ML062980077
Text
From:
Marvin Mendonca To:
Research and Test Reactor Date:
10/2312006 6:53:38 AM
Subject:
Draft Directors Decision on uncontrolled/unmonitored releases I believe I've previously shared the attached with you. I will send final which is due to be out soon.
Marv
I c:*temp\\GW)}O0O1.TMP Page I I Mail Envelope Properties (453C9F32.F68: 1: 35040)
Subject-Creation Date From:
Created By:
Draft Directors Decision on uncontrolied/unmonitored releases 10/23/2006 6:53:38 AM Marvin Mendonca MMM@nrc.gov Recipients afiri.usuhs.mil AM spence (Harry Spence) aol.com AM Adams9508 (Al Adams) mendmk (Mary Mendonca) buffalo.edu AM msadams (Mark Adams) comell.edu AM crfl (Charles Fay) hcal (Howard Alderhold) crocker.ucdavis.edu AM flocchini (Robert Flocchini) dow.com AM tiquinnili (Tom Quinn) wirigot (Ward Rigot) eng.umd.edu AM mohamad (Mohamad AI-Sheikley) via (Vince Adams)
Action Transferred Date & Time 10/23/2006 6:54:08 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:08 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:09 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:10 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:09 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:10 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:10 eng.utah.edu AM mpk (Melinda Krahenbuhl)
Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:10
I f~mn~~lAflOOOO1 TMP Page 2 1 I
ra~
Page 2 1 c:VemnIGViW001.TMP engr.psu.edu AM cfsnuc (C. Frederick Sears) tIfiuc (Terry Flinchbaugh) engr.washington.edu AM carette (Mike Carrete) engr.wisc.edu AM agasie (Bob Agasie) mblanchard (Michelle Blanchard) facilities.buffalo.edu AM dvasbind (Dave Vasbinder)
Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:10 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:10 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:11 10/23/2006 6:54:11 Transferred ga.com AM razvi (Junaid Razvi)
Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:11 gat.com AM john.greenwood (John Greenwood) keith.asnussen (Keith Asmussen) gene.ge.com AM chuck.bassett (Chuck Bassett) david.turner (David Turner) edward.ehrlich (Ed Ehrlich) gmail.com AM sgfrantz (Stephen Frantz) grc.nasa.gov AM John.A.Thomnas (John Thomas) keith.peecook (Keith Peecook)
Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:11 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:11 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:12 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54.12 gso.uri.edu AM Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:12
I r-awnmmeý.ummol TMp Page 3 1
~mn1flW~flflflfl1 TMP Page 3 I I ~
bicehous (Hank Bicehouse) jdavis (Jeff Davis) mmiddleton (Mike Middleton) gsosunl.gso.uri.edu AM ttehan (Terry Tehan) isu.edu AM jbennion (John Bennion) kunzejay (Jay Kunze) ksu.edu AM ronbrid (Ronald Bridges) whaley (Paul M. Whaley) mail.utexas.edu AM sokeily (Sean OKelly) mail.wsu.edu AM kfox (Keith Fox) marad.dot.gov AM Erhard.Koehler (Erhard Koehler)
MED.VA GOV AM lynell.klassen (Lynell Klassen) mnissouri.edu AM butlerra (Ralph Butler)
FoytoL (Les Foyto)
MeyerW (Walt Meyer) mit.edu AM bernardj (John Bernard) eslau (Eddie Lau) jpfoster (John Foster)
Transferred Transferred Transferred Transferred Transferred Transferred Transferred Transferred Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:12 10/23/2006 6:54:13 10/23/2006 6:54:13 10/23/2006 6:54:39 10/23/2006 6:54:13 10/23/2006 6:54:14 10/23/2006 6:54:14 10/23/2006 6:54:14 10/23/2006 6:54:14
Page 41 I.-viamkrumno(W olflll TMPPae1 tnewton (Tom Newton) ncsu.edu AM atcook (Andrew Cook) nist.gov AM syweiss (Sy Weiss) tjmyers (Tom Myers) wade.richards (Wade Richards) nrc.gov ATLPO.ATLDO AM CHBI (Craig Bassett) nrc.gov OWGWPOO1.HQGWDO01 AM AXA (Alexander Adams) nrc.gov OWGWPO03.HQGWDO01 AM PVD (Paul Doyle) nrc.gov OWGWPO04.HQGWDO01 AM DEH3 (Daniel Hughes)
PM (Patrick Isaac)
WBK (William Kennedy) nrc.gov TWGWPOO1.HQGWDO01 AM MMM (Marvin Mendonca)
AM nrc.gov TWGWPOO2.HQGWDO01 AM WCS1 (William Schuster)
Transferred Transferred Delivered Delivered Delivered Delivered Delivered Opened Delivered 10/23/2006 6:54:14 10/23/2006 6:54:14 10/23/2006 6:54:08 10/23/2006 6:53:44 10/23/2006 6:53:44 10/23/2006 6:53:44 10/23/2006 6:53:44 10/23/2006 6:56:44 10/23/2006 6:53:44
I clem-pNGW)00001.TMP Pai g--
-e--
6-1 I c:\\temp~GW)00OO1.TMP Page 5 I nrc.gov TWGWPO03.HQGWDOO1 AM JFQ (Jessie Quichocho) nrc.gov TWGWPO04.HQGWDO01 AM KMW (Kevin Witt)
MHV (Marcus Voth)
PTY (Phillip Young) oregonstate.edu AM mike.hartman (Mike Hartman) osu.edu AM kauffinan.9 (Andrew Kauffman) myser.2 (Rick Myser)
Delivered 10/23/2006 6:53:44 Delivered 10/23/2006 6:53:44 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:14 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:15 prodigy.net AM aonray (Fred Mehren)
Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:14 purdue.edu AM edward.c.merritt. 1 (Ed Merritt) jere (Jere Jenkins) rc.orst.edu AM reeses (Steve Reese) reed.edu AM beavers (Susan Beaver) rpi.edu AM audinj (Joe Audino) caracp3 (Peter Caracappa) delvem (Marc Del Vecchio) matthj3 (Jerry Matthews) winteg (Glenn Wimters)
Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:15 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:15 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:15 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:16
%fgxm umnnni Tup
--- ag e 6 1 I,.~hinn~f~Aflflflflfl1 TMP Page 61 simelectronics.corn AM sim (Steve Miller) tamu.edu AM jaremlinger (Jun Remlinger) w-reece (Dan Reece) trinity.tamu.edu AM hamilton (Ian Hamilton) u.washington.edu AM pankowb (Brian Pankow) rso (Stan Addison) ucdavis.edu AM dreap (David Reap) wgsteingass (Guy Steingass) uci.edu AM gemiller (George Miller) ufl.edu AM dms4uftr (Donna Seifert) vernet (William Vernetson) uiuc.edu AM r-holm (Richard Homn) umich.edu AM ewbecker (Chris Becker) uml.edu AM leobobek (Leo Bobek)
Transferred Transferred Transferred Transferred Transferred Transferred Transferred Transferred Transferred Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:39 10/23/2006 6:54:15 10/23/2006 6:54:16 10/23/2006 6:54:16 10/23/2006 6:54:16 10/23/2006 6:54:16 10/23/2006 6:54:16 10/23/2006 6:54:16 10/23/2006 6:54:17 10/23/2006 6:54:17
c:~temp~GW)OO0O1.TMP Page 7 1 I c:\\temp\\GW)OOOOI.TMP Page 7 1 umr.edu AM destel (Dan Estel) webonzer (Bill Bonzer) unity.ncsu.edu AM wicks (Gerry Wicks) unm.edu AM busch (Robert Busch) kenc (Ken Carpeter) usgs.gov AM dliles (Darrell Liles) tdebey (Tim DeBey) wam.umd.edu AM jemnier (Josh Emmer)
Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:17 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:18 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:18 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:18 Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:18 wpi.edu AM laflamme (Stephen LaFlamme)
Transferred 10/23/2006 6:54:18 Post Office Delivered Route afi'i.usuhs.mil aol.com buffalo.edu comell.edu crocker.ucdavis.edu dow.com eng.umd.edu eng.utah.edu engr.psu.edu engr.washington.edu engr.wisc.edu facilities.buffalo. edu ga.com gat.com gene.ge.com gmail.com grc.nasa.gov
Page 8 1 I --......
Pr....
a P.Page.8.1 ATL PO.ATLDO OWGWPOO1.HQGWDO01 OWGWPOO3.HQGWDOO1 OWGWPOO4.HQGWDOO1 TWGWPOOI.HQGWDOO1 TWGWPOO2.HQGWDOOI TWGWPO03.HQGWDOO1 TWGWPOO4.HQGWDOO1 gso.uri.edu gsosunl.gso.uri.edu isu.edu ksu.edu mail.utexas.edu mail.wsu.edu marad.dot.gov MED.VAGOV missouri.edu nit.edu ncsu.edu nist.gov 10/23/2006 6:54:08 AM nrc.gov 10/23/2006 6:53:44 AM nrc.gov 10/23/2006 6:53:44 AM nrc.gov 10/23/2006 6:53:44 AM
-rc.gov 10/23/2006 6:53:44 AM nrc.gov 10/23/2006 6:53:44 AM nrc.gov 10/23/2006 6:53:44 AM nrc.gov 10/23/2006 6:53:44 AM nrc.gov oregonstate.edu osu.edu prodigy.net purdue.edu rc.orst.edu reed.edu rpi.edu simelectronics.com tamu.edu tinity.tamu.edu u.washington.edu ucdavis.edu uci.edu ufl.edu uiuc.edu umich.edu uml.edu umr.edu unity.ncsu.edu unm.edu usgs.gov wam.umd.edu wpi.edu Fries Size Date & Time
Page 9 1 I rr-VemnIGWI0OO1 TMP rg MESSAGE 464 tritium draft dd MI061740555.pdf AM 10/23/2006 6:53:38.
518236 10/23/2006 6:51:38 Options Auto Delete:
Expiration Date:
Notify Recipients:
Priority:
ReplyRequested:
Return Notification:
Concealed
Subject:
Security:
To Be Delivered:
Status Tracking:
No None Yes Standard No None No Standard Immediate Delivered & Opened
June 28, 2006 David Lochbaum, Director Nuclear Safety Project Union of Concerned Scientists 1707 H Street NW., Suite 600 Washington, DC 20006 Dear Mr. Lochbaurnr The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)staff has completed a preim-inary review of the petition dated January 25, 2006, filed pursuant to Section 2.206 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 2206) by the Union of Concerned Scientists and numerous other organizations and individuals. Ve share your concerns regarding the control, monitoring, and reporting of possible releases of radioactive liquid effluents from NRC-regulated facilities. The participation by you, your co-petitioners, and other stakeholders has been helpful to the NRC and to our licensees in responding to this issue and related pubic concerns. However, we do not, at this time, believe that our response to this issue needs to involve issuance of enforcement actIons such as the Demands for Information mentioned in your petiton. The NRC staffs proposed Director's Decision (DD) on the petition is enclosed.
VWe appreciate you agreeing to serve as a point of contact for this petition. You may collect and organize the comments from your co-petitioners or they may provide them directly to the NRC staff for consideration.
VW especially seek comments on any portions of the DD that you believe involve errors or any issues in the petition that you believe have not been fuly addressed. The NRC staff will then review any comments provided by the petitioners and consider them in the final version of the DD. Please provide your comments within 30 days of the date of this letter.
Please feel free to contact Mr. Whiam Reckley, petition manager, at 301-415-1323. to discuss any questions related to this petition.
Sircerely, MRA J. E. Dyer, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
Proposed Directors Decision
David Lochbaum, Director Nuclear Safety Project Union of Concerned Scientists 1707 H Street NW, Suite 600 Washington, DC 20006 June 28, 2006 Dear Mr. Lochbaum The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)staff has completed a prelirninary review of the petition dated January 25, 2006, filed purs uant to Section 2.206 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 2.206) by the Union of Concerned Scientists and numerous other organizations and individuals.
We share your concerns regarding the control, monitoring, and reporting of possble releases of radioactive liquid effluents from NRC-regulated facilities. The participation by you, your co-petitioners, and other stakeholders has been helpful to the NRC and to our licensees in responding to this issue and related pubic concerns. However, we do not, at this time, believe that our response to this issue needs to involve issuance of enforcement actions such as the Demands for Information mentioned in your petition. The NRC staffs proposed Director's Decision (DD) on the petition is enclosed.
We appreciate you agreeing to serve as a point of contact for this petiton. You may collect and organize the comments from your co-petitioners or they may provide them directly to the NRC staff for consideration.
ft especially seek comments on any portions of the DD that you believe involve errors or any issues in the petition that you believe have not been fuly addressed. The NRC staff will then review any comments provided bythe petioners and consider them in the final version of the DD. Please provide your comments within 30 days of the date of this letter.
Please feel free to contact Mr. VViWam Reckley, petition manager, at 301-415-1323, to discuss any questions related to this petition.
Sincerely, IRA/
J. E. Dyer, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
Proposed Director's Decision DISTRIBUTION:
PUBUC RidsNnOd RldsN-iFspb JGoldberg RidsRgn2MailCent er RldsNrrnfcMalI eDweer-PSPB Reading RidsNirAdra Rlds/AsmcnwMal Center GLongo RidsRgn3MailCent er RIdsNrrWMDWII ars RidsNfAi*p RklsEdoMalCente r NRCVYEB (DD Only)
RidsAslb~ocket "yr RidsRqr4MaICert er RilsOpaMall RidsNrrDlrs RidsOgcRp RldsNrrDpr RitsNrrt.ADBaxley RkisRgn1Ma1enrt or RidsNrd~r~nJedckl y RktisOcaMaliCeriter RidsNrr~irslhpb Inconing MLG0S!0228, ML010400171, and ML081360423 Letter and Decision
Enclosure:
MLICt740666 Package:
ML018740663 NRR-106 OFFICE DPR/PSPB DPR/PSPB DPR/PRTA DIRS Tech Editor DPR/D (A)
NRRPD NAME WReckley DBaxley BThomas SRichards HChang HNieh IJDyer h== far DATE 6123f06 6/23/06 6/22/06 6/22/06 6/16/06 6/26/05 6/28/M6 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Proposed DD UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION James E. Dyer, Director In the Matter of
)
Operating and Decommissioning
)
Power Reactors and Operating and Decommissioning
)
Research and Test Reactors PROPOSED DIRECTOR'S DECISION UNDER 10 C.F.R. 2.206 I. Introducion By letter dated January 25, 2006, as supplemented by the letters dated February 2 and April 26, 2006, Mr. David Lochbaum, on behalf of the Union of Concerned Citizens and numerous other organizations and individuals (the Petitioners) filed a Petition pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 2.206. The Petitioners requested that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) respond to public concerns about nuclear reactors releasing water potentially contaminated with radioactive materials by taking the folowing action:
.... take enforcement action against all applicable icensees* by issuing a Demand for Information requiring them to submit on the docket answers to the following questions:
- 1.
Miat are the systems and components at your licensed faciity that contain radioactivly contaminated water?
- 2.
Mat methods are being used to monitor leakage of radioactively contaminated water from the systems and components identified in response to question 1?
- 3.
Vh at is the largest leak rate that can remain undetected by the monitoring methods identified in response to question 2?
- 4.
MAhat methods are being used to monitor the grounds around the facility for potential leakage of radioactively contaminated water from the systems and components identified in response to question 1?
- 5.
Mhat assurance is there against a leak of radioactively contaminated water into the ground around your licensed facility from remaining undetected long enough to permit migration offsite in quantities exceeding federal regulations?
Applicable icensees' are those licensees as isted in Appendix A, "U.S.
Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors," Appendix B. "U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors Formerly Licensed to Operate," Appendix E, 'U.S. Nuclear Research and Test Reactors Regulated by NRC," and Appendix F, "U.S.
Nuclear Research and Test Reactors Under Decommissioning" in the "NRC Information Digest 2004-2005 Edition," NUREG-1350, Vol. 16, Rev. 1, published February 2005 by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
As the basis for the request, the Petitioners cited several examples of contamination at NRC-licensed facilities and cited NRC regulations requiring icensees to have controls limiting the release of radioactive materials and limiting the radiation dose individuals receive from the operation of NRC-licensed facilities.
In a letter dated March 1, 2006, the NRC informed the Petitioners that their request was received and that the issues in the Petition were being referred to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) for appropriate action.
As mentioned in the March 1,2006, letter, the NRC has responded to specific cases of unmonitored releases from nuclear power reactors and to the general issue and related public concerns about possible groundwater contamination near NRC-licensed facilites.
All available information on those releases shows no threat to the public health and safety. The NRC's actions include conducting special inspections, revising NRC inspection guidance, and forming a lessons-learne d task force. The task force will evaluate cases of unmonitored releases of iquid effluents at nuclear power reactors and make recomnmendations for possible changes in the NRC's regulation and oversight of power reactor facilities. The NRC has held several meetings with licensees, industry groups, and other stakeholders regarding this matter and has committed to hold additional meetings in the months ahead.
The Petitioners request thatthe NRC issue a Demand for Information (DFI)requiring the subject licensees to provide specific information about the potential for unmonitored releases of liquid effluents containing radioactive materials and the licensees' ability to detect such releases before the contamination migrates beyond site boundaries. The administrative action of issuing a DFI is described in 10 CFR 2204 as follows :
(a) The Commission may issue to a licensee or other person subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission a demand for information for the purpose of determining whether an order under S 2.202 should be issued, or whether other action should be taken, which demand wil:
(1) Alege the violations with which the licensee or other person is charged, or the potentially hazardous conditions or other facts deemed to be sufficient ground for issuing the demand; and (2) Provide that the licensee must, or the other person may, file a written answer to the demand for information under oath or affirmation within twenty (20) days of its date, or such other time as may be specified in the demand for information.
In addition, the NRC Enforcement Manual (available on the NRC Web site, (http:/Awww.nrc.gov/what-we-do/r egulatorylenforc ementlguidance.h tml)) states:
A DFI is a significant action. It should be used only when it is Ikely that an inadequate response will result In an order or other enforcement action.
During a meeting and teleconference on Apri 5,2006, the Petitioners further explained and supported their Petition by providing additional Information to the NRCs Petition Review Board (PRB). The transcript of this teleconference was treated as a supplement to the Pettion and is available in the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) for inspection under Accession No. ML061230344, and at the Commission's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One VWhite Flint North, Pubic Fie Area 01 F21, 11555 Rockv le Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible from the ADAMS Pub*c Electronic Reading Room on the NRC Web site hU:llwwwnrcoy/r~ding-rnladarms.htmnl. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mal to odr0.nrc.gov.
In addition to the specific meeting and teleconference with the Petitioners, the NRC staff has held several other public meetings on the topic of groundwater contamination near specific facilities and at NRC headquarters in Rocky lie, Maryland. Meetings with representatives from the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) and the nuclear power industry to discuss the issue and possible industry actions were held on March 22, May 9, and June 21, 2006. Many of the Petitioners participated in the public question and comment periods of these meetings. The NRC staff has posted information regarding the meetings and other activities related to groundwater contamination on its Wekb site at http.llwww.nrc.g ovlreactorsloperatmnflops-ex perience/.Cmdwt--contam-tritium. html.
This proposed Director's Decision Is being issued to solicit comments on the NRC's disposition of the Petition.
II. Discussion The Petition requests that the NRC issue a DFI seeking information on the potential for and monitoring of lquid effluents from the following operating and decommissioning reactors:
(1) commercial nuclear power reactors and (2) research and test reactors (RTRs). Because there is a clear distinction between the regulated communities and NRC programs for commercial nuclear power reactors and RTRs, the NRC specifically addresses each group in this Director's Decision.
- 1. Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors During te meetings on May 9 and June 21, 2006, NEI described an industry itiative that includes the participation by licensees for all commercial nuclear power reactors, both operating and decommissionirg. The initiative includes each licensee developing an action plan with the following elements:
Assess sources and pathways; Assess site geo-hydrobgy; and Assess the current site monitoring program.
Each icensee also will share operating experience and best practices related to the control of liquid effluents and increase reporting to the NRC and State or local governments. Most of the information related to the initiative would be available to the publi in documents such as the
-annual effluents release reports, which are submitted to the NRC.
An industry initiative, such as the one being undertaken to address the issue of groundwater contamination, defines a course of action for every licensee of an operating or decommissioning nuclear power reactor. The industry initiative was unanimously approved by the Chief Nuclear Officers for power reactor licensees and each licensee is contractually obligated as a member of NEI to implement the actions defined in the initiative. The NRC has and continues to encourage industry initiatives and other voluntary programs that result in licensees resolvig operational problems and technical issues. The NRC staff will continue to interact with NEI and licensees on the development and implementation of the initiative.
As part of the industry initiative, each icensee will be asked to complete a questionnaire providing details on potential sources of inadvertent releases of radioactive liquids, monitoring programs in place to detect unplanned releases of radioactive iquids, and past occurrences of inadvertent releases of radioactive liquids. The information collected from this questionnahie will be provided to the NRC and will be made avaiable to the Petitioners and other members of the pubic.
The NRC staff believes that the Industry initiative and related questionnaire will satisfy the NRC's current information needs. The NRC wil monitor the implementation of the action plans at power reactor faclities and will respond as appropriate to additional cases of groundwater contamination such as those referenced in the Petition. The NRC therefore has concluded that a DFI to licensees for operating and decommissioning power reactors is not warranted at this time. Other forms of generic communication that would require a written response from licensees were considered but likewise are deemed unnecessary at the current time. In accordance with established NRC procedures (e.g., NRR Office Instruction LIC-503,
'Generic Communications Affecting Nuclear Reactor Licensees'), the NRC staff may descnrbe in a Regulatory Issue Summary the agencys acceptance of the industry initiative as part of the longer term resolution of this issue.
Because the NRC's interactions with NEI and power reactor licensees will result in the information requested by the Petitioners being available to the public, the NRC considers the portion of the Petition related to power reactors to be granted in part The portion of the Petition requesting a DFI be used as the mechanism to obtain information is denied. The NRC will rely on the development and implementation of the industry initiative to ensure that the requested information is made available to the NRC, State and local governments, and the public. The NRC will revisit the need to issue p generic communication or take other action regarding power reactor icensees if problems arise with the implementation of the industry initiative or the NRC identifies additional concerns as a result of operating experience or activities such as the ongoing lessons learned task force.
- 2. Research and Test Reactors RTRs are not addressed by the industry initiative created to address the issue of groundwater contamination at operating and decommissioning commercial nuclear power reactors. The NRC staff therefore has assessed the icensed RTRs in terms of designs and operating characteristics, inventories of radioactive iquids, operating histories, and the potential for unplanned, uncontrolled releases of iquid radioactive effluents.
RTRs differ from commercial power reactors in several ways that significantly reduce the potential for and associated consequences of a release of radioactive liquid effluents. The first is the sheer size difference, which can best be exemplfied by icensed power levels.
As shown in Figure 1, operaling RTRs regulated by the NRC range in power levels from 5 watts to a maximum of 20 megawatts (MVM). In comparison, the reactor core of a typical power reactor has a thermal power level of 3,000 MW or more than a factor of 100 greater than the power level of the highest power-level RTR.
F~guro I 1:n*
H Cibr(R~fby PVALOVOI 10 In addition, most RTRs are operated as needed to support specific research or educational needs, while power reactors are generaly operated continuously between refueling and maintenance outages. Specifically, most RTRs operate for relatively shorttimes at power levels up to the licensed power. The low power levels together with the noncontrnuous operation of RTRs result ina much lower inventory of radioactive materials for RTRs than is associated with power reactors.
Another factor is that the volume of contaminated water at RTRs is much less than those routinely handled by power reactors. Further, the amount of inventory-mak eup water at RTRs to address evaporation and controlled leakage is wel known and relatively small.
Therefore, licensees will likely recognize even a small loss of water to the environment This characteristic introduces a practical defense against the release of liquid effluents that supplements the environmental monitoring requirements in NRC regulations and RTR Technical Specifications.
As part of the required programs, licensees assess the possibility of uncontrolled leakage of contaminated liquid and establish preventive measures and protective features.
NRC-icensed RTRs maintain radiological contamination of their iquids to a mininum (Le., generally well below the levels allowed for release to the environment). This is accomplished by maintaining water chemistry within specified limits in these low power, low temperature reactors to minmize fuel leakage, activation, and corrosion. Further, monitoring of radioactivity levels provides acceptable assurance that actions are taken to correct any problem to keep radioactivity levels low and provides confidence in understanding the magnitude and consequences of a release if it occurs.
To ensure that radiation hazards are identified, each icensee is required to make radiological surveys necessary to comply with the regulations and to evaluate the magnitude and extent of radiation levels and concentrations or quantities of radioactive material. The requirements and operating practices for RTRs provide assurance that radiological exposures to the pubic remain wel below the established regulatory limits and that conditions related to a release of radioactive material would be identified, evaluated and corrected. These measures eliminate or dramatically reduce the potential for groundwater contamination, such as occurred at Brookhaven National Laboratories and power reactor facb tes such as the Salem and Indian Point Nuclear Generating Stations.
Each licensee also is required to keep records of information important to the safe and effective decommissioning of the facity. Such information includes records of spils or other unusual occurrences involving the spread of contamination in and around the facility when significant contamination remains after performing the cleanup procedures or when there is reasonable likelhood that contaminants may have spread to inaccessible areas as in the case of possible seepage into porous materials. These controls and records evaluate If the facity can meet the radiological criteria for icense termination in 10 CFR Part 20, Subpart E,
'Radiological Criteria for License Termination."
Past operating practices and controls on some RTRs undergoing decommissioning have led to the discovery of radioactive materials outside the facility site boundaries. An example is the Plum Brook reactor previously operated by the National Aeronautical and Space Administration (NASA). The contamination near Plum Brook was discovered as part of the site characterization, decontaminatio n, and planned release of the site. Such activities have been or are being performed at the other RTRs being decommissioned to ensure compliance with the requirements 10 C.F.R. Part 20, Subpart E. Further, NRC has performed and will conti nue to perform confirmatory radiological surveys to ensure radiological criteria for license ternination are satisfied, including radiation from potential environmental releases of licensed material. For those RTRs being maintained in a safe storage condition (SAFESTOR) prior to active decommissioning (DECON), routine monitoring, similar to an operating RTR, is
-1o-sufficient to detect a loss of inventory that might lead to an uncontrolled release of iquid effluents.
Based on the previous discussion, the NRC staff finds that NRC-rensed RTRs pose a minimal risk for a significant release of contaminated Squid effluents. We therefore believe that a DFI or other generic action is not warranted to address the control of liquid effluents at operating or decommissioni ng RTRs and deny the portion of the Petition related to RTRs. The NRC staff will continue to inspect fac ilities to ensure they meet the mquirements for control of radioactive materials and contamination. Further, the NRC staff will continue to evaluate the need for site-specific and generic communications and inspections on RTRs. The NRC staff will incorporate, as needed, such discussions or inspections kfto its routine site-specific licensing and oversight activities.
Ill. Conclusion The NRC staff shares the concerns expressed by the Petitioners. The NRC staff is addressing the concerns related to commercial nuclear power reactors that are operating or undergoing decommissioning by interacting with NEI and specific icensees. Because the industry initiative will provide the Petit oners with the requested Information, the portion of the Petition related to power reactors is considered granted in pert even though the NRC win not use a DFI as the mechanism to obtain the information. The NRC denies the portion of the Petition related to RTRs because existing regulatory programs ensure that there is minimal risk for a significant release of contaminated lquid effluents and the NRC does not need additional information from the RTR licensees.
As provided in 10 CFR 2206(c), a copy of this DD will be fied with the Secretary of the Commission for the Commission to review. As provided for by this regulation, the decision will constitute the final action of the Commission 25 days after the date of the decision unless the Commission, on its own motion, institutes a review of the decision within that time.
Dated at Rockvle, Maryland, this th day of 2006.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION J. E. Dyer, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
2.206 Petition Dated January 25, 2006, as supplemented on February 2,22006 CC:
Aliance for Nuclear Responsib lity PO Box 1328 San Luis Obispo, CA93406 Frieda Berryhill 2610 Grendan Avenue Wlmington, DE 19802 Jon Block Attorney at Law 94 Main Street P.O. Box 566 Putney, VT 05346-0566 Lou Zeler Nuclear Campaign Coordinator Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League PO BOx 88 Glendale Springs, NC 28629 Jeffrey Brown 22 Mary Ann Driv Brick, NJ 08723 Deb Katz Citizens Awareness Network Box 83 Shelburne Falls, MA01370 Norm Cohen Executive Director Coalition for Peace and Justice 321 Barr Avenue Linwood, NJ 08221 Matt Baker Executive Director Envronment Colorado 153 VWynkoop Street, Suite 100 Denver, CO 80202 Holy Bins Field Director Florida Public Interest Research Group 26 E. Park Ave.
Tallahassee, FL 32301 Glenn Carroll Coordinatx)r Georgians Against Nuclear Energy PO Box 8574 Atianta, GA 31106 Sidney Goodman 158 Grandview Lane Mahwah, NJ 07430 Alan Muller Executive Drector Green Delaware Box 69 Port Penn, DE 19731 Ms. N. Kymn Harvin, Ph.D.
165 Edgewood Road Watchung, NJ 07069 Suzanne Leta Advocate New Jersey Public Interest Research Group 11 N. WIlow Street Trenton, NJ 08608 Jim Warren Executive Director North Carolina Waste Awareness &
Reduction Network PO Box 61051 Durham, NC 27715-1051 Dave Kraft Director Nuclear Energy Information Service PO Box 1637 Evanston, IL 60204-1637 Paul Gunter Director, Reactor Watchdog Project Nuclear Information and Resource Service 1424 16th Street NW, #404 Washington, DC 20036
cc:
David Masur Director PennEnvironment 1334 Walnut Street, 6th Floor Philadelphia, PA 19107 Mary Lampert Pilgrim Watch 148 Washington Street Duxbury, MA 02332 Dolores C. Pino, Esq.
7200 Wlson Terrace Morton Grove, IL 60053-1142 Michele Boyd Legislative Director, Energy Program Public Citizen 215 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE Washington. DC 20003 Mike Shriberg, Ph.D.
Director Public Interest Group in Michigan 103 E. Liberty Street, Suite 202 Ann Arbor, MI 48104 Lisa Rainwater van Suntum Indian Point Campaign Director Riverkeeper, Inc.
828 South Broadway Tarrytown, NY 10591 Jane Swanson Spokesperson and Member Board of Directors San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace P.O. Box 164 Pismo Beach, CA93448 Luke Metzger Advocate Texas Pubic Interest Research Group 700 West Avenue Austin, TX 78701 Eric Epstein Chairman TMI Alert 4100 Hillsdale Road Harrisburg, PA 17112 Norm Cohen Executive Director UNPLUG Salem Campaign 321 Barr Avenue Unwood, NJ 08221 Sandra Gavutis Executive Director C-10 Foundation Newburyport, MA 01950 Nancy Burton Connecticut Coalition Against Millstone 147 Cross Highway Reddcing Ridge, CT 06876 James P. Riccio Nuclear Policy Analyst Greenpeace 702 H Street, NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20001 Ralph Andersen Chief Health Physicist Nuclear Energy Institute 1776 I Street, NW Suite 400 Washington. DC 20006-3708 Sean Bushart Electric Power Research Institute 3420 H~lview Avenue Pa21 Alto, CA94304 Test, Research, and Training Reactor Newsletter University of Florida 202 Nuclear Sciences Center Gainesville, FL 32611