Request for Public Comment on the U.S. Department of Energy Interpretation of High-Level Radioactive Waste, 50909-50911 [2018-22002]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 10, 2018 / Notices
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
compartment temperature from falling
below 42 °F.
DOE has reviewed PAPRSA’s waiver
extension request in Case Number RF–
043. Based on this review, DOE has
determined that the basic model
specified in PAPRSA’s current waiver
extension request incorporates the same
design characteristics as those basic
models covered under the waiver in
Case Number RF–043 such that the DOE
test procedure evaluates that basic
model in a manner that is
unrepresentative of its actual energy
use. DOE also determined that applying
the alternate procedure specified in
Case Number RF–043 will allow for the
accurate measurement of the energy use
of the consumer refrigerator basic model
identified by PAPRSA in its waiver
extension request.
III. Order
After careful consideration of all the
material submitted by PAPRSA in this
matter, it is Ordered that:
(1) PAPRSA must, as of the date of
publication of this Extension of Waiver
in the Federal Register, test and rate the
combination cooler-refrigerator basic
model PR5181JKBC as set forth in
paragraph (2).
(2) The alternate test procedure for the
basic model listed in paragraph (1) is
the test procedure in 10 CFR part 430,
subpart B, appendix A, with the
exception that PAPRSA must calculate
energy consumption using a correction
factor (‘‘K-factor’’) of 0.85, as follows.
The energy consumption is defined
by:
If compartment temperatures are
below their respective standardized
temperatures for both test settings
(according to 10 CFR part 430, subpart
B, appendix A, sec. 6.2.4.1):
E = (ET1 × 0.85) + IET.
If compartment temperatures are not
below their respective standardized
temperatures for both test settings, the
higher of the two values calculated by
the following two formulas (according
to 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix
A, sec. 6.2.4.2):
Energy consumption of the ‘‘cooler
compartment’’:
ECooler Compartment = (ET1 +
[(ET2¥ET1) × (55 °F¥TW1)/
(TW2¥TW1)]) × 0.85 + IET
Energy consumption of the ‘‘fresh
food compartment’’:
EFreshFood Compartment = (ET1 +
[(ET2¥ET1) × (39 °F¥TBC1)/
(TBC2¥TBC1)]) × 0.85 + IET.
(3) Representations. PAPRSA may not
make representations about the energy
consumption of the combination coolerrefrigerator identified in paragraph (1) of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:20 Oct 09, 2018
Jkt 247001
this section for compliance, marketing,
or other purposes unless that basic
model has been tested in accordance
with the provisions set forth above and
such representations fairly disclose the
results of such testing.
(4) This Extension of Waiver shall
remain in effect consistent with the
provisions of 10 CFR 430.27. This Order
will terminate on October 28, 2019, in
conjunction with the compliance date
that applies to the standards published
on October 28, 2016 for miscellaneous
refrigeration products (‘‘MREFs’’). See
81 FR 75194 (Oct. 28, 2016). Testing to
demonstrate compliance with those
standards must be performed in
accordance with the MREF test
procedure final rule. See 81 FR 46768
(July 18, 2016) (MREF test procedure
final rule) and 81 FR 49868 (July 29,
2016) (MREF test procedure final rule
correction notice).
(5) This Extension of Waiver is issued
on the condition that the statements,
representations, and documents
provided by PAPRSA are valid. If
PAPRSA makes any modifications to the
controls or configurations of these basic
models, the waiver will no longer be
valid and PAPRSA will either be
required to use the current Federal test
method or submit a new application for
a test procedure waiver. DOE may
rescind or modify this Extension of
Waiver at any time if it determines the
factual basis underlying the petition for
extension of waiver is incorrect, or the
results from the alternate test procedure
are unrepresentative of the basic
models’ true energy consumption
characteristics. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(1).
Likewise, PAPRSA may request that
DOE rescind or modify the Extension of
Waiver if the petitioner discovers an
error in the information provided to
DOE as part of its petition, determines
that the Extension of Waiver is no
longer needed, or for other appropriate
reasons. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(2).
(6) Granting of this Extension of
Waiver does not release PAPRSA from
the certification requirements set forth
at 10 CFR part 429.
Signed in Washington, DC, on October 2,
2018.
Kathleen B. Hogan,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy.
[FR Doc. 2018–22003 Filed 10–9–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
50909
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Request for Public Comment on the
U.S. Department of Energy
Interpretation of High-Level
Radioactive Waste
Office of Environmental
Management, U.S. Department of
Energy.
ACTION: Notice of public comment
period.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE or the Department)
provides this Notice and request for
public comment on its interpretation of
the definition of the statutory term
‘‘high-level radioactive waste’’ (HLW) as
set forth in the Atomic Energy Act of
1954 and the Nuclear Waste Policy Act
of 1982. This statutory term indicates
that not all wastes from the reprocessing
of spent nuclear fuel (‘‘reprocessing
wastes’’) are HLW, and DOE interprets
the statutory term such that some
reprocessing wastes may be classified as
not HLW (non-HLW) and may be
disposed of in accordance with their
radiological characteristics.
DATES: DOE invites stakeholders to
submit written comments on its
interpretation. The 60-day public
comment period begins on October 10,
2018 and ends on December 10, 2018.
Only comments received through one of
the methods described below will be
accepted. DOE will consider all
comments received or postmarked by
December 10, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Please direct comments to:
(a) Email: Send comments to
HLWnotice@em.doe.gov. Please submit
comments in MicrosoftTM Word, or PDF
file format, and avoid the use of
encryption.
(b) Mail: Send to the following
address: Theresa Kliczewski, U.S.
Department of Energy, Office of
Environmental Management, Office of
Waste and Materials Management (EM–
4.2), 1000 Independence Avenue SW,
Washington, DC 20585.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Theresa Kliczewski at HLWnotice@
em.doe.gov or at U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Environmental
Management, Office of Waste and
Materials Management (EM–4.2), 1000
Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
DC 20585. Telephone: (202) 586–3301.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
A. Background
DOE manages large inventories of
legacy waste resulting from spent
nuclear fuel (SNF) reprocessing
activities from atomic energy defense
programs, e.g., nuclear weapons
E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM
10OCN1
50910
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 10, 2018 / Notices
production. DOE also manages a small
quantity of vitrified waste from a
demonstration of commercial SNF
reprocessing. Reprocessing generally
refers to the dissolution of irradiated
SNF in acid, generating liquid or
viscous wastes, and the chemical
processing to separate the fission
products or transuranic elements of the
SNF from the desired elements of
plutonium and uranium, which are
recovered for reuse. Liquid reprocessing
wastes have been or are currently stored
in large underground tanks at three DOE
sites: Savannah River Site (SRS) (South
Carolina), Idaho National Laboratory
(INL) (Idaho), and the Office of River
Protection at the Hanford Site
(Washington). Solid reprocessing wastes
are liquid wastes that have been
immobilized in solid form and are
currently stored at SRS, INL, and the
West Valley Demonstration Project
(New York).
DOE’s interpretation of HLW is that
reprocessing waste is non-HLW if the
waste:
I. Does not exceed concentration limits for
Class C low-level radioactive waste as set
out in section 61.55 of title 10, Code of
Federal Regulations; or
II. Does not require disposal in a deep
geologic repository and meets the
performance objectives of a disposal
facility as demonstrated through a
performance assessment conducted in
accordance with applicable regulatory
requirements.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Under DOE’s interpretation, waste
meeting either of these criteria is nonHLW and may be classified and
disposed of in accordance with its
radiological characteristics.
At this time, DOE is not making—and
has not made—any decisions on the
disposal of any particular waste stream.
Disposal decisions, when made, will be
based on the consideration of public
comments in response to this Notice
and prior input and consultation with
appropriate state and local regulators
and stakeholders. DOE will continue its
current practice of managing all its
reprocessing wastes as if they were
HLW unless and until a specific waste
is determined to be another category of
waste based on detailed technical
assessments of its characteristics and an
evaluation of potential disposal
pathways.
B. High-Level Waste Interpretation
DOE interprets the term ‘‘high-level
radioactive waste’’, as stated in the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954 as amended
(AEA),1 and the Nuclear Waste Policy
1 42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq. This definition of HLW
was first enacted in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:20 Oct 09, 2018
Jkt 247001
Act of 1982 as amended (NWPA) 2 in a
manner that defines DOE reprocessing
wastes to be classified as either HLW or
non-HLW based on the radiological
characteristics of the waste and their
ability to meet appropriate disposal
facility requirements. The basis for
DOE’s interpretation comes from the
AEA and NWPA definition of HLW:
In paragraph A, Congress limited
HLW to those materials that are both
‘‘highly radioactive’’ and ‘‘resulting
from the reprocessing of spent nuclear
fuel.’’ Reprocessing generates liquid
wastes, with the first cycle of
reprocessing operations containing the
majority of the fission products and
transuranic elements removed from the
SNF. Thus, in paragraph A, Congress
distinguished HLW with regard to its
form as both ‘‘liquid waste produced
directly in reprocessing’’ and ‘‘any solid
material derived from such liquid waste
that contains fission products in
sufficient concentrations.’’
In paragraph B, Congress defined
HLW also to include ‘‘other highly
radioactive material’’ that the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC)
determines by rule ‘‘requires permanent
isolation.’’ HLW under paragraph B
includes highly radioactive material
regardless of whether the waste is from
reprocessing or some other activity.
Further, under paragraph B,
classification of material as HLW is
based on its radiological characteristics
and whether the material requires
permanent isolation.
The common element of these
statutory paragraphs defining HLW is
the requirement and recognition that the
waste be ‘‘highly radioactive.’’
Additionally, both paragraphs reflect a
primary purpose of the NWPA, which is
to define those materials for which
disposal in a deep geologic repository is
the only method that would provide
reasonable assurance that the public and
the environment will be adequately
protected from the radiological hazards
the materials pose.
The terms ‘‘highly radioactive,’’ and
‘‘sufficient concentrations’’ are not
defined in the AEA or the NWPA. By
providing in paragraph A that liquid
reprocessing waste is HLW only if it is
‘‘highly radioactive,’’ and that solid
waste derived from liquid reprocessing
waste is HLW only if it is ‘‘highly
radioactive’’ and contains fission
products in ‘‘sufficient concentrations’’
without further defining these
standards, Congress left it to DOE to
determine when these standards are
met. Given Congress’ intent that not all
reprocessing waste is HLW, it is
appropriate for DOE to use its expertise
to interpret the definition of HLW,
consistent with proper statutory
construction, to distinguish waste that is
non-HLW from waste that is HLW.
The DOE interpretation is informed
by the radiological characteristics of
reprocessing waste and whether the
waste can be disposed of safely in a
facility other than a deep geologic
repository. This interpretation is based
upon the principles of the NRC’s
regulatory structure for the disposal of
low-level radioactive wastes. 4
In its regulations, NRC has identified
four classes of low-level radioactive
waste (LLW)—Class A, B or C—for
which near-surface disposal is safe for
public health and the environment, and
greater-than-Class C LLW for which
near-surface disposal may be safe for
public health and the environment. This
waste classification regime is based on
the concentration levels of a
combination of specified short-lived and
long-lived radionuclides in a waste
stream, with Class C LLW having the
highest concentration levels. Waste that
exceeds the Class C levels is evaluated
on a case-specific basis to determine
whether it requires disposal in a deep
geologic repository, or whether an
alternative disposal facility can be
demonstrated to provide safe disposal.
The need for disposal in a deep geologic
repository results from a combination of
two radiological characteristics of the
waste: High activity radionuclides,
including fission products, which
generate high levels of radiation; and
long-lived radionuclides which, if not
properly disposed of, would present a
risk to human health and the
environment for hundreds of thousands
of years.
Because the NRC has long-standing
regulations that set concentration limits
for radionuclides in waste that is
acceptable for near-surface disposal, it is
reasonable to interpret ‘‘highly
radioactive’’ to mean, at a minimum,
of 1982, as amended, and incorporated into the
AEA in 1988.
2 42 U.S.C. 10101 et seq.
3 42 U.S.C. 10101(12)(A), (B).
4 NRC licensing requirements for the land
disposal of LLW, originally promulgated in 1962,
are codified in Part 61 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, 10 CFR part 61.
(A) the highly radioactive material
resulting from the reprocessing of spent
nuclear fuel, including liquid waste
produced directly in reprocessing and any
solid material derived from such liquid waste
that contains fission products in sufficient
concentrations; and
(B) other highly radioactive material that
the Commission, consistent with existing
law, determines by rule requires permanent
isolation.3
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM
10OCN1
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 10, 2018 / Notices
radionuclide concentrations greater than
the Class C limits. Reprocessing waste
that does not exceed the Class C limits
is non-HLW.
DOE interprets ‘‘sufficient
concentrations’’ in the statutory context
in which the definition was enacted,
which, as discussed above, is focused
on protecting the public and the
environment from the hazards posed by
nuclear waste. In addition to the
characteristics of the waste itself, the
risk that reprocessing waste poses to
human health and the environment
depends on the physical characteristics
of the disposal facility and that facility’s
ability to safely isolate the waste from
the human environment. Relevant
characteristics of a disposal facility may
include the depth of disposal, use of
engineered barriers, and geologic,
hydrologic, and geochemical features of
the site. Taking these considerations
into account, it is reasonable to interpret
‘‘sufficient concentrations’’ to mean
concentrations of fission products in
combination with long-lived
radionuclides that would require
disposal in a deep geologic repository.
Accordingly, under DOE’s
interpretation, solid waste that exceeds
the NRC’s Class C limits would be
subject to detailed characterization and
technical analysis of the radiological
characteristics of the waste. This,
combined with the physical
characteristics of a specific disposal
facility and the method of disposal,
would determine whether the facility
could meet its performance objectives,
and if the waste can be disposed of
safely. This approach would be
governed by the waste characterization
and analysis process and performance
objectives for the disposal facility
established by the applicable regulator,
and thereby protective of human health
and the environment.
The DOE interpretation does not
require the removal of key radionuclides
to the maximum extent that is
technically and economically practical
before DOE can define waste as nonHLW. Nothing in the statutory text of
the AEA or the NWPA requires that
radionuclides be removed to the
maximum extent technically and
economically practical prior to
determining whether waste is HLW.
DOE has determined that the removal of
radionuclides from waste that already
meets existing legal and technical
requirements for safe transportation and
disposal is unnecessary and inefficient,
and does not benefit human health or
the environment. To the contrary, it
potentially presents a greater risk to
human health and the environment
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:20 Oct 09, 2018
Jkt 247001
because it prolongs the temporary
storage of waste.
Therefore, under DOE’s
interpretation, waste resulting from the
reprocessing of SNF is non-HLW if the
waste:
I. Does not exceed concentration limits for
Class C low-level radioactive waste as set
out in section 61.55 of title 10, Code of
Federal Regulations; or
II. Does not require disposal in a deep
geologic repository and meets the
performance objectives of a disposal
facility as demonstrated through a
performance assessment conducted in
accordance with applicable regulatory
requirements.
Reprocessing waste meeting either I or
II of the above is non-HLW, and may be
classified and disposed in accordance
with its radiological characteristics in
an appropriate facility provided all
applicable requirements of the disposal
facility are met.
C. Request for Comments
The Department specifically requests
comments on its interpretation that
reprocessing waste meeting either of the
two criterion stated above is non-HLW.
This Notice is intended to solicit public
feedback on the DOE interpretation to
better understand stakeholder
perspectives prior to appropriate input
and consultation with affected state and
local regulators and any waste disposal
classification decisions.
The Department will consider all
comments received during the public
comment period, and modify its
proposed approach, as appropriate,
based on public comment.
Signed at Washington, DC, on October 4,
2018.
Anne Marie White,
Assistant Secretary for Environmental
Management.
[FR Doc. 2018–22002 Filed 10–9–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
Combined Notice of Filings #1
Take notice that the Commission
received the following electric corporate
filings:
Docket Numbers: EC19–2–000.
Applicants: AL Sandersville, LLC,
Effingham County Power, LLC, MPC
Generating, LLC, Walton County Power,
LLC, Washington County Power, LLC.
Description: Joint Application for
Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act, et al. of AL
Sandersville, LLC, et. al.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
50911
Filed Date: 10/3/18.
Accession Number: 20181003–5078.
Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/18.
Take notice that the Commission
received the following electric rate
filings:
Docket Numbers: ER10–1521–004;
ER10–1520–004;ER10–1522–003.
Applicants: Occidental Power
Marketing, L.P., Occidental Power
Services, Inc., Occidental Chemical
Corporation.
Description: Second Supplement to
June 29, 2018 Updated Market Power
Analysis for the Central Region of the
Occidental MBRA Entities.
Filed Date: 9/28/18.
Accession Number: 20180928–5171.
Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/19/18.
Docket Numbers: ER17–2515–004.
Applicants: Chambers Cogeneration,
Limited Partnership.
Description: Compliance filing:
Settlement Compliance Filing to be
effective 11/1/2017.
Filed Date: 10/1/18.
Accession Number: 20181001–5150.
Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/22/18.
Docket Numbers: ER18–1424–001.
Applicants: Rio Bravo Fresno, A
California Joint Venture.
Description: Report Filing: refund
report 2018 to be effective N/A.
Filed Date: 10/2/18.
Accession Number: 20181002–5171.
Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/18.
Docket Numbers: ER18–1427–001.
Applicants: Rio Bravo Rocklin, A
California Joint Venture.
Description: Report Filing: refund
report 2018 to be effective N/A.
Filed Date: 10/2/18.
Accession Number: 20181002–5174.
Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/18.
Docket Numbers: ER18–2175–001.
Applicants: Mid-Atlantic Interstate
Transmission, LLC, West Penn Power
Company, The Potomac Edison
Company, Monongahela Power
Company, Trans-Allegheny Interstate
Line Company, American Transmission
Systems, Incorporated, PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.
Description: Tariff Amendment: MAIT
et al submit Supplement in ER18–2175–
000 re: IAs, SA Nos 2149 and 3743 to
be effective 10/5/2018.
Filed Date: 10/3/18.
Accession Number: 20181003–5013.
Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/18.
Docket Numbers: ER18–2426–001.
Applicants: The Potomac Edison
Company, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Description: Tariff Amendment:
Potomac submits Supplemental Filing
in ER18–2426–000 re: IA SA No. 4452
to be effective 11/13/2018.
E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM
10OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 10, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50909-50911]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-22002]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Request for Public Comment on the U.S. Department of Energy
Interpretation of High-Level Radioactive Waste
AGENCY: Office of Environmental Management, U.S. Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of public comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) provides
this Notice and request for public comment on its interpretation of the
definition of the statutory term ``high-level radioactive waste'' (HLW)
as set forth in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and the Nuclear Waste
Policy Act of 1982. This statutory term indicates that not all wastes
from the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel (``reprocessing wastes'')
are HLW, and DOE interprets the statutory term such that some
reprocessing wastes may be classified as not HLW (non-HLW) and may be
disposed of in accordance with their radiological characteristics.
DATES: DOE invites stakeholders to submit written comments on its
interpretation. The 60-day public comment period begins on October 10,
2018 and ends on December 10, 2018. Only comments received through one
of the methods described below will be accepted. DOE will consider all
comments received or postmarked by December 10, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Please direct comments to:
(a) Email: Send comments to [email protected]. Please submit
comments in MicrosoftTM Word, or PDF file format, and avoid
the use of encryption.
(b) Mail: Send to the following address: Theresa Kliczewski, U.S.
Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management, Office of
Waste and Materials Management (EM-4.2), 1000 Independence Avenue SW,
Washington, DC 20585.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Theresa Kliczewski at
[email protected] or at U.S. Department of Energy, Office of
Environmental Management, Office of Waste and Materials Management (EM-
4.2), 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585. Telephone:
(202) 586-3301.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
DOE manages large inventories of legacy waste resulting from spent
nuclear fuel (SNF) reprocessing activities from atomic energy defense
programs, e.g., nuclear weapons
[[Page 50910]]
production. DOE also manages a small quantity of vitrified waste from a
demonstration of commercial SNF reprocessing. Reprocessing generally
refers to the dissolution of irradiated SNF in acid, generating liquid
or viscous wastes, and the chemical processing to separate the fission
products or transuranic elements of the SNF from the desired elements
of plutonium and uranium, which are recovered for reuse. Liquid
reprocessing wastes have been or are currently stored in large
underground tanks at three DOE sites: Savannah River Site (SRS) (South
Carolina), Idaho National Laboratory (INL) (Idaho), and the Office of
River Protection at the Hanford Site (Washington). Solid reprocessing
wastes are liquid wastes that have been immobilized in solid form and
are currently stored at SRS, INL, and the West Valley Demonstration
Project (New York).
DOE's interpretation of HLW is that reprocessing waste is non-HLW
if the waste:
I. Does not exceed concentration limits for Class C low-level
radioactive waste as set out in section 61.55 of title 10, Code of
Federal Regulations; or
II. Does not require disposal in a deep geologic repository and
meets the performance objectives of a disposal facility as
demonstrated through a performance assessment conducted in
accordance with applicable regulatory requirements.
Under DOE's interpretation, waste meeting either of these criteria
is non-HLW and may be classified and disposed of in accordance with its
radiological characteristics.
At this time, DOE is not making--and has not made--any decisions on
the disposal of any particular waste stream. Disposal decisions, when
made, will be based on the consideration of public comments in response
to this Notice and prior input and consultation with appropriate state
and local regulators and stakeholders. DOE will continue its current
practice of managing all its reprocessing wastes as if they were HLW
unless and until a specific waste is determined to be another category
of waste based on detailed technical assessments of its characteristics
and an evaluation of potential disposal pathways.
B. High-Level Waste Interpretation
DOE interprets the term ``high-level radioactive waste'', as stated
in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 as amended (AEA),\1\ and the Nuclear
Waste Policy Act of 1982 as amended (NWPA) \2\ in a manner that defines
DOE reprocessing wastes to be classified as either HLW or non-HLW based
on the radiological characteristics of the waste and their ability to
meet appropriate disposal facility requirements. The basis for DOE's
interpretation comes from the AEA and NWPA definition of HLW:
\1\ 42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq. This definition of HLW was first
enacted in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended, and
incorporated into the AEA in 1988.
\2\ 42 U.S.C. 10101 et seq.
(A) the highly radioactive material resulting from the
reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel, including liquid waste produced
directly in reprocessing and any solid material derived from such
liquid waste that contains fission products in sufficient
concentrations; and
(B) other highly radioactive material that the Commission,
consistent with existing law, determines by rule requires permanent
isolation.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 42 U.S.C. 10101(12)(A), (B).
In paragraph A, Congress limited HLW to those materials that are
both ``highly radioactive'' and ``resulting from the reprocessing of
spent nuclear fuel.'' Reprocessing generates liquid wastes, with the
first cycle of reprocessing operations containing the majority of the
fission products and transuranic elements removed from the SNF. Thus,
in paragraph A, Congress distinguished HLW with regard to its form as
both ``liquid waste produced directly in reprocessing'' and ``any solid
material derived from such liquid waste that contains fission products
in sufficient concentrations.''
In paragraph B, Congress defined HLW also to include ``other highly
radioactive material'' that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
determines by rule ``requires permanent isolation.'' HLW under
paragraph B includes highly radioactive material regardless of whether
the waste is from reprocessing or some other activity. Further, under
paragraph B, classification of material as HLW is based on its
radiological characteristics and whether the material requires
permanent isolation.
The common element of these statutory paragraphs defining HLW is
the requirement and recognition that the waste be ``highly
radioactive.'' Additionally, both paragraphs reflect a primary purpose
of the NWPA, which is to define those materials for which disposal in a
deep geologic repository is the only method that would provide
reasonable assurance that the public and the environment will be
adequately protected from the radiological hazards the materials pose.
The terms ``highly radioactive,'' and ``sufficient concentrations''
are not defined in the AEA or the NWPA. By providing in paragraph A
that liquid reprocessing waste is HLW only if it is ``highly
radioactive,'' and that solid waste derived from liquid reprocessing
waste is HLW only if it is ``highly radioactive'' and contains fission
products in ``sufficient concentrations'' without further defining
these standards, Congress left it to DOE to determine when these
standards are met. Given Congress' intent that not all reprocessing
waste is HLW, it is appropriate for DOE to use its expertise to
interpret the definition of HLW, consistent with proper statutory
construction, to distinguish waste that is non-HLW from waste that is
HLW.
The DOE interpretation is informed by the radiological
characteristics of reprocessing waste and whether the waste can be
disposed of safely in a facility other than a deep geologic repository.
This interpretation is based upon the principles of the NRC's
regulatory structure for the disposal of low-level radioactive wastes.
\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ NRC licensing requirements for the land disposal of LLW,
originally promulgated in 1962, are codified in Part 61 of the Code
of Federal Regulations, 10 CFR part 61.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its regulations, NRC has identified four classes of low-level
radioactive waste (LLW)--Class A, B or C--for which near-surface
disposal is safe for public health and the environment, and greater-
than-Class C LLW for which near-surface disposal may be safe for public
health and the environment. This waste classification regime is based
on the concentration levels of a combination of specified short-lived
and long-lived radionuclides in a waste stream, with Class C LLW having
the highest concentration levels. Waste that exceeds the Class C levels
is evaluated on a case-specific basis to determine whether it requires
disposal in a deep geologic repository, or whether an alternative
disposal facility can be demonstrated to provide safe disposal. The
need for disposal in a deep geologic repository results from a
combination of two radiological characteristics of the waste: High
activity radionuclides, including fission products, which generate high
levels of radiation; and long-lived radionuclides which, if not
properly disposed of, would present a risk to human health and the
environment for hundreds of thousands of years.
Because the NRC has long-standing regulations that set
concentration limits for radionuclides in waste that is acceptable for
near-surface disposal, it is reasonable to interpret ``highly
radioactive'' to mean, at a minimum,
[[Page 50911]]
radionuclide concentrations greater than the Class C limits.
Reprocessing waste that does not exceed the Class C limits is non-HLW.
DOE interprets ``sufficient concentrations'' in the statutory
context in which the definition was enacted, which, as discussed above,
is focused on protecting the public and the environment from the
hazards posed by nuclear waste. In addition to the characteristics of
the waste itself, the risk that reprocessing waste poses to human
health and the environment depends on the physical characteristics of
the disposal facility and that facility's ability to safely isolate the
waste from the human environment. Relevant characteristics of a
disposal facility may include the depth of disposal, use of engineered
barriers, and geologic, hydrologic, and geochemical features of the
site. Taking these considerations into account, it is reasonable to
interpret ``sufficient concentrations'' to mean concentrations of
fission products in combination with long-lived radionuclides that
would require disposal in a deep geologic repository.
Accordingly, under DOE's interpretation, solid waste that exceeds
the NRC's Class C limits would be subject to detailed characterization
and technical analysis of the radiological characteristics of the
waste. This, combined with the physical characteristics of a specific
disposal facility and the method of disposal, would determine whether
the facility could meet its performance objectives, and if the waste
can be disposed of safely. This approach would be governed by the waste
characterization and analysis process and performance objectives for
the disposal facility established by the applicable regulator, and
thereby protective of human health and the environment.
The DOE interpretation does not require the removal of key
radionuclides to the maximum extent that is technically and
economically practical before DOE can define waste as non-HLW. Nothing
in the statutory text of the AEA or the NWPA requires that
radionuclides be removed to the maximum extent technically and
economically practical prior to determining whether waste is HLW. DOE
has determined that the removal of radionuclides from waste that
already meets existing legal and technical requirements for safe
transportation and disposal is unnecessary and inefficient, and does
not benefit human health or the environment. To the contrary, it
potentially presents a greater risk to human health and the environment
because it prolongs the temporary storage of waste.
Therefore, under DOE's interpretation, waste resulting from the
reprocessing of SNF is non-HLW if the waste:
I. Does not exceed concentration limits for Class C low-level
radioactive waste as set out in section 61.55 of title 10, Code of
Federal Regulations; or
II. Does not require disposal in a deep geologic repository and
meets the performance objectives of a disposal facility as
demonstrated through a performance assessment conducted in
accordance with applicable regulatory requirements.
Reprocessing waste meeting either I or II of the above is non-HLW,
and may be classified and disposed in accordance with its radiological
characteristics in an appropriate facility provided all applicable
requirements of the disposal facility are met.
C. Request for Comments
The Department specifically requests comments on its interpretation
that reprocessing waste meeting either of the two criterion stated
above is non-HLW. This Notice is intended to solicit public feedback on
the DOE interpretation to better understand stakeholder perspectives
prior to appropriate input and consultation with affected state and
local regulators and any waste disposal classification decisions.
The Department will consider all comments received during the
public comment period, and modify its proposed approach, as
appropriate, based on public comment.
Signed at Washington, DC, on October 4, 2018.
Anne Marie White,
Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management.
[FR Doc. 2018-22002 Filed 10-9-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
