Information Notice No. 89-13:Alternative Waste Management Procedures in Case of Denial of Access to Low-Level Waste Disposal Sites
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555
February 8, 1989
Information Notice No. 89-13: ALTERNATIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES
IN CASE OF DENIAL OF ACCESS TO LOW-LEVEL
WASTE DISPOSAL SITES
Addressees:
All holders of NRC specific licenses.
Purpose:
This information notice is being provided to inform addressees of important
recent and potential future events concerning restrictions on disposal of
low-level radioactive waste, and to suggest actions to minimize possible
adverse consequences of these events if licensed activities involve the need
to dispose of radioactive waste. It is expected that recipients will review
this information for applicability to their activities and consider action,
as appropriate. However, suggestions contained in this information notice
do not constitute NRC requirements; therefore, no specific action or written
response is required.
Description of Circumstances:
The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-240,
the Act) established a series of milestones, incentives, and penalties
designed to assure that States and Regional Compacts without low-level
radioactive waste disposal facilities make timely progress toward development
of such facilities. States and Regional Compacts which do not meet the
milestones specified in the Act can be subject to penalties such as higher
disposal costs, and may even-tually be denied access to currently operating
burial sites.
The most recent milestone under the Act was on January 1, 1988. This
milestone required non-sited Regional Compacts (those not affiliated with the
currently-sited States of Nevada, South Carolina, and Washington) to identify
a host state, develop a siting plan, and delegate legal implementing
authority. States not affiliated with a Regional Compact were required to
develop a siting plan and provide for delegation of authority as well.
In January of 1988, the U.S. Department of Energy and the sited States of
Nevada, South Carolina, and Washington determined that the States of New
Hampshire and Vermont were in noncompliance. On December 19, 1988, the State
of Washington
8902070339
. IN 89-13
February 8, 1989
Page 2 of 4
informed the States of New Hampshire and Vermont that effective January 1,
1989, waste originating in those States would be denied access to the regional
disposal facility located near Richland, Washington. Similar action is
anticipated by the States of South Carolina and Nevada.
On January 31, 1989, the Governor of Michigan issued a letter to the members
of the seven-State Midwest Interstate Compact in which he stated that he was
halting the siting process for a disposal facility in Michigan. As a result,
the State of Washington has denied access to waste originating from the State
of Michigan. Similar action is anticipated by the States of South Carolina
and Nevada. At this time, it does not appear that any immediate action will
be taken to deny access to the other members of the Midwest Compact (Indiana,
Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin).
Discussion:
Denial of access to disposal sites could disrupt licensed operations which
generate waste by preventing licensees from shipping waste from their faci-
lities. This, in turn, could cause regulatory and safety problems such as
exceeding authorized possession limits due to the accumulation of waste, in-
adequate waste management capability, or inadequate waste storage facilities.
It is suggested that licensees monitor the progress of their States or
Regional Compacts in meeting milestones specified in the Act. Licensees in
States for which it appears milestones will not be met may need to prepare for
the possi-bility of severe restrictions on disposal of radioactive waste.
Licensees in New Hampshire, Vermont, and Michigan may wish to consider actions
now to miti-gate the potential impact of loss of disposal capability.
Following are examples of suggested actions to be considered:
1. Review your current NRC license and license application, particularly
possession limits and procedures and requirements for waste processing,
storage, and disposal to determine if changes need to be made for
increased storage of waste.
2. Determine how much of your waste goes to a licensed burial site either
directly or indirectly through a "waste broker."
3. Evaluate potential safety problems and technical difficulties which might
result if radioactive waste remains in storage at your facilities for
long periods of time; e.g., package deterioration, inventory control,
fire hazards, etc.
4. Review alternatives to minimize generation of waste shipped to burial
grounds; for example:
a. Carefully segregating long-lived radioactive waste from short-lived
and non-radioactive waste.
b. Stopping unnecessary work which generates waste.
. IN 89-13
February 8, 1989
Page 3 of 4
c. Changing processes, procedures, or radionuclides to reduce volume
of generated waste.
d. Using volume reduction techniques, such as compaction.
5. Review alternative waste management and disposal methods; for example:
a. Transfer of unneeded sealed sources to their respective
manufacturers.
b. Disposal of biomedical wastes in accordance with 10 CFR
Section 20.306.
c. Decay-in-storage.
d. Incineration.
e. Interim storage pending transfer to a licensed burial site if access
is restored in the future.
6. For waste management measures which are not currently authorized by your
NRC license, consider requesting an amendment to your license to
authorize additional waste management actions in the event of restricted
access to burial grounds. Examples would be amendments to authorize
increased pos-session limits, decay-in storage, incineration, or use of
interim storage facilities.
The above suggestions would not be a permanent solution to waste burial
restrictions, but would better assure that licensees have contingency plans in
place to avoid safety violations and to minimize disruption of licensed
activities.
A number of parties have inquired about the granting of emergency access under
the provisions of Section 6 of the Act. On February 3, 1989, NRC issued a new
rule, 10 CFR Part 62, in the Federal Register (54 FR 5409) which establishes
criteria and procedures to be used in determining whether emergency access
should be granted. These criteria and procedures, consistent with
Congressional intent, view the granting of emergency access as a last resort.
Therefore, waste generators should be aware that only under the most limited
and rare circumstances would generators be granted such access.
Questions about license requirements and license amendments should be directed
to the appropriate NRC licensing office, either in one of the Regional Offices
or in Washington, D.C. Questions on low-level radioactive waste policy issues
. IN 89-13
February 8, 1989
Page 4 of 4
should be directed to: Paul Lohaus, Chief, Operations Branch, Division of
Low-Level Waste Management and Decommissioning, Mail Stop 5E4, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555, Phone: (301) 492-3345. No
specific action or written response is required by this information notice.
Richard E. Cunningham, Director
Division of Industrial and
Medical Nuclear Safety
Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards
Charles E. Rossi, Director
Division of Operational Events Assessment
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Technical Contact: Paul Lohaus, NMSS
(301) 492-3345
Attachments:
1. List of Recently Issued NMSS Information Notices
2. List of Recently Issued NRC Information Notices
. Attachment 2
IN 89-13
February 8, 1989
Page 1 of 1
LIST OF RECENTLY ISSUED
NRC INFORMATION NOTICES
_____________________________________________________________________________
Information Date of
Notice No._____Subject_______________________Issuance_______Issued to________
89-12 Dose Calibrator Quality 2/9/89 All NRC medical
Control licensees.
89-11 Failure of DC Motor-Operated 2/2/89 All holders of OLs
Valves to Develop Rated or CPs for nuclear
Torque Because of Improper power reactors.
Cable Sizing
89-10 Undetected Installation 1/27/89 All holders of OLs
Errors In Main Steam Line or CPs for BWRs.
Pipe Tunnel Differential
Temperature-Sensing Elements
at Boiling Water Reactors.
89-09 Credit for Control Rods 1/26/89 All holders of OLs
Without Scram Capability or CPs for test and
in the Calculation of the research reactors.
Shutdown Margin
89-08 Pump Damage Caused by 1/26/89 All holders of OLs
Low-Flow Operation or CPs for nuclear
power reactors.
89-07 Failures of Small-Diameter 1/25/89 All holders of OLs
Tubing in Control Air, Fuel or CPs for nuclear
Oil, and Lube Oil Systems power reactors.
Which Render Emergency Diesel
Generators Inoperable
89-06 Bent Anchor Bolts in 1/24/89 All holders of OLs
Boiling Water Reactor or CPs for BWRs
Torus Supports with Mark I steel
torus shells.
89-05 Use of Deadly Force by 1/19/89 All holders of OLs
Guards Protecting Nuclear for nuclear power
Power Reactors Against reactors.
Radiological Sabotage
_____________________________________________________________________________
OL = Operating License
CP = Construction Permit
..
Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021