95-17562. Land Ownership Requirements for Low-Level Waste Sites  

  • [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 137 (Tuesday, July 18, 1995)]
    [Proposed Rules]
    [Page 36744]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 95-17562]
    
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
    
    10 CFR Part 61
    
    RIN 3150-AE88
    
    
    Land Ownership Requirements for Low-Level Waste Sites
    
    AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    
    ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking; withdrawal.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) is 
    withdrawing an advance notice of proposed rulemaking that presented a 
    possible change to the NRC Federal or State land ownership requirements 
    for low-level waste (LLW) facility sites. The Commission has decided 
    that a rule change to allow private ownership of a LLW site is not 
    warranted or needed. The basis for this decision is that States and 
    compacts have generally indicated that they do not need, nor would they 
    allow, private ownership, and that this rule change could be 
    potentially disruptive to the current LLW program.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Haisfield, Office of Nuclear 
    Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 
    20555-0001, telephone (301) 415-6196.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 3, 1994 (59 FR 39485), the 
    Commission published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) 
    to consider amending its regulations to allow private ownership of LLW 
    facility sites as an alternative to the current requirement for Federal 
    or State ownership. In the ANPRM, the Commission requested information 
    on specific questions that dealt with (1) the potential use of this 
    alternative, (2) impacts to public health and safety or the 
    environment, and (3) liability considerations.
        The 60-day comment period was extended another 60 days at the 
    request of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (October 20, 
    1994; 59 FR 52941). The comment period expired on December 2, 1994. The 
    Commission received 49 comment letters: 19 commenters were from States, 
    compacts, or their representatives; 12 were from public organizations; 
    11 were from commercial/industrial organizations or their 
    representative; 4 were from individuals; and 1 each were from a Federal 
    agency, a national laboratory, and a professional organization. Most of 
    the commenters took a definitive position regarding whether to initiate 
    a proposed rule. For the most part the commenters, at a ratio of about 
    4 to 1, were against developing a generic rule. The Commission prepared 
    a detailed summary of the comments received. Copies of the summary are 
    available for inspection or copying for a fee from the NRC Public 
    Document Room at 2120 L Street NW. (Lower Level), Washington DC; the 
    PDR's mailing address is US NRC, Mail Stop LL-6, Washington, DC 20555-
    0001; telephone (202)634-3273; fax (202)634-3343.
        As noted in the ANPRM, the purpose for making a generic rule change 
    would be to facilitate the objectives of the Low-Level Radioactive 
    Waste Policy Act of 1980, as amended. Therefore, as noted in the ANPRM, 
    the NRC was particularly interested in determining whether Agreement 
    States or compacts would use a provision allowing private ownership of 
    the land for a LLW facility. The Commission believes that if there did 
    not seem to be a significant interest or need for such a provision, 
    addressing private ownership issues through appropriate exercise of 
    exemption authority would be sufficient.
        The Agreement State and compact commenters generally indicated that 
    they would not allow private land ownership, and in many cases, State 
    ownership of the land is required by State law or regulation. Of the 19 
    comments from States, compacts, or their representatives, only Nebraska 
    indicated a desire to actively consider changes permitting private 
    ownership. Nebraska and the Cortland County, New York, Low-Level 
    Radioactive Waste Office stated that there is not an adequate basis for 
    requiring Federal or State land ownership, which therefore would 
    support private ownership. The Commission believes there is adequate 
    statutory authority for the NRC to require Federal or State land 
    ownership. Moreover, because Nebraska is the only additional State 
    considering changes permitting private ownership, the Commission 
    believes assisting Nebraska on a case-specific basis, if requested and 
    appropriate, is preferable to developing a generic rule change.
        Many commenters, including States and compacts, also believe that 
    this type of change to 10 CFR part 61 is not only unnecessary but would 
    be a significant disruption to the current siting and licensing 
    process. As one commenter noted, this would have a negative impact on 
    public health and safety because it would affect the timely development 
    of new LLW disposal facilities needed to reduce on-site storage at 
    thousands of licensee sites throughout the country. The Commission 
    believes that these comments have merit. The Commission believes that 
    the potential negative impact of disrupting the current process far 
    outweighs any potential benefits that might be derived from making a 
    generic rule change at this time.
        This change could also generate significant public misunderstanding 
    and unwarranted public concern about the potential rollback of other 
    LLW disposal requirements. The Idaho National Engineering Laboratory's 
    National Low-Level Waste Management Program summarized this issue, 
    stating:
    
        For over three decades the public has been led to believe that 
    all LLW disposal sites would necessarily be owned and controlled by 
    either a Federal or State government. This, we believe, has been an 
    important factor in convincing many proponent groups and State and 
    local LLW advisory groups that LLW can and will be disposed of in a 
    safe manner. To now try and convince these groups that Federal or 
    State ownership of LLW disposal sites is not required, may be 
    difficult and generate a significant credibility problem.
    
        The Commission has not objected to private ownership of the 
    Envirocare site under Agreement State authority in the State of Utah 
    because of special reasons and provisions applicable to that site. The 
    Commission believes that if any other State desires to use an exemption 
    provision, a case-specific evaluation would be conducted, as was done 
    for the State of Utah. Any evaluation would consider whether the 
    underlying purpose of governmental ownership, assuring the existence of 
    a responsible entity for long-term care and monitoring of the site, can 
    be achieved.
    
        For the reasons discussed, the Commission is withdrawing the ANPRM.
    
        Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 12th day of July, 1995.
    
        For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    John C. Hoyle,
    Secretary of the Commission.
    [FR Doc. 95-17562 Filed 7-17-95; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    
    

Document Information

Published:
07/18/1995
Department:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Advance notice of proposed rulemaking; withdrawal.
Document Number:
95-17562
Pages:
36744-36744 (1 pages)
RINs:
3150-AE88
PDF File:
95-17562.pdf
CFR: (1)
10 CFR 61