ML20055C234
Text
~ h b c)( p OEigt
- M te" Morris-
=
' ' ' #[r umq'o
~
Lahs/DiPalo/Af UNIT ED STATES n-g "i
[
p,
. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Hichar
.o j.
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20$5s Riani
/
. File t
pt b
FEB - g y MEMORANDUM FOR:
Bill M. Morris, Director Division of Regulatory Applications Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research E
FROM Halcolm R. Knapp, Director Division of Low-Level Waste Management' and Decommissioning, HMSS
SUBJECT:
PROPOSED RULE CHANGE ON MOTIFICATION OF INCIDENTS As promised in our letter to you dated January 10, 1989, we.have provided a i
L list (attachment 1) of low-level waste package material conditions which we believe require prompt (30 day) but.not necessarily inmediate-(24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />) notification. These conditions should be reported under 10 CFR 920.403 (b)(4), " Damage to property in excess of $2000.00."
In addition, we are providing the November 8, 1989 staff requirements memo (attachment 2) in which the Commission requests that the staff assess the need for developing a mechanism for reporting nuclear waste mishaps, including those associated with low-level waste packages.
The: Division of Low-Level Waste Management and Decomissioning contact on this will be LeRoy Person X 20575, f
l l
Malcolm R. Knapp, Dire or l
Division of Low-Level Waste Management and Decommissioning i
1 See Attachments:
1.
Staff requirements memo 2.
List of material Conditions I
cc: Robert L. Fonner, OGC L
/"
~m
('/89@41@Gef &
x i-o-
~,-
La ;
_4_
MMM SOLIDIFIED WASH llGRE
..Ch*L
- 1) The production of a solidified Class B or Class C low-level waste i
form that shows evidence of containing smater than 0.5 percent volume of free (non-solidified) liquid.
- 2) The prxxiuction of a solidific.t Class B or Class C low-level waste form that contains concentratiers of wastes (whether primary or hvy ing sdients) that a m greater taan those demonstrated to be stable in qualification testing and accerptable to the NRC and/or Agnement State regulatory authority.
- 3) 'Ihe production of a solidified Class B or Class C waste fom that contains lesser or greater amounts of solidification media (including chemical additives) than were used in the qualification testing of the waste form and found to be moceptable to the NRC and/or Agnement State resulttory authority.
- 4) h production of a solidified Claw B or Class C low-level waste form that shows evidence of unstable behavior, including but not limited to:
- a. Crumbling, disintegration, excessive cemoking, spalling, defoliation, excessive void spaces, softening or non-homogeneity,
- b. m anging Dimensions.
- 5) h production of a solidified Class B or Class C low-level weste fore that contains chemical ingredients that were not present &lring the testing used to qualify the waste form and that may affect the 1
solidification /s+ahilisation of the waste form.
l
- 6) 'Ihe pro & action of a solidified Class B or Class C low-level waste form that involves the observance of #;r-- - = that avranda the 3
processing boundary conditions identified in applicable topical mports l
or process control plans. Examples of reportable p;r----- a or pexessing conditions include but are not -vily limited to foaming, production i.
L of avea==ive amounts cf volatile material, observance of excessive temperatures, and either premature or slow hartlening of the weste form.
t
l 1
}.
+
HIGH INf1ER11T_CINfAIN1mS
- 1) The containment of Class B or Class C l~ -level waste in a high s
integrity container that shows evidence of containing greater than 1 percent volume of fcse liquid.
1
- 2) 'The containment of Class B or Class C low-level waste in a high integrity container that shows evidence of changing dimensions or breaching (cracking) caused by interaction with the waste or from external causes.
.j
- 3) The contalment of Claes B or Class. C low-level waste in a high integrity container that shous evidence of excessive void space inside the container due to improper filling, waste settling, or any other reasons zweulting in excessive void space.
- 4) The containment of Claes B or Class C low-level waste in a high integrity container that has been did or insected resulting in a need to exmine the container to detemine the extent of possible damage.
-i
~
1
~
t.p.w h a w+w.mago,A,g
- 4..y,, e,-
o
,. m ma ms,n.,
- .s, - -
, e :
t g-s DRAFT-For:
The Commissioners From:
William C. Parler, General Counsel Victor Stello, Jr., Executive Director for Operations-i
Subject:
REPORTING 0F NUCLEAR WASTE MISHAPS
Purpose:
To Inform the Commission of the staff's assessment of the need to report certain low-level waste disposal mishaps.
Background:
On October 27, 1988 the Advisory Comittee on Nuclear Waste briefed the Commission on nuclear waste issues.
Among'these issues was the adequacy of the information base for Commission and staff action on low level waste issues, particularly problems in waste form and packaging
- for. disposal; Subsequent to the briefing the Commission requested the General Counsel and the Executive Director CONTACT
' Leroy Person, NMSS x20575 Robert Fonner, OGC x21643
v49w >
~,. m :,..p > n.,
m umygm n.yo wgun.m. ummma.w 2
for Operations to submit a Comission paper which assesses the need for developing a mechanism for reporting nuclear waste mishaps, such as beyond the design basis failure of solidified low-level waste.
(StaffRequirementsMemorandumofNovember8,1988).
This paper responds to that request.
DJscussion:
In its consideration of the Comission's request the -
staff first reviewed the kinds of information concerning mishaps in waste form and packaging for disposal that would be useful in making regulatory and licensing decisions.
Secondly, the staff reviewed present reporting requirements in 10 CFR Parts 20 and 61 to determine-if the needed information was already included in a record keeping and reporting requirement.
As a result of this process the staff identified:three1 classes of needed information not presently captured by reporting requirements.
(The information is not captured either because the reporting threshold is too high, as in 10 CFR-20.403, or because the record keeping and reporting requirement does not apply to presently operating disposalfacilities,e.g.10CFR61.80(f)). These three classes are:
i
m.
. ; Je m;
~.9 w w www w s ou+ m ( % s,t+
-,,y
" t
- 1. The failure ~of high integrity containers used to ensure waste form.
The failure can be evidenced by changed container dimensions, cracking, or' injury resulting from mishandling (dropping or impacting against anotherobject).
- 2. The misuse.of high integrity containers. evidenced by a
-quantity of free liquid greater than'one percent of container volume, or an excessive void space within the container.
Such misuse is contrary to 10 CFR 61.56.
- 3. The production of a solidified class B or C waste form that has any of the following characteristics:
o greater than 0.5 percent volume of free liquid, i
l' o
concentrations of radionuclides greater than the concentrations demonstrated to be stable in the waste form in qualification testing accepted by the l
l regulatory agency.
1 o
greater or lesser amounts of solidification media than were used in qualification testing accepted by l
the regulatory agency.
l l
sqe'~L
,,Loaok s,
, e w i U g. m.
>a. m.;
f
- p l
4..
o contains chemical ingredients not present in qualification testing accepted by the regulatory
- agency, o
shows instability evidenced by crumbling, cracking, spalling, voids, softening, disintegration, nonhomogeneity, or change in dimensions, o
evidenced processing phenomena that exceed the' limiting processing conditions identified in applicable topical reports or process control plans, such as foaming, excessive temperature, premature or slow hardening, production of volatile material,_
etc.
The staff-has identified only a few mechanisms for obtaining information of the above mishaps in a. timely manner for regulatory purposes. Theseare,(1)the
' promulgation of a rule with mandatory reporting requirements for waste generators, waste processors and packagers,anddisposalsiteoperators,(ii)4re11anceon; voluntaryreporting,or(iii)relianceuponreportsby the~ inspection staffs of the regulatory agencies. The staff believes that only.the first mechanism presents-a realistic and effective regulatory means of getting the
- ,. 3 wp w
..m,w
+.
5--
desired information.
Reliance on voluntary reporting would be based on acceptance of:the good faith and reliability of licensees to self report potential violations of regulations and licenses. Reliance on the regulatory agencies inspection staff is not feasible due to limitations on available personnel and_ inspection priorities.
For example, low level waste processing and packaging at power reactors receives, on-the average, only 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> of inspection effort per year.
The Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research is presently developing a proposed rule for the reporting of materials (as contrasted to reactor) incidents.
The.
purpose'of the proposal is to clarify for materials licensees the application of certain provisions of 10 CFR 20.403 that experience has shown seem to be misunderstood by materials licensees. There is a staff consensus that-this proposal might be expanded to include the above listed waste form and container information needs. 'If.
this is not-feasible the staff intends to initiate separate development of a rule amending the reporting requirementsin10CFRParts20and61(andotherParts as necessary) following normal agency rulemaking procedures. Because the added reporting requirements would apply at nuclear power reactors, there will in any
.. n,;;
y n
+r
+. ;
6 --
case be a review by the Committee to Review Generic Requirements, and preparation of a backfit analysis pursuant to 10 CFR 50.109. The new set of reporting requirements will require OMB review pursuant'to the Paperwork Reduction Act. The staff anticipates a two year schedule for the rulemaking.
If such new reporting requirements are to be useful and effective they must become a matter of compatibility for-Agreement States and also be implemented in Agreement States programs.
Further, the Comission will have to establish procedures with licensing States to assure that reports from State licensed generators and operators of disposal facilities are made available to the Commission.
Present Commission policies regarding the criteria for entering into an Agreement and for subsequent evaluation of Agreement State programs do not require compatibility in reporting requirements.
Theref. ore, the relevant policy statements will need appropriate revision.
(Policy Statement of January 23, 1981, Criteria for Guidance of States and NRC in Discontinuance of NRC Regulatory Authority and Assumption Thereof by States ThroughAgreement(46FR7540),andPolicyStatementof June 4, 1987, Evaluation of Agreement State Radiation i
l
- gy,
^^
, ' nosla-a i
?
! Control Programs;- Final General Statement of Policy (52 i
FR21132)).
' Pursuant to the Staff Requirements Memorandum the.0ffice of the General Counsel has participated in the preparation of this memorandum, but has no views as to the need for the additional reporting requirements outlined above.
If needed, however, the General Counsel
' agrees that mandatory reporting is the appropriate mechanism and' that rulemaking should be-undertaken.