83 FR 50909 - Request for Public Comment on the U.S. Department of Energy Interpretation of High-Level Radioactive Waste
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 196 (October 10, 2018)
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 196 (October 10, 2018)
| Page Range | 50909-50911 | |
| FR Document | 2018-22002 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 10, 2018)] [Notices] [Pages 50909-50911] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-22002] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Request for Public Comment on the U.S. Department of Energy Interpretation of High-Level Radioactive Waste AGENCY: Office of Environmental Management, U.S. Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of public comment period. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) provides this Notice and request for public comment on its interpretation of the definition of the statutory term ``high-level radioactive waste'' (HLW) as set forth in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. This statutory term indicates that not all wastes from the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel (``reprocessing wastes'') are HLW, and DOE interprets the statutory term such that some reprocessing wastes may be classified as not HLW (non-HLW) and may be disposed of in accordance with their radiological characteristics. DATES: DOE invites stakeholders to submit written comments on its interpretation. The 60-day public comment period begins on October 10, 2018 and ends on December 10, 2018. Only comments received through one of the methods described below will be accepted. DOE will consider all comments received or postmarked by December 10, 2018. ADDRESSES: Please direct comments to: (a) Email: Send comments to [email protected]. Please submit comments in MicrosoftTM Word, or PDF file format, and avoid the use of encryption. (b) Mail: Send to the following address: Theresa Kliczewski, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management, Office of Waste and Materials Management (EM-4.2), 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Theresa Kliczewski at [email protected] or at U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management, Office of Waste and Materials Management (EM- 4.2), 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585. Telephone: (202) 586-3301. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Background DOE manages large inventories of legacy waste resulting from spent nuclear fuel (SNF) reprocessing activities from atomic energy defense programs, e.g., nuclear weapons [[Page 50910]] production. DOE also manages a small quantity of vitrified waste from a demonstration of commercial SNF reprocessing. Reprocessing generally refers to the dissolution of irradiated SNF in acid, generating liquid or viscous wastes, and the chemical processing to separate the fission products or transuranic elements of the SNF from the desired elements of plutonium and uranium, which are recovered for reuse. Liquid reprocessing wastes have been or are currently stored in large underground tanks at three DOE sites: Savannah River Site (SRS) (South Carolina), Idaho National Laboratory (INL) (Idaho), and the Office of River Protection at the Hanford Site (Washington). Solid reprocessing wastes are liquid wastes that have been immobilized in solid form and are currently stored at SRS, INL, and the West Valley Demonstration Project (New York). DOE's interpretation of HLW is that reprocessing waste is non-HLW if the waste: I. Does not exceed concentration limits for Class C low-level radioactive waste as set out in section 61.55 of title 10, Code of Federal Regulations; or II. Does not require disposal in a deep geologic repository and meets the performance objectives of a disposal facility as demonstrated through a performance assessment conducted in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements. Under DOE's interpretation, waste meeting either of these criteria is non-HLW and may be classified and disposed of in accordance with its radiological characteristics. At this time, DOE is not making--and has not made--any decisions on the disposal of any particular waste stream. Disposal decisions, when made, will be based on the consideration of public comments in response to this Notice and prior input and consultation with appropriate state and local regulators and stakeholders. DOE will continue its current practice of managing all its reprocessing wastes as if they were HLW unless and until a specific waste is determined to be another category of waste based on detailed technical assessments of its characteristics and an evaluation of potential disposal pathways. B. High-Level Waste Interpretation DOE interprets the term ``high-level radioactive waste'', as stated in the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 as amended (AEA),\1\ and the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 as amended (NWPA) \2\ in a manner that defines DOE reprocessing wastes to be classified as either HLW or non-HLW based on the radiological characteristics of the waste and their ability to meet appropriate disposal facility requirements. The basis for DOE's interpretation comes from the AEA and NWPA definition of HLW: \1\ 42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq. This definition of HLW was first enacted in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended, and incorporated into the AEA in 1988. \2\ 42 U.S.C. 10101 et seq. (A) the highly radioactive material resulting from the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel, including liquid waste produced directly in reprocessing and any solid material derived from such liquid waste that contains fission products in sufficient concentrations; and (B) other highly radioactive material that the Commission, consistent with existing law, determines by rule requires permanent isolation.\3\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ 42 U.S.C. 10101(12)(A), (B). In paragraph A, Congress limited HLW to those materials that are both ``highly radioactive'' and ``resulting from the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel.'' Reprocessing generates liquid wastes, with the first cycle of reprocessing operations containing the majority of the fission products and transuranic elements removed from the SNF. Thus, in paragraph A, Congress distinguished HLW with regard to its form as both ``liquid waste produced directly in reprocessing'' and ``any solid material derived from such liquid waste that contains fission products in sufficient concentrations.'' In paragraph B, Congress defined HLW also to include ``other highly radioactive material'' that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) determines by rule ``requires permanent isolation.'' HLW under paragraph B includes highly radioactive material regardless of whether the waste is from reprocessing or some other activity. Further, under paragraph B, classification of material as HLW is based on its radiological characteristics and whether the material requires permanent isolation. The common element of these statutory paragraphs defining HLW is the requirement and recognition that the waste be ``highly radioactive.'' Additionally, both paragraphs reflect a primary purpose of the NWPA, which is to define those materials for which disposal in a deep geologic repository is the only method that would provide reasonable assurance that the public and the environment will be adequately protected from the radiological hazards the materials pose. The terms ``highly radioactive,'' and ``sufficient concentrations'' are not defined in the AEA or the NWPA. By providing in paragraph A that liquid reprocessing waste is HLW only if it is ``highly radioactive,'' and that solid waste derived from liquid reprocessing waste is HLW only if it is ``highly radioactive'' and contains fission products in ``sufficient concentrations'' without further defining these standards, Congress left it to DOE to determine when these standards are met. Given Congress' intent that not all reprocessing waste is HLW, it is appropriate for DOE to use its expertise to interpret the definition of HLW, consistent with proper statutory construction, to distinguish waste that is non-HLW from waste that is HLW. The DOE interpretation is informed by the radiological characteristics of reprocessing waste and whether the waste can be disposed of safely in a facility other than a deep geologic repository. This interpretation is based upon the principles of the NRC's regulatory structure for the disposal of low-level radioactive wastes. \4\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ NRC licensing requirements for the land disposal of LLW, originally promulgated in 1962, are codified in Part 61 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 10 CFR part 61. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In its regulations, NRC has identified four classes of low-level radioactive waste (LLW)--Class A, B or C--for which near-surface disposal is safe for public health and the environment, and greater- than-Class C LLW for which near-surface disposal may be safe for public health and the environment. This waste classification regime is based on the concentration levels of a combination of specified short-lived and long-lived radionuclides in a waste stream, with Class C LLW having the highest concentration levels. Waste that exceeds the Class C levels is evaluated on a case-specific basis to determine whether it requires disposal in a deep geologic repository, or whether an alternative disposal facility can be demonstrated to provide safe disposal. The need for disposal in a deep geologic repository results from a combination of two radiological characteristics of the waste: High activity radionuclides, including fission products, which generate high levels of radiation; and long-lived radionuclides which, if not properly disposed of, would present a risk to human health and the environment for hundreds of thousands of years. Because the NRC has long-standing regulations that set concentration limits for radionuclides in waste that is acceptable for near-surface disposal, it is reasonable to interpret ``highly radioactive'' to mean, at a minimum, [[Page 50911]] radionuclide concentrations greater than the Class C limits. Reprocessing waste that does not exceed the Class C limits is non-HLW. DOE interprets ``sufficient concentrations'' in the statutory context in which the definition was enacted, which, as discussed above, is focused on protecting the public and the environment from the hazards posed by nuclear waste. In addition to the characteristics of the waste itself, the risk that reprocessing waste poses to human health and the environment depends on the physical characteristics of the disposal facility and that facility's ability to safely isolate the waste from the human environment. Relevant characteristics of a disposal facility may include the depth of disposal, use of engineered barriers, and geologic, hydrologic, and geochemical features of the site. Taking these considerations into account, it is reasonable to interpret ``sufficient concentrations'' to mean concentrations of fission products in combination with long-lived radionuclides that would require disposal in a deep geologic repository. Accordingly, under DOE's interpretation, solid waste that exceeds the NRC's Class C limits would be subject to detailed characterization and technical analysis of the radiological characteristics of the waste. This, combined with the physical characteristics of a specific disposal facility and the method of disposal, would determine whether the facility could meet its performance objectives, and if the waste can be disposed of safely. This approach would be governed by the waste characterization and analysis process and performance objectives for the disposal facility established by the applicable regulator, and thereby protective of human health and the environment. The DOE interpretation does not require the removal of key radionuclides to the maximum extent that is technically and economically practical before DOE can define waste as non-HLW. Nothing in the statutory text of the AEA or the NWPA requires that radionuclides be removed to the maximum extent technically and economically practical prior to determining whether waste is HLW. DOE has determined that the removal of radionuclides from waste that already meets existing legal and technical requirements for safe transportation and disposal is unnecessary and inefficient, and does not benefit human health or the environment. To the contrary, it potentially presents a greater risk to human health and the environment because it prolongs the temporary storage of waste. Therefore, under DOE's interpretation, waste resulting from the reprocessing of SNF is non-HLW if the waste: I. Does not exceed concentration limits for Class C low-level radioactive waste as set out in section 61.55 of title 10, Code of Federal Regulations; or II. Does not require disposal in a deep geologic repository and meets the performance objectives of a disposal facility as demonstrated through a performance assessment conducted in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements. Reprocessing waste meeting either I or II of the above is non-HLW, and may be classified and disposed in accordance with its radiological characteristics in an appropriate facility provided all applicable requirements of the disposal facility are met. C. Request for Comments The Department specifically requests comments on its interpretation that reprocessing waste meeting either of the two criterion stated above is non-HLW. This Notice is intended to solicit public feedback on the DOE interpretation to better understand stakeholder perspectives prior to appropriate input and consultation with affected state and local regulators and any waste disposal classification decisions. The Department will consider all comments received during the public comment period, and modify its proposed approach, as appropriate, based on public comment. Signed at Washington, DC, on October 4, 2018. Anne Marie White, Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management. [FR Doc. 2018-22002 Filed 10-9-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 10, 2018 / Notices 50909
compartment temperature from falling this section for compliance, marketing, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
below 42 °F. or other purposes unless that basic
DOE has reviewed PAPRSA’s waiver model has been tested in accordance Request for Public Comment on the
extension request in Case Number RF– with the provisions set forth above and U.S. Department of Energy
043. Based on this review, DOE has such representations fairly disclose the Interpretation of High-Level
determined that the basic model results of such testing. Radioactive Waste
specified in PAPRSA’s current waiver AGENCY: Office of Environmental
extension request incorporates the same (4) This Extension of Waiver shall
remain in effect consistent with the Management, U.S. Department of
design characteristics as those basic Energy.
models covered under the waiver in provisions of 10 CFR 430.27. This Order
will terminate on October 28, 2019, in ACTION: Notice of public comment
Case Number RF–043 such that the DOE
conjunction with the compliance date period.
test procedure evaluates that basic
model in a manner that is that applies to the standards published SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of
unrepresentative of its actual energy on October 28, 2016 for miscellaneous Energy (DOE or the Department)
use. DOE also determined that applying refrigeration products (‘‘MREFs’’). See provides this Notice and request for
the alternate procedure specified in 81 FR 75194 (Oct. 28, 2016). Testing to public comment on its interpretation of
Case Number RF–043 will allow for the demonstrate compliance with those the definition of the statutory term
accurate measurement of the energy use standards must be performed in ‘‘high-level radioactive waste’’ (HLW) as
of the consumer refrigerator basic model accordance with the MREF test set forth in the Atomic Energy Act of
identified by PAPRSA in its waiver procedure final rule. See 81 FR 46768 1954 and the Nuclear Waste Policy Act
extension request. (July 18, 2016) (MREF test procedure of 1982. This statutory term indicates
III. Order final rule) and 81 FR 49868 (July 29, that not all wastes from the reprocessing
2016) (MREF test procedure final rule of spent nuclear fuel (‘‘reprocessing
After careful consideration of all the correction notice). wastes’’) are HLW, and DOE interprets
material submitted by PAPRSA in this the statutory term such that some
matter, it is Ordered that: (5) This Extension of Waiver is issued
on the condition that the statements, reprocessing wastes may be classified as
(1) PAPRSA must, as of the date of not HLW (non-HLW) and may be
publication of this Extension of Waiver representations, and documents
disposed of in accordance with their
in the Federal Register, test and rate the provided by PAPRSA are valid. If
radiological characteristics.
combination cooler-refrigerator basic PAPRSA makes any modifications to the
DATES: DOE invites stakeholders to
model PR5181JKBC as set forth in controls or configurations of these basic
submit written comments on its
paragraph (2). models, the waiver will no longer be
interpretation. The 60-day public
(2) The alternate test procedure for the valid and PAPRSA will either be comment period begins on October 10,
basic model listed in paragraph (1) is required to use the current Federal test 2018 and ends on December 10, 2018.
the test procedure in 10 CFR part 430, method or submit a new application for Only comments received through one of
subpart B, appendix A, with the a test procedure waiver. DOE may the methods described below will be
exception that PAPRSA must calculate rescind or modify this Extension of accepted. DOE will consider all
energy consumption using a correction Waiver at any time if it determines the comments received or postmarked by
factor (‘‘K-factor’’) of 0.85, as follows. factual basis underlying the petition for
The energy consumption is defined December 10, 2018.
extension of waiver is incorrect, or the ADDRESSES: Please direct comments to:
by:
results from the alternate test procedure (a) Email: Send comments to
If compartment temperatures are
below their respective standardized are unrepresentative of the basic HLWnotice@em.doe.gov. Please submit
temperatures for both test settings models’ true energy consumption comments in MicrosoftTM Word, or PDF
(according to 10 CFR part 430, subpart characteristics. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(1). file format, and avoid the use of
B, appendix A, sec. 6.2.4.1): Likewise, PAPRSA may request that encryption.
DOE rescind or modify the Extension of (b) Mail: Send to the following
E = (ET1 × 0.85) + IET.
Waiver if the petitioner discovers an address: Theresa Kliczewski, U.S.
If compartment temperatures are not Department of Energy, Office of
error in the information provided to
below their respective standardized Environmental Management, Office of
temperatures for both test settings, the DOE as part of its petition, determines
that the Extension of Waiver is no Waste and Materials Management (EM–
higher of the two values calculated by 4.2), 1000 Independence Avenue SW,
the following two formulas (according longer needed, or for other appropriate
reasons. 10 CFR 430.27(k)(2). Washington, DC 20585.
to 10 CFR part 430, subpart B, appendix FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
A, sec. 6.2.4.2): (6) Granting of this Extension of Theresa Kliczewski at HLWnotice@
Energy consumption of the ‘‘cooler Waiver does not release PAPRSA from em.doe.gov or at U.S. Department of
compartment’’: the certification requirements set forth Energy, Office of Environmental
ECooler Compartment = (ET1 + at 10 CFR part 429. Management, Office of Waste and
[(ET2¥ET1) × (55 °F¥TW1)/ Signed in Washington, DC, on October 2, Materials Management (EM–4.2), 1000
(TW2¥TW1)]) × 0.85 + IET 2018. Independence Avenue SW, Washington,
Energy consumption of the ‘‘fresh Kathleen B. Hogan, DC 20585. Telephone: (202) 586–3301.
food compartment’’: Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
EFreshFood Compartment = (ET1 + Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and Renewable
[(ET2¥ET1) × (39 °F¥TBC1)/ Energy.
A. Background
(TBC2¥TBC1)]) × 0.85 + IET. DOE manages large inventories of
[FR Doc. 2018–22003 Filed 10–9–18; 8:45 am]
(3) Representations. PAPRSA may not legacy waste resulting from spent
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
make representations about the energy nuclear fuel (SNF) reprocessing
consumption of the combination cooler- activities from atomic energy defense
refrigerator identified in paragraph (1) of programs, e.g., nuclear weapons
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:20 Oct 09, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM 10OCN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_51105/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 10, 2018 / Notices 50911
radionuclide concentrations greater than because it prolongs the temporary Filed Date: 10/3/18.
the Class C limits. Reprocessing waste storage of waste. Accession Number: 20181003–5078.
that does not exceed the Class C limits Therefore, under DOE’s Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/18.
is non-HLW. interpretation, waste resulting from the Take notice that the Commission
DOE interprets ‘‘sufficient reprocessing of SNF is non-HLW if the received the following electric rate
concentrations’’ in the statutory context waste: filings:
in which the definition was enacted, I. Does not exceed concentration limits for Docket Numbers: ER10–1521–004;
which, as discussed above, is focused Class C low-level radioactive waste as set ER10–1520–004;ER10–1522–003.
on protecting the public and the out in section 61.55 of title 10, Code of
Applicants: Occidental Power
environment from the hazards posed by Federal Regulations; or
II. Does not require disposal in a deep Marketing, L.P., Occidental Power
nuclear waste. In addition to the Services, Inc., Occidental Chemical
geologic repository and meets the
characteristics of the waste itself, the performance objectives of a disposal Corporation.
risk that reprocessing waste poses to facility as demonstrated through a Description: Second Supplement to
human health and the environment performance assessment conducted in June 29, 2018 Updated Market Power
depends on the physical characteristics accordance with applicable regulatory Analysis for the Central Region of the
of the disposal facility and that facility’s requirements. Occidental MBRA Entities.
ability to safely isolate the waste from Reprocessing waste meeting either I or Filed Date: 9/28/18.
the human environment. Relevant II of the above is non-HLW, and may be Accession Number: 20180928–5171.
characteristics of a disposal facility may classified and disposed in accordance Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/19/18.
include the depth of disposal, use of with its radiological characteristics in Docket Numbers: ER17–2515–004.
engineered barriers, and geologic, an appropriate facility provided all Applicants: Chambers Cogeneration,
hydrologic, and geochemical features of applicable requirements of the disposal Limited Partnership.
the site. Taking these considerations facility are met. Description: Compliance filing:
into account, it is reasonable to interpret Settlement Compliance Filing to be
‘‘sufficient concentrations’’ to mean C. Request for Comments
effective 11/1/2017.
concentrations of fission products in The Department specifically requests Filed Date: 10/1/18.
combination with long-lived comments on its interpretation that Accession Number: 20181001–5150.
radionuclides that would require reprocessing waste meeting either of the Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/22/18.
disposal in a deep geologic repository. two criterion stated above is non-HLW. Docket Numbers: ER18–1424–001.
Accordingly, under DOE’s This Notice is intended to solicit public Applicants: Rio Bravo Fresno, A
interpretation, solid waste that exceeds feedback on the DOE interpretation to
California Joint Venture.
the NRC’s Class C limits would be better understand stakeholder
Description: Report Filing: refund
subject to detailed characterization and perspectives prior to appropriate input
report 2018 to be effective N/A.
technical analysis of the radiological and consultation with affected state and
Filed Date: 10/2/18.
characteristics of the waste. This, local regulators and any waste disposal
Accession Number: 20181002–5171.
combined with the physical classification decisions.
The Department will consider all Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/18.
characteristics of a specific disposal
facility and the method of disposal, comments received during the public Docket Numbers: ER18–1427–001.
would determine whether the facility comment period, and modify its Applicants: Rio Bravo Rocklin, A
could meet its performance objectives, proposed approach, as appropriate, California Joint Venture.
and if the waste can be disposed of based on public comment. Description: Report Filing: refund
safely. This approach would be report 2018 to be effective N/A.
Signed at Washington, DC, on October 4,
governed by the waste characterization 2018. Filed Date: 10/2/18.
and analysis process and performance Anne Marie White,
Accession Number: 20181002–5174.
objectives for the disposal facility Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/18.
Assistant Secretary for Environmental
established by the applicable regulator, Management. Docket Numbers: ER18–2175–001.
and thereby protective of human health [FR Doc. 2018–22002 Filed 10–9–18; 8:45 am] Applicants: Mid-Atlantic Interstate
and the environment. BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
Transmission, LLC, West Penn Power
The DOE interpretation does not Company, The Potomac Edison
require the removal of key radionuclides Company, Monongahela Power
to the maximum extent that is DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Company, Trans-Allegheny Interstate
technically and economically practical Line Company, American Transmission
before DOE can define waste as non- Federal Energy Regulatory Systems, Incorporated, PJM
HLW. Nothing in the statutory text of Commission Interconnection, L.L.C.
the AEA or the NWPA requires that Description: Tariff Amendment: MAIT
radionuclides be removed to the Combined Notice of Filings #1 et al submit Supplement in ER18–2175–
maximum extent technically and Take notice that the Commission 000 re: IAs, SA Nos 2149 and 3743 to
economically practical prior to received the following electric corporate be effective 10/5/2018.
determining whether waste is HLW. filings: Filed Date: 10/3/18.
DOE has determined that the removal of Docket Numbers: EC19–2–000. Accession Number: 20181003–5013.
radionuclides from waste that already Applicants: AL Sandersville, LLC, Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/24/18.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with NOTICES1
meets existing legal and technical Effingham County Power, LLC, MPC Docket Numbers: ER18–2426–001.
requirements for safe transportation and Generating, LLC, Walton County Power, Applicants: The Potomac Edison
disposal is unnecessary and inefficient, LLC, Washington County Power, LLC. Company, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
and does not benefit human health or Description: Joint Application for Description: Tariff Amendment:
the environment. To the contrary, it Authorization Under Section 203 of the Potomac submits Supplemental Filing
potentially presents a greater risk to Federal Power Act, et al. of AL in ER18–2426–000 re: IA SA No. 4452
human health and the environment Sandersville, LLC, et. al. to be effective 11/13/2018.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:20 Oct 09, 2018 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\10OCN1.SGM 10OCN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_51105/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2018-10-10 17:37:29
Document Modified: 2018-10-10 17:37:29
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | Notice of public comment period. | |
| Dates | DOE invites stakeholders to submit written comments on its interpretation. The 60-day public comment period begins on October 10, 2018 and ends on December 10, 2018. Only comments received through one of the methods described below will be accepted. DOE will consider all comments received or postmarked by December 10, 2018. | |
| Contact | Theresa Kliczewski at [email protected] or at U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management, Office of Waste and Materials Management (EM- 4.2), 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20585. Telephone: (202) 586-3301. | |
| FR Citation | 83 FR 50909 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR