CY-02-012, Project Response to AIF Generator Survey

Project Response to AIF Generator Survey

ML040130517
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	02/28/2002
From:	South Texas
To:	Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
References
SECY-02-0127
Download: ML040130517 (4)

Text

Survey of Generators of Low-Level Radioactive Waste for Interest in an Assured Isolation Facility The Nuclear Regulatory Commission directed the NRC staff to proceed with a rulemaking plan that explores interest in the assured isolation concept for the storage of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) and provides a foundation for a Commission decision on whether to develop a rule. The rulemaking plan should include Agreement State interaction and participation (SRM-SECY-02-0127, 9/5/02, ML022480322). This decision was made in conjunction with the Commission's approval of the staff's proposed response to a letter from the State of Ohio requesting NRC's views on a proposed Ohio regulation for licensing an assured isolation facility.

(See 9/12/02 letter to Robert Owen, ML022560082.) Accordingly, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff and the Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors, Suggested State Regulations Committee on Part L, chaired by Robert Owen, State of Ohio, are jointly developing basic information on the projected need for disposal or storage of LLW and projected disposal capacity.

As an important aspect of this basic information, we are interested in knowing the extent of need for and interest in an assured isolation facility that would provide long-term, centralized storage of low-level radioactive waste, including material regulated under the Atomic Energy Act, naturally-occurring material, accelerator-produced material and technologically-enhanced material (discrete sources only for this last). The facility would be open to multiple generators.

We exclude mixed radioactive and chemical waste from this inquiry. We realize that not all this information is readily available even for past activities and that any projections for the period of ten years are very uncertain, so we would appreciate rough estimates or ranges, with any qualifications you think appropriate. For purposes of this survey, we do not define an assured isolation facility other than to describe it as an engineered facility that would provide long-term, centralized storage of LLW to multiple generators. The facility could be designated as: 1.

Exclusively for storage, with no option for disposal at the AIF; 2. For storage, with the expectation of disposal of the waste at the AIF; or 3. For storage, with the option of disposing of waste at the AIF. The tables below are our preferred format for information but if it is more convenient to use another format, please feel free to provide the information in the most complete form you can. There are no formulas in the tables.

Company: South Texas Proiect Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC)

For ten years, beginning in 2003:

1. How many cubic feet and how many curies of low-level waste material in Classes A, B and C and non-Atomic Energy Act radioactive waste (ARM, NORM, TENORM) that your company generates do you expect to require disposal? If you don't have a breakdown by category, please provide a cumulative figure.

2. How much disposal capacity do you expect to be available to your company for the various categories of waste?

3. Are there any other options for storage, disposal, or processing, not presently in use, that you expect to be available to reduce the quantities of low-level waste without a designated disposition (e.g., extended storage, segregation of wastes, volume reduction)?

I

Estimated Generation of LLW by Category (thousands of cubic feet) l 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Class A 19.2 19.2 19.3 19.2 19.2 19.3 19.2 19.2 19.3 19.2 192.3 Class B 0.7 0.3 0.9 0.4 0.9 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 6.2 Class C 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.0 NARM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 20.0 19.6 20.3 19.7 20.2 20.0 19.9 19.9 20.0 19.9 199.5 Estimated Generation of LLW by Category (curies) 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Class A 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 Class B 440 440 440 440 440 440 440 440 440 440 4400 Class C 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 900 NARM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 532 532 532 532 532 532 532 532 532 532 5320 Estimated Disposal Capacity of LLW by Category (thousands of cubic feet) 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Net*

Class A 19.2 19.2 19.3 19.2 19.2 19.3 19.2 19.2 19.3 19.2 192.3 0 Class B 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 0 0 0 0.6 5.6 Class C 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 0 0 0 0.6 0.4 NARM 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 Total 19.4 19.4 19.5 19.4 l 19.4 19.5 l 19.2 19.2 19.3 19.2 193.5 6.0

• Amounts generated minus disposal capacity Estimated Disposal Capacity of LLW by Category (Curies)

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Net*

Class A 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 0 Class B 440 440 440 440 440 440 0 0 0 0 2640 1760 Class C 90 90 90 90 90 90 0 0 0 0 540 360 NARM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 532 532 532 532 532 532 2 2 2 2 3200 2120

• Amounts generated minus disposal capacity Estimated Total Generation and Disposal of LLW and NARM (thousands of cubic feet)*

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Total 20.0 19.6 20.3 19.7 20.2 20.0 N/A 19.9 19.9 20.0 19.9 199.5 Generated Disposal 19.4 19.4 19.5 19.4 19.4 19.5 N/A 19.2 19.2 19.3 19.2 193.5 Capacity Disposal/ 0.6 0.2 0.8 0.3 0.8 0.5 N/A 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 6.0 Storage LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW Needed (n e t)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

If information is not available for both LLW and NARM, please indicate which material you are providing information for.

Estimated Total Generation and Disposal of LLW and NARM (curies)*

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2008 2009 2010 2011 l 2012 Total Total 532 532 532 532 532 532 N/A 532 532 532 532 5320 Generated Disposal 532 532 532 532 532 532 N/A 2 2 2 2 3200 Capacity l l l_ l l l l l l Disposal/ 0 0 0 0 0 0 N/A 530 530 530 530 2120 Storage LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW LLW Needed If information is not available for both LLW and NARM, please indicate which material you are providing information for.

In response to the question, "Are there any other options for storage, disposal, or processing, not presently in use, that you expect to be available to reduce the quantities of low-level waste

without a designated disposition (e.g., extended storage, segregation of wastes, volume reduction)? "

STPNOC is currently either exploring or using the following options: segregation of resins and filters by waste classification, volume reduction of resins and dry active waste, and arrangements for direct burial of LLW at the Envirocare Facility in Utah. We also plan to construct several on-site storage containers to help enhance our ability to segregate our different waste classes and to provide on-site storage capability should we lose access to approved disposal facilities. Currently, for Class B and C waste, the Barnwell site in South Carolina is the only option and the site closes its doors to STPNOC in 2008.