membership is balanced--the views, areas of expertise, etc., included.
AS A ZERO BASE REVIEW, TBE JUSTIFICATION SHOULD BE BASED ON
- TBE PREMISE THAT *TBE COMMITTEE IS NOT GOING TO BE CONTINUtO.
~- **-
.,.*** - *----.-.+-
April 10
- 1980 ilTACHMENT 1 EXEMPTIONS USED FOR PARTLY CLOSED ACRS MEETINGS HELD DURING CY-1979 Government in the Sunshine Act, PL 94-409, 5 USC 552b(c)-
(4) to protect propri~tary information.
(6) to protect information, the release of which would represent an undue invasion of personal privacy.
I. Full ACRS Mee tings - ( 13) *
Th.e remaining six were primarily open except for short sessions which were closed mder the exemptions indicated below:
Full ACRS Meetings With Some Closed Sessions
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
(4) fil Jan. 04-06 X
Feb. 08-10 X
X Mar. *08-10 X
X Sep. 06-08 X
Nov. 08-10 X
Dec. 06-08 X
SUMMARY
7 full ACRS meetings completely open 4 full ACRS meetings with ~xemptions (6)
_2_full ACRS meetings with exemptions (4) (6) 13
Exemptions used for partly: closed ACRS Subconmittee Meetings held during CY 1979.
Public Law 92-463 Subsection lO(d) 5 use 552b(c)(l) Security of infonnation identified,and supplied by foreig~ governments.
(Exemption 1).
Public Law 92-463 (5 USC 552l:>(c)(9))-To*protect information the premature disclosure of which might s_ignificantly frustrate implementation of proposed action.
(Exemption 9(B))
Public Law 92-463 5 USC 552b(c)(4)- To protect proprietary information.
Duri_ng CY 1979, 77 ACRS Subcommittee Meetings were open, 7 were partly closed and 4 were completely closed under the exemptions indicated below:
ACRS Subcommittee Meetfog ill. ill
- 1.
Feb; 27
- 2.
May 31-J'un 1
- 3.
Sep. 13-14
- 4.
Oct. 16-17
- 5.
Oct. 31
- 6.
Nov. 6-7
'7.
Nov. 6-7
- 8.
Nov. 15-16
- 9.
Nov. 29-30
- 10.
Dec. 5
- 11.
Dec. 19
SUMMARY
Zimmer TMI-2 Accident Fluid Dynamics Radiol _ogical Effects/Site Eval.
Waste Management Reactor Safety Research Reliability & Prob. Assmt.
Extreme External Phenomena Advanced Reactors Re 1 i ability & Prob. Ass mt..
Waste Management/Fuel Cycle 4 Closed ACRS Subcommittee Meetings 1-exempti on ( 1)
X 3-exemption (9)(B) (All re budget info.)
X X
X X
7 Partly Closed ACRS Subcommittee Meetings 3-exempti on ( 4)
I-exemptions (4). & (9)(B) (Re budget info.)
3-exemption (9)(8) (All re bu_dget info.)
77 Open ACRS *subcommittee Meetings.
88 ACRS Subcommittee Meeti_ngs, CY-1979
{9)(8)
X x (CLOSED) x (CLOSED)
(CLOSED)
X X
X x ( CLOSED)
- -- --* **-;,- -- --* ff#
~--- - ---
Advi so*ry Commi t-;ee on Reactor Saf_eguards ATTACHMENT II TO ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE REPORT TO'GSA FOR 1979 The following infonnation is provided as background in support for the recorrrnendation that the Advisory Committee.on Reactor Safeguards be continued.
The Committee's establishment, objectives and the scope of its activities and duties-are prescribed by statute. Section*29 of*the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, provides:
"There is hereby established an Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards consisting of a maximum of fifteen members. appointed by the Corrmission for tenns of four years each.
The Committee shall review safety studies and facility license applications referred to it and shall make reports thereon, shall advise the Commis,sion with regard to the hazards of proposed or existing reac;tor facilities and the adequacy of proposed reactor safety standards, and shall perform such other duties as the Corrrnission may request. One member shall be designated by the Committee as its Chairman.
The members of the Committee shall receive a per diem compensation for each day spent in meetings or conferences, or other work for the Committee and all members shall receive
- their necessary traveling or other expenses while engaged in the work of the Committee.. The provisions of Section 163 shall be applicable to the Committee.
ln addition to its other duties
Adv_i~orY. Committee on Reactor Safeguards under* this section, the Committee (ACRS). making use of all avail-ab le sources, shall undertake a study of reactor safety research and prepare and submit annually to the Congress a report contain-ing the results of such study.
The first such report shall be submitted to the Congress not 1 ater than December 31, 1977."
Also, Section 182 b. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, states:
"The Advisory Corrmi ttee on Reactor Safeguards sha 11 review each application under Section 103 or Section 104 b. for a con~truction permit or an operating license for a facility, any application under Section 104 c. for a construction per-mit or an operating license for a testing facility, any application under Section 104 a. or c. specifically referred to it by the Corranission, and any application for an amendment to a construction permit or an amendment to a-n operating license_ under Section 103 or 104 a., b., or c. specifically referred to it by the Commission, and shall submit a report thereon which shall be made par~ of the record of the appli-cation and available to the public except to the extent that security classification prevents disclosure.
11 Public Law 95-209. also provides:
"To assist the Advis_ory Corrmittee on Reactor Safeguards in carrying out its function, the Corrmittee shall establish a fellowship program under which persons havi_ng appropriate engineering or scientific expertise are assigned particular tasks.relating to the functions of the Corm1ittee.
Such fel-lowships shall be for 2-year periods and the recipients of such fellowships shall be selected pursuant to such criteria as may be established by the Corrmittee."
Section 1.20 10 CFR Part 1 states:
l'Upon request from the Department of Energy (DOE) the ACRS performs reviews, provides reports, and advises DOE w1th re-gard to the hazards of DOE nuclear activities and facilities.
(1)
Number of Meetings The ACRS, its subcommittees and working groups held 101 rreetings during 1979.
The number of meetings held is directly related to the number of reactor projects referred by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to the Committee for review; the number of generic issues which arose during the year; the number of criteria and guides referred to the Cormiittee fo~ review and
Nuclear Regulatory Co1T111ission Advisory ColllTlittee on Reactor Safeguards collllTlant; the number of DOE and DOD reactor projects referred; and the number o"f special reviews requested by the NRC and Congress.
The full Corrmittee nonnally meets once a month for a three day session to consider projects, generic and special reviews, _and criteria and regulatory guides that are ready for f u 11 Cammi t tee cons i de ration.
ACRS sub comrni ttees meet as necessary with license applicants, NRC Staff, and others to develop information for the Corrrnittee on the particular matters under review and to identify those matters warranting particular attention by the full Committee.
(2)
Number of Reports The ACRS submitted 43 reports during 1979. See section (6) for further discussion of the reports.
(3) Agency Utilization of ACRS Recommendations The ACRS reports and recomrrendations to the Commission have been used extensively in NRC policy formulation and decision making since establishment of the agency on January 19, 1975.
In those cases where a license application is submitted under Section 103 or designated facilities under section 104 of the Atomic Energy Act, an ACRS report is required by statute. In each such case,
,,...._,ww,
'"'-::,w1w.... w1.1 vvu*n*~~IVII
. Advisory Corranittee on Reactor Safeguards the NRC Staff; *following the receipt of an ACRS report, prepares a supplemental safety evaluation report which outlines in detail the actions the NRC Staff has or is taking to carry out the ACRS recommendations.
These reports are entered into the public docket file for each facility case so they are available for use. by parties to NRC licensing proceedings.
On several occasions, substantive restrictions and/or requirements have been imposed by the NRC on nuclear facility operations, includ-ing pO'tler level l irni tati ons, augmented test programs, and added engineered safety features, based on the recorrrnendations of the Corrrnittee.
Specific attention is given to ACRS recommendations with respect to other generic or selected safety issues and appropriate action is implemented by the NRC Staff. Additionally,
- ACRS recorrmendations are implemented in regulations, guides and regulatory policies arid practices promulgated by the Commission.
For example, proposed NRC regulatory guides developed for power reactors are not promulgated for public comment or for final imple-mentation without the concurrence of the ACRS.
Other types of regulatory guides are referred to. the Corrrnittee on a selective basis by NRC.
The action taken to implement specific ACRS recomrnendati ons regard-ing an individual licensing application is published in an NRC Staff
~dviso.ry conrm ttee on Keact.or ~ar_eguaros Suppleinentary*Safety Evaluation Report for consideration at the related public licensing hearing. In addition, the status -of ACRS recorrmendations, conmen ts, and questions is monitored on a pe ri odi"c basis using a detailed report to the ACRS from the NRC Staff relating point by point what Staff action has been taken or is planned on each ACRS recorrrnendation.
In addition, frequent status and fin a 1 reports regarding resolution of ACRS comments and recorrrnendations are given during monthly ACRS meetings and re-corded in the minutes _ of these meetings.
In the event the ACRS considers NRC Staff action inadequate with respect to its recom-m:ndations, a mechanism is available to bring these matters directly to the attention of the Corrmissioners.
With regard to the development of proposed regulatory guides and criteria, the ACRS subcommittee and full Committee meetings pro-vide a public forum where differences of opinion between interested groups may be presented.
In the area of reactor safety research, the ACRS peri odi ca lly examines the thrust and magnitude of the overall NRC safety research program and* conducts _annual in-*depth reviews of the effectiveness of ~e 10 to 15 separate major NRC research programs.
The c"oncl us i ans of these reviews are reported to the Congress as mandated by Public
Nuclear*Regulatory Co1m1ission Advisory Co11111ittee on Reactor Safeguards Law 95-209.
In addition, the Conmissioners have requested and the Corrmi ttee provides a separate report on the NRC' s proposed research budget prior to action on the budget by the Comnission.
For the RSR report to Congress prepared by the ACRS, a specific reply has been or wil 1 be provided by the NRC Research Staff re*gardi ng the action taken to implerrent ACRS recommendations.
The ACRS recently provided tes tim::my to the House Corrani ttee on Environment and Public Works, Subconrnittee on Nuclear Regulation regarding the NRC authorization for its FY-1981 Reactor Safety Research Budget.
In the a-rea of policy f annul a ti on, the ACRS often suggests initiation of staff studies and participates in the fonnulation of technical policy on -important safety issues. The Committee's overa 11 knowledge and advice with respect to the reso 1 uti on of specific safety issues and generic issues is useful to the Commission both in decision making for individual cases and in program planning for the NRC Staff 1s resources. Additionally, the Committee 1s continuing review of both industrial and govern-mental research programs provides the valuable perspective of an independent body of technical experts with respect to the scope and content of the program and the assignment of priorities to individual research efforts.
Nuclear*Regulatory" Convnission
- Advisory ColTITlittee on Reactor Safeguards The role of the ACRS in providing advice on safety issues was recently evaluated by the presidential Corrrnission on the TMI-2 incident {Kemeny Convnission), which concluded that the Corrrnittee should be retained, i.n a strengthened role, to continue pro-vi ding an* independent technical check on safety matters.. The Kerreny Commission also concluded that the staff of the ACRS should be strengthened to provide increased capacity for in-dependent analysis.
The reports of the Presidents Corrrnission on the Accident at TMI and the report of the NRC Special Inquiry Group on TMI have recommended strengthened involvement of the ACRS in the NRC licensing and rulemaking processes.
(4)
Why ACRS Recorrrnendations and Information Cannot Be Obtained from Other Sources As established by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, the Advisory Corrmittee on Reactor Safeguards is an independent organization which is mandated to perfonn certain specific functions and provide advice to the Nuclear Regulatory Corrmission with regard
y I\\Wl,,11:;QI
"~l::IUIQl,VIJ 1,,v111111.:,.:,1u11
_Advisory Corrmi ttee on Reactor Saf_eguards to the potentia1 hazards of proposed or existing nuclear facili-ties and the adequacy of proposed reactor standards.
The Committee 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 Corrmission with independent advice in this area. 11 The Commission necessarily has its own expert staff on whom it relies in the day to day regulation of nuclear power facilities. However, there is no other advisory corrrnittee, either within the Commission or in other agencies, which could be called upon for independent ~ssess-rrents 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 bring to bear in an organized manner a breadth of experience and current technical knowledge which would be difficult to dupli-cate with full-time government employees.
The Kemeny Commission recommended -that the Committee members continue as part time appointees and stated their belief that the independence and high quality of the members might be compromised by making them full time Federal employees..
Nuclear-Regulatory Comnission Advisory Comnittee on Reactor Safeguards 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 would be impossible to duplicate by use of*individua1, part-time consultants on a case-by-case basis.
Through the ACRS, the public and.the Congress are provided assurance that an independent technical review and evaluation of nuclear reactor projects and safety issues is accomplished.
(5)
Degree of Duplication of Effort As noted above, ACRS efforts are not dup 1 i ca ted by other committees or agencies within the government.
However, due to the independent nature of the Committee's statutory responsibilities, the ACRS re-view and that.of its consultants does duplicate, to some degree, as intended by law, some aspects of the NRC Staff's review of applications for nuclear power facility licenses and of the rronitoring of operating reactors. In this regard, the ACRS effort provides an independent check of NRC regulatory activities \\l(hich is largely directed at new and improved reactor safety features, an exploration of the basis for NRC Staff decisions as they relate to reactor safety., and assurance that all factors that could endanger the public health and safety have been adequately considered in making licensing decisions.
*--~------., ------- --- *-**
Advisory Co1m1it~e on Reactor Safeguards (6) Relationsh, p-of the.Annual Costs of the ACRS to Reports, Recommendations, and Information Provided The direct cost of the ACRS activities.in CY 1979 was approxi-mately $2,550,000.
As noted earlier, the Cormiittee conducted 101 meetings during CY 1979.and submitted 43 reports. Twenty-four of these reports were required for independent reviews of sp~cific nuclear power plant projects, standardized plant designs, power level increases or generic safety issues. Three were reports to Congress in areas related to nuclear safety and the licensing process.
Four were reports to indi vi dual Corrrni ss i one rs responding to specific requests for safety related information; five were special reports to the Commission made on Committee initiative and seven were directed to the NRC Executive Director for Operations regarding proposed regulatory guides, amendments to.
regulations and related matters.
It should be noted that, while the ACRS reports serve as the rrechanis'm by which the Corrnnittee fulfills its legal mandate, the Corrmittee provides invaluable assistance in many other areas. Principally among these is service to the NRC as a sounding and review board on many issues which arise in the conduct of NRC business. For example, in 1979, the Corrrnittee
- Nuclear Regulatory Comnission A9visory Committee on Reactor Safeguards provided special repor~ to NRC on the relationship between DOE and NRC reactor safety research programs and reconrnended several areas for improvement.
The Corrrnittee also reviewed and made recorrmendations on the NRC system of establishing research require-ments.
These reports were in addition to the extensive review and cormients on the NRC Safety Research Program Budget contained in NUREG-06q3 prepared by the Corrrnittee.
In this same area, the Corrrrnittee recorrrnended a number of studies and surveys which the members believe wi 11 improve reactor safety. In this conne.ction, the Corrmittee also recorrrnended that the Commission develop quanti-tative safety goals and criteria for nuclear facilities in relation to non-nuclear facilities, and has itself embarked on a study in this area at the request of the Conrnission to develop such criteria.
In more specific technical areas, the Corrmittee reported on a com-parison of stainless steel vs. Zircaloy fuel rod cladding under both nonnal operating and accident conditions; on pipe cracking in Light Water Reactors; on containment of radioactive Xenon during and following accidents in nuclear plants, and on proposed rrodification of the foundation pilings on the Bailly Generating Station Nuclear 1.
. Nu.clear-Regulatory Conmission
- Advisory Cormnittee on Reactor Saf~guards In the policy and organizational area; the Cormiittee co11Jnented.
on the recommendations of the President's Corrrnission on TMI-2 regarding ACRS activities; responded to the NRC/TMI Special Inquiry Group; commented on the NRC licensing pause; reported I
to Commissioner Ahearne on procedures for transmitting recommenda-tions a*_nd questions from ACRS to NRC; and reported to Cormnissioner Bradford on identification of NRC regulatory requirements which need changing.
Finally, at the year's end, the Corrmittee con-ducted a review of NRC regulatory processes and functions and published NUREG-0642 on this subject.
(7)
Balance in Membershi p on ACRS The Nu.clear Regulatory Corrrnission, on the basis of the technical review functions outlined in the statutory mission of the Com-mittee,, _ appoints ACRS members from the scientific and engineering disciplines with three indispensable prerequisites in mind:
out-standing scientific and technical ability, balanced and-mature judgement, and willingness to devote the time required (approxi-mately 130 days each year) to the demanding work involved. The
- Nu-Clear* Regulatory Col'Tlllission Advisory Corrrnittee on Reactor Saf~guards pool of persons so qualified is limited. At the end of 1979, the Committee included several members from academic institutions. 'b\\lo employees of national laboratories and five members who have retired from active employment with nuclear and non-nuclear backgrounds in industrial, developmental and regulatory fields. There has been a conscious effort to obtain rrerrbers trained in both nuclear and the non-nuclear disciplines who have had.considerable experience in various fields needed to evaluate proposed construction and opera-tion of nuclear power plants and related facilities. This pennits and fosters a concentration within the Committee of scientific and engineering proficiency, together with a diversity of viewpoints and persp~ctives, which provides assurance that adequate independent, open discussion and analysis of the potential hazards of nuclear reactors and the adequacy of safety standards can take place.
During 1979, the merrbership included those experienced in radia-I tion safety, electrical engineering, chemica*1 engineering, civil engineering, materials engineering, mechanical engineering, nuclear engineering, reactor operations, heat transfer and fluid flow, reactor physi*cs and probabilistic analysis. Anticipated membership needs in~lude an individual knowledgeable in the design, manu-facture and perfcnnance* of la_rge :pO\\ller_ generati_n"g* e-quipment and ulti-mate disposal of nuclear wastes.
~ Nuclea~ Regulatoy Convnission Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards In order to provide for public involvement in the nominating pro-cess for ACRS members;the NRC issues public announcements solicit-ing nominees when vacancies arise. In the past~ a large number of nominations have.been received from the public, including organizations such as public interest groups and technical societies,.and we expect this interest to continue when future vacancies ~re announced.
- Further, the diversity of viewpoints presently represented by current ACRS members *is broadly based from the standpoint of special fields of interest, employment experience and scientific or technical specialty.
These membership characteristics provide the Corm1ittee with a balance of highly qualified technical experts in the nuclear and non-nuclear fields which are necessary to carrying out the Cormnittee 1s statutory requirements.
ANNUAL REPORT ON FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEES
SUMMARY
SHEET
- 3. EXACT NAME OF ADVISORY COMMITTEE (Lut alp.laabeticaU11, See SF,_.,, Bloot. #II, Indent and liat aub-committee* or other nbgroup* under parent committee.)
dvisory A
u Committee on Medical A
s ses of Isotopes dvisory Committee afeguards Study of Nuclear on Reactor Power Plant Con9truction cation During Adjudi-
- Subtotal for Terminated Committees Sub.total for Committees in Existence at End of Year
~
_T OTAL COMMITTEE STATUS DURING THIS CY
~
u i
u~
c* E C
~=- J;,..e ~~
-~-
-"-5
.. 0 I§ l§i El t....,
cc ~.,_., ~=
z
-41 SF248 BloCk#4 X
X X
X 1
1 2
1 2 1
(If continuation of this summary listing Is required, use this same form SF 250.
No continuation sheet exists for this form.)
ESTABLISHMENT COMMITTEE AUTHORITY TYPE II b
Ji'~
TOTAL "2~ *
~
NUMBER 1
~-
C.,
l C
REPORTS J1 ~ t' _g.!: 8
- E
-0
~I *;;;i :c J.!'
l~
C Q
~
0 cl:
c.J
.. ~.;
t°'"
,i...
SF248 SF248 SF248 Block# 5 Block# 6 Block# 13 X
X 26 X
X 43 X
X 2
1 1
2 1
1 2
69 1
2 1 2 71
- 1. DEPARTMENT OR AGENCY U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission MEETINGS PERSON-YEARS Federal Staff Support Total Annual
- c. Total
- a. Total
- b. Total Current Next
- Current Ye partially open closed closed year year
( Whole Doll*
( Whole Numbera & Fraction,)
SF248 SF248 Block# 14 Block# 15a 0
0 0
1/4 1/4 18,00(
84 4
13 50 55 2,308,00(
15 0
0 1
0 20,00(
15 0
0 1
0 20,00(
44 4
53 50 1/4 55 1/4 *2t326,00(
99 4
13 511/4 55 1/4 2,346,000 (See in,tructiona on reverse)