ML033290467: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:November 21, | {{#Wiki_filter:November 21, 2003 TO: LSNARP Members (See Attached List) | ||
FROM: Daniel J. Graser /RA/ | |||
Licensing Support Network Administrator | |||
==SUBJECT:== | ==SUBJECT:== | ||
Status of Licensing Support Network Expansion Activities and Request | Status of Licensing Support Network Expansion Activities and Request to Provide Information Regarding Any Material Document Collection Changes In light of the planned December 9, 2003, Licensing Support Network Advisory Review Panel (LSNARP), I wanted to provide you with current status information regarding Licensing Support Network (LSN) operations and reiterate again the need for the parties and potential parties to the possible adjudicatory proceeding relating to the Yucca Mountain high-level waste repository construction authorization to keep us apprised of any material changes in their document collections. | ||
: 1. Status of LSN Resizing Effort. As reported at the June 2003 LSNARP meeting, the LSN staff began work last summer to expand LSN system capacity to hold up to 40 million pages of text information. That expansion (which includes an increase in the speed with which the system spiders or creates document collection indices) was based on planning information provided by the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff. In that update, the DOE forecast included a ten-fold increase in the number of documents and NRC reported an approximately 10% increase in the volume estimates originally submitted in 1999. Together, the increased number of documents vastly exceeded the original 15 million page high end estimates for LSN capacity. Subsequent canvassing of other parties and potential parties indicated no other significant variation in the estimated number of documents and pages in their document collections that could not be accommodated within the 40 million page upper boundary of the resized LSN configuration. Based on that information, the LSNA was able to obtain the agency funding needed for system expansion. | |||
Work on LSN expansion is now actively under way. Complete re-architecting of the LSN server configuration and database structures, the installation of an updated version of the Autonomy' text search engine, and an enhancement in the speed of the systems spidering capabilities are planned and should be concluded in January 2004. Of note, it is expected that there will be a two-to-three week period during installation of the new system when the LSN will not be available for search and retrieval or for the addition of any new documentary materials. | |||
Accordingly, parties and potential parties thus are advised to plan their document loading and case preparation activities around a late January 2004 interruption in LSN availability. | |||
: 2. Need to Keep LSNA Apprised of Material Changes Regarding Party/Potential Party Document Collections. As our current resizing effort illustrates, close, ongoing coordination by | |||
HLW proceeding parties and potential parties with the LSN staff about the size of party/potential party document collection is essential. The NRC relies on the parties/potential parties to provide official notification of any anticipated material changes in load schedules, document/page volumes, or document collection server configuration. Given the lead times involved in federal government budget/procurement processes and the complexities of technology insertion, failure by any of the LSN program entities promptly to communicate, update, or routinely validate key planning assumptions could be detrimental to the overall success of the LSN. Therefore, party/potential party LSNARP representatives are urged to notify the LSNA immediately if there have been any material changes to their organizations planned document collection since June 2003 (e.g., size increase of more than 5 percent). | |||
As you may be aware, the proposed revisions to 10 C.F.R. Part 2, Subpart J, that will be a major topic of the December 2003 LSNARP meeting include discussions of relevancy categorization, opportunities for eliminating duplication of entry by multiple parties, ongoing addition of materials to the LSN, and a new category of excluded material. If the proposed revisions are adopted by NRC, any combination of these factors could affect the number of documents each organization plans to make available via the LSN. As a consequence, we anticipate a discussion during the December 2003 LSNARP meeting in Las Vegas regarding each partys planned volume of documents, and the confidence each has in its current estimates in light of the proposed revisions to Subpart J. | |||
The LSNA has an obvious interest in understanding as soon as possible how those revisions will affect party/potential party current document collection estimates. The LSNAs semiannual report to the Commission will be compiled in January 2004 and will include an assessment of the progress of the agency and the parties/potential parties toward the milestone certification dates that will occur within the next year under the current DOE schedule for application submission. Should sufficient and reliable planning information not be available at that time, the LSNAs semiannual report will identify that as an item that enhances the risk to successful LSN operation. Moreover, after the planned December 2003 LSNARP meeting, the LSNA will continue to canvass the parties/potential parties seeking confirmation of the size, loading schedule, and server configuration for the document collection each plans to make available. | |||
Parties and potential parties wishing to update information about size or other aspects of their document collection should contact the LSNA via e-mail at djg2@nrc.gov or via phone at (301) 415-7401. | |||
Memorandum to LSNARP Members dated November 21, 2003 Ray Clark, EPA Marta Adams, State of Nevada David Warriner, DOE Chris Berlien Elaine Ezra Andrew Remus, Inyo County Karrie L. Garcia Judy Treichel Tony Cain Rex Massey Eve Culverwell Alan Kalt, Churchill County Jimmie Pegues, City of Las Vegas Malachy Murphy, Nye County Engelbrecht vonTiesenhausen, Clark County C. Little, Nye County Les Bradshaw, Nye County Kazem Taghva, UNLV Loreen Pitchford Leonard Fiorenzi, Eureka County Abby Johnson Steve Frishman, State of Nevada Susan Lynch, State of Nevada Mike OMealia, State of Nevada Bob Wells, DOE Jason Pitts, Lincoln & White Pine Tom Nartker, UNLV Debra Kolkman Steven Kraft, NEI Jake Wooley, DOE Jerome Weiser, DOE Jill Schrecongost, DOE Annette Vietti-Cook, SECY Francis Cameron, OGC Mitzi Young, OGC Paul Bollwerk, ASLBP Jack Whetstine, ASLBP Beth Serepca, OIG Elizabeth Bowlin, OIG Joseph Turner, ASLBP Margie Janney, ASLBP Matthew Schmit, ASLBP Rebecca Underhill, OIG R. Irish III, OIG Andrew Bates, SECY C.W. (Bill) Reamer, NMSS Jeff Ciocco, NMSS John Linehan, NMSS JRS1 Joseph Egan, State of Nevada Victoria Reich, NWTRB William Briggs, State of Nevada John Gandi, DOE Jackie Wallace Cathy Reynolds, DOE George Hellstrom, DOE Harry Leake, DOE Jake Wooley, DOE Lew Robertson, DOE Mark Vanderpuy, DOE Sheryl Morris, DOE}} | |||
Memorandum to LSNARP Members dated November 21, | |||
Latest revision as of 02:29, 24 November 2019
Text
November 21, 2003 TO: LSNARP Members (See Attached List)
FROM: Daniel J. Graser /RA/
Licensing Support Network Administrator
SUBJECT:
Status of Licensing Support Network Expansion Activities and Request to Provide Information Regarding Any Material Document Collection Changes In light of the planned December 9, 2003, Licensing Support Network Advisory Review Panel (LSNARP), I wanted to provide you with current status information regarding Licensing Support Network (LSN) operations and reiterate again the need for the parties and potential parties to the possible adjudicatory proceeding relating to the Yucca Mountain high-level waste repository construction authorization to keep us apprised of any material changes in their document collections.
- 1. Status of LSN Resizing Effort. As reported at the June 2003 LSNARP meeting, the LSN staff began work last summer to expand LSN system capacity to hold up to 40 million pages of text information. That expansion (which includes an increase in the speed with which the system spiders or creates document collection indices) was based on planning information provided by the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) and Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff. In that update, the DOE forecast included a ten-fold increase in the number of documents and NRC reported an approximately 10% increase in the volume estimates originally submitted in 1999. Together, the increased number of documents vastly exceeded the original 15 million page high end estimates for LSN capacity. Subsequent canvassing of other parties and potential parties indicated no other significant variation in the estimated number of documents and pages in their document collections that could not be accommodated within the 40 million page upper boundary of the resized LSN configuration. Based on that information, the LSNA was able to obtain the agency funding needed for system expansion.
Work on LSN expansion is now actively under way. Complete re-architecting of the LSN server configuration and database structures, the installation of an updated version of the Autonomy' text search engine, and an enhancement in the speed of the systems spidering capabilities are planned and should be concluded in January 2004. Of note, it is expected that there will be a two-to-three week period during installation of the new system when the LSN will not be available for search and retrieval or for the addition of any new documentary materials.
Accordingly, parties and potential parties thus are advised to plan their document loading and case preparation activities around a late January 2004 interruption in LSN availability.
- 2. Need to Keep LSNA Apprised of Material Changes Regarding Party/Potential Party Document Collections. As our current resizing effort illustrates, close, ongoing coordination by
HLW proceeding parties and potential parties with the LSN staff about the size of party/potential party document collection is essential. The NRC relies on the parties/potential parties to provide official notification of any anticipated material changes in load schedules, document/page volumes, or document collection server configuration. Given the lead times involved in federal government budget/procurement processes and the complexities of technology insertion, failure by any of the LSN program entities promptly to communicate, update, or routinely validate key planning assumptions could be detrimental to the overall success of the LSN. Therefore, party/potential party LSNARP representatives are urged to notify the LSNA immediately if there have been any material changes to their organizations planned document collection since June 2003 (e.g., size increase of more than 5 percent).
As you may be aware, the proposed revisions to 10 C.F.R. Part 2, Subpart J, that will be a major topic of the December 2003 LSNARP meeting include discussions of relevancy categorization, opportunities for eliminating duplication of entry by multiple parties, ongoing addition of materials to the LSN, and a new category of excluded material. If the proposed revisions are adopted by NRC, any combination of these factors could affect the number of documents each organization plans to make available via the LSN. As a consequence, we anticipate a discussion during the December 2003 LSNARP meeting in Las Vegas regarding each partys planned volume of documents, and the confidence each has in its current estimates in light of the proposed revisions to Subpart J.
The LSNA has an obvious interest in understanding as soon as possible how those revisions will affect party/potential party current document collection estimates. The LSNAs semiannual report to the Commission will be compiled in January 2004 and will include an assessment of the progress of the agency and the parties/potential parties toward the milestone certification dates that will occur within the next year under the current DOE schedule for application submission. Should sufficient and reliable planning information not be available at that time, the LSNAs semiannual report will identify that as an item that enhances the risk to successful LSN operation. Moreover, after the planned December 2003 LSNARP meeting, the LSNA will continue to canvass the parties/potential parties seeking confirmation of the size, loading schedule, and server configuration for the document collection each plans to make available.
Parties and potential parties wishing to update information about size or other aspects of their document collection should contact the LSNA via e-mail at djg2@nrc.gov or via phone at (301) 415-7401.
Memorandum to LSNARP Members dated November 21, 2003 Ray Clark, EPA Marta Adams, State of Nevada David Warriner, DOE Chris Berlien Elaine Ezra Andrew Remus, Inyo County Karrie L. Garcia Judy Treichel Tony Cain Rex Massey Eve Culverwell Alan Kalt, Churchill County Jimmie Pegues, City of Las Vegas Malachy Murphy, Nye County Engelbrecht vonTiesenhausen, Clark County C. Little, Nye County Les Bradshaw, Nye County Kazem Taghva, UNLV Loreen Pitchford Leonard Fiorenzi, Eureka County Abby Johnson Steve Frishman, State of Nevada Susan Lynch, State of Nevada Mike OMealia, State of Nevada Bob Wells, DOE Jason Pitts, Lincoln & White Pine Tom Nartker, UNLV Debra Kolkman Steven Kraft, NEI Jake Wooley, DOE Jerome Weiser, DOE Jill Schrecongost, DOE Annette Vietti-Cook, SECY Francis Cameron, OGC Mitzi Young, OGC Paul Bollwerk, ASLBP Jack Whetstine, ASLBP Beth Serepca, OIG Elizabeth Bowlin, OIG Joseph Turner, ASLBP Margie Janney, ASLBP Matthew Schmit, ASLBP Rebecca Underhill, OIG R. Irish III, OIG Andrew Bates, SECY C.W. (Bill) Reamer, NMSS Jeff Ciocco, NMSS John Linehan, NMSS JRS1 Joseph Egan, State of Nevada Victoria Reich, NWTRB William Briggs, State of Nevada John Gandi, DOE Jackie Wallace Cathy Reynolds, DOE George Hellstrom, DOE Harry Leake, DOE Jake Wooley, DOE Lew Robertson, DOE Mark Vanderpuy, DOE Sheryl Morris, DOE