ML20199C726
| ML20199C726 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/17/1998 |
| From: | Shirley Ann Jackson, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Hoyle J NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20199C723 | List: |
| References | |
| SECY-98-225-C, NUDOCS 9901190093 | |
| Download: ML20199C726 (2) | |
Text
.
=
I NOTATION VOTE l
i RESPONSE SHEET
. TO:
John C. Hoyle, Secretary l
FROM:
CHAIRMAN JACKSON I
SUBJECT:
SECY-98-225 - PROPOSED RULE: 10 CFR PART 63
- DISPOSAL OF HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTES l
IN A PROPOSED GEOLOGIC REPOSITORY AT YUCCA
. MOUNTAIN, NEVADA" w/ comments Approved X Disapproved Abstain Not Participating COMMENTS:
See attached comments.
Shirle Ann Jac son SIGNATURE g
j DATE Entered on "AS" Yes xx No 9901190093 990112 i
PDR COMMS NRCC l
CORRESPONDENCE PDR 996//9 0093
l l
i i
l Chairman Jackson's Comments on SECY 98-225 l
In its statement of considerations, the staff has appropriately addressed the basis for the NRC rulemaking action at this time, i.e. prior to the EPA issuing standards. The staff makes it clear that it is issuing the NRC proposed rule now, because deferral until EPA standards are in place l
would make it impossible for NRC to issue final implementing regulations within one year of EPA's action, as specified in the Energy Policy Act. DOE has indicated that NRC regulations providing its approach for the requirements are needed for the national program to proceed without further delay.
I considered issuance of the draft rule without the proposed health and safety standard (25 mrem), because 1) DOE is most interested in a regulation that provides NRC's approach for the requirements,2) by law, NRC must have regulations that conform to the EPA standards, and
- 3) perception of some stakeholders is that NRC-published standards at this time are unnecessary. However, the staff has proposed a " placeholder" all-pathways dose standard that is protective of public health and safety, and that maintains consistency with NRC radiological criteria for license termination and other waste management facilities. In addition, the proposed rule is generally consistent with the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences, and is consistent with the overall movement of the NRC to risk-informed, performance-based regulation. Many times in the FRN, the staff clearly states its recognition of the fact that when the EPA issues its final standards, or if pending legislation affecting the regulation of HLW is passed, these proposed regulations may need to be amended. If changes to the regulation are needed based on the EPA eventual standards, the effect on schedule and resources would be minimal, since the Commission could go to direct final rulemaking for amendment of Part 63.
Therefore, I approve for publication the notice of proposed rulemaking that includes alternative one, i.e., a proposed rule with risk-informed, performance-based criteria (with a " placeholder" 25 mrem standard) for both pre-closure operation and post-closure performance of the Yucca Mountain high-level waste repository.
The staff should clarify in the FRN, in the regulatory analysis, and in the congressionalletters its reference to " implementable" standards, to avoid misinterpretation of that term as meaning "able to be met by DOE."
Finally, in this draft FRN, the staff references the ongoing Commission evaluation of the hearing process and the impact this may have on Part 63, but states that it is not seeking comment on this matter in this rulemaking. The staff should not use this rule as a forum for the evaluation of the hearing process that is being addressed as a separate agency-wioe action. Since reference to the hearing process evaluation would result in comments on it, the staff should remove discussion of the separate hearing process action from the FRN. This rulemaking should focus on the high-level waste repository issues, and reserve hearing process discussion for any action j
resulting from the agency-wide evaluation.
l l
r