ML20128A066

Notice of Workshop 10CFR Part 20, Radiological Criteria for Decommissioning of NRC-Licensed Facilities;Workshop

ML20128A066
Person / Time
Issue date:	01/09/1993
From:	Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
To:
References
FRN-57FR58727, RULE-PR-20 NUDOCS 9302020113
Download: ML20128A066 (13)

Text

._ - . ___ _ _ - - - -

'\

].).'lb

. 2_ _ .~0.__. .  !

t7sso-ol) l G51F/15PU7) liUCLEAR REGULATORY CCIOilSSIO!J '93 jfy j] A8 :23 J q

10 CFR Part ::0 , s .-l 9

)

l Radiological Criteria for Decommission.ing of  ;

11RC-licensed Facilities; Workshop AGE 11CY 1 11uclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTIO!1: llotice of Workshop.

SUliMARY : The liuclear Regulatory Commission (11RC) is preparing to initiate an enhanced participatory rulemaking on establishing the radiological criteria for the decommissioning of !1RC-licensed facilities. The Commission intends to enhance the participation of affected interesta in the rulemaking by soliciting c mmentary from these interests on the rulemaking issues before the staff develops the draft proposed rule. The Commission plans to conduct a series of workshops to solicit commentary from affected interests on the fundamental approaches and issues that must be addressed in establishing the radiological criteria for ,

decommiccioning. The first workshop will be held in Chicago, h,

Illinois on January 27 and'28, 1993 and will be open to the public, y\

r &

9302020113 930109 PDR PR c%g I

20 57FR50727 PDR .

I 2 DATES: January 27, 1993 from 9:00am to 6:00pm; January 28, 1993 from 8:30am to 4:30pm, Park Hyatt Hotel, 800 florth Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Illinois.

As diccussed later in this notice, the workshop discussions will focus on the issues and approaches identified in a Rulemaking Issues Paper prepared by the IIRC stafi The Commission will accept written comments on the Rulemaking Issues Paper from the public, as well as from workshop partic'iants.

Written comments should be submitted by May 28, 1993.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments on the Rulemaking Issues Paper to: Secrotary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. ATTM: Docketing and Service Branch.

!!and deliver comments to 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. on Federal workdays.

The Rulemaking Issues Paper is available from Francis X. Cameron (See "FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT").

FOR TURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Francis X. Cameron, Special Counsel for Public Liaison and Waste Management, Office of the General Counsel, Washington D.C. 20555, Telephone: 301-e04-1642.

SUPPLEMENTAPY INFORMATION:

Background

. .-. . . - . _ . . . . . . . ~ . - - - . - -

-~-- _.--- _-.-.--.

3  !

^

The NRC has the statutory responsibility for protection.of health and safety related to the use of source, byproduct, ar; special nuclear material under the Atomic Energy Act. The SRC believes that one portion of this responsibility is to ensure the safe-and timely decommissioning of nuclear facilities whiuh it licenses ,

and to provide guidance to licensees on how to plan for and prepare their sites for decommissioning. Once licensed activities have ceased, licensees are required to' decommission.

their facilities no that their licenses may be termir.ated. .This ,

requires that the radioactivity in land, groundwater, buildings, and equipment resulting from the ]icensed operation be recuced to levels that allow the property to be released-for unrestricted use. Licenseen must then demonstrate that all facilities-have been properly decontaminated and that radioactive material has-been transferred to authorized recipients. Confirmatory surveys are conducted by NRC, where appropriate, to verify-that sites ,

meet NRC radiological criteria for decommissioning.

Tt ./ pes of nuclear fuel cycle facilities that will require t decommissioning include nuclear power plants; non-power ~

(research and test) reactors; fuel fabrication plants, uranium -

hexafluoride production plants, and independent spent-full-storage installations. In addition there are currently about.

24,000 materials licensees. About one third of these are NRC. ,

licensees, while the.romainder are licensed'by Agreement States acting under the authority of' the _ Atomic Energy: Act, Section 274, fI t

3

--. .. . . - - - . .. .,_....-..m_ -

._.._,._-___.,..__.-._._a.--____..-._._...

del c

-4 '

b I -These licensees includo universities, medical institutions, radioactive source. manufacturers, and companies that use. y radioisotopes for industrial purposes. .About 50% of~NRc's 7,500-u materials licensees use either. sealed radioactive sources or small v ' ants of short-lived radioactive materials._ '[

Decommiss.9ning of these facilities should be1relatively: simple ,

because there is usually little or no residual; radioactive- -l contamination. Of the remaining 50t, a smallinumber (e.'q.

radioactive source manufacturers, radiopharmaceutical: producers, and radioactj o ore processors) conduct operations 1that could .;

produce substantial radioactive contamination in-_ portions'ofcthe- :i

~

-i f a cil 4.ty . These facilities, like the fuel _ cycle; facilities identified above,..must be decontaminated"before they can bc safely released for unrestricted use. .

Several hundredJNRC and Agreement. State [ licenses areLterminated each year. --'rhe mejority of 'these licenses ~ involve 1.imited operations, produce little orEno radioactive -contamination,7and

- do.not'present complex decommissioning problems or potential risks to public haci'n. or the elstronment-from. residual 1 0 contamination. However, as1the nuclear-industryLmathres, it is .

(} expected that more and'more of the: larger' nuclear facilities 1thats L . -

have been-opernting for a-number of years willl reach:the-end!of .,

o

" their useful lives and-be decommissioned. . -Therefore~, both the-

' number 1and complexity.c.f f acilities: that- will' require o, _

~

(decommiesioning is. expected to increase. ,

4 4 w C - e '

M4 .- .. - , . -6

s. ,

.- r 1 3 5 A The Commission. believes that there is a-need to incorporate'into -

its regulations radiological criteria for termination of-licenses.  ;

and release of land and structuresifor-unrestricted use. :Thel 't intent of this action would be to provide a. clear and consistent.

regulatory basis for determining the extent to which lands land structures.must be decontaminated before a site can be ,

Tne Commission believes that inclusion of decommissioned.

criteria in the regulations would result-in more efficient and consistant licensing actions related to the numerous and .

frequently complex site decontamination and decommissioning'  :

activities anticipated in the-future. A-rulemaking; effort would also provide an opportunity to reassess the-basis for the residual contamination levels contained in existing guidance in-  ;

light of changes in basic radiation protection standards and- -

decommissioning experiencs obtained during'the past 15 years. ';

The new criteria'would apply to the decommissioning.'of power reactors,-non-power reactors, fuel' reprocessing plants, fuell f fabrication plants, uranium hexafluoride! production.piants,_ -

U Q independent spent' fuel storage installations, and. materials L ..

R ' licenses. The criteria would apply to' nuclear facilities >that-operate through their normal--l-ifetime, as well1as'to those that.

M may be-snut down prematurely. TheEproposed criteria would;notL apply to-uranium (other.than' source. material)Emines and mill tailings, high-level waste repositories,.or low-level waste i

' disposal' facilities.

+

.,g E$-2

i ...

~ , o ,  ?

" ' ~

, .a - . - , - +.i

s.

I( ,

4 k 6-Until tha'new criteria'are in place, the. Commission intends to 3! -proceed with the decommissioning of nuclear facilities on a sito-specific basis as the need arises considering existingLeriteria..

Case and' activity-specific risk decisions vill continue to be.-

made as necessary during the pendency of this process.

The Enhanced Participatory Rulemaking The Commission. believes it is desirable to provide for early and' .- j comprehensive. input fron affected interests ort important public3 health and safety' issues, such as the development of-radiological' criteria for decommissioning. Accordingly, the Commission is-

. initiating an enhanced participatory tulemaking to establish these criteria. 'The objective of'the'rulemaking is to. enhance-4 the participation of affected'interesta in tne rulemaking by-o

-soliciting commentary from .these interests--on .the :rulemaking: -

0 issues before:the'NRC staff develops the' draft-proposed rule.:

The NRC: staff will considerL this commentary::~in the development Lof -

the draft. proposed rule, Ens well an darument how these comments? ,

q were considered in arriving >at acregulatory. approach. The?

Commission believes that thisiwill~be an' effective methodEfor" ,

g illuminating the? decision making. process on; complex and n .. .

. 'cantroversia11public health and' safety. issues. This approach:

will ensure that'the important issues have-been~ identified; twill?

assistLin icentifying potential.-information gaps-.or Limplementation problems; and-! willL f acilitate the '_developnent?of s

=P.

v eie

- a

.- j mh. . , . . . _ _ ~.. ,i , _ - . . .

_ m - - _ - - _ . _ . . _ _ . _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ . ._._m. . _ . .

i t

7 ,

potential solutions to add'ress the concerns.that affected

. interests maylhave in regard to the rulemaking.

N The early involvement of affected interests in-the development of-the draft proposed rule will be accomplished through a series of '

workshops. A workshop format was selected because it-will ,

provide representatives of the affected interests ~withian ,

ooportunity to discuss the rulemaking issues with one another.and to question _one another about their respective positions'and concerns. Although the workshops are intendedoto foster a clearer understanding of the positionc and concerns of-the affected interests, as well' as to identify. areas of' agreemerit and disagreement, it'is.not the intent of:the workshop-process-to-attempt to develop a consensus agreement on the rulemakir3g issues. In <.ddition to the commentary from the workshop participants, the workshops'will be-open to the publiciand'the l' public will-ha provided with the opportunity to comment on the-

~

i rulemhking iscues.and.the workshop discussions at. discrete:

' intervals during the workshops. ,

i .The normal 1 process for conducting Commission rulemakings is NRC

' staff development of'a. draft proposed rule for Commission review-

~

[

L E -and approval,. publication of the proposed rule:for public' l

l

' comment,. consideration of'the commcats byythe NRC staff, and preparation of a-draft final rule.for Commission approval._ In-the enhanced participatory rulemaki m , aut'only will comments-be' h

f f N w I E "7P- = 1 1 P k

~l

~

1 8

solicited before the NRC staff prepares a draft proposed rule, ,

but the mechanism for soliciting these early comments will also

provide an opportunity for the affected interests.and~the NRC staff to discuss the issues with each other, rather than relying on the traditional one-to-one written correspondence with the.NRC staff. After Commission review and approval of the draft proposed rule that is developed using the workshop commentary, s

-the. general process _of issuing the propocod rule for public l

-comment, NRC staff' evaluation vf comments,- and preparation of a draft final rule for Comuission-approval,- will occur._ <

]

I participants.

r In order to have a manageable discussion among the workshop participants, the number of participants in each workshop 7must be- 3 limited. Based on discussions with experts 1on workshop:  ;

r+ facilitation, the1NRC staff believes-that the-optimum size of the-1 - -

~

a

=

workshop: group is-fifteen-to twenty participants. :Due to -

differing levels of_ interest in each. region,ithe actual number o?. W participants in any:one_ workshop, as well--_as theinumber of-o participants that represent-'a particular interest'in anyjone-Lworkshop, may vary. Invitations to--attend the.vorkshops will bel

j. extended by thelNRC staff using1several-selection criteria.

g

[. First, to ensure that the Commission nas.the benefit'of'the_

1 ~

L spectrut. of viewpoints on the issues,.;he NRC staff is-attempting to achieve the participation of the full range of-interests thatL h

1

.,,.m. .?I ., , , . , ~ .

9 may be affected by the rulemaking. The NRC staff has identified several general interests that will be used to select specific workshop participants -- state governments, local governments, tribal governments, Federal agencies, citizens groups, nuclear utilities, fuel cycle facilities, and non-fuel cycle facilities.

In addition to these interests, the staff also plans to invite representatives from the contracting industry that performs decommissioning work and representatives from professional societies, such as the Health Physics Society and the American Nuclear Society. The NRC anticipates that most of the participants will be representatives of organizations. However, e

it is also possible that there may be a few participants who, because of their expertise and influencu, will participate without any organizational affiliation.

The second selection criterion is the ability of tne participant to knowledgeably discuss the full range of ruleraking issues. y The NRC staff wishes to ensure that the workshope will elicit 9 informed discussions of options and approaches, and the rationale for those options and approaches, rather than simple statements of opinion. The NRC staff's identification of potential participants has been based on an evaluation of such factors as the extent of a motential par (icipant's experience with a broad range of radiation protection issues and types of nuclear facilities, specific experience with the decommissioning issue, and the extent of a potential participart's substantive conment

.'g' 11-  ;<

10 6 7

. and participation on previous Commission regulatory or licensing  ;

actions.-

The third criterion emphasizes participation from organizations within the region encompassed by the workshop. As much as practicable, those crganizations that primarily operate within the region, as opposed to regional unitn of-national organizations, will have priority-in. terms of participat'ing-in-the corresponding regional workshops. 1 Organizations with L national standing will be part of the " national"' workshop to be held'in Washington, D.C.  :

p Workshop Format.

g

. t o To assure tnat each workshop addresses the issues 1in.a. consistent ,

manner, the workshops will have afcommonupre-defined: scope'andi agenda. focused.-on the Rulemaking. Issues, Paper discussed below.= q b However,-the' workshop' format will bo sufficiently-flexible:to!

allow for the introduction ~ of any' additional" issues - that the - '

participants may;want to raise. At each: workshop, t h e N R C_-_ s t a f f -  ?

will-begin each discussion period-with a.brief overview of the-rulemaking issues to be discussed and'the: remainder of the Jworkshop.will be devoted to a discussion of'theuissues by.the> >

?

participants. . ^The. workshop commentary will.be transcribed and'-

rade available to participants and to the public.. ,

L

< 4 L

l /

-p

[. +

L, .

--- E -; .

Y -

' ll'

, e Personnel from The Keystone Center, a nonprofit organization--

located in Keystone, Colorado, will serve as neutral' facilitators -  ;

for each workshop. The facilitators will chair the. Workshop _

sessionr. and encare that. participants are given an _ opportunity, to , .l express their viewpointo,_ assist participanto in drticulating-  ;

y t their interests, ensure that participants are given the -

opportunity to question each other about their respective viewpoints, and assist in keeping the discussion moving at a pace.

that' will allow all major issue areas to be addressed.

' Rulemaking Issues ' Paper.

E The NRC statf has prepared a Rulcmaking.. Issues Paper to-be used l as.a focal point for the workshop discussions. This'paperfwhich; will - be diatributed ' to_. participants 'in ! advanzo ' or' th's workshops', ni:, .

_ __ s%~ ;

Acts forth in : neutral terms the l issues . that :-must be . addressed in the rulemaking, as well asLbackground'ihformation an theinature i -

-and extent of theLproblem to beiaddressed. ~n framing the issues- g O ~ and approaches discussedjin.the Rulemaking Isr.ues> Paper,_the.NRC- -

staff has attempted to-anticipate the variety of: views that' exist .

3 I

on these_approa'ches and issues 4 , The, paper wi'll provide' .L:

o Lassistance to the participants as..they prepare,for.the' workshops,

'suggest . the. Workshop agenda,e and . establish;the level ot technical;_

1 EU -discussion,that can-bet expected <at the' workshops. The workshop (

4

-discussions ~are intended to'be used.by the-staff.'in dnveloping the draft proposed rule. Prior?to the.-workshops no staff: -

gy

/ 3 ,

g ' i'-'

2ec ,

l . 1 ,,

. x ,

. , . .- .. .w.... .. nw

. -. - .= . - - . - .- . - - . - - . - - .- -

by;fyp V:. y >

s ,

t

,.y n ,

, + ,

s 12 positions will be taken.on the_rulemaking approaches and-issues- 1 As-noted earlier, to identified:in the Rulemaking Issues Papor, the extent that - the Rulemaking Issues Paper; fails to identify a '

d.

4 pertinent issue, this nay be corrected at the workshop sessions.  ;

f The discussion of incues is divided into two parts. First are

+

..wo primary issues dealing with: 1) the objectives for E developing radiological cciteria; and 2): application of practicality considerations. The objectives constitute the 3

fundamantal approach to the establishment of the radiological criteria, and the.NRC scaff has identified four distinct possibilities including: 1) Risk i.,imits, which is the o L 1 estab\ishment at limiting values above which the risks.to theo public are deemed unacceptable,1but allows for criteria'to be' set.

^

below the limit using practicality considerations;;2) Risk: Goals,'

-where a goal is - selected 'and practicality considerat. tons are itisedi l g

-to establish criteria ~ar close to the goal"as practical';;3).;Bestr Effort, where-the:tecnnology"for'Aecontamination considerad-to be; the best available is-applied; and 4)_ ReturnLto Preexisting- p n

~ Background,.where the decontamination would continue until'tho' p .

? radiological conditic is were tho' same as _ existed . prior: to.' the-

? licensed-activities.

2

=q u

Following the primary. issues _are~several. secondary' issues 1that- ,

o

• - -arerelatedtothediscussionsoftheprimary.insues,-jhiut:which .

the NRC- staf f L believci" warrant separate Lpresentations and--

p 3 .

a

% _'y.,

a v

?

[ j _!^-

4 O

hivgc.5 .< . ;. 1; l$ <

L L.

J'

~

s y @

.n

}

i ,-

J s;d,'. 1i

, 4 ;, ,

-, 7_,, .,_ t _ ; , , 9  ; , , ((/ 7[

e' t

13 discussions. These secondary issues include the time frame for dose calculation, the individuals or groups to be= protected, thn-use of separate criteria for specific exposure-pathways such as groundwater, the treatment of radon, and the treatment of previously buried raterials.

4 The Rulemaking Issues Paper will be provided to each' potential workshop participant. Addit.ional copics will be available to' nemners of too public in attendance at the workshop. Copies vil1 also be available from the NRC staff contact identified above In addition to the comments on the Rulemaking Issues Paper ,

provided at the workshops, the Commission is also receptive to the submittal of written comments on the rulemaking issues, ao noted under.the heading " DATES".

Dated at Rockville, MD this f h day of January , _1993.

l For t'he Nuclear (Regulatory Commission, f

y il --

s ', (

~ l/ Samuel J. Ch,f k, 4 Secretar;y c( the Co,nmission E

4 J

' 5

= 1