The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has suspended work on a study of potential regulatory updates for disposal of very low-level radioactive waste (VLLW) while it considers other approaches to the matter.
As recently as March, the agency said it expected to issue its scoping-study findings before the end of spring. However, staff is now separately gearing up to evaluate the scope of “acceptable disposal” of very low-level waste under federal regulations on general requirements for radioactive waste disposal (Section 20.2001 under Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations), according to a Sept. 16 letter from John Lubinski, director of the NRC Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, to the Nuclear Energy Institute.
“The process that would allow the use of 20.2001 in certain cases is just a proposal under consideration at this time,” NRC spokesman David McIntyre said by email. “We have not determined any details on how this would be implemented at this point. As a result, we have put the VLLW scoping study on hold while we consider how to proceed on 20.2001.”
The agency on Thursday indicated it would resume the scoping study at some point, but has not set a time frame.
Very low-level waste is not an official NRC designation, but instead the informal term for the least radioactive form of Class A radioactive waste. Class A, which comprises about 90 percent of all low-level radioactive waste, is the least-radioactive material with an official classification. Very low-level material includes very lightly contaminated concrete or dirt from nuclear decommissioning, according to the NRC. Under existing federal rules, it can be disposed of at a facility specifically licensed to take low-level waste or at a municipal or hazardous waste landfill under the agency’s process for alternative disposal (Code of Federal Regulations Title 10, Section 20.2002)
The scoping study was the outgrowth of the agency’s 2016 programmatic assessment of low-level radioactive waste regulations. It was intended, according to a 2018 notice in the Federal Register, “to identify possible options to improve and strengthen the NRC’s regulatory framework for the disposal of the anticipated large volumes of VLLW associated with the decommissioning of nuclear power plants and material sites, as well as waste that might be generated by alternative waste streams that may be created by operating reprocessing facilities or a radiological event.”
The study’s goals included cooperating with other government agencies to establish consistent regulation of VLLW and defining the conditions in which the material could be sent for disposal at Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle C hazardous waste sites. During a 2018 public comment period, the NRC asked stakeholders to weigh in on a possible formal designation on the waste type.
Agency staff reviewed the comments and were preparing options when a real-life event interceded – The NRC determined in 2018 that the South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Co., owner of two reactors about 90 miles southwest of Houston, had shipped very low-level waste to an exempt facility in the state without securing the federal regulator’s approval. This ran afoul of the agency’s determination in 2016 that it has authority under Section 20.2002 to authorize disposal of such material from power plants at sites not directly licensed for low-level waste, even in Texas and other NRC agreement states that otherwise have assumed much of the authority for regulating radioactive materials within their borders.
The agency did not penalize the company, but the nuclear industry – led by its trade association, the Nuclear Energy Institute – has objected to the NRC’s stance on its authority under 10 CFR 20.2002.
That proceeding got the NRC thinking about how it might apply Section 20.2001 to the question of VLLW disposal.
Section 20.2001 covers the broad rules for disposal of radioactive waste. It permits disposal of licensed material by transfer to an authorized recipient covered by other regulations, decay in storage, release in effluents within regulatory limits, or as authorized under other sections of NRC regulations.
“Under the approach the staff is considering, the NRC could interpret the term ‘authorized recipient’ in 20.2001(a)(1) to apply not only to a license holder for those listed parts of the regulations, but also to a person who is specifically exempted from those parts of the regulations for the purpose of disposal,” according to McIntyre. “This approach could allow, for example, a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) disposal site to request a specific exemption from the NRC or an Agreement State to receive specific wastes for disposal. A waste generator could then ship that type of waste to such a facility pursuant to 20.2001, without the need for a separate authorization under 20.2002.”
The current pause will allow for eventual integration, as needed, of the South Texas Project case and a potential 20.2001 approach to be wrapped into the scoping study, McIntyre stated.
