ML20244C955
| ML20244C955 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/06/1989 |
| From: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Martin D HOUSE OF REP. |
| References | |
| REF-WM-3 NUDOCS 8906150220 | |
| Download: ML20244C955 (7) | |
Text
-
June 6, 1989 The Honorable' David O'B. Martin l U.S. House of Representatives j Washington, D.C. 20515 l
Dear Congressman Martin:
i j
In your April 13 letter to John Bradburne, you brought 'to our attention some i correspondence you received from two of your constituents. They expressed a ]
concern that in promulgating'the regulation 10 CFR Part 61, the Nuclear ..
Regulatory Commission (NRC) arbitrarily raised the low-level waste threshold, thereby redefining as low-level waste, material that'had previously_been. .
defined as high-level waste. They also expressed a concern that low-level lI waste will be dangerous enough after the 100-year institutional control period to kill human life.
The Part 61 regulation establishes requirements for licensing facilities for disposal of low-level' waste by land disposal methods. It defines low-level ;
waste in the same'way that the U.S. Congress defines it-in the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980; namely, " radioactive waste not classified as high-level radioactive waste, transuranic waste, spent nuclear fuel, or byproduct material as defined in Section 11 e (2) of the Atomic Energy Act (uranium or thorium tailings and waste)." This is a very broad definition; it defines a wide range of waste materials having a wide range of concentrations.
To ensure safety, therefore, the Part 611 regulation includes a radioactive waste classification system. Three waste classes are established (Waste Classes A, B, and C), and. low-level waste is determined to fall into one of the classes by comparison to a set.of concentration limits.for a number of short-and long-lived radionuclides. Class A waste has the lowest concentration.
limits and the least restrictive waste form and disposal requirements.- Class C waste has the highest allowable concentration limits and the.most restrictive waste form and disposal requirements.
Low-level waste having concentrations exceeding the Class'C limits is considered generally unacceptable for naar-surface disposal (disposal within the first thirty meters of the earth's surface). The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 stipulates that disposal of this
" greater-than-Class-C" waste is the responsibility of-the Federal government.
Disposal of high-level radioactive waste, including spent nuclear reactor. fuel )
as well as concentrated wastes from reprocessing spent nuclear reactor fuel, is also the responsibility of the Federal government.
Thus, the Part 61 regulation did not redefine high-level waste to be. low-level waste. Rather, it adopted the existing _ legal definition of low-level waste and j restricted near-surface disposal of greater-than-Class C waste. As noted, ;
disposal of greater-than-Class-C and high-level wastes is the responsibility ]
not of the States and Compacts, but of the Federal-Government. !
1 1
8906150220 890606 PDR WASTE 'l WM-3 PDC g ,j i
_ _ - - -_-_ - __ _ _ _ _ - - _-_____._ _ _ - _ P&9-3 A(Ll4-
The Honorable David O'B. Martin Regarding your constituents' second concern, the Part 61 requirements assure that, in the event of release of radioactive material from the disposal '
facility and into the general environment, no individual in the general '.~,
environment will receive a whole bocty radiation dose exceeding 25 millirems per -
year. Possible doses to individuals in the general environment must furthermore be reduced to levels as low as reasonably achievable. In addition, the Part 61 requirements assure that even in the unlikely event that an '
individual inadvertently enters the disposal facility after the 100-year institutional control period, and performs activities such as excavating for a house and living on the disposal facility, that individual will not receive a whole body radiation dose exceeding 500 millirem per year.
For perspective, the annual natural background radiation dose in the United States varies locally, but averages about 300 millirems per_ year (whole body dose equivalent). In contrast, a lethal radiation dose is cv r a thousand times higher. Thus, potential radiation doses to individnis after disposal of low-level waste will be far below lethal levels, and in f act in the range of . I natural background levels, even in the unlikely event of an individual living h on the disposal facility and directly contacting some cf the disposed waste. {
In the event of release of radioactive material to the general environment, potential doses to an individual would be less than 10 percent of background radiation levels.
I hope that this explanation is responsive to your constituents' concerns.
Sincerely, Original signed by Victor Stello, Jr. -
Victor Stello, Jr.
Executive Director for Operations l
l 4
.9
l .
REP MARTIN LTR The Honorable David O'B. Martin DISTRIBUTION AND CONCURRENCE -
e M
Distribution: EDO 0004438 al File # M d, l NMSS r/f LLRB r/f LLRB t/f AHenry CJenkins Directors r/f. GRoles TJohnson MBell JGreeves DBangart E00 r/f HThompson SECY BT OlV75~ JSurmeier PLohaus JFunches 0CA 1
PDR Yes /)(7 PDR No L/ Category: Proprietary / / or CF Only / /
ACNW Yes /Y / No / /
I' l
SUBJECT ABSTRACT: RESPONSE TO REPRESENTATIVE D. O'B. MARTIN: ED0 0004438
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE OFC :LLRB* :LLRB* :LLRB* :TEDITOR* :LLWM* :LLWM* :0GC*
NAME:GRoles/es :TJohnson :MBell :EKraus :JGreeves :RBangart :RFonner DATE:05/05/89 :05/05/89 :05/08/89 :05/09/89 :05/08/89 :05/09/89 :05/08/89
./
OFC :NMSS* :NMSS* :DEDS* :EDO :0CA :
............__...................... 45 ..... .........................
NAME: CPaperie l l o : RBernero : HThompson o: VS : ~[p :
te.......................__.....__._............./.l DATE:05/09/89 :05/09/89:05/24/89 :05/30/89 :06/ /89 :
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY w... ... . .. .. .. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ - _ _
mAfog
),,
(('g UNITED STATES g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- ! C WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
- ks-o gv f i f
....+
The Honorab k David O'B. Martin United House of Igresentatives ,
Washington, DC 20515 j
Dear Representative Martin:
[
In your April 13 letter to John Bradburne, you brought to/our attention some correspondence you received from two of your constituent's. They expressed concerns that in promulgating the regulation 10 CFR Paft 61, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) arbitrarily raised the Jo,w-level waste threshold, thereby redefining as low-level waste, material that had previously been defined as high-level waste.
The Part 61 regulation establishes requiremen for licensing facilities for disposal of low-level waste by land disposal p'.ethods. It defines low-level waste in the same way that the U.S. Congresp' defines it in the low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980; name y, " radioactive waste not classified as high-level radioactive waste, transura iic waste, spent nuclear fuel, or byproduct material as defined in Section 11 e (2) of the Atomic Energy Act (uranium or thorium tailings and waste) " This is a very broad definition; it defines a wide range of waste material having a wide range of concentrations.
Toensuresafety.therefore,thePar/61 regulation includes a radioactive waste classification system. Three waste classes are established (Waste Classes A, B, and C), and low-leve waste is determined to fall into one of the classes by comparison to a set of concentration limits for a number of short-and long-lived radionuclides. C) ass A waste has the lowest concentration limits and the least restrictiv( waste form and disposal requirements. Class C waste has the highest allowabl concentration limits and the most restrictive waste form and disposal requir ments.
Low-level waste having concentrations exceeding the Class C limits is considered generally unacc table for near-surface disposal (disposal within the first thirty meters of he earth's surface). The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments A of 1985 stipulates that disposal of this
" greater-than-Class-C" wpste is the responsibility of the Federal government.
Disposal of high-level radioactive waste, including spent nuclear reactor fuel as well as concentrated ~ wastes from reprocessing spent nuclear reactor fuel, is also the responsibility of the Federal government.
The proposet " art 61 regulation was issued in 1981 and was supported by technical ana fyses as presented in a draf t environmental impact statement (NUREG-0782). A nunber of public comments on the proposed classification system and its technical support pointed out areas of excess conservatism.
Based on NRC's analysis of public comments and on further work as presented in the final Part 61 environmental impact statement (NUREG-0945), some adjustments were made in the final classification system and limits. These adjustments
REP MARTIN LTR The Honorable David O'B. Martin eliminated the excess conservatism in NRC's analyses. As a result, the Class C concentration limits for a number of radionuclides were raised by a/f actor of 10 in the final rule compared to those limits in the proposed rule. /
/
It should be noted, however, that prior to promulgation of the finh'l Part 61 rule in December 1982, low-level waste disposal sites accepted a)most any material meeting the above broad definition of low-level waste,/with the exception that all sites had adopted a disposal limit for transuranic radionuclides of ten nanocuries per gram. But the Part 61 classification.
system provides disposal limits for transuranic radionuclides as well as a
~
number of additional radionuclides. We believe that in the absence of- the Part 61 classification system, the quantities of radioactivity' delivered to low-level waste disposal sites would be significantly higher.
Thus, the Pa'-t 61 regulation did not redefine high-level waste to be low-level waste. Rathtr, it adopted the existing legal definition of low-level waste and restricted nur-surface disposal of greater-than-Class C waste. As noted above, dispost1 of greater-than-Class C and high-level wastes is the responsibility not of the States and Compacts, but of the Federal government.
I hope that this explanation is responsive to.your constituents' concerns.
Sincerely, Victor Stello, Jr.
. Executive Director for Operations Distribution: EDO 0004438 Central File # NMSS r/f/ LLRB r/f LLRB t/f AHenry CJenkins Directors r/f GRoles TJohnson MBell JGreeves DBangart EDO r/f HThompson SECY 79-OM JSurmeier PLohaus JFunches PDR Yes / / . .
PDR No / / Category: Proprietary /- -
/ or CF Only / /
ACNW Yes / / 'No / /
SUBJECT ABSTRACT: ~RSPONSE.T0 REPhT5ENTATIVE D. O'B. MARTIN: EDO 0004438 y *Previously concurred 0FC :LLRB * :LLRB * :LLRB * :TEDITOR .* : L :L :NM55
- l ,
3 INkkEkRokes/esEJohnsonhBek5 EKraYs Jhre hE Rhd'n rt CPaperkekko iiiiiifliii~iiiiiiiTiflisiT57s7ii INT 7ii~is7K7ii iiTi7ii-~
OFC :HM55 * :DEDS :EDO : uw Nkii Riekrh iThohson Vitekko kh$$er DATE: 5 / 9 /89 : / /89 : / /89 : /# /09 0FFICIAL RECORD LOPY
~
REP MARTIN LTR The Honorable David O'B. Martin 2-
/
eliminated the excess conservatism in NRC's analyses. As a result, th ss C concentration limits for a number of radionuclides were raised by a actor of 10 in the final rule compared to those limits in the proposed rule.
Itshouldbenoted,however,thatbeforepromulgationofthefinaiPart61 rule in December 1982, low-level waste disposal sites accepteFalmost any material meeting the above broad definition of low-level wast'e, with the exception that all sites had adopted a disposal limit, for' transuranic radionuclides, of ten nanocuries per gram. But the Pary 61 classification system provides disposal limits for transuranic radionuclides as well 6s a number of additional radionuclides. We believe that/in the absence of the Part 61 classification system, the quantities of radioactivity delivered to low-level waste disposal sites would be significa/itly higher.
Thus, the Part 61 regulation did not redefine gh-level waste to be low-level waste. Rather, it adopted the existing lega^l definition of low-level waste and restricted near-surface disposal of greate'r-than-Class C waste. As noted, disposal of greater-than-Class C and higti-level wastes is the responsibility not of the States and Compacts, but oF the Federal government.
Ihopethatthisexplanationisresp/ - onsive to your constituents' concerns.
Sincerely, Victor Stello, Jr.
Executive Director for Operations Distribution: ED 0004438 Central File # NMSS r/f LLRB r/f LLRB t/f AHenry CJenkins l Directors r/f GRoles TJohnson MBell JGreeves DBangart l
ED0 r/f HTb mpson SECY JSurmeier PLohaus JFunches PDR Yes /%/
PDR No / / Category: Proprietary / / or CF Only / v/
ACNW , Yes / / No /X/
SUBJECT ABSTRACT: ~YESPONSE TO REPRE5ENTATIVE D. O'B. MARTIN: EDO 0004438
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE
\s.
!_E.[bb$I .....[.b$$.....[b_$I*....[ M..[bb5$*....['.b$$*____[ShM_. if IE[I$$![I(II.N!$.".!!"_[5II!!....[..E$ t.[!![II"II.[$$'."_9".[..[$[$""$[.f.# . .
DATE:05/05/89 :05/05/89 :05/08/89 :05/0$/89 :05/08/89 :05/09/89 : 9/,8/89 0FC :NM55 ' OED :EDO :
.........f.j g {.}...: hMS NAME:CPapeqiEllo:RB lm on: Stello :
DATEff0fb9 [ )89[h)fb9 fhb9 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY
1 REP MARTIN LTR The Honorable David O'B. Martin eliminated the excess conservatism in NRC's analyses. As a result, the Class C concentration limits for a number of radionuclides were raised by a factor of 10 in the final rule compared to those limits in the proposed rule.
It should be noted, however, that prior to promulgation of the final Part 61 rule in December 1982, low-level waste disposal sites accepted almost any material meeting the above broad definition of low-level waste, with the exception that all sites had adopted a disposal limit for transuranic radionuclides of. ten nanocuries per gram. But the Part 61 classification system provides disposal limits for transuranic radionuclides as well as a number of additional radionuclides. We believe that in the absence of the Part 61 classification system, the quantities of radioactivity delivered to low-level waste disposal sites would be significantly higher.
\
Thus, the Part 61 regulation did not re-define high-levr' waste to be low-level waste. Rather, it adoptedsthe existing legal definition of low-level waste and restricted near-surface disposal of greater-than-Class C waste. As noted above, disposal of greater-than-Class C and high. level wastes is the responsibility not of the States and Compacts, but of the Federal government.
\
I hope that this explanation is p sponsive y to your constituents' concerns.
Sincerely, ictor Stello, Jr.
EhecutiveDirectorforOperations Distribution: 'ED0 0004438 Central File f NMSS r/f LLRB r/f ILRB t/f AHenry CJenkins Directors r/f GRoles TJohnson MBell JGreeves DBangart EDO r/f HThompson SECY JSurmeier PLohaus JFunches l
PDR Yes /T7 PDR No / / Category: Proprietary / / or CF Only /w/
ACNW Yes / / No M/
SUBJECT ABSTRACT: ~RSPONSE TO REPRESENTATT7E D. O' . MARTIN: EDO 0004438 0FC :LLR :LLRB :LLRB :TEDITOR :LLWM :LLWM :NM55
.... p.
nson :M ,
NAME h M s'.. :EKraus :JGreeves :RBangart :CPaperiello E;iTf;ii ;TF6;r;?Ti;ir; 7 ;ir; 7 ;;;T 7 ;;;T 7 ;;;-
~
0FC :NMSS :DEDS :EDO :
NAME:RBernero :HThompson:VStello :
DATE: / /89 : / /89 : / /89 :
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY