Questions and Answers

1. What is U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) new position on blending of 

Low Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW) to reduce its waste classification?

Answer: 

NRC’s new position is that large-scale LLRW blending may be conducted when it can be 

demonstrated to be safe. NRC’s blending position will become risk-informed, 

performance-based, and consistent with the agency’s overall policy for regulating the 

nuclear industry.

The new position is risk-informed – it is tied to how LLRW blending might affect

the protection of public health and safety.

The new position is performance-based - NRC’s decision making involving 

blending will above all be based on performance and results. Performance 

means that the blended waste must meet the limits on radiation exposures at the 

disposal facility and limits on how much the radioactivity concentration may vary 

(i.e., how well-mixed it must be).

NRC’s previous position was to discourage blending under some conditions 

without a health and safety basis, but did not discourage blending if a nuclear 

facility’s operational efficiency could be improved. The position was not riskinformed, performance-based. 

2. What steps will NRC take to implement this new position and when will they 

occur?

Answer:

NRC’s paper, SECY-10-0043, “Blending of Low-Level Radioactive Waste,” describes the 

steps involved in implementing this option:

NRC will piggyback blended wastes onto the “unique waste streams” rulemaking that 

is currently underway. That rulemaking is designed to address waste streams not 

evaluated in developing NRC’s disposal regulation in 10 CFR Part 61. Specifically, 

Part 61 will be revised to clarify that a site specific intruder analysis must be 

conducted to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 61.42, the performance objective 

requiring protection of an inadvertent intruder into the disposal site. Large-scale 

blended waste, as well as other types of waste, was not evaluated at the time that 

10 CFR Part 61 was developed. The draft rulemaking is scheduled to be sent to the 

Commission late in 2011, and after Commission approval, will be published for public 

comment in the Federal Register. The final rulemaking is to be completed in the fall 

of 2012.
2

NRC will also update its Concentration Averaging Branch Technical Position (CA 

BTP). The BTP contains NRC’s current guidance on LLRW blending, and will be 

updated to incorporate the Commission’s recent decision. The BTP also covers 

mathematical averaging of radioactivity concentrations. For example, reactor 

components of varying concentrations can be placed in containers and their 

concentration averaged over the volume of the container under certain 

circumstances. The staff plans to have a scoping meeting on these other potential 

revisions to the BTP in February 2011 in Rockville, MD. After that, NRC’s Advisory 

Committee on Reactor Safeguards will review a draft in the summer 2011, followed 

by public comment, both in writing and in public meeting. The staff plans to publish 

the final BTP in mid-2012 after public comments are received and addressed. 

NRC will update its 1981 “Policy Statement on Low-Level Waste Volume Reduction.”

Some stakeholders interpreted blending of LLRW to be contrary to the Policy 

Statement, since blending would not use existing processes that can further reduce 

waste volumes. The revision to the Policy Statement will: (1) continue to recognize 

the importance of volume reduction in the effective management of low-level 

radioactive waste; (2) acknowledge the substantial progress in achieving volume 

reduction since the policy statement was first issued nearly 30 years ago; (3) remove 

dated information and; (4) recognize that other factors affect licensees’ decisions on 

how to manage LLRW safely, including risk-informed, performance-based 

approaches. 

NRC will provide guidance to Agreement States on how to address blending 

proposals by their licensees received before the above rulemaking and guidance are 

completed. NRC will also summarize its plans for implementing the Commission 

decision and identify opportunities for Agreement State participation. The staff 

expects to issue this letter by April 2011.

The following table identifies the milestones and schedules for the publication of 

rulemaking and guidance documents related to LLRW blending, as well as opportunities 

for public input on these documents. This table will be periodically updated. Interested 

stakeholders can also periodically check NRC’s public meeting web page to determine 

the specific dates, agendas, contacts, etc. for meetings.

Milestone Schedule Comments

Publish Interim Guidance on 

LLRW Blending for 

Agreement States

April 2011

Issue Federal Register 

Notice requesting comments 

on potential changes to CA 

BTP

January 2011
3

Conduct public meeting 

requesting comments on 

potential changes to CA BTP

February 2011 Location is Legacy Hotel 

in Rockville, MD. Details 

will be provided in the 

“public meetings” section 

of the NRC web site

Brief Advisory Committee on 

Reactor Safeguards on draft 

CA BTP

June 2011

Complete Commission 

paper with revised draft 

Volume Reduction Policy 

Statement

August 2011

Issue draft CA BTP for 

public comment

October 2011

Issue draft Volume 

Reduction Policy Statement 

for public comment

October 2011

Complete Commission 

paper on proposed 

rulemaking for unique waste 

streams

October 2011

Conduct public meeting on 

draft CA BTP 

October 2011 To be held in 

Albuquerque, NM

Complete Commission 

paper with proposed final 

Volume Reduction Policy 

Statement

December 2011

Issue final CA BTP June 2012

Complete Commission 

paper with proposed final 

rule on unique waste 

streams

October 2012

3. Is NRC saying that “dilution is the solution to pollution” with its position on LLRW 

blending?

Answer: 

No. Dilution means the mixing of clean and contaminated materials together for release 

to the general environment. Dilution increases the volume of waste through the addition 

of clean materials to a mixture, and enables the release of materials to the general 

environment where members of the public could be exposed to the hazard, however 

small. Blending, in the context of NRC’s current activity, involves the mixing of already 

contaminated materials containing different concentrations of radioactivity for disposal in 

a licensed disposal site. There is no clean material used in the blending of LLRW, and 
4

the material is not released to the general environment. Thus, the undesirable 

characteristics of dilution are not present in this kind of blending. 

4. NRC is considering comprehensive revisions to its disposal regulations in 10 CFR 

Part 61. What is the status of that effort and how might it affect blended waste?

Answer:

On July 1, 2010, the Commission directed the NRC staff to “. . . provide the Commission 

with the staff’s approach to initiate activities related to a risk-informed, performancebased comprehensive revision to Part 61, including the resources and a timeline for 

completing the rulemaking. The staff paper, SECY-10-0165, was completed on 

December 27, 2010, and is available on the NRC’s public web site using the above 

hyperlink or in ADAMS (ML103400242). 

In the paper, the staff identities several options for revising 10 CFR Part 61. At least one 

would preserve the current Class A, B, and C waste classification framework, while 

others would eliminate the framework and allow for site-specific waste acceptance 

criteria. Although the staff does not anticipate any change to the new risk-informed, 

performance-based blending policy, a site-specific approach for waste acceptance 

criteria (as opposed to the generic Class A, B, C approach in 10 CFR 61.55) could 

eliminate or reduce further discussions about reducing the waste class through blending, 

since Class A, B, and C waste classifications would no longer exist. 

5. Hasn’t NRC changed its position on blending by now allowing large-scale 

blending of LLRW from nuclear power plants? What is the basis for this change 

in position?

Answer: 

No. Blending is not prohibited or explicitly addressed in current NRC regulations. NRC’s 

guidance also acknowledges that blending may be appropriate under certain conditions. 

As a result of the Commission’s recent decision on blending, NRC’s will strengthen the 

regulations and guidance, and make them more risk-informed and performance-based, 

consistent with NRC’s overall philosophy of regulation. A new requirement is being 

added to NRC’s regulations that will require that a safety analysis be performed for 

large-scale blending of LLRW. 

6. Did NRC take into account the fact that blending increases waste volumes and 

takes up limited U.S. disposal capacity?

Answer: 

The NRC determined that blending does not increase waste volumes (because waste is 

mixed with waste). Waste that would otherwise be Class B/C waste would be blended 

into a Class A mixture for disposal. However, NRC acknowledges that there are 

commercial volume reduction processes that could be used for Class B/C waste that 

would not be used if these wastes were blended. This issue was addressed in the staff 
5

paper on LLRW blending, SECY-10-0043 (p. 15 of Enclosure 1), available on NRC’s 

public web site.

7. Can States adopt stricter guidance and/or regulations on blending of LLRW than 

NRC’s?

Answer: 

Yes. NRC regulations do not prohibit, nor do they address blending of LLRW, and so 

there are no “compatibility” requirements for blending of LLRW by Agreement States at 

this time. Agreement States may implement regulations that are more restrictive than 

NRC requirements, and they are not required to follow NRC guidance. They may 

develop stricter guidance if they choose. 

As part of the new agency blending position, NRC will promulgate a rule that will require 

a safety assessment of the disposal of blended waste. The Commission directed NRC 

staff to ensure maximum state flexibility in determining the appropriate compatibility 

category of the rule while also ensuring that the rule provides a clear requirement for a 

site specific analysis to ensure that blended waste is disposed of safely.

8. How will you ensure that blending does not result in these wastes being disposed 

of in municipal landfills or other facilities not licensed for radioactive waste?”

Answer: 

The scope of the staff’s effort on blending of LLRW is for radioactive waste to be 

disposed of in licensed LLRW disposal facilities, not landfills.

9. Is blending another means of reducing the radioactivity of material so it can be 

released into consumer products?

Answer: 

No. The blending being addressed by the staff is for blending of radioactive waste 

batches with each other for disposal in a licensed LLRW disposal facility, not for release 

to the general environment.

10. Has NRC considered the potential conflict between a policy that allows blending 

and the principles of the compact system in the Low-Level Radioactive Waste 

Policy Amendments Act of 1985 (LLRWPAA). What about downblending of 

Greater Than Class C (GTCC) waste that would enable the Federal government to 

shift responsibility for this waste class to the States?

Answer:

The LLRWPAA makes each State responsible for providing, either by itself or in 

cooperation with other States in a regional compact, for the disposal of Class A, B, 

and C LLRW generated within the State. Increased amounts of blending by industry 
6

could affect the relative amounts of Class A, B, C for disposal, but all of these classes 

would still be the responsibility of the States and LLRW Compacts. The LLRWPAA also 

makes the Federal government responsible for disposal of GTCC waste. In its October 

13, 2010, decision on LLRW blending, the Commission stated, “The staff should not 

include waste at GTCC concentrations in the scope of this rulemaking; GTCC waste is a 

Federal responsibility and these volumes should not be made into a State responsibility, 

even if the waste has been blended into a lower classification.” The staff will provide 

guidance on this Commission direction in the revisions to the Concentration Averaging 

BTP. 

11. Why is blending a controversial issue? If the waste meets the acceptance criteria 

for a disposal facility and the performance objectives for the disposal facility are 

met, isn’t that what’s most important?

Answer:

Several stakeholders have expressed concerns with blending of LLRW that lowers the 

waste class. These concerns include, but are not limited to, the possible impact of largescale blending on the economic viability of a proposed new disposal facility; the 

perception that Class B/C waste would be disposed of in a Class A facility if these 

wastes were blended to Class A concentrations (in fact, the radioactivity in that waste 

which was previously Class B/C would be disposed of in a Class A facility, but within 

Class A limits); and potential safety impacts of disposing of blended waste at or near the 

Class A concentration limits, which was not analyzed in the technical basis for NRC’s 

disposal regulation in 10 CFR Part 61. Any blended waste would have to meet the 

acceptance criteria and performance objectives for a disposal facility to ensure that 

public health and safety and the environment were protected. NRC staff held public 

meetings to identify stakeholder concerns on the blending issue. SECY-10-0043, 

“Blending of Low-Level Radioactive Waste,” identifies and analyzes these issues, and 

the Commission considered them in developing its new position on LLRW blending. 

12. Isn’t waste blending prohibited for hazardous waste disposal? If so, why is NRC 

allowing it? 

Answer:

NRC is allowing it, subject to certain additional analyses, because it would be done 

safely and would be consistent with the agency’s overall policy of risk-informed, 

performance-based regulation. With respect to the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), in a 2004 Commission paper, NRC staff documented the use of mixing or 

blending in other programs, including EPA’s Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

hazardous waste program. That paper noted that EPA has occasionally allowed 

blending to meet regulatory goals for waste management, under limited circumstances, 

while generally discouraging and prohibiting blending and dilution.