ML20028H155

Responds to Asking NRC to Address Concerns of Constituent,Dc Frisco Re Disagreement W/Nrc Policy

ML20028H155
Person / Time
Issue date:	10/17/1990
From:	Rathbun D NRC OFFICE OF GOVERNMENTAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRS (GPA)
To:	Roth W SENATE
Shared Package
ML20028H156	List: ML20028H155 ML20028H157
References
FRN-53FR49886, RULE-PR-CHP1 NUDOCS 9011140039
Download: ML20028H155 (2)

Text

. - -

3 "8%i 3

,k UNITED STATES -

., f g

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 5

l WASHINGTON, D. C. 20$55 g,,g*

October 17, 1990 The, Honorable William V. Roth United States Senate Washington, D. C.

20510

Dear Senator Roth:

I am responding to your September 24, 1990, letter in which you asked us to address the concerns-of your constituent, Mr. Donald C. Frisco, who expressed his disagreement with a Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) policy which establishes guidelines for the NRC staff in reviewing requests for exemptions i

for.certain low-level radioactive waste (LLW) as being below regulatory concern or BRC.

On July 3,1990,.the Commission issued a Below Regulatory Concern Policy Statement.

I have enclosed a copy of. this statement together with a companion explanatory booklet for your use in responding to your constituent. -The statement identifies the principles and criteria that will govern Commission ~ decisions to exempt certain radioactive material-from the full scope of ' regulatory controls. Thus, the policy could apply, but would not be limited to potential BRC waste determinations.. I would emphasize that the policy is not-self-executing and does not, by itself, deregulate any LLW. Any: specific exemption decisions would be accomplished through rulemaking or licensing actions during which opportunity for pubite comment would be provided in those situations where generic exemption provisions

.have not already been established.

The policy can be-considered an outgrowthLof the concepts articulated in 99-240). - That Act. (i.e., Section 10)y Amendments-Act of-1985 (Pub.- L.

the-Low-Level Radioactive Waste Polic directed the.NRC to "... establish

. standards and procedures...and develop the technical capability for.

considering and acting upon petitions to exempt specific radioactive waste streams from regulation...due to the presence of radionuclides in such waste streams'in sufficiently low concentrations or quantities as to be below regulatory concern."

In response to the legislation, NRC developed and published in 1986-a Statement of Policy and Procedures which outlines the criteria for considering such petitions.. Our recently issued broad policy statement, which has implications beyond waste disposals-(e.g.,-

applicable to decommissioning decisions involving the release of residually-contaminated lands or structures), reflects much of the basic radiation protection approach described in this earlier Commission policy. The Commission, in-both actions, has acted in the belief that the.

nation's best interests are served by policies that establish a consistent l'c 4 2< w - 'Lc+ / '/I RJLLTEXT ASCll SCAN

(

y 90:11140039 901017 PDR ORG NGPZ

)

PDC

. risk framework within which exemption decisions can Le made with assurance l

that human health and the environment are protected, in this, regard, we l

believe-our actions are consistent with those of other Federal agencies; e.g., the Environinental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), who have formulated or are 6ttempting to formulate similar policies for the hazardous materials they ' regulate.

It may be helpful to first summarize the typical exposures wh'ich we all routinely receive from a variety of sources of radiation. The exposures occur from radiation that is natural in origin as well as from sources r

which involve min-made uses of radioactive material.

In total, as-4 estimated by the National Council on Radiation Protection and fieasurements (NCRP Report No. 93), the effective dose equivalent received by an average individual in the United States population is about 360 millirem per year. Of this total, over 83 percent (about 300 millirem per year) is a result of natural sources. including radon and its decay products, while-medical exposures such as x-rays, when averaged over the 1J.'S. population, contribute an estimated 15 percent (53 millirem per year). Other man-made.

sources, including nuclear fallout, contribute the remaining 1 to 2 percent of the total exposure. The remaining 1 to 2 percent also includes the contribution from nuclear power plant effluents. Any sow-level radioaccive material associated with an exemption decision would not be expected to change this typical exposure " picture."

I can assure you that any low-level radioactive waste that could be

~

considered for BRC classification would involve only materibls with the lowest levels of radioactivity content.

In fact, the level of

- radioactivity may be such a small fraction of natural background radiations that it may.not be-readily detectable.

Any NRC-developed' constraints, including the provision for regulatory inspectionL at~the o

L

. licensed facility generating the waste, will_ ensure that tne materials in

-question can safely be-released as below regulatory concern from a l

L

' radiological-standpoint.

In closing,1_ want' to assure you that'the Commission tskes its mandate.to L

protect the health and safety of the.public very seriously, I,-therefore, l

hope the views expressed and the encloset) faformation will prove-useful in-L

. responsibly expanding the dialogue on this controversial and technically complex issue.

Sincerely, hA e

v y

Dennis K. Rathbun. Director Congressional Affairs Office of Governmental-and

-Public Affbirs

Enclosures:

As Stated l

l~

.-