The WPP Bulletin United States Environmental Protection Agency A Message From the Director by Betsy Forinash any of our readers may not be aware, but EPA is in the midst of a crucial period in our over- sight of the WIPP's safety. The start of the WIPP recertification period is still over a year away, but it is actually the current year that will set the foundation for the work that we will do after DOE submits its recertification application. DOE has initiated a number of activities that will require EPA's attention well be- fore we begin the formal process of re- certification. During the summer and fall of 2002, we expect DOE to submit sev- eral proposals to EPA for changes to WIPP activities that are covered by our recertification. While these changes cover a variety of project areas, perhaps the most important ones concern the WIPP performance assessment, which is the cornerstone of DOE's demonstration of compliance with our public health and environmental radiation protection standards. We have been meeting often with DOE representatives to discuss their work in this area. EPA has advised DOE to submit proposed changes in 2002 to allow sufficient time for review in advance of recertification. I would also like to highlight an action that EPA has undertaken that is separate from recertification. We have proposed to change several provisions in our WIPP Compliance Criteria (40 CFR Part 194) through a rulemaking. The pro- posed changes are described in this Bul- letin. We welcome your input through written comments and public hearings, which we will hold in New Mexico in the fall. This issue of the WIPP Bulletin intro- duces yet another new feature, Ask EPA, in which we respond to ques- tions raised by stakeholders that are of general interest. Please feel free to sub- mit questions to our web page or toll- free information line. We will respond to requests for information, either indi- vidually or also in the Bulletin. Also, this issue's Technical Corner addresses one of the most important compliance topics during the initial certification: DOE's analysis of the pos- sible environmental releases of radioac- tive materials due to human intrusion into the WIPP (such as drilling for oil). Our hope is that the Technical Cor- ner will help to explain some of the more complicated technical issues in a straightforward, understandable way. Finally, you should have received a copy of our newest fact sheet on recer- tification. This fact sheet explains what's involved in recertification and when the key steps will occur. If you did not receive the fact sheet and would like one, please contact us. On behalf of all of us at EPA who work on the WIPP, I want to thank you for your continued interest in this impor- tant project. Inside this Issue A Message From the Director 7 News Notes 2 WIPP Dockets Locations 2 Waste Shipments 3 Focus on: Making Experience Count 4 Ask EPA 5 Technical Corner 6 EPA's WIPP Activities 2002 7 Contacts and Online Resources 7 Printed on recycled paper ------- WIPP News Notes What's New on the WIPP Website We have redesigned our WIPP website and added new user- friendly features. Recent changes include: A separate side bar/menu for easier site navigation An improved link for WIPP-related news as well as other recent devel- opments within EPA's Radiation Pro- tection Division (RPD) A separate inspections page for up- dated information on upcoming and completed inspections An updated Publications page with our latest WIPP Bulletins and Fact Sheets for 2002. EPA's IMew Electronic Docket (EDOCKET) On June 1st, 2002, EPA unveiled a new electronic docketing sys- tem, EDOCKET, for use by the Agency and the general public. This new system supports the President's new E- Government Strategy for WIPP Dockets Locations expanding electronic government to make interactions easier. What is a public docket? A docket is a collection of documents (letters, reports, reference materials, etc.) that are used to support EPA's reg- ulatory actions. EPA has three dockets for the WIPP program: A-92-56, which contains information about the WIPP compliance criteria, A-93-02, which contains information considered in making the WIPP cer- tification decision, and A-98-49, which contains new infor- mation that the EPA is reviewing to determine whether the certification should be modified, suspended, or revoked. Currently, all pertinent material is submitted to the dockets in their original, hard-copy form. This new electronic system will eliminate the use of cumbersome paper docu- ments and allow greater participation in Agency processes, including those related to the WIPP. Any interested parties may use EPA's EDOCKET at http://www.epa.gov/rpas EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) Air and Radiation Docket EPA West, Mail Code 6102T 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Washington, DC 20460 (202)260-7548 (all dockets) Carlsbad Public Library 101 S. Halagueno Carlsbad, NM 88220 (505)885-6776 (all dockets) Zimmerman Library Government Publications University of New Mexico Albuquerque, NM 87131 (505) 277-5441 (all dockets) Fogelson Library College of Santa Fe 1600 St. Michaels Drive Santa Fe, NM 87505 (505) 473-6576 (DocketA-93-02 only, EPA's WIPP Certification Decision) New Mexico State Library 1209 Camino Carlos Rey Santa Fe, NM 87505 (505)476-9717 (Docket A-98-49 only, EPA's WIPP Recertification Decision) to access the index of all available pub- lic dockets and view current docu- ments electronically. An advanced search option is also available, which will allow the user to search for a par- ticular item by tide, release date, docu- ment type, Federal Register citation, program office, or other various identi- fiers. The documents will be available for viewing and can be downloaded in .pdf (Adobe) format. Parties wishing to submit comments to EPA will be able to do so electronically. Once in the system, users will be able to search for or key in the ID number for the docket they wish to review. After agreeing to a privacy and dis- claimer notice, the user will then be al- lowed to submit their comments (along with any attachments) and enter their name, group, or organization if they wish to do so. The user will then re- ceive a confirmation notice and their comment will be published on the in- ternet after review by the docket staff. This allows the public to see their own comments and also comment on an- other user's comment(s). This process is similar to a feedback forum. Due to certain limitations and regula- tions, certain types of information (databases, copyrighted documents, etc.) will not be placed in the elec- tronic docket. For more information on what is or is not accepted or any other issue regarding EDOCKET, please refer to the Federal Register for May 31, 2002 (Vol. 67, No. 105; 38102- 38104), or contact Shivani Desai by phone (202-566-1674) or e-mail (desai.shivani@epa.gov). EPA's WIPP dockets are not yet available on EDOCKET. Stakeholder Meetings Several members of EPA's WIPP staff met this spring with representatives of the following WIPP stakeholder or- The WIPP Bulletin July 2002 ------- ganizations in New Mexico: the Envi- ronmental Evaluation Group, Nuclear Watch of New Mexico, the Southwest Research and Information Center, Sis- ters of Loretto, Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety, and the New Mexico Attorney General. The meetings took place in Albuquerque and Santa Fe in March. In addition, we spoke sepa- rately with representatives of Citizens Against Radioactive Dumping by con- ference call. At the meetings, EPA responded to questions on such topics as recertifica- tion planning, DOE's research on ac- tinide solubility, and recent peer reviews conducted by DOE. EPA also briefed participants about the pro- posed changes to the WIPP Compli- ance Criteria (see Focus on article). A general topic that was discussed was the need to make information pro- duced by EPA and DOE easily accessi- ble to the public. One avenue that EPA is pursuing in this regard is an elec- tronic docket that will make materials available to anyone with access to the Internet. Several stakeholders re- quested that files posted electronically be readily downloadable, and that re- quests for comment be staggered to fa- cilitate public review. We will take this request into account when we post documents online. EPA Completes Review of DOE's Annual WIPP Change Report EPA requires that DOE submit an an- nual WIPP Change Report that doc- uments any changes that were made to the WIPP program during the previous year. In September 1998 we provided DOE with reporting guidance. We re- view the changing information and de- termine whether the initial certification should be modified, suspended, or re- voked. Sometimes DOE may want to make changes to their activities to make improvements or increase effi- ciency. In most cases, these changes are insignificant. If EPA thinks the changes are significant, we may ask for public comments to assist in our re- view. Details of changes to the WIPP that EPA has reviewed since 1998 may be found in our recertification docket. DOE submitted its fourth (FY 2001) an- nual WIPP Change Report on Novem- ber 13, 2001. EPA evaluated it along with requested supplemental informa- tion. On June 13, 2002, we determined that the reported changes were not sig- nificant and do not require a modifica- tion, suspension, or revocation of our Certification Decision of May 13, 1998. We expect to receive the 2002 change report in November. Waste Characteriza- tion Inspections In December 2001 EPA inspected the Hanford Site Plutonium Finish- ing Plant to verify its continued com- pliance with our regulations. During this inspection we also examined the use of new waste characterization systems at the site. Based on our inspection, we approved the site to continue characterizing transuranic waste using both the new methods we inspected and previously ap- proved systems. In April, 2002, EPA inspected the Idaho National Engineering and Envi- ronmental Laboratory (INEEL) to ex- amine new waste characterization systems and a new waste stream (or- ganic sludge). Based on our inspec- tion, we determined the site was in compliance with our regulations for characterizing the waste streams and equipment examined. The reports for these inspections may be found in our docket (A-98-49, Items II-A4-20 and 21). Waste Shipments The number of shipments from transuranic waste sites to the WIPP as of June 30 is listed below. Each shipment could contain as many as 42 drums of radioactive waste. Savannah River Rocky Flats Los Alamos Idaho Hanford 12002 The WIPP Bulletin 3 ------- Focus On: Making Experience Count Proposed Changes to EPA's Compliance Criteria for the Recertification of the WIPP It has been four years since we cer- tified the WIPP as a disposal facil- ity for defense transuranic (TRU) wastes. In that period, we have con- ducted dozens of regulatory inspec- tions. Now we seek to apply that experience to the WIPP Compliance Criteria to keep them comprehensive and appropriate, while also improving process and resource efficiencies. What are the proposed changes? Proposed revisions to the compliance criteria include: (1) addition of a process for making minor changes to the provisions of the Compliance Cri- teria; (2) changes to the approval process for waste characterization pro- grams at Department of Energy transuranic waste sites; (3) changes to allow for the submission of copies of compliance applications and reference materials in a non-paper format (e.g., compact disk); and (4) replacement of the term "process knowledge" with "acceptable knowledge." The second item is the most significant change and the focus of this article. What is our Role? On May 13, 1998, EPA announced its final compliance certification deci- sion. Since March 1999, the WIPP has received hundreds of waste ship- ments for disposal. EPA has regula- tory authority over the WIPP for the operational lifetime of the facility, ap- proximately 35 years. As part of our regulatory role at the WIPP, we re- view, analyze, inspect, and approve WIPP-related activities throughout the DOE complex to ensure that DOE operates the WIPP facility in compli- ance with our regulations. How are we making our experience count? One of the most critical aspects of our ongoing regulatory oversight involves the inspection of waste generator sites that wish to send their waste to the WIPP for disposal. WIPP certification is based on specific assumptions made about the composition of the waste destined for disposal. It is cru- cial that waste composition be mea- sured and tracked, so that established limits for waste components impor- tant to the safe performance of the WIPP facility are not exceeded. At the time of the final certification, DOE submitted a comprehensive waste characterization plan for their facili- ties, but was able to demonstrate their waste characterization capability at only one site for a single "waste stream." A "waste stream" is defined by DOE as waste material generated from a single process or activity that is simi- lar in material, physical form, iso- topic make-up, and hazardous constituents. Given the limited demonstration of DOE's waste char- acterization capability, EPA issued a condition in its final certification that precludes DOE from shipping waste to the WIPP until EPA has approved the processes for characterizing wastes destined for disposal. Section 194.8(b) establishes the process we use to approve waste shipments from the waste generator sites to the WIPP facility. Under the section 194.8(b) approval process, we must inspect and approve each DOE TRU generator waste site that wishes to ship waste, by conducting an in- spection for each waste stream or group of waste streams proposed for disposal at WIPP. We also must pub- lish a Federal Register notice to an- nounce the inspection, open a 30-day comment period, and solicit public comment on relevant DOE docu- ments. If a site receives our approval to ship a single waste stream or group of waste streams, that site may not ship a different waste stream until we perform an additional inspection under section 194.8(b). After four years of regulatory experi- ence, we have determined that the process used to approve waste ship- ments to the WIPP may be improved. To date, we have performed over 20 inspections under 194.8(b). Five major DOE sites have been approved to ship a variety of waste streams to the WIPP. EPA inspectors have been able to witness and verify DOE's ability to characterize numerous waste streams. Our experience in verifying DOE's compliance shows that it is not always ideal to have waste generator sites demonstrate their characterization ca- pabilities on individual waste streams. The focus of our inspection program will be on the overall waste character- ization program at the site. For exam- ple, we will evaluate how DOE staff use their knowledge of waste charac- terization processes and waste types to select and use the right waste char- acterization process for the particular characteristics of the waste destined for disposal. We have also observed that the public notice process in 194.8 has proven to be confusing to the public, stakehold- ers, and DOE. The proposed rule will The WIPP Bulletin July 2002 ------- Ask EPA What is EPA's process for recertifying WIPP? DOE is required by law to submit documentation that the WIPP remains in compliance with EPA's certification. DOE must submit the first recertification application in March 2004, five years after the first receipt of waste at WIPP in March 1999. As with the original WIPP application, EPA will examine the information submitted by DOE to deter- mine if it is complete. EPA may request additional infor- mation from DOE. Once EPA has complete information, EPA has six months to determine whether or not to recer- tify WIPP. During these six months EPA will conduct a thorough evaluation of the application, paying particular attention to information or conditions that may have changed since the original 1998 certification. EPA will also request at least 30 days of public comment on DOE's re- certification application to help form our decisions. Once EPA's evaluation is complete, EPA will issue a determina- tion on recertification in the Federal Register and will pro- vide supporting documentation for our decision. As the time for recertification approaches, we will provide more updates and details on our activities and plans. Focus on: Making Experience Count (continued from page 4) clarify this process. Only one approval per site will be issued under 194.8. Under the new process, EPA will conduct in- spections at each site and request public comment on EPA's inspection report and proposed approval for a site. (Cur- rently, we request comment on site waste characterization plans that are made available to the public before inspec- tion.) Reporting requirements will be assigned to each site to address changes that may occur in the waste character- ization program after site approval. Information received through the reporting requirements will be used to deter- mine when additional inspections are necessary. These in- spections will be carried out to confirm continued compliance and verify the adequacy of changes in the ap- proved waste characterization programs. We believe the proposed process will offer the same level of oversight for waste characterization activities, make site ap- provals more transparent, and increase EPA's control over re- sources while maintaining confidence in DOE's compliance. Ask EPA highlights questions received from citizens on our WIPP Information Line, our WIPP Web Site, at our stakeholder meetings, and from our newsletter readers. What is RH Waste? RH (remote-handled) waste is a type of radioactive waste with a surface radiation dose rate of greater than 200 mrem per hour. RH waste emits higher levels of penetrating gamma radiation and, therefore, must be handled by remotely-oper- ated machines. Like contact-handled transuranic waste (cur- rently disposed of at the WIPP repository) RH waste may be disposed of at the WIPP if the EPA approves such disposal. Only a small portion of the volume of wastes potentially des- tined for disposal at the WIPP is remote-handled waste. To obtain an EPA approval, DOE sites generating or storing RH waste (for example, Hanford and Oak Ridge) must show that the radioactivity of RH waste that would be disposed of at the WIPP facility will not exceed the limit imposed by law. EPA is expecting a proposal from DOE for handling RH waste during the summer. What areas of expertise are repre- sented on EPA's WIPP Team and how can I contact them if I have questions on EPA's WIPP Program? EPA's WIPP Team consists of experts in the fields of chem- istry, environmental science, geology, engineering, hydrol- ogy and communications. The WIPP staff are located in Washington, DC; and Dallas, Texas. Members of the team conduct regular audits and inspections of WIPP-related ac- tivities at the WIPP site and at other DOE facilities. If you have questions about our WIPP regulatory program, you can leave a message or question on our WIPP Information (202) 564-9310. You may also contact us on the internet through our webmaster at: webmaster.oria@epa.gov. A member of the WIPP Team will respond to you directly and promptly. > 2002 The WIPP Bulletin 5 ------- WIPP Technical Comer A Look at Human Intrusion into the WIPP In our last Bulletin we discussed the Features, Events and Processes (FEPs) that were compiled and ex- amined for evaluating the long-term performance of the WIPP repository. In that article, you may recall, we stated that the human intrusion scenarios are the most important to the containment of waste. In this Technical Corner, we will discuss the human intrusion sce- narios specifically. Analyses have shown that the only way radioactive waste could be released from the WIPP repository is if someone intrudes into the repository or if intru- sions elsewhere in the vicinity of WIPP have impacts on the repository. DOE has developed a list of ways that vari- ous intrusions could impact the reposi- tory. These are called human intrusion scenarios. Most of the scenarios involve Sample Drilling Scenario Drilling Rig Land Surface Culebra Waste Disposal RoomsI -Borehole Filled Shaft- Key Pressurized Brine (Not to scale) - i Possible pathways for radionuclide releases resulting from human intrusion some type of drilling or drilling prac- tices. The intrusion scenario that will have the most impact on radioactive waste releases is one that involves a borehole that is drilled directly through a stack of waste drums. This event is the most sig- nificant because there are three ways that radioactive waste could leave the repository: cuttings, cavings and spallings. 1) Cuttings are the actual waste cut out by the action of the drill bit. 2) Cavings are the waste that is re- moved or washed from the sides of the borehole by the action of drilling fluid flowing in the borehole. 3) Spallings are the waste that can be forced into the borehole of the sur- rounding waste room by the action of pressurized gas in the waste room. These mechanisms combine to pro- duce the greatest releases when modeling the WIPP. A great deal of work has been done to attempt to understand cuttings, cav- ings, and in particular, spallings. Spallings is driven by gas pressure. therefore a clear understanding of the mechanisms that create gas in the waste rooms is very important. Gas pressure in the waste rooms is created by the degradation of materials in the waste. For example, if there is suffi- cient water in the repository, the steel 55 gallon drums used to transport waste to WIPP and other metals will rust and produce gas. If the pressure generated in a waste room is high enough when a drilling intrusion hap- pens, a spallings release could occur. (continued on page 7) The WIPP Bulletin July 2002 ------- Technical Corner EPA and DOE also considered the im- pact of mining for natural resource, such as potash mining, near WIPP. This human intrusion scenario may not directly impact the waste rooms, but it may affect the transport of waste from WIPP. For example, potash mining hundreds of feet above the WIPP may indirectly change the characteristics of shallower rock for- mations, such as the Culebra, and may cause brine to flow more readily through those formations. EPA's analyses of the human intru- sion scenarios showed that even with human intrusion into the WIPP repository, EPA's containment re- quirements will be met and the site will remain safe. The human intrusion scenarios can be very complex. They cover many im- portant topics that integrate all that we currently know about the WIPP site. In our next issue of the WIPP Bulletin, we will consider one of the human in- trusion scenarios that was important during EPA's Certification Decision: Fluid Injection. EPA's WIPP Activities 2OO2 Summer Proposed Technical Meet- ing with DOE (Location: TBD) DOE's Proposal for Remote Handled Waste (RH) at WIPP Proposal on Revisions to EPA's Compliance Criteria for the WIPP Fall Proposed Technical Meeting with DOE (Location: TBD) Public Hearings in New Mexico on EPA's Proposed Revisions to WIPP Compliance Criteria Meetings with Stakeholder Groups in New Mexico Performance Assessment Related Proposal from DOE Publish Final Decision on Revisions to EPA's Compliance Criteria for the WIPP Dates for EPA's WIPP Activities are based on projected time- frames for receiving infor- mation from DOE For A/lore Information About the WIPP More information on EPA's continued activities concerning the WIPP can be obtained from any of EPA's five public dockets (Washington DC, and Albu- querque, Carlsbad, and Santa Fe, New Mexico). The Docket number for EPA's recertification activities at the WIPP is A-98-49. The pre-certification and certi- fication decision Docket is A-93-02. For the latest information on EPA activities regarding the WIPP, please call EPA's recorded WIPP Information Line at ad all about EPA's WIPP Program on the Internet. EPA's WIPP Homepage is an excellent source for current information on EPA's WIPP activ- ities. From the Homepage you can also download EPA documents and docket information. EPA's WIPP Homepage ad- dress is: www.epa.gov/radiation/wipp/ Contacts and On-Line Resources WIPP Transportation Information* WIPP Facility Dennis Hurtt TRU Waste U.S. Department of Energy Transportation Office of Public Affairs National Transportation Program Transportation Anne Clarke Issues Coordinator of New Mexico's Radioactive Waste Task Force, State of New Mexico Richard Swedberg Health Physicist U.S. Department of Transportation Ron Ross Program Manager Western Governors' Association Debbie Cohen National Safety Council (505) 234-7327 (505) 476-3224 (303) 969-6744, ext. 0363 (303) 623-9378 (202) 293-2270, ext. 478 www.wipp.carlsbad.nm.us www.ntp.doe.gov www.emnrd.state.nm.us/wipp www.fhwa.dot.gov/omc/omchome.html www.westgov.org/wipp www.nsc.org/ehc/wipp.htm *EPA does not regulate waste transportation to WIPP, however, we receive many requests for this information. July 2002 The WIPP Bulletin 7 ------- SEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency (6608J) Washington, DC 20460 First Class Mail Postage and Fees Paid EPA G-35 Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300 Forwarding Service Requested For Further Information on EPA's WIPP Activities Pleasp Hall thp WIPP Information Line or visit our website at: http://www.epa.gov/radiation/wipp Office of Radiation and Indoor Air (6608J) EPA 402-N-02-002 www.epa.gov/radiation July 2002 ------- |