Though it may add months to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s ongoing site-specific analysis rulemaking, stakeholders told NRC representatives on Friday that the agency should expand the rule to fully address necessary changes to 10 CFR Part 61. After Larry Camper, director of the NRC’s Division of Waste Management, confirmed last week that staff would seek Commissioner feedback on the past six months of feedback after a final public meeting in July, stakeholders at the Electric Power Research Institute’s annual Low Level Radioactive Waste meeting, held in Tucson last week, said a few major issues should be added to the site specific analysis rule making to eliminate the need for a more comprehensive Part 61 revision down the road. "If staff says we can’t do this in 18 months but we can do it in 24. … If you want an additional 4 months or 6 months … if it takes a little longer to do one, we’re all for it," Tom Magette, senior vice president for nuclear strategy with EnergySolutions, said at the meeting.
RadWaste Monitor Vol. 13 No. 11
Visit Archives | Return to Issue PDF
Visit Archives | Return to Issue PDF
Morning Briefing
Article of 9
March 17, 2014
NRC URGED TO EXPAND SITE-SPECIFIC ANALYSIS RULEMAKING, EVEN IF IT EXTENDS PROCESS
The site-specific assessment rule making began to address disposal for blended waste and depleted uranium, but in January the NRC Commissioners told staff to expand the scope and gather stakeholder feedback on a two-tiered period of compliance, developing a site-specific waste acceptance criteria, setting a compatibility level with Agreement States, and updating dose methodologies. Over the last few months, issues such as the period of institutional control and a handful of chronically over-estimated isotopes have also been a focus of stakeholder discussion, with some saying that adding two or three of those issues to the rule now may make a second review of Part 61 unnecessary. Paul Black with Neptune told NRC staff that taking the time to complete the site specific assessment rule fully should be of utmost importance, since it’s not clear that a comprehensive Part 61 revision will ever happen. "How long will it be before we get another chance? Everything we need has to go in there. If it takes another 6 months, it takes another 6 months," Black said. "How many chances will we get?"
Though NRC staff has commission direction telling them to budget for a comprehensive revision to Part 61 beginning in 2014, "When I talk to people informally, particularly discussions earlier this week with [NRC Commissioner William] Magwood and his staff, I get the sense that the desire is strong to not have a comprehensive rule making," Lisa Edwards, senior project manager for EPRI, said at the June 22 meeting. "That’s part of why EPRI is pushing the issues that we are now," such as extending the institutional control period, something not currently included in the scope of the site specific assessment rule. "If you’re really going to do the comprehensive rule making you could address those issues there, but what I hear is that it may not happen. if the comprehensive won’t happen we will continue to push." The final public meeting on the site specific assessment rule will be held in Rockville, Md. on July 19.