Proposed Approval of the Transuranic Waste Characterization Program at the Hanford Site, 5565-5568 [E8-1658]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 20 / Wednesday, January 30, 2008 / Notices
and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C.
346a, proposing the establishment or
modification of regulations in 40 CFR
part 180 for residues of pesticide
chemicals in or on various food
commodities. EPA has determined that
the pesticide petition described in this
notice contains data or information
regarding the elements set forth in
FFDCA section 408(d)(2); however, EPA
has not fully evaluated the sufficiency
of the submitted data at this time or
whether the data supports granting of
the pesticide petition. Additional data
may be needed before EPA rules on this
pesticide petition.
Pursuant to 40 CFR 180.7(f), a
summary of the petition included in this
notice, prepared by the petitioner, is
included in a docket EPA has created
for this rulemaking. The docket for this
petition is available on-line at https://
www.regulations.gov.
New Exemption from Tolerance
PP 7F7290. Syngenta Seeds, Inc., 3054
East Cornwallis Road, P.O. Box 12257,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709,
proposes to establish an exemption from
the requirement of a tolerance for
residues of the plant-incorporated
protectant, Bacillus thuringiensis
modified Cry1Ab protein containing an
additional 26 amino acid ‘‘Geiser motif’’
in all crops and agricultural
commodities. The petition includes a
reference to a description of the
analytical methods available to EPA for
the detection and measurement of the
pesticide chemical residues or an
explanation of why no such method is
needed.
List of Subjects
Environmental protection,
Agricultural commodities, Feed
additives, Food additives, Pesticides
and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: January 17, 2008.
W. Michael McDavit,
Acting Director, Biopesticides and Pollution
Prevention Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.
[FR Doc. E8–1545 Filed 1–29–08; 8:45 am]
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 6560–50–S
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:49 Jan 29, 2008
Jkt 214001
5565
Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0027; FRL–8522–
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Attn: Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
6]
2008–0027. The Agency’s policy is that
Proposed Approval of the Transuranic all comments received will be included
Waste Characterization Program at the in the public docket without change and
Hanford Site
may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, including
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
any personal information provided,
Agency.
unless the comment includes
ACTION: Notice of availability; opening
information claimed to be Confidential
of public comment period.
Business Information (CBI) or other
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit
Agency (EPA or we) is announcing the
information that you consider to be CBI
availability of, and soliciting public
or otherwise protected through https://
comments for 45 days on, the proposed
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
approval of the radioactive, contacthttps://www.regulations.gov Web site is
handled (CH), transuranic (TRU) waste
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
characterization program implemented
means EPA will not know your identity
at the Hanford Site in Richland,
or contact information unless you
Washington. This waste is intended for
provide it in the body of your comment.
disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot
If you send an e-mail comment directly
Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico.
to EPA without going through https://
In accordance with the WIPP
Compliance Criteria, EPA evaluated the www.regulations.gov your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
characterization of CH TRU debris and
and included as part of the comment
solid waste from Hanford during an
that is placed in the public docket and
inspection conducted the week of June
made available on the Internet. If you
4, 2007. Using the systems and
submit an electronic comment, EPA
processes developed as part of the U.S.
recommends that you include your
Department of Energy’s (DOE’s)
name and other contact information in
Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) program,
the body of your comment and with any
EPA verified whether DOE could
disk or CD ROM you submit. If EPA
adequately characterize CH TRU waste
cannot read your comment due to
consistent with the Compliance Criteria.
technical difficulties and cannot contact
The results of EPA’s evaluation of
you for clarification, EPA may not be
Hanford’s program and its proposed
able to consider your comment.
approval are described in the Agency’s
Electronic files should avoid the use of
inspection report, which is available for
special characters, any form of
review in the public dockets listed in
encryption, and be free of any defects or
ADDRESSES. We will consider public
viruses. For additional information
comments received on or before the due about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
date mentioned in DATES.
Docket Center homepage at https://
This notice summarizes the waste
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
characterization processes evaluated by
Docket: All documents in the docket
EPA and EPA’s proposed approval. As
are listed in the https://
required by 40 CFR 194.8, at the end of
www.regulations.gov index. Although
a 45-day comment period EPA will
listed in the index, some information is
evaluate public comments received, and not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
if appropriate, finalize the reports
information whose disclosure is
responding to the relevant public
restricted by statute. Certain other
comments, and issue a final report and
material, such as copyrighted material,
approval letter to DOE.
will be publicly available only in hard
DATES: Comments must be received on
copy. Publicly available docket
or before March 17, 2008.
materials are available electronically at
https://www.regulations.gov.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
These documents are also available
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
for review in hard-copy form at the
OAR–2008–0027, by one of the
following three EPA WIPP informational
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow docket locations in New Mexico: in
Carlsbad at the Municipal Library,
the on-line instructions for submitting
Hours: Monday–Thursday, 10 a.m.–9
comments.
• E-mail: To a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. p.m., Friday–Saturday, 10 a.m.–6 p.m.,
and Sunday, 1 p.m.–5 p.m., phone
• Fax: 202–566–1741.
• Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and number: 505–885–0731; in Albuquerque
at the Government Publications
Information Center, Environmental
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\30JAN1.SGM
30JAN1
5566
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 20 / Wednesday, January 30, 2008 / Notices
Department, Zimmerman Library,
University of New Mexico, Hours: vary
by semester, phone number: 505–277–
2003; and in Santa Fe at the New
Mexico State Library, Hours: Monday–
Friday, 9 a.m.–5 p.m., phone number:
505–476–9700. As provided in EPA’s
regulations at 40 CFR part 2, and in
accordance with normal EPA docket
procedures, if copies of any docket
materials are requested, a reasonable fee
may be charged for photocopying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rajani Joglekar or Ed Feltcorn, Radiation
Protection Division, Center for Federal
Regulations, Mail Code 6608J, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC
20460; telephone number: 202–343–
9601; fax number: 202–343–2305; e-mail
address: joglekar.rajani@epa.gov or
feltcorn.ed@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
A. What Should I Consider As I Prepare
My Comments For EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this
information to EPA through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly
mark the part or all of the information
that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD ROM that
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or
CD ROM the specific information that is
claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.
When submitting comments, remember
to:
• Identify the rulemaking by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number).
• Follow directions—The agency may
ask you to respond to specific questions
or organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
• Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
• Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
• If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:49 Jan 29, 2008
Jkt 214001
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
• Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.
• Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
• Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
II. Background
DOE is developing the WIPP, near
Carlsbad in southeastern New Mexico,
as a deep geologic repository for
disposal of TRU radioactive waste. As
defined by the WIPP Land Withdrawal
Act (LWA) of 1992 (Pub. L. 102–579), as
amended (Pub. L. 104–201), TRU waste
consists of materials that have atomic
numbers greater than 92 (with half-lives
greater than twenty years), in
concentrations greater than 100
nanocuries of alpha-emitting TRU
isotopes per gram of waste. Much of the
existing TRU waste consists of items
contaminated during the production of
nuclear weapons, such as rags,
equipment, tools, and sludges.
TRU waste is itself divided into two
categories, based on its level of
radioactivity. Contact-handled (CH)
TRU waste accounts for about 97
percent of the volume of TRU waste
currently destined for the WIPP. It is
packaged in 55-gallon metal drums or in
metal boxes and can be handled under
controlled conditions without any
shielding beyond the container itself.
The maximum radiation dose at the
surface of a CH TRU waste container is
200 millirems per hour. CH waste
primarily emits alpha particles that are
easily shielded by a sheet of paper or
the outer layer of a person’s skin.
Remote-handled (RH) TRU waste
emits more radiation than CH TRU
waste and must therefore be both
handled and transported in shielded
casks. Surface radiation levels of
unshielded containers of remotehandled transuranic waste exceed 200
millirems per hour. RH waste primarily
emits gamma radiation, which is very
penetrating and requires concrete, lead,
or steel to block it.
On May 13, 1998, EPA issued a final
certification of compliance for the WIPP
facility. The final rule was published in
the Federal Register on May 18, 1998
(63 FR 27354). EPA officially recertified
WIPP on March 29, 2006 (71 FR 18015).
Both the certification and recertification
determined that WIPP complies with
the Agency’s radioactive waste disposal
regulations at 40 CFR part 191, subparts
B and C, and is therefore safe to contain
TRU waste.
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The final WIPP certification decision
includes conditions that (1) prohibit
shipment of TRU waste for disposal at
WIPP from any site other than the Los
Alamos National Laboratories (LANL)
until the EPA determines that the site
has established and executed a quality
assurance program, in accordance with
§§ 194.22(a)(2)(i), 194.24(c)(3), and
194.24(c)(5) for waste characterization
activities and assumptions (Condition 2
of Appendix A to 40 CFR part 194); and
(2) (with the exception of specific,
limited waste streams and equipment at
LANL) prohibit shipment of TRU waste
for disposal at WIPP (from LANL or any
other site) until EPA has approved the
procedures developed to comply with
the waste characterization requirements
of § 194.22(c)(4) (Condition 3 of
Appendix A to 40 CFR part 194). The
EPA’s approval process for waste
generator sites is described in § 194.8
(revised July 2004).
Condition 3 of the WIPP Certification
Decision requires EPA to conduct
independent inspections at DOE’s waste
generator/storage sites of their TRU
waste characterization capabilities
before approving their program and the
waste for disposal at the WIPP. EPA’s
inspection and approval process gives
EPA (a) discretion in establishing
technical priorities, (b) the ability to
accommodate variation in the site’s
waste characterization capabilities, and
(c) flexibility in scheduling site WC
inspections.
As described in section 194.8(b),
EPA’s baseline inspections evaluate
each WC process component
(equipment, procedures, and personnel
training/experience) for its adequacy
and appropriateness in characterizing
TRU waste destined for disposal at
WIPP. During an inspection, the site
demonstrates its capabilities to
characterize TRU waste(s) and its ability
to comply with the regulatory limits and
tracking requirements under § 194.24. A
baseline inspection may describe any
limitations on approved waste streams
or waste characterization processes
[§ 194.8(b)(2)(iii)]. In addition, a
baseline inspection approval must
specify what subsequent WC program
changes or expansion should be
reported to EPA [§ 194.8(b)(4)]. The
Agency is required to assign Tier 1 (T1)
and Tier 2 (T2) to the reportable changes
depending on their potential impact on
data quality. A T1 designation requires
that the site must notify EPA of
proposed changes to the approved
components of an individual WC
process (such as radioassay equipment
or personnel), and EPA must also
approve the change before it can be
implemented. A WC element with a T2
E:\FR\FM\30JAN1.SGM
30JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 20 / Wednesday, January 30, 2008 / Notices
designation allows the site to implement
changes to the approved components of
individual WC processes (such as visual
examination procedures) but requires
EPA notification. The Agency may
choose to inspect the site to evaluate
technical adequacy before approval.
EPA inspections conducted to evaluate
T1 or T2 changes are follow-up
inspections under the authority of
§ 194.24(h). In addition to the follow-up
inspections, if warranted, EPA may opt
to conduct continued compliance
inspections at TRU waste sites with a
baseline approval under the authority of
§ 194.24(h).
The site inspection and approval
process outlined in § 194.8 requires EPA
to issue a Federal Register notice
proposing the baseline compliance
decision, docket the inspection report
for public review, and seek public
comment on the proposed decision for
a period of 45 days. The report must
describe the WC processes EPA
inspected at the site, as well as their
compliance with § 194.24 requirements.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
III. Proposed Baseline Compliance
Decision
EPA has performed a baseline
inspection of CH TRU waste
characterization (WC) activities at
Hanford (EPA Inspection No. EPA–
HAN–6.07–8). The purpose of EPA’s
inspection was to verify that the waste
characterization program implemented
at Hanford for characterizing CH TRU,
retrievably-stored, debris and solid
waste is technically adequate and meets
the regulatory requirements at 40 CFR
194.24.
During the inspection, EPA evaluated
the adequacy of the site’s WC programs
for two CH TRU waste categories, debris
(S5000) and solids (S3000), to be
disposed of at the WIPP. The Agency
examined the following activities:
• Acceptable knowledge (AK) for CH
TRU debris waste (S5000) and solid
waste (S3000) and AK for CH,
repackaged debris waste (S5000) from
the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP).
• Visual examination (VE) in lieu of
real-time radiography (RTR) for CH TRU
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:49 Jan 29, 2008
Jkt 214001
debris waste (S5000) and solid waste
(S3000) and Visual Examination
Technique (VET) for CH, repackaged
debris waste from the PFP.
• RTR for CH TRU debris waste
(S5000) and solid waste (S3000).
• Nondestructive assay (NDA)
systems at the Waste Receiving and
Processing (WRAP) Facility for
characterizing debris (S5000) and solid
(S3000) wastes: the Gamma Energy
Analysis Units A and B (GEA A and
GEA B); the Pajarito Imaging Passive
Active Neutron Units A and B (IPAN A
and IPAN B); and the Super High
Efficiency Neutron Counter A
(SHENCA).
• NDA systems at the plutonium
Finishing Plant (PFP) for characterizing
debris waste (S5000): Calorimeters AR–
1, AR–5, P–13, P–14 and Q–1 in
conjunction with the Room 172
Segmented Gamma Scanner Assay
System (SGSAS).
• WIPP Waste Information System
(WWIS) for tracking the components of
CH retrievably-stored TRU debris waste
(S5000) and solid waste (S3000).
During the inspection, Hanford
personnel stated that load management
will never be performed at the site and
EPA did not evaluate this aspect during
the inspection [see section 8.1(5) of the
inspection report]. Therefore, this
proposed approval does not include
load management for Hanford.
The EPA inspection team determined
that the Hanford WC program for CH
TRU waste was technically adequate.
EPA is proposing to approve the
Hanford CH TRU WC program in the
configuration observed during this
inspection and described in this report
and the attached checklists
(Attachments A.1 through A.9). This
proposed approval includes the
following:
(1) The AK process for CH TRU debris
and solid wastes and for newlygenerated debris wastes.
(2) The WRAP GEA Units A and B for
assaying solid and debris wastes.
(3) The WRAP IPAN Units A and B
for assaying solid and debris waste.
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
5567
(4) The WRAP SHENCA system for
assaying solid and debris wastes.
(5) The PFP Calorimeters AR–1, AR–
5, P–13, P–14 and Q–1 in conjunction
with the Room 172 SGSAS for assaying
debris wastes.
(6) The nondestructive examination
(NDE) process of RTR for solid and
debris wastes.
(7) VE in lieu of the RTR process for
retrievably-stored solid and debris
wastes and VET of newly-generated
debris wastes.
(8) The WWIS process for tracking of
waste contents of solid and debris
wastes Hanford must report and receive
EPA approval of any Tier 1 (T1) changes
to the Hanford WC activities from the
date of the baseline inspection, and
must notify EPA regarding Tier 2 (T2)
changes according to Table 1, below. It
is worth noting that Table 1 in this
report closely follows the format used in
the previous CH baseline approval
report of Los Alamos National
Laboratory—Central Characterization
Project (LANL–CCP) (see EPA Docket
No. A–98–49, II–A4–88). This format
departs from what was used in baseline
inspection reports and EPA site
approval letters prior to LANL–CCP in
several ways, as detailed in the LANL–
CCP report and repeated here. The most
important of these differences involves
presentation of the T2 elements. In
previous reports, there were two T2
columns that have been merged into a
single T2 column for Hanford. The T2
column entries have also been modified
to better reflect the 40 CFR 194.24(h)
requirements that the site provide
notification regarding the completion or
availability of specific T2 elements,
whereas the previous tables stated that
the site must actually provide the T2
elements (document or procedure
revisions, etc.). This approach is similar
to the tiering tables used in EPA reports
for sites characterizing remote-handled
TRU waste. Additionally, there are other
minor word changes to the table for the
sake of legibility.
E:\FR\FM\30JAN1.SGM
30JAN1
5568
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 20 / Wednesday, January 30, 2008 / Notices
TABLE 1. TIERING OF TRU WC PROCESSES IMPLEMENTED BY HANFORD BASED ON JUNE 4–7 AND 27, 2007 ON-SITE
BASELINE INSPECTION
WC process elements
Hanford WC T1 changes
Hanford WC T2 changes*
Acceptable Knowledge (AK) and Load
Management.
Implementation of load management; AK (5) .........
Notification to EPA upon completion of AK Accuracy Reports; AK (2).
Notification to EPA upon completion of updates to
or substantive modifications****of the following:
—AK Summaries/Waste Stream Profile Forms
(WSPFs) and AK Documentation Reports;
AK (16)
—AK–NDA Communication changes; AK (3)
—Changes to site procedure WMP 400.7.1.9;
AK (4).
Notification to EPA upon generation of new
WSPFs, AK summaries and AK documentation
reports; AK (16).
Notification to EPA upon completion of changes to
software for approved equipment, operating
range(s) and site procedures that require CBFO
approval; NDA (2)***.
Notification to EPA upon the following:
—Implementation of new equipment or substantive changes****to approved equipment;
RTR (1)
—Completion of changes to site procedures
requiring CBFO approval; RTR (2).
Notification to EPA upon the following:
—Completion of changes to site VE and VET
procedures requiring CBFO approval; VE
(1) and VET (1)
—Addition of new Summary Category Group
(SCG) or waste stream(s); VE (2) and VET
(2).
Notification to EPA upon the completion of
changes to WWIS procedure(s) requiring CBFO
approval; WWIS (1).
New waste streams created as a result of combining or separating previously distinct waste
streams; AK (6).
Nondestructive Assay (NDA) ...............
Real-Time Radiography (RTR) ............
Categories of waste not approved under this baseline inspection (e.g., soil/gravel, newly-generated solids including K Basin waste); AK (16).
New equipment or physical modifications to approved equipment**; NDA (1)***.
Extension or changes to approved calibration
range for approved equipment; NDA (2)***.
N/A ..........................................................................
Visual Examination (VE) and Visual
Examination Technique (VET).
N/A ..........................................................................
WIPP Waste
(WWIS).
Implementation of load management; WWIS (4) ...
Information
System
* Upon receiving EPA approval in this action, Hanford will report all T2 changes to EPA at the end of each fiscal year quarter.
** Modifications to approved equipment include all changes with the potential to affect NDA data relative to waste isolation and exclude minor
changes, such as the addition of safety-related equipment.
*** These are discussed in Sections (1) and (2) of the section for each NDA system, i.e., 8.2.1 for WRAP GEA Units A & B, 8.2.2 for WRAP
IPAN Units A & B, 8.2.3 for WRAP SHENCA and 8.2.4 for PFP Calorimeters and the Room 172 SGSAS.
**** Substantive changes means changes with the potential to impact the site’s waste characterization activities or documentation thereof, excluding changes that are solely related to Environmental Safety & Health (ES&H), nuclear safety, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) or are editorial in nature.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
IV. Availability of the Baseline
Inspection Report for Public Comment
EPA has placed the report discussing
the results of the Agency’s inspection of
the Hanford Site in the public docket as
described in ADDRESSES. In accordance
with 40 CFR 194.8, EPA is providing the
public 45 days to comment on these
documents. The Agency requests
comments on the proposed approval
decision, as described in the inspection
report. EPA will accept public comment
on this notice and supplemental
information as described in section 1.B.
above. EPA will not make a
determination of compliance before the
45-day comment period ends. At the
end of the public comment period, EPA
will evaluate all relevant public
comments and revise the inspection
report as necessary. If appropriate, the
Agency will then issue a final approval
letter and inspection report, both of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:49 Jan 29, 2008
Jkt 214001
which will be posted on the WIPP Web
site.
Information on the certification
decision is filed in the official EPA Air
Docket, Docket No. A–93–02 and is
available for review in Washington, DC,
and at the three EPA WIPP
informational docket locations in New
Mexico (as listed in ADDRESSES). The
dockets in New Mexico contain only
major items from the official Air Docket
in Washington, DC, plus those
documents added to the official Air
Docket since the October 1992
enactment of the WIPP LWA.
Dated: January 18, 2008.
Elizabeth Cotsworth,
Director, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air.
[FR Doc. E8–1658 Filed 1–29–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
[Notice 2008–1]
Rules of Procedure
Federal Election Commission.
Notice of Rules of Procedure.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Federal Election
Commission is revising its written rules
for conducting its activities to provide
for the circumstance when the
Commission has fewer than four
Members. Further information is
provided in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION that follows.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Associate General Counsel Lawrence L.
Calvert, 999 E Street, NW., Washington,
DC 20463, (202) 694–1650 or (800) 424–
9530.
Under 2
U.S.C. 437c(e) the Commission ‘‘shall
prepare written rules for the conduct of
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\30JAN1.SGM
30JAN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 20 (Wednesday, January 30, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 5565-5568]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-1658]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0027; FRL-8522-6]
Proposed Approval of the Transuranic Waste Characterization
Program at the Hanford Site
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Notice of availability; opening of public comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or we) is announcing
the availability of, and soliciting public comments for 45 days on, the
proposed approval of the radioactive, contact-handled (CH), transuranic
(TRU) waste characterization program implemented at the Hanford Site in
Richland, Washington. This waste is intended for disposal at the Waste
Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in New Mexico.
In accordance with the WIPP Compliance Criteria, EPA evaluated the
characterization of CH TRU debris and solid waste from Hanford during
an inspection conducted the week of June 4, 2007. Using the systems and
processes developed as part of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's)
Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) program, EPA verified whether DOE could
adequately characterize CH TRU waste consistent with the Compliance
Criteria. The results of EPA's evaluation of Hanford's program and its
proposed approval are described in the Agency's inspection report,
which is available for review in the public dockets listed in
ADDRESSES. We will consider public comments received on or before the
due date mentioned in DATES.
This notice summarizes the waste characterization processes
evaluated by EPA and EPA's proposed approval. As required by 40 CFR
194.8, at the end of a 45-day comment period EPA will evaluate public
comments received, and if appropriate, finalize the reports responding
to the relevant public comments, and issue a final report and approval
letter to DOE.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 17, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2008-0027, by one of the following methods:
https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: To a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
Fax: 202-566-1741.
Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Attn: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2008-0027. The Agency's policy is that all comments received will
be included in the public docket without change and may be made
available online at https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information
that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through https://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/
epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available electronically at
https://www.regulations.gov.
These documents are also available for review in hard-copy form at
the following three EPA WIPP informational docket locations in New
Mexico: in Carlsbad at the Municipal Library, Hours: Monday-Thursday,
10 a.m.-9 p.m., Friday-Saturday, 10 a.m.-6 p.m., and Sunday, 1 p.m.-5
p.m., phone number: 505-885-0731; in Albuquerque at the Government
Publications
[[Page 5566]]
Department, Zimmerman Library, University of New Mexico, Hours: vary by
semester, phone number: 505-277-2003; and in Santa Fe at the New Mexico
State Library, Hours: Monday-Friday, 9 a.m.-5 p.m., phone number: 505-
476-9700. As provided in EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 2, and in
accordance with normal EPA docket procedures, if copies of any docket
materials are requested, a reasonable fee may be charged for
photocopying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rajani Joglekar or Ed Feltcorn,
Radiation Protection Division, Center for Federal Regulations, Mail
Code 6608J, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-343-9601; fax
number: 202-343-2305; e-mail address: joglekar.rajani@epa.gov or
feltcorn.ed@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. What Should I Consider As I Prepare My Comments For EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of
the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk
or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
II. Background
DOE is developing the WIPP, near Carlsbad in southeastern New
Mexico, as a deep geologic repository for disposal of TRU radioactive
waste. As defined by the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act (LWA) of 1992 (Pub.
L. 102-579), as amended (Pub. L. 104-201), TRU waste consists of
materials that have atomic numbers greater than 92 (with half-lives
greater than twenty years), in concentrations greater than 100
nanocuries of alpha-emitting TRU isotopes per gram of waste. Much of
the existing TRU waste consists of items contaminated during the
production of nuclear weapons, such as rags, equipment, tools, and
sludges.
TRU waste is itself divided into two categories, based on its level
of radioactivity. Contact-handled (CH) TRU waste accounts for about 97
percent of the volume of TRU waste currently destined for the WIPP. It
is packaged in 55-gallon metal drums or in metal boxes and can be
handled under controlled conditions without any shielding beyond the
container itself. The maximum radiation dose at the surface of a CH TRU
waste container is 200 millirems per hour. CH waste primarily emits
alpha particles that are easily shielded by a sheet of paper or the
outer layer of a person's skin.
Remote-handled (RH) TRU waste emits more radiation than CH TRU
waste and must therefore be both handled and transported in shielded
casks. Surface radiation levels of unshielded containers of remote-
handled transuranic waste exceed 200 millirems per hour. RH waste
primarily emits gamma radiation, which is very penetrating and requires
concrete, lead, or steel to block it.
On May 13, 1998, EPA issued a final certification of compliance for
the WIPP facility. The final rule was published in the Federal Register
on May 18, 1998 (63 FR 27354). EPA officially recertified WIPP on March
29, 2006 (71 FR 18015). Both the certification and recertification
determined that WIPP complies with the Agency's radioactive waste
disposal regulations at 40 CFR part 191, subparts B and C, and is
therefore safe to contain TRU waste.
The final WIPP certification decision includes conditions that (1)
prohibit shipment of TRU waste for disposal at WIPP from any site other
than the Los Alamos National Laboratories (LANL) until the EPA
determines that the site has established and executed a quality
assurance program, in accordance with Sec. Sec. 194.22(a)(2)(i),
194.24(c)(3), and 194.24(c)(5) for waste characterization activities
and assumptions (Condition 2 of Appendix A to 40 CFR part 194); and (2)
(with the exception of specific, limited waste streams and equipment at
LANL) prohibit shipment of TRU waste for disposal at WIPP (from LANL or
any other site) until EPA has approved the procedures developed to
comply with the waste characterization requirements of Sec.
194.22(c)(4) (Condition 3 of Appendix A to 40 CFR part 194). The EPA's
approval process for waste generator sites is described in Sec. 194.8
(revised July 2004).
Condition 3 of the WIPP Certification Decision requires EPA to
conduct independent inspections at DOE's waste generator/storage sites
of their TRU waste characterization capabilities before approving their
program and the waste for disposal at the WIPP. EPA's inspection and
approval process gives EPA (a) discretion in establishing technical
priorities, (b) the ability to accommodate variation in the site's
waste characterization capabilities, and (c) flexibility in scheduling
site WC inspections.
As described in section 194.8(b), EPA's baseline inspections
evaluate each WC process component (equipment, procedures, and
personnel training/experience) for its adequacy and appropriateness in
characterizing TRU waste destined for disposal at WIPP. During an
inspection, the site demonstrates its capabilities to characterize TRU
waste(s) and its ability to comply with the regulatory limits and
tracking requirements under Sec. 194.24. A baseline inspection may
describe any limitations on approved waste streams or waste
characterization processes [Sec. 194.8(b)(2)(iii)]. In addition, a
baseline inspection approval must specify what subsequent WC program
changes or expansion should be reported to EPA [Sec. 194.8(b)(4)]. The
Agency is required to assign Tier 1 (T1) and Tier 2 (T2) to the
reportable changes depending on their potential impact on data quality.
A T1 designation requires that the site must notify EPA of proposed
changes to the approved components of an individual WC process (such as
radioassay equipment or personnel), and EPA must also approve the
change before it can be implemented. A WC element with a T2
[[Page 5567]]
designation allows the site to implement changes to the approved
components of individual WC processes (such as visual examination
procedures) but requires EPA notification. The Agency may choose to
inspect the site to evaluate technical adequacy before approval. EPA
inspections conducted to evaluate T1 or T2 changes are follow-up
inspections under the authority of Sec. 194.24(h). In addition to the
follow-up inspections, if warranted, EPA may opt to conduct continued
compliance inspections at TRU waste sites with a baseline approval
under the authority of Sec. 194.24(h).
The site inspection and approval process outlined in Sec. 194.8
requires EPA to issue a Federal Register notice proposing the baseline
compliance decision, docket the inspection report for public review,
and seek public comment on the proposed decision for a period of 45
days. The report must describe the WC processes EPA inspected at the
site, as well as their compliance with Sec. 194.24 requirements.
III. Proposed Baseline Compliance Decision
EPA has performed a baseline inspection of CH TRU waste
characterization (WC) activities at Hanford (EPA Inspection No. EPA-
HAN-6.07-8). The purpose of EPA's inspection was to verify that the
waste characterization program implemented at Hanford for
characterizing CH TRU, retrievably-stored, debris and solid waste is
technically adequate and meets the regulatory requirements at 40 CFR
194.24.
During the inspection, EPA evaluated the adequacy of the site's WC
programs for two CH TRU waste categories, debris (S5000) and solids
(S3000), to be disposed of at the WIPP. The Agency examined the
following activities:
Acceptable knowledge (AK) for CH TRU debris waste (S5000)
and solid waste (S3000) and AK for CH, repackaged debris waste (S5000)
from the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP).
Visual examination (VE) in lieu of real-time radiography
(RTR) for CH TRU debris waste (S5000) and solid waste (S3000) and
Visual Examination Technique (VET) for CH, repackaged debris waste from
the PFP.
RTR for CH TRU debris waste (S5000) and solid waste
(S3000).
Nondestructive assay (NDA) systems at the Waste Receiving
and Processing (WRAP) Facility for characterizing debris (S5000) and
solid (S3000) wastes: the Gamma Energy Analysis Units A and B (GEA A
and GEA B); the Pajarito Imaging Passive Active Neutron Units A and B
(IPAN A and IPAN B); and the Super High Efficiency Neutron Counter A
(SHENCA).
NDA systems at the plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) for
characterizing debris waste (S5000): Calorimeters AR-1, AR-5, P-13, P-
14 and Q-1 in conjunction with the Room 172 Segmented Gamma Scanner
Assay System (SGSAS).
WIPP Waste Information System (WWIS) for tracking the
components of CH retrievably-stored TRU debris waste (S5000) and solid
waste (S3000).
During the inspection, Hanford personnel stated that load
management will never be performed at the site and EPA did not evaluate
this aspect during the inspection [see section 8.1(5) of the inspection
report]. Therefore, this proposed approval does not include load
management for Hanford.
The EPA inspection team determined that the Hanford WC program for
CH TRU waste was technically adequate. EPA is proposing to approve the
Hanford CH TRU WC program in the configuration observed during this
inspection and described in this report and the attached checklists
(Attachments A.1 through A.9). This proposed approval includes the
following:
(1) The AK process for CH TRU debris and solid wastes and for
newly-generated debris wastes.
(2) The WRAP GEA Units A and B for assaying solid and debris
wastes.
(3) The WRAP IPAN Units A and B for assaying solid and debris
waste.
(4) The WRAP SHENCA system for assaying solid and debris wastes.
(5) The PFP Calorimeters AR-1, AR-5, P-13, P-14 and Q-1 in
conjunction with the Room 172 SGSAS for assaying debris wastes.
(6) The nondestructive examination (NDE) process of RTR for solid
and debris wastes.
(7) VE in lieu of the RTR process for retrievably-stored solid and
debris wastes and VET of newly-generated debris wastes.
(8) The WWIS process for tracking of waste contents of solid and
debris wastes Hanford must report and receive EPA approval of any Tier
1 (T1) changes to the Hanford WC activities from the date of the
baseline inspection, and must notify EPA regarding Tier 2 (T2) changes
according to Table 1, below. It is worth noting that Table 1 in this
report closely follows the format used in the previous CH baseline
approval report of Los Alamos National Laboratory--Central
Characterization Project (LANL-CCP) (see EPA Docket No. A-98-49, II-A4-
88). This format departs from what was used in baseline inspection
reports and EPA site approval letters prior to LANL-CCP in several
ways, as detailed in the LANL-CCP report and repeated here. The most
important of these differences involves presentation of the T2
elements. In previous reports, there were two T2 columns that have been
merged into a single T2 column for Hanford. The T2 column entries have
also been modified to better reflect the 40 CFR 194.24(h) requirements
that the site provide notification regarding the completion or
availability of specific T2 elements, whereas the previous tables
stated that the site must actually provide the T2 elements (document or
procedure revisions, etc.). This approach is similar to the tiering
tables used in EPA reports for sites characterizing remote-handled TRU
waste. Additionally, there are other minor word changes to the table
for the sake of legibility.
[[Page 5568]]
Table 1. Tiering of TRU WC Processes Implemented by Hanford Based on
June 4-7 and 27, 2007 On-Site Baseline Inspection
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hanford WC T1 Hanford WC T2
WC process elements changes changes*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acceptable Knowledge (AK) Implementation of Notification to EPA
and Load Management. load management; AK upon completion of
(5). AK Accuracy
Reports; AK (2).
New waste streams Notification to EPA
created as a result upon completion of
of combining or updates to or
separating substantive
previously distinct modifications****of
waste streams; AK the following:
(6). --AK Summaries/Waste
Stream Profile
Forms (WSPFs) and
AK Documentation
Reports; AK (16)
--AK-NDA
Communication
changes; AK (3)
--Changes to site
procedure WMP
400.7.1.9; AK (4).
Categories of waste Notification to EPA
not approved under upon generation of
this baseline new WSPFs, AK
inspection (e.g., summaries and AK
soil/gravel, newly- documentation
generated solids reports; AK (16).
including K Basin
waste); AK (16).
Nondestructive Assay (NDA).. New equipment or Notification to EPA
physical upon completion of
modifications to changes to software
approved for approved
equipment**; NDA equipment,
(1)***. operating range(s)
Extension or changes and site procedures
to approved that require CBFO
calibration range approval; NDA
for approved (2)***.
equipment; NDA
(2)***.
Real-Time Radiography (RTR). N/A................. Notification to EPA
upon the following:
--Implementation of
new equipment or
substantive
changes****to
approved equipment;
RTR (1)
--Completion of
changes to site
procedures
requiring CBFO
approval; RTR (2).
Visual Examination (VE) and N/A................. Notification to EPA
Visual Examination upon the following:
Technique (VET). --Completion of
changes to site VE
and VET procedures
requiring CBFO
approval; VE (1)
and VET (1)
--Addition of new
Summary Category
Group (SCG) or
waste stream(s); VE
(2) and VET (2).
WIPP Waste Information Implementation of Notification to EPA
System (WWIS). load management; upon the completion
WWIS (4). of changes to WWIS
procedure(s)
requiring CBFO
approval; WWIS (1).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Upon receiving EPA approval in this action, Hanford will report all T2
changes to EPA at the end of each fiscal year quarter.
** Modifications to approved equipment include all changes with the
potential to affect NDA data relative to waste isolation and exclude
minor changes, such as the addition of safety-related equipment.
*** These are discussed in Sections (1) and (2) of the section for each
NDA system, i.e., 8.2.1 for WRAP GEA Units A & B, 8.2.2 for WRAP IPAN
Units A & B, 8.2.3 for WRAP SHENCA and 8.2.4 for PFP Calorimeters and
the Room 172 SGSAS.
**** Substantive changes means changes with the potential to impact the
site's waste characterization activities or documentation thereof,
excluding changes that are solely related to Environmental Safety &
Health (ES&H), nuclear safety, the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) or are editorial in nature.
IV. Availability of the Baseline Inspection Report for Public Comment
EPA has placed the report discussing the results of the Agency's
inspection of the Hanford Site in the public docket as described in
ADDRESSES. In accordance with 40 CFR 194.8, EPA is providing the public
45 days to comment on these documents. The Agency requests comments on
the proposed approval decision, as described in the inspection report.
EPA will accept public comment on this notice and supplemental
information as described in section 1.B. above. EPA will not make a
determination of compliance before the 45-day comment period ends. At
the end of the public comment period, EPA will evaluate all relevant
public comments and revise the inspection report as necessary. If
appropriate, the Agency will then issue a final approval letter and
inspection report, both of which will be posted on the WIPP Web site.
Information on the certification decision is filed in the official
EPA Air Docket, Docket No. A-93-02 and is available for review in
Washington, DC, and at the three EPA WIPP informational docket
locations in New Mexico (as listed in ADDRESSES). The dockets in New
Mexico contain only major items from the official Air Docket in
Washington, DC, plus those documents added to the official Air Docket
since the October 1992 enactment of the WIPP LWA.
Dated: January 18, 2008.
Elizabeth Cotsworth,
Director, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air.
[FR Doc. E8-1658 Filed 1-29-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
