ML20133P396

Responds to Re Doi Preparation of Supplemental Environ Impact Statement for California Proposed LLRW Disposal Facility in Ward Valley

ML20133P396
Person / Time
Issue date:	01/10/1997
From:	Shirley Ann Jackson, The Chairman NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:	Lischeske C CALIFORNIA, STATE OF
Shared Package
ML20133P400	List: ML20133P396 ML20133P423
References
NUDOCS 9701240227
Download: ML20133P396 (2)

Text

r h

t

/#N UNITED STATES 4

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINoToN, D.C. 20655 4 001 g

E 0,g

[

January 10, 1997 CHA:RMAN Mr. Carl Lischeske, Manager Low-Level Radioactive Waste Program Department of Health Services Stata of California

'714/744 P Street P.O. Box 942732 Sacramento, California 94234-7320

Dear Mr. Lischeske:

I am responding to your letter of November 7,1996, regarding the Department of the Interior's (001's) preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) for California's proposed low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disoc:-al facility in Ward Valley.

29, 1996 letter, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission As I indicated in my August (NRC) has confidence in the State of California's Agreement State Program and The staff has in its ability to license the Ward Valley LLW disposal site.

concluded that California has followed NRC licensing guidelines and the standard review plan for acceptance and review of the Ward Valley application, and that the California staff, advisory committees, and supporting contractual staff are well qualified. Accordingly, while we have not made detailed findings on all the technical issues in this case, we have no reason to believe that public health and safety would not be adequately protected by However, the Commission also disposal of LLW at the Ward Valley site.

recognizes that DOI has authority for public lands and may determine that it has certain responsibilities under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) when the use of such lands will be changed.

f Your request that the NRC review the SEIS is consistent with the NEPA concept that agencies with special expertise should comment on environmental impact statements.

In the case of NRC, that special expertise would be the 4

Consistent regulation of the use and disposition of radioactive materials.

with our normal practice, the NRC staff will arrange to receive copies of the SEIS when it is published and will determine whether any radiological health and safety comments by the NRC are appropriate at that time. With respect to j>

your request that the NRC also review the Request for Proposal for the SEIS, as a practice, we do not typically comment on procurement documents that the

')

lead agency prepares for an SEIS.

p i

The Commission believes that the timely resolution of the controversy related to the transfer of the Ward Valley site is important. As a matter of Commission policy, the Commission has favored permanent disposal over temporary storage, at facilities not intended for that purpose, as the 9701240227 970110 PDR COMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE PDR g Q (jf i). M us b? y

l i

2 I

preferred method for managing LLW. The Commission believes that prolonged

~

l storage of LLW, while adequately protective of public health and safety in the short term, does not provide the same degree of protection of public health and safety as permanent disposal at a facility that has been licensed for that 3

j purpose.

J; Finally, I would like to call your attention to a letter (copy enclosed) that I sent on October 11, 1996 to Senator Frank Murkowski regarding possible i

legislation to provide for an expedited NRC review of remaining health, safety and environmental questions raised by DOI.

l Sincerely, 1

[

^

/-

I Shirley Ann Jackson 1

i l

Enclosure:

Letter to Senator Murkowski i

cc: The Honorable Bruce Babbitt Secretary of the Interior J

i.

i

UNITED STATES

[

I NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t

c WASHINGTON, o.C. 2066H001

.E T'

o G

-l October 11, 1996

%g

,/

no.*

CHAMMAN The Honorable Frank H. Murkowski, Chairman Committee on Energy and Natural Resources United States Senate Washington, D.C.

20510

Dear Mr. Chairman:

19, 1996 letter on the Ward Valley low-evel 0

l I am responding to your SeptemberYou indicate that consideration is being given to a waste facility Commission to review the health, safety, and environmental questions raised by the Department of Interior for the Ward Valley site.

In particular, the Department of Interior would forward its remaining questions to us within 30 days of enacting legislation for our expedited review on the of.our receipt of those questions on whether current provisions adequately protect public health and safety.

The Commission can comply with such a request if any such legislation is However, absent additional resources being provided by legislation, enacted.

we would need to defer other work to make resources available to do the required reviews, although without knowing more about the specific nature and scope of these reviews, we cannot identify what specific work would have to be Moreover, given the relctively short time provided, we would not be deferred.

We estimate it would able to involve the public in our expedited review.

require additional time -- estimated to be on the order of 4 to 6 additional months -- to obtain,. consider, and respond to written comments from the public.

If we can be of further assistance on this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely, Shirley Ann Jackson cc:

Sen. J. Bennett Johnston 1

4LHer7E0/k 2.

IP' i