ML18121A393: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Line 15: Line 15:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management The United States of AmericaPresentation to the 6 thReview MeetingMay 22, 2018 U.S.PresentersMark GilbertsonAssociate Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Regulatory and Policy Affairs, Office Environmental ManagementUnited States Department of EnergyMarc L. DapasDirector, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and SafeguardsUnited States Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2
{{#Wiki_filter:Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management The United States of America Presentation to the 6th Review Meeting May 22, 2018
Agenda for U.S.PresentationOverview of U.S. Program
 
*Regulatory Framework, Overview Matrix, Facilities, Program Features, Sixth Cycle Themes, Summary of Questions on National ReportDepartment of Energy Update
U.S. Presenters                                                  2 Mark Gilbertson                      Marc L. Dapas Associate Principal Deputy Assistant Director, Office of Secretary for Regulatory and Policy   Nuclear Material Safety Affairs, Office Environmental         and Safeguards Management                            United States Nuclear United States Department of Energy    Regulatory Commission
*Agency Highlights & Topics of Interest, Questions on National ReportNuclear Regulatory Commission Update
 
*Regulatory Approach, Agency Highlights & Topics of Interest, Questions on National ReportKey Takeaways from National Report
Agenda for U.S. Presentation                                                    3 Overview of U.S. Program
*Challenges, Proposed Areas of Good Performance, Summary 3
* Regulatory Framework, Overview Matrix, Facilities, Program Features, Sixth Cycle Themes, Summary of Questions on National Report Department of Energy Update
Overview of U.S. Program   Regulatory Framework, Overview Matrix, Facilities, Program Features, Sixth Cycle Themes, Summary of Questions on National Report 4
* Agency Highlights & Topics of Interest, Questions on National Report Nuclear Regulatory Commission Update
RegulatoryFrameworkEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA):Establishes environmental standardsDepartment of Energy (DOE):Regulates DOE activitiesNuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC):Regulates commercial nuclear sectorEPADOE NRCNRC Agreement StatesEPA AuthorizedStates 5 Overview MatrixType of LiabilityLong-term Management PolicyFunding of LiabilitiesCurrent Practice/FacilitiesFuture FacilitiesSpent fuelDisposal at Yucca Mountain in a geologic repository in compliance with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA).The Standard Contract between utilities and DOE for the disposal of spent fuel requires utilities to pay fees into the Nuclear Waste Fund sufficient to cover the costs associated with disposal activities for spent fuel. In compliance with a November 2013 court ruling, the fee was adjusted to zero and payment of fees by utilities were suspended in May 2014.Onsite and away from reactors wet and dry interim storage (commercial & government property).NRC completed a rulemaking on Continued Storage of Spent Fuel and prepared a supporting Environmental Impact Statement (EIS); integrated spent fuel regulatory strategy.Acceptance of foreign research reactor fuel.A license application for a repository at Yucca Mountain was filed by DOE with the Commission in 2008, but adjudicatory proceedings before NRC in which the application has been challenged have been suspended. Interim storage facility applications were received by NRC.Nuclear fuel cycle wastes (all LLW included in Non
* Regulatory Approach, Agency Highlights & Topics of Interest, Questions on National Report Key Takeaways from National Report
-Nuclear fuel cycle wastes for brevity)HLW: See above.Uranium & Thorium (U&Th) recovery sites: Near
* Challenges, Proposed Areas of Good Performance, Summary
-surface disposal.All: Producer pays.U&Th recovery sites: Long Term Surveillance Fund.Financial assurance required by license.HLW: Interim storage. U&Th recovery sites: Surface disposal locally.HLW: See above.U&Th recovery sites: additional license applications expected.Non-Nuclear fuel cycle wastesDefense HLW: See above. Defense TRU waste: disposal at WIPP.LLW: Near-surface disposal Class A, B and C; GTCC LLW disposal path to be determined.All: Producer pays.Defense HLW and TRU waste: Public funds.LLW: Licensees required to demonstrate financial qualifications.Defense HLW: Interim storage. Defense TRU waste: Disposal at WIPP.LLW: 4 commercial sites plus multiple government (DOE) facilities.Storage of GTCC LLW pending disposal availability.Defense HLW Disposal: See above.Additional Defense HLW Treatment Facilities.GTCC LLW Final EIS completed; DOE submitted report to Congresson disposal alternatives. GTCC LLW disposal pathto be determined. Decommissioning liabilitiesNuclear Power Plants (NPPs): Decontamination & Decommissioning (D&D) to be completed within 60 years.Defense, U&Th recovery and other sites: Based on risk.NPPs: D&D fund required by law.Non-legacy Sites: Producer pays.Defense sites: Public funds for defense liabilities.Large number of facilities undergoing decommissioning/ remediation.Large number of facilities planned for decommissioning/ remediation.Disused Sealed SourcesReturn to manufacturers and distributors. Disposal, reuse or recycle.Licensee or government, if disposed by government in support of public health, safety or national security.Disposal at commercial disposal sites and government sites.Storage of sources onsite by licensees pending disposal.Off-site Source Recovery Project Source Collection and Threat Reduction Program.Possibledisposal of some sources in a future GTCC LLW disposal facility
 
.NRC is considering a rulemaking to expand financial assurance requirements for sealed sources.
Overview of U.S. Program                       4 Regulatory Framework, Overview Matrix, Facilities, Program Features, Sixth Cycle Themes, Summary of Questions on National Report
6 U.S.SpentFuel&RadioactiveWasteFacilities99 operating civilian nuclear power plants79 licensed independent spent fuel storage installations 19,300 licenses for medical, academic, industrial, and general uses of nuclear materials7 operating uranium recovery sites 13 licensed fuel cycle facilities 20 power reactors and 4 research reactors in decommissioning status4 operating and 4 closed commercial low
 
-level radioactive waste (LLW) licensed disposal facilities 4 DOE sites with stored high
Regulatory Framework                                                      5 EPA EPA Environmental Protection Agency (EPA):           Authorized Establishes environmental standards                States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC):
-level radioactive waste (HLW) 1 geologic repository for DOE transuranic (TRU) defense waste11 operating DOE LLW disposal facilities 7
Regulates commercial nuclear sector NRC NRC      DOE Department of Energy (DOE):
U.S.SpentFuel&HighLevelRadioactiveWasteSites 8 U.S.LowLevelWasteSites 9 Robust regulatory framework supported by multiple agenciesClose coordination among agencies and with the public on rulemaking and implementationCommitment to safe management of commercial and government sector spent fuel and radioactive wasteCommitment to information sharing and collaboration with international partnershttps://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/12/f46/10 17%206th_%20US_National_Report%20%28Final%29.pdfKeyFeatures ofthe U.S.Program 10 U.S.ResponsestoSixthCycleThemesStaffing, staff development, reliability of funding, other human resource areas
Regulates DOE activities Agreement States
*Use of workforce retention and succession plans to maintain core competencies
 
*Many opportunities for higher education, professional development, and training Public involvement and engagement  
Overview Matrix                                                                                                                                                                            6 Type of Liability        Long-term Management Policy                    Funding of Liabilities                  Current Practice/Facilities                    Future Facilities Disposal at Yucca Mountain in a       The Standard Contract between utilities       Onsite and away from reactors wet and      A license application for a repository geologic repository in compliance      and DOE for the disposal of spent fuel       dry interim storage (commercial &          at Yucca Mountain was filed by DOE with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act      requires utilities to pay fees into the       government property). NRC completed a      with the Commission in 2008, but (NWPA).                                Nuclear Waste Fund sufficient to cover the   rulemaking on Continued Storage of Spent  adjudicatory proceedings before NRC costs associated with disposal activities for Fuel and prepared a supporting            in which the application has been Spent fuel spent fuel. In compliance with a November     Environmental Impact Statement (EIS);      challenged have been suspended.
*Extensive statutory and regulatory system informs the public and provides opportunities to comment on proposed actionsDeveloping strategies for radioactive waste and spent fuel at an early stage
2013 court ruling, the fee was adjusted to   integrated spent fuel regulatory strategy. Interim storage facility applications zero and payment of fees by utilities were   Acceptance of foreign research reactor    were received by NRC.
*Factors considered include safety, environmental protection, emergency preparedness, justification of facility need, cost, and scheduleManagement of disused sealed sources
suspended in May 2014.                       fuel.
*Addressed in subsequent slides 11 Summary of Questions Received on U.S. National Report 12TopicQuantity%Spent Fuel Management 29 28%Decommissioning 16 15%Radioactive Waste Management 9 9%Regulatory Framework 6 6%Radiation Safety 5 5%Emergency Preparedness 5 5%Spent Fuel Fees 4 4%Greater-Than-Class C LLW 4 4%Import/Export 4 4%Concentration Averaging 3 3%NRC Regulations 3 3%Waste Isolation Pilot Plant 3 3%Other 13 11%Total 104 100%
HLW: See above.                      All: Producer pays.                          HLW: Interim storage.                      HLW: See above.
Department of Energy Update Agency Highlights & Topics of Interest, Questions on National Report 13 Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Recovery & RestartDepleted Uranium OxideGreater-Than-Class-C (GTCC) LLWDisused Sealed SourcesMedical Isotope Molybdenum
Nuclear fuel cycle wastes (all  Uranium & Thorium (U&Th) recovery    U&Th recovery sites: Long Term                U&Th recovery sites: Surface disposal      U&Th recovery sites: additional license LLW included in Non-Nuclear    sites: Near-surface disposal.        Surveillance Fund.                           locally.                                  applications expected.
-99Decontamination & Decommissioning (D&D) ProgressDOEHighlights
fuel cycle wastes for brevity)                                        Financial assurance required by license.
&Topics ofInterest 14 Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP)Recovery & RestartSeries of recovery activities and corrective actions initiated to work toward safe re
Defense HLW: See above.              All: Producer pays.                          Defense HLW: Interim storage.             Defense HLW Disposal: See above.
-opening of WIPP following February 2014 incidentsEnhanced WIPP waste acceptance criteria and systemic improvements provide new layers of contractor and government oversightWaste emplacement operations resumed January 2017Shipments resumed in April 2017Priority is the safe preparation, shipment, and emplacement of TRU waste at WIPP 15 DepletedUraniumOxidePlanning underway for future disposal of depleted uranium oxide conversion product generated from DOE's inventory of depleted uranium hexafluorideDOE is working on a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to support potential disposition of this wasteDisposition location alternatives being analyzed are:
Defense TRU waste: disposal at WIPP. Defense HLW and TRU waste: Public funds.     Defense TRU waste: Disposal at WIPP.       Additional Defense HLW Treatment LLW: Near-surface disposal Class A, B LLW: Licensees required to demonstrate        LLW: 4 commercial sites plus multiple      Facilities. GTCC LLW Final EIS Non-Nuclear fuel cycle wastes  and C; GTCC LLW disposal path to be   financial qualifications.                     government (DOE) facilities.               completed; DOE submitted report to determined.                                                                         Storage of GTCC LLW pending disposal      Congress on disposal alternatives.
*Nevada National Security Site in Nevada  
availability.                             GTCC LLW disposal path to be determined.
*EnergySolutions, LLC in Utah
Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs):         NPPs: D&D fund required by law.               Large number of facilities undergoing      Large number of facilities planned for Decontamination & Decommissioning    Non-legacy Sites: Producer pays.             decommissioning/ remediation.              decommissioning/ remediation.
*Waste Control Specialists LLC in Texas 16 Greater-Than-Class C (GTCC) LLWIn February 2016, DOE issued the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Disposal of Greater-Than-Class C (GTCC) Low
(D&D) to be completed within 60      Defense sites: Public funds for defense Decommissioning liabilities years.                               liabilities.
-Level Radioactive Waste and GTCC
Defense, U&Th recovery and other sites: Based on risk.
-Like WasteThe Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) included a preferred alternative of land disposal at generic commercial facilities and/or disposal at WIPP geologic repositoryIn accordance with the Energy Policy Act of 2005, DOE issued a Report to Congress in November 2017 on disposal alternatives for GTCC LLW The Final EIS and Report to Congress do not constitute a final decision on GTCC LLW disposal 17 End of life management options include storage, return to manufacturer, recycling, and disposal
Return to manufacturers and           Licensee or government, if disposed by       Disposal at commercial disposal sites and Possible disposal of some sources in a distributors. Disposal, reuse or      government in support of public health,      government sites. Storage of sources       future GTCC LLW disposal facility. NRC Disused Sealed Sources          recycle.                              safety or national security.                  onsite by licensees pending disposal. Off- is considering a rulemaking to expand site Source Recovery Project Source        financial assurance requirements for Collection and Threat Reduction Program. sealed sources.
*Three commercial facilities available for disposal, with some limitations on waste acceptance
 
*Manufacturers and distributors accept return of sources from customers as deemed appropriate
U.S. Spent Fuel & Radioactive Waste Facilities                  7 99 operating civilian nuclear power plants 79 licensed independent spent fuel storage installations 19,300 licenses for medical, academic, industrial, and general uses of nuclear materials 7 operating uranium recovery sites 13 licensed fuel cycle facilities 20 power reactors and 4 research reactors in decommissioning status 4 operating and 4 closed commercial low-level radioactive waste (LLW) licensed disposal facilities 4 DOE sites with stored high-level radioactive waste (HLW) 1 geologic repository for DOE transuranic (TRU) defense waste 11 operating DOE LLW disposal facilities
*Safe and secure storage required for sources that remain with the owner of recordThe National Nuclear Security Administration Off
 
-Site Source Recovery Project (OSRP) recovers disused sealed sources in support of national security, public health and safety
U.S. Spent Fuel & High Level Radioactive Waste Sites                              8
*Since 1997, over 37,000 disused sealed sources recovered domestically under this projectOSRP includes repatriation of certain U.S
 
-manufactured sources
U.S. Low Level Waste Sites 9 Key Features of the U.S. Program                                                                    10 Robust regulatory framework supported by multiple agencies Close coordination among agencies and with the public on rulemaking and implementation Commitment to safe management of commercial and government sector spent fuel and radioactive waste Commitment to information sharing and collaboration with international partners https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/12/f46/10 17%206th_%20US_National_Report%20%28Final%29.pdf
*The Code of Conduct on the Safety and Security of Radioactive Sources supports return to supplier in cases where authorized by national law
 
*Since 2005, over 3,000 sources recovered internationallyDisusedSealedSources 18 DOE supports U.S. private sector acceleration of commercial, non
U.S. Responses to Sixth Cycle Themes                                                        11 Staffing, staff development, reliability of funding, other human resource areas
-highly-enricheduranium methods to produce molybdenum
* Use of workforce retention and succession plans to maintain core competencies
-99 (99Mo)  
* Many opportunities for higher education, professional development, and training Public involvement and engagement
*NRC or Agreement State responsible for licensing of any new medical isotope facility used for 99Mo productionDOE established the Uranium Lease and Take
* Extensive statutory and regulatory system informs the public and provides opportunities to comment on proposed actions Developing strategies for radioactive waste and spent fuel at an early stage
-Back Program (ULTB) in January 2016, in accordance with the American Medical Isotope Production Act of 2012
* Factors considered include safety, environmental protection, emergency preparedness, justification of facility need, cost, and schedule Management of disused sealed sources
*The ULTB Program makes DOElow-enriched uranium available through lease contracts for production of 99Mo for medical uses
* Addressed in subsequent slides
*The ULTB Program also requires DOE to take title and be responsible for the final disposition of radioactive waste for which the Secretary of Energy determines there is no disposal path and for spent nuclear fuel generated through the production of 99MoU.S. commercial production of 99Mo has not yet commenced
 
*In February 2018, the U.S Food and Drug Administration approved NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, LLC's non
Summary of Questions Received on U.S. National Report                                 12 Topic                        Quantity    %
-highly-enriched uranium technology called the RadioGenix System. The company is working towards commercial production and shipments. MedicalIsotopeMolybdenum
Spent Fuel Management             29   28%
-99 19 DOE continues to make significant progress on D&D within cleanup sites across the U.S., some examples include:
Decommissioning                   16   15%
*At the East Tennessee Technology Park on the Oak Ridge Reservation we've completed D&D of the large gaseous diffusion enrichment plants and continue to work on the remaining supporting facilities and remediation
Radioactive Waste Management       9   9%
*At the Portsmouth gaseous diffusion enrichment plant near Piketon Ohio, we are in the midst of D&D, and are beginning construction of a new onsite disposal facility for the majority of the radioactive waste generated from that process  
Regulatory Framework               6   6%
*At the West Valley Demonstration Project, in New York, we are demolishing the vitrification facility and are preparing the Main Plant Process Building for demolition.
Radiation Safety                   5   5%
*At Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory, in California, we removed several buildings, concrete slabs, and associated underground utilities and contaminated soil.Decontamination
Emergency Preparedness             5   5%
&Decommissioning(D&D)Progress 20 Radioactive Waste ManagementCoordination Among Regulatory AgenciesQuestionsReceived on U.S.NationalReport 21 Summary of Questions & Comments
Spent Fuel Fees                     4   4%
*What factors are considered in selecting disposal options for legacy waste?
Greater-Than-Class C LLW           4   4%
*How is performance controlled?
Import/Export                       4   4%
*How does the U.S. minimize generation of waste with no disposal path?Key Points
Concentration Averaging             3   3%
*Protection and safety of workers, the public, and the environment is paramount in all disposal decisions
NRC Regulations                     3   3%
*Several DOE directives specify performance objectives and measures that must be met for disposal activities
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant         3   3%
*DOE Order 435.1, RadioactiveWaste Management, and DOE Manual 435.1
Other                             13   11%
-1, Radioactive Waste Management Manual, contain specific requirements for the generation, treatment, storage, and disposal of DOE radioactive waste
Total                           104 100%
*The Order and Manual also describe requirements for life
 
-cycle planning and for generation of waste with no disposal path
Department of Energy Update                           13 Agency Highlights & Topics of Interest, Questions on National Report
*Waste streams with no disposal path may only be generated in accordance with approved conditionsRadioactiveWasteManagement 22 Summary of Questions & Comments
 
*How are interfaces between NRC and DOE managed?
DOE Highlights & Topics of Interest                    14 Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Recovery & Restart Depleted Uranium Oxide Greater-Than-Class-C (GTCC) LLW Disused Sealed Sources Medical Isotope Molybdenum-99 Decontamination & Decommissioning (D&D) Progress
*Are joint inspections conducted?
 
*How are discrepancies avoided?Key Points
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) 15 Recovery & Restart Series of recovery activities and corrective actions initiated to work toward safe re-opening of WIPP following February 2014 incidents Enhanced WIPP waste acceptance criteria and systemic improvements provide new layers of contractor and government oversight Waste emplacement operations resumed January 2017 Shipments resumed in April 2017 Priority is the safe preparation, shipment, and emplacement of TRU waste at WIPP
*Each agency's roles and responsibilities outlined in legislation
 
*Agencies coordinate on various issues, especially rulemaking, and may communicate via formal and informal meetings, workshops, conferences, and public meetings
Depleted Uranium Oxide                                                      16 Planning underway for future disposal of depleted uranium oxide conversion product generated from DOEs inventory of depleted uranium hexafluoride DOE is working on a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to support potential disposition of this waste Disposition location alternatives being analyzed are:
*Agencies do not perform joint inspections, but may allow observers from other agencies to attend*Regulatory agencies may coordinate activities and share information where the same facility is subject to their separate authorities
* Nevada National Security Site in Nevada
*The Interagency Steering Committee on Radiation Standards, comprised of multiple agencies, facilitates consensus on radiation dose levels and consistent risk approaches in setting and implementing standardsCoordinationAmongRegulatoryAgencies 23 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Update Regulatory Approach, Agency Highlights & Topics of Interest, Questions on National Report 24 NRC Regulatory ApproachThe NRC was created through the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 to independently oversee  
* EnergySolutions, LLC in Utah
-but not promote  
* Waste Control Specialists LLC in Texas
-the civilian use of radioactive materials 25 Enacted in 1959Regulates about 16,500 licensees in 37 StatesProvides a mechanism for transfer and discontinuance of certain NRC authority; reserves certain areas for NRC to regulate Establishes cooperative program All active commercial LLW disposal sites are in Agreement StatesNRC'sAgreementStateProgram 26 Consolidated Interim Storage Facilities (CISF) for Spent FuelHigh-Level Radioactive Waste (HLW) ActivitiesReactor Decommissioning ActivitiesReactor Decommissioning RulemakingCleanup of Non
 
-Military RadiumTitle 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 61 RulemakingGreater-than-Class-C (GTCC) LLWVery Low-Level Waste (VLLW)Radiation Source Protection and Security Task ForcePublic Engagement in the Regulatory ProcessNRCHighlights
Greater-Than-Class C (GTCC) LLW                      17 In February 2016, DOE issued the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Disposal of Greater-Than-Class C (GTCC) Low-Level Radioactive Waste and GTCC-Like Waste The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) included a preferred alternative of land disposal at generic commercial facilities and/or disposal at WIPP geologic repository In accordance with the Energy Policy Act of 2005, DOE issued a Report to Congress in November 2017 on disposal alternatives for GTCC LLW The Final EIS and Report to Congress do not constitute a final decision on GTCC LLW disposal
&Topics ofInterest 27 Consolidated Interim Storage Facilities (CISF) for Spent Fuel Applications for CISFs
 
*April 2016  
Disused Sealed Sources                                                                            18 End of life management options include storage, return to manufacturer, recycling, and disposal
-Waste Control Specialists (WCS) submitted a license application to the NRC to construct and operate a CISF in the state of Texas
* Three commercial facilities available for disposal, with some limitations on waste acceptance
*April 2017  
* Manufacturers and distributors accept return of sources from customers as deemed appropriate
-WCS requested that the NRC temporarily suspend the application review  
* Safe and secure storage required for sources that remain with the owner of record The National Nuclear Security Administration Off-Site Source Recovery Project (OSRP) recovers disused sealed sources in support of national security, public health and safety
*March 2017  
* Since 1997, over 37,000 disused sealed sources recovered domestically under this project OSRP includes repatriation of certain U.S-manufactured sources
-HoltecInternational, in coordination with the Eddy
* The Code of Conduct on the Safety and Security of Radioactive Sources supports return to supplier in cases where authorized by national law
-Lea Energy Alliance, submitted a license application to the NRC to construct and operate a CISF in the state of New Mexico
* Since 2005, over 3,000 sources recovered internationally
*The Holtec application is currently under review by the NRC staff 28 Yucca Mountain License Application Review
 
*In January 2015, the NRC staff completed the safety evaluation report (NUREG
Medical Isotope Molybdenum-99                                                                          19 DOE supports U.S. private sector acceleration of commercial, non-highly-enriched uranium methods to produce molybdenum-99 (99Mo)
-1949) *In May 2016, NRC published a supplement to DOE's EIS (NUREG
* NRC or Agreement State responsible for licensing of any new medical isotope facility used for 99Mo production DOE established the Uranium Lease and Take-Back Program (ULTB) in January 2016, in accordance with the American Medical Isotope Production Act of 2012
-2184)*In 2018, NRC will conduct limited evaluation of infrastructure needs associated with possible resumption of hearing activitiesHigh-LevelRadioactiveWaste(HLW)Activities 29 Increasing inventory of reactor decommissioning sitesExpecting large volumes of waste Completing rulemaking to improve efficiency Crystal RiverVermont YankeeKewauneeReactorDecommissioningActivities 30 Rulemaking initiated in 2015 to provide a more efficient and predictable decommissioning transition processSchedule:*November 2017  
* The ULTB Program makes DOE low-enriched uranium available through lease contracts for production of 99Mo for medical uses
-Final Regulatory Basis published
* The ULTB Program also requires DOE to take title and be responsible for the final disposition of radioactive waste for which the Secretary of Energy determines there is no disposal path and for spent nuclear fuel generated through the production of 99Mo U.S. commercial production of 99Mo has not yet commenced
*May 2018 -Proposed Rule submitted to the Commission for review  
* In February 2018, the U.S Food and Drug Administration approved NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, LLCs non-highly-enriched uranium technology called the RadioGenix System.
*Fall 2019  
The company is working towards commercial production and shipments.
-Final Rule submitted to the Commission for review ReactorDecommissioningRulemaking 31 NRC identifying and facilitating cleanup of sites with Radium
 
-226 contamination in Non-Agreement StatesRecent developments
Decontamination & Decommissioning (D&D)
*Implementing risk
Progress                                                                                        20 DOE continues to make significant progress on D&D within cleanup sites across the U.S., some examples include:
-informed approach
* At the East Tennessee Technology Park on the Oak Ridge Reservation we've completed D&D of the large gaseous diffusion enrichment plants and continue to work on the remaining supporting facilities and remediation
*33 initial sites assessed
* At the Portsmouth gaseous diffusion enrichment plant near Piketon Ohio, we are in the midst of D&D, and are beginning construction of a new onsite disposal facility for the majority of the radioactive waste generated from that process
*14 sites had residual radium activity above background levels
* At the West Valley Demonstration Project, in New York, we are demolishing the vitrification facility and are preparing the Main Plant Process Building for demolition.
*Coordinating with other Federal agencies in their cleanup efforts  
* At Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory, in California, we removed several buildings, concrete slabs, and associated underground utilities and contaminated soil.
*Sharing lessons learned
 
*Extensive stakeholder communication and coordinationCleanup ofNon-MilitaryRadium 32 Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 61 RulemakingAmend regulations that govern LLW disposal facilities
Questions Received on U.S. National Report 21 Radioactive Waste Management Coordination Among Regulatory Agencies
*Ensure LLW streams that are significantly different from those considered in the current 10 CFR Part 61 rule can be disposed of safely
 
*Increase the use of site
Radioactive Waste Management                                                              22 Summary of Questions & Comments
-specific information to ensure performance objectives are metRecent developments
* What factors are considered in selecting disposal options for legacy waste?
*September 2016  
* How is performance controlled?
-Draft Final Rule provided to the Commission
* How does the U.S. minimize generation of waste with no disposal path?
*September 2017  
Key Points
-Staff Requirements Memorandum SECY 0106 -Final Rule: Low
* Protection and safety of workers, the public, and the environment is paramount in all disposal decisions
-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal  
* Several DOE directives specify performance objectives and measures that must be met for disposal activities
*The Commission directed the staff to make substantive revisions and republish as a supplemental proposed rule 33 GTCC LLW is not generally acceptable for near
* DOE Order 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and DOE Manual 435.1-1, Radioactive Waste Management Manual, contain specific requirements for the generation, treatment, storage, and disposal of DOE radioactive waste
-surface disposal and must be disposed of in a geologic repository licensed by the NRC unless the Commission approves an alternative proposalNRC to prepare regulatory basis for the disposal of GTCC LLW, through a means other than deep geologic disposalRecent Developments
* The Order and Manual also describe requirements for life-cycle planning and for generation of waste with no disposal path
*January 2015  
* Waste streams with no disposal path may only be generated in accordance with approved conditions
-State of Texas asked NRC whether it could authorize disposal of GTCC LLW in a near
 
-surface disposal facility
Coordination Among Regulatory Agencies                                                          23 Summary of Questions & Comments
*February/March 2018  
* How are interfaces between NRC and DOE managed?
-NRC issued draft technical analysis and held public meetingsGreater-Than-Class-C(GTCC)LLW 34 In the U.S., VLLW is not a formal designation and does not have a statutory or regulatory definitionMay be approved for disposal at locations other than LLW disposal facilities on a case-by-case basisRecent developments  
* Are joint inspections conducted?
*February 2018  
* How are discrepancies avoided?
-NRC initiated a scoping study to assess its regulatory oversight of VLLW
Key Points
*Purpose is to identify options to improve and strengthen NRC's regulatory framework for disposal of VLLW  
* Each agencys roles and responsibilities outlined in legislation
*Will assess international VLLW disposal practices  
* Agencies coordinate on various issues, especially rulemaking, and may communicate via formal and informal meetings, workshops, conferences, and public meetings
*Recommendations could include future rulemaking or guidance developmentVeryLowLevelWaste(VLLW)35 Task Force composed of 14 Federal Agencies and one State organization
* Agencies do not perform joint inspections, but may allow observers from other agencies to attend
*Chaired by NRC
* Regulatory agencies may coordinate activities and share information where the same facility is subject to their separate authorities
*DOE, EPA, and the Department of State are member agenciesObjective is to evaluate and provide recommendations related to domestic security of radioactive sourcesRecent developments
* The Interagency Steering Committee on Radiation Standards, comprised of multiple agencies, facilitates consensus on radiation dose levels and consistent risk approaches in setting and implementing standards
*Implementation Plan issued in February 2017
 
*Preparing 2018 report to the President and CongressRadiation Source Protection and Security Task Force 36 Various opportunities to participate in a meaningful wayNoteworthy examples:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Update                                   24 Regulatory Approach, Agency Highlights & Topics of Interest, Questions on National Report
*Formal petition  
 
-formal process to raise health/safety concerns*Hearing process  
NRC Regulatory Approach            25 The NRC was created through the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 to independently oversee - but not promote - the civilian use of radioactive materials
-opportunity to intervene in a licensing action
 
*Petition for rulemaking process  
NRCs Agreement State Program                    26 Enacted in 1959 Regulates about 16,500 licensees in 37 States Provides a mechanism for transfer and discontinuance of certain NRC authority; reserves certain areas for NRC to regulate Establishes cooperative program All active commercial LLW disposal sites are in Agreement States
-requests to change NRC rules*Allegations Program  
 
-less formal process to raise health/safety concerns via hotline, email, or in person
NRC Highlights & Topics of Interest                                      27 Consolidated Interim Storage Facilities (CISF) for Spent Fuel High-Level Radioactive Waste (HLW) Activities Reactor Decommissioning Activities Reactor Decommissioning Rulemaking Cleanup of Non-Military Radium Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 61 Rulemaking Greater-than-Class-C (GTCC) LLW Very Low-Level Waste (VLLW)
*Public comment process under the U.S. Administrative Procedure Act (Public Law 79
Radiation Source Protection and Security Task Force Public Engagement in the Regulatory Process
-404)*Public meeting feedback formsPublicEngagement intheRegulatoryProcess 37 LLW Concentration AveragingSpent Fuel Storage Emergency PreparednessQuestionsReceived on U.S.NationalReport 38 Summary of Questions and Comments
 
*What U.S. regulations allow blending of higher
Consolidated Interim Storage Facilities (CISF) for Spent Fuel                                                                                 28 Applications for CISFs
-activity LLW with lower
* April 2016 - Waste Control Specialists (WCS) submitted a license application to the NRC to construct and operate a CISF in the state of Texas
-activity LLW?
* April 2017 - WCS requested that the NRC temporarily suspend the application review
*Is blending of LLW consistent with objectives to protect the environment?Key Points
* March 2017 - Holtec International, in coordination with the Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance, submitted a license application to the NRC to construct and operate a CISF in the state of New Mexico
*NRC regulations in 10 CFR 61.55(a)(8) allow averaging radionuclide concentrations when determining waste classification
* The Holtec application is currently under review by the NRC staff
*Guidance is provided in NRC's Branch Technical Position on Concentration Averaging and Encapsulation (CA BTP), available at https://www.nrc.gov/waste/llw
 
-disposal/llw
High-Level Radioactive Waste (HLW) Activities        29 Yucca Mountain License Application Review
-pa/llw-btp.html*The CA BTP was extensively revised in 2015 to be more risk
* In January 2015, the NRC staff completed the safety evaluation report (NUREG-1949)
-informed and performance
* In May 2016, NRC published a supplement to DOEs EIS (NUREG-2184)
-based*The techniques and methods described in the CA BTP are protective of public health and safety and the environment LLWConcentrationAveraging 39 Summary of Questions and Comments
* In 2018, NRC will conduct limited evaluation of infrastructure needs associated with possible resumption of hearing activities
*What are the licensing requirements for independent spent fuel storage installations (ISFSIs)?*What scenarios were considered in NRC's 2014 rulemaking on Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel?Key Points
 
*For a site
Reactor Decommissioning Activities                           30 Crystal River Increasing inventory of reactor decommissioning sites Expecting large volumes of waste Completing rulemaking to improve efficiency Vermont Yankee  Kewaunee
-specific ISFSI license, the site and containers are approved for up to a 40
 
-year period with possible renewals
Reactor Decommissioning Rulemaking                    31 Rulemaking initiated in 2015 to provide a more efficient and predictable decommissioning transition process Schedule:
*For a general license, the license term is a function of the Certificate of Compliance (CoC) for the dry cask system; the CoC may also be renewed
* November 2017 - Final Regulatory Basis published
*Renewal applications must address aging mechanisms and effects that could impact structures, systems, and components relied upon for safety
* May 2018 - Proposed Rule submitted to the Commission for review
*In the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel (NUREG
* Fall 2019 - Final Rule submitted to the Commission for review
-2157), the NRC considered three scenarios for the storage of spent fuel beyond the licensed operating life of a reactor
 
*NRC considers the most likely scenario to be the short
Cleanup of Non-Military Radium                    32 NRC identifying and facilitating cleanup of sites with Radium-226 contamination in Non-Agreement States Recent developments
-term timeframe of 60 years after a reactor ceases operationsSpentFuelStorage 40 Summary of Questions and Comments
* Implementing risk-informed approach
*What are the arrangements for notifying the public in case of an emergency?
* 33 initial sites assessed
*What are the requirements for conducting emergency preparedness exercises at spent fuel storage facilities?Key Points
* 14 sites had residual radium activity above background levels
*The National Response Framework guides how the U.S. responds to all types of disasters and emergencies
* Coordinating with other Federal agencies in their cleanup efforts
*Protective Action Guides help emergency managers and public officials make decisions about evacuation or other actions to protect the public
* Sharing lessons learned
*NRC regulations provide requirements for emergency plans at spent fuel storage facilities, including provisions for conducting exercises to test the response to simulated emergencies EmergencyPreparedness 41 Key Takeaways from U.S. National ReportChallenges, Proposed Areas of Good Performance, Summary 42 Disposal of spent fuel and HLW
* Extensive stakeholder communication and coordination
*Continued Congressional appropriations funding uncertainty regarding path forward for repository at Yucca Mountain
 
*NRC and DOE prepared to support resumption of Yucca Mountain licensing process  
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 61 Rulemaking                                                                  33 Amend regulations that govern LLW disposal facilities
*DOE supports development of interim storage capabilities for spent fuel  
* Ensure LLW streams that are significantly different from those considered in the current 10 CFR Part 61 rule can be disposed of safely
*President's 2019 Federal Budget Proposal requests funding for both activitiesThe NRC is responding to changes in the external environment  
* Increase the use of site-specific information to ensure performance objectives are met Recent developments
*"Transformation" initiative Challenges forthe U.S.Program 43 Cleanup of non
* September 2016 - Draft Final Rule provided to the Commission
-military radium contaminationContinuous improvement of the regulatory framework Public engagement in decisions related to spent fuel and radioactive waste managementDomestic and international disused sealed source collection effortsInternational cooperation ondecommissioning and other nuclear safety and security topicsProposedAreas ofGoodPerformance 44 The U.S. collaborates with international partners on a wide range of nuclear safety and security topicsPromotes the exchange of institutional and technical knowledgeDecommissioning has been a focus area
* September 2017 - Staff Requirements Memorandum SECY-16-0106 - Final Rule: Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal
*Led workshops and training sessions
* The Commission directed the staff to make substantive revisions and republish as a supplemental proposed rule
*Supported bilateral meetings and technical exchanges
 
*Hosted foreign assignees
Greater-Than-Class-C (GTCC) LLW                              34 GTCC LLW is not generally acceptable for near-surface disposal and must be disposed of in a geologic repository licensed by the NRC unless the Commission approves an alternative proposal NRC to prepare regulatory basis for the disposal of GTCC LLW, through a means other than deep geologic disposal Recent Developments
*Participated in conferences and multilateral consultanciesInternationalCooperation 45 Mature and successful safety program for spent fuel and radioactive waste management Comprehensive regulatory infrastructureActive support and promotion of the Joint ConventionSummary 46 Thank you for your attention!
* January 2015 - State of Texas asked NRC whether it could authorize disposal of GTCC LLW in a near-surface disposal facility
47}}
* February/March 2018 - NRC issued draft technical analysis and held public meetings
 
Very Low Level Waste (VLLW)                                                                   35 In the U.S., VLLW is not a formal designation and does not have a statutory or regulatory definition May be approved for disposal at locations other than LLW disposal facilities on a case-by-case basis Recent developments
* February 2018 - NRC initiated a scoping study to assess its regulatory oversight of VLLW
* Purpose is to identify options to improve and strengthen NRCs regulatory framework for disposal of VLLW
* Will assess international VLLW disposal practices
* Recommendations could include future rulemaking or guidance development
 
Radiation Source Protection and Security Task Force                                                      36 Task Force composed of 14 Federal Agencies and one State organization
* Chaired by NRC
* DOE, EPA, and the Department of State are member agencies Objective is to evaluate and provide recommendations related to domestic security of radioactive sources Recent developments
* Implementation Plan issued in February 2017
* Preparing 2018 report to the President and Congress
 
Public Engagement in the Regulatory Process                  37 Various opportunities to participate in a meaningful way Noteworthy examples:
* Formal petition - formal process to raise health/safety concerns
* Hearing process - opportunity to intervene in a licensing action
* Petition for rulemaking process - requests to change NRC rules
* Allegations Program - less formal process to raise health/safety concerns via hotline, email, or in person
* Public comment process under the U.S. Administrative Procedure Act (Public Law 79-404)
* Public meeting feedback forms
 
Questions Received on U.S. National Report 38 LLW Concentration Averaging Spent Fuel Storage Emergency Preparedness
 
LLW Concentration Averaging                                                                39 Summary of Questions and Comments
* What U.S. regulations allow blending of higher-activity LLW with lower-activity LLW?
* Is blending of LLW consistent with objectives to protect the environment?
Key Points
* NRC regulations in 10 CFR 61.55(a)(8) allow averaging radionuclide concentrations when determining waste classification
* Guidance is provided in NRCs Branch Technical Position on Concentration Averaging and Encapsulation (CA BTP), available at https://www.nrc.gov/waste/llw-disposal/llw-pa/llw-btp.html
* The CA BTP was extensively revised in 2015 to be more risk-informed and performance-based
* The techniques and methods described in the CA BTP are protective of public health and safety and the environment
 
Spent Fuel Storage                                                                              40 Summary of Questions and Comments
* What are the licensing requirements for independent spent fuel storage installations (ISFSIs)?
* What scenarios were considered in NRCs 2014 rulemaking on Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel?
Key Points
* For a site-specific ISFSI license, the site and containers are approved for up to a 40-year period with possible renewals
* For a general license, the license term is a function of the Certificate of Compliance (CoC) for the dry cask system; the CoC may also be renewed
* Renewal applications must address aging mechanisms and effects that could impact structures, systems, and components relied upon for safety
* In the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel (NUREG-2157), the NRC considered three scenarios for the storage of spent fuel beyond the licensed operating life of a reactor
* NRC considers the most likely scenario to be the short-term timeframe of 60 years after a reactor ceases operations
 
Emergency Preparedness                                                                          41 Summary of Questions and Comments
* What are the arrangements for notifying the public in case of an emergency?
* What are the requirements for conducting emergency preparedness exercises at spent fuel storage facilities?
Key Points
* The National Response Framework guides how the U.S. responds to all types of disasters and emergencies
* Protective Action Guides help emergency managers and public officials make decisions about evacuation or other actions to protect the public
* NRC regulations provide requirements for emergency plans at spent fuel storage facilities, including provisions for conducting exercises to test the response to simulated emergencies
 
Key Takeaways from U.S. National Report                        42 Challenges, Proposed Areas of Good Performance, Summary
 
Challenges for the U.S. Program                                                            43 Disposal of spent fuel and HLW
* Continued Congressional appropriations funding uncertainty regarding path forward for repository at Yucca Mountain
* NRC and DOE prepared to support resumption of Yucca Mountain licensing process
* DOE supports development of interim storage capabilities for spent fuel
* Presidents 2019 Federal Budget Proposal requests funding for both activities The NRC is responding to changes in the external environment
* Transformation initiative
 
Proposed Areas of Good Performance                                          44 Cleanup of non-military radium contamination Continuous improvement of the regulatory framework Public engagement in decisions related to spent fuel and radioactive waste management Domestic and international disused sealed source collection efforts International cooperation on decommissioning and other nuclear safety and security topics
 
International Cooperation                                45 The U.S. collaborates with international partners on a wide range of nuclear safety and security topics Promotes the exchange of institutional and technical knowledge Decommissioning has been a focus area
* Led workshops and training sessions
* Supported bilateral meetings and technical exchanges
* Hosted foreign assignees
* Participated in conferences and multilateral consultancies
 
Summary                                                                    46 Mature and successful safety program for spent fuel and radioactive waste management Comprehensive regulatory infrastructure Active support and promotion of the Joint Convention
 
Thank you for your attention! 47}}

Revision as of 06:06, 21 October 2019

Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management - U.S. Presentation for the May 2018 Review Meeting
ML18121A393
Person / Time
Issue date: 05/22/2018
From: Dapas M, Gilbertson M
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, US Dept of Energy (DOE)
To:
RWhited NMSS/DUWP/LLWB 415.1154 T5D25
References
Download: ML18121A393 (47)


Text

Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management The United States of America Presentation to the 6th Review Meeting May 22, 2018

U.S. Presenters 2 Mark Gilbertson Marc L. Dapas Associate Principal Deputy Assistant Director, Office of Secretary for Regulatory and Policy Nuclear Material Safety Affairs, Office Environmental and Safeguards Management United States Nuclear United States Department of Energy Regulatory Commission

Agenda for U.S. Presentation 3 Overview of U.S. Program

  • Regulatory Framework, Overview Matrix, Facilities, Program Features, Sixth Cycle Themes, Summary of Questions on National Report Department of Energy Update
  • Agency Highlights & Topics of Interest, Questions on National Report Nuclear Regulatory Commission Update
  • Regulatory Approach, Agency Highlights & Topics of Interest, Questions on National Report Key Takeaways from National Report
  • Challenges, Proposed Areas of Good Performance, Summary

Overview of U.S. Program 4 Regulatory Framework, Overview Matrix, Facilities, Program Features, Sixth Cycle Themes, Summary of Questions on National Report

Regulatory Framework 5 EPA EPA Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Authorized Establishes environmental standards States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC):

Regulates commercial nuclear sector NRC NRC DOE Department of Energy (DOE):

Regulates DOE activities Agreement States

Overview Matrix 6 Type of Liability Long-term Management Policy Funding of Liabilities Current Practice/Facilities Future Facilities Disposal at Yucca Mountain in a The Standard Contract between utilities Onsite and away from reactors wet and A license application for a repository geologic repository in compliance and DOE for the disposal of spent fuel dry interim storage (commercial & at Yucca Mountain was filed by DOE with the Nuclear Waste Policy Act requires utilities to pay fees into the government property). NRC completed a with the Commission in 2008, but (NWPA). Nuclear Waste Fund sufficient to cover the rulemaking on Continued Storage of Spent adjudicatory proceedings before NRC costs associated with disposal activities for Fuel and prepared a supporting in which the application has been Spent fuel spent fuel. In compliance with a November Environmental Impact Statement (EIS); challenged have been suspended.

2013 court ruling, the fee was adjusted to integrated spent fuel regulatory strategy. Interim storage facility applications zero and payment of fees by utilities were Acceptance of foreign research reactor were received by NRC.

suspended in May 2014. fuel.

HLW: See above. All: Producer pays. HLW: Interim storage. HLW: See above.

Nuclear fuel cycle wastes (all Uranium & Thorium (U&Th) recovery U&Th recovery sites: Long Term U&Th recovery sites: Surface disposal U&Th recovery sites: additional license LLW included in Non-Nuclear sites: Near-surface disposal. Surveillance Fund. locally. applications expected.

fuel cycle wastes for brevity) Financial assurance required by license.

Defense HLW: See above. All: Producer pays. Defense HLW: Interim storage. Defense HLW Disposal: See above.

Defense TRU waste: disposal at WIPP. Defense HLW and TRU waste: Public funds. Defense TRU waste: Disposal at WIPP. Additional Defense HLW Treatment LLW: Near-surface disposal Class A, B LLW: Licensees required to demonstrate LLW: 4 commercial sites plus multiple Facilities. GTCC LLW Final EIS Non-Nuclear fuel cycle wastes and C; GTCC LLW disposal path to be financial qualifications. government (DOE) facilities. completed; DOE submitted report to determined. Storage of GTCC LLW pending disposal Congress on disposal alternatives.

availability. GTCC LLW disposal path to be determined.

Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs): NPPs: D&D fund required by law. Large number of facilities undergoing Large number of facilities planned for Decontamination & Decommissioning Non-legacy Sites: Producer pays. decommissioning/ remediation. decommissioning/ remediation.

(D&D) to be completed within 60 Defense sites: Public funds for defense Decommissioning liabilities years. liabilities.

Defense, U&Th recovery and other sites: Based on risk.

Return to manufacturers and Licensee or government, if disposed by Disposal at commercial disposal sites and Possible disposal of some sources in a distributors. Disposal, reuse or government in support of public health, government sites. Storage of sources future GTCC LLW disposal facility. NRC Disused Sealed Sources recycle. safety or national security. onsite by licensees pending disposal. Off- is considering a rulemaking to expand site Source Recovery Project Source financial assurance requirements for Collection and Threat Reduction Program. sealed sources.

U.S. Spent Fuel & Radioactive Waste Facilities 7 99 operating civilian nuclear power plants 79 licensed independent spent fuel storage installations 19,300 licenses for medical, academic, industrial, and general uses of nuclear materials 7 operating uranium recovery sites 13 licensed fuel cycle facilities 20 power reactors and 4 research reactors in decommissioning status 4 operating and 4 closed commercial low-level radioactive waste (LLW) licensed disposal facilities 4 DOE sites with stored high-level radioactive waste (HLW) 1 geologic repository for DOE transuranic (TRU) defense waste 11 operating DOE LLW disposal facilities

U.S. Spent Fuel & High Level Radioactive Waste Sites 8

U.S. Low Level Waste Sites 9 Key Features of the U.S. Program 10 Robust regulatory framework supported by multiple agencies Close coordination among agencies and with the public on rulemaking and implementation Commitment to safe management of commercial and government sector spent fuel and radioactive waste Commitment to information sharing and collaboration with international partners https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/12/f46/10 17%206th_%20US_National_Report%20%28Final%29.pdf

U.S. Responses to Sixth Cycle Themes 11 Staffing, staff development, reliability of funding, other human resource areas

  • Use of workforce retention and succession plans to maintain core competencies
  • Many opportunities for higher education, professional development, and training Public involvement and engagement
  • Extensive statutory and regulatory system informs the public and provides opportunities to comment on proposed actions Developing strategies for radioactive waste and spent fuel at an early stage
  • Factors considered include safety, environmental protection, emergency preparedness, justification of facility need, cost, and schedule Management of disused sealed sources
  • Addressed in subsequent slides

Summary of Questions Received on U.S. National Report 12 Topic Quantity  %

Spent Fuel Management 29 28%

Decommissioning 16 15%

Radioactive Waste Management 9 9%

Regulatory Framework 6 6%

Radiation Safety 5 5%

Emergency Preparedness 5 5%

Spent Fuel Fees 4 4%

Greater-Than-Class C LLW 4 4%

Import/Export 4 4%

Concentration Averaging 3 3%

NRC Regulations 3 3%

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant 3 3%

Other 13 11%

Total 104 100%

Department of Energy Update 13 Agency Highlights & Topics of Interest, Questions on National Report

DOE Highlights & Topics of Interest 14 Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Recovery & Restart Depleted Uranium Oxide Greater-Than-Class-C (GTCC) LLW Disused Sealed Sources Medical Isotope Molybdenum-99 Decontamination & Decommissioning (D&D) Progress

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) 15 Recovery & Restart Series of recovery activities and corrective actions initiated to work toward safe re-opening of WIPP following February 2014 incidents Enhanced WIPP waste acceptance criteria and systemic improvements provide new layers of contractor and government oversight Waste emplacement operations resumed January 2017 Shipments resumed in April 2017 Priority is the safe preparation, shipment, and emplacement of TRU waste at WIPP

Depleted Uranium Oxide 16 Planning underway for future disposal of depleted uranium oxide conversion product generated from DOEs inventory of depleted uranium hexafluoride DOE is working on a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to support potential disposition of this waste Disposition location alternatives being analyzed are:

  • Nevada National Security Site in Nevada

Greater-Than-Class C (GTCC) LLW 17 In February 2016, DOE issued the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Disposal of Greater-Than-Class C (GTCC) Low-Level Radioactive Waste and GTCC-Like Waste The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) included a preferred alternative of land disposal at generic commercial facilities and/or disposal at WIPP geologic repository In accordance with the Energy Policy Act of 2005, DOE issued a Report to Congress in November 2017 on disposal alternatives for GTCC LLW The Final EIS and Report to Congress do not constitute a final decision on GTCC LLW disposal

Disused Sealed Sources 18 End of life management options include storage, return to manufacturer, recycling, and disposal

  • Three commercial facilities available for disposal, with some limitations on waste acceptance
  • Manufacturers and distributors accept return of sources from customers as deemed appropriate
  • Safe and secure storage required for sources that remain with the owner of record The National Nuclear Security Administration Off-Site Source Recovery Project (OSRP) recovers disused sealed sources in support of national security, public health and safety
  • Since 1997, over 37,000 disused sealed sources recovered domestically under this project OSRP includes repatriation of certain U.S-manufactured sources
  • The Code of Conduct on the Safety and Security of Radioactive Sources supports return to supplier in cases where authorized by national law
  • Since 2005, over 3,000 sources recovered internationally

Medical Isotope Molybdenum-99 19 DOE supports U.S. private sector acceleration of commercial, non-highly-enriched uranium methods to produce molybdenum-99 (99Mo)

  • NRC or Agreement State responsible for licensing of any new medical isotope facility used for 99Mo production DOE established the Uranium Lease and Take-Back Program (ULTB) in January 2016, in accordance with the American Medical Isotope Production Act of 2012
  • The ULTB Program makes DOE low-enriched uranium available through lease contracts for production of 99Mo for medical uses
  • The ULTB Program also requires DOE to take title and be responsible for the final disposition of radioactive waste for which the Secretary of Energy determines there is no disposal path and for spent nuclear fuel generated through the production of 99Mo U.S. commercial production of 99Mo has not yet commenced
  • In February 2018, the U.S Food and Drug Administration approved NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes, LLCs non-highly-enriched uranium technology called the RadioGenix System.

The company is working towards commercial production and shipments.

Decontamination & Decommissioning (D&D)

Progress 20 DOE continues to make significant progress on D&D within cleanup sites across the U.S., some examples include:

  • At the East Tennessee Technology Park on the Oak Ridge Reservation we've completed D&D of the large gaseous diffusion enrichment plants and continue to work on the remaining supporting facilities and remediation
  • At the Portsmouth gaseous diffusion enrichment plant near Piketon Ohio, we are in the midst of D&D, and are beginning construction of a new onsite disposal facility for the majority of the radioactive waste generated from that process
  • At the West Valley Demonstration Project, in New York, we are demolishing the vitrification facility and are preparing the Main Plant Process Building for demolition.
  • At Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory, in California, we removed several buildings, concrete slabs, and associated underground utilities and contaminated soil.

Questions Received on U.S. National Report 21 Radioactive Waste Management Coordination Among Regulatory Agencies

Radioactive Waste Management 22 Summary of Questions & Comments

  • What factors are considered in selecting disposal options for legacy waste?
  • How is performance controlled?
  • How does the U.S. minimize generation of waste with no disposal path?

Key Points

  • Protection and safety of workers, the public, and the environment is paramount in all disposal decisions
  • Several DOE directives specify performance objectives and measures that must be met for disposal activities
  • DOE Order 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and DOE Manual 435.1-1, Radioactive Waste Management Manual, contain specific requirements for the generation, treatment, storage, and disposal of DOE radioactive waste
  • The Order and Manual also describe requirements for life-cycle planning and for generation of waste with no disposal path
  • Waste streams with no disposal path may only be generated in accordance with approved conditions

Coordination Among Regulatory Agencies 23 Summary of Questions & Comments

  • How are interfaces between NRC and DOE managed?
  • Are joint inspections conducted?
  • How are discrepancies avoided?

Key Points

  • Each agencys roles and responsibilities outlined in legislation
  • Agencies coordinate on various issues, especially rulemaking, and may communicate via formal and informal meetings, workshops, conferences, and public meetings
  • Agencies do not perform joint inspections, but may allow observers from other agencies to attend
  • Regulatory agencies may coordinate activities and share information where the same facility is subject to their separate authorities
  • The Interagency Steering Committee on Radiation Standards, comprised of multiple agencies, facilitates consensus on radiation dose levels and consistent risk approaches in setting and implementing standards

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Update 24 Regulatory Approach, Agency Highlights & Topics of Interest, Questions on National Report

NRC Regulatory Approach 25 The NRC was created through the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 to independently oversee - but not promote - the civilian use of radioactive materials

NRCs Agreement State Program 26 Enacted in 1959 Regulates about 16,500 licensees in 37 States Provides a mechanism for transfer and discontinuance of certain NRC authority; reserves certain areas for NRC to regulate Establishes cooperative program All active commercial LLW disposal sites are in Agreement States

NRC Highlights & Topics of Interest 27 Consolidated Interim Storage Facilities (CISF) for Spent Fuel High-Level Radioactive Waste (HLW) Activities Reactor Decommissioning Activities Reactor Decommissioning Rulemaking Cleanup of Non-Military Radium Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 61 Rulemaking Greater-than-Class-C (GTCC) LLW Very Low-Level Waste (VLLW)

Radiation Source Protection and Security Task Force Public Engagement in the Regulatory Process

Consolidated Interim Storage Facilities (CISF) for Spent Fuel 28 Applications for CISFs

  • April 2016 - Waste Control Specialists (WCS) submitted a license application to the NRC to construct and operate a CISF in the state of Texas
  • April 2017 - WCS requested that the NRC temporarily suspend the application review
  • March 2017 - Holtec International, in coordination with the Eddy-Lea Energy Alliance, submitted a license application to the NRC to construct and operate a CISF in the state of New Mexico
  • The Holtec application is currently under review by the NRC staff

High-Level Radioactive Waste (HLW) Activities 29 Yucca Mountain License Application Review

  • In January 2015, the NRC staff completed the safety evaluation report (NUREG-1949)
  • In 2018, NRC will conduct limited evaluation of infrastructure needs associated with possible resumption of hearing activities

Reactor Decommissioning Activities 30 Crystal River Increasing inventory of reactor decommissioning sites Expecting large volumes of waste Completing rulemaking to improve efficiency Vermont Yankee Kewaunee

Reactor Decommissioning Rulemaking 31 Rulemaking initiated in 2015 to provide a more efficient and predictable decommissioning transition process Schedule:

  • November 2017 - Final Regulatory Basis published
  • May 2018 - Proposed Rule submitted to the Commission for review
  • Fall 2019 - Final Rule submitted to the Commission for review

Cleanup of Non-Military Radium 32 NRC identifying and facilitating cleanup of sites with Radium-226 contamination in Non-Agreement States Recent developments

  • Implementing risk-informed approach
  • 33 initial sites assessed
  • 14 sites had residual radium activity above background levels
  • Coordinating with other Federal agencies in their cleanup efforts
  • Sharing lessons learned
  • Extensive stakeholder communication and coordination

Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 61 Rulemaking 33 Amend regulations that govern LLW disposal facilities

  • Ensure LLW streams that are significantly different from those considered in the current 10 CFR Part 61 rule can be disposed of safely
  • Increase the use of site-specific information to ensure performance objectives are met Recent developments
  • September 2016 - Draft Final Rule provided to the Commission
  • September 2017 - Staff Requirements Memorandum SECY-16-0106 - Final Rule: Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal
  • The Commission directed the staff to make substantive revisions and republish as a supplemental proposed rule

Greater-Than-Class-C (GTCC) LLW 34 GTCC LLW is not generally acceptable for near-surface disposal and must be disposed of in a geologic repository licensed by the NRC unless the Commission approves an alternative proposal NRC to prepare regulatory basis for the disposal of GTCC LLW, through a means other than deep geologic disposal Recent Developments

  • January 2015 - State of Texas asked NRC whether it could authorize disposal of GTCC LLW in a near-surface disposal facility
  • February/March 2018 - NRC issued draft technical analysis and held public meetings

Very Low Level Waste (VLLW) 35 In the U.S., VLLW is not a formal designation and does not have a statutory or regulatory definition May be approved for disposal at locations other than LLW disposal facilities on a case-by-case basis Recent developments

  • February 2018 - NRC initiated a scoping study to assess its regulatory oversight of VLLW
  • Purpose is to identify options to improve and strengthen NRCs regulatory framework for disposal of VLLW
  • Will assess international VLLW disposal practices
  • Recommendations could include future rulemaking or guidance development

Radiation Source Protection and Security Task Force 36 Task Force composed of 14 Federal Agencies and one State organization

  • Chaired by NRC
  • DOE, EPA, and the Department of State are member agencies Objective is to evaluate and provide recommendations related to domestic security of radioactive sources Recent developments
  • Implementation Plan issued in February 2017
  • Preparing 2018 report to the President and Congress

Public Engagement in the Regulatory Process 37 Various opportunities to participate in a meaningful way Noteworthy examples:

  • Formal petition - formal process to raise health/safety concerns
  • Hearing process - opportunity to intervene in a licensing action
  • Petition for rulemaking process - requests to change NRC rules
  • Allegations Program - less formal process to raise health/safety concerns via hotline, email, or in person
  • Public comment process under the U.S. Administrative Procedure Act (Public Law 79-404)
  • Public meeting feedback forms

Questions Received on U.S. National Report 38 LLW Concentration Averaging Spent Fuel Storage Emergency Preparedness

LLW Concentration Averaging 39 Summary of Questions and Comments

  • What U.S. regulations allow blending of higher-activity LLW with lower-activity LLW?
  • Is blending of LLW consistent with objectives to protect the environment?

Key Points

  • NRC regulations in 10 CFR 61.55(a)(8) allow averaging radionuclide concentrations when determining waste classification
  • The CA BTP was extensively revised in 2015 to be more risk-informed and performance-based
  • The techniques and methods described in the CA BTP are protective of public health and safety and the environment

Spent Fuel Storage 40 Summary of Questions and Comments

  • What are the licensing requirements for independent spent fuel storage installations (ISFSIs)?
  • What scenarios were considered in NRCs 2014 rulemaking on Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel?

Key Points

  • For a site-specific ISFSI license, the site and containers are approved for up to a 40-year period with possible renewals
  • For a general license, the license term is a function of the Certificate of Compliance (CoC) for the dry cask system; the CoC may also be renewed
  • Renewal applications must address aging mechanisms and effects that could impact structures, systems, and components relied upon for safety
  • In the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel (NUREG-2157), the NRC considered three scenarios for the storage of spent fuel beyond the licensed operating life of a reactor
  • NRC considers the most likely scenario to be the short-term timeframe of 60 years after a reactor ceases operations

Emergency Preparedness 41 Summary of Questions and Comments

  • What are the arrangements for notifying the public in case of an emergency?

Key Points

  • The National Response Framework guides how the U.S. responds to all types of disasters and emergencies
  • Protective Action Guides help emergency managers and public officials make decisions about evacuation or other actions to protect the public
  • NRC regulations provide requirements for emergency plans at spent fuel storage facilities, including provisions for conducting exercises to test the response to simulated emergencies

Key Takeaways from U.S. National Report 42 Challenges, Proposed Areas of Good Performance, Summary

Challenges for the U.S. Program 43 Disposal of spent fuel and HLW

  • Continued Congressional appropriations funding uncertainty regarding path forward for repository at Yucca Mountain
  • NRC and DOE prepared to support resumption of Yucca Mountain licensing process
  • DOE supports development of interim storage capabilities for spent fuel
  • Presidents 2019 Federal Budget Proposal requests funding for both activities The NRC is responding to changes in the external environment
  • Transformation initiative

Proposed Areas of Good Performance 44 Cleanup of non-military radium contamination Continuous improvement of the regulatory framework Public engagement in decisions related to spent fuel and radioactive waste management Domestic and international disused sealed source collection efforts International cooperation on decommissioning and other nuclear safety and security topics

International Cooperation 45 The U.S. collaborates with international partners on a wide range of nuclear safety and security topics Promotes the exchange of institutional and technical knowledge Decommissioning has been a focus area

  • Led workshops and training sessions
  • Supported bilateral meetings and technical exchanges
  • Hosted foreign assignees
  • Participated in conferences and multilateral consultancies

Summary 46 Mature and successful safety program for spent fuel and radioactive waste management Comprehensive regulatory infrastructure Active support and promotion of the Joint Convention

Thank you for your attention! 47