Document: NRC Regulatory Guide
Document ID: 9c2d8a16-b451-4bff-afa8-ff9f8bf6234b
Document Type: regulatory_guide
Title: Standard Format and Content of Site Characterization Plans for High-Level-Waste Geologic Repositories + HISTORY - HISTORY 11/2015 – Periodic Review of Revision 1 – No issues identified 11/2010 – Periodic Review of Revision 1 – No issues identified 02/1985 – Draft WM 404-4, Proposed Revision 1 04/1981 – Draft GS 027-4, Proposed Original Version (Rev. 1)
Source: NRC Regulatory Guide Division 4
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1532/ML15323A184.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 
Section ID: RG-4.17
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
Enclosure Regulatory Guide Periodic Review Regulatory Guide Number: 4.17, Revision 1 Title: Standard Format and Content of Site Characterization Plans for High-Level-Waste Geologic Repositories Office/Division/Branch: NMSS/YMD Technical Lead: Christopher Markley Staff Action Decided: Reviewed with no issues identified 1. What are the known technical or regulatory issues with the current version of the regulatory guide (RG)? RG 4.17, which dates to March 1987, provides guidance on the information to be provided for the site characterization plan (SCP) in accordance with 10 CFR Part 60, “Disposal of High-Level Wastes in Geologic Repositories,” in order to establish a uniform format for submitting SCP information to NRC. There are no technical or regulatory issues with the current version of this RG since the processes discussed in the RG are consistent with current regulatory requirements. 2. What is the impact on internal and external stakeholders of not updating the RG for the known issues, in terms of numbers of licensing and inspection activities? There is no impact in terms of licensing and inspection activities. 3. What is an estimate of the level of effort needed to address identified issues in terms of full-time equivalent (FTE) and contractor resources? Not applicable. 4. Based on the answers to the questions above, what is the recommended staff action for this guide (Reviewed with no issues identified, Reviewed with issues identified for future consideration, Revise, or Withdraw)? Reviewed with no issues identified. 5. If a RG should be revised, provide a conceptual plan and timeframe to accomplish this. Not applicable. NOTE: This review was conducted in November 2015 and reflects the staff’s plans as of that date. These plans are tentative and subject to change.