ML20024G972
| ML20024G972 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/07/1991 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| SECY-91-124, NUDOCS 9105140401 | |
| Download: ML20024G972 (10) | |
Text
.
RELEASED TO THE PDR I
r/u/m cp
/* "%'\\
ings ke
(
........ m.............
g 7
s a
%.....,o May 7, 1991 POLICY ISSUE SEcy_,1_124 (Information)
For:
The Commissioners From:
James M. Taylor Executive Director for Operations Sub.iect:
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT ON THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION'S LOW-LEVEL WASTE MANAGEMENT AND DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAM
Purpose:
To provide the Commission with a semi-annual report on the Low-level Waste Management and Decommissioning (LLWM)
Program.
Discussion:
The enclosed report summarizes the status of projects and activities in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's)
LLWM Program.
It discusses the following main categories within the program:
(1) Low-Level Waste (2) Uranium Mill Tailings (3) Decommissioning (4) Staffing Efforts and Reorganization Although the staff has issued this semi-annual report for several years, the staff questions the need to continue this reporting effort.
The Commission is kept well-informed of staff activities in the LLWM program through formal and informal communications that render this report, when it goes forward, largely historical.
Preparation and review of this report is a resource commitment which, in light of the above, could be better directed.
Note:
1.
In the near future, the staff expects to bring several matters before the Commission for decision.
The staff will give an analysis of comments on the title transfer and possession provisions of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act and ask the Commission for NOTE:
TO BE MADE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE t 1, LLWM IN 10 WORKING DAYS FROM THE 492-3447
~'
DATE OF THIS PAPER f O f lihh if h l b T f
)
t.
I.
The Comissioners guidance on subsequent actions.
The staff expects to ask the Commission for approval of amendments to 10 CFR Part 61 regarding the definition of near-surface disposa' and the use of quality assurance programs for low-leve l waste f acilities. The staff also plans to provide the Comission with a status t.pdate on the NRC dom safety program.
The staff will also inform the Commission on uranium mill tailings issues, the site decontamination management program, and several issues related to financial assurance.
2.
Unless directed otherwise, the staff plans to discontinue the semi-annual report on the LLWM program.
/
CL~
JalesM.Tehler
.ccutive Director for Operations Enclosurc:
LLWM Semi-Annual Report DISTRIBUTION:
Commissioners OGC 01G GPA REGIONAL OFFICES EDO ACNW SECY I
SLM1-Alit 4UAL REPORT ON THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION'S LOW-LEVEL WASTE mat 4AGEMENT AND DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAli MARCH 1991 1.
INTRODUCTION The Division of Low-level Waste Management and Decommissioning (LLWM) in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NM55) is responsible for the program areas of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) management, uraniumIts rnis recovery, and decommissioning.
The safety and the environment from hazards associated with these activities.
Uranium Recovery Field Office (URFO), Region IV, perforrns licensing activities for active uranium reccvery f acilities, conducts uranium recovery f acility inspections, and conducts reviews of selected Title 1 facility reclamation This report sunnarizes the main projects, under LLWM program direction. issues in each crea of responsibility and ide for the period of approximately October 1, 1990, to March 31, 199'.
2.
LOW-LEVEL WASTE 2.1 Agteement State keview Support During the reporting period, rnultidisciplinary LLWM teams have supported State Programs in the review of LLW rnanagement regulatory programs in nine Agreement States (Horth Carolina, Washington, Nebraska, Nevada, LLWM has Cal 11ornit, hew York, Illinois, Utah, and Snuth Carolina).
provided specific detailed programmatic and technical conunents that should:
(1) provide a stronger focus on the Agreement State LLW reculatory programs; (?) improve individual Agreement State prograos; and (3) lead to uniform approaches in addressing LLW regulatory issues throughout the country.
2.2 LLRWPAA Compliance Update NRC received a Governor's Certification f rom the On September 13, 1990, State of Vermont stating that Vermont would "be capable of providing for, and [would] provide for, the storage, disposal, or management of any low-level racioactive waste generated within its borders and requiring 31, 1992." Vermont and Puerto Rico were the only disposal after December stctes that did not file certifications by January 1, 1990, the date specified in the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act Puerto Rico submitted a certification in late January (LLRWPAA) of 1985.
The NRC steff transuitted the Vermont certification to Congress anc 1991.
This brought the Departnent of Energy (DOE) as required by the LLRWPAA.
(The the total number of Governors' Certifications filed with NRC to 33.
rnilestone requirements of the LLRWPAA do not apply to the 19 states that are rnenbers of the 3 compacts with operating sites.)
Enclosure
2-Recently, Vermint LLW generators have been granted access to disposal capacity et the Barnwell LLW disposal facility, in part because of their progress in LLW disposal, as outlined in the certification.
The sited States of NevaJa, South Carolina, and Washington extended notices of denial of access to the State of Michigan, effective November 11, 1990.
Since that date, no LLW generated in the State of Michigan has been accepted for disposal at the currently sited States.
The staif issued an information notice to all Michigan generators, to provide staff guida.1ce on storage. The staff is also monitoring the gencrators and their storage of LLW.
The currently sited States issued, on October 1,1990, a notice of impending denial of access to the States of Connecticut, Maine, This notice requested that, by Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York.
December 7,1990, the concerned States supply " persuasive evidence" that 1
thcir waste will not "... constitute an involuntary burden on other States."
In January 1991, af ter reviewing documentation submitted by the five concerned statti, the sited States notified the concerned States of their conclusions. Massachusetts was given the gravest warning, with noti #ication that the Commonwealth's LLW generators will lose access to thc operating disposal facilities unless it immediately addresses and resolves its funding crisis and initiates site identification, characterization, and development actions.
New Jersey was warned that site development will continue tc be monitored, and that uncertainties The sited States warned with program funding continue to be a concern.
that while developn:ent of the LLW disposal programs in New York, Maine, and Connecticut fulfilled the compliance requirements of the LLRWPAA, progress in these states continues at a slow pace.
Hence, the sited States will continue to closely monitor site development activities in these states.
2.3 Mixed Waste NRC and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have joint jurisdiction over mixed waste. To help States, compacts, and generators comply with r
the applicable requirements, EPA and NRC have previously issued three joint guidance documents addressing the oefinition of mixed waste, and the Staff siting and conceptual design of a mixed waste disposal facility.
continues this effort, working with EPA to develop guidance on mixed waste Staff has participated in workshops characterization and storage.
sponsored by EPA to explain the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Staff is developing (RCRA) requirements to Federal and state regulators.
similar workshops for NRC inspectors and license reviewers to be conducted in April and May 1991.
EPA, in cooperation with NRC, has develo)ed pamphlets on RCRA and the Land Disposal Restrictions (LDRs) whici will be sent to NRC licensees that may generate mixed waste.
NRC and EPA began development of a national profile on the volumes, characteristics, and treatability of ccmriercially generated mixed waste in September 1990.
i j
l This profile, to be completed by March 1992, is expected to be of use to NRC and EPA, as well as to States, compacts, mixed waste generators, and operators of treatment, storage and disposal facilities, in d% eloping strategies for the management and disposal of mixed waste.
Perhaps the most significant event in the area over the past 6 months was addressed in SECY-91-053; i.e., the Department of Energy's indication that it may be willing to accept commercially-ge% rated mixed waste for disposal.
2.4 Performance Assessment Staff and contractors working on Jeveloping performance assessment methodology have completed the five volume series " Background Information for the Development of a low-level Waste Performance Assessment Methodology," NUREG/CR-5453.
A description of the methodology, "A Performance Assessment Methodology for low-Level Waste Facilities," NUREG CR-5532, was published in July 1990.
State Programs and LLWM sponsored a performance assessment workshop held in Bethesda in Scptember 1990, in support of State Regulators' performance assessment efforts. The three day workshop, attended by 16 participants representing 12 states, provided guidance on the structure of the perfornance assessment methodology and on the use of computer codes in the methodology.
In January 1991, "A Self-Teaching Curriculum for the NRC/Sandia National Laboratory Low-Level Waste Performance Assessment Methodology," NUREG/CR-5539,'was published. This publication was sent to the stat e, the compacts, and the regulators.
In November 1990, a member of the staff participated as a consultant to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna in developing test case problems for the IAEA Coordinated Research Project (CRP) on Safety The focus of the Assessment of Low-level Radioactive Weste facilities.
CRP is performance assessment model intercomparison and validation, to 2nhance confidence in performance assessment.
Division staff joined with the staff of the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) to form the Performance Assessment Working Group (PAWG) in August 1990. The purpose of the group is to identify, examine, and resolve issues in LLW disposal performance assessment. PAWG may recommend changes and enhancements to NRC guidance documents and may recommend implementation of technical research in support of performance assessment initiatives.
Standard Review Plan Revisions 2.5 _
The staff evaluated whether the Standard Format and Content Guide (NUREG-1199) and the Standard Review Plan (SRP) (NUREG-1200) comport with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 61.
These reviews identified four itens [ Meteorology, Seismology, Reference to 10 CFR Part 20, and Quality Assurance) that appear not to comport with Part 61.
Also, several statements in the SRP are imprecise or incorrectly emphasize certain In matters as regulatory requirements, rather than regulatory guidance.
addition. the staff evaluated any need for revisions as a result of its review of the Prototype License Application Safety Analysis Repo'rts
. ~
(PLASARs) submitted by DOE.
The staff revised NUREG 1199 and 1200 to correct the regulatory requirements items and provided early notification to affected states and compacts.
2.6 Waste Form Waste form stability topical reports have been reviewed based on criteria set out in a 1983 Branch Technical Position (BTP). Technical advances in this area have been incorporated into a revised BTP issued in January 1991.
In addition, a plan has been developed to hasten action on remaining cement topical reports, to approve, reject, or accept the formulations, with a condition for surveillance testing. Current schedules call for cement topical report review determinations to be made While the grandfathering of cement waste forms is phased out on a schedule to be worked out with State Regulatory Authorities.
2.7 Below Regulatory Concern On July 3, 1991, the Commission adopted a Below Regulatory Concern (BRC) policy to serve as_ a basis for determining when radiation levels are so low that stringent regulatory controls to ensure protection of the public Related to the LLW disposal aspects of and environment are not needed.
this policy, the Commission had received a petition for rulemaking to classify the disposal of solid, biomedical wastes containing tritium and The LLWM staff provided assistance to RES in evaluating carbon-14 as BRC.
this petition by using the IMPACTS-BRC computer code to assess the impacts of the proposed exemption. The Commission deferred action on this petition on February 26, 1991, to allow NRC to carry out a consensus-building process on BRC policy issues.
2.8 Uniform Manifest In May 1990, the Host State Technical Coordinating Committee (TCC) wrote to both Chairman Carr and Secretary of the Department of Transportation (DOT) Samuel K. Skinner, on the need for a uniform manifest for shipments The TCC requested that both DOT and NRC support such a uniform of LLW.
manifest as part of the proposed NRC rule concerning LLW manifest information requirements.
The TCC also informed NRC that it was developing a draft uniform manifest, which was subsequently transmitted to In response to the TCC request, NRC reconsidered NRC in November 1990.
the merits of developing an NRC uniform manifest and decided to appropriately modify the existing rulemaking package. Meetings held with DOT defined the format for, and content of, 00T-required information.
Uniform manifest forms were subsequently developed to capture DOT, NRC, and Host State information, and a revised proposed rulemaking package with tne uniform manifest forms and instructions was transmitted to the Agreement States in March 1991.
l l
2.9 Radioactive Medical Waste The staff drafted a " Strategic Plan for Radioactive Medical Waste Management," in February 1991, which is designed to better ensure the safe mansgement and disposal of radioactive medical waste. The plan recommends p
/
5-actions for the nanagement of, and discusses current and future resource allocations for, radioactive medical waste issues.
Issues include the shipment of ordinary trash and medical waste containini; racioactivity to and landfills and commercial medical waste incinerators, def b;4ticn:
trestment of medical waste, patient excreta, generally licensed materials, incineration, and decay-in-storage of radioactive wast..
The strategic plan, as it exists now, will be carried out over the next three years.
In response to recent incidents involving radioactive materials detected at landfills and connercial medical waste incinerators, the staff has sent NRC Information Notice No. 90-03, " Management of Waste Contaminated with Radioactive Materials (" Red Bag" Waste and Ordinary Trash) " dated January 7, 1991, to all medical licensees.
This information notice was prepared to heighten medical licensee awareness of these incidents and to remind medical licensees to carefully monitor all waste that may be contaminated with radioactive materials.
The staff has participated in meetings and workshops with EPA and other federal and state agencies, to discuss issues related to the management of These included an EPA Medical Waste Workshop in November medical waste.
1990, which focused on state experiences, and a Medical Waste Roundtable meeting, in March 1991, which addressed both EPA and state activities related to medical waste.
The staff is currently pursuing contractor assistance to identify various regulations, standards, guidelines, and training proarams related to radioactive medical waste, current practices by NRC licensees regarding radioactive medical waste management, and hazards and risks associated The staff has also met with with radioactive medical waste management.
the Browning-ferris Company and Waste Management, Inc., to discuss the management of medical waste and other common issues.
3.
URANIUM RECOVERY 3.1 Title 1 During the past eight months, the staff has completed 35 00E Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UMTRA) Project review and concurrence actions.
In addition, staff actions have included:
- 1) publication of a final
" Staff Technical Position on Erosion Protection Covers for Uranium Mill Tailings Sites;" 2) a major modification of the NRC/ DOE UMTRA Project Memorandum of Understanding, to reflect recent measures to streamline the review and concurrence process; and 3) organization and presentation of a workshop on Alternative Concentration Limits (ACLs). A Comission paper LLWM also on " EPA Title 1 Ground Water Standards" is nearing completion.
worked with RES to complete and publish a rulemaking, modifying 10 CFR Part 40, to provide a general license for long-term care under government NRC and DOE staffs have continued UMTRA Project management rustody.
h terface meetings to discuss and resolve programmatic issues periodically.
These Three meetings have been held during this reporting period.
management nectings, coupled with ongoing weekly NRC/ DOE telephone discussions on the UMTRA Project casework, have led to effective conpletien of reviews through improved staff interactions.
6 3.2 Title II For the period from July 1, 1990, to January 31, 1991, the URF0 staff completed the following licensing and inspection actions for comercial uranium mills, heap-leaching facilities, commercial solution mininp and uranium extraction research and development projects:
2 new licenses; one renewal license; 26 major amendmentst 37 minor amendments; and 19 inspections. LLWM staff also developed Title !! licensing and inspection guidance.
3.3 Other Major Uranium Recovery Actions a.
Envirocare of Utah In November 1989, Envirocare, Inc., applied for a license to dispose of uranium and thorium byproduct material in a manner similar to the disposal of mill tailings stabilized under the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA). The Comission determined that the technical requirements of Part 40 would apply in the review and licensing of this facility.
Af ter Comission approval of the licensing basis for this facility, a Notice of Receipt of Envirocare's license application was published in the Federal Register on The staff has performed an acceptance review of January 25,199h the application and has developed questions, comments, and requests for additional information,
- b. Louisiana Energy Services The LLWM staff participated in the development of a Commission Information Paper, SECY-91-019, on the disposition of depleted uranium; tails from enrichment plants.
DOE supplied enrichment services previously, and the depleted uranium tails were considered a resource, not a waste. Presently, there is a surplus of depleted uranium tails in the Western World.
In addition, NRC has received an application from Louisiana Energy Services for a license for an enrichment facility, to which newly revised legislation allowing commercial enrichment services applies.
Such oaerations will-require an environmental impact statement, in w11ch the disposition of the tailings will be considered. The Comission paper discussed plausible strategies to be considered.
^
4, DECOMMISSIONING 4.1 Power Reactor Decommissioning NMSS/LLWM r,taff review power reactor decommissioning plans and assume project management responsibility after the decommissioning plan is Plans currently under approved and a possession-only license is issued.
review include those for Shoreham and Fort St. Vrain.
The detailed decommissioning plan for the Rancho Seco plant in California is due for Staff previously completed the Safety submittal by July 1, 1991.
ISER) and Environmental Assessment (EA) for dismantlement Evaluation Report
)
7 of Northern States Power Company's Pathfinder plant near Sioux Falls, South Dakota.
This facility is now undergoing dismantlement and cleanup activities, with hoisting, preparation and rail shipment of the reactor pressure vessel scheduled for later this spring and summer.
Guidance developments currently underway include preparation of an SRP for review of power reactor decommissioning plans, and a set of inspection procedures (IPs) specifically tailored for reactors in active decommissioning and/or safe storage. These IPs will provide guidance on frequency and coverage of a minimum inspection program, based on activities underway or authorized by license, and on whether spent fuel is beino stored on site.
4.2 Materials and Fuel Cycle Decommissioning For materials and fuel cycle licensees, important actions have included development of an updated Site Decommissioning Management Plan (SDMP, Rev. 1, January 1991), development of guidance on financial assurance requirements for decommissioning, and ongoing technical assistance to the Division of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety (IMNS) in the review of groundwater hydrology, site characterization, and long-term stability aspects of decommissioning p ans submitted by licensees, The original SDMP was submitted to the Commission as SECY 90-121 on March 29, 1990, and identifies sites requiring action, prioritizes those sites, identifies a schedule for cleanup, and defines needed resources for the proposed actions. Regulatory Guide 3.36 on financial assurance was issued in June 1990. Llutt provided assistance to the Office of Enforcerrent in the development of enforcement guidance that will be used by the regions when noncompliance with the decommissioning rule financial assurance requiremant occurs.
in flarch, May, and November of 1990, LLWM issued three Information Notices concerning conpliance with the new Decommissioning Rule. Licensees authorized to possess certain quantities of byproduct, source, or special nuclear material were required to submit financial assurance for.
decommissioning not later than July 27, 1990.
The notices requested that licensees consider the applicability of the rule to their facilities and, if appropriate, submit any required financial assurance documertation to NRC.
Contractor assistance is being used in reviewing financial assurance submittals from NRC licensees. The regions use a contractor with financial expertise to help review the large number of submittals.
As of early December 1990, pursuant to new internal NMSS procedures, IMNS Of transferred 12 decommissioning cases to LLWM, for project management.
these 12 cases, 9 are SDMP sites:
Dow Midland; Dow Bay City; Kawkawlin; Pawling; West Lake Landfill; Cushing; Chemetron; BP Chemical; and Whittaker.
The other three cases are Cintichem, Rockwell Santa Susanna, and Stepan Chemical.
Decommissioning plans are under review for three of these sites (BP Chemicals, Cintichen, and Rockwell Sarita Susanna).
[
II
LLWM staff has helped review deconmissioning plans for Cimarron (Kerr-McGee, Crescent, Oklahoma) and the Nuclear Fuel Services (NFS) facility at Erwin, Tennessee.
LLWM is reviewing the licensee's license renewal application and monitoring decommissioning activities at both Chemetron sites located near Cleveland, Ohio. LLWM is also reviewing site restoration progress at Kerr-McGee, Cushing, Oklahoma, as well as monitoring remediation activities with EPA RVII, regarding the West Lake Landfill in Missouri.
4.3 Residual Radioactivity Cleanup Criteria The lack of firm criteria for levels of residual radioactivity permitting unrestricted use hinders both decontamination planning and staff's ability to effectively direct site cleanup.
This situation is particularly problematic in cases where licensees (or responsible parties) are reluctant or unwilling to undertake prompt cleanup voluntarily (e.g., some of the SDMP sites). For the SDMP sites, the establishment of acceptable levels of residual radioactivity, especially for uranium and thorium in soils, is an issue that must be resolved before meaningful progress on contaminated site cleanup can proceed.
LLWM staff continues to help RES develop residual contamination limits for the decommissioning of nuclear facilities.
The principal effort involved a technical review of NUREG/CR-5512, a draft report that provided proposed technical bases for translating contamination levels to annual dose.
5.
STAFFING EFFORTS AND REORGANIZATION Since November 1990, LLWM branch chiefs have screened 362 applicants and have interviewed 75 candidates in efforts to fill 20 positions within LLWM.
LLWM technical staff has attended 10 recruiting events across the country since This effort has resulted in 27 offers being made to nid-November 1990.
potential employees; and as of this date, 12 acceptances have been received.
Five offers are outstanding at this time.
Interviews are continuing to fill the remaining three technical vacancies.
-In January 1991, LLWM implemented an internal reorganization in order to more efficiently carry out its responsibilities in-the major program areas for which NRC is responsible. The three branches in the division are designated:
Low-level Waste Management Branch; Uranium Recovery Branch; and the Decommissioning and Regulatory Issues Branch. Each-branch is, or will be, staffed appropriately with technical staff and project management staff, in order to fulfill its mission with only limited reliance on expertise in other branches.
,. _ _