ML20059F356
| ML20059F356 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/03/1990 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Herger W HOUSE OF REP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059F359 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-53FR49886, RULE-PR-CHP1 CCS, NUDOCS 9009110186 | |
| Download: ML20059F356 (3) | |
Text
_
s UNITED STATES g
['
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
l
-E ij WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 August 3, 1990 The Honorable Wally Herger United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 1
l
Dear Congressman Herger:
t I am responding to your May 31, 1990, letter to Chairman Carr in which you requested our consideration of issues raised by your constituent, Mr. Siri Pritam Kaur Khalsa. Mr. Khalsa's concerns involve the disposal-of~1ow-level radioactive waste (LLW); specifically, those wastes which could potentially fall:
into a category characterized as "below regulatory concern" or "BRC."
l As you may be aware, on July 3,1990, the Commission issued a Below Regulatory; Concern Policy Statement.
I have enclosed a copy of this statement and an explanatory booklet for your use in responding to your constituent (Enclosures 1 and 2).
I would point out that the policy _is not self-executing and does not, by itself, deregulate any LLW. Rather, the policy states the principles and criteria that would apply to Commission decisions which would allow licensed radioactive material to be released to the environment or to the general public.
Any specific exemption decision would be accomplished through rulemaking or licensing actions during which opportunity for public comment would be provided in those situations where generic exem) tion provisions have not already been established. Furthermore, the policy las implications beyond waste disposals in that it would also provide the basis for deconnissioning decisions involving
- the release of lands, structures, or recycled materials for. unrestricted use as well as decisions regarding consumer product exemptions. The policy can be considered an outgrowth of the concepts articulated in the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 (Pub. L.99-240). ThatAct(i.e.,Section
- 10) 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."
l The Commission, in developing the BRC policy, has acted in the belief that the nation's best interests would be served by the establishment of a consistent risk framework within which exemption decisions can be made with assurance that human health and the environment are protected.
In this regard we believe our actions are consistent with those of other Federal agencies; e.g,., the l
Enviroraental Protection Agency-(EPA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), who have formulated or are attempting to formulate similar policies for the hazardous materials they regulate.
I also believe our policy will contribute to focusing our radiation protection resources-on those risks with l
greatest potential impact on public health and safety.
RRTEXT AScil 80AM
,comoie6 900soa p
PDR ORG NE E
\\
's j
l
.The Honorable Wally Herger 2
l s
Your constituent's reference to the environmental release of 30 percent or more of the low-level radioactive waste from nuclear power plants may originate from l
a view expressed by the nuclear power industry and--the EPA that 30 percent of.
the low-level radioactive waste generated by volume (at nuclear: power facilities) may be considered for BRC waste classification. The nuclear power industry has estimated that this volume of material would contain approximately 0.01 percent '
of the radioactivity contained in all their low-level radioactive waste.
I can assure you that any low-level waste that eculd be considered for BRC classification would involve only materials with the lowest levels of radioactivity content.
In fact, the level of radioactivity may be such a small fraction'of natural-l background radiation that it may not be readily detectable. Any NRC-developed BRC waste disposal regulations would also be expected to provide the necessary-constraints, including the provision for regulatory inspections at the licensed facility generating the waste, to ensure that the materials in-question can safely be released as belw regulatory concern from a l
radiological standpoint.
i In conclusion, I believe our BRC policy is in concert with our mandate to protect the health and safety of the public and the environment.
I hope these views and the enclosed information will prove useful in responsibly expanding the dialogue on this controversial and technically complex issue.
Sincerely, 1
l
/
va es a or L
E cutive rector for Operations
Enclosures:
)
1.
BRC Policy Statement 2.
BRC Explanatory Booklet i
t k
e
- L
,v--
I
.g t-l i
CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENCE SYSTEM-DOCUMENT PREPARATION CMECKLIST.
,j This checklist is to be submitted with each document (or group of f
Qs/As) sent for entering into the CCS.
i 1.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENT (S) b C(A-I o
c 3.
TYPE OF DOCUMENT Correspondense Nearings (Qs/As) 3.
DOCUMENT CONTROL Sensitive (WRC Only)
Sensitive 4.-
CONGRESSIONALCOMMITTEEandSUSCOMMITTEkS(ifapplicable)
Congressional Committee Subcommittee 5
5.
SUBJECT CODES j
l (a)
{
i (b)
I (c) 4.
SOURCE OF DOCUMENTS (a) 5520 (document name
/ can.
/
(b)
S (c)
Attachments (4)
Rekey (e)
Other 7.
SYSTEM LOG DATES 9hkD i
(3)
Date OCA sent document to CCS t
/
l l
(b)
Date CCS receives document (c)
Date returned to OCA for additional information l
l (d)
Date resubmitted by OCA-to CCS (e)
Data entered into CCS by
{
(f)
Date OCA notified that' document is in CCS t
S.
COMMENTS I
I i
...- --.. m... ~
m 1
I
-