[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 55 (Wednesday, March 22, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 15190-15191]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6878]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 60

[Docket No. PRM-60-3]


Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in Geologic 
Repositories

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Partial grant/partial denial of petition for rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In a petition for rulemaking (PRM-60-3) submitted by the U.S. 
[[Page 15191]] Department of Energy (DOE), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission was requested to establish specific dose criteria for design 
basis accidents at a high-level radioactive waste repository. NRC 
hereby grants in part, and denies in part, the specific proposals of 
the petitioner.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the petition for rulemaking, the public comments 
received, and NRC's letter to the petitioner are available for public 
inspection or copying, for a fee, in the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 
L Street, NW (Lower Level), Washington, DC 20555.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Richard Weller, Office of Nuclear 
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555, telephone (301) 415-7287.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    DOE submitted a petition for rulemaking on April 19, 1990. On July 
13, 1990 (55 FR 28771) NRC published a notice of receipt of the 
petition for rulemaking. The comment period expired on October 11, 
1990. The petition requested that the Commission amend 10 CFR part 60 
to prescribe certain numerical accident-dose criteria to be applied at 
the boundary of a ``preclosure control area.''
    Under DOE's proposal, the definition of ``important to safety,'' in 
10 CFR 60.2, would be changed to apply a reference dose limit at the 
preclosure-control-area boundary, instead of the present unrestricted-
area boundary; further, the definition would be amended to add a 
statement ``All engineered safety features shall be included within the 
meaning of the term `important to safety.''' The petition also proposed 
that performance objectives of 10 CFR 60.111 would be revised to 
incorporate an explicit accident dose limit, at the preclosure control 
area boundary, of 0.05-Sv (5-rem) effective dose equivalent, or 0.5-Sv 
(50-rem) committed dose equivalent. DOE indicated its intention that 
this limit would apply to direct irradiation and inhalation pathways, 
alone, and not to ingestion of contaminated foodstuffs. The phrase ``at 
all times'' would be deleted from 10 CFR 60.111(a), to clarify that the 
performance objective for the period of operations does not apply to 
exposure from accidents. Finally, the petition proposed adding new 
definitions, to 10 CFR 60.2, for the terms ``preclosure control area,'' 
``committed dose equivalent,'' ``committed effective dose equivalent,'' 
and ``effective dose equivalent,'' to support the application of the 
accident dose criteria described above.
    For a fuller statement of the petition for rulemaking, see the 
Federal Register notice cited above.
    In response to NRC's publication of notice of receipt of the 
petition, comments were received from: DOE; Edison Electric Institute 
and the Utility Nuclear Waste and Transportation Program (EEI/UWASTE); 
Intertech Consultants, on behalf of Lincoln County, Nevada, and the 
City of Caliente, Nevada; and an anonymous ``Concerned U.S. Citizen.'' 
The Commission, having now considered the petition and comments, grants 
the petition in part and denies the petition in part, and to that end, 
the Commission is publishing, concurrently with this notice, a notice 
of proposed rulemaking.
    Under the proposed rule, accident-dose criteria would be applied at 
the boundary of a newly defined ``preclosure controlled area,'' as 
recommended by DOE. Further, in response to the petition, the term 
``important to safety'' would be redefined, though not in the form 
suggested by DOE. The Commission is also proposing to adopt the 
petitioner's request that the phrase ``at all times'' be deleted from 
the performance objective that applies to preclosure operations. In all 
other respects, the petition is denied.
    The reasons for the action, insofar as it both grants and denies 
parts of the petition, are set out at length in the statement of 
considerations accompanying the proposed rule.

    Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day of March, 1995.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John C. Hoyle,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 95-6878 Filed 3-21-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P