ML20245E999

Informs of Conclusion That West Valley Demonstration Project Appropriately Focused & Results Favorable,Per 890123-24 Meeting

ML20245E999
Person / Time
Site:	West Valley Demonstration Project
Issue date:	01/26/1989
From:	Moeller D NRC ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON NUCLEAR WASTE (ACNW)
To:	Zech L NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
References
REF-PROJ-M-32 NACNUCLE, NUDOCS 8902100290
Download: ML20245E999 (2)

Text

--

m~

Q:

. pw a Y

s*%

a*

UNITED STATES

! }

,, c f NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION q..

r ADVISORY COMMITTEE oN NUCLEAR WASTE 6VAsHINGToN. o C. 20556

. o

\\.... /'

o January 26, 1989 RE The Honorable Lando W. Zech, Jr.

Chairnan U.S. Nuclear Reculatory Commission Washingten, D.C. 20EEE

SUBJECT:

WEST VALLEY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT During its sixth reeting, January 23-24, 1989, the Advisory Comittee on Nuclear Weste ( ACNW) met with representatives of the U.S. Department of Energy (DCE), its contractors, and the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority fer a review of the West Valley Demonstration Proje:t.

We discussed, amcng other concerns, the procedures that have been developed and are being applied in solidifying decontaminated supernatant low-level

' wastes and testing tFe melter for vitrification of the high-level wastes r

As a result cf this review, the Committee concludes that the program is appropriately focused and that the results are favorable.

Although there eppears te be good connunication between the DOE contractors and staff and tre Nuclear Fegula tory Cennission (NRC) staff, there may be a need for additional input from the NRC staff in two areas:

l.

Acceptance criteria for the vitrified high-level waste, including the enumeration of testing procedures to indicate conformance with these criterie, need to be identified by DOE for the w.7ste pro-ducers, and these criteria, in turn, need to be reviewed by the NRC to determine if they are acceptable; and 2.

Public health and safety criteria for the facilities and land areas being decontaminated and decommissioned as part of this project need

'to be established.

ll_.

We plan to schedule a visit to the West Valley site within the next six months.

We trust these coments are responsive to your request.

Sincerely, 9s DadeW.Moefer

{Q Chairman b

bN&].f $ 0 2jy

af y;

The Honorable Lendo W. Zech, Jr.

.2-January 26, 1989

~

~

References:

1.

U..

5.

Department of Energy Report, DOE /NE/44139--15, " West Valley Demonstration Project Plan," January 1989 P.

Letter dated August 3,1988 from R. D. Hurt, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, to W.

W.

Bixby, U.

S.

Department of Energy, regarding connents on the revised West Velley Demonstration Project Plan

\\\\

4 h

a L_

____'.__.-._m.

b

[ps tic.,'o, UNITED STATES

[,

,. < y },

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t

AovisORY COMMITif f ON NUCLEAR WASTE.

_ 'o WASHINGTON. D C 20566 s.,

/

Februa ry 24, 1989 f

The Honorable Lando W. Zech, Jr.

m Chairman

' U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Washington, D.C.

20555

SUBJECT:

FINAL RULEMAKING ON 10 CFR PART 61 RELATIE TO DISPOSAL OF GREATER-THAN-CLASS-C LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE VASTES During its seventh meeting, February 21-23, 1989, the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Weste (ACNW) met with members of the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research to discuss ' the proposed amendment to 10 CFR Part.61 relative to final rulemaking for disposal of. greater-than-Class-C low-level radioactive wastes.. A ' representative from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) partici-pated in this meeting.

The NRC staff discussed the proposed rule--(referenced), public coments on the rule, and. the draf t final rule.

On the basis of these discussions, we recorrend that the NRC staff:

(1) Explicitly state that DOE can exercise a range of options in selecting retheds for dispesing of such wastes in NRC-licensed facilities; and (2) Specify 'the performance requirements for the waste package in order to assist DOE in selecting an appropriate option.

Subject to these qualifications, we agree with the rule as proposed.

Sincerely, Dade W. Moeller Chairman

Reference:

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Proposed Rule,10 CFR Part 61,

• Disposal of Radioactive Wastes," published in the Federal Register, Vol. 53, No. 96, Wednesday, May 18, 1988 n () A, 2 m & A lf lY

( g-3 c y a w y-w o u

l

[dobscpk' i

'I UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I

.[ ",

ADVISORY COMMITTEE oN NUCLEAR WASTE t

o,

[

WASHINGTON. o C. 20b66 "b

%,..u /

..+

January 25, 1989 The Honorable Lando W. Zech, Jr.

Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D.C. 20555

SUBJECT:

ACTIVITIES OF ACNW CONCERNING HIGH-LEVEL WASTE MANAGEMENT its sixth meeting, January 23-24, 1989, the Advisory Committee on During Nuclear Weste (ACNW) met with members of the NRC staff to review the activ-ities of the Division of High-Level Weste Management (DHLWM). Emphasized in the discussions was the work of the Division with respect to the proposed High-Level Weste (HLW) Repository at Yucca Mountain and the role of the ACNW in this effort.

We found the discussions beneficial, and the NRC staff was fully responsive to our questions. We concluded that DHLWM has good leadership and their work is progressing well.

We were particularly impressed by the efforts of the division director to keep'the size of his staff modest and to monitor rather than duplicate the work of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).

In terms of the work of this Comittee concerning the NRC staff's ongoing review of the Site Characterization Plan (SCP) and their preparation of the Site Characterization Analysis for the HLW repository, we have concluded that our resources would best be directed to the activities noted below and intend to proceed in this direction:

1.

An evaluation of the several " Review Plans" completed or being developed by the NRC staff to be used as guidance for its reviews, e.g., the Review Plans for the SCP and for Performance Assessment, An evaluation of DOE's responses to the five " Objections" cited by 2.

the NRC staff concerning the Consultation Draft SCP; any additional areas of disagreement resulting from DOE's responses to the " Point Papers," which were prepared by the NRC staff; any substantive concerns raised by the state of Nevada; and any additional areas noted by the ACNW as being of special interest.

We also plan to review selected HLW rules, key NRC Technical Positions, and l

Guides which are being developed within the NRC, as well as l

Regulatory related plans and reports being developed by DOE.

In addition, we plan to review relevant research under the direction of NRC, including the programs of the Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses.

'}

g Q na,

i nu

, o 5 IY j

e-___--

g:

.The Honorable Lando W. Zech 'Jr.

2 January 25',.1989 l

If there~ are additional ~ areas important to the Comission on which you desire j

out. input, we will be pleased to respond.

Sincerely, 9 s 14 9 Dade W. Moeller Chairman i

W i

e

- - - _ _ - - - - _ _ _. - - - - - - - - -