ML20045H111
| ML20045H111 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/17/1993 |
| From: | Weber M NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Drekmeier P BAY AREA ACTION |
| References | |
| REF-WM-3 NUDOCS 9307190073 | |
| Download: ML20045H111 (4) | |
Text
O o
y m)+,
UNITED STATES
.,4 f,
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
^f WASHINGTON, D.C. 20565-0001 g, *,/
- a..
MAY 171933 Mr. Peter Drekmeier Bay Area Action 504-A Emerson Street Palo Alto, CA 94301
Dear Mr. Drekmeier:
I am responding to the March 11, 1993 letter from Bay Area Action regarding the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's workshop in San Francisco on the Enhanced Participatory Rulemaking (EPR) on radiological criteria for decommissioning.
The letter raised a number of comments and questions.
I received the letter several weeks ago, but have been actively involved with the EPR workshops until they concluded last week.
The letter commented that the notification process and timing of the workshop were restrictive and that many local organizations were not notified. We had heard similar comments from participants and observers.at the first several EPR workshops and made changes to achieve broader notification and increased public access to the subsequent workshops. After the San Francisco workshop, we sent letters to more than 100 individuals and organizations in advance ofe each workshop. We also sent notices about the workshops to Federal depository libraries and other institutions.
In addition, we attempted to work with the media to ensure wide notice of the workshops through radio and the press.
Further, we added a public discussion session from 7:00 to 9:30 p.m. during the evening before the workshops to provide an opportunity to participate for members of the public who would not otherwise be able to participate in the workshops because of work schedules or other commitments. These public discussion sessions allowed interested citizens and organizations to explore the issues associated with the rulemaking and ask questions. We would appreciate Bay Area Action's suggestions for how we might further improve the notification process for similar workshops that we may hold in the future.
In addition to the comment about notification, the letter raised a series of questions about radioactive waste.
I have provided answers to these questions in the enclosure.
Regarding information about the composition of wastes anticipated for the Ward Valley site, I suggest that you contact the California Department of Health Services (Mr. Reuben Junkert, Environmental Health Division, 714/744 P Street, P.O. Box, Sacramento, CA, 94234-7320). As an Agreement State, the State of California has the licensing responsibility for the proposed disposal facility at Ward Valley. Consequently, the State is the best source for information about the composition and characteristics of waste destined for the Ward Valley site, as well as the anticipated budget for waste disposal.
l 130147 l9 d
4 9307190073 930517
(
[
WM-3
O O
Decommissioning and Regulatory Issues Branch Answers to Questions on Radioactive Waste from Bay Area Action May 17, 1993 1.
Please explain the rationale for distinguishing between high-level and low-level radioactive waste.
ANSWER: The rationale for distinguishing between high-level and low-level radioactive waste is based on the relative hazard posed by the waste. This rationale evolved over several decades since the 1950s.
This concept was eventually codified in relevant statutes and regulations.
The Federal agencies developed waste classifications based on this concept relating method of disposal with the hazard potential of the waste, expressed roughly in terms of radioactivity per unit volume at the time of disposal. These classifications were also related back to the processes that generated the radioactive waste because of the general relationship between the processes (e.g., high-level waste generated from reprocessing spent fuel) and the hazard potential of the waste.
High-level radioactive waste is specifically defined in 10 CFR Part 60 as:
(1) irradiated reactor fuel, (2) liquid wastes resulting from the operation of the first cycle solvent extraction system, or equivalent, and the concentrated wastes from subsequent extraction cycles, or equivalent, in a facility for reprocessing irradiated reactor fuel, and (3) solids into which such liquid wastes have been converted.
Essentially this waste ind udes spent fuel and certain, highly radioactive wastes that result from the reprocessing of irradiated fuel.
However, at this time, no commercial reprocessing occurs in the United States.
Low-level radioactive waste (LLW) is defined in 10 CFR Part 61 and the Lcw-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985.
LLW is any waste containing source, special nuclear material, and byproduct material that is acceptable for-disposal in a land disposal facility and is not class'ified as high-level radioactive waste, or uranium or thorium tailings and waste, i.e., byproduct material as defined in section 11e.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act.
To ensure that LLW is acceptable for disposal in a land disposal facility, all LLW is relegated into four classes representing different concentrations of specific radionuclides in the LLW.
In order of increasing concentrations, these classes are defined as A, B, C, and greater-than-Class C (GTCC) waste.
Class B and C LLW must be in a form which will provide a required degree of structural stability when disposed of at the disposal site.
In addition, Class C LLW must be placed in the disposal site in a manner designed to protect against inadvertent intrusion for at least 500 years.
GTCC LLW would not generally be acceptable for near-surface disposal and, in the absence of specific NRC requirements, must be disposed of.in a HLW geologic repository.
l O
s\\40 Peter Drekmeier Please contact me at (301) 504-1298 if you have any additional questions or comments.
Sincerely,/
/3' Michael F. Weber, Section Leader Regulatory Issues Section Decommissioning and Regulatory Issues Branch Division of Low-Level Waste Management and Decommissioning Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
Enclosure:
As stated DJSIRIBUTION:
Central File NMSS r/f RBangart WBrach JSurmeier LLWM r/f PLohaus FCameron DCool LBell TCJohnson VMiller RMeck in small Box on "0FC:" line place a: C = Cover E = Cover & Enciosure N = No Copy ^
I LLWf) h/
0FC :
LLDR E
LLDR f
LLDR p-j NAME: WLahs /d MWeber[
JAu[n PLohhus'
[
DATE: 05//S/93 05/lf/93 N
05////93 05/)l/93 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY PDR :
YES
/
NO Category:
Proprietary or CF Only ACNW:
YES NO V
IG:
YES N0 V Path & Name of File: s:\\llwmtype\\cecilia\\baa.mw Olf
O O,.-
Decommissioning and Regulatory Issues Branch Answers to Questions on Radioactive Waste from Bay Area Action May 17, 1993 1.
Please explain the rationale for distinguishing between high-level and low-level radioactive waste.
ANSWER:
The rationale for distinguishing between high-level and low-level radioactive waste is based on the relative hazard posed by the waste. This rationale evolved over several decades since the 1950s. This concept was eventually codified in relevant statutes and regulations.
The Federal agencies developed waste classifications based on this concept relating method of disposal with the hazard potential of the waste, expressed roughly in terms of radioactivity per unit volume at the time of disposal.
These classifications were also related back to the processes that generated the radioactive waste because of the general relationship between the processes (e.g., high-level waste generated from reprocessing spent fuel) and the hazard potential of the waste.
High-level radioactive waste is specifically defined in 10 CFR Part 60 as:
(1) irradiated reactor fuel, (2) liquid wastes resulting from the operation of the first cycle solvent extraction system, or equivalent, and the concentrated wastes from subsequent extraction cycles, or equivalent, in a facility for reprocessing irradiated reactor fuel, and (3) solids into which such liquid wastes have been converted.
Essentially this waste includes spent fuel and certain, highly radioactive wastes that result from the reprocessing of irradiated fuel. However, at this time, no commercial reprocessing occurs in the United States.
Low-level radioactive waste (LLW) is defined in 10 CFR Part 61 and the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985.
LLW is any waste containing source, special nuclear material, and byproduct material that is acceptable for disposal in a land disposal facility and is not class'ified as high-level radioactive waste, or uranium or thorium tailings and waste, i.e., byproduct material as defined in section 11e.(2) of the Atomic Energy Act.
To ensure that LLW is acceptable for disposal in a land disposal facility, all LLW is relegated into four classes representing different concentrations of specific radionuclides in the LLW.
In order of increasing concentrations, these classes are defined as A, B, C, and greater-than-Class C (GTCC) waste. Class B and C LLW must be in a form which will provide a required degree of structural stability when disposed of at the disposal site.
In addition, Class C LLW must be placed in the aisposal site in a ma,ner designed to protect against inadvertent intrusion for at least 500 years.
GTCC LLW would not generally be acceptable for near-surface disposal and, in the absence of specific NRC requirements, must be disposed of in a HLW geologic repository.
O O
2.
Where are reliable statistics on the amount of radioactive wastes generated to date to be found?
ANSWER:
Information on LLW disoosed of at licensed disposal facilities can be found in several places:
(1) NRC's annual Information Digest (NUREG-1350), (2) Integrated Radioactive Waste Data Base documents issued by DOE (00E/RW-0006), and (3) data bases maintained by the low-level waste disposal site operators, i.e., U.S.
Ecology, Inc. and Chem-Nuclear Systems Inc.
The State regulatory agencies in the sited States (Nevada, South Carolina, and Washington) and the NRC receive pertinent information from these data bases, which are based on information originally provided by the waste generator on required shipment manifests.
In 1990, NRC published NUREG/CR-1418, which summarizes this data for the 1987-89 period.
NRC also publishes annual reports (NUREG/CR-2907), which indicate the LLW volumes and activities transferred from nuclear power plants.
3.
Please supply statistics on the anticipated waste of the decommissioning reactors.
ANSWER: NRC completed generic requirements for decommissioning nuclear facilities in 1988.
This rulemaking was supported by numerous technical assessments on the technologies and costs of decommissioning, including the Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities (FGEIS),
These assessments included estimates of the volumes and activities of radioactive wastes that will be generated in decommissioning power reactors.
Although the volumes and activities of the low-level wastes will vary depending upon the extent and nature of the contamination and the design of the facility, the FGEIS indicates that a typica generate on the order of 20,000 m] (700,000decommissiopingofanuclearpowerpla ft ) if the reactor is promptly dismantled; the waste will contain about 300,000,000 MegaBecquerel (8000 Curies) of activity. About 98% of the radioactive waste will be Class A low-level waste, with the remainder of the waste consisting of Class B (1 to 2%), Class C, and Greater than Class C waste.
Based on these estimates, an estimate of the total amount of low-level waste generated by promptly decommissioning all existipg 4
commercialpowp)rreactorsintheU.S.wouldbeontheorderof 2,200,000 m (80,000,000 ft containing about 33,000,000,000 MegaBecquerel (900,000 Curies).
Additional information on the characteristics and amounts of waste generated in decommissioning nuclear facilities may be found in the FGEIS and the documents that it references.
We are presently updating the assessments that supported the FGEIS as part of the Enhanced Participatory Rulemaking on radiological criteria for decommissioning.
Preliminary results from these assessments indicate that the decommissioning waste volumes may vary significantly from the previous estimates. We anticipate that the results of these assessments will be included in the Generic Environmental Impact Statement in support of the EPR rulemaking, which we intend to publish as a draft in April 1994.
NRC will conduct at lent one scoping meeting on the GEIS in July 1993.
I 2
r
\\1,'ih
~
Peter Drekmeier Please contact me at (301) 504-1298 if you have any additional questions or comments.
Sincerely,/
/S Michael F. Weber, Section Leader Regulatory Issues Section Decommissioning and Regulatory Issues Branch Division of Low-Level Waste Management and Decommissioning Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
Enclosure:
As stated DISTRIB' TION:
Central File : NMSS r/f RBangart WBrach JSurmeier LLWM r/f J
PLohaus FCameron DCool LBell TCJohnson VMiller RMeck In small Box on "0FC:" line place a: C = Cover E = Cover & Enclosure N = No Copy LLW() y 0FC :
LLDR 4-LLDR
,E LLDR p-NAME: WLabs[d MWeber[
JAu$n PLohSus' DATE: 05//u/93 05/lf/93 N
05//t /93 05/)l/93
/
0FFICIAL RECORD COPY PDR :
YES
/
NO Category:
Proprietary or CF Only ACNW:
YES N0 V
IG: YES N0 V Path & Name of File: s:\\1lwmtype\\cecilia\\baa.mw 0/6 i