ML20154N476

Testimony of Cv Smith Before Subcommittee on Energy & Environment,Committee on Interior & Insular Affairs on 770516 Re NRC Role in Important Business of Nuclear Waste Mgt

ML20154N476
Person / Time
Issue date:	05/16/1977
From:	Casey Smith NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To:
References
TASK-TF, TASK-URFO NUDOCS 9810210305
Download: ML20154N476 (26)

Text

. l p U. . . . . . .

.O Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs Presented by Dr. Clifford V. Smith, Jr.

Director, Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards USNRC May 16, 1977 I am pleased to be here today to discuss with you the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) role in the important business of nuclear waste management.

When the NRC was established as an independent agency in January of 1975, we had neither an established regulatory framework nor staff assigned in the area of nuclear waste management. Since its inception, though, the NRC has assigned a high priority to the waste management activity within its staff.

I would like to summarize 3 facets of the NRC's program on waste manage-ment: (1) our authority for the regulation of the storage and disposal of nuclear waste and its limitations; (2) the regulatory program which we are developing; and (3) our interactions with other agencies which also have responsibilities in this area.

I

{

9810210305 770516 PDR ORG NOMA

~' '

Q 9 I

NRC AUTHORITY TO REGULATE RADI0 ACTIVE WASTES AND LIMITATIONS ON THAT AUTHORITY NRC authority to regulate radioactive waste is derived from two acts:

the' Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended. The Act of 1954 gave the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) authority to license and regulate possession, use and disposal by persons

• of source, byproduct, and special nuclear material. The AEC staff and its prime' contractors were exempt from licensing control.

Title II of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 transferred the regula-tory authority given in the Atomic Energy Act to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ERDA and its prime contractors remained exempt from NRC regulatory authority except as provided in Section 202 of the Act.

Section 202 of the-1974 Act gave NRC cpecific authority to license certain ERDA' waste management activities:

202(3) provides for licensing of " Facilities used primarily for the receipt or storage of high-level radioactive wastes ** resulting from licensed activities." Thus the NRC must license an ERDA storage or

" Persons are any individuals, firms, or agencies (with exception of NRC and ERDA).

• • High level waste has a specific meaning within current NRC regulations.

It is defined in Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50, Appendix F, as follows: "'High level liquid radioactive wastes' means those aquaeous wastes resulting from the operation of the first cycle solvent extraction system, or equivalent.....in a facility for reprocessing radiated reactor fuels."

\

3-disposal fa'cility which is intended primarily to receive high-level radioactive waste from industrial producers of that waste (i.e., reactors',

reprocessing plants, etc.). ,

t 202(4) provides for licensing of " Retrievable Surface Storage l

Facilities and other facilities authorized for the express purpose of subsequent long-term storage of high-level radioactive waste generated by the Administration which are not used for, or a part of, research and development activities." Thus with the exception of research and development activities NRC must license ERDA operations l for the long-term storage (or disposal) of high-level wastes generated by ERDA or its predecessor the AEC. The Commission has considered storage of. longer than 20 years to be long-term.

Under Section 274 of the 1954 Act NRC may relinquish to the states certain regulatory authority over byproduct, source, and special nuclear materials in quantities not sufficient to form a critical mass. The discontinuance of NRC authority is accomplished by entering into formal agreements j with the states. There are currently 25 such Agreement States. Under the agreement and pursuant to 10 CFR Part 150, these Agreement States license-commercial burial sites for low-level waste including low-level i

7 O O transuranic waste.* In addition, these states license uranium milling

, operations and decommissioned facilities located within their boundaries.

NRC regulatory authority over radioactive waste is limited by statutes which specify who and what is to be regulated. It is not based primarily on the. degree of hazard posed by the waste, the lifetime of the waste, or the waste form.

The definition and usage of the term "high-level waste" illustrates some of the limitations and uncertainties of NRC's regulatory authority. When developed some years ago, the definition of high-level waste in the AEC's (now NRC's) regulations contemplated reprocessing of spent fuel so that the fission products, along with small amounts of transuranic nuclides, would be separated from usable uranium and plutonium. NRC regulations defined high-level waste as those highly radioactive liquids resulting from the separation process. Further, NRC regulations required that such high-level liquid wastes be solidified and sent to a Federal repository.

The rationale for sending the wastes to a Federal repository was that the

~

" Transuranic nuclides are nuclides with atomic numbers above that of uranium (i.e., 92). These nuclides are produced in the fuel elements i during operation of a nuclear reactor. Most are long-lived and highly  ;

radiotoxic. For example, plutonium 239, which has a half-life of '

24,000 years is a transuranic nuclides.

1

l intensely radioactive fission products (dangerous for a few hundred years) and the highly radio-toxic transuranic nuclides, (potentially dangerous for thousands of years) require special care over long periods of time which can best be exercised by the Federal Government, j i

It became apparent several years ago that these high-level wastes were not the only wastes which required care over long periods. Certain wastes of lower activity are contaminated with significant quantities of the long lived transuranium elements. These so-called transuranic wastes comprise larger volumes than the high-level waste and remain i i

potentially hazardous for similarly long periods of time. An AEC regula-tion proposed in 1974 contemplated requiring the shipment of these l

transuranic wastes to a Federal repository. The required environmental I impact statement in support of the proposed rule was to be part of the l

generic environmental impact statement on " Management of Commercial High-Level and Transuranium Contaminated Radioactive Waste" (WASH-1539).

This GEIS was also in support of the then planned Retrievable Surface Storage Facility (RSSF) program. When the RSSF concept was rejected WASH-1539 was withdrawn and the proposed rule on transuranic waste was left without the required environmental statement to support it. Further action was delayed because of the reorganization of AEC into NRC and ERDA. In developing its regulatory program, NRC joined the decision on disposition of transuranic wastes with its waste classification study.

Proposed waste classification regulations are scheduled to be published in March 1978.

9

.9 The rationale for sending transuranic waste to a Federal repository has not changed.

Similarly, irradiated fuel, if it is to be disposed of or stored for long periods, requires consideration and care over the same long periods of time as the high-level waste from reprocessing. In fact irradiated i

fuel.contains all of the fission products and transuranium elements in  !

i high-level waste plus the. additional plutonium that is not extracted by reprocessing.

Thus spent fuel and/or transuranic waste require long-term care similar i i

to_that required for high-level waste from reprocessing. While a persua- J sive argument can be made that NRC does have authority to regulate an ERDA repository for the. receipt of spent fuel, as waste, NRC's authority to regulate an ERDA repository for the receipt of transuranic wastes'is in question. There is uncertainty as to what point spent fuel becomes waste.

There are other limitations on NRC's regulatory authority for waste management. I would like to offer here, by way of example, two lists; one of waste storage and disposal activities which are clearly within NRC's licensing authority and the second a list of those which are not.

J

9 Q WASTE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES FOR WHICH NRC HAS LICENSING AUTHORITY

1. Disposal and/or storage of high-level waste from licensed (commercial) activities.

]

.)

2. Long term storage and/or disposal of high-level waste from ERDA 1 activities except for facilities used for research and development activities. l

3. Commercial storage and disposal of transuranium and low-level wastes.

4. Commercial storage of :1 pent fuel.

5. ERDA facility for storage of commercial spent fuel, as waste.

I 1

ACTIVITIES FOR WHICH NRC HAS NO CLEAR LICENSING AUTHORITY

1. Disposal or. storage of high-level waste in an ERDA operated R&D l facility.

2. Short-term storage of ERDA produced high-level waste.

3. Existing storage (short-term or long-term) of ERDA generated wastes.

9 9

4. Storage and/or disposal in an ERDA operated facility of:

. transuranic contaminated waste

. . foreign generated high-level waste and/or spent fuel

. low level waste

5. Storage or disposal of uranium mill tailings after the expiration of the milling license.*

I would like to submit for the record a more comprehensive discussion of the limitations on NRC's authority to regulate radioactive waste.

As I indicated, NRC had no regulatory framework for nuclear waste manage-ment in place when it was established in 1975. As we have developed our regulatory program, the regulatory and licensing limitations discussed became apparent. We are currently analyzing those areas where additional I legislation clarifying our authority might be desirabic. When the analysi.s is complete we will make appropriate recommendations to the Commission.

" Disposition of mill tailings does not fall within NRC regulatory authority because the naturally occurring radium and its daughter nuclides are not addressed by either the Atomic Energy Act or NRC regulations.

1 STATUS OF THE NRC WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Since the time NRC was established, our principal efforts in waste management have' been to (1) establisti performance goals (technical, social, economic, and environmental) for management of nuclear wastes,

'(2) develop a regulatory framework (regulations, standards and guides) which reflects these goals, and (3) prepare licensing procedures and assessment methodologies to evaluate proposed waste management programs.

Initial studies have been completed, tentative regulatory needs have been established and a program which will allow NRC to make timely t' licensing decisions is underway.

I Recognizing that managing nuclear wastes is not only a technological challenge, but encompasses'significant social, political and economic questions as well, the Commission established in late 1975 a multidisci-plinary task force which addressed concerns such as the magnitudes and lifetimes of potential hazards; technologies necessary for management of the wastes; institutions and institutional arrangement required for such management; possible interference with utilization of other resources; foreclosure of future options; impact on decisions and/or actions of future generations; distribution of hazards and benefits (geographical and temporal); uncertainties which will remain during decisionmaking; and public involvement in decisionmaking.

O O In the course of its deliberation, the task force met with several segments of the industry and public. The result of this task force effort was a simple statement of principles against which proposed waste management pro' grams and strategies might be evaluated. The task force report was submitted to the Commission within the next few days.

New NRC regulations will be structured to require conformance with a fixed set of minimum acceptable performance standards (technical, social, and environmental) for waste management activities while providing for flexibility in technological approach. In addition to developing regula-tory requirements, regulatory guides and other staff position papers will be published to indicate ways of meeting the Commission's regulations.

The key concepts in our regulatory development program are to provide

" effective," timely," and " balanced" standards.

To be effective the standards must meet industry's needs for guidance, our staff reviewers needs for definitive acceptance criteria, and the general public's needs for understandable, safe, and environ-mentally sound regulatory controls.

To be timely we rust set the sequence of standards developed to ,

precede or meet industry and staff decision points and thereby minimize tardy or deferred design requirements.

9 9 i

I I

To be balanced, the standards should provide guidance where guidance is needed and fixed requirements only where justified. We plan to 1 place requirements on performance, wherever possible, but to allow l flexibility in decision options'and in industry approaches to conformance. Regulatory guides will be specific, where possible, to reduce subjectivity in both_the design and review processes.

.The regulations will be directed towards:

j Isolating radioactive wastes from man and his environment for time _

periods sufficient to protect public health and safety and to  ;

l preserve environmental values, and  ;

Reducing to as low as reasonably achievable levels: (1) the risk to the public health and (2) long-term social commitments _such as land-use withdrawal, resource commitment, surveillance requirements, committed site proliferation, etc.

1 l

With respect to high level wastes, we are proceeding with a regulatory )

l development program on a schedule which will enable NRC to reach a timely licensing decision on an ERDA repository planned for operation by 1985. This is consistent with the ERDA program schedule. Both NRC's

'and ERDA's schedules are demanding but we have confidence that they can be met.

_, 2.._ _. .- _-. . . - ~ . -. _

We feel it is very important to maintain the momentum of the current program which will allow us to be in a position to license a repository by 1985. All the information we have today indicates that the technology for the safe management of high-level waste is available. Past lack of institutional direction, and the low priority waste management has held, have resulted in our not having a repository available today. I am submitting for the record a list of the various projects and their schedules which we have under way or planned for our high level waste program.

In response to the Presidential policy indefinitely deferring reprocessing, ERDA has embarked on a program to develop a Spent Unreprocessed Fuel Facility (SURFF). NRC and ERDA are proceding under the assumption that that NRC will license the facility, and in fact, we are developing specific licensing procedures. Present fuel storage techniques and studies underway will support the development of performance criteria.

We also recognize that additional commercial storage of spent fuel either on-site or at centralized independent storage facilities may be contemplated. We anticipated publishing a draft environmental impact statement on spent fuel storage in July of this year. It will discuss alternative storage methods and the impact of spent fuel storage through the year 2000.

In the area of low-level wastes, the staff has recently completed a survey of the regulatory status of commercial shallow land burial grounds. l The report (NUREG-0217) is now published for public comment. I would like to submit a copy for the record. The report contains broad ranging recommendations including Federal regulation (as opposed to Agreement State regulation) of all burial grounds, Federal ownership of burial ground lands, development of more comprehensive regulations, and explora-tion of alternatives to shallow land burial. The staff is presently developing a plan and schedules for moving on the recommendations. This plan, as it might be modified by the public comments, will be submitted to the Commission for adoption within the next few months. Implementa-tion of some of the recommendations, for example Federal ownership of waste disposal land, might require legislation.

In the area of uranium mill tailings management, the problem i.s one of safe management of small concentrations of radium in large quantities of tails. The Atomic Energy Act gives NRC regulatory authority over source material (viz uranium and thorium). NRC implementing regulations define source material as ores containing by weight .05 percent or greater uranium and/or thorium. Neither the Atomic Energy.Act nor NRC regulations address the naturally occurring radium or its daughter nuclides which are contained in source material ores. After the source material is extracted, the radium remaining in the tailings is sufficient enough to require long-term control. Although NRC has no licensing authority over N

9 9

--14 -

radium contaminated mill tailings.as such, some degree of control over fina1' disposition has been' asserted through the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). Once mill operations cease and the license is terminated, NRC cannot currently assert jurisdiction over mill . tailings

.for any subsequent use.

The exact nature of.the risk to the public from tails, while estimated to be very low, is not-known with precision. We are reassessing the risk and at the same time investigating improved methods for tails stabilization and improved regulations for operational and long term control through the mechanism of a generic environmental impact state-ment on uranium milling. Work on the statement is underway. I am submitting for.the record a copy of the Federal Register notice covering this work. Additional legislative authority might be needed to establish long term regulatory control over tailings.

While the generic environmental impact statement on mill tailings is being prepared, NRC is requiring that each applicant for a new mill license or license renewal develop a tailings management and reclamation

. plan which meets interim performance objective developed by the NRC licensing staff and make provisions to assure that the finances are available to pay for the reclamation. Individual environmental impact

statements will be prer.ared for each licensing action. These statements

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

15 - - -

1 l

will_contain specific requirements for tailings management and these i requirements will become conditions of the license. Any licensing

• actions that are taken will be subject to express conditions that approved l

- waste generating processes and. mill tailings management practices may be l subject to review in accordance with the conclusions of the final generic statement and any related rulemaking.

' i

~

0 S

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

[O . O

)

!NTERFACES WITH OTHER' FEDERAL AGENCIES

• . I I

l A number of Federal agencies have substantive regulatory, research or )

l

\

operational. responsibilities in the area of nuclear waste management.  !

Most of these responsibilities interface with NRC regulatory responsibility.

The principal agencies with which we interact are ERDA, EPA, USGS, and DOT.- Cooperation and communication among' agencies to minimize duplication ,

i of work requires vigilance and a considerable amount of staff effort. I would like to describe briefly some of our efforts, along with those of  !

other agencies, to. coordinate our respective waste management programs.

l

1. OMB Task Force: An interagency' task force was convened by the Office of Management and Budget (0MB) in late 1976 to review the  ;

several _ agency waste management prograras', to structure programs into an integrated Federal program and to identify jurisdictional matters which might result in some aspects being overlooked or in some duplication of efforts. Representatives from the NRC, ERDA, EPA, CEQ (Council on Environmental Quality), NSF (National Science Foun-dation), and USGS participated.

2. Low-Level Waste Working Group: An informal interagency working group was established in February 1976, to coordinate the efforts of Federal agencies and the states in responding to the GA0 recom-mendations on low-level waste burial grounds. Representatives on  ;

O O i l

j l

I the working group are from NRC, ERDA, USGS, and EPA. The group is _

l in the process of formalizing information exchange procedures. A l draft memorandum of understanding-is being prepared.

3. NRC/ERDA Interface ERDA has been supplying the NRC staff with its most up-to-date schedules and program plans for its repositories so that we may budget our tirae and resources accordingly. We keep the ERDA staff informed of our progress and thinking in developing regulations. At ERDA's request the NRC staff is preparing a description of the NRC Waste Management Program and responses to a number of pertinent issues of'a regulatory nature for inclusion in the ERDA generic environmental impact statement (GEIS) on waste management. All NRC input will be carefully identified as such in the GEIS, and it will l be clearly stated that NRC does not necessarily endorse any conclu-sions or opinions appearing in the non-NRC sections of the statement.

The NRC staff also reviews EIS's prepared by or for ERDA or its contractors for non-licensed waste facilities or activities. One i such statement presently undergoing review involves the interim management of Savannah River Plant wastes during the development of long-term methods.

l ERDA has supported research activities to provide answers to specific questions proposed by the NRC and several reports have resulted from NRC requests. ,

l l

< I. >

l~

4. NRC/ EPA Interface Both NRC and EPA have responsibilities for regulation in the area of waste management. EPA unquestionably has responsibility to set generally applicable environmental standards for the nuclear fuel cycle. NRC has responsibility to regulate the operation of specific waste management facilities including ensuring that these facilities meet reguirements set by EPA. Questions exist as to how these 1 responsibilities overlap. No formal understanding as to division l l

of authority has been reached.

NRC and EPA have been in frequent contact over the last half year and have held several interagency meetings. An interagency agreement

is being drafted.by EPA and ERDA to which NRC and USGS will also be i V

l parties. The agreement is expected to include weekly working l

l meetings. Agency schedules are also expected to be coordinated.

EPA has contracted for services to collect studies and analyses that have been and are being performed by ERDA and NRC. EPA criteria l

L and regulations will be based on this collection of information.

l l- .NRC will cooperate fully with EPA in this effort.

I

5. NRC/USGS Interface NRC is supporting part of the USGS research related to the geohydro-I logical characteristics of low-level waste burial sites. It is i

..._. . . . _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ . . . . ~ . _ . _ . _ . . _ . _ . . _ . . . _ _ . . . . . .

o

.o j

l L l-also anticipated that the USGS will provide licensing review consulta-tion to the NRC staff regarding the licensing of waste disposal

facilities.

i i

L

.6. NRC/ DOT Interface I

The Department of Transportation (DOT) has the responsibility under  ;

I the Transportation of Explosives Act and the Hazardous Materials l Transportation Act~for regulating the shipment and transportation of radioactive materials. The delineation of responsibility between i l

l AEC (NRC) and DOT is spelled out in a memorandum of understanding l i

dated March 22, 1973, and activities under that agreement are pro- l ceeding smoothly.

l 7. Joint Funding l Joint sponsorship by several agencies'for waste management' activities i

helps in moving forward with a coordinated Federal program. Recent i

efforts in this area include funding of a study by the American i

Physical Society, funding of a conference held last October on '

i Public Policy Issues in Nuclear Waste Management, and cooperation i l: l L in presenting the several agencies programs to numerous forums  ;

L 1 l around the country. I f )

I s

As should be apparent from even this abbreviated listing of agency .

interactions, there are intersecting responsibilities among the several

' Federal agencies in the area of waste management.

In response to this-situation the agencies have developed a variety of mechanisms for exchange l of information, program coordination, and agreement on responsibilities and schedules. Understandings regarding many of the interagency inter- I actions still need to be developed through mutual efforts.

' Summary l

In 1975, NRC had no regulatory framework for nuclear waste management l

'and less than one man year total effort was expended for licensing of low-level waste burial grounds. Since that time the NRC Waste Management Rranch was established in the Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety  ;

and we have assembled a. highly qualified staff of 12 permanent technical staff'and three technical interns. Our FY 1977 personnel ceiling is 31 and is expected to increase,to 38 in FY 78. Because of the high' degree of importance placed on solving the nuclear waste problem, the status of the waste management staff has progressed from branch status to program status and is now at an Assistant Division Director level with two separate branches.

We have moved rapidly in outlining a comprehensive regulatory framework and are developing regulations and licensing procedures. During this process we have identified limitations to our regulatory authority.

Further limitations were identified as the direction of our program l shifted in response to Ford Administration and Carter Administration l

.. L-21 -

i policy decisions in the area of nuclear energy. We are analyzing how to address the regulatory limitations and how to address expected program

.~ changes'in response to Executive Branch policies in nuclear waste manage-

. ment. We will make recommendations, as appropriate, to the Commission.

l 1

I i

i 1

1 s

1 i

l l

l l

1 l

.. .-- - .. - - - - ~ - .

J .s .

1 LIMITATIONS 'ON NRC AUTHORITY TO REGULATE RADIOACTIVE WASTE i Current Authority The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, gave the Atomic Energy Commission ( AEC) authority to license and regulate possession, use, i and disposal by persons of source, byproduct, and specini nuclear material. l Title II of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 transferred that 1 authority to NRC. Under the 1954 and 1974 Acts, the Energy Research )

'and Development Administration (ERDA) and its prire contractors are exempu i

- from NRC licensing and regulatory requirements. However, section 202 of

'the 1974 act gave NRC specific authority to Itcense certain ERDA waste management activities:

"(3) Facilities used primarily for the receipt a'ad storage of high-level

• radioactive wastes resulting from licensed activi ties .

(4) Retrievable Surface Storage Facilities and other facilities authorized for the express purpose of subsequent long-term storage of high-level radioactive waste generated by the Administration, which are not used for, or are part of, research and development activities."

~

Under section. 274 of the 1954 Act, NRC may relinquish to states regulatory authority over byproduct, source, and special nuclear materials in quantities not sufficient to form s critical mass by entering into formal agreements. There are currently 25 Agree:ent States. Pursuant to 10 CFR Part 150 and the individual agreements, these States license commercial burial sites for low level wastes, including low level I transuranic wastes.** Only one of the six comercial shallow land burial sites (Hanford, Washington) currently accepts transuranic wastes. ,

These Agreement States also license' uranium milling operations and l decommissioned facilities located within their boundaries.

• High level waste has a specific meaning within current NRC regulations.

It is defined in Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50,: Appendix F as "'high-level liquid radioactive wastes' means those aqueous wastes resulting from the operation of the first cycle solvent extraction system, or equivalent, ... in a facility for reprocessing frradiated reactor fuels."

• • Transuranic nuclides are nuclides with atomic nu=bers above that of uranium (i.e.,92). These nuclides are produced in the fuel elements during operation of a nuclear reactor. Most are long-lived and highly radiotoxic. For example, plutonium 239, which has a half-life of 24,000 years is a transuranic l nuclide.

I

9 9

2 The NRC regulatory program must be viewed in context of its t~ relation to other Federal agencies which have regulatory responsibilities for eclear waste management. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has responsibility for setting generally applicable radiation standards for the protection of the environment and for providing radiation l protection guidance to all Federal agencies. Although NRC and EPA

are working together to develop a regulatory structure, no formal l understanding about the division of authority has been reached; EPA l

has only recently embarked on its ambitious program to set generally applicable environmental standards related to waste management.

The Department of Transportation (D0T) has the responsibility under the Transportation of Explosives Act and the Hazardous Materials l- Transportation Act for regulating the shipment and transportation of L radioactive materials. A memorandum of understanding dated March 22, 1973 spells out DOT-NRC activities.

NRC is clearly responsible for licensing:

1. All facilities primarily. used for storage and/or disposal of high-level waste resulting from licensed activities (i.e.,

i commercial ) .

2. Facilities for long-term storage and/or disposal of ERDA high-level waste.

l

' 3. Commercial facilities for storage and/or disposal of spent fuel and transuranic wastes.

. 4. Commercial waste burial sites in non-Agreeent States.

5. Commercial disposal of special nuclear material in quantities sufficient to form a critical mass (in Agreement States and non-Agreement States).

l 6. Commercial facilities for processing or treatment of waste (including ERDA wastes).

l i

l Limitations of Authority and Licensing tincertainties j L' i flRC licensing jurisdiction is nonexistent or uncertain with respect i to some waste storage or disposal facilities. In sFert, in many respects  !

> NRC authority to regulate nuclear wastes is equhocal. l l

f 4

f

_ . _ _ . _ ---- _ _ __m _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __. - ..

~

.i. .-

3 High-Level Wastes NRC authority to license ERDA high level waste storage facilities does not extend to ERDA wastes which are used for or are part of research and development activitiec.. It also does not include licensing of ERDA waste storage facilities in existence prior to enactment of the Energy Reorganization Act or ERDA facilities not intended for "long-term storage" of ERDA high-level wastes.

When developed some years ago, the definition of high-level waste in AEC's (now NRC's) regulations contemplated reprocessing of spent fuel so that the fission products along with small amounts of transuranic >

nuclides would be separated from re-usable uranium and plutonium. NRC regulations require that high-level wastes be sent to a Federal repository because the intensely radioactive fission products (dangerous for a few hundred (dangerous foryears) thousandsandofthe highly)radiotoxic years transuranic require special nuclides care over long periods of time which can best be exercised by the Federal Government in order to assure adequate protection of the public health and safety. Two other waste types--irradiated fuel and transuranic wastes--require consideration and care similar to that for high-len) waste for the protection of public health and safety. It appears that irradiated fuel which contains all the fission products contained in high-level waste as well as all the plutonium produced during reactor operation is a candidate for disposal in a Federa1 repository. Transuranic waste from both the commercial and defense sectors will also likely be sent to Federal repositories for disposal. Neither irradiated fuel nor transuranic waste currently fall under the definition of "high-level

~

waste" and therefore are not within NRC's licensing jurisdiction if stored or disposed of in an ERDA repository.

The regulatory limitations and uncertainties with regard to high-level wastes, then, are as follows:

1. Only facilities for long-term storage or disposal of ERDA high-level wastes are subject to NRC licensing whereas all storage or disposal of commercially produced high-level' wastes must be licensed. Facilities for short-term handling, treatment, or storage of ERDA high-level wastes are not subject to licensing.

2. "Long-term" and "short-term" storage are not defined in the 1974 Act. As a rule of thumb, the Cocaission has con-sidered storage of less than 20 years to be short term.

3. There is some uncertainty about licensing ERDA facilities built to store or dispose of waste types in addition to high-level waste (e.g. , irradiated fuel or transuranic wastes) since technically they may not be primarily for storage of

..~ . ]

~

O O -

4 I

high-level wastes. Modifying Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, to redefine high-level waste to include irradi-ated fuel and transuranic wastes would partially clarify this point; but such a redefinition would fly in the face of commonly accepted meanings.

l 4. As it now stands, ERDA does not have to seek an NRC license i for a high level waste repository used for research and L development. ERDA could theoretically decide to convert such a facility to commercial operation at a later date and NRC would then be required to review that facility for a license after heavy commitments and scme irreversible decisions have been made. ,

j .5. ERDA facilities for disposal of high-level waste generated

in foreign countries would not fall under NRC jurisdiction L. unless they could be regarded as resulting from issuance of an NRC export license.

l Transuranic Wa'ste i

! ERDA storage or disposal of non-high-level transuranic waste, no matter what the source, is not subject to licensing.

Irradiated Fuel  ;

I -

1. Irradiated fuel resulting from licensed activitties and stored l- or disposed of commercially is subject to licensing.

2. Irradiated fuel, no matter what the source, stored or disposed of by ERDA might not be subject to ifcensing because of the definition of high-level waste.

I

! 3. It is possible that NRC could redefine high-level waste to include waste irradiated fuel. Even with such redefinition. l if the irradiated fuel is considered a resource to be stored by ERDA for future use, it may not be subject to NRC licensing.  ;

4. Irradiated fuel brought back from other countries and stored by ERDA would not be subject to NRC licensing.

Low-Level Wastes I i 1. Commercial low-level wastes disposed of in Agreement States i

are licensed by the Agreement States.  !

z . . . .

o

, 9 ,

Low Level Wastes (cont'd)

2. _ Commercial low level wastes disposed of in non-Agreement States are licensed by NRC.

3. No ERDA low-level waste disposal operatices are licensed.

Mill Tailings The Atomic Energy Act gives NRC regulatory authority over source material (viz uranium and thorium). NRC iglementing regu-lations define source material as ores containing by weight .05 percent or greater uranium and/or thorium. Neither the Atomic

= Energy Act nor NRC regulations. address the naturally occurring radium or its daughter nuclides which are contained in source material ores.

After the source material is extracted, the radius remaining in the tailings is sufficient enough to require long-tem control. Al though ,

NRC has no licensing authority over radium contacinated mill tailings '

as such, some degree of control over final disposition has been asserted through the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA).

Once mill oper.ations cease and the license is teminated, NRC cannot currently assert jurisdiction over mill tailings for any subsequent use, i

O t

4

?

e

)

- -