10 CFR Part 61 Low Level Waste Disposal Rulemaking Update October 22, 2015 LLW Forum Meeting Chicago, IL Ryan Whited Senior Project Manager LLW Branch Division of Decommissioning, Uranium Recovery and Waste Programs Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

Objective Provide some brief background on NRC’s 10 CFR Part 61 Rulemaking Summarize stakeholder comments received to date Discuss the schedule and next steps for the NRC’s review

Why Are We Doing This Rulemaking? Require LLW disposal licensees or license applicants to ensure that LLW streams that are significantly different from the LLW streams considered in the current 10 CFR Part 61 regulatory basis can be disposed of safely. 3

Rationale for Current Rulemaking Large quantities of depleted uranium (especially from enrichment facilities) LLW from Department of Energy operations Waste forms/volumes Blended LLW (greater quantities than previously expected) New technologies might generate unexpected LLW waste streams 4

Major changes in the proposed rule (10 CFR Part 61) 1,000 year compliance period Inadvertent Intruder analysis Protective Assurance analysis Long-lived LLW analysis for performance period beyond 10,000 years 5

Major changes in the proposed rule (10 CFR Part 61) (cont’d) Safety Case/Defense in Depth Updated technical analyses at closure Site Specific Waste Acceptance Criteria 6

Commission Direction: SRM-SECY-13-0075 (2014) 11

Comments Received Use of current ICRP methodology and what that might imply. Others agreed with proposal to use latest ICRP methodology. Compatibility B designation for major portions of the proposed rule. Long term siting stability. The intruder dose and related assumptions. The phantom four (C-14, Tc-99, I-129, & H-3). Second rulemaking on waste classification. 8

Comments Received (cont’d) Applicability of new requirements to existing sites. Reduce complexity by moving more information to the guidance document. Two-tiered approach would be simpler and better. Supplemental environmental impact statement needed. Transparency and availability of performance assessments. Cost benefit analysis needed. 9

Next Steps Initial comment period ended on July 24, 2015 Comment period reopened to address extension requests received Reopened comment period expired September 21, 2015 Final rule to be sent to Commission by May 2016 Staff will then develop recommendation to Commission on need for second rulemaking on revising waste classification tables 10

Questions? 11