April 8, 2014 

MEMORANDUM TO: Aby Mohseni, Deputy Director 

 Environmental Protection and Performance 

 Assessment Directorate 

 Division of Waste Management 

 and Environmental Protection 

FROM: Melanie Wong, Senior Project Manager /RA/ 

 Environmental Protection and Performance 

 Assessment Directorate 

 Division of Waste Management 

 and Environmental Protection 

SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF MARCH 7, 2014, PUBLIC WORKSHOP ON 

 LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL RULEMAKING AND 

STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT OF LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE 

REGULATORY PROGRAM IN PHOENIX, ARIZONA 

On March 7, 2014, staff from the Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental 

Management Programs conducted a public workshop to discuss the status of proposed 

revisions to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) Low-Level Radioactive Waste 

(LLRW) disposal regulations and to gather information on an update to the NRC’s 2007 

Strategic Assessment of the LLRW regulatory program from stakeholders and other interested 

members of the public. 

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

Revisions to LLRW Disposal Regulations

The Commission’s licensing requirements for the disposal of LLRW in near-surface [the 

uppermost 30 meters (100 feet)] disposal facilities reside in Part 61 of Title 10 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (10 CFR), “Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive 

Waste.” 

CONTACT: Melanie Wong, FSME/DWMEP 

301-415-2432 
A. Mohseni 2 

In its March 18, 2009, Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) SRM-SECY-08-0147, 

“Response to Commission Order CLI-05-20 Regarding Depleted Uranium”, which can be found 

in the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) (Accession 

No. ML090770988), the Commission directed the NRC staff to proceed with a rulemaking to 

amend 10 CFR Part 61 to specify a requirement for a site-specific analysis for the disposal of 

large quantities of depleted uranium including the technical requirements for such an analysis, 

and to develop a guidance document that outlines the parameters and assumptions to be used 

in conducting such site-specific analyses. 

On July 18, 2013, the NRC staff submitted a revised draft proposed rule and associated 

guidance for Commission’s review and approval, SECY-13-0075, “Proposed Rule: Low-Level 

Radioactive Waste Disposal (10 CFR Part 61) (RIN 3150-A192)” (ADAMS Accession No. 

ML13129A268). The draft proposed rule would update the existing technical analysis 

requirements for protection of the general population (i.e., performance assessment); add a new 

site-specific technical analysis for the protection of inadvertent intruders (i.e., intruder 

assessment); add a new analysis for certain long-lived LLRW; and revise the technical analyses 

required at closure. The draft proposed rule would also add a new requirement to develop 

criteria for the acceptance of LLRW for disposal based on either the results of these technical 

analyses or on the existing LLRW classification requirements. 

In its February 12, 2014, SRM-SECY-13-0075, the Commission approved publication of the 

proposed rule and the associated draft guidance for public comment, subject to the comments 

and changes noted in the SRM. 

Update to the 2007 Strategic Assessment of the LLRW Regulatory Program

In 2007, the NRC staff published the Strategic Assessment in SECY-07-0180, “Strategic 

Assessment of Low-Level Radioactive Waste Regulatory Program” (ADAMS Accession No. 

ML071350299), which identified and prioritized the NRC staff’s activities for the NRC’s LLRW 

regulatory program. After 7 years, much progress has been made in completing several 

activities identified in the 2007 Strategic Assessment. In addition, the national LLRW program 

continues to evolve. To set the direction for the NRC’s LLRW regulatory program in the next 

several years, the NRC staff will begin developing an updated Strategic Assessment of the 

NRC’s LLRW program. The new assessment will provide opportunities for stakeholder 

engagement

MARCH 7, 2014, PUBLIC WORKSHOP:

The March 7, 2014, Public Meeting Notice and meeting agenda were made publicly available 

prior to the meeting and can be found in (ADAMS Accession No. ML14035A503). The 

announcement for this facilitated public meeting was published in the Federal Register (FR) on 

January 24, 2014, (79 FR 4102). Seventy-five individuals participated in this public meeting, 

both in person and remotely (electronically) via webinar/telephone. Attendance included 

representatives from the Agreement States, disposal facility operators, and waste generators 

(including private and governmental) and members of non-governmental organizations (see 

enclosure). 

The March 7, 2014, public workshop was organized into two parts. In the first part, the NRC 

staff discussed the status of the proposed revisions to 10 CFR Part 61. In the second part, a 
A. Mohseni 3 

panel of invited experts discussed developments that would affect the LLRW regulatory program 

in the next 5 to 7 years, including changes to the national landscape in the LLRW area that 

would affect licensees and sited States in the context of safety, security, and the protection of 

the environment. During the workshop, time was provided for facilitated public discussion with 

members of the audience. The public meeting was transcribed to serve as an official record of 

the event, and the stakeholder comments and suggestions provided can be found in the 

transcript (ADAMS Accession No. ML14086A540). The meeting slides are available in ADAMS 

(ADAMS Accession No. ML14070A058). 

As the meeting facilitator responsible for moderating the workshop, Chip Cameron opened the 

workshop. Larry Camper, Director of the Division of Waste Management and Environmental 

Protection (DWMEP), then welcomed the attendees and discussed the objectives of the 

workshop. He also thanked the panelists for their participation in the Strategic Assessment 

discussion. 

David Esh provided a status of the LLRW disposal rulemaking, specifically focusing on the 

Commission’s direction in SRM-SECY-13-0075. He presented information on the three-tiered 

period of analysis, intruder assessment, Agreement State compatibility, protective assurance 

analysis period, defense-in-depth and safety case, and next steps for the proposed rulemaking. 

Comments from the discussion on the 10 CFR Part 61 proposed rulemaking include: 

• A request was made to issue early and separately the draft guidance document related 

to the rulemaking since the SRM directed staff to focus on ensuring a thorough review of 

the draft guidance by the limited community of disposal operations.

• A request was made to issue the next version of the document as a proposed rule and 

not as a preliminary proposed rule. The commenter believes the rulemaking package is 

ready to be issued for public review. 

• While the Commission directed that the proposed rule should be published with a 

compatibility Category “B” applied to the most significant provisions of the revised rule, a 

commenter questioned whether the Commission is open to further examination on the 

compatibility designation as the SRM requested staff to propose questions in the 

proposed rule on its appropriateness. 

• It was noted that during the rulemaking process, the NRC has engaged the States 

allowing them opportunities to offer comments and directions on the preliminary draft 

rulemaking package. Once the proposed rule is issued, a commenter recommended 

additional outreach efforts in the four sited States to engage those directly affected by 

the proposed rulemaking. 

• A statement was made that the waste classification tables in 10 CFR 61.55 are out of 

date and are no longer state-of-the-art resulting in underutilization of the current disposal 

facilities. It was stated that “these facilities are national treasures” and they should be 

analyzed with state-of-the-art tools and site-specific performance assessments. It was 

noted that the proposed rulemaking includes flexibility to enable licensees to use either 
A. Mohseni 4 

site-specific waste acceptance criteria based on a site’s performance and intruder 

assessments or the waste classification tables. 

• A commenter stressed the importance of selecting the appropriate scenarios for the 

intruder assessment. It was suggested that these scenarios should be risk-informed and 

use realistic current technology. 

Melanie Wong introduced the topic of the 2007 Strategic Assessment providing background on 

the development of the assessment, status of the high priority activities in the assessment, 

proposed activities for the updated Strategic Assessment and next steps in the process. 

Next, a panel of subject matter experts addressed three questions related to updating the 

Strategic Assessment: 

• What changes are anticipated to the national landscape in the LLRW area in the context 

of safety, security, and the protection of the environment in the next 5 to 7 years? 

• As a result of the new national landscape, what activities from the 2007 Strategic 

Assessment should remain on the list and are they appropriately prioritized in order to 

strengthen the NRC’s ability to ensure safe and secure LLRW disposal, improve the 

effectiveness of its regulations, and assure regulatory stability and predictability while 

allowing flexibility in disposal options? 

• As a result of the new national landscape, what additional changes are needed to the 

NRC regulatory framework? 

PANELISTS: 

PARTICIPANT ORGANIZATION 

Ralph Andersen Nuclear Energy Institute 

Brad Broussard Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 

William Dornsife Waste Control Specialists 

Earl Fordham Washington Department of Health 

Michael Garner Northwest Interstate Compact on Low-Level 

Radioactive Waste Management/State of Washington 

Christine Gelles U.S. Department of Energy 

Rusty Lundberg Utah Department of Environmental Quality 

Dan Shrum EnergySolutions 

Gregory Suber U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

The staff will use the information and feedback obtained from these discussions to develop a list 

of priorities for the updated Strategic Assessment. 

Comments from the discussion on the Strategic Assessment include: 

• The Strategic Assessment should not only consider activities under the NRC regulatory 

purview but those activities which would broadly impact the national LLRW program. 

The updated Strategic Assessment should include a review on whether the laws and 

regulations need to be revised to improve the LLRW framework. 
A. Mohseni 5 

• A high priority gap analysis is needed between the current LLRW disposal and future 

needs. This analysis could be an activity in the updated Strategic Assessment and 

would lead to a comprehensive national radioactive waste management program. 

• Postulated high impact and low impact scenarios should be developed for the Strategic 

Assessment which would consider how the national LLRW program might change with 

each scenario. 

• In developing the prioritization of the Strategic Assessment activities, the urgency of the 

activity should be considered. 

• The period of implementation of the updated activities (5 to 7 years) may not be 

appropriate due to the time frame of future activities of the national LLRW program. For 

example, the generation of wastes can be predicted with some certainty in the next 85 

years. Therefore, a longer strategic time horizon tied to nuclear generation should be 

considered. 

• Large number of decommissioning activities in the future could strain the resources of 

the national LLRW program. 

• Climate change may lead to increase reliance on nuclear energy in the future. 

• Greater-than-Class C (GTCC) LLRW is likely to be a high priority activity in the future. 

However, the activity should focus on determining the regulatory authority for licensing a 

GTCC disposal facility versus developing the technical requirements for the facility. If 

the site-specific analysis rulemaking is promulgated, then new technical requirements 

may not be required. 

• A new paradigm shift or a moving away from a more traditional view of the LLRW 

framework should include public outreach and education. 

• Changes to the classification tables in 10 CFR 61.55 were suggested including updating 

the tables based on the current International Commission on Radiological Protection 

dosimetry. The deletion of the classification tables was also suggested, however, this 

should be carefully considered since the classification tables are embodied within a 

number of laws. The updating of the classification tables could follow a similar process 

to the International Atomic Energy Agency process for updating its safety requirements 

on regulations for the safe transport of radioactive material. 

• The involvement of the LLRW community in the process of revising 40 CFR 190 was 

recommended as it may have implications to the national LLRW program. 

• Waste incidental to a large nuclear event should be considered in the context of the 

NRC LLRW regulatory framework. 

• There is an urgency to dispose of disused sealed sources based on national security 

concerns and consideration should be given on how disposal of sealed sources can be 
A. Mohseni 6 

encouraged. Financial responsibility for sealed sources is important, as well as ways to 

improve their tracking. 

• The recycling (clearance) of LLRW was suggested to be included in the updated 

Strategic Assessment. 

• New technology that generate new waste forms and new waste streams should be 

considered in the updated Strategic Assessment. For example, small modular reactors 

and domestic production of molybdenum-99 may generate different waste streams. 

• Maintaining sufficient disposal capacity should be considered by the LLRW community 

(e.g., the development of new LLRW disposal sites). Implications of disposing of LLRW 

waste in a subtitle C facility or a Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) facility needs to be considered. For 

example, low activity waste disposal in other than a 10 CFR Part 61 disposal facility 

could increase the cost of disposal for all the generators that use such a facility. 

The U.S. Department of Energy is also planning to develop three new CERCLA disposal 

sites which may have economic and facility operability implications to the commercial 

market. 

• The NRC’s interim staff guidance for alternative disposal requests for low-activity waste 

is being revised and should be considered an ongoing activity. The appropriateness of 

the 20.2002 exemption process needs to be considered in the updated Strategic 

Assessment. The 20.2002 exemption process is considered by some to be 

inappropriate to be used to dispose of large volume of wastes. The transparency of the 

20.2002 exemptions process also should be considered. 

• A low-activity waste rulemaking could rely on the technical analysis performed for the 

rulemaking for disposition of solid materials, which focused on clearance and restricted 

release of materials. 

 

• There may be some waste management implications from the recently approved 

exemption process for the disposal of radioactive materials in an existing Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act permitted disposal cell based on concentrations that 

were developed from a site-specific performance assessment. 

• Update to the manifest requirements should be included in the Strategic Assessment. 

The scope of the update would be impacted by the upcoming Regulatory Issue 

Summary on the Phantom 4 scaling factors. 

• An activity in the updated Strategic Assessment should include determining when 

radioactive material becomes waste and could be coupled with addressing waste 

attribution issues. 

• Regarding changes to 10 CFR Part 61, the impact of changes to the regulatory structure 

and its impact to disposal of materials such as depleted uranium should be considered. 

The appropriateness of the dose criteria to a member of the public was noted. 
A. Mohseni 7 

• Regarding the activities listed in the 2007 Strategic Assessment, several of the activities 

should be grouped together such as those related to low-activity wastes and changes to 

10 CFR Part 61. Several of the activities could be combined in the proposed gap 

analysis activity. It was suggested that change to CFR Part 61 would first begin with an 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking. However, it was noted that the Commission’s 

previous direction ceased any efforts to develop and implement major revisions to 

10 CFR Part 61. In addition to the site specific analysis rulemaking, a risk-informing the 

waste classification tables rulemaking is the only rulemaking currently being considered. 

• The NRC should include the medical and industrial generators of LLRW in its outreach 

activities related to updating the Strategic Assessment. 

PATH FORWARD: 

At the end of the meeting, Aby Mohseni, Deputy Director of DWMEP, summarized highlights 

from the workshop. He expressed the view that the discussions, as well as the subsequent 

feedback from the meeting participants had been constructive and informative. He noted there 

would be additional outreach efforts related to both the proposed rulemaking and updated 

assessment. Both the proposed rule and draft updated Strategic Assessment are expected to 

be published in 2015. In addition, the NRC plans additional meetings and workshop on GTCC 

related issues. 

Enclosure: 

Attendance List 
A. Mohseni 7 

• Regarding the activities listed in the 2007 Strategic Assessment, several of the activities 

should be grouped together such as those related to low-activity wastes and changes to 

10 CFR Part 61. Several of the activities could be combined in the proposed gap 

analysis activity. It was suggested that change to CFR Part 61 would first begin with an 

advance notice of proposed rulemaking. However, it was noted that the Commission’s 

previous direction ceased any efforts to develop and implement major revisions to 

10 CFR Part 61. In addition to the site specific analysis rulemaking, a risk-informing the 

waste classification tables rulemaking is the only rulemaking currently being considered. 

• The NRC should include the medical and industrial generators of LLRW in its outreach 

activities related to updating the Strategic Assessment. 

PATH FORWARD:

At the end of the meeting, Aby Mohseni, Deputy Director of DWMEP summarized highlights 

from the workshop. He expressed the view that the discussions, as well as the subsequent 

feedback from the meeting participants had been constructive and informative. He noted there 

would be additional outreach efforts related to both the proposed rulemaking and updated 

assessment. Both the proposed rule and draft updated Strategic Assessment are expected to 

be published in 2015. In addition, the NRC plans additional meetings and workshop on GTCC 

related issues. 

Enclosure: 

Attendance List 

 

ML14092A114 

OFC DWMEP DWMEP DWMEP DWMEP DWMEP DWMEP 

NAME MWong DEsh TMoon CMcKenney GSuber MWong 

DATE 04/2/14 04/2/14 04/2/14 04/4/14 04/3/14 04/8/14 

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY