 |
NRC NEWS
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION |
| Office of Public Affairs |
Telephone: 301/415-8200 |
| Washington, DC 20555-001 |
E-mail: opa@nrc.gov |
No. 96-107 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
(Wednesday, July 31, 1996)
NOTE TO EDITORS:
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has received the attached report
from its Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste. The report, in the form of
a letter, provides comments on the elements of an adequate NRC low-level
radioactive waste program.
#
Attachment:
As stated
.
July 24, 1996
The Honorable Shirley Ann Jackson
Chairman
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington DC 20555-0001
Dear Chairman Jackson:
SUBJECT: ELEMENTS OF AN ADEQUATE NRC LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE
WASTE PROGRAM
You have expressed interest in our view of what constitutes an adequate
low-level radioactive waste (LLW) program. This topic was discussed by
the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW) in connection with its
report to the Commission on SECY-95-201, "Alternatives to Terminating the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal
Program," July 31, 1995. In addition, the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission's (NRC's) LLW program has a direct link to decommissioning and
the Site Decommissioning Management Plan (SDMP) program. This report
relates the comments of the ACNW and its continued deliberations to a
practical template.
Several fundamental assumptions emphasized in the introduction will help
clarify the structure and priorities found in this description of a LLW
program. This letter, as the subject implies, only addresses what the
Committee believes are the "elements" of an adequate NRC low-level
radioactive waste program. It is not intended to be a comprehensive
program, the ideal program, or anything more than the subject of the
letter implies. Neither have we attempted to specifically relate the
elements to activities that are already a part of the current NRC
program. We decided that the concept would be clearer if we stuck to the
principle of describing the program elements without the interruption of
frequent reference to current practices and activities. The Committee is
aware that many of the elements noted are involved in the current
program. In addition, the content and structure of an adequate program
are outlined without the constraints of budget or politics. Further,
this description is focused only on a NRC program. Programs under the
jurisdiction of Agreement States will, of course, have a structure and
scope determined by the individual State within the compatibility and
adequacy criteria of the NRC. Such programs may differ from those
identified here.
EXECUTIVE ABSTRACT
A program on LLW that is believed to be adequate to meet the
responsibilities of the NRC is described. This description is based on
selected fundamental principles and a view of the role of the NRC in its
relation to the public, the states, and licensees. An adequate program
must have elements that include staff capabilities; protocols related to
standards, regulations, licensing; evaluation of technical and
programmatic factors and documents; research; communication with the
public; and interaction with other groups. This description presents a
framework of a LLW program rather than simply reinstating activities that
have been reduced by budget pressures.
1. INTRODUCTION
The NRC LLW program represents a most important interface between NRC
and the public. The current absence of LLW facilities has forced the
waste to be dispersed in thousands of interim storage location places
that are generally much less secure than the storage areas for spent
nuclear fuel. The LLW is generated and stored in a large variety of
locations that are closer to the population and groundwater aquifers than
any other major source of regulated radioactive materials. The nuclear
waste issues, as conveyed to the public, have no closer general
association with public health and safety than through LLW management.
Therefore, the Commission should assign very high priority to the
maintenance of a competent LLW program with a focused structure. In this
context, the elements of an adequate LLW program are described, one that
accomplishes the goals required by the mission of the NRC and responds to
the impact on and importance to the public of this phase of nuclear
activities.
The underlying assumptions on which a program is based define the scope
and objectives of the program. This description of an adequate LLW
program is based on the following assumptions including: (1) an Agreement
States program has been established through revision of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, as amended (AEA), (2) the goal of the NRC's LLW program is
the protection of public health and safety and of the environment, and
(3) the role of the Federal Government is to provide a centralized,
demonstrably qualified, and highly responsive source of regulatory
concepts, activities, and audits to which the public and governmental
entities can turn for a satisfactory model and in case of questions,
doubts, or concerns. The elements of an adequate LLW program are, by
this definition, not limited by budgetary constraints or by political
divisions. However, the "adequate" nature of the LLW program can be
contrasted to an "ideal" program by budgetary constraints. The present
description does not address specific budgetary issues for several
reasons, not the least of which is our lack of experience with NRC budget
processes.
In addition, the adequate program is not intended to interact with
Agreement States programs except in a supportive manner or, as now
practiced, when evaluations are required. Finally, elimination of parts
of the described program can be expected to have a negative effect on the
adequate nature of the remaining program.
2. BASES OF THE PROGRAM
(a) Objective
An adequate NRC LLW program ensures that the processing, storage, and
disposal of LLW, as it is defined in 10 CFR Part 61, are carried out in
accord with other NRC regulations (e.g., 10 CFR Part 20) and that the
current and future impact of such activities will not represent an
excessive risk to the affected population or the environment. This
objective extends to all LLW-related activities within the jurisdictions
of the NRC.
(b) Scope
For the purpose of this limited description, the primary scope of the LLW
program includes all activities, regardless of agreements (e.g.,
Agreement State contracts) or coordination (e.g., compacts) among
participants that involve the processing, temporary storage,
transportation, and disposal of LLW. Also, it would be desirable to
include in an adequate LLW program a modest amount of attention to
"greater than class C" (GTCC) waste as defined in Part 61 and to "mixed
waste." Under such an expanded scope, other wastes that would be
included in an adequate LLW program are naturally occurring and
accelerator produced radioactive material (NARM) and naturally occurring
material (NORM), wastes from uranium recovery and processing, wastes that
are formed by the inadvertent concentration of contaminants (e.g.,
sewage, bag house dust), and wastes derived from decontamination and
decommissioning activities.
3. COMPONENTS OF AN ADEQUATE LLW PROGRAM
The components of an adequate LLW program include standards, regulations,
licensing, enforcement, evaluation, communication, technical support and
technical resources, research, and activities with other entities. The
distinction between an "adequate" and an "ideal" LLW program is likely to
be in the scope and completeness of execution of the LLW components. In
order to be classed as adequate, the LLW program needs to contain those
elements and subelements that are critical (or believed to be critical by
the public) to the NRC'S public protection role. Program components at
the "adequate" level are briefly described below.
(a) Standards
An adequate LLW program must have available to it generally applicable
environmental standards, preferably expressed in terms of risk. The
standards for groundwater protection should address the risk at the edge
of any disposal facility in terms appropriate to this point of
enforcement. In addition, the standards for exposure of the general
population and occupational workers should be available in terms of risk
that is in concert with risk standards found in other regulations. The
present standards may be acceptable, except that Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) groundwater standards include resource protection that is
not directly relevant to public health and safety. The protocol for a
working relationship between the NRC and the EPA needs to be developed,
perhaps using the current interaction on the Yucca Mountain standard as a
model.
(b) Regulations
The regulations, specifically Parts 20 and 61, should be re-examined and
revised so that their principal, obvious outcome is the protection of
public health and safety when advanced concepts (e.g., above-grade
vaults, advanced waste forms) of LLW disposal are utilized. The NRC
should have in place regulations that identify minimum site
characteristics for an acceptable LLW disposal facility location. There
should be very few unequivocal disqualifying site attributes, and the
site characteristics should be developed while mindful of the variety of
disposal techniques likely to be submitted by prospective practitioners
and the wide diversity in proposed facility terrains.
Regulations should identify the performance of a repository related to
risk and be coupled to a time frame over which an applicant must demonstrate
compliance. To be considered adequate, a LLW program should include
regulations so structured that anticipated LLW disposal licensees (now largely
but not exclusively in Agreement States) would be
able to use the regulations as guides for demonstrating their compliance.
Further, the regulations should identify the "as low as reasonably
achievable" (ALARA) process as part of the basis for performance of a LLW
disposal facility and should ensure that the ALARA concept is employed,
not as a numeric goal or quasistandard, but as a process . In order to
be a useful guide, the regulations should (1) state the limits of
contamination of groundwater at the accessible environment (e.g., the
EPA drinking water limit for appropriate aquifers), (2) state the limits
on airborne contamination as measured at the site boundary, (3) refer to
10 CFR Part 20 for occupational exposure limits, and (4) set the limits
to the contamination of the soil at the site. The regulations should be
carefully crafted to allow applicants flexibility in reaching the desired
goals. Agreement State regulations should be compatible. The NRC LLW
staff should, however, be prepared to evaluate the proposals of
applicants that elect to follow paths other than regulatory guides or
position papers while claiming to arrive at the required level of
protection of public health and safety. In order to maintain the LLW
program in the adequate range, the NRC staff should be prepared to
examine and modify the regulations as experience dictates. In addition,
the NRC staff should exercise the capability to examine and evaluate the
regulations of other entities, such as Agreement States. Also, the
internal organization structure of the NRC that deals with Agreement
States should ensure that the technical experts from the Office of
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) are directly available to
help the Agreement States. Small teams of experts in technical and
licensing matters could be drawn from various divisions and groups by
matrix management. The role of the Office of State Programs should be
defined to ensure such NMSS participation.
(c) Licensing
The NRC staff should be capable of managing, with internal expertise, all
important aspects of licensing a LLW facility. Similar capability must
exist for the approval (e.g., review of topical reports) of concepts,
equipment, and processes. Procedures for licensing, i.e., requirements
for documentation and associated information, should be defined in
available documents. These should detail the considerations to be used
by the NRC staff in the review process. The details of compliance
determination strategies and methodologies should be defined in guides
except in those rare instances where rulemaking is required when focused
(e.g., singular) protocols are deemed to be optimal (should be rare) or
to avoid excessive and unproductive legal arguments at the time of
processing the license application.
This implies that the LLW staff in an adequate program largely has
technical capability no less than any applicant or intervenor. Such
competence can be obtained by employing qualified personnel maintained
by, for example, continuing scientific and technical activities. The
latter is a necessary part of maintaining a capable staff for an adequate
LLW program.
(d) Enforcement
An adequate LLW program should contain NRC inspection and enforcement
activities to ensure that public health and safety is unequivocably
protected. The public must be able to see the enforcement of the NRC
regulations. Further, the evaluation of the compatibility and adequacy
of Agreement State programs must contain provisions measuring the quality
of the enforcement process as well as the use of evaluation criteria that
are directly related to public health and safety, e.g., number of
incidents, number of overexposures, and violations of technical
specifications leading to excessive risks.
(e) Evaluation
Evaluations can be divided into several parts. The NRC staff must have
sufficient technical skill (see (c) above and footnote 9) and sufficient
working knowledge to evaluate the submissions of potential licensees.
This includes information about site characteristics, as well as disposal
and operating systems. Further, the NRC staff must be able to support
Agreement State activities by providing requested technical evaluations.
Such support will likely involve negotiation about the extent, timing,
and costs. The NRC LLW staff must remain cognizant of activities
in Agreement States and should provide requested comments and advice,
especially when recognized deficiencies could lead to an unsatisfactory
outcome.
The NRC LLW program staff should have the capability to evaluate all
aspects of the performance of LLW facility licensees. In addition,
incidents that result in serious violation of the technical
specifications of a LLW facility, provide indications of important
deficiencies in the control of wastes, result in excessive exposures of
personnel, or result in offsite contamination in excess of predetermined
levels should be investigated and evaluated by the NRC LLW staff. In
this role, the NRC LLW staff as the technically competent and vigilant
Federal oversight agency should seek to ensure the protection of public
health and safety.
(f) Communication With the Public
The adequate LLW program must be able to communicate, in terms clear to
the public, the actions and their consequences of evaluating
applications, granting licenses, evaluating Agreement State programs,
rectifying deficiencies in licensee and Agreement State activities, etc.
The NRC staff needs to communicate regularly with Agreement States and
licensees. The interactions should be designed to address technical
issues and to ensure that misconceptions and misunderstanding of LLW
regulations or the NRC role in their application are corrected in a
timely manner. In order to ensure this process is effective, staff size
and capabilities must match the needs and the results of evaluation of
the outcome of the interaction processes. The use of small
interdisciplinary teams (see (b) above) may be an effective paradigm.
Public perception of NRC activities should reflect the basic mission of
the NRC, i.e., protection of public health and safety and the
environment. Regular reporting to the public on all facets of LLW
disposal and management should be part of an adequate LLW program.
(g) Technical Support
The NRC must be able to provide technical support to licensees and
Agreement State programs when requested and also when such support
appears to be required. As already noted, technical evaluations and
support in the prelicensing stage should include evaluation of
applications, identification of deficiencies in analyses and data
acquisition, etc. The NRC staff should be able to formulate peer review
process protocols for LLW technical issues that would aid the potential
licensee or Agreement States in developing a sound and defensible
technical basis for license applications. Technical support from an
adequate program must also be functioning during the operational and
closure phase of LLW facilities. An adequate LLW program should evidence
coordination between the LLW staff and operating materials licensees.
(h) Research
An adequate NRC LLW program may encompass research activities. However,
the LLW program need not involve a research component, except that the
maintenance of technical skills of the staff could be implemented in part
by research programs, and except in instances where important research
broadly related to LLW is not being done by other groups. Research
activities must specifically address problems noted in evaluation of LLW
disposal facility sites or that have been identified through internal and
external performance evaluation of the LLW systems. Research on site- or
facility-specific problems need not be part of an adequate LLW program.
In the absence of a suitable research program, the NRC LLW technical
staff needs to be provided with scientific and technical growth through
other avenues.
(i) Interfaces
An adequate LLW program should have identified points of contact with
other agencies and organizations, as well as within the NRC. The former
include the EPA regarding standards and mixed wastes, the Department of
Energy (DOE) regarding GTCC disposal and Agreement States. Sound agency
management will define the extent and distribution of such contacts.
4. OTHER ACTIVITIES IN AN ADEQUATE LLW PROGRAM
In SECY-95-201, the NRC staff presents in Table 1 the options considered
in the SECY paper and the activities for a number of elements. We
comment here on their relevance to an adequate LLW program.
(a) Rulemaking will be needed both initially to develop functional
bases for the adequate LLW program and occasionally thereafter to
correct and expand regulations as the need arises. The LLW staff
should have sufficient technical capability to evaluate the work of
RES and others in the rulemaking process.
(b) The NRC LLW staff will need to be able to respond to petitions in
concert with other offices (e.g., the Office of the General
Counsel).
(c) The Commission should be able to obtain policy guidance and advice
from the LLW staff. That staff can, in the course of normal
duties, develop various technical documents that provide guidance
to potential applicants, to Agreement State programs, and to
others.
(d) International activities should be part of an adequate LLW program,
owing to the importance of such activities to the U.S. and to the
safe use of nuclear technology. The extent to which such
activities are pursued needs to be carefully defined, largely
because of budget constraints.
(e) Import/export authorization need not be part of an adequate LLW
program. This topic can be managed by other Federal agencies in
consultation with NRC and DOE.
(f) Emergency access to LLW facilities is not a necessary part of an
adequate LLW program and could be managed by another Federal
agency.
(g) Assistance to other Federal agencies should be part of an adequate
LLW program if the topics so warrant. NRC management should
determine the extent of involvement on a case-by-case basis.
We trust these comments are responsive to your request.
Sincerely,
/s/
Paul W. Pomeroy
Chairman, ACNW
|
