ML19347D742
| ML19347D742 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/13/1981 |
| From: | Hendrie J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Lujan M HOUSE OF REP., SCIENCE, SPACE & TECHNOLOGY (FORMERLY |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19347D737 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-45FR31393, RULE-PR-60 NUDOCS 8103261199 | |
| Download: ML19347D742 (2) | |
Text
- prng i
UNITED STATES
~g 8,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIMilON g
- g WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 t
Q *.... "o$
March 13, 1981 CHAIRMAN i
t The Honorable Manuel Lujan Subcoamittee on Energy Research and Production Committee on Science and Technology United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C.
20515
Dear Congressman Lujan:
This is in response to your request that the Commission delay issuance of 10 CFR Part 60 -
" Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in Geologic Repositories -- Licensing Procedures" until the current administration has had an opportunity to make anticipated policy changes regarding the disposal of spent fuel.
The Commission has considered your request, and shares your desire to continue a cooperative relationship between the NRC and the Executive Branch, while preserving its statutorily mandated independence.
For the reasons discussed below, we have concluded that issuance of 10 CFR Part 60 will advance the federal program for disposing of high-level radioactive waste and will neither further delay the final solution of the waste disposal issue nor increase its ultimate cost.
Accordingly, the Commission, by unanimous vote, approved 10 CFR Part 60 as a final rule on February 5, 1981.
l 1
I Your letter characterizes Part 60 as being predicated on the l
l disposal of spent fuel.
Because you believe Ebat the disposal of spent fuel requires more stringent performance criteria on geologic media than the disposal of reprocessed waste, you are concerned that Part 60 may be too demanding regarding the need to character-ize alternative repository sites for the purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
In addition, yo 1 indicated your view daat the characterization of alternative sites under Part 60 would be more stringent Chan provided for in H.R. 8378.
Part 60 establishes the general procedures for licensing a high-level waste facility.
Technical criteria for disposal will be provided in a separate rule.
Part 60 is not predicated on the disposal of spent fuel.
Even if the current Administration modifies the national waste management program, we believe that the rule will still be suitable for whatever types of geologic t0003261 \\ 4'$
6
l l
The Hon. Manuel Lujan 2
i repositories and waste forms are. contemplated.
The Commission believes daat this rule can be rea,dily amended if future needs indicate that changes are needed. 'Accordingly, we do not believe that issuance of the rule should have been deferred to await possible new policy statements on the disposal of radioactive waste.
As for the requirements for characterizing alternative repository sites for the purposes of NEPA, the procedures established by the rule are not based on any particular form of radioactive waste.
The procedures recognize that a conservative approach to licensing is appropriate because a repository would be the first facility of its kind.
Also, because disposal technology is rapidly developing, the procedures provide for NRC involvement at the research and development stage at several alternative sites.
Accordingly, the l
procedures are designed to provide the Commission with a sufficient number of alternatives to arrive at a reasoned decision as to whether to grant a construction authorization.
Although these procedures require a sizeable initial investment of resources, the Commission believes daat in the long run this rule will provide the most expeditious and economical procedures for licensing a waste repository, consistent with protection of the public health and safety.
Moreover, these procedures are consistent with H.R.
8378, which recognized that DOE must provide the NRC with sufficient information to allow the Commission to reach a reasoned decision on health, safety, and environmental issues.
Finally, these procedures will ensure that the public is provided with a reasoned basis for the final choice of a repository site.
l Thus, because the procedures for site characterization are designed to satisfy regulatory needs independent of the waste fonn, we do l
not believe daat issuance of this rule should be deferred.
In summary, the Commission believes that this rule is equally applicable to licensing any disposal facility, regardless of the form of radioactive waste.
Thus, there is no reason to delay issuance of this rule to await possible policy changes regarding the waste form chosen for disposal.
Delay in issuing the rule now could have the undesirable effect of slowing the momentum j
recently developed in pursuing a national waste program.
We appreciate your interest in the Commission's work, and we will keep the Congress fully and currently informed about development of NRC's regulatory approach to nuclear waste management.
m l
Sincerely, I
l Josep M. Hendrie s s I
..