ML23156A070
| ML23156A070 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/22/1993 |
| From: | NRC/SECY |
| To: | |
| References | |
| 58FR09552, PRM-150-2 | |
| Download: ML23156A070 (1) | |
Text
DOCUMENT DATE: 02/22/1993
TITLE: PRM-150-2 - 58FR09552 - ENVIROCARE OF UTAH, INC.
PETITION FOR RULEMAKING
CASE
REFERENCE:
PRM-150-2
58FR09552
KEYWORD: RULEMAKING COMMENTS
Document Sensitivity: Non-sensitive - SUNSI Review Complete STATUS OF RULEMAKING
PROPOSED RULE: PRM-150-2 OPEN ITEM (Y/N} N
RULE NAME: ENVIROCARE OF UTAH, INC. PETITION FOR RULEMAKING
PROPOSED RULE FED REG CITE: 58FR09552
PROPOSED RULE PUBLICATION DATE: 02/22/93 NUMBER OF COMMENTS: 2
ORIGINAL DATE FOR COMMENTS: 04/23/93 EXTENSION DATE: I I FINAL RULE ;FED. REG:,..CITE: FINAL RULE PUBLICATION DATE: I I
NOTES ON: PET. FOR REVISION OF REGS. TO EXEMPT THOSE WHO GENERATE OR DISPOSE STATUS OF VERY LOW SPECIFIC ACTIVITY WASTES CONTAMINATED W/SNM THAT DO OF RULE: NOT FORM A CRITICAL REACTION. PET. WITHDRAWN (64FR66115, 11/24/99)
HISTORY OF THE RULE
PART AFFECTED: PRM-150-2
RULE TITLE: ENVIROCARE OF UTAH, INC. PETITION FOR RULEMAKING
PROPOSED RULE PROPOSED RULE DATE PROPOSED RULE SECY PAPER: SRM DATE: I I SIGNED BY SECRETARY: 02/16/93 FINAL RULE FINAL RULE DATE FINAL RULE SECY PAPER: SRM DATE: I I SIGNED BY SECRETARY: I I
STAFF CONTACTS ON THE RULE CONTACT!: MICHAEL T. LESAR MAIL STOP: P-223 PHONE: 492-7758
CONTACT2: JAYNE M. MCCAUSLAND MAIL STOP: T-9F32 PHONE: 415-6219 DOCKET NO. PRM-150-2 (58FR09552)
In the Matter of ENVIROCARE OF UTAH, INC. PETITION FOR RULEMAKING
DATE DATE OF TITLE OR DOCKETED DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENT
11/24/92 10/21/92 PETITION FOR RULEMAKING SUBMITTED BY ENVIROCARE OF UTAH, INC.
02/16/93 02/16/93 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE - RECEIPT OF PETITION FOR RULEMAKING 04/21/93 04/19/93 COMMENT OF WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORP (A. T. SABO) ( 1) 04/23/93 04/23/93 COMMENT OF UNITED STATES ECOLOGY, INC (ARTHUR J. PALMER) ( 2)
11/19/99 11/18/99 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE - PETITION FOR RULEMAKING; WITHDRAWAL DOCKET NUMBER PETITION RULE PRM / 58FRq6"S~ 5D -:;_)
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 0:,-il 10 CFR Part 150 AD J
Docket No. PRM-150-2
Envirocare of Utah, Inc.; Withdrawal of Petition for Rulemaking
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; withdrawal.
SUMMARY
- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRG) is withdrawing, at the petitioner's
request, a petition for rulemaking (PRM-150-2) (58 FR 5992, February 22, 1993) filed by
Envirocare of Utah. In PRM-150-2, the petitioner requested that the Commission amend its
regulations in 10 CFR Part 150 to exempt those persons that generate or dispose of very low
specific activity wastes contaminated with special nuclear materials that are not capable of
forming a critical reaction from the current possession limits specified in its regulations. In
withdrawing this petition, the petitioner indicated that the NRG Order dated May 7, 1999
(64FR27826, May 21, 1999), satisfied the intent of the petition.
ADDRESSES: A copy of the petitioner's letter, dated August 25, 1999, requesting the
withdrawal of the petition is available for public inspection at the NRG Public Document Room
located at 2120 L Street NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC 20012-7082, telephone:
(202) 634-3273.
--pp),_ O?-) 11/~4/e:;q J t,'i Fl< t,, r, I I 5:"° FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jayne M. McCausland, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001,
telephone (301) 415-6219, e-mail jmm2@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
On February 22, 1993 (58 FR 5992), the NRC published in the Federal Register a notice
of receipt of a petition for rulemaking PRM-150-2 that requested NRC to exempt persons who
generate or dispose of very low specific activity wastes contaminated with special nuclear
materials. Based upon the petitioner's letter requesting that its petition be rescinded dated
August 25, 1999, the NRC is withdrawing this petition for rulemaking. The basis for petitioner's
request for withdrawal is that the NRC issued an Order on May 7, 1999, which exempted
Envirocare of Utah, Inc. from the licensing requirements in 1 O CFR Part 70. Accordingly, the
NRC is not taking any further action on the petition because it has been withdrawn by the
petitioner.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this I~ day of November, 1999.
- For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
L11,p;c-~
Annette L. Vietti':cook, Secretary of the Commission.
2 US Ecology, Inc.
9200 Shelbyville Road, Suite 300 DOCKET NUMBER P.O. Box 7246 PROPOSED RULE PR / 5 0 - 2.
Louisville, Kentucky 40257 -0246 502/426 -7160 csrF ?ss1
US &ology
an American Ecology company
April 23, 1993
Secretary, U.S. Nuc lear Re;*.1latory Ccmmissi cm, Washington, DC 20555
- ATTN: Docketing and Service Branch
US Ecology is offering the following comments with regard to a petition for rule ma king filed by Envirocare of Utah, Inc.
requesting an exemption for persons generating or disposing of low specific activities of waste contaminated with special nuclear material from current poss es sion limits specified in regulations.
(FR, Vol.SB, No.33, Monday, February 22, 1993, page 9552, Docket PRM150-2).
US Ecology.- l;l,?ls cs _ucc.essfc ihlY-!*m -rmgedr 1.was t:e.s "1 10f this nature under an NRC license. (=..1t 6L li1'2 04-01} at _q:u.
- R.ic..b.lan(i;
- Washingt:Qn LLRW.*disposal facility. We,:- believe, Errv.i~a-re : cif ~,T.Ut.ah *.~has t,sµbmitted this petition to avoid being regulq.t *ed i_n thls ~.area
- by.the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. It appear:s - also **that by submitting this petition that Envirocare is shit.ting the onus of criticality analysis and safety evaluation from the prospective licensee to the regulating body. This shift is inconsistent with previous licensing action in this area.
Additional, more specif i c, concerns are presented below.
- 1. With respect to the cont r ol o f SNM material by the federal governl"lent versus state governments, Special Nuclear Mater i a l is still of strategic importance in this day and age (irregardless o f how may cubic feet of was te it would t ake tq. achiev;e t, a a:i.gnJ:f.i cant quantity/critical
~ mas,s -- it ma~.E'J~ l 'ttle.~ens -t?o !~.el-i-nquiSth _<;on_t~ol over
,. s~ to non..f~de:r:al L::g ~ ment :"a.genpi:~s -,..:_!:*~..., : ~-
.. _...; ;,:.:< ~~-~ji,.,;J~~; / -~f )} 19~3-~:*':.,:-:
Acknowledqecf b'y' card................ --,. *-NtfHHltl/Ht~ttn
@ Recycled Paper
~
~
.:, y., :-:,
. ~- 8.E, r -.
l.i"l., i l!9.)f~ *"' 1-'--
~,.., -. rl::>!!.~ :,.r.J r
...trl;i e..,t1
'*._1_. t -r ":'nl.S,:,r ' ',.., <"' ' ;
- "... I ~** --'!~ _....,.......
rr. -:1".,
1,S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCKETING & OFFICE OF THE SECRET SERVICE SECTION -ARY
OF THE COMMISSION
Document Statistics fOstmarkDafe. ~f U /~J ~ ~ &, ~ t1"- *"1/;-~Vf1 Copies Received ___ / __ __ _
Add'I Ccpies Reprcduced _3L.___,...-,....,.,........;
Special Distribution f[I P S po ~ :
LL5p..,-.,
.rrc.:::.r: !i.C
.r.rt$:::C
.. _e, 8.:10
- 2. Large scale remediation projects involving SNM material (as indicated in the Envirocare petition) can involve tens of thousands of grams of SNM material. As the waste material is. basically excavated and then placed into large containers such as rail cars, there is no way of assuring what concentrations are in each cubic centimeter, cuoi~ inch, cubic foot, etc. of waste
material. Many times, this waste material is not at all homogeneous. Granting amendments for exemptions of such waste material from current regulations without knowing the concentrations of SNM in such waste material would defeat the ability of such regulations to ensure the protection of public heal th and safety and to ensure that adequate controls over SNM material are maintained. This issue appears to be driven solely by cost. With such an exemption, characterization, transportation, disposal, long-term care and maintenance and many other such issues may not be adequateJ.y addressed.
- 3. Many issues pertaining to the Envirocare facility appear to be in direct contrast with the other Low-level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facilities, either the state or federal government will assume ownership of the land and oversee long term care and maintenance. It is unclear as to what will occur with regard to this issue with the Envirocare facility. As the NRC would be relinquishing its current responsibility over SNM should they grant such an exemption, perhaps they should at least ensure that controls in place both within the State of Utah and the Envirocare facility are at least comparable as well as compatible with the other three existing LLRW disposal facilities and their respective States.
- 4. In the Filing of Petition of Rulemaking by Envirocare (FR, Vol.SB, No.33, Monday, February 22, 1993, page 9552)
"the petitioner notes that mass concentrations of the waste material may be as low as 0.0004 percent."
However, it is not stated in the notice how high the concent~~atior:.s ~f the wast*e TYJ:Jterial may be. There appears to be little if ary information pertaining to such waste materials and the characterization of such.
It would appear to be impossible for the NRC to issue a broad exemption based upon such limited information with regard to which waste materials would be exempted and which waste materials would not be exempted. A more logical approach would be for the NRC to establish a framework whereby each individual facility could apply for such an. exemption from the NRC after a complete characterization has been performed. The NRC could then assure that all aspects of their regulatory framework were addressed.
- 1-:;... c.JG.$JE
- * ~ }-'"1101'\\
I - ':I -,.,..
"fJ"
- 5. Again, this appears to be an issue which should be addressed by individual licensees to the NRC rather than by a disposal fad lity on behalf of licensees. As individual licenses (facilities) are responsible for their own operations, know more about their history and operations then anyone else, and do not share all aspects of their operations and history with other facilities, have all the historical, operational, and technical disposal facilities such as Envirocare could not possibly information necessary for making such a request on behalf of all.
US Ecology believes these items should be addressed as part of any proposed rulemaking on this issue. Please contact me at 713-624-1900 if I can be of any further assistance with this item.
41}~
Arthur J. Palmer, CHP Chief Radiological Control and Safety Officer
AJP/kmj
cc: Michael Lasar DOCKET NUMBER.
PETITION RULE PRU O - 2 4 *
Westinghouse 3 :~6}355 Pittsburgh Pennsylvania 15230-0355 Electric Corporation Nuclear Manufacturing Divisions '93 APR 21 p uP it.:: v SEi.,f<t_ it-1K T' April 19, 1993 DUCKE: tN(i.., Sl r* V !Cf f:HANL...;
(D Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
ATTENTION: Docketing and Service Branch
Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
PETITION FOR RULEMAKING FIELD BY ENVIROCARE OF UTAH. INC. DATED OCTOBER 21, 1992
The Westinghouse Electric Corporation submits the following comments in response to the Commission's invitation in the notice of proposed rulemaking on Envirocare of Utah, Inc. (58 Fed. Reg. February 22, 1993) petition.
Westinghouse supports the petition which would permit a license to possess special nuclear materials in amounts at or exceeding that defined in 10CFR150.11 as a critical mass. This petition approval would enable Agreement States to regulate possession of special nuclear materials involving remediation processes generating large balk quantities of soil and debris. Use of this proposed rule should be limited to licensee's processing waste materials for disposal in approved burial sites. Additional controls needed to prevent an accident critical reactions should include a mass concentration limit for balk materials when the SNM 350 gm limit is exceeded.
A. T. Sabo, Manager Environmental & Regulatory Services
Acknowledged by card.._.__ __ IAY 11199:,
,..............,,.,,,,,,,.,.,,nn S, 'UvlE.\\rt ~[GuLATOAY COMMI SSIOf'.
Ov~ KE T!NO & SE:AVICE SECTION OFF:CE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE COMMISSK>N Document Smtisticl Postmark Date '-I/ I 11'13 Copies R~ceived ______ / ____ _
Add'I Copies Reprodu~ sd - ---,,.--
Special Oictribt.rtion /l...7:..tJ5
- fl,Qll, t Leso..,c ' '
f)(/' ( N MBER -~ 5 O '-J_
P1:.:1*110N RULE PRM - ~
- *..,'(;Kf ii_ !, U SNRC,.
(Si F{t o/552.j
[7590-01]
- 93 FEB 16 p 3 : 1 l NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
, I :
- 10 CFR Part 150.**, j[~;' - ;.
..- - /.
[Docket No. PRM 150-2]
Envirocare of Utah, Inc.; Filing of Petition for Rulemaking
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of receipt of petition for rulemaking.
SUMMARY
- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is publishing
for public comment a notice of receipt of a petition for rulemaking. The petition, dated October 21, 1992, was filed with
the Commission by Envirocare of Utah, Inc., and was assigned
Docket No. PRM-150-2 on November 24, 1992. The petitioner
requests that the NRC revise its regulations to exempt those
persons who generate or dispose of very low specific activity
wastes contaminated with special nuclear materials that are not
capable of forming a critical reaction from the current
possession limits specified in its regulations.
L/ 12.!1'13 DATES: Submit comment by (60 days after publication in the
Federal Register). Comments received after this date will be
1 considered if it is practical to do so, but assurance of
consideration cannot be given except as to comments received on
or before this date.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Attention: Docketing and
Service Branch. For a copy of the petition, write: Rules Review
Section, Rules Review and Directives Branch, Division of Freedom
of Information and Publications Services, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael T. Lesar, Chief, Rules
Review Section, Rules Review and Directives Branch, Division of
Freedom of Information and Publications Services, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555. Telephone: 301-492-7758 or Toll Free: 1-800-368-5642.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Petitioner's Concern
The petitioner indicates that facilities where special
nuclear material was previously handled and that are now
2 contaminated with low concentrations of special nuclear material are being required to be remediated. The petitioner states that the remediation process generates large quantities of very low specific activity waste material which may consist of both soil and debris. The petitioner states that transport, storage, and disposal of the waste material involve large volumes of bulk waste that can exceed many times the amount of special nuclear material defined in 10 CFR 150.11 as a critical mass.
The petitioner notes that mass concentrations of the waste material may be as low as 0.0004 percent. However, even at very low concentrations, a bulk rail car or a large container of waste material may exceed the 350-gram limit for U-235. The petitioner states that the presence of higher concentrations requires shipping smaller amounts of the waste material so the 350-gram limit is not exceeded. According to the petitioner, this requirement creates onsite storage problems and results in a bottleneck that slows the remediation process.
Requested Amendment Therefore, the petitioner is requesting that existing regulations, which were drafted before the advent of current remediation efforts, be amended to include a further exemption for persons who generate or dispose of very low specific activity wastes containing special nuclear material. The petitioner requests that this category of exemption be included
3 in 10 CFR 150.10 and any other regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I that specify possession limits. The petitioner asserts that the existing quantity limitation on possession of special nuclear material serves the purpose of preventing the accumulation of material that could inadvertently or through purposeful actions be sufficient to cause critical reaction. The petitioner believes that in the case of waste material containing diffuse special nuclear material that is destined for disposal, no accidental or purposeful act could cause a critical reaction.
Other Considerations Under current NRC regulations, possession of special nuclear materials in amounts at or exceeding that defined in 10 CFR 150.11 as a critical mass is regulated by the NRC. Thus, licensees in Agreement states who desire to possess special nuclear material in quantities of a critical mass, or greater, need an NRC license (in addition to any Agreement State license for possession of byproduct or source material not exceeding the stated limitations). By granting this petition, the material in question would be regulated by the Agreement States alone.
The NRC is interested in receiving comments concerning the various approaches that might be used to exempt from NRC regulations those licensing materials containing very small amounts of specified nuclear material, but still greater than a critical mass as defined in 10 CFR 150.11, such as concentration
4 or quantity limits. The NRC is also interested in knowing if
there is a need for any additional controls on material of this
type.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this /(~ day of February,
1993.
For ;;;;t~. RbZCommission.
secretary of-~ Commission.
5 USNRL'. T' r" or=r:: 1C£:1VV'lRtJCARE OF UTAH, INC
- gz NO\\iftaE' JSA1t! ALTERNATIVE
October 21, DOCKETED Executive Director for Operations NOV 2 1t 1992 U. s. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 DOCKETING & '
SERVICE BRANCH, I SECY-NRC
Dear Sir:
.J
include in 10 CFR 150.10 a further category of persons exempt, or This to request that the u. s. Nuclear Regulatory Commission issue such other waiver as appropriate.
- At the present time, many facilities *which have handled some form of special nuclear material, and which are now contaminated with low concentrations of the material used, are being required to quantities of very low specific activity waste material, both soil remediate the premises. The process of remediation generates large and debris. Transport, storage and disposal of this waste material involves large volumes of bulk wastes which can contain many times
~he amount of special nuclear material defined in 10 CFR 150.11 as a critical mass. However, the mass concentrations may be as low as 0.0004 percent. Even at these very low concentrations, a bulk rail car or large container can exceed the 350-gram limi~ for U-235.
The presence of higher concentrations requires shipping smaller amounts of material so that less than 350 grams is received at any one time. On-site storage pending final disposal is complicated in the same way. The ultimate effect is to create a bottleneck which greatly slows the process of remediation while serving no useful end.
It seems clear that the quantity limitation on possession of special nuclear material serves the purpose of preventing the accumulation of material which could inadvertently, or through purposeful actions, be sufficient to cause a critical reaction. In the case of waste material containing diffuse special nuclear material destined for disposal, no accidental or purposeful acts could cause such an event. This seems to be generally acknowledged within the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, but existing regulations, drafted before the advent of current remediation efforts, prevent an application of this reality to the handling and possession of such wastes.
This petition, then, is to request that those persons generating or disposing of very low specific activity wastes contaminated with special nuclear materials and not capable of forming a critical reaction be exempt from the possession limits of this or other parts.
EDO -- 008221
'1). ()l_,!}S_i _ /-0° 215 So. STATE STREET* SUITE 1160
- SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111* TELEPHONE (801) 532-1330 ENVIROCARE
Page 2 October 21, 1992 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Your consideration of this request is greatly appreciated.
Please contact me at the address below or at (801)532-1330 if you have any questions or comments.
Vernon E. Andrews Corporate Radiation Safety Officer
cc: Mr. Dane Finerfrock Utah Division of Radiation Control