While not much has appeared to happen for the majority of the past year, there is still reason for optimism that the federal government will find a way forward to establish a means for permanent disposal of the most radioactive form of low-level waste, an industry executive said.
Congress did not address the issue of Greater-Than-Class-C waste in its recently passed fiscal 2019 “minibus” appropriations bill covering the Department of Energy and Nuclear Regulatory Commission, among other agencies. However, lawmakers could still act in separate legislation during the current session, according to David Carlson, president and chief operating officer at Waste Control Specialists (WCS). Work is also continuing at DOE, he told RadWaste Monitor.
The 2005 Energy Policy Act directed the Energy Department to provide Congress with a report on alternatives for disposal of GTCC waste, then wait for action from Capitol Hill. The report is in, but there has been no formal response from Congress.
“WCS is working with DOE and appropriate committees to support this effort. We are hopeful that there will be an opportunity,” Carlson said by email Wednesday.
The U.S. stockpile of GTCC and GTCC-like waste is expected to grow to about 12,000 cubic meters by 2083. The material, ranging from sealed sources to scrap metal to soil, is produced by decommissioning of nuclear power plants, various industrial operations, and other government and commercial nuclear activities. Today it remains held at the site of generation.
Under federal rules, this waste type is currently considered “not suitable for near-surface disposal,” according to the NRC. A 1989 agency regulation directs that GTCC waste go into a licensed geologic repository – which does not exist today.
The federal government has spent years evaluating alternative disposal options after Dallas-based WCS in 2015 petitioned the state of Texas for authorization to permanently hold GTCC, GTCC-like, and transuranic waste at the Federal Waste Facility within its Andrews County disposal complex. Texas kicked the question of licensing authority to Washington.
The Energy Department in 2016 issued an environmental impact statement on the matter, citing as its preferred disposal methods the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico and/or generic commercial facilities. In a report to Congress last November, the department laid out details of its preferred approach.
The NRC, meanwhile, would issue a regulatory basis for a potential rulemaking on disposal of commercial GTCC and transuranic waste six months after completing the supplemental rule for its Part 61 rulemaking on low-level radioactive waste disposal. That document is now expected in early 2019.
Per the Energy Policy Act, it has been assumed that some form of legislative language would be necessary to authorize the form of permanent disposal of GTCC waste – for example, allowing the material to go to WIPP, an underground disposal site that by law currently is allowed only to hold transuranic waste from across the DOE complex.
If Congress prefers commercial disposal, the answer could be as simple as simply saying the federal process now underway is appropriate, Carlson said. He added, though, that there does not appear to be agreed-upon language on the matter.
One complication is lawmakers’ lack of familiarity with the topic, Carlson noted earlier this month at the ExchangeMonitor’s RadWaste Summit in Henderson, Nev.
“How do you get Congress to act, particularly when it was 2005 when they put these words into a bill and now nobody really remembers what that was all about due to the delayed action by Congress,” Carlson said during a panel discussion. “But we need to get language into must-pass legislation, a minibus or whatever they pass this year, in order to try to get that congressional action to kick that off.”
The Energy Department is readying an environmental assessment looking at particular effects of possible disposal alternatives, including disposal at WCS, that were not completely addressed in the environmental impact statement, Carlson said. That could wrap up this year, and could be followed by a record of decision anytime from 2019-2021 that would formalize the disposal approach, he added.
The Energy Department did not respond to requests for comment on its work regarding GTCC waste. There was also no word from Capitol Hill on efforts in Congress.
“There is awareness on the Hill of the completion and delivery of the report that was specified in legislation, and there are ongoing discussions as to how Congress should respond,” Carlson stated.
There are now four facilities licensed by NRC agreement states for disposal of commercial low-level radioactive waste: WCS’ complex in West Texas; U.S. Ecology’s operation at DOE’s Hanford Site in Washington state; and EnergySolutions facilities in Clive, Utah, and Barnwell, S.C.
US Ecology said this week it has no intention of pursuing business in disposal of GTCC waste.
Waste Control Specialists, both under prior owner Valhi Inc. and new owner J.F. Lehman & Co., has made clear its interest in getting into that business.
“I think that would be up to DOE to state that. But I think that a generic commercial facility was stated in the previous version of that. So we’re a generic commercial facility,” Carlson said during the conference.
Speaking on the same panel, EnergySolutions Senior Vice President of Regulatory Affairs Daniel Shrum noted that the company’s Clive site is not authorized to receive Class B and C radioactive waste. “So, yeah, process of elimination.” However, the Barnwell facility, owned by the state of South Carolina, is licensed for Classes A to C.
Shrum reaffirmed EnergySolutions’ desire for more regulatory clarity on GTCC waste, including a clear definition and criteria for disposal. “We believe the NRC needs to specifically define what GTCC is as opposed to what it is not,” he said. “Right now it’s a big category. We hit C and then all” higher-level material is GTCC.
