ML20059G431
| ML20059G431 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/29/1990 |
| From: | Rathbun D NRC OFFICE OF GOVERNMENTAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRS (GPA) |
| To: | Roukema M HOUSE OF REP. |
| References | |
| FRN-53FR49886, RULE-PR-CHP1 CCS, NUDOCS 9009120304 | |
| Download: ML20059G431 (4) | |
Text
_
j.
\\,
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION r
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20665 i
g*****
August 29, 1990 l
i t
The Honorable Marge Roukema i
United States House of Representatives Washington, D. C.
20515 l
Dear Congresswoman Roukema:
t I am responding to your August 8,1990, letter in thich you asked us to address the concerns of your constituent, Mr. Sihey J. Goodman. Mr. Goodman expressed his disagreement with a Nuclear Reguktory Comission (NRC) p(olicy which could be used to classify certain low-level radioactive waste LLW) as being below regulatory concern or BRC.
i
)
On July 3,1990, the Comission issued a Below Regulatory Concern Policy i
Statement.
I have enclosed a copy of this statement together with a companion explanatory booklet for your use in responding to Mr. Goodman.
The statement identifies the principles and criteria that will govern Comission decisions to exempt certain radioactive material from the full scope of regulatory controls. Thus, the policy could apply, but would not be limited to potential BRC waste determinations.
I would emphasize that-the policy is not self-executing and does not, by itself, deregulate any l
LLW. Any specific exemption decisions would be accomplished through rulemaking or licensing actions during which opportunity for public comment would be provided in those situations where generic exemption provisions have not i
already been established, j
The policy can be considered an outgrowth of the concepts articulated in j
the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 (Pub. L.
t 99-240). That Act (i.e., Section 10) directed the NRC to "... establish standards and procedures...and deve'op the technical capability for considering and acting upon petitions to exempt specific. radioactive waste l
streams from regulation...due to the presence of radionuclides in such l
l waste streams in sufficiently low concentrations or quantities-as to be below regulatory concern."
In response to the legislation,-NRC developed i
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 decomissioning decisions involving the release-of l
residually-contaminated lands or structures), reflects much of the basic j
$g89282804ggs!29 FULL TEXT ASCll SCAN PDC t
L
(
M4( Lh I
i.
s j
I l
radiation protection approach described in this earlier Commission l
policy. The Commission, in both actions, has acted in the belief that the i
nation's best interests are served by policies that establish a consistent i
i risk framework within which exemption decisions can be made with assurance i
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 Environmental 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.-
)
In responding to the specific concern on dispersal of BRC radioactive material in community landfill sites, I would point out that natural-radioactive material is pervasiveLin our environment, including the radioactivity which exists in our own bodies. As a result, very low levels of radioactivity from both natural and man-made sources are currently entering landfills. Thus, I would submit for your consideration that the real issue involved in radioactive material disposals is, "What level of radioactivity can we allow to be disposed of at specifically i
defined non-licensed disposal facilities without compromising public
)
health and safety or the environment"? On this point, Section 10 of the Act focuses on the concentratiors or quantities of radionuclides which could be disposed of at other than licensed low-level radioactive waste 1
sites.
It is this question, among others, to which the Commission's BRC l
policy is directed.
Mr. Goodman's reference to the environmental release of 30 percent or more of the low-level radioactive waste from nuclear power plants may originate from a view expressed by the nuclear power industry and the EPA that 30 percent may be considered for BRC 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 l
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 radioactive waste that could 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 background radiations that it may not be readily detectable. Any NRC-developed constraints, including the provision for regulatory inspections at the licensed facility generating the waste, will i
ensure that the materials in question can safely be released as below r
regulatory concern from a radiological standpoint.
I i
i
.j
3 i
In closing, I want to assure you that the Commission takes its mandate to i
protect the health and safety of the public very seriously.
.I, therefore, hope the views expressed and the enclosed information will prove useful in j
responsibly expanding the dialogue on this controversial and technically.
complex issue.
Sincerely, i
[
b Dennis K. Rathbun, Director.
?
Congressional Affairs Office of Governmental'and Public Affairs
Enclosures:
As Stated i
i t
i 1
]
1 V
- - - --r-r
-*__-v----,m-La_,-_ _ _ _ _ _ --,, _.,, _
m
i 1
i CONGRESSIONAL CORAESPONDENCE SYiTEM i
1 DOCUMENT PAEPARAT10N CNECRLIST i
l 1
l This checklist is to be submitted with each document (or group of
]
Gs/As) sont for entering into the CCs.
1.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DOCUNINT(S) fN r b bbMe
/
f 3.
TYPE OF DOCUMENT Correspondense Bearings (Qs/As) 3.
DOCUMENT CONTROL sensitive (NRC caly),.
-sensitive 4.
CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE and SUSCOMMITTEE8 (if applicable)
Congressional Committee i
subcommittee j
1 1
S.
sUNECT CODES j
(a)
(b)
(e) s.
s0URCE OF DOCUMENTS (a)
_ 5520 (document name (b) s can. -
(e)
Attachments (d)
Rekey (e)
Other l
7.
SYSTEN M0 D TES
!7 YB (a)
Date OCA sent document to CCS (b)
Date CCS receives docuneat (e)
Date returned to OCA for af.sitional information (d)
Date resubmitted by OCA tt, CCS (e)
Date entered into CCS by (f)
Date OCA ractified that document is in CCS 8.
COMMENTS 1
1 2
,,.._x..<.
.....-.,-.r,.,..,_..m,--,,.,_---.---...~,-,.,.-,,.m.,~...
.._.em._,w._m._
...w.,..
-