ML20045D398
| ML20045D398 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/11/1993 |
| From: | Bernero R NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Oge M ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY |
| References | |
| REF-WM-3 FACA, NUDOCS 9306280326 | |
| Download: ML20045D398 (2) | |
Text
3
. p*A"%q d
i UNITED STATES j
[
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
't WASHINoToN, D.C. 20555-0001
)
JUN 111993 Ms. Margo T. Oge, Director 4
Office of Radiation Programs i
1 and Indoor Air U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20460
Dear Ms. Oge:
I am writing in response to our meeting on March 24, 1993, in which we resumed i
discussions on the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) draft standards for low-level radioactive waste (LLW) management and disposal in 40 CFR Part 193. At this meeting, you informed us that EPA had tentatively made a finding, under Section C of the March 1992 Memorandum Of Understanding J
i (MOU), that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's LLW regulatory program does not afford a sufficient level of protection of the public health and safety or the environment because it does not:
(1) sufficiently protect groundwater; 4
and (2) provide sufficient protection from exposure to direct radiation.
You indicated that for the purpose of resolving disagreements concerning EPA's LLW standards, Section C of the General MOU is the appropriate section.
NRC agrees that Section C of the MOV is one of the appropriate portions of the MOV to consider. However, NRC believes that the M00 must be considered in its entirety, including the " Principles" section, and not simply as independent provisions. Accordingly, the agencies must first work together to define a sufficient level of protection for low-level radioactive waste management under the provisions of Paragraph D.
Following that, an evaluation must be undertaken to determine whether NRC's current program is achieving this level of protection.
In this regard, the MOU requires that a determination must first be made as to whether NRC's regulatory program achieves a sufficient level of protection of the public health and environment.
If it is determined that our program does not provide the requisite level of protection, and in 1
the absence of any action on the NRC's part to address the situation, the M00 further contemplates that any regulatory initiative of EPA's must lead to a substantial reduction of significant risk to the public health and safety and the environment.
If you believe that our existing requirements in 10 CFR Part 61, coupled with the other applicable regulatior,s (e.g.,10 CFR Parts 20 and 51) and program elements, de not provide sufficient protection, we need to further explore the basis for your decision in light of our experience with current facilities.
We believe that the MOU process further requires EPA to indicate which sections of 10 CFR Part 61 do not afford a sufficient level of protection of the public health and safety or the environment and provide the basis by which your determination was made. None of the currently operating disposal facilities were sited, des'gned, constructed, and operated in accordance with NRC's requirements in 10 CFR Part 61.
Potential doses to members of the public associated with the older commercial low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities do not appear to exceed a small fraction of the public
/
dose limit in the revised 10 CFR Part 20, which includes all pathways. NRC s, (3 n c'
- w
&jpj 9306280326 930611 li' hg PDR WASTE WM-3 PDR
Margo T. Oge expects that new disposal facilities that comply with 10 CFR Part 61 would provide even greater protection because Part 61 was specifically developed to address the limitations of the older disposal facilities, such as Maxey Flats, Kentucky; Sheffield, Illinois; and West Valley, New York.
In response to our March meeting, I propose that we meet to better understand EPA's views on what constitutes a sufficient level of protection for low-level waste management and to pursue a joint evaluation of the level of protection associated with the existing waste management facilities.
I would also propose that we defer this meeting on the draft LLW standards until after completion of the " White Paper" on risk harmonization. The generic risk harmonization discussions will provide the framework, perspective and insights l
needed to resolve specific issues of concern such as sufficient protection.
l This approach will also provide a stronger and consistent basis for future efforts to resolve issues in other program areas.
l I look forward to your response on this issue.
Please have your staff contact l
John Austin of my staff at (301) 504-2560 if you have questions or need more l
information.
Sincerely, l
Originalsigned by floM M. Bemero F
Robert M. Bernero, Director J
Office of Nuclear Material Safety g
and Safeguards gy 1
- See previous concurrence p
- Nhsjh, NMSh 0FC LLDR*
C LLDR*
C LLWM*
LLWM*
C a
NAME MWEBER/CV JAUSTIN BBRACH RBANGART'
[AkLOTTO RBNh DATE 6/03/93 6/03/93 6/04/93 6/04/93
[ / /93 th h /93 C = COVER E = COVER & ENCLOSURE N = NO COPY OFFICIAL RECORD COPY:
S:\\LLWMTYPE\\CECILIA\\EPALLW.0GE PDR : YES x
NO Category:
Proprietary or CF Only ACNW: YES x
NO Delete file after distribution Yes x No IG: YES x
NO DISTRIBUTION: Central File-LLWM r/f PLohaus RBangart WBrach JSurmeier NMSS r/f Dir. r/f TCJohhson LBell MBridgers CPoland MLopez-Otin MMalsh HLThompson JMTaylor JDavis