ML24059A209

2001 Annual Report - Review of Federal Advisory Committee

ML24059A209
Person / Time
Issue date:	12/03/2001
From:	NRC/SECY
To:
References
Download: ML24059A209 (1)

Text

Annual Report http://www. facadatabase. gov /rptann ual report.as I of 3 2001 Annual Report: Review of Federal Advisory Committee 12/3/200111:35:44 AM I. Depanment or Agency Nuclear Regulatory Commis.sion

3. Committee or SubCommittee Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste

4. Is this New During Fiscal Year?

No

5. Current Charter

6. Expected Renewal Date 5/24/2000 5/24/2002 L:§mittee Menu

2. Fiscal Year 2001 3b. GSA Committee No.

1100

7. Expected Term Date 8a. Was Terminated During FY?

8b. Specific Termination Authority Sc.Actual Termination Date No

9. Agency Recommendation for Next FY Continue

11. Establishment Authority 42 u.s.c. 2201 I 0a.Legislation Req to Terminate?

No Agency Authority I Ob.Legislation Pending?

12. Specific Establishment Authority

13. Effective Date 1/6/1988 Scientific Technical Program Advisory Board

14. Committee Type Continuing 14c. Presidential?

42 u.s.c. 2201 No

15. Description of Committee 16a. Total Number of Reports 14 I 6b. Repon Titles and Dates Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste -- Yucca Mountain Stakeholders Meeting 11/1/2000 Comments on NRC Draft Policy Statement on Decommis.sioning Criteria for the West Valley Demonstration Project and West Valley ll/1/2000 Site Alloy C-22 Corrosion Studies Exemption in 10 CFR Part 40 for Materials Les.s Than 0.05 Percent Source Material -- Options and Other Issues Concerning the Control of Source Material Update to Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste Report on Nuclear Waste-Related Research Comments on Improvements in NRC Staff's Capability in Performance As.ses.sment NRC High Level Radioactive Waste Key Technical Is.sue Resolution Process Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste 2001 Action Plan and Priority Issues Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste Comments on Entombment NRC Staff Public Outreach Activities Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Regulation of Waste Management and Decommissioning Review of Chemistry Is.sues and Related NRC Staff Capability for the Proposed High-Level Waste Repository at Yucca Mountain Total System Performance As.ses.sment-Site Recommendation (TSPA-SR)

ACNW Comments on NRC Staff's Is.sue Resolution Process for Risk-Informing Its Sufficiency Review of DO E's Tech. Basis Docs.

for Yucca Mtn. Site Recommendation 12/6/2000 12/11/2000 2/5/2001 2nt2001 2/8/2001 4/18/2001 5/24/2001 6/27/2001 6/29/2001 8/13/2001 9/18/2001 9/28/2001 17a Open:

9 17b. Closed:

0 17c. Partially Closed:

0 17d. Total Meetings 9 Meeting Purposes and Dates 122nd Full Committee 123rd Full Committee 124th Full Committee Workshop on Chemistry Is.sues and Related NRC Staff Capability for the Proposed High-Level Waste Repository at Yucca Mountain 125th Full Committee 126th Full Committee 127th Full Committee 128th Full Committee 129th Full Committee 10/17/2000 10/19/2000 ll/27 /2000 11/29/2000 1/16/20011/18/2001 2/21/2001 2/22/2001 3/21/2001 3/22/2001 5/15/2001 5/16/2001 6/19/2001 6/21/2001 7/17/2001 7/19/2001 8/28/2001 8/30/2001 i

j 12/03/200 I 11 :26 AM

Annual Report http://www.facadatabase.gov/rptannual report.as 2 of 3 I Sa( I) Personnel Pmts to Non-Federal Members I 8a(2) Personnel Pmts to Federal Members I 8a(3) Personnel Pmts to Federal Staff I 8a( 4) Personnel Pmts to Non-member Consultants I 8b(I) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Federal Members l 8b(2) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Members l 8b(3) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Staff l 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 Suppon Years 20a. How does the Committee accomplish its purpose?

Current Fiscal Year

$128,069

$0

$367,258

$31,903

$57,300

$0

$37,155

$15,474

$25,384

$662,543 4.0 Next Fiscal Year

$133,960

$0

$384,152

$23,928

$61,000

$0

$39,000

$7,737

$53,500

$703,277 4.5 The Committee reports to and provides the Commis.sion with independent review of and advice on technical matters related to nuclear waste management. The bases of ACNW reviews include 10 CFR Parts 61, 63, 71, and 72, and other applicable regulations and legislative mandates.

The ACNW will undertake 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 is.sues, as requested by the Commis.sion. The Committee will interact with representatives of the public, NRC, the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, other Federal agencies, State and local agencies, Indian Nations, and private, international, and other affected organizations as appropriate to fulfill its responsibilities. The Committee issues written reports, providing advice on matters within its scope of responsibility and meets periodically with the Commis.sioners in public meetings to discuss issues of mutual interest. The focus of the ACNW work during FY 2001 has been on the proposed waste repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, and on is.sues related to the decommissioning of nuclear facilities. The ACNW members are chosen for their technical expertise relevant to waste management issues important to the Commis.sion. 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 the ACNW members and consultants with the appropriate expertise are used on occasion to addres.s specific technical issues in depth. These working groups meet in public meetings and their activities are 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 the ACRS/ACNW website.

The ACNW issues an Action Plan for Commis.sion approval and conducts a self as.sessment which includes the use of extensive stakeholder input. The ACNW conducts ongoing reviews of its plans and schedules to assure that it properly addres.ses regulatory matters within its scope of responsibility and on schedules that are consistent with the needs of its stakeholders. Input from the Commis.sion, 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 ACNW and the staff.

20b. How does the Committee balance its membership?

The Commission appoints ACNW members with the scientific and engineering expertise needed to addres.s the waste management issues of importance to the Commission. Members are sought who can provide an independent perspective on waste management issues, and who posses.s 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 normally provides input to this Panel. Ti,e diversity of viewpoints represented by current members is based on special fields of interest, profes.sional experience, and technical expertise. These member attributes provide the Committee with the balance of highly qualified technical expertise and diverse perspectives necessary to carry out effectively the Committee's statutory requirements. At the end of FY 2001, the Committee included one member from academia, one member from a national laboratory, and two members from private industry. During FY 2001, the ACNW included members experienced in radioactive waste management, chemistry, nuclear engineering, risk assessment, environmental engineering, performance as.sessment, hydrology, research, and technical management. There has been a systematic effort to obtain members with backgrounds that can address the difficult and diverse questions as.sociated 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 discus.sion 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?

In FY 2001, the ACNW held 8 Full Committee meetings. Normally, all ACNW members meet 8 times a year for 2-3 days in Full 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, and the number of important topics of concern to the Committee and its stakeholders. The ACNW Action Plan for CY 2001 formed the basis for the selection of issues to be addres.sed during its 2001 meetings. The Committee intends to meet once each year in the vicinity of Yucca Mountain to provide an opportunity for local stakeholders to participate in the meetings. The written reports that contain the ACNW's advice are issued during Full Committee meetings. When resources are available, the ACNW holds working group meetings on particularly complex is.sues. At these meetings, additional time and expertise can be brought to bear on an is.sue and the subject developed for Full Committee consideration. Reviews are conducted during each Full Committee meeting to assess the relevance of proposed meetings and review topics, resource needs, and the priority of each activity. These as.sessments have the benefit of input from the Commission, NRC's Executive Director for Operations (EDO), and other stakeholders. The self as.sessment conducted by the ACNW for its CY 2000 activities involved collection of input from a variety of stakeholders. This information was used to assess the relevance of ACNW activities.

All ACNW meetings for this reporting period addres.sed either matters delineated in the ACNW's Action Plan, specific requests from either the Commission or the EDO, or other important regulatory matters within the ACNW's scope of responsibility.

I 2/03/200 I 11: 26 AM

Annual Report http://www.facadatabase.gov/rptann ual report.as 3 of 3 20d. Why can't the advice or information this committee provides be obtained elsewhere?

The ACNW is an independent body of recognized experts in the field of nuclear waste management whose mandate is to provide the Commission with independent advice. The ACNW provides the public assurance that an independent technical review and evaluation of nuclear waste safety issues is accomplished and an opportunity for public input is assured. 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, West Valley Demonstration Project and West Valley Site and other site decommissionings, nuclear reactor decommissioning, and low-level waste 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 with both 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. 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, and 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 this period, the Committee held eight Full Committee meetings. All portions of these meetings were open to public attendance.

21. Remarks NONE Designated Federal Official: Michele Kelton DFO Committee Members Start End Occupation Garrick, Dr. B. John 3/6/1994 6/30/2003 Consultant Hornberger, Dr. George M. 9/23/1996 6/30/2004 Professor, Dept. of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia Levenson, Mr. Milton 5/17/2000 5/25/2004 Consultant Wymer, Dr. Raymond G.

10/11/1997 6/30/2005 Retired, Distinguished Scientist in the International Technology Programs Division of Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc.

Total Count of Committee Members 4

12/03/200 I 11 :26 AM

Annual Report http://www. facadatabase. gov /rptannualreport.as I of 4 2001 Annual Report: Review of Federal Advisory Committee 12/3/2001 2:04:29 PM Committee Menu I. Department or Agency Nuclear Regulatory Commission

3. Committee or SubCommittee Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards

4. Is this New During Fiscal Year?

5. Current Charter

6. Expected Renewal Date

2. Fiscal Year 2001 3b. GSA Committee No.

207

7. Expected Term Date No 12/20/2000 12/20/2002 Sa. Was Terminated During FY?

Sb. Specific Termination Authority Sc.Actual Termination Date No

9. Agency Recommendation for Next FY Continue 11. Establishment Authority IOa.Legislation Req to Terminate?

!Ob.Legislation Pending?

No Statutory(Congress Created)

I 2. Specific Establishment Authority

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 Reports 34 16b. Report Titles and Dates Scientific Technical Program Advisory Board Union of Concerned Scientists Report, "Nuclear Plant Risk Studies: Failing the Grade" No 10/11/2000 Proposed Revision to 10 CFR 73.55, "Requirements for Physical Protection of Licensed Activities in Nuclear Power Reactors Against l0/ll/2000 Radiological Sabotage" Pressurized Thermal Shock Technical Basis Reevaluation Project Draft Final Technical Study of Spent Fuel Pool Accident Risk at Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants License Renewal Guidance Documents BWROG Proposal to Use Safety Relief Valves and Low Pressure Systems as a Redundant Safe Shutdown Path to Satisfy the Requirements of 10 CFR SO, Appendix R Proposed Framework for Risk-Informed Changes to the Technical Requirements of 10 CFR Part SO Nuclear Energy Institute Draft Report, NEI 99-03, "Control Room Habitability Assessment Guidance" Proposed Final Regulatory Guide DG-1053, "Calculational and Dosimetry Methods for Determining Pressure Vessel Neutron Fluence" Issues Associated with Industry-Developed Thermal-Hydraulic Codes Proposed Resolution of Generic Safety Issue-152, "Design Basis for Valves That Might Be Subjected to Significant Blowdown Loads" Draft ANS External Events PRA Methodology Standard Review of the Siemens Power Corporation S-RELAPS Code to Appendix K Small-Break Loss-of-Coolant Accident Analyses NUREG-1740,"Voltage-Based Alternative Repair Criteria -- A Report to the ACRS by the Ad Hoc Subcommittee on a Differing Professional Opinion" Draft Report, "Regulatory Effectiveness of the Anticipated Transient Without Scram Rule" Electric Power Research Institute RETRAN-3D Thermal-Hydraulic Transient Analysis Code Proposed Final License Renewal Guidance Documents Closure of Generic Safety Issue-170, "Reactivity Transients and Fuel Damage Criteria for High Burnup Fuel" Interim Letter Related to the License Renewal of Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 NUREG-1635, Vol. 4, "Review and Evaluation of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Safety Research Program - A Report to the U.S.NRC" Report on the Safety Aspects of the License Renewal Application for Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 Proposed Final Management Directive 6.4, "Generic Issue Program" Response to Chairman Meserve's May 7, 2001 Memorandum Regarding Differing Professional Opinion on Steam Generator Tube Integrity Issues Response to Chairman Meserve's April 12, 2001 Letter on Issues Raised by ACRS Pertaining to Industry Use of Thermal-Hydraulic Codes Risk-Based Performance Indicators: Phase 1 Report Recommendation on the Need to Revise 10 CFR Part 54, "Requirements for Renewal of Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants" Draft NUREG-1742, "Perspectives Gained from the Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) Program" So. Texas Proj. Nuclear Operating Co. Requests for Exemption to Exclude Certain Components from Scope of Special Treatment Reqmnts Required by Regs. (Option 2) 10/12/2000 11/8/2000 11/15/2000 11/20/2000 11/20/2000 12/14/2000 12/15/2000 1/11/2001 2/8/2001 2/9/2001 2/13/2001 3/1/2001 3/8/2001 3/15/2001 4/13/2001 4/13/2001 4/16/2001 5/1/2001 5/18/2001 5/18/2001 6/14/2001 6/19/2001 6/19/2001 7/20/2001 7/20/2001 7/23/2001 12/03/2001 1:55 PM

Annual Report http://www.facadatabase.gov/rptannualreport.as 2 of 4

\\...,ICCUllllt!Ct!llltlil \\...,CHCKIHg 01 r t'l' I\\. V C.SSt!I Dt!au t't!llt!trauuns SECY-01-0100 - Policy Issues Re to Safeguards, Insurance, & Emergency Preparedness Regs. at Decommissioning Nuc. Power Plants Storing Fuel in Spent Fuel Pools Feasibility Study on Risk-Informing the Technical Requirements of 10 CFR 50.46 for Emergency Core Cooling Systems Proposed Final Rev. to Regulatory Guide 1.78," "Evaluating the Habitability ofa Nuc. Power Plant Control Room Dur!ng a Postulated Hazardous Chemical Release" Generic Safety lssue-191, "Assessment of Debris Accumulation on PWR Sump Pump Performance" Application of GE Nuclear Energy TRACG Code to Anticipated Operational Occurrences 7/24/2001 7/25/2001 9/13/2001 9/14/2001 9/17/2001 17a Open:

49 17b. Closed:

0 17c. Partially Closed:

6 17d. Total Meetings 55 Meeting Purposes and Dates Planning & Procedures Subcommittee 476th Full Committee Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Differing Professional Opinion Fire Protection Subcommittee Reactor Fuels Subcommittee Plant License Renewal Subcommittee Planning & Procedures Subcommittee Plant Systems Subcommittee Safety Research Program Subcommittee 477th Full Committee Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Subcommittee Severe Accident Management Subcommittee Materials & Metallurgy Subcommittee Planning & Procedures Subcommittee Plant Operations Subcommittee 478th Full Committee Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Subcommittee Jt. Materials & Metallurgy and Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Subcommittee ACRS/ACNW Joint Subcommittee Planning & Procedures Subcommittee Meeting and Retreat Planning & Procedures Subcommittee 479th Full Committee Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Subcommittee Jt. Plant Operations and Reliability & Probabilistic Risk Assessment Subcommittee Plant License Renewal Subcommittee Planning & Procedures Subcommittee 480th Full Committee Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Subcommittee Jt. Materials & Metallurgy and Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena and Probabilistic Risk Assessment Subcommittees Plant License Renewal Subcommittee Reactor Fuels Subcommittee Planning & Procedures Subcommittee 481st Full Committee Reliability & Probabilistic Risk Assessment Subcommittee Plant Operations Subcommittee Planning & Procedures Subcommittee 482nd Full Committee Advanced Reactors Subcommittee Workshop on Regulatory Challenges for Future Nuclear Power Plants Planning & Procedures Subcommittee 483rd Full Committee Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Subcommittee Reliability & Probabilistic Risk Assessment Subcommittee Jt. Plant Operations and Fire Protection Subcommittee and Waterford Site Visit Plant Operations Subcommittee 10/4/2000 10/4/2000 101512000 10n12000 10/10/2000 10/14/2000 10/16/2000 10/17/2000 10/18/2000 10/18/2000 10/19/2000 10/20/2000 10/31/2000 10/31/2000 10/31/2000 10/31/2000 11/1/2000 11/1/2000 11/2/2000 11/4/2000 11/13/2000 11/14/2000 11/15/2000 11/15/2000 11/16/2000 11/16/2000 12/5/2000 12/5/2000 12/6/2000 12/6/2000 12/6/2000 12/9/2000 1/16/2001 1/17/2001 1/18/2001 1/18/2001 l/19/20011/19/2001 1/22/2001 1/24/2001 1/31/2001 1/31/2001 2/1/2001 2/3/2001 2/20/2001 2/20/2001 2/21/2001 2/21/2001 2/22/2001 2/22/200 I 2/28/2001 2/28/2001 3/1/2001 3/3/2001 3/15/2001 3/15/2001 3/16/200 I 3/16/2001 3/27/2001 3/28/2001 4/4/2001 4/4/2001 4/4/2001 4/4/2001 4/5/2001 4/7/2001 4/17/20014/17/2001 5/9/2001 5/9/2001 5/9/2001 5/9/2001 5/10/2001 5/12/2001 6/4/2001 6/5/2001 6/6/2001 6/6/2001 6/6/2001 6/8/2001 6/12/2001 6/12/2001 6/22/2001 6/22/2001 6/27/2001 6/28/2001 7/9/2001 7/9/2001 12/03/200 1 1:55 PM

Annual Report http://www.facadatabase.gov/rptann ual report.as 3 of 4 Jt. Materials & Metallurgy and Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena and Probabilistic Risk Assessment Subcommittee Jt. Materials & Metallurgy and Plant Operations Subcommittee Planning & Procedures Subcommittee 484th Full Committee Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Subcommittee Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Subcommittee Planning & Procedures Subcommittee 485th Full Committee Plant License Renewal Subcommittee Materials & Metallurgy Subcommittee Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Subcommittee 18a( l ) Personnel Pmts to Non-Federal Members I 8a(2) Personnel Pmts to Federal Members I 8a(3) Personnel Pmts to Federal Staff I 8a(4) Personnel Pmts to Non-member Consultants l 8b(l) 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?

7/9/2001 7/9/2001 7/10/2001 7/10/2001 7/10/2001 7/10/2001 7/11/2001 7/13/2001 7/17/2001 7/18/2001 8/22/2001 8/23/2001 9/4/2001 9/4/2001 9/5/2001 9/8/2001 9/25/2001 9/25/2001 9/26/2001 9/26/2001 9/26/2001 9/27/2001 Current Fiscal Year

$541,394

$0

$2,554,157

$23,620

$251,640

$0

$19,138

$10,694

$33,180

$3,433,823 20.8 Next Fiscal Year

$566,298

$0

$2,671,648

$47,080

$255,000

$0

$22,000

$20,000

$43,500

$3,625,526 21.3 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 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 work changing with the needs of the Commission. Some ACRS 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 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 work on matters within the scope of the ACRS responsibilities. ACRS meeting agenda, meeting transcripts, and letter reports are available for downloading or viewing on the internet at the ACRS/ACNW website. The ACRS and its subcommittees held 55 meetings during FY 2001, 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 is.sues 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 is.sues and to report to 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 is discussed with the Commission in public meetings. The ACRS conducts an ongoing review of its plans and schedules to ensure that regulatory matters within its scope of responsibility are being properly addressed and within its resources, and on schedules that 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 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 this process. The focus of the ACRS work during FY 2001 was on risk-informed and performance-based regulatory initiatives, license renewal applications, boiling water reactor extended core power uprates, thermal-hydraulic codes, differing professional opinion on steam generator tube integrity issues, spent fuel pool fire risk issues, and the NR C 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 is.sues of importance to the Commission. Members are sought who can provide an independent perspective on nuclear safety is.sues, 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 for 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 2001, the membership was comprised of individuals with diverse employment backgrounds and included those experienced 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.

12/03/2001 1:55 PM

Annual Report http://www.facadatabase.gov/rptannualreport.as 4 of 4 20c. How frequent and relevant are the Committee meetings?

The ACRS and its subcommittees held 55 meetings during FY 2001, 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 and special issues, rules, and regulatory guidance. The ACRS subcommittees, which normally are comprised of three to six members with the relevant expertise, meet as necessary with stakeholders to conduct in-depth reviews of particular matte;:s for later consideration by the full membership during Full Committee meetings. Subcommittee meetings are conducted under the same FACA procedures as the Full Committee meetings and 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 A CRS for its CY 2000 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 ACRS scope of responsibility.

20d. Why can' t the advice or information this committee provides be obtai ned 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 reactor operating license renewal applkations, standard design applications, and construction permit and operating license applications for nuclear power plants) are dictated by statute or regulation.

In addition, functional arrangements exist wherein, upon request, the ACRS also 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 part-time consultants could not provide. The A CRS 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 nuclear reactor projects and safety issues and of an opportunity for stakeholder input.

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

During this period, the Committee held 10 full Committee meetings, of these 10 meetings one meeting was partially closed to discuss information that was classified as "Confidential

• Restricted Data

• Government Sensitive" to protect information provided in confidence by a foreign source and the other meeting was partially closed to protect proprietary information (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4).

21. Remarks None Designated Federal Offi cial: Michele S Kelton DFO Committee Members Start End Occupation Apostolakis, Dr. George E. 6/4/1995 6/2/2003 Professor, Nuclear Engineering Department, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Bonaca, Dr. Mario V.

1/6/1999 1/5/2003 Retired Director, Nuclear Engineering Department, Northeast Utilities Ford, Dr. Peter F.

3/23/2001 3/22/2005 Consultant and retired Program Manager, General Electric Research and Development Center Kress, Dr. Thomas S.

9/4/1999 9/3/2003 Retired Head of Applied Systems Technology Section, Oak Ridge National Laboratory Leitch, Mr. Graham B.

Powers, Dr. Dana A.

Rosen, Mr. Stephen L.

Seale, Dr. Robert L.

Shack, Dr. William J.

Sieber, Mr. John D.

Urig, Dr. Robert E.

Wallis, Dr. Graham B.

7/10/2000 7/9/2004 Retired Vice-President, Limerick Generating Station, PECO Energy; Retired Vice-President, Maine Yankee Atomic Power Co., Member, Offisite Safety Review Committee, Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 6/6/1998 6/5/2002 Senior Scientist, Nuclear Facilities Safety Department, Sandia National Laboratories 6/12/2001 6/11/2005 Retired Manager, Risk Management and Industry Relations, STP Nuclear Operating Company at South Texas Project Electric Generating Station 2/8/1997 2n /2001 Professor Emeritus of Nuclear & Energy Engineering, University of Arizona 8/1/2001 7/31/2005 Associate Director, Energy Technology Division, Argonne National Laboratory 7/12/1999 7/11/2003 Retired Senior Vice-President, Nuclear Power Division, Duquesne Light Company 8/25/1997 8/24/2001 Distinguished Professor, Nuclear Engineering Department, University of Tennessee 1/23/1998 1/22/2002 Professor, Thayer School of Engineering, Dartmouth College Total Count of Committee Members 12 12/03/2001 1:55 PM

Annual Report http://www.facadatabase.gov/rptann ual report.as I of 2 2001 Annual Report: Review of Federal Advisory Committee 11/27/2001 3:35:45 PM I. Department or Agency Nuclear Regulatory Commission

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

4. Is this New During Fiscal Year?

No Sa. Was Terminated During FY?

No

9. Agency Recommendation for Next FY Continue 11. Establishment Authority

5. Current Charter 4/4/2000

6. Expected Renewal Date 4/4/2002 Sb. Specific Termination Authority 42 u.s.c. 2201 I 0a.Legislation Req to Terminate?

No Agency Authority

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

13. Effective Date 7/1/1958 Scientific Technical Program Advisory Board

14. Commiuee Type Continuing

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

I 6b. Report Titles and Dates Minutes of Nov 8-9, 2000 ACMUI Meeting Transcript of April 18, 2001 ACMUI Meeting 17a Open:

1 Meeting Purposes and Dates I 7b. Closed:

Review of Issues associated with Implementation of 10 CFR Part 35 Discuss Issues Associated with 10 CFR Part 35 and Committee Self Assessment I Sa( I ) Personnel Pmts to Non-Federal Members I Sa(2) Personnel Pmts to Federal Members I Sa(3) Personnel Pmts to Federal Staff I Sa(4) Personnel Pmts to Non-member Consultants I Sb( I ) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Federal Members I Sb(2) Travel and Per Diem lo Federal Members I Sb(3) Travel and Per Diem to Federal Staff I Sb(4) Travel and Per Diem to Non-Member Consultants I Sc.Other(rents,user charges,graphics,printing,rnail etc.)

ISd Total

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

0 I 7c. Partially Closed:

11/8/2000 11/9/2000 4/18/2001 4/18/2001 Current Fiscal Year

$14,704

$0

$106,000

$1,283

$6,046

$1,169

$0

$431

$0

$129,633 1.5 1

Committee Menu

2. Fiscal Year 2001 3b. GSA Committee No.

1102

7. Expected Term Date 4/4/2002 Sc.Actual Termination Date I Ob.Legislation Pending?

14c. Presidential?

No 1/8/2001 4/18/2001 17d. Total Meetings 2 Next Fiscal Year

$18,930

$0

$111,200

$0

$12,093

$0

$0

$0

$0

$142,223 1.5 The NRC staff believes that both licensees and the general public benefit when recognized experts provide advice to the staff on medical issues in which NRC's standards may be unclear or inapplicable. These experts provide advice on rulemaking and other initiatives during critical stages in their development. The Staff provides a summary of issues to be addressed during meetings. The ACMUI discusses the issues and makes recommendations to the Staff. Furthermore, working groups and subcommittees are formed when necessary to discuss certain issues in more depth than can be accomplished during regular meetings.

20b. How does the Commiuee balance its membership?

The Commission ensures balanced membership on the Committee by placing professionals with diverse areas of expertise on the Committee.

Committee members consist of professionals who routinely use NRC's regulations during the course of medical practice, but also consists of members who represent patients' interests, medical institutions' interests, and local government's interests. For instance, the Committee is currently comprised of the following: a physician representing nuclear cardiology, one physician practicing nuclear medicine, a medical physicist in diagnostics, a medical physicist in therapy, one health care administrator, one patients' rights advocate, a food and Drug Administration representative, a State representative, a nuclear pharmacist, and a radiation safety officer. Committee membership may be adjusted from time to time to address emerging medical technologies and issues.

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

Committee meetings are generally held semi-annually, although their frequency may be increased when important issues emerge. Meetings directly address issues of relevance and interest to stakeholders, including patients, medical professionals, and medical institutions 11/27/200 1 3:27 PM

Annual Report http://www.facadatabase.gov/rptannualreport.as 2 of2 20d. Why can't the advice or information this committee provides be obtained elsewhere?

As NRC continues to move toward a more risk-informed, less burdensome regulatory agency, it must seek the advice of stakeholders so that it can ascertain its effectiveness toward achieving this goal. As stakeholders in NRC's regulations, the Committee is the best source of advice regarding the practicality and effectiveness of NRC's regulations. The type of advice NRC receives from the Committee cannot be obtained from NRC staff, because the staff does not consist of professionals from a broad spectrum of medical specialties who routinely use NRC's regulations.

Furthermore, the ability to maintain such a representation on NRC staff would be impractical, if not impossible. NRC staff continues to believe that the best way to receive insight into the practicality and usefulness of its regulations is to seek opinions from those who are routinely affected by them.

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

Meetings are closed to conduct annual ethics briefings. During these briefings, information of a confidential and personal nature is discussed.

These meetings are closed so that Committee members feel free to ask sensitive questions and obtain the information they need in a secure environment.

21. Remarks None Designated Federal Official: John W.N. Hickey DFO Committee Members Alazraki M.D., Dr. Naomi Cerqueira M.D., Dr. Manuel D.

Diamond M.D., Dr. David A.

Graham, Mr. John Hobson, Ms. Nekita Jones M.D., Dr. A. Eric McBurney, Ms. Ruth Nag, Dr. Subir Schwarz M.S., Ms. Sally W.

Vetter Ph.D., Dr. Richard J.

Wagner Ph.D., Dr. Louis K.

Williamson Ph.D., Dr. Jeffrey F.

Total Count of Committee Members Start 3/5/1998 2/15/1999 11/8/2000 10/1/1995 2/15/1999 1/1/1996 2/15/1999 11/8/2000 11/8/2000 11/8/2000 7/3/1994 11/8/2000 End 4/18/2001 4/18/2001 Occupation Nuclear Medicine Physician Nuclear Cardiologist Radiation Oncologist Hospital Administrator Patient Advocate Food and Drug Administration Representative State Representative Radiation Oncologist Nuclear Pharmacist Radiation Safety Officer Medical Physicist - Nuclear Medicine Therapy Physicist 12 11/27/2001 3:27 PM

Annual Report http://www.facadatabase.gov/rptannualreport.as I of 2 2001 Annual Report: Review of Federal Advisory Committee 11/27/20013:21:50 PM I. Department or Agency Nuclear Regulatory Commission

3. Committee or SubCommittee Licensing Support System Advisory Review Panel

4. Is this New During Fiscal Year?

No 8a. Was Terminated During FY?

No

9. Agency Recommendation for Next FY Continue 11. Establishment Authority

5. Current Charter 12/14/2000

6. Expected Renewal Date 12/14/2002 8b. Specific Termination Authority 42 u.s.c. 2201 I 0a.Legislation Req to Terminate?

Agency Authority

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

13. Effective Date 1/19/1975

14. Committee Type Continuing

15. Description of Committee 16a. Total Number of Reports Non Scientific Program Advisory Board I 6b. Report Titles and Dates Transcript of August 8, 2001 LSNARP Meeting 17a Open:

1 17b. Closed:

0 17c. Partially Closed:

Meeting Purposes and Dates Review of Status of Licensing Support Network and Revisions to 10 CFR 81812001 81812001 Part 2 Current Fiscal Year I Sa( I) Personnel Pmts to Non-Federal Members 18a(2) Personnel Pmts to Federal Members 18a(3) Personnel Pmts to Federal Staff 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 J 8c.Other(rents,user charges,graphics,printing,mail etc.)

18d Total

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

$0

$1,200

$0

$0

$702

$5,205

$0

$0

$2,563

$9,670 0.0 0

Committee Menu

2. Fiscal Year 2001 3b. GSA Committee No.

1104

7. Expected Term Date 12/14/2006 Sc.Actual Termination Date I Ob.Legislation Pending?

14c. Presidential?

No 8/8/2001 17d. Total Meetings 1 Next Fiscal Year

$0

$1,500

$0

$0

$1,000

$7,500

$3,000

$0

$1,200

$14,200 0.0 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission continues to rely upon the Licensing Support Network Advisory Review Panel (LSNARP) for advice and recommendations on the design and operation of the searchable electronic database for documents that will be pertinent to the licensing of a geologic repository for the storage of high level nuclear waste. This document repository will contain electronic copies of all of the material that will be used by parties in the NRC's licensing prceeding for a high level radioactive waste repository. The LSN must be in operation at the time The Department of Energy submitts its site reccomendation to the President, currently expected in December 2001. During this reporting period, the LSNARP provided feedback on the functional requirements of the LSN and on the initial hardware and software development.

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 California, Indian tribes, represented by the National Congress of American Indians and 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 met once on August 8, 2001 in Las Vegas to review the implementation of the initial hardware and software for the LSN and the NRC's use of Electronic Information Exchange (EIE) to submit! electronic documents to the NRC under secure conditions. During the year, Technical Working Groups formed from members of the LSNARP or their representatives met with NRC staff and contractors to work out details of data fields to be encorporated into the internet based document management system.

11/27/200 1 3: 13 PM

Annual Report http://www. facadatabase. gov /rptann ual report.as 2 of 2 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. During the next reporting period, the Licensing Support Network will become fully operational and the Advisory Review Panel will have to address implementational and operational issues.

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

The LSSARP did not hold any closed meetings in FY 2000

21. Remarks NONE Designated Federal Official: Dr. Andrew L Bates DFO Committee Members Bates, Andrew L Bechtel, Dennis Bradshaw, Les Brandt, Joy Clark, Ray Culverwell, Eve Fiorenzi, Leonard Frishman, Steve Gill,April Graser, Daniel Holden, Robert Kall,Alan Kolkman, Debra Kraft, Steven McCorkell, George Murphy, Malachy Shankle, Judy Smith, Courtney Treichel, Judy von Tresenhausen, Engelbrech Total Count of Committee Members Start 6/15/2000 12/18/1989 1/15/1993 10/1/2000 7/1/1999 1/15/1993 7/1/1999 7/1/1999 12/1/2000 10/1/1999 7/1/1999 7/1/1999 7/1/1999 1/1/1998 10/1/2000 12/18/1989 10/1/2000 6/15/2001 1/1/1998 7/1/2001 End 6/30/2001 20 Occupation US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Clark County, Nevada Nye County, Nevada Lander County, Nevada US EPA Lincoln County, Nevada Eureka County, Nevada State Of Nevada US Department of Energy US Nuclear regulatory Commission National Congress of American Indians Churchill County, Nevada White Plan County, Nevada Nuclear Energy Institute - Energy Coalition Esmeralda County, Nevada Nye County, Nevada Mineral County, Nevada Inyo County, Nevada Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force Clark County Nevada 11/27/200 1 3:13 PM

Annual Report http://www.facadatabase.gov/rptannualreport.as I of2 2001 Annual Report: Review of Federal Advisory Committee ll/26/20012:12:12 PM I. Department or Agency Nuclear Regulatory Commission

3. Committee or SubCommittee Reactor Oversight Process Initial Implementation Evaluation Panel

4. Is this New During Fiscal Year?

Yes Sa. Was Terminated During FY?

Yes

9. Agency Recommendation for Next FY Terminate

11. Establishment Authority

5. Current Charter 10/17/2000

6. Expected Renewal Date Sb. Specific Termination Authority I 0a.Legislation Req to Terminate?

No Agency Authority

12. Specific Establishment Authority 42 USC 2201 I 3. Effective Date 7/1/1958 Scientific Technical Program Advisory Board

14. Committee Type Ad Hoc

15. Description of Committee 16a. Total Number of Reports 1

I 6b. Report Titles and Dates Final Report - Reactor Oversight Process Initial Implementation Evaluation Panel 17a Open:

6 17b. Closed:

0 17c. Partially Closed:

Meeting Purposes and Dates 0

Committee Menu

2. Fiscal Year 2001 3b. GSA Committee No.

9533

7. Expected Term Date 7/31/2001 Sc.Actual Termination Date 7/31/2001 I Ob.Legislation Pending?

14c. Presidential?

No 5/10/2001 17d. Total Meetings 6 Discuss Performance Measures for Reactor Oversight Process Review Results of Reactor Oversight Preocess Review of Reactor Oversight Process Prioritization of Issues Identified by Oversight Panel 11/1/2000 1:00:00 PM 11/2/2000 4:30:00 PM 12/11/2000 8:00:00 AM 12/12/2000 5:00:00 PM 1/22/2001 8:00:00 AM 1/23/2001 5:00:00 PM 2/26/20018:00:00 AM 2/27/2001 5:00:00 PM Review of Reactor Oversight Process - Self-Assessment Program and Lessons Learned Workshops Review Draft Report and Finalize Recommendations

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

18d Total

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

4/2/2001 9:00:00 AM 4/3/20013:00:00 PM 4/25/2001 8:00:00 AM 4/25/2001 5:00:00 PM Current Fiscal Year

$0

$119,067

$39,683

$0

$19,016

$29,420

$1,751

$0

$5,000

$213,937 0.4 Next Fiscal Year

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0 0.0 The HEP worked as a management-level cross-disciplinary oversight group of experts to evaluate whether the NRC's new reactor regulatory oversight process was effectively carried out and whether it was achieving its overall objectives. The panel solicited and obtained additional views, to supplement the members' personal insights, from representatives of four States (New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Vermont), the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), NRC resident inspectors, NRC senior reactor analysts, the NRC Office of Public Affairs, and McGraw-Hill. The NRC staff members directly involved in the process development reported on the status of the initial implementation and responded to questions and comments. The HEP concluded that the revised Reactor Oversight Process was a notable improvement over the previous licensee performance assessment program and should be continued. The reactor oversight process made progress toward achieving the Agency's four performance goals: 1) maintain safety, 2) increase public confidence, 3) increase regulatory effectiveness and efficiency, and 4) reduce unnecessary regulatory burden. In addition, the process provides a more objective, risk-informed, predictable, and understandable approach to the oversight of commercial nuclear reactor facilities.

20b. How does the Committee balance its membership?

Committee membership included NRC regional and headquarters staff, representatives from the Nuclear Energy Institute, licensee management, public intrest groups, and state regulatory agencies.

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

The Committee met 6 times and produced a final report on May 10, 2001.

11/26/200 1 2:03 PM

Annual Report http://www.facadatabase.gov/rptannual report.as 2 of2 20d. Why can't the advice or information this committee provides be obtained elsewhere?

The Committee provided the NRC with the opportunity to get broad input and evaluation of its new reactor oversight process during the initial year of its implementation so that valuable feedback could be factored into the program and revisions made at an early stage.

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

No closed meetings were held.

21. Remarks Committee Terminated 7/31/2001 Designated Federal Official: John D Monninger Committee Members Start End Blough, A Randolph 11/1/2000 7/31/2001 Borchardt, R William 11/1/2000 4/2/2001 Brockman, Kenneth 11/1/2000 7/31/2001 Ferdig, Mary 12/4/2000 7/31/2001 Floyd, Steve 11/1/2000 7/31/2001 Garchow, David 11/1/2000 7/31/2001 Hill, Richard 11/1/2000 7/31/2001 Krich, Rod 11/1/2000 7/31/2001 Laurie, Robert 11/1/2000 7/31/2001 Lochbaum, David 11/1/2000 11/6/2000 Moorman III, James 11/1/2000 7/31/2001 Plisco, Loren 11/1/2000 7/31/2001 Reynolds, Steven 11/1/2000 7/31/2001 Scherer, A Edward 11/1/2000 7/31/2001 Setser, James 11/1/2000 7/31/2001 Shadis, Raymond 12/4/2000 7/31/2001 Trapp, James 11/1/2000 7/31/2001 Total Count of Committee Members Occupation US Nuclear Regulatory Commission U S Nuclear Regulatory Commission U S Nuclear Regulatory Commission Ferdig Inc. Orginizational Research and Development Nuclear Energy Institute PSEG Nuclear LLC Southern Nuclear Operating Company Commonwealth Edison Company California Energy Commission Union Of Concerned Scientists U S Nuclear Regulatory Commission U S Nuclear Regulatory Commission U S Nuclear Regulatory Commission Southern Califirnia Edison Company Georgia Department Of Natural Resources New England Coalition On Nuclear Pollution U S Nuclear Regulatory Commission 17 11/26/2001 2:03 PM