ML20006C469
| ML20006C469 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/31/1990 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL (OIG) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| OIG-89A-9, NUDOCS 9002080076 | |
| Download: ML20006C469 (21) | |
Text
.
s l-L f-%,,,
%....l.l i
)
J l
OFFICE OF THE
)
INSPECTOR GENERAL U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION T_
l Review of NRC Activities u
Relating to Low-Level Waste Disposa l
l
?
V o
JANUARY 1990 01G 69A-9 hkh,'
j,'f1 I
x.
Dc
/
'c UNITED STATES
[ h"vf [g g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o y%
f.
E WASHINGTON. D.C. 20H6 r
e g
k*#
I JAN I 8 1993 CFFICE OF THE
. lNSPECTOR GENERAL j
MEMORANDUM FOR: Chairman Carr Commissioner Roberts Commissioner Rogers Comissioner Curtiss Comissioner Remick FROM:
David C. Williams Inspector General Office of the Inspector General 1
SUBJECT:
REVIEW OF NRC ACTIVITIES RELATED TO LOW-LEVEL WASTE DISPOSAL Attached is our report on the results of our review of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) activities related to low-level waste disposal. We conducted our review at NRC Headquarters from May 1989 through September 1989.
The objectives of the review were to: (1) assess the progress of the agency in implementing the provisions of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 (LLRWPAA); (2) determine the effectiveness of the NRC staff in providing assistance and support to the States in developing and licensing low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities; and, (3) survey representatives of the States and regional compacts to determine whether the i
assistance being provided to them by NRC is adequate.
FINDINGS-The LLRWPAA requires hRC to provide States ano regional compacts with regula-tory assistance in their efforts to develop low-level radioactive waste l
disposal facilities and to license such facilities once they are established.
The provisions of the LLRWPAA require NRC to take specific actions including developing guidance to be used by States and regional compacts in petitioning the NRC for a license to operate a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility. The< staff has developed such guidance and, although no petitions for such licenses are expected to be filed until 1990, appears to be ready to process such petitions when they are submitted. The staff has also taken steps to implement the other specific actions required to be taken by NRC, including the publishing of other regulatory guidance and technical information. We also found in talking with representatives from the Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors and the Low-level Waste Forum, two groups that represent the States and regional compacts on low-level waste issues, that those groups are satisfied with NRC's efforts to assist the L*-
States.
L i
i 1
i 2
CONCLUSIONS On the basis of our review, we believe the staff has made good progress in implementing the provisions of the LLRWPAA.
It also appears that the staff is prepared to perform licensing reviews when tho States and regional compacts begin to submit licensing applications. Because we found no particular area in which we believe the staff needs to make improvements, this report contains no recommendations regarding the NRC's low-level waste program.
Because the report contains no recommendations, we did not ask the Executive Director for Operations to formally comment on a draft of the report. We did, however, ask officials in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards and the State, local and Indian Trit,es Program. Office of Governmental and Public Affairs, to informally review a craft and provide comments. We considered those comments in preparing the final version of this report.
M (.
b'^ 9 David C. Williams Inspector General Office of the Inspector General
Attachment:
As stated cc w/ attachment:
J. Taylor, EDO H. Thompson, EDO S. Chilk, SECY W. Parler, OGC H. Denton, GPA J. Lieberman, OE T. Murley, NRR E. Jordan, AEOD E. Beckjord, RES R. Bernero, NMSS W.-Russell, R1 S. Ebneter, R!l A. B. Davis, Rlli R. Martin, RIV J. Martin, RV l.
J. Blaha, EDO i
L. Hiller,' ICC 1
L l
l
7 i
t i:("
Table of Contents i
C Page INTRODUCTION 1
===.
Background===
1 p..
T-Legislative Authority 2
- Low-Level Waste Disposal Management 3
r' Regional Compacts 3
Scope' 4
SUMMARY
OF FINDINGS 5
Implementation of the Provisions of the LLRWPAA 5
Exemption of Waste Streams from hRC Regulation 5
Establishment of'Frocedures and Technical Capability for Reviewin5 License Applications 5
Identification and Issuance of Requirements for Licensing Alternative Disposal Methods 6
Granting of Emergency Access 6
Licensing ~of Disposal _ Facilities for Greater Than Class C Waste 6
Transmittal of Certifications of Governors 7
Assessment of Support Role 7
Description of Functions Performed by NRC 7
Assistance Provided to States 8
Review of Low-level Radioactive Waste Research Projects 8
CONCLUSION 9
AGENCY COMMENTS 10 1
J k
09[ ~
~
,.g..
p<
- c. :4 2
t Appendix A - HRC Required Actions by LLRWPAA Appendix B - Schedule of Supplemental Actions i
Nec6ssary or Prudent to implement Provisions of LLRWPAA n
Appendix C - Map of the Low-Leve1' Radioactive j
/
F-Waste Compacts as of October 1989 l
)
I t
.t I
s 4
0 8
P i R-
7-REVIEW OF NRC ACTIVITIES RELATED TO LOW-LEVEL WASTE DISPOSAL INTRODUCTION The Office of the Inspector General (OIG), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has completed a review of NRC activities related to the disposal of low-level radioactive waste. NRC's overall Low-Level Waste Management Program is administered by the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS). The low-Level Waste Program consists of four elements:
(1) low-level waste disposal licensing and inspection (2) uranium recovery facility licensing and inspection, (3) uranium mill tailings remedial actions and (4) decommissioning. Our review focused only on those activities related to the disposal of low-level waste and the licensing of low-level waste disposal facilities.
NRC's activity under " low-level waste disposal licensing and inspection" consists primarily of implementing the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 (LLRWPAA) and the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 The LLRWPAA governs most low-level waste disposal facility development in the United States. While the LLRWPAA contains provisions that require NRC to take several specific actions in a number of areas, it is the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 which grants NRC the authority to license disposal facilities. Our review did not focus on NRC's authority under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 but rather on NRC's implementation of the provisions of the LtRWPAA.
i
Background
Low-level waste is defined as radioactive material that is not high-level waste, spent nuclear fuel or by-product material (as defined in Section 11c.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954).
Low-level waste is generally classified into three categories:
(1) Class A low-level waste, which is generally considered to be safe after 100 years; (2) Class B after 300 years; and (3) Class C after 500 years.
In the United States, low-level waste is generated by more than 23,000 entities licensed either by NRC or agreement states.
It is estimated that these licensees generate between one million and 1.5 million cubic feet of low-level waste annually. Currently, there are three sites at which this waste can be disposed of.
These sites are located near Barnwell, South Carolina, and at Beatty, Nevada, and Hanford, Washington.
Concern over both the fact that disposal capacity was limited to three states and the health ano safety of the public in those States, led to the passage of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980 (LLRWPA). The LLRWPA set forth the Federal policy for the disposal of low-level radioactive waste. Under it, each State was given the responsibility for providing for the availability of disposal capacity required to dispose of radioactive waste generated within its borders, except for waste generated as a result of certain defense activities. The LLRWPA also gave States permission to enter into regional compacts for the purpose of establishing and operating regional disposal facilities.
I
- r..
2 legislative Authority Although the LLRWPA set forth a Federal policy for the disposal of low-level waste, it left many questions unanswered regarding the establishment and regulation of disposal facilities. Consequently, the Low-Level Radioactive Weste Policy Amencments Act (LLRWPAA) was passed in 1985.
This statute reaffirmed the States' responsibility for the disposal of low-level waste and retained the provision for States to join together in compacts to develop regional low-level waste facilities.
It also estabitsbed penalties and a series of milestones to be met by the States to assure the development of new low-level waste facilities (see Appendix A).
While the main purpose of the LLRWPAA was to improve procedures for implementing compacts providing for establishing and operating regional facilities for the disposal of low-level radioactive waste, it est6blished several specific actions NRC is required to take.
Although the primary emphasis of the LLRWPAA is on the development of low-level waste disposal facilities by States, it does not relieve NRC of its licensing and regulatory responsibilities granted under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.
Rather, it requires NRC to develop and issue technical guidance and provide other regulatory support functions to the States. More specifically.
NRC must:
1.
Estrblish standards and procedures and develop the technical capability for acting upon petitions to exempt specific watte streams from NRC reguletion by July 1906.
2.
Establish procedures cod develop the technical capaH lity for processing license applications by January 1987.
3.
Identify methods other than shallow land buHal for the disposal of low-level radioactive waste and issue technical guidance on the licensing of these alternative methods by January 1987.
4.
Identify and publish all relevant technical information that must be submitted to NRC in order to pursue an alternative disposal method, together with the technical requirements for licensing alternativt disposal facilities by January 1988.
l 5.
Determine whether emergency access is necessary after receiving a l
request for emergency access to a disposal site, within 45 days of the receipt of that request.
NRC must also designate an appropriate non-Federal disposal facility or facilities to receive wastes found to require emergency access, notify the affected State (s) and compact comissions with the designated facilities, and describe the waste and the minimum volume and duration of disposal required. The i
requesting State must also be notified if emergency access has been granted.
i 6.
License facilities fcr the disposal of low-level radioactive waste generated from NRC or Agreement State licensed activities having radionuclides in concentrations which exceed the limits established by NRC for class C waste under 10 CFR 61.
i-3 7.
Transmit to Congress any Governor's certification that his or her State will provide for the management, storage, and disposal of low-level waste after 1992.
In addition to the specific actions NRC is required to take, a number of provisions of the LLRWPAA make other NRC measures necessary or prudent, or affect the timing of required actions. A summary of those provisions, along with s statement on actions taken by NRC, can be found in Appendix B.
Low-Level Waste Disposal Management Much of the NRC's Low-level Waste Management Program is handled directly by the Division of Low-Level Waste Management and Decommissioning (DLLWMD), NMSS.
This Division directs the NRC's program for licensing, inspecting and regulating the treatment of disposal of low-level waste. The Division's work includes virtually all of the technical aspects of low-level waste management.
The development and issuance of technical guicance, for example, is administered by DLLWMD.
DLLWMD also deals directly with States and regional compacts in those States that are not Agreement States on such things as training and technical assistance.
in those States that are Agreement States, however, DLLWMD acniinisters the agency's low-level waste program with the assistance of the State Local and Indian Tribe Program (SLlTP) of the Office of Governmental ano Public Affairc (GPA).
As a matter of policy, NRC has chosen, pursuant to its authority unc'er Section 2?4 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, to reling.nsh its ruulatory authority over disposal facilities to certain States anoer its Stite Agreement; Procrem.
This regulatory authority wts granted to Sr6tes upur. request and ircludes licensing and inspectien activities relstfe3 to tJe land disposel of low-level waste. While this regulatory authority was relir,cuished to qualified Stues e
requesting it, NRC retaint>d regulctory responsibility over the disposal of low-level waste for those States which have chosen not to be Agreement States for purposes of low-level waste. The rslinquishment of regulatory authority, however, does not relieve NRC of its re3ponsibilities under the LtRWPAA and Atomic Energy Act of 1954 Even in those cases where States are granted regulatory authority NRC must still assure that those States are capable of regulating such facilities and have programs that are compatible with NRC's.
The State Agreements Program is administered by the Director, SLITP, and encompasses a wide range of activities, only one of which is the adminis-tration of agreements between the States and NRC on low-level waste. Under the State Agreements Program, SLITP performs annual reviews of the regulatory l
programs of Agreement States to assure they remain technically adequate and I
compatible with NRC's regulatory requirements. Thus, while Agreement States will be performing licensing reviews and inspections of low-level radioactive L-waste disposal sites, NRC will review the administration of such activities by Agreement States.
Regional Compacts States are allowed to enter into regional compacts for the purpose of develop-ing regional disposal facilities. As of October 1989, nir.a compacts involving l
l
4 i
I I
43 States had been establisheo (see Appendix C).
The remaining 9 States had not yet decided to join a compact. Generally speaking, onc or more member states of each compact is designated by the compact comission to be the host state. The host state is the one in which the disposal facility developed by a compact will bt located. The facility in the host state will be regulated either by the State itself, if an Agreement State, or by NRC, if a non-agreement State.
In either case, the facility will bt subject to regulations promulgated by hRC or with regulations promulgated by States which are compatible with those of the NRC.
Scope O!G's review was conducted during the period May 1989 through September 1989.
The purpose of our review was to assess NRC's implementation of the provisions of the LLRWPAA applicable to NRC. Our objectives were to: (1) assess the progress of the agency in implementing the provisions of the LLRWPAA; (2) determine the effectiveness of the NRC staff in providing assistance and support to the States; ano (3) survey representatives of the States and regionel compacts to get a perspective on whether the assistance being 1
provided by NRC is adequate.
We reviewed the LLRWPA and LLRWPAA, reviewed reports and other documentation regarding kRC's activities related to low-level waste disposal, and ex6 mined budgetary information. We interviewed NRC staff members responsible for the various aspects of the program. including the Director, NMSS, the Director and Branch Chsefs of the Division of Low-Level Watto Management and 3
Decomisstoning, the Direstor and the Assistant Directors of State Agreenent Programs and State Local and Indian 3 elations, SM TP4 We also peHermed limited reviews of SLITP's functiert twformed in granting states a5reement status for low-level waste disposal purposes, and the process of pnitoring the regulatory progr6ms of states for technical adequacy anJ compatibility with NRC's regulatory programs.
In addition, we interviewed representatives from tne low-Level Radiotetive Waste Forum and the Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors.
The Low-Level R6dioactive Waste Forum was established on behalf of the states to l
address the states' concerns in the development of low-level waste disposal capacity. The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Forum is an association of representatives of states and regions established to facilitate state and compact commission implementation of the LLRWPA and LLRWPAA and to promote the objectives of low-level radioactive waste regional compacts. The Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors is an organization whose membership is comprised of the Directors of State Radiation Control Programs in host states and which concerns itself with overall radiological safety including the discussion and treatment of the technical aspects of low-level waste disposal.
Lastly, we performed a limited review of research projects regarding low-level waste disposal being administered by the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research IThe District of Columbia and Puerto Rico are included in this total as l
States.
L
.i.
5 (RES). This review was performed to assess the relevancy of those projects to NRC's compliance with exposure standards to be promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
SUMARY OF FINDINGS The results of our review indicate that NRC has made good progress in imple.
menting the provisions of the LLRWPAA which establish milestone dates to be met by NRC. NRC has met these milestone dates and is continuing its efforts to comply with the provisions of the LLRWPA. NRC has not yet begun reviewing license applications because no licensing applications are expected to be filed before 1990.
Our review of the provisions of the LLRWPAA that apply to NRC indicates that the objective of these provisions is not to have NRC delay the process of low-level waste disposal facility development. NRC, as a whole, has taken a pro-active approach towards developing regulatory guidance and in working with other Federal agencies, namely EPA and the Departa nt of Energy (DOE), in fulfilling its requirements established in the 8.LRWPAA to develop disposal capacity.
This fact, coupled with the indication that States are satisfied with the regulatory assistance and support provided by the NRC, leads us to believe that NRC's efforts have not hampered or delayed the efforts of the States in their developnent of disposal fecilities.
Bccouse we identified no area in which we believe the agency needs to inprove, this report contains nc recommendations.
The following sections of the report identify actions taken by NRC to carry-out its responsibilitics under the LLRWPAA.
llaDiementatio,n, of the Provisions of the LLRWPAA The LLRWPAA requires NRC to take specific ections in several arces. These actions include the development of guidance on various topics, identification of alternative methods of disposal, and the publishing of technical informa-tion. A more detailed description of the actions recoir.ed and a discussion of actions taken by NRC follows.
l Exemption of Weste Streams from NRC Regulation Sections 10(a) and (b) of the LLRWPAA requircs NRC to establish standards and procedures and to develop the technical capability for acting upon petitions to exempt specific waste streams from NRC regulation by July 1936. A final rule containing the standards and procedures mandated was published in the Federal Register on August 29, 1986 (51 FR 43367) (Appendix K). The agency has also developed a computer code for use by potential licensees when submitting petitions for exemptions.
Establishment of Procedures and Technical Capability for Reviewing License Applications Section 9(1) of the LLRWPAA requires NRC to establish standards and procedures and to develop the technical capability for processing licensing applications by January 1987. The staff does not anticipate receivint sny license applica-tions before 1990. Nonetheless, NRC has developed and issued a " Standard Review Plan for the Review of a License Application for a low-Level Radioac-tive Waste Disposal Facility" and a " Standard Format and Content..." guide l
l
L 6
for use by prospective licensees when applying for b license to operate a low-level radioactive waste disposal facility, in addition, the staff has developed estimates of staff resources and technical expertise required to
_ perform application reviews.
Identification and Issuance of Requirements for Licensing Alternative Disposal Methods Section 8(a) of the LLRWPAA requires NRC, in consultation with the States anc other interested parties, to identify, by January 1987, methods other than shallow land burial for the disposal of low-level radioactive waste, and establish and publish technical guidnce regarding licensing of facilities that use such methods. Sectiot: 8(b) requires the NRC to identify and publish by January 1988 all relevant technical information regard'ng the methods identified pursuant to subsection (a) that a State or compact must provide to the Comission in order to pursue such methods, together with the technical requirements that such facilities must meet.
In December of 1986, the NRC published a position statement identifying end describing specific methods of disposal being considered at that time as alternatives to shallow land burial. The position statement also provided general guidance on these methods of disposal and recommended procedures that would improve and simplify the licensing process, in addition, the position statement identified a contractor report that addresses the applicability of 10 CFR 61, " Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioective Waste " to a range of generic di,posal ccncepts and which provides tachnical guioance 4, hat the NRC staff intends to use fur these concepts. Subseqyently, in January 1988, NRC's "$tandard Roylew Plan for the Review of a License Applica.
tion for a Low-Level Rac'ioactive Weste bisporal Facility" end itt,
- Standard Format and Content Guide..." were re vised to f ncorporate guidance regardug the submission of license applicMione for alternative disposal methodL Granting of Emergency Access Under Section 5(t)(3)(B) of the LLRWPAA, any state in which a regional dis-posal facility is locateo may, under M rtain conditions, prohibit the disposal of low-level waste generated outside of the compact region in the regiorps disposal facility. Section (6)(a) authorizes NRC to grant emergency access to i
any regional disposal facility or non-federal disposal facility that is not 6 member of a compact for specific low-level waste, to generators of low-level waste, if necessary, to eliminate an immediate and serious threat to the public health and safety or common defense and security. UnderSection6(c) of the LLRWPAA, NRC must, within 45 days after receiving a request for emergency access to a disposal site, complete determinations on whether such access is necessary, in March 1989, NRC issued a final rule on the require-l.
ments for granting emergency access. This rule set forth the criteria and procedures that will be used by the Commission to determine if emergency access to a low-level waste facility should be granted.
Licensing of Disposal Facilities for Greater Than Class C Waste Section 3(b)(1) of the LLRWPAA assigns the responsibility for disposing of low-level waste with concentrations of radionuclides that exceed the limits established by the Commission-for Class C waste, to the Federal government.
l l
I l
-~
t 7
l l
l Section 3(b)(2) requires that all wastes designated a Federal responsibility under Subparagraph 3(b)(1)(D) be disposed of in a facility licensed by NRC.
DOE has assumed responsibility for the disposal of greater than Class C waste.
Such wastes are to be stored in a deep geologic waste repository unless disposal elsewhere has been approved by the NRC. NRC has also defined greater than Class C waste by establishing an upper limit for low-level weste.
In addition, the NRC staff is continuing its efforts to work with EPA and DOE on issues related to greater than Class C waste.
Transmittal of Certifications of Governors l
NRC is required by Section S(e)(1)(E) of the LLRWPAA to transmit to Congress in 1990, any certifications received from Governors of States that their States will provide for the storage and disposal of low-level waste ef ter 1992. As of the conclusion of our review, no certifications had been filed by Governors. The staff has issued a letter to Governors of States urging them l
to file any required certifications as soon as possible. The staff has also issued guidance outlining the format and content of certifications to be filed.
Assessment of Support Role The LLRWPAA gives the States primary responsibility for the development of low-level waste disposal capacity.
In doing so, it relegates NRC to the role of providing regulatory assistance and support to the States. NRC has primary responsibility for licensing and regulating such facilities once they are developed; hDwaver: NPC has cetermined that even those functions can be performed by the States pursuant to S(ction 274 of the Atomic Energy Act.
Tnis relinquishment of regulatory authority under Section 274 is to be accomplished through the NRC's State Agreement Program. Under the Stett Agreement Program, states will be granted licensing and inspection huthority for low-level waste repositories within their boundaries only if their progrsms are determinec adequate by the NRC to protect public health e w 46ftty ar.d compatible with NRC's regulatory program. The focus of HRC's efforts in this area is to assure that the regulatory agencies of those States are capable of performing the required regulatory functions.
Description of Functions Performed by NRC For the most part, the functions performed by NRC in providing support and assistance to States depend on whether or not a State becomes an Agreement State.
For States that do not become Agreement States, NRC, through NMSS, provides technical assistance, training and regulatory guidance.
NRC also reviews licensing applications to operate disposbl facilities in non-Agreement States and inspects operations at sites in those States.
If a State wishes to become an Agreement State for the purpose of regulating its own low-level radioactive waste disposal facility, NRC must assure that each such State's regulatory program is adequate to protect public health and safety and their regulatory programs are compatible with NRC's. Thest functions are performed by NRC's regional office staffs under the policy direction of the Director State, local and Indian Tribe Programs (SLITP),
Office of Governmental and Public Mfairs (GPA). Although the Director, SLITP
8 is responsible for noministering the NRC's State Agreement Progrta, the technical aspects of regultting low-level waste disposal f6cilities ren, bins under the purview of the Director NMSS.
Assistance Provided To States NRC's role of providing assistance and support to States encompasses those activities aimed at providing training and technical assistance to States, providing regulatory and policy guidance to States, and collecting and publishing inform 6 tion related to low-level waste disposal. Our review of functions being performed by DLLWMD, NMSS, and SLITP, GPA, shows that these two organiz6tions have done a good job in coordinating and providing assistance to States in regards to low-level waste disposal.
We found, for example, that the staff of SLITP has conducted training sessions on low-level waste issues and has funded training programs sponsored specifically for State agency personnel. DLLWMD has issued a number of regulatory guides for ust by -
NRC and the states in regulating low-level radioactive waste facilities.
We contacted both the Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors and the Low-level Radioactive Waste Forum to obtain the views of States regarding l
NRC's role of assisting the States.
These two organizations address low-level waste issues on behalf of the States and regional compacts.
Represent 6tives of these two organizations told us that, generally speaking, the States have I
been pleased with the assistance received from NRC. The rcpresentatives stated they believe NRC has done a good job of keeping States ano Compacts appraised of current developments, establishing and Leeping open lines of communicatinn, and responding tc questions and requests for assistance. Due 1
responsts, when co. Glad witn the results of our review of activities heir.g L
performed by SLITP and DLWG, have led us to concitde that tbc actiont of the l
staff apoear to be consistent with the objectives of the L!RWPAA.
Revior of io.* Level Radioactive Waste Research Projec,ts l
l tRC has proposed spending c little more then $15.6 million on research con-fi ming tha safet/ cf low-level waste disposal over the five year period beginning in Fiscal Yoar 1989 and ending in riscal Year 1993. WL reviewed the renarch procram to determine whether the end product? generated froni the research could be affected if EPA established radiation release st,ancards that are more stringent than NRC's existing standards specified in 10 CFR. Part 61 of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), " Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste," establishes NRC's regulations for land disposal of radioactive waste, and the procedures, criteria ano terms and J
. conditions upon which the Commission issues licenses for the disposal of radioactive waste containing by-product, source and special nuclear material received from other persons.
In particular, 10 CFR 61.41 " Protection of the General Population from Releases of Radioactivity" states that:
Concentrations of radioactive material which may be released to the general environment in ground water, surface water, air, soil, plants or animals must not result in an annual dose exceeding an equivalent of 25 millirems to the whole body... and 25 millirems to any other orgen of any member of the public, i
t
I, 9
The EPA is charged with the task of establishing environmental standaros in regard to the release of hazardous wastes into the general environment.
EPA i
has proposed issuing star.dards for management of low-level radioactive and naturally occuring and accelerator-produced materials waste that would impose a 4 millirem per year limit on doses to incividuals at disposal site boundaries through the groundwater pathway only. NRC has opposed EPA's i
issuance of the proposed standard, citing it as duplicative of NRC's existing regulations, unnecessary to protect public health and safety and potentially j
extremely disruptive to the site selection and development process the Statts are conducting under rigorous schedules set by the LLRWPAA.
1 I
At the time our field work was being performed, EPA's proposed standard was undergoing review by the Office of Management and Budget (0M3). When contacted, an official at OMB stated that the proposed standard had been under review for some time and that OMB had not made a decision on whether it should be approved. He stated there was an ongoing debate as to which standard is more feasibic. The official added that given the direction of the debate, it is unlikely, in his opinion, that EPA's proposed standard will be approved.
We have, however, performed a review of the planned low-level radioactive waste research projects to determine their nature and potential for invalidation should OMB approve EPA's issuance of the 4 millirems per year l
standard. We found that the objective of these projects, for the most part, is to develop evaluation criteria in the form of models and statistics to be used in reviewing license applications. Based on our review of the objectives containco in work statements prepared on each research project, we have determined that these projects are not intended to design materials to meet a specific perturmance objective.
Therefore, it appears that end products generated from these projects would not be affected materially, regardless of which standard is 6dopted.
Because it does not appear that issulace of a more stringent standard by EPA is likely or that the nature of planned low-level wasty research projects would be significantly effected by the issuance of EPA's standard, we a*e raaking no recommendation regarding this Matter.
00gCLUS G On the basis of cur review of the agency's actions, we believe the NRC hw taken appropriate steps to implereht the applicable sections of the LLRWPAA.
It appears NRC has met all of its milestones-established so far and in doing so has provided the regulatory assistance needed by the States in facilitating the development of low-level waste disposal facilities.
In addition, it does not appear that planned research projects would be affected significantly if EPA issues guidance establishing a more stringent generally applicable environmental release standard than that contained in NRC regulations.
Because we found no instance where we believe NRC needs to improve its efforts in implementing the applicable sections of the LLRWPAA, or in providing regulatory guidance to States and compacts, we are making no recommendation regarding those efforts.
c 10 AGENCY COMMENTS On December 7, 1989, we provided draft copies of this report to NMSS and SLITP, GPA, for informal review and comment. Because the report contained no recommendations for corrective action, we did not ask the EDO for formal comments. However, we did ask the Director, DLLWMD, NMSS, and the Director, SLITP..GPA, for comments to assure the accuracy of the report's contents. On December 20, 1989, we met with officials from SLITP and NMSS ano on December 22, 1989 met with a representative from NRC's Office of General Counsel, who had been provided a copy of the draft by SLITP, to discuss the report. As a result of these two discussions, we have revised our report where we deemed appropriate to take into account those comments received.
b 9
APPENDIX A en 1
Figure i Key Site Development MRestones sees iets ite7 ises ines teos teet I sees iets itse isee sees i
l I(EY milestone 8 1
I States avst ratify Caspect legislatten er certify latent to develop a site ($ec. S(e)(1)(A)),
8 Accesstoentstingsitesmaybedented(Sec.$(e)(2)(A)(ft)).
8 States / Compacts must develop a siting plan (Sec. 5(e)(1)(B)].
Access to eststing sites may be dented [Sec $(e)(f)(t)(it)).
Qt A complete 11 cense appitcation must be filed or certtftcation provided to the NRC that the $ tate will manage the waste after 12/31/92(Sec.5(e)(1)(C)).
Access to entsting sites may be dented [5ec. $(e)(2)(C)).
All Itcense applications swst be filed and determined to be conq)1ste (Sec. Sle)(1)(3)).
State /Capact assumes responsibility )for low level waste disposal or avst repay a portion of the surcharpe to the generators (Sec. 5(d (2)(C)).
State / Compact avat take title /possessten of low level weste [5oc. S(d)(f)(C)).
Fgue ; adRC Actions Required by LLRWPAA
~
ises I sees I iser isse I tese I sese I sees I seen 1 issenew sees I isse o
e;RC REQUIRED N
ACTIONS i
Section 2:
Classify all wastes as either low-level weste er hi completion likely end of 1988 or beginning of 1909)gh-level waste (no date specified, Section 3:
License Federal disposal of above Cless-C waste (no date speciflod).
.ySection5:
Transmit State certifications to Congress (no date specified).
C y section si titabitsh_ emersency eccess procedures and criteria (completten likely stes).
ySectionSet identify alternative disposal methods and issue technical putdance (met 12/86).
]Sectionab:
Estabitsh technical requirements for alternative disposal methoes (t/88 specified).
y sectson 9:
Estabitsh Itcensing review procedures and capablitty (met 1/s7).
-ysectionto:
titabitsh standards ano procedures for wastes below reeutatory coreers (7/86).
R NUREG-1213 2
APPEND 1X B SCHEDULE OF SUPPLEMENTAL ACTIONS NECESSARY OR PRUDENT TO IMPLEMENT PROVISIONS OF Lt.RWPAA (1) Petitions for Emergency Access Access to an operating disposal facility could have been denied by the sited States on January 1,1989. In anticipation of the possibility that the January 1989 milestone would not be met, NRC issued final regulations on petitions for emergency access on January 31, 1989. These regulations became effective March 6, 1989.
1 (2) Financial Assurance Requirements for Extended Storage To asture that extended storage does not becoms de-facto disposal if a licensee becomes intolkent, NRC e4y find it necessary to reemke financial assurance requirements for such storage. The problem of such insolvencies cowld arise during tne time between JcNary 1,1987, when access to a disposal site may firn Le deniod, end January 1,19'M when States that have not i
provided for disposal are required to take title to anti gc6 session of low-level waste generated within their borders.
' s.
(3) Disposal of Greater Than Class C Waste
'The NRC staff has reviewed the Department of Energy's (DOE's) report to Congress on recomendations for disposal of waste exceeding Class C concentrations ("Recomendations for Management of Greater-Than-Class C l
l
-e
.ww
+m--
.,-.,yvwc ww
,w'e-
. -+
i 2
Low level Radioactive Waste." DOE /NE-0077) and suggested to DOE that DOE consider disposal of all greater than Class C (GTCC) waste in a high-level waste (HLW) repository subject to licensing requirements established by NRC.
(4) Criteria for the Acceptance of GTCC l
DOE has assumed responsibility for the safe disposal of GTCC and has announced a plan for accepting and disposing of such wastes.
Pending acceptance by 00E, licensees may need to store GTCC waste for an indefinite period. NRC is interacting with licensees and DOE on DOE's development of criteria for the acceptance of GTCC waste for storage prior to disposal.
(5) Definition of Low-level Waste NRC has clarified the definition of low-level waste to identify the upward bound of low-level wastes having radionu;:lides exceeding the Class C limits.
This clarification was done as part of the H.laraking effort on the definttfora of high-level wasta.
(6) Encouragement of Licensees for loss of Access t
L The several opportunities for sited States to curtail access to their fccilities may make it prudent for NRC staff to consider measures to encourage the preparedness of licensees for such losses of access and to ensure the adequacy of alternative means of waste management. This preparedness appears the more advisable in light of the stringent requirements for obtaining emergency access to disposable sites under Section 6.
t
3 n
L*'
(7) Guidance for Emergency Access p
l-Given'the added costs, uncertainties, and limits on access to currently operating sites, there may be an increase in the number of licensing actions requested for onsite storage, onsite disposal under 10 CFR 20.302, incineration and other forms of treatment or volume reduction. NRC staff believes that sufficient licensing guidance is in place for decision-making in these areas.
(8) Possession of Wastes by State Agencies Any State agency that take title to or possession of wastes after 1992 under Section 5(d)(2)(C) will require a license from the NRC or from an Agreement State agency. NRC staff is working closely with State agencies expecting to assume these responsibilities
, epare them for the job of managing those responsibilities.
(9) Potential for Conflict Interest Given NRC's and DOE's mutual interest in cooperating with one another for accurate and up-to-date information, NRC staff has had to exercise care to ensure that this interest does not compromise the arm's length relationship it will need to maintain with DOE as a prospective licensee for disposal of wastes having radionuclides exceeding Class C limits.
.~
7 4
l f
i.
A.
.(10) Regulation of Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials t'-
J
,e Because the LLRWPAA does not address the jurisdictional questions of naturally.
' occurring or accelerator-produced radioactive materials (NARM), the NRC staff believes it must proceed on the assumption that it is not required at this
~
time to consider possible future NRC regulatory requirements for these wastes in providing "all relevant infomation" on alternative disposal methods, i
(11) Mixed Wastes
'The LLRWPAA also does not address the jurisdictional questions surrounding
~
mixed wastes, i.e., wastes that contain both-radioactive and other hazardous waste constituents. NRC and EPA are continuing their efforts to sort out the responsibilities of each agency in regards to such wastes in an effort to minimize the dual regulation of such wastes.
-(12) Identification and Assessment of New Wastes L
.l i
. The NRC staff has realized-the possibility that new wastes may be identified L
as a result of future licensing activities and the need to consider ways to strengthen on-going agency efforks to identify and assess the disposal 4
- requirements of such wastes.
u l
[.
n 1
u
., ~. -,
LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE COMPACT STATUS OCTOBER 1999 UWWyitaATEDSTATESP77777777J
~
scolmfunT
- 11% Notonal LLW p Statee)
- WAis host Stees
- NY to host site - 5% Nabonel LLW - SLB bonned AK
- 9% NemonalLLW MfDWEST
- MA to host site - 4% Nedonal LLW - SLB banned
- SLB
- Mi selected as host State i
- 7% NabonelLLW I
1% Notonal LLW-SLB bonned in ME
- SLBbonned p
vr NN L<
M NORTHEAST I
- O My
-)
- NJ and CT selected as host 10 States g-EEA
- 6% Nabonel LLW HI g
f egg t
/
V l
l HI
- Burieltednology to be IA 1
on CT
- by - Ste.es
- 8 PA I
}
esJ
- SLB banned tri no DE
(
g i
MO MD I
WV SD g
N CA
- PAis hostState d
CGmtALMIDWEST
- 13% Negonal LLW f
- iue host State
- SL benned
- 8% Nebonel LLW AZ Il-
- SLB bonned L
1' ffE
(
SOUTHWESTERN 3
"Y VA
- CAis host State 90V CO
- 8% NeuonalLLW gg IOC
- SLB TN I
SC OK SOUTHEAST l
Q AR Ms At GA
- SC a now hoen Sinne owng Sim pegg J
- NC selected as host State wilh 4 LA operenne see by 19e2 l
HOCKY B000NrAIII
~
- 33% Nemonal LLW
- NV asrent host Steen y-J
- New burialtemnology to be j
- CO next host Stees wnh FL determned by NC-SLB bonned operahng site by 1992
- <1% NedonalLLW g
- NE selected as host State TEXAS
- 5% NeuonalLLW 3 l y
- TX to host site
,g m ;
b m
- opues uw one=e san.
Pft z !
- 1% Negonal LLW O
o *
- SLB bonned Seeses: Stehe, M and ladlen N Pnsgrasne i
Note: NeGenal LLW h 9er 1988 = 1.4 enEEen eelde feet.
Ome eressenenenessand SLs = enssowinneIseries Polies Afletro,IIRC l
-