ML20059G153
| ML20059G153 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/08/1990 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Gonzales H HOUSE OF REP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059G156 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-53FR49886, RULE-PR-CHP1 CCS, NUDOCS 9009120162 | |
| Download: ML20059G153 (3) | |
Text
. ---
- - - ~ ~
l I
$ mag
]
'94
- UNITED STATES
~
'[\\'
g NOCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION r,,
wassiworow, o. c. rows
\\,...../
August 8, 1990 The Honorable Henry B. Gonzales United States House of Representatives i
Washington, D.C.
20515
Dear Congressman Gonzales:
I am responding to your July 18, 1990 letter in which you asked us to address the concerr.s of your constituent, Mr. John B. Suenram. Mr. Suenram expressed 2
his disagreement with a Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) policy which could be used to classify certain low-level radioactive waste (LLW)'as below-regulatory concern or BRC.
As you may be aware, on July 3,1990, the Commission issued a Below Regulstory Concern Policy Statement.
I have enclosed a copy of this, statement and'an.
explanatory booklet (Eticlosures 1 and 2) for your information.and use in responding to Mr. Suenram.
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 could allow licensed radioactive material to be released from-the full scope of reguiatory controls.. Any specific exemption decision would be accomplished through rulemaking or licensing actions during which opportunity for public coment would be provided in those situations where generic exemption provisions have not already been established.
The policy can be considered an outgrowth of the concepts articulated in the i
Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 (Pub. L.99-240).
That Act (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 l
regulation...due to the presence of radionuclides in such waste streams in sufficiently low concentrations or quantities as to be below regulatory concern."
In response to the legislation, NRC developed and published in 1986 a Statement of Policy and Procedures which outlines the criteria for considering such petitions. Our recently. issued broad policy' statement, which has implications beyond waste disposals (e.g., applicable to decommissioning decisionsinvolvingthereleaseofresidua11y-contaminatedlandsorstructures),
reflects much of the basic radiation protection approach described in this earlier Coia.hsion policy. The Commisi on, in both actions, has acted in the belici that the nation's best interests are served by policies that establish-a consistent risk framework within which exemption decisions can be' made with assurance that human health and the envir:mment are protectede In
?' f' this regard, we believe our actions are consistent with those of other Federal agencies, e.g., the Environmental Protection Agenvy (EPA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), who have formulated or are attempting to formulate similar policies for the hazardous materials they regulate..
In responding to Mr. Suenram's specific statements I v uld emphasize that the o
NRC does not believe and has not calculated that e m ptions could lead to the i
),
R
'%& Q l
cn g'f/
9009120162 900808 U
The 'Honorele Hecry B. Gonzales 2
deaths of 2500 people ancually. The Comission has estimated the hypothetical risk to individuals and populations from the individual and collective dose criteria defined in the BTC policy. These projections of risk, which are l
contained in the policy, Ere 'oased on estimates recently made by the United Nations Scientific Comittee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) and the National Research Council's Comittee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation. This latter comittee has recently issued a report, " Health Effects of Exposures to Low-Levels of Ionizing Radiation," commonly referred to as the BEIR V report. The risk estimates in this report are based primarily upon the Japanese atomic-bomb survivors and pertain to the high doses and dose rates associated with those exposures because there is not direct evidence of health effects from radiation at low dose levels. The potential exposure. levels that would be associated w% BRC waste disposals are significantly smaller than those received by the bomb survivors, and in fact, would only be a small fraction of natural background exposures. On this issue, the BEIR Y report states-that the possibility cannot be ruled out that there may be no risks from exposures-comparable to external natural background radiation.
Mr. Suenram also asserts that a significant portion of the waste material from nuclear power plants may be reclassified. This statement may originate from 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 thi, volume of material would contain approximately 0.01 percent of the radioactivity contained in all their low-level radioactive waste. There are other industries such as hospitals that also produce low-level waste.
In closing, I can assure you that we take our mandate to protect the health and safety of the public very seriously.
As a result, we will continue to do our best in carefully and clearly responding to the issues and questions raised by Mr. Suenram and other concerned citizens.
l Sincerely,
.d anes M. Tay' r E ecutive D,ector for Operations
Enclosures:
1.
BRC Poli y Statement 2.
BRC Exp'.anatory Booklet l
a w
--r+-
+ -,
>m-- -
,,-,-s
-,--e7,-
.,--,,m-,n e-
O I
I CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENCE SYSTEM DOCUMENT PREPARATION CNECKLIST l
This checklist is.to be submitted with each document (or group of l
Os/As) sent for entering into the CCS.
Nk M2a[(S 1.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF NT(S) 3.
TYPE OF DOCUMENT Correspondense' Bearings (Qs/As) 3.
DOCUMENT CONTROL Sensitive (WRC Only) on-Sensitive 4.
CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE and SUSCOMMITTEES ~(if applicable)
Congressional Committee Subcommittee t
8.
SUBJECT CODES (a)
(b)
(c) 8.
SOURCE OF DOCUMENTS (a) 5520 (document name (b) n.
(c) ttachments (4)
Rekey (e)
Other 7.
SYSTEM G DATES (a)
/
d Date OCA sent document to CCS
,,f (b)
Date CCS receives dctfmant (e)
Date returned to CCA for additional information (4)
Date resubmitted by OCA to CCS (e)
Date entered into CCS by (f)
Date OCA notified that document is in CCS.
S.
COMMENTS
_ _.. _. ~, _.. _
_, _... _.. _.