ML20055C245
| ML20055C245 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/08/1989 |
| From: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18009B008 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-90-268, TASK-PIA, TASK-SE SECY-89-177, NUDOCS 8906260123 | |
| Download: ML20055C245 (16) | |
Text
,
s k
5 June 8, 1989
,F_or:
The Comissioners o
from:
Victor Stello, Jr.
Executive Director for Operations
Subject:
REVIEW OF EXISTING REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR EXTENDED INTERIM STORAGE OF LOW-LEVEL RADIDACTIVE WASTE
Purpose:
To res >ond to the Comission's direction contained in the Staff Requirements Memorandum for SECY 88-342 dated February 8,1989.
Category:
This paper addresses regulatory issues associated with extended interim storage of low-level radioactive waste by materials, fuel cycle, and reactor licensees.
Sumary:
This paper presents the results of the staff's review of the existing regulatory requirements for extended interim storage of low-level radioactive waste (LLW).
The staff has concluded that the existing regulatory framework contained in 10 CFR Parts 20, 30, 40, 50, and 70 is adequate and that additions to or modifications of these regulations are not needed.
However, the staff is making three recommendations to augment the existing regulations.
These recomendations are: (1) the Comission should publish a Comission solicy statement on extended interim storage of LLW; (2) tie staff should develop guidance on information needed in applications for extended interim storage license amendments by materials and fuel cycle licensees as well as guidance for technical reviewers; and (3) the staff should develop inspection guidance for LLW storage by fuel cycle and saterials licensees.
Background; In enacting the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980, Congress assigned to the States the responsibility of providing LLW disposal capacity by January 1,1986. This responsibility was affirmed in the Low-Level Radioactive WastePolicyAmendmentsActof1985(LLRWPAA)inwhich Congress extended the deadline for providing disposal
Contact:
George Pangburn, NMSS 492-0580 b
lN l
The Consissioners 1 I
capacity from 1986 to 1993.
In exchange for providing this interim access period, Congress subjected the States to a series of milestones penalties and incentives to assure thatStateswouldmakeadequateprogresstowardbeingable to manage their LLW by 1993.
The next milestone for the States and Compacts under the LLRWPAA is January 1 1990.
ThreeoptionsareavailableforcompliancewiththIs milestone:
filing a complete license application for a low-level waste disposal facility; filing a Governor's certification that the State will be capable of providing for, and will provide for, storage, disposal or management of LLW generated within the State and requiring disposal af ter 1992; or negotiating a disposal agreement with a sited compact.
The staff estimates that as many as thirty States may meet the 1990 milestone by filing Governors' certifications.
Those States which do so are expected to rely primarily on storage of LLW for as long as several years, either at licensees' sites or at central storage facilities, until disposal facilities are operational. Nineteen of the thirty States expected to submit Governors' certifications are States in which the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has licensing authority.
Licensees in such States may require NRC license amendments to authorize extended interim storage and/or to raise possession limits of radioactive material.
These amendment requests may have significant resource implications for the Regions and raise a number of regulatory issues associated with extended interim storage of LLW.
The Connission recognized these implications, and in the Staff Requirements Memorandum of February 8,1989 approving i
the staff's plans for implementing NRC's responsibilities I
under the Governor's certification provisions of the 1990 l
milestone of the LLRWPAA (SECY 88-342), the Connission directed the staff to:
1)
Examine in detail the existing regulatory requirements for extended storage; 2)
Identify any areas which may require improvement; and 3)
Submit to the Connission its results, including reconmendations to modify the existing regulatory requirements, if appropriate.
Discussion:
Extended interim storage is not defined in Commission regulations, but for purposes of this paper, the staff considers it to be storage for a period longer than normal, l
l L
E
1 t
i r
The Consissioners '
where wastes cannot be disposed of as generated in a low-level waste disposal facility.
Other types of LLW storage are routine parts of many licensees' activities.
Medical and academic licensees may be authorized to hold waste with short half-lives in storage for decay to background levels before disposal in ordinary trash.
Licensees may also store waste until they have a sufficient quantity to ship for disposal at LLW disposal facilities.
Similarly, waste brokers / processors may store LLW before or 1
after processing, l
Storage itself is not defined or specifically addressed in 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, 50 and 70.
However, the activity is authorized and licensed on a case-by-case basis under these Parts and in accordance with the radiation protection standards in Part 20.
The health and safety considerations related to extended interim storage are not dissimilar from those of other activities licensed under Parts 30, 40, 50 and 70.
Consequently, the staff believes that the existing t
regulations provide an adequate framework for licensing and regulation of extended interim storage, and that additions l
to the regulations, either in the form of a new rule or a modification of existing rules, are not warranted.
Moreover, amending the regulations at this time could cause uncertainty in the States and Compacts regarding the need p
for disposal capacity, at a crucial time in the schedule l
set up by the LLRWPAA.
However, the staff believes that it is important for NRC to take appropriate actions to assure pubife health and safety in the achievement of the LLRWPAA's milestones.
Storage for some period of time between 1993 and 1996 was clearly envisioned and allowed for in the Act.
As noted above, States and Compacts are basing their plans for Governors' certifications on extended interim storage in the years from 1992 until disposal capacity is available.
The Regions are beginning to receive inquiries from licensees about license amendments to authorize storage.
In meetings of waste generators held in Michigan. Ohio, and Wisconsin and attended by Headquarters and Regional staff, these same types of questions have been raised.
Finally, one firm has contacted the staff about engineered centralized storage facilities to assist States and Compacts at the end of interim access.
F Regulatory guidance on LLW storage by reactor licensees has existed since 1981, when the staff isse;d Generic Letter 81-38, " Storage of Low-level Radioactive Nastes at Power 1
1 The Commissioners Reactor Sites." This letter allowed reactor licensees to provide on site LLW storage capacity not to exceed the generated waste projected for five years, under the provisions of 10 CFR Section 50.59.
In addition to the five-year condition, the licensee has to assure that license conditions or technical specifications da aat
)
prohibit storage and that no unreviewed safety question exists.
The staff also provided radiological safety guidance for design and operation of interim contingency LLW storage facilities.
In addition, Generic Letter 81-38 noted that if an unreviewed safety question exists or if the storage capacity is to be for more than five years, the licensee would need to apply for a Part 30 license.
In 1985, the staff issued Generic Letter 85-14, " Commercial Storage at Power Reactor Sites of Low-Level Radioactive Waste Not Generated by the Utility."
This letter expanded on 81-38 to address information needed from licensees in an application for commercial LLW storage at a reactor site.
The guidance contained in Generic Letters 81-38 and 85-14 continues to be useful for reactor licensees, and the staff sees no need to amend it at this time.
l The aforementioned Generic Letters addressed LLW storage by reactor licensees. The staff has from time to time also issued information relating to aspects of LLW storage by fuel cycle and materials licensees.
However there is no L
singleguidancedocumentwhichcomprehensivelyaddresses regulatory considerations or existing guidance on LLW storage by fuel cycle and materials licensees. To assure that such licensees are able to provide necessary storage.
l the staff considers that guidance in the form of an Information Notice or Generic Letter is necessary. A l
recent communication from Region 111 has underscored the neec f6P such guidance, which could be similar to the guidance contained in Generic Letter 81-38, but which would I
be addressed to fuel cycle and materials licensees. The guidance would identify existing documents developed and issued by the staff and provide broad, topical characterization of information to be included in an amendment application for extended interim storage. Among areas to be addressed would be:
the types, quantities, half-lives and chemical / physical form of waste to be L
stored; location and duration of storage; plans for final disposal; financial assurances; packaging and container integrity; ventilation; accessibility; security; emergency preparedness; fire protection; radiation protection; and accountability.
In addition to the guidance for licensees, the staff believes that development of a checklist or concise review l
t The Consissioners '
format for technical reviewers is advisable.
This checklist would assure consistent reviews of amendments and would clarify the criteria applied to such reviews.
Development of a. checklist for reviewers is also supported by Region ll!'s memorandum.
Financial mechanisms for ultimate disposal of LLW in extended interim storage are essential to assure that, irressective of economic or business conditions, such waste will se disposed of and will not-remain in storage.
Under the new decommissioning rule, financial assurances will be required for deconnissioning of all production and utilization facilities and certain materials licensee facilities based upon possession limits in licenses. With respect to materials licensees, these limits are set sufficiently high that most such licensees will not be required to develop a decommissioning funding plan and to provide financial assurances of their ability to implement that plan, including disposal of LLW which they may have in storage.
Consequently, the staff may need to impose, through license condition, requirements for financial assurance.
Prior to January 1,1996, when the financial and liability burden for disposal capacity will shift to the unsited States, licensees may not reserve adequate funds to cover disposal costs of wastes accumulated in storage.
Similarly, licensees who go 1996 could leave out of business prior to January 1,h no funds for their substantial inventories of LLW, wit ultimate disposal.
The requirements for financial assurance by materials licensees will necessarily be case-s)ecific, depending on estimated volumes of stored wastes tie estimated handling, transportation and disposal costs of such waste in regional disposal facilities; and the i
prognosis as to availability of disposal capacity.
Another area where staff work should be undertaken is in l
development of guidance for inspection of waste storage facilities, inspection Procedure (I.P.) 65051 describes procedures for inspecting LLW storage facilities at i
reactors.
Similar guidance is not extant in the applicable Inspection Procedure for Radioactive Waste Management at fuel cycle and material licensees, I.P. 84850. Development of this inspection guidance will assure thorough, uniform inspection of LLW in storage.
Finally, in both Generic Letters 81-38 and 85-14, as well as a 1984 letter f rom Chairman Palladino to Governor l
Dukakis of Massachusetts, NRC has stated that storage l
The Commissioners '
t should only be an interim contingency measure and that licensees should continue to_ ship waste for disposal to the maximum extent practicable.
The staff believes that the 4
proposed issuance of guidanct to licensees on extended interim storage of LLW could be interpreted as a change f om j
NRC's previous statements or positions on storage relative to disposal. While the Comission has never issued an explicit statement of policy on LLW storage, issuance of a i
>olicy statement could accomplish several objectives.
First, it would affirm NRC's previous statements or positions on storage of LLW. Second, it would identify the conditions under which NRC would authorize extended interim storage by licensees.
Third, since a policy statement would reach a broader audience and carry greater weight than either an information notice or a generic letter, it would help assure that the focus of States and Compacts remains on i
disposalratherthanstorage.] Consequently,thestafthas-prepared for the Commission s consideration, a policy statement for publication in the Federal Register. This statement is contained in AttachmeMTIo UiTi Fiper.
In addition to the work reported in this paper on NRC regulatory requirements for extended interim storage, the staff has recently become aware of developing U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations which could effectively prohibit storage of low-level radioactive waste containing some categories of hazardous waste (i.e.,mixedwaste). The staff is exploring this subject with EPA staff and will report on its findings at a later l
date.
TheOfficeoftheGeneralCounsel(OGC)hasreviewedthis paper and has no legal objection to its contents.
Recomendation:
That the Comission:
1)
Ajurove the publication in the Federal Register of the atached Comission policy statement on"ixli53id interim storage of LLW.
j 2)
Approve the staff's proposal to develop guidance for licensees on information to be included in applications for extended interim storage amendments as well as guidance for technical reviewers to use in the review of such amendment requests.
l l
l l
,.r,
~,,
,.nc,
The Connissioners
- Note:
The staff's plan to develop additional inspection guidance for LLW storage at fuel cycle and materials licensees MM s'.q<M, 3
Victor Stello, Or.
Executive Director or Operations
Enclosure:
Conrnission Policy Statement on Extended Interim Storage of LLW Commissioners' comments or consent should be provided directly e
to the Office of the Socrotary by COB Priday, June 23, 1989.
Commission Staff Office comments, if any, should be submitted to the 'ommissioners NLT Friday, June _16, 1989, with an infor-
~
- na t f.
Opy to the Offico of the Secretariat.
If the paper is of a nature that it requires additional time for analytical rev' - and comment, the Commissioners and the Secretariat should be apprised of when commnnts may be expected.
This paper is tentatively scheduled for affirmation at an Open Meeting during the Week of June 26, 1989.
Please refer to the appropriate Weekly Commission Schedule, when published, for a specific date and timo.
DISTRIBUTION:
Commissioners OGC 0IG GPA REGIONAL OFFICES EDO ACRS ACNW ASLBP ASIAP SECY
'i'-
4 l'
i i.
4 g
I ENCLOSURE i
E v.
~-
i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION EXTENDED INTERIM STORAGE OF LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE GENERAL STATEMENT OF POLICY t
i
~
AGENCY:
Nuclear Regulatory Comission ACTION:
General Statement of Policy
SUMMARY
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission is defining in a general policy statement its position on extended interim storage of low-level radioactive wastes (LLW) by licensees. The purpose of the policy statement is to make clear the Comission's position on storage of LLW as well as to discuss the conditions under which NRC will authorize extended interim storage of LLW when these wastes cannot be disposed of promptly in a low-level waste disposal l
facility.
l EFFECTIVE DATE:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Paul Lohaus, Operations Branch, Division of Low-Level Waste Management and Decomissioning, Office of Nuclear Material l
Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, D.C.20555, telephone (301)492-0553.
l l
l l
. _ ~.
j
)
2 i
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
l In enacting the low-level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980, Congress assigned to the States the responsibility of providing LLW disposal capacity by i
January 1,1986. This responsibility was affirmed in the Low-Level Radioactive WastePolicyAmendm'intsActof1985(LLRWPAA),inwhichCongressextendedthe deadline for providing disposal capacity from 1986 to 1993.
In exchange for providing this extended interim access period, Congress subjected the States to a series of milestones, penalties and incentives to assure that States would make adequate progress toward being able to manage their LLW in 1993. The Comission does not believe it is appropriate to encourage any actions that could be construed as slowing the pace of the States' progress.
l l
l The next milestone under the LLRWPAA is January 1,1990 by which time States and Compacts must either: (1) file a complete license application for a LLW disposal facility; (2) provide to NRC a Governor's certification that the State will be capable of providing and will provide for storage, disposal or management of LLW generated within the State and requiring disposal after 1992; c
or (3) secure a disposal agreement with a sited Compact. NRC estimates that 30 States may file Governors' certifications, and in those States the preferred course of action for their waste after 1992 may be to rely on waste generators l
to store their own LLW, until a disposal facility is operational. Depending
3 upon the situation in a given State or Compact, licensee storage of LLW could be required for as little as a few months to as long as several years. For most licensees, storage of LLW for this period of time could constitute extended interim storage and may require amendments to their licenses.
The Consission recognizes that special considerations apply to the storage of i
some wastes, such as waste with concentrations of radionuclides exceeding Class C or waste containing both radioactive and hazardous constituents (i.e.,
mixedwaste). These wastes will need separate and additional considerations which will be developed and applied on a case-by-case basis.
Statement of Commission Policy The Commission believes that, whenever possible, direct shipment of LLW for final disposal is preferable to storage from the standpoints of public health and safety and keeping occupational exposure levels as low as reasonably achievable. The Commission, however, permits wastes with relatively short half-lives to be stored for decay to undetectable levels and then to be disposed of according to their non-radiological properties. This practice is used primarily by medical and academic licensees, and certain industrial licensees. However, the Commission does not encourage storage of materials containing long-lived radionuclides, either at the site of waste generation or at centralized facilities serving multiple generators. While the Commission recognizes that storage will be necessary as an interim step between the end
.~.
i j
4 1
)
ofaccesstoexistingdisposalfacilities(December 31,1992) and when new Regional or State disposal capacity comes on line, it encourages States and Compacts to move with all due speed to develop such capacity and to minimize the length of time LLW remains in storage.
The Comission believes that a State or Compact should not rely on indefinite storage as an acceptable means for timely fulfillment of State responsibilities to provide a disposal facility for generators of LLW. From the standpoint of public health and safety, indefinite or long-term storage of LLW is not an acceptable alternative to prompt disposal in a lowalevel waste disposal facility. However, storage of LLW as an interim step to, and not an alternative for, development of disposal capacity is acceptable from the standpoint of public health and safety and can be licensed.
Comission regulations do not categorically preclude storage, either on-site or in centralized storage facilities. However, many materials licensees may not be authorized to store wastes on-site because of license conditions limiting I
the amounts and forms of radioactive materials that may be possessed under license. The Comission will consider amendment of licenses to permit on-site storage on a case-by-case basis.
Applications by materials licensees to amend Comission licenses to increase possession limits or otherwise change license conditions, or to construct and operate centralized storage facilities, must be supported with comprehensive
information on the propn "d activity. The Cosenission staff is developing guidance for its licensees on applications for amendments to authorize storage, either at existing licensed facilities where radioactive materials are used or at specific centralized storage facilities. Applications will be reviewed based on the proposed location and duration of storage; the types, quantities, half-lives and chemical / physical forms of the waste involved; plans for final disposal; packaging and container integrity; radiation protection; ventilation; accessibility; security; fire protection; errrrgency preparedness; and accountability as appropriate for each proposal. The Comission will evaluate the need for financial assurances on a case-by-case basis to provide for ultimate disposal when the storage facility is filled to capacity or the licensee must unexpectedly terminate operations.
Specific plans for final disposal and related financial assurances are important elements of the Commission's licensing evaluations. The disposal plans of the States and Compacts are of key importance, particularly the dates by which stored wastes will ultimately be disposed of in a low-level waste disposal facility.
Licensing will be carried out under 10 CFR parts 30, 40 and 70 for byproduct, source and special nuclear material, respectively. The radiation protection standards contained in 10 CFR Part 20 will apply to all proposed activities.
. Reactor licensees may add on-site contingency storage for up to five years of LLW under provisions of 10 CFR Section 50.59 or for a longer period under a part 30 license as specified in the guidance provided by Generic Letter 81-38,
" Storage of Low-level Radioactive Wastes at Power Reactor Sites."
Information needs and licensing approval for on site commercial LLW storage by _ reactor licensees of waste generated by other persons was addressed in Generic letter 85-14. " Commercial Storage at Power Reactor Sites of Low-Level Radioactive Waste Not Generated by the Utility." Nothing in this Policy Statement is intended to conflict with or alter the guidance contained in either Generic l
Letter 81-38 or 85-14 Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this day of
, 1989 l
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
i Samuel J. Chilk Secretary of the Commission