Public Comment Response Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Public Comment Response Report December 1993 GOV^ ENTS 1S94 THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Board Department of Public Health Department of Environmental Protection Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2014 https://archive.org/details/publicconinientresOOmass Public Comment Response Report December 1993 THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Board Department of Public Health Department of Environmental Protection Publication No. 17488 - 165 - 1400 - 1/94 - 4.00 - C. R. printed on recycled paper Approved by; Philmore Anderson III, State Purchasing Agent Table of Contents Page Introduction 1 Overall Summary 5 Comments on VOLUME I of the Draft Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Plan (with responses) 11 Comments on VOLUME 11 of the Draft Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Plan (with responses) 21 Comments on the Draft LLRW Facility Operator Selection Regulations (345 CMR 3.00) (with responses) 115 Comments on the Draft Department of Public Health Licensing and Op)erational Regulations for LLRW Facilities (Part M - 105 CMR 120.800) and LLRW Minimization Regulations (Part Ml - 105 CMR 120.890) (with responses) 119 Comments on the Draft Department of Environmental Protection LLRW Facility Site Selection Criteria regulations (310 CMR 41.00) (with responses) 137 List of Commenters 1 47 Introduction This Public Comment Response Report summarizes the comments received on draft documents relating to the management of low-level radioactive waste (LLRW) in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The -- documents were issued January 21 , 1993. by three state government agencies the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Board (a nine-member board appointed by the Governor), the Department of Public Health (DPH), and the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) - in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 1 1 1 H, the Massachusetts Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Act (referenced throughout this report as "Chapter 111H"). In addition to sumnnarizing the comments, this report includes brief responses from the three agencies, so that the reader can see how the agencies dealt with each comment raised by the public. Because each of the three agencies decided which comments to respond to, how to group the comments, and how to respond to the comments, the format and style of the sections of this report differ accordingly. Even in the overall summary tfiat follows this introduction, the sections on the DPH and DEP regulations were written by the staffs of those departments. Overview State and federal laws require the Management Board to decide whether or not the Commonwealth should Identify a Massachusetts site and build and operate a facility for the storage, treatment, or disposal of LLRW. Another option would be to enter into an agreement to have another state take Massachusetts waste, though efforts in this direction to date have not been fruitful. A third option would be for each business and institution generating LLRW to store its waste temporarily on its own premises, until a longer-range disposal solution is agreed upon. On February 16, 1994, at the end of a public hearing in Boston, the Board will choose one option or a combination of options. In accordance with state law, the Management Board cannot make such choices until the documents have been adopted. The draft documents spell out how the management of LLRW can take place in the future. These documents, and the agencies responsible for them (shown in parentheses), are: • The draft LLRW Management Plan and implementing regulations (Management Board). The draft Management Plan provides background information, details options for long-term LLRW nruinagement, and explains the need for dependable access to a disposal facility. Its recom- mendations Include the minimization of LLRW and technical assistance to generators storing LLRW on their premises. In the event the Management Board votes to site a disposal facility in Massachusetts, the draft also recommends grants to communities that wish to evaluate the potential economic impacts of having such a facility in their towns, and a system of property value guarantees. Also recommended is the segregation by short and long radioactive half-life of LLRW placed in a disposal facility, in order to enhance the safety and efficiency of any retrieval which may be required later. • Draft regulations establishing criteria for the selection of a company, to be chosen by the site community, that would operate a facility, should facility siting t>egin (Management Board). • Draft regulations regarding the licensing, development, operation, closure, post-closure observation and maintenance, and institutional control of any storage, treatment, or disposal facility for LLRW, should the Management Board vote (after all the draft documents have been revised, finalized, and adopted) to site such a facility in Massachusetts (DPH). • Draft regulations to encourage LLRW generators to use fewer radioactive materials and /or types tfiat decay relatively soon, and to otherwise minimize the amount of LLRW they produce (DPH). Public Comment Response Report - Massachusetts LLRW Management Program Page 1 •6 • Draft regulations that spell out methods for identifying potential sites, and ultimately a superior site, for an LLRW disposal, treatment, or storage facility, should the Management Board vote to t>egin the siting process (DEP). • A statement on the put)lic health, environmental, social, and economic impacts of LLRW management practices and regulations proposed by the Department of Public Health (DPH). This document does not require adoption. Until the close of the comment period on July 15, 1993, the drafts unden/vent a thorough review by the citizens of the Commonwealth, as required by Chapter 1 1 1 H. The drafts were mailed to public libraries, chief town and city officials, and other interested individuals and organizations. To receive comments on the documents, 17 taped and transcribed public meetings were held in the following cities and towns (1993 dates in parentheses): Boston (2/22), Plymouth (2/23). Worcester (2/25), Springfield (3/2), Greenfield (3/3), Pittsfield (3/4), Attleboro (3/9), Haverhill (3/10), West Springfield (3/16), Athol (5/12), North Adams (5/13), Palmer (5/18). Concord (5/26). Worcester (5/27), Lee (6/2), Harvard (6/10), and Brockton (6/16). More comments were gleaned from flyers and other printed nr»aterials handed out by participants at the above meetings; from minutes of regular Management Board meetings, which included public comment periods; from notes taken by the Management Board's Public Participation Coordinator at six informal briefing sessions held in Taunton (1 /25), Fitchburg (1 /26), Worthington (2/2), Amherst (2/3), Sheffield (2/3), and Duxbury (2/10) (all dates are 1993); from letters; from a petition; and from telephone calls. Because It comes from a variety of sources, LLRW takes many forms. For example, nuclear power plants dispose of contaminated tools, replaced piping, and sludges generated in the course of normal maintenance. Contaminated glassware and various liquid wastes are generated in the manufacture and use of radioactive tracers, needed for medical and biological research at Massachusetts universities, hospitals, and private laboratories. Other waste forms include latex gloves, disposable protective clothing, paper towels, and other items used to protect workers and clean up work areas at facilities where radioactive materials are used. Some LLRW can be stored where it is generated, until it decays to natural background levels of radioactivity. However, the waste containing radioactivity concentrated enough and /or long-lasting enough to require long-term isolation is of special concern because It requires long-term management solutions. Currently, such waste is shipped to a disposal facility in Barnwell, South Carolina. But access to this facility is expect- ed to be cut off in the near future. More than 400 hospitals, universities, biotechnology firms, and other businesses are licensed to use radioactive materials In Massachusetts. In the most recent annual survey by the Management Board, 263 of these organizations said they generated LLRW in 1992. Of these waste generators, 106 indicated they had shipped at least a portion of their waste out of state during 1992. By volume, after compaction and other treatments, this shipped waste totaled 1 19,004 cubic feet. By radioactivity, the total came to 76,363 curies. Most of this waste will decay to background levels within 150 years. A small amount, however, will remain radioactive beyorxi this time. Report Format The Management Board sections of this Public Comment Response Report (comments and responses relating to VOLUMES I and II of the LLRW Management Plan and to the Operator Selection Regulations) have evolved from a series of discussion documents created by the Management Board's staff in order to facilitate the Board's deliberations of the put>lic comments on the draft documents. These discussions began as prelimir^ry discussions before the end of the public comment period on July 15, 1993. After that date, the Board spent the rest of the year going through every comment relating to the draft Management Plan, the draft Management Plan implementation regulations, and the draft Operator Selection Regulations, this time deciding how to resporxj to each comment for this report. Some comments prompted the Board to revise the draft documents. All decisions