DOE G 435.1-1 Appendix A, Technical Basis and Considerations for DOE M 435.1-1 (Appendix A)

Approved: 7-09-99 APPENDIX A Technical Basis and Considerations for DOE M 435.1-1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Distribution: Initiated By: All Departmental Elements Office of Environmental Management (This page intentionally left blank.) DOE G 435.1-1 A-i 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations TABLE OF CONTENTS TECHNICAL BASIS AND CONSIDERATIONS 1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1 2.0 BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-2 3.0 ORDER REVISION TEAM ORGANIZATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-3 3.1 Order Revision Team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-3 3.2 Executive Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-4 3.3 Senior Review Panel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-4 4.0 ORDER REVISION PROCESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-7 4.1 Identification of Radioactive Waste Management Functions and Activities . . . A-7 4.2 Assessment of the Hazards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-8 4.3 Requirements Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-13 5.0 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-17 5.1 Protection of the Public . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-17 5.2 Protection of the Workforce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-17 5.3 As Low as Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-17 5.4 Defense-in-depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-18 5.5 Protection of the Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-18 5.6 Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-18 5.7 Authorization Basis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-18 5.8 Cost-Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-19 5.9 Voluntary Consensus Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-19 5.10 Waste Minimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-19 5.11 Property and Facility Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-19 5.12 Timely Disposal of Waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-20 5.13 Waste Characterization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-20 6.0 REQUIREMENT DOCUMENTATION AND TECHNICAL BASIS . . . . . . . . . . . A-20 6.1 Order Writing Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-20 6.2 Documentation of Technical Basis Crosswalk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-20 BASIS FOR REGULATION OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-40 Chapter I General Requirements and Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-43

A-ii DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations BASIS FOR REGULATION OF HIGH-LEVEL WASTE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-73 Chapter II High-Level Waste Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-75 BASIS FOR REGULATION OF TRANSURANIC WASTE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-116 Chapter III Transuranic Waste Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-119 BASIS FOR REGULATION OF LOW-LEVEL WASTE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-152 Chapter IV Low-Level Waste Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-160 CROSSWALK TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Attachment 1 DOE G 435.1-1 A-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations TECHNICAL BASIS AND CONSIDERATIONS 1.0 INTRODUCTION This section outlines and summarizes the methodology used by the Department of Energy in revising its Order on radioactive waste management. The purpose of this appendix is to establish the technical basis of the order revision process and of each of the requirements included in the revised radioactive waste management order. The Department of Energy revised the Order on radioactive waste management for several reasons: C After thorough technical reviews and analyses, both the Department of Energy and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board concluded that the existing Order, 5820.2A, did not adequately address the Department’s radioactive waste management and disposal practices. C There have been significant advances in radioactive waste management practices and changes within the Department of Energy since the Order was issued in 1988. C Risk based and performance-based requirements are a prudent and necessary component of DOE’s new directives system. C Opportunities for stakeholder involvement, a key element of DOE decision making, needed to be provided. C The technical basis for the Department’s radioactive waste management requirements and guidance needed to be documented. The revised Order, designated DOE O 435.1, establishes the requirements for management of radioactive waste consistent with the Department's Atomic Energy Act responsibilities to provide for radiological protection from DOE operations. The scope of DOE O 435.1 includes: (1) high- level waste, including closure of high-level waste tank systems and management of associated incidental wastes; (2) transuranic waste, including safe treatment, storage, and characterization/ certification to support disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant; and (3) low-level waste, with attention to disposal and the impacts of interacting source terms on projected public dose. The revised Order does not contain requirements for the decontamination or decommissioning of radioactively contaminated facilities. Those requirements are incorporated in a revision of DOE O 430.1A, Life-Cycle Asset Management. Additionally, the requirements for the management of spent nuclear fuel are not contained in this Order. The hazards analysis performed to identify requirements for high-level waste did not address the functions associated with management of spent nuclear fuel. Thus the requirements contained in DOE M 435.1-1 do not apply to this DOE-managed spent nuclear fuel. A-2 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations

2.0 BACKGROUND DOE 5820.2A, Radioactive Waste Management, was issued by the Department of Energy in September 1988. As early as 1990, the Department began analyzing, assessing, and reviewing the implementability of the Order on radioactive waste management, 5820.2A. Most DOE Orders are scheduled for review every two years to determine whether they should be continued, revised, or canceled. The policy of the Department of Energy is to use a consistent and effective management system for the development, communication, implementation, and periodic review of its Orders. Objectives in revising a DOE Order include providing more effective program direction, accountability, and performance assurance. In 1991, the Department initiated efforts to revise DOE 5820.2A. During this initial revision effort, the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) also began examining low-level waste management within the defense nuclear complex, including the Department’s low-level management program and practices in terms of its past, present, and future operations. In September 1994, the DNFSB issued Recommendation 94-2, Conformance with Safety Standards at Department of Energy Low-Level Nuclear Waste and Disposal Sites, which identified problems with the Department’s radioactive waste management specific to low- level waste. The DNFSB's findings, as reported to DOE in Recommendation 94-2, were that: (1) DOE had not kept pace with the evolution of commercial practices for waste disposal; (2) that six years after the issuance of DOE 5820.2A, the performance assessment process had not been completed for any of DOE's low-level waste disposal facilities; (3) that the performance assessments excluded waste buried prior to September 1988 and interacting source terms; (4) that there was considerable uncertainty in the DOE projections of low-level waste volumes; (5) that DOE needed additional requirements standards, or guidance on LLW Management; and (6) that DOE needed to improve its modeling and predictive capability for assessing radionuclide migration, enhancing stability of buried waste forms, deterring intrusion, and inhibiting migration of radionuclides. In May 1995, a revision to 5820.2A (draft DOE 5820.2B) was issued for review by DOE and the DNFSB staff. The draft revised DOE 5820.2B was an extensive, detailed set of requirements. However, the relationship of the requirements to guidance within the Order and the technical basis for each was not clear. When distributed for review, the draft revision drew 1,500 comments from within DOE and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. DNFSB staff identified 41 significant safety concerns and eight additional observations which they determined could adversely affect the safety of DOE's management of its radioactive waste and/or which conflicted with commitments made by DOE in response to other DNFSB Recommendations, including 94-2. Based on the DNFSB's concerns and those raised by the numerous comments on the draft Order, a significant number of issues were raised internally within DOE. As a result, the Office of DOE G 435.1-1 A-3 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Environmental Management (EM) committed to a new approach to revising the radioactive waste management Order, and also committed to issuing a draft of the revised Order.

DOE objectives in revising the Order included: (1) incorporate DOE commitments in response to 94-2 and other DNFSB Recommendations into the Order; (2) develop a clear and sound technical basis for the requirements and guidance; (3) incorporate considerations of risk, including the processes being developed under DOE's Integrated Safety Management System; (4) develop less prescriptive and more performance-based requirements; (5) address stakeholder concerns; and (6) address other emerging considerations, such as the movement toward external regulation, legislation requiring the adoption of industry consensus standards, and DOE's ongoing efforts to delegate decision-making and managerial controls from Headquarters to the Field Office level. The Department’s approach for revising the Order on radioactive waste management involved: C Undertaking a systematic review of DOE’s radioactive waste management activities to identify and evaluate the functions and activities necessary to manage radioactive waste effectively; C Assessing the hazards posed by performing the functions and activities; C Identifying the regulatory requirements and guidance to mitigate identified hazards and manage waste effectively; and C Establishing and documenting the technical basis for the requirements and guidance. The revised DOE radioactive Waste Management Order, as DOE O 435.1, with its accompanying Contractor Requirements Document, Manual, and Guidance Documents governs the management of DOE’s radioactive wastes: high-level waste, transuranic waste, low-level waste, and the radioactive component of mixed waste. The process of developing these documents recorded the technical basis for the general requirements common to all radioactive waste, and the waste-type specific requirements. The overall Order revision process is summarized below. Functions maps, crosswalk tables, and technical bases for waste type specific requirements are included in this Appendix. 3.0 ORDER REVISION TEAM ORGANIZATION 3.1 Order Revision Team DOE drew on the technical expertise of its Headquarters and Field staff and contractors to assist in the analysis radioactive of waste management functions and development of requirements. Four subteams were formed, one to address each waste type, and one to address the Order's A-4 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations general requirements. The revision of the Order relied on a broad spectrum of relevant talent within and beyond DOE. Many of the team members who contributed to the response to the DNFSB Recommendation 94-2 on low-level waste were recruited for this effort because of their extensive experience in the operation and regulation of radioactive waste management activities. The expertise of the DOE National Program Managers for radioactive waste types were tapped. Also, representatives from each DOE site assisted through frequent participation via conference calls, meetings, workshops, and document reviews. The Organization Chart in Figure 4-1 reflects both the structure of the Order Revision Team and the relationships among the Team, the Executive Committee, line management, and the Senior Review Panel. 3.2 Executive Committee

The Executive Committee provided direction on major policy issues and ensured that all programmatic issues regarding the Order revision were addressed in an integrated fashion. The Committee consist upper level management representatives from the following DOE Environmental Management offices: Office of the Assistant Secretary (EM-1); Office of the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary (EM-2); Office of Safety and Health (EM-4); Office of Management and Evaluation (EM-10); Office of Planning, Policy and Budget (EM-20); Office of Waste Management (EM-30); Office of Environmental Restoration (EM-40); Office of Science and Technology (EM-50); Office of Nuclear Material and Facility Stabilization (EM-60); and Office of Site Operations (EM-70). 3.3 Senior Review Panel A Senior Review Panel was established to review and provide independent technical advice and comment on the technical issues, analytical approaches, conclusions, and other activities performed for revising of the Order. The Panel consisted of top-level experts from outside DOE in the field of radioactive waste management. The expertise of the Senior Review Panel and the perspectives of each member is shown in Table 3-1. DOE G 435.1-1 A-5 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations • Provides direct ion on pol icy issues and programmatic issue integration • Provides overal l direction • Al locates resources • Interprets policy/directives Executive Committee Deputy Assistant Secretar ies/ Senior Managers • • • • • •EM-1 S-1 Deputy Assistant Secretary for Waste Management EM-30 Senior Management Off icer and DNFSB Interface Deputy Assistant Secretary for Waste Management • Provides overall guidance • Approves Team recommendat ions • Interfaces with DNFSB Radioactive Waste Management Order Revision Team Team Leader Assistant Team Leader • Charters Order Revision Team • Develop revision approach • Communicates guidance to Sub-Teams • Communicates progress to management • Reviews and provides technical comment on progress, issues, approaches, revisions, and supporting documentat ion Senior Review Panel • • • Sub-Teams High Level Waste Lead Assistant Field Members Transuranic Waste Lead Assistant Field Members Low Level Waste Lead Assistant Field Members General Requirements Lead Assistant Field Members • Identify and assess issues • Revise Order • Document support ing information and guidance on Order revision FIGURE 3-1. Organization Chart A-6 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Figure 3-1: DOE Low-Level Waste (LLW) Management Essential Requirements Senior Review Panel Members NAME HIGHLIGHTS OF EXPERIENCE STRENGTH Paul L. Ziemer, Ph.D, CHP Chairman (317) 494-1435 (317) 496-1377 Fax Adviser to DOE LLW Advisory Committee 1971; Former DOE Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health (EH); Member of the National Academy Science (NAS) BIER VI Committee Dean of School of Health Sciences, Purdue University; Past President of Health Physics Society. Representation of professional and academic views; Familiarity with DOE practices, Order development & implementation, and political sensitivity; Established relations with DNFSB, EH, NAS, and others. Dade Moeller, Ph.D., CHP, P.E. (919) 633-3352 (919) 633-3352 Fax Former Chairman of NRC's Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW); Led DOE/Office Waste Management Disposal Site Working Group Senior Review Board.

Familiarity with Office of Waste Management; Experience with radiological performance assessments; Familiarity with NRC views and practices. William A. Mills, Ph.D. (301) 774-0975 Former Senior Science/Policy Advisor to the Committee on Interagency Coordination on Radiation Research and Policy Coordination; Retired Public Health Service; Formerly with the Environmental Protection Agency and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Past-President of the Health Physics Society Representation of professional views; Familiarity with NRC policies and regulations; Familiarity with DOE practices. Familiarity with EPA policies and regulations; Mary Birch, P.E., CHP 803 831-3310 803 831-344 Fax Currently Engineering Supervisor, Duke Power Company Former Regulatory and Licensing Manager, U.S. DOE Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System Management and Operating Contractor Former Licensing Manager, Duke Engineering Services Former Technical System Manager, Radiation Protection, Duke Power Company Former Technical System Manager, Radioactive Waste Management Function, Duke Power Company Former Member of the North Carolina Governor’s Waste Management Board Chaired the Electric Power Research Institute Advisory Committee on Below Regulatory Concern Familiarity with NRC policies and regulations; Familiarity with DOE practices; Familiarity with EPA policies and regulations; Familiarity with State Waste Management Issues; Extensive knowledge and understanding of commercial waste management practices. Robert Bernero 301 926-3844 301 926-1368 Fax Currently acting as a nuclear safety consultant on projects involving spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste management Served as a member of the Commission of Inquiry for an International Review of Swedish Nuclear Regulatory Activities to examine the effectiveness of Swedish regulations for nuclear reactor safety, radiation protection and waste management Former Director NRC’s Office of Nuclear Material Safeguards and Security Former NRC Division Director for boiling water reactor licensing, reactor systems safety, and radiological safety Former NRC Division Director in Research for probablistic risk analysis and the analysis of severe reactor accidents Representation of professional views; Familiarity with NRC policies and regulations; Familiarity with DOE practices. DOE G 435.1-1 A-7 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 4.0 ORDER REVISION PROCESS The Order on radioactive waste management was revised using the following process which included the use of work and documents which were completed under a number of ongoing efforts, which supported the requirements and objectives of the Order revision task. The process included the following five steps: 1) Identification of radioactive waste management functions and activities based on standard systems engineering approaches. 2) Assessment of the hazards posed by performing the functions and activities. 3) Assessment of existing requirements (e.g., DOE directives, NRC regulations, EPA standards and international standards) for possible use and development of preferred language for the revised Order. 4) Development of requirements to address significant hazards and the technical basis for each requirement. 5) Solicitation of wide review and comment and resolution of comments.

This approach also corresponds to the grouping of activities used in DOE's Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS). This system establishes a logical process for integrating risk into all of DOE's activities and was used as the foundation for the next steps in the Order revision process. As noted, the ISMS outlines a simple and logical process for understanding and mitigating risks. Under this process, the development of work processes should include the following five steps: (1) identifying the functions (tasks) that must be performed to complete the work; (2) conducting a safety and hazards analysis of those functions; (3) identifying mitigating measures and controls based on that analysis; (4) applying the controls and implementing a periodic reassessment of the activities, and (5) providing for a feedback to revising the work processes as necessary. As described above, this analytical approach has been incorporated into the core of DOE's effort to revise the radioactive waste management Order, and represents the overall philosophical approach and major steps of this effort. 4.1 Identification of Radioactive Waste Management Functions and Activities The identification of the functions associated with the management of each of the waste types was based on standard systems engineering approaches. These functions provided the framework for analysis of the tasks involved in radioactive waste management throughout the rest of the Order revision process. The identification of the functions associated with the management of low-level waste was performed as part of DOE’s response to the DNFSB Recommendation 94-2. This A-8 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations effort was documented in the Low-Level Waste Systems Description Document (reference). The other waste type team members used this approach as a model for developing function maps for high-level and transuranic waste management activities. The use of this systems engineering approach resulted in a consistent approach across the specific waste types. The function maps for each of the waste types are included. The functions were grouped into three basic categories: those associated with planning (formulate the program); those involving performance of work tasks (execute the program); and those which provided for review of activities and feedback (evaluate the program). 4.2 Assessment of the Hazards Following the development of the function maps for each of the waste types, a Safety and Hazards Analysis Workshop was conducted. The workshop was attended by both DOE Headquarters and Field Element staff and support was provided by contractor personnel. At the workshop, the waste-type teams formed breakout groups and using the functional maps for all of the waste types discussed their respective functional maps to identify any omissions or inconsistencies. After the functional maps were finalized the teams identified and documented the activities that occur in each of the functions. Once the task descriptions were completed, they were used to conduct a qualitative hazards and safety analysis. Through this analysis, scenarios were developed for each task of a radioactive waste management function to identify events that could result in an exposure to a worker or the public, a release of radioactivity to the environment, or an impact on disposal facility performance. Potentially affected receptors were then identified for each scenario, and the likelihood and consequences of the postulated exposure or release was qualitatively estimated. Next, the likelihood of occurrence and consequences were used to determine risk. The last step involved identifying the weakness or condition in the work performance and managerial structures which lead to the risk and developing mitigation options to address these weaknesses or conditions. This identification of weaknesses and conditions and associated mitigation options became part of the foundation for writing the technical basis for each of the requirements in the Order, Contractor Requirement Document, and Manual. This information was used to document the need for the final requirement. A diagram of the steps in the Safety and Hazards Analysis Process is presented in Figure 4.2. Each of the steps in the Safety and Hazards Analysis Process are discussed in greater detail in the following section.

The methodology for predictive hazard evaluation of the radioactive waste management system (Safety and Hazards Analysis Process) was used to identify system weaknesses and/or conditions, qualitatively estimate risks, and develop mitigation options associated with each of the functions of the radioactive waste management system. This analysis focused on the radiological hazards associated with the management of radioactive waste. The analysis was conducted from a complex-wide perspective using a generic facility concept that drew on site/facility specific knowledge as a basis. This information was then evaluated to provide the basis for identifying and developing the requirements and implementing guidance needed to safely manage radioactive DOE G 435.1-1 A-9 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations waste from a radiological perspective. The Safety and Hazards Analysis Process was performed on the low-level, high-level, and transuranic waste management systems described in each waste- type functions map. To the extent appropriate, existing systems engineering functional analysis maps were used as a starting point. The Safety and Hazards Analysis Process involved 11 steps. A flow diagram of the 11 steps is presented in Figure 4-2. The steps are as follows: 1. Operationalize the Function. Define and describe the physical activities associated with each function to be performed in managing each waste type. 2. Identifying Initiating Event Categories. Initiating events are those in the chain of events that could affect the function as described in step 1. Initiating events were classified as either: C Natural Events (e.g., flood, earthquake, freezing temperatures, electrical storm); C Natural Processes/Passage of Time (e.g., corrosion, erosion, aging material, intrusion of plants/animals); C Equipment Malfunctions (e.g., instrument/sensor malfunction, process equipment malfunction); C External Events (e.g., fire, loss of utilities, high velocity impact); or C Human/Information Errors (e.g., communication error, operator error, documentation error, inadvertent intrusion by humans). 3. Identify Follow-on Event Categories. Follow-on events are those which could affect the function as described in step 1, and were classified as: C Structural Failure (e.g., building collapse, containment failure), C Infrastructure Failure (e.g., loss of water or water pipe break, loss of power or electrical surge), C Equipment Failure (e.g., instrument/sensor malfunction, process equipment malfunction), C Human Error (e.g., communication error, operator error), A-10 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations R a d Waste Management Funct ion Operat ional ize Funct ion (def ine and descr ibe physical act iv i t ies) Identi fy Ini t iat ing Event/Categories (checkl ist) Ident i fy Fol low-On Event Categor ies (checkl ist) Develop Relevant Scenar ios Determine Which Receptors Are Af fected in Each Scenar io (publ ic, workers, environment, d isposal faci l i ty performance) Est imate L ike l ihood of Occurrence for Each Scenar io Est imate Receptor-Speci f ic Consequences for Each Scenar io Apply the L ike l ihood and Consequences to the Risk Matr ix for Each Receptor Aggregate Impacts by Fol low-on Event Category Analyze Scenar ios to Ident i fy W eaknesses/Condi t ions and Develop Mi t igat ion Opt ions S T E P S I N T H E S A F E T Y A N D H A Z A R D S A N A L Y S IS

Rank the Mi t igat ion Opt ions to Focus on the Development of the Most Ef fect ive Requirements Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 7 Step 8 Step 9 Step 10 Step 11 DOE G 435.1-1 A-11 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations C Method/Information Failure (e.g., documentation error), or C Other. These categories reflect the first line of defense in preventing an initiating event from leading to exposure of a receptor. 4. Develop Relevant Scenarios. Sub-Team members developed one or more scenarios for each follow-on event category identified in step 3 that could reasonably lead to an exposure of a receptor (defined as workers, public, the environment, and disposal facility performance). The number of scenarios developed was determined by the need to address all of the activities identified in step 1. The scenarios were also used in step 10 as the basis for identifying the weaknesses and/or conditions that might exist in each scenario. The weaknesses and conditions identified were then used to focus the development of mitigation options. 5. Determine Which Receptors are Affected in Each Scenario. The scenarios developed may not have led to impacts to all four of the receptors. This step provided an opportunity for assessing which receptors were impacted under each scenario. Determining that a receptor was not impacted by a scenario eliminated the need to further evaluate that scenario/receptor combination. 6. Estimate Likelihood of Occurrence for Each Scenario. The frequency with which a scenario was expected to occur then was estimated using a set of ranges and the professional judgment of waste-type team members. The likelihood of occurrence was not meant to be a deterministic calculation, but a qualitative evaluation using experience or information on probabilities previously known or calculated (e.g., safety analysis evaluations). The likelihood of occurrence was used as one of the inputs to determine the receptor-specific qualitative risk in step 8. To determine the likelihood of the occurrence of such a scenario, each waste-type team used the process adapted from “Risks and the Risk Debate: Searching for Common Ground “The First Step,’” Volume 1, June 1995, and successfully employed in the Complex-Wide Review of DOE’s Low-Level waste Management ES&H Vulnerabilities. The likelihoods of occurrence fall into categories of time: C < 1 year indicates a scenario whose consequence already exists or is expected to occur with a frequency of at least once per year; C 1 - 10 years indicates a scenario whose consequence is expected less frequently than once per year, but more frequently than once every 10 years; A-12 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations C 10 - 100 years indicates a scenario whose consequence is expected less frequently than once every 10 years, but more frequently than once every 100 year); and C > 100 years indicates a scenario whose consequence is unlikely to occur within the operating life of a facility, but is not completely precluded from occurring. 7. Estimate the Receptor-Specific Consequences for Each Scenario. The consequences for each scenario/receptor combination was estimated using broadly defined ranges of effects, allowing waste-type team members to use their professional judgement and experience. Again, information on consequences previously known or calculated (e.g., safety analysis evaluations) was applied. This information was a key input to the qualitative risk evaluation in step 8. To determine the consequences to the receptor, each waste-type team adapted the system from the “Risks and the Risk Debate: Searching for Common Ground “The First Step”. Consequences are receptor specific:

C Injury/loss of life for workers; C Exposure/loss of life for the public; C Damage for the environment; and C Impact for the disposal facility performance. 8. Apply the Likelihood and Consequences to the Risk Matrix for Each Receptor and Aggregate the Impacts. The likelihood of occurrence (from step 6) and estimated consequence (from step 7) for each scenario was used in this step as the basis for qualitatively estimating the risk to a receptor through the standard risk matrices developed for each receptor type. This information along with the information from steps 4 through 7, was used to develop the mitigation options. 9. Aggregate Impacts by Follow-on Event Category. The risks for scenario/receptor combinations were then tabulated by follow-on event category to provide a relative measure of the potential risk associated with each category of follow-on events. 10. Analyze Scenarios to Identify Weaknesses and/or Conditions and Develop Mitigation Options. The scenarios developed in step 4 were analyzed to identify the weaknesses and/or conditions that were assumed in the operations or managerial structure of each scenario. The weaknesses and conditions identified were then used to help focus the development of mitigation options. Using the results of steps 4 through 9, the waste-type team members developed mitigation DOE G 435.1-1 A-13 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations measures that would address the weaknesses and/or conditions and that could reduce the likelihood of occurrence and/or consequences of an event. The information from steps 4 through 9 also were used to focus the development of the mitigation activities in the context of the scenarios. These mitigation options served as the basis for identification and development of the requirements and the implementing guidance for the safe management of radioactive waste. 11. Rank the Mitigation Options to Focus on the Development of the Most Effective Requirements. The tabulated risks for each scenario/receptor combination were used as the basis for ranking mitigation options for effectiveness in addressing safe management of radioactive waste. This ranking served as an input to the decision of which potential requirements and/or implementing guidance would be most effective in safely managing radioactive waste. 4.3 Requirements Analysis Once the weaknesses and conditions and mitigation options to address these weaknesses or conditions were developed, existing requirements were evaluated to identify those which addresses the mitigation options. This was accomplished during the Requirements Analysis Workshop. The workshop was attended by both DOE Headquarters and Field Element staff and support was provided by contractor personnel. At the workshop the waste type teams formed breakout groups and using the weakness and conditions and associated mitigation options identified by all the waste types at the previous workshop they evaluated their own to identify any omissions or inconsistencies. Following this the weaknesses and conditions and associated mitigation options were finalized for each of the waste type. The process of searching through existing requirements to identify those that would address these weaknesses and conditions began. This effort was facilitated by the identification of potentially applicable requirement sources before the workshop. These sources were then readily available for the team members. This resulted in the inclusion of over 100 DOE directives (orders, manuals, guides, and policies) and other agency requirements and guides (EPA and NRC requirements and other national, international, and industry consensus standards).

The evaluation involved a determination of whether the requirement addressed the weakness or condition. If yes, did it adequately address the weakness or condition? If yes, it was adopted for use. If no, could it be modified to adequately address the weakness or condition? If yes, it was modified and adopted for use. If no, a requirement was written and adopted for use. To ensure a complete evaluation, checklists were prepared for each function which included a list of DOE directives and other requirements that might apply that were required to reviewed. If more than one requirement was identified which would address a weakness or condition, they were evaluated and the most appropriate one or a if necessary a hybrid using one or more of the requirements was adopted for use. This evaluation, modification, writing, and adoption for use A-14 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations process became part of the foundation for writing the technical basis for each of the requirements in the final Order, Contractor Requirement Document, and Manual. This information was used to describe the source of the language used in the final requirement. The following describes the Requirements Analysis and each of its steps in more detail. A flow diagram of the steps in the Requirements Analysis, which includes decisions on which document is most appropriate for each requirement is depicted in Figure 5-1. The steps are as follows: 1) Operationalize Functions For each waste type, the functions were listed along with the definition of the function and phrases representing the operationalization of the function. An example is high- level waste function 1.3.1.1.1.2 Characterize Site for Storage Facility: Recognize facility-specific characteristics and gather and review technical data from candidate sites. 2) Identify Needed Requirement Areas For the function being analyzed, the list of items for which requirements were needed was included. This comprised a list of weaknesses and conditions from the Safety and Hazards Analysis process and a list of the vulnerabilities from the low-level waste Complex-Wide Review and similar evaluations of transuranic and high-level waste which have been identified. 3) Identified Existing and External Requirement Sources For each function, the appropriate requirements were listed from sources that are or could be requirements for the safe and effective implementation of the function for managing radioactive waste. Each requirement was then linked to any weaknesses, conditions, or vulnerability which it could potentially address. Requirement sources included: C DOE 5820.2A, Radioactive Waste Management and other DOE directives; C Applicable Federal requirements (e.g., 40 CFR Part 190); C A set of proposed multi-function requirements; C Other Federal requirements (e.g., 10 CFR Part 61); C International standards (if appropriate); and DOE G 435.1-1 A-15 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations C National standards and practices (if appropriate). 4) Evaluate Adequacy of Requirements Each of the requirements compiled in Step 2 was evaluated to determine its adequacy in providing for safe management of radioactive waste for the function being analyzed. This evaluation was based on an analysis of the requirement against the following considerations: C Does the requirement support an upper-level requirement?

C Does the requirement address an activity of the function as defined in the function definition and operationalization? C Does the requirement address a weakness or condition identified through the Safety and Hazards Analysis process? C Does the requirement address a vulnerability identified through the Complex-Wide Review for low-level and mixed low-level wastes or other assessments for transuranic or high-level wastes? C Does the requirement address the guiding principles for establishment of specific requirements to support the upper-level requirements? C Does the requirement describe a best management practice or a proven site- specific method? The requirements were evaluated in the following Order. First, any proposed multi- function requirements and other applicable Federal requirements and DOE directives were evaluated. Then requirements potentially applicable from DOE 5820.2A, Radioactive Waste Management, were evaluated. Finally, requirements from other non-applicable sources (similar U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulations, and national standards), followed by any international information were evaluated. 5) Identification of Additional Requirements When the preceding steps in the requirements analysis were completed, the lists of vulnerabilities and weaknesses or conditions, and the list of operationalized functions were examined to identify if any additional requirements were needed. Similarly, the A-16 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Requirements Analysis Waste Type Functions Bin Requirements (e.g., 5820.2A, Other DOE Directives, Federal Regulations, National/ International Standards) by Waste Type Function Evaluate Adequacy of Requirements Relevant to Each Function • Do Requirements Exist? • If So, Do They Adequately Address Weaknesses/Conditions Identified Through the Safety and Hazards Analysis? • If So, Do They Adequately Address Vulnerabilities Identified Through the Complex-Wide Review? Document Rationale and/or Citation and Retain Requirements For Functions Where No Adequate Requirements Have Been Identified, Use Draft DOE Order 5820.2B, the Mitigating Action Identified Through the Safety and Hazards Analysis, and Recommendations Identified Through the Complex-Wide Review to Generate Draft Requirements Which Address the Weaknesses/Conditions and/or Vulnerabilities and Document the Rationale for Adoption of the Draft Requirements. Requirements Apply Guiding Principles to Refine Requirements Guidance Evaluate to Determine Adequacy of Guidance Document Rationale of Adoption for Guidance Develop Additional Guidance Evaluate Requirements to Determine if Guidance is Needed ORDER Applies to CRD Stop Yes No Contractors FED Yes No Step 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 DOE G 435.1-1 A-17 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations proposed requirements listed were examined to see if additional requirements were needed in order to effectively implement the waste management functions of each waste type. 5.0 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS The following areas of consideration were identified as concepts and values to be incorporated in and reflected throughout the revised radioactive waste management order. 5.1 Protection of the Public

Radioactive waste management activities at DOE sites including design, construction, operation, decontamination, disposal, closure, and post-closure activities shall be conducted and shown to assure adequate protection of the public from exposure to radioactive materials during both normal operations and during reasonably foreseen off-normal events. Adequate radiation protection is defined by the exposure limits set forth in 10 CFR Part 834. In addition, the DOE Nuclear Safety Policy defines safety goals that are expressed in terms of public risk of accidental fatality and fatal cancer incidence. The risk of prompt fatality to average individual due to an accident in the vicinity of a DOE facility is to be less than 0.1% of the sum of prompt fatalities due to other accidents to which members of the public are generally exposed. The risk of cancer fatality that might result from operations at a DOE site should not exceed 0.1% of the sum of all cancer fatality risks to the public resulting from all other causes [SEN-35-91]. 5.2 Protection of the Workforce Radioactive waste management activities at DOE sites including design, construction, operation, decontamination, disposal, closure, and post-closure activities, shall be conducted and shown to protect the workforce from hazards to a level commensurate with comparable, safe industrial facilities and shall meet the requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) requirements 29 CFR Part 1910 and 29 CFR Part 1926 [DOE O 440.1A]. Facilities shall be designed, operated, decontaminated, and closed to limit radiation exposures to the workforce during normal operations and during reasonably foreseen off-normal events to levels below limits set forth in 10 CFR Part 835 as supplemented by DOE Notice 441.1 5.3 As Low as Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) Radioactive waste management activities at DOE sites including design, construction, operation, decontamination, disposal, closure, and post-closure activities shall be analyzed to show and shall be conducted in manners such that radiation exposures of the public, the workforce, and environment are kept as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA). ALARA is the approach to radiation protection to manage and control exposures, taking into account social, technical, economic, practical and policy considerations. ALARA does not identify a dose limit but is A-18 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations instead a process which has the objective of attaining doses as far below the applicable limits as can be reasonably achieved. [10 CFR 835.1001 and 10 CFR 835.1002] 5.4 Defense-in-depth The safety strategy for radioactive waste management activities at DOE sites shall be based on defense-in-depth. In this context, defense-in-depth is the practice of using systems of equipment and systems of procedures in a structure of mutual re-enforcement to avoid exposures of the public, the workforce, and the environment to nuclear radiation [DNFSB/TECH-6]. A graded approach based on risk shall be utilized to comply with the requirement [10 CFR 830.3 and 10 CFR 830.7]. 5.5 Protection of the Environment Radioactive waste management activities at DOE sites including design, construction, operation, decontamination, disposal, closure, and post closure activities shall be conducted to meet statutory limits and shown to minimize contamination of the environment in a cost-effective manner and to limit exposure of aquatic animals to levels below the limits specified in 10 CFR Part 834. Contamination of land by DOE activities shall be limited to avoid permanently restricting land from beneficial use [Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended; Executive Order 11514].

5.6 Compliance Radioactive waste management activities at DOE sites including design, construction, operation, decontamination, disposal, closure, and post-closure activities shall be compliant with applicable Federal, State, and local laws and regulations, as well as Compliance Orders [10 CFR Part 820]. These activities shall also comply with applicable Executive Orders, DOE’s Strategic Plan, and DOE Policies [SEN-15-90; DOE Policy P 251.1]. 5.7 Authorization Basis Radioactive waste management activities at DOE sites shall have an authorization basis. “The authorization basis establishes the safety envelop for a facility operation or activity and defines what will have to be done to control safety of the operation [or activity]. The authorization basis includes the hazards analysis, the definition of administrative and engineering controls to prevent and mitigate hazards, and the associated technical and operation limits. The type of safety documents that will constitute the authorization basis will vary with the hazard and complexity of the operation or activity.” [DOE O 425.1A; DOE 5480.21; DOE 5480.22; DOE 5480.23] DOE G 435.1-1 A-19 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 5.8 Cost-Effectiveness Radioactive waste management activities at DOE sites including design, construction, operation, decontamination, disposal, closure, and post-closure activities shall be shown to be cost effective with OMB Circular A-94. The evaluation of cost effectiveness shall include: C Quantified estimates of life-cycle cost of proposed activities and alternatives. Life- cycle cost shall include capital investment, acceptance testing, operations, maintenance, decontamination, decommissioning, disposal, closure and post-closure activities. C Quantified estimates of the benefits of proposed activities and alternatives. The benefits shall include waste minimization, increments in the expected radiation dose to the public, the workforce, and the contamination of the environment, land use, and timely disposal of waste. The conversion of benefits to monetary values for use in comparisons to cost shall have a defensible and documented basis. Estimates of costs and benefits shall include the time cost of capital and quantification of uncertainties. Selection among alternatives shall minimize life-cycle costs and investment risk while maximizing the net benefit for the timely disposition of wastes without compromising the protection of the public, the workforce, and the environment, nor the compliance with applicable laws and regulations [SEN-35-91 Section 1; Executive Order 12780 (1991)]. 5.9 Voluntary Consensus Standards Radioactive waste management activities at DOE sites including design, construction, operation, decontamination, disposal, closure, and post-closure activities shall be conducted in conformance with applicable technical standards that are developed or adapted by voluntary consensus standard bodies to the extent that these standards are appropriate and practical [Public Law 104-113; SEN- 35-91, Section 2, Paragraphs 1 and 2; DOE Policy 251.1]. 5.10 Waste Minimization Radioactive waste management activities at DOE sites including design, construction, operation, decontamination, disposal, closure, and post-closure activities shall minimize the waste quantity, volume, and toxicity to an extent technically and economically practical. 5.11 Property and Facility Protection

Radioactive waste management activities at DOE sites including design, construction, operation, decontamination, disposal, closure, and post-closure activities shall be conducted in manners that A-20 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations minimize the threats to DOE property [Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, Executive Order 13101, Greening the Government through Waste Prevention, Recycling, and Federal Acquisition]. 5.12 Timely Disposal of Waste Radioactive waste management activities at DOE sites shall be prioritized to minimize with respect to life-cycle cost the time integral of risk of radiation exposure to the public and the workforce, as well as the time integral of the risk of environmental contamination. 5.13 Waste Characterization Radioactive waste on DOE sites shall be characterized sufficiently to assure compliance with other requirements including those concerning limitations on radiation doses to the public and the workforce, possible degradation of the environmental quality, and the cost-effective management of radioactive waste, as well as to assure compliance with the waste acceptance criteria both on the site and at the eventual waste disposal site. 6.0 REQUIREMENT DOCUMENTATION AND TECHNICAL BASIS 6.1 Order Writing Process The general requirements and waste-type teams took the requirements that resulted from applying the guiding principles and began to organize then into the draft outline of the Order and Manual. Once all of the requirements had been place into the appropriate section of the draft outline it was reviewed and modified to eliminate redundancies, provide for better flow and logic, identification of requirements common to all waste types (these requirements were then evaluated for possible inclusion in the General Requirements section), and other changes associated with consistency and wording selection. Once each of the individual waste-type chapters was completed the chapters were reviewed collectively for consistency and continuity and further revised to address suggested changes. Finally, the draft was sent out for a Department-wide review. 6.2 Documentation of Technical Basis Crosswalk During the entire Order revision process, information needed to develop the technical basis for each of the requirements was identified and generated. The Safety and Hazards Analysis provided the technical basis for why the requirements are important and necessary for the safe management of radioactive waste. The Requirements Analysis provided the technical basis for the source and, in some cases, the wording of the requirements. The application of the guiding principles for generating requirements provided the technical basis for the wording of the requirements and, in the case of some of general requirements, also provided the technical basis for the need and DOE G 435.1-1 A-21 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations source of the requirements. The following sections provide a discussion of the approaches for the management of radioactive waste, high-level waste, transuranic waste, and low-level waste. Additionally, a crosswalk of the requirements from DOE 5820.2A, Radioactive Waste Management, to Draft DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, was conducted and the technical basis for each of the requirements is included for general requirements and the requirements for high-level waste management, transuranic waste management, and low-level waste management. The technical basis provides crosswalk tables (Attachment 1) depicting the revised 435.1 requirements, the 5820.2A requirements, and the technical basis for the revised requirements.

The technical basis for the revised requirement includes: C The driver for the requirement (Safety and Hazard Analysis, Requirements Analysis, complex-wide review, etc.). C The weakness/condition or vulnerability which the requirement addresses. C The origin or source of the requirement. C Other information (e.g., the requirement addresses other considerations as identified in Section 5.0, such as provides defense in depth, addresses ALARA, etc.). A-22 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Functions Maps DOE G 435.1-1 A-23 7-09-99 1.3 Manage HLW 1.3.1 Store HLW 1.3.2 Pretreat HLW 1.3.3 Immobilize HLW 1.3.4 Store Immobilized HLW 1.3.1.1 Acquire HLW Storage Facilities 1.3.1.2 Provide Safe Storage of HLW 1.3.1.3 Close HLW Storage Facility 1.3.2.1 Acquire HLW Pretreatment Facilities 1.3.2.2 Perform Pretreatment 1.3.2.3 Close HLW Pretreatment Facility 1.3.3.1 Acquire HLW Immobilization Capability 1.3.3.2 Perform Immobilization 1.3.3.3 Close HLW Immobilization Facilities 1.3.4.1 Acquire Immobilized HLW Storage Capability 1.3.4.2 Provide Safe Storage of HLW 1.3.4.3 Close Immobilized HLW Storage Facilities A-24 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 1 .3 .1 S t o r e H L W 1 . 3 . 1 . 1 A c q u i r e H L W Sto rage Fac i l i t i e s 1 . 3 . 1 . 2 P r o v i d e S a f e S t o r a g e o f H L W 1 . 3 . 1 . 3 C l o s e H L W Sto rage Fac i l i t i e s 1 .3 .1 .1 .1 C o n s t r u c t N e w H L W S t o r a g e Fac i l i t y 1 .3 .1 .2 .1 R e c e i v e H L W f o r S t o r a g e 1 .3 .1 .2 .2 M a i n t a i n S a f e H L W S t o r a g e 1 .3 .1 .1 .1 .1 D e v e l o p S t o r e S y s t e m T e c h n i c a l R e q u i r e m e n t s 1 .3 .1 .1 .1 .2 C h a r a c t e r i z e S i t e f o r S t o r a g e F a c i l i t y 1 .3 .1 .1 .1 .3 E s t a b l i s h S t o r a g e S i t e E n v i r o n m e n t a l B a s e L i n e 1 .3 .1 .1 .1 .4 D e s i g n S t o r a g e Fac i l i t y 1 .3 .1 .1 .1 .5 B u i l d S t o r a g e Fac i l i t y 1 .3 .1 .1 .1 .6 R e a d y F a c i l i t y f o r O p e r a t i o n s 1 .3 .1 .2 .1 .1 Es tab l i sh con t r o l s / p l a n s f o r H L W rece ip t 1 .3 .1 .2 .1 .2 E s t a b l i s h S t o r a g e W A C 1 .3 .1 .2 .1 .3 Ve r i f y W a s t e M e e t s S t o r a g e W A C 1 .3 .1 .2 .1 .4 T r a n s f e r W a s t e f o r S t o r a g e 1 .3 .1 .2 .2 .1 E s t a b l i s h C o n t r o l s / P l a n s 1 .3 .1 .2 .2 .2 M o n i t o r O p e r a t i o n s 1 .3 .1 .2 .2 .3 M a i n t e n a n c e DOE G 435.1-1 A-25 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 1 . 3 . 2 P r e t r e a t H L W 1 . 3 . 2 . 1 A c q u i re H L W P r e t r e a t m e n t F a c i l i t ies 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 P e r f o r m P r e t r e a t m e n t 1 . 3 . 2 . 3 C l o s e H L W S t o r a g e F a c i l i t ies 1 . 3 . 2 . 1 . 1 P r o c u r e H L W P r e t r e a t m e n t F a c i l i t ies 1 . 3 . 2 . 1 . 2 C o n s t r u c t N e w H L W P r e t r e a t m e n t F a c i l i t ies 1 . 3 . 2 . 1 . 1 . 1 D e v e l o p P r e t r e a t m e n t T e c h n i c a l R e q u i r e m e n t s F o r P r i v a t i z a t i o n A c t i v i t i e s , a n a l y s i s s t o p s h e r e 1 . 3 . 2 . 1 . 2 . 1 D e v e l o p P r e t r e a t m e n t T e c h n i c a l R e q u i r e m e n t s 1 . 3 . 2 . 1 . 2 . 2 C h a r a c t e r i z e S i t e s f o r P r e t r e a t m e n t F a c i l i ty

1 . 3 . 2 . 1 . 2 . 3 E s t a b l i s h P r e t r e a t m e n t S i t e E n v i r o n m e n t a l B a s e l i ne 1 . 3 . 2 . 1 . 2 . 4 D e s i g n P r e t r e a t m e n t F a c i l i ty 1 . 3 . 2 . 1 . 2 . 5 B u i l d P r e t r e a t m e n t F a c i l i ty 1 . 3 . 2 . 1 . 2 . 6 R e a d y F a c i l i ty t o O p e r a t e 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 1 R e t r i e v e H L W f o r P r e t r e a t m e n t 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1 E s t a b l i s h C o n t r o l s / p l a n s 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 2 I n s t a l l R e t r i e v a l E q u i p m e n t 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 2 M o n i t o r O p e r a t i o n s 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 4 M a in t e n a n c e 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 R e c e i v e H L W f o r P r e t r e a t m e n t 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 1 E s t a b l i s h c o n t r o l s / p la n s f o r H L W r e c e i p t 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 2 E s t a b l i s h P r e t r e a t m e n t W A C 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 3 V e r i f y H L W M e e t s P r e t r e a t m e n t W A C 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 1 . 4 T r a n s f e r H L W i n P r e t r e a t m e n t S y s t e m 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 3 P r e t r e a t H L W 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 1 E s t a b l i s h c o n t r o l s p la n s f o r H L W P r e t r e a t m e n t 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 S e p a r a t e H L W F r a c t i o n 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 3 R e d u c e V o l u m e o f H L W 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 4 D i s p o s i t i o n n o n - H L W S t r e a m s 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 . 5 M o n i t o r H L W i n P r e t r e a t m e n t 1 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 4 M a in t a i n H L W P r e t r e a t m e n t F a c i l i ty A-26 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 1 . 3 . 3 Im m o b i l i z e H L W 1 . 3 . 3 . 1 A c q u i r e H L W Im m o b i l i za t i on C a p a b i l i t y 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 P e r f o r m Im m o b i l i za t i on 1 . 3 . 3 . 3 C lo s e H L W Im m o b i l i za t i on F a c i l i t i e s 1 . 3 . 3 . 1 . 1 P r o c u r e H L W Im m o b i l i za t i on C a p a b i l i t y 1 . 3 . 3 . 1 . 2 C o n s t r u c t N e w H L W Im m o b i l i za t i on F a c i l i t y 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 1 R e t r i e v e H L W f o r Im m o b i l i za t i on 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2 R e c e i v e H L W f o r Im m o b i l i za t i on 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 3 Im m o b i l i za t i on H L W 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 4 M a i n t a i n H L W T r e a t m e n t F a c i l i t y 1 . 3 . 3 . 1 . 1 . 1 D e v e l o p I m m o b i l i za t i on T e c h n i c a l R e q u i r e m e n t s F o r P r i v a t i z a t i o n A c t i v i t i e s , a n a l y s i s s t o p s h e r e 1 . 3 . 3 . 1 . 2 . 1 D e v e l o p I m m o b i l i za t i on T e c h n i c a l R e q u i r e m e n t s 1 . 3 . 3 . 1 . 2 . 2 C h a r a c t e r i z e S i t e f o r T r e a t m e n t F a c i l i t y 1 . 3 . 3 . 1 . 2 . 3 E s t a b l i s h T r e a t m e n t S i t e E n v i r o n m e n t a l B a s e l i n e 1 . 3 . 3 . 1 . 2 . 4 D e s i g n I m m o b i l i za t i on F a c i l i t y 1 . 3 . 3 . 1 . 2 . 5 B u i l d I m m o b i l i za t i on F a c i l i t y 1 . 3 . 3 . 1 . 2 . 6 R e a d y F a c i l i t y t o O p e r a t e 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 1 . 1 E s t a b l i s h c o n t r o l s / p l a n s f o r H L W r e c e i p t 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 1 . 2 In i t ia l R e t r i eva l E q u i p m e n t 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 1 . 3 M o n i t o r / O p e r a t i o n s 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 1 . 4 M a i n t e n a n c e 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 1 E s t a b l i s h c o n t r o l s / p l a n s f o r H L W r e c e i p t 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 2 E s t a b l i s h

Im m o b i l i za t i on W A C 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 3 V e r i fy H L W M e e ts Im m o b i l i za t i on W A C 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 3 . 1 E s t a b l i s h c o n t r o l s / p l a n s f o r H L W Im m o b i l i za t i on 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 3 . 2 P r e p a r e F e e d 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 3 . 3 Im m o b i l i za t i on H L W 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 3 . 4 P a c k a g e I m m o b i l i z e d H L W 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 3 . 5 T r e a t O f f g a s 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 3 . 6 D i s p o s i t i o n o f n o n - I m m o b i l i zed W a s t e S t r e a m s 1 . 3 . 3 . 2 . 2 . 4 V e r i fy H L W M e e ts Im m o b i l i za t i on W A C DOE G 435.1-1 A-27 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 1 . 3 . 4 S t o r e I m m o b i l i z e d H L W 1 . 3 . 4 . 1 A c q u i r e I m m o b i l i zed H L W S t o r a g e C a p a b i l i t y 1 . 3 . 4 . 1 . 1 P r o c u r e H L W S t o r a g e C a p a b i l i t y 1 . 3 . 4 . 1 . 2 C o n s t r u c t N e w H L W S t o r a g e F a c i l i t y 1 . 3 . 4 . 1 . 1 . 1 D e v e l o p I m m o b i l i zed H L W T e c h n i ca l R e q u i rem e n t s 1 . 3 . 4 . 1 . 2 . 1 D e v e l o p I m m o b i l i zed H L W T e c h n i ca l R e q u i rem e n t s 1 . 3 . 4 . 1 . 2 . 2 C h a r a c t e r i z e S i t e f o r Im m o b i l i z e d H L W S t o r a g e F a c i l i t y 1 . 3 . 4 . 1 . 2 . 3 E s t a b l i s h I m m o b i l i zed H L W S t o r a g e S i t e E n v i r o n m e n t a l B a s e l i n e 1 . 3 . 4 . 1 . 2 . 4 D e s i g n I m m o b i l i zed H L W S t o r a g e F a c i l i t y 1 . 3 . 4 . 1 . 2 . 5 B u i l d I m m o b i l i zed H L W S t o r a g e F a c i l i t y 1 . 3 . 4 . 1 . 2 . 6 R e a d y F a c i l i t y t o O p e r a t e 1 . 3 . 4 . 2 . 1 R e c e i v e Im m o b i l i z e d H L W f o r S t o r a g e 1 . 3 . 4 . 2 . 1 . 1 E s t a b l i s h c o n t r o l s / p l a n e f o r I m m o b i l i zed H L W r e c e i p t 1 . 3 . 4 . 2 . 1 . 2 E s t a b l i s h I m m o b i l i zed H L W S t o r a g e W A C 1 . 3 . 4 . 2 . 1 . 3 E n s u r e C o r r e c t D i s p o s i t i o n o f E f f l u e n t s 1 . 3 . 4 . 2 . 1 . 4 V e r i fy Im m o b i l i zed H L W M e e ts S t o r a g e W A C 1 . 3 . 4 . 2 . 1 . 5 T r a n s f e r I m m o b i l i zed H L W i n S t o r a g e F a c i l i t y 1 . 3 . 4 . 2 . 2 S t o r e Im m o b i l i zed H L W 1 . 3 . 4 . 2 . 2 . 1 E s t a b l i s h c o n t r o l s / p l a n s f o r I m m o b i l i zed H L W s t o r a g e 1 . 3 . 4 . 2 . 2 . 2 M o n i to r Im m o b i l i zed H L W 1 . 3 . 4 . 2 . 3 D i s p o s i t i o n S t o r e d H L W 1 . 3 . 4 . 2 . 3 . 1 P r e p a r e H L W f o r S h i p m e n t 1 . 3 . 4 . 2 . 4 M a i n t a i n H L W S t o r a g e F a c i l i t y 1 . 3 . 4 . 2 P r o v i d e S a f e S t o r a g e o f H L W 1 . 3 . 4 . 3 C l o s e I m m o b i l i zed H L W S t o r a g e F a c i l i t i e s A-28 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 2.1 Generation 2.2 Characterization 2.3 Treatment 2.4 Storage 2.5 Offsite Transportation 2.6 Disposal 1.0 Plan TRU Program 2.0 Execute TRU Program 3.0 Evaluate TRU Program 0.0 Manage Integrated TRU Program DOE G 435.1-1 A-29 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 2.1 Generation 2.1.1 New Waste 2.1.2 Retrieve Waste 2.1.1.1 New Waste 2.1.1.2 D&D Waste 2.1.2.1 Bermed Waste 2.1.2.2 Buried Waste A-30 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 2 .2 Charac te r i za t ion

2.2 .2 .2 .1 P rocess K n o w ledge 2.2 .2 .2 .2 Per fo rm N D A 2.2 .2 .2 .3 Per fo rm R T R 2.2 .2 .2 .4 V e n t & Asp i ra te 2 .2 .2 .2 .5 H e a d G a s S a m p le 2.2 .2 .2 .6 In t rus ive C h a racter ize 2 .2 .2 .1 R e c e ive P a c k a g e 2.2 .2 .2 C h a racter ize W as te 2.2 .2 .3 D ispos itio n W as te 2.2 .2 .4 M a inta in Faci l i ty 2 .2 .1 A c q u ire C h a racter iza t ion Faci l i ty 2 .2 .2 O p e ra te & M a inta in C h a racter iza t ion Faci l i ty 2 .2 .3 C lose C h a racter iza t ion Faci l i ty DOE G 435.1-1 A-31 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 2.3 Treatment 2.3.1 Acquire Treatment Capability 2.3.2 Operate & Maintain Treatment Capability 2.3.3 Close Treatment Capability 2.3.2.1 Receive Waste 2.3.2.2 Treat Waste 2.3.2.3 Disposition Waste 2.3.2.4 Maintain Facility 2.3.2.1.1 Verify WAC for Treatment 2.3.2.1.2 Move Waste to Lag Storage 2.3.2.2.1 Change Physical Character 2.3.2.2.2 Change Chemical Character 2.3.2.2.3 Sort, Segregate Decontaminate and Package A-32 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 2.4 Storage 2.4.1 Acquire Storage Facility 2.4.2 Operate & Maintain Storage Facility 2.4.3 Close Storage Facility 2.4.2.1 Receive Waste 2.4.2.2 Place Waste in Storage 2.4.2.3 Maintain Waste in Storage 2.4.2.4 Disposition Waste 2.4.2.5 Maintain Facility DOE G 435.1-1 A-33 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 1.0 Formulate LLW Program 1.1 Set LLW Policy 1.2 Establish LLW Technical Strategy 1.3 Establish LLW Implementation Strategy 1.4 Manage LLW Site Interfaces 1.5 Authorize and Fund LLW Work 1.6 Manage LLW Information 1.5.1 Prepare Site Budget Submissions 1.5.2 Review Site Budget Submissions 1.5.3 Establish Site Funding Levels 1.4.1 Define Site Interfaces 1.1.1 Review Standards & Requirements 1.1.2 Establish Consensus & Draft Policy 1.1.3 Issue Policy 1.1.4 Establish Regulatory Framework 1.2.1 Develop LLW Generation Forecasts 1.2.2 Develop LLW Configuration Strategy 1.2.3 Develop LLW & R&D Strategy 1.2.4 Perform Systems Engineering (F-R-A-T) 1.4.2 Document Site Interfaces 1.3.1 Define Organizational Division and Responsibility 1.3.2 Establish LLW Program Milestones 1.3.3 Estimate LLW Program Resources 1.3.4 Prepare & Maintain LLW Program Management Plan A-34 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 2.0 Execute LLW Program 2.1 Perform Generator WM Activities 2.2 Treat LLW 2.3 Store LLW 2.4 Dispose LLW DOE G 435.1-1 A-35 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 2.1 Perform Generator WM Activities 2.1.2 Request WM Services 2.1.1.1 Precertify New LLW 2.1.1.2 Provide Process & Forecast Data 2.1.1.3 Implement Waste Min/PP Practices 2.1.2 Characterize LLW 2.1.2.1 Identify Physical Characteristics 2.1.2.2 Sample Waste (RAD/HAZ) 2.1.2.3 Document Process Knowledge 2.1.3 Disposition LLW 2.1.3.1 Certify Waste has met WAC 2.1.3.2 Package LLW 2.1.3.3 Transport LLW to DOE or Commercial A-36 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 2 . 2 T r e a t L L W 2 . 2 . 1 A c q u i r e L L W T r e a t m e n t C a p a b i l i t y 2 . 2 . 2 O p e r a t e & M a in ta in Ex i s t i ng T r e a t m e n t F a c i l i t y 2 . 2 . 3 C l o s e L L W T r e a t m e n t F a c i l i t y 2 . 2 . 1 . 1 P r o c u r e L L W T r e a t m e n t C a p a b i l i t y

2 . 2 . 1 . 2 C o n s t r u c t N e w L L W T r e a t m e n t F a c i l i t y ( N T F ) 2 .2 .1 .1 .1 D e v e l o p T r e a t S e r v i c e T e c h n i c a l R e q u i r e m e n t s 2 .2 .1 .1 .2 N e g o t i a t e C o n t r a c t f o r T r e a t S e r v i c e 2 .2 .1 .1 .3 D e v e lop I n te r f ace P r o c e s s t o A c c e s s T r e a t S e r v i c e 2 .2 .1 .1 .4 A d m in i s te r T rea t S e r v i c e C o n t r a c t 2 .2 .1 .2 .1 C h a r a c t e r i z e S i t e f o r L L W T r e a t m e n t Fac i l i t y 2 .2 .1 .2 .2 E s t a b l i s h T r e a t m e n t S i t e E n v ’ l B a s e l i n e 2 .2 .1 .2 .3 D e s i g n T r e a t m e n t Fac i l i t y 2 .2 .1 .2 .4 B u i ld T rea tm e n t Fac i l i t y 2 . 2 . 2 . 1 R e c e i v e L L W f o r T r e a t m e n t 2 .2 .2 .1 .1 E s t a b l i s h T r e a t m e n t W A C & G e n e r a t o r A p p r o v a l P r o c e s s 2 .2 .2 .1 .2 C o n f i r m T r e a t m e n t N e e d / C o m p a t i b i l i t y 2 .2 .2 .1 .3 Ve r i f y W a s t e M e e t s T r e a t m e n t W A C 2 .2 .2 .1 .4 P r o v i d e I n t e r i m S t o r a g e P r e / P o s t - T r e a t m e n t 2 . 2 . 2 . 2 P r o c e s s L L W 2.2 .2 .2 .1 C h a n g e P h y s i c a l C h a r a c t e r 2 .2 .2 .2 .2 C h a n g e C h e m i c a l C h a r a c t e r 2 .2 .2 .2 .3 P a c k a g e T r e a t e d L L W 2.2 .2 .2 .4 D e c o n t a m i n a t e M a ter ia ls 2 . 2 . 2 . 3 D ispos i t i on T r e a t e d L L W 2.2 .2 .3 .1 E n s u r e C o n f o r m a n c e w i t h S / D W A C 2 .2 .2 .3 .2 T r a n s p o r t T r e a t e d L L W t o D O E o r C o m m e r c i a l 2 . 2 . 2 . 4 M a in ta in L L W T r e a t m e n t Fac i l i t y 2 .2 .2 .2 .5 M o n i t o r W a s t e i n T r e a t m e n t DOE G 435.1-1 A-37 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 2.3 Store LLW 2.3.1 Acquire LLW Storage Capability 2.3.1.1 Procure LLW Storage Capability 2.3.1.2 Construct New LLW Storage Facility (NSF) 2.3.1.1.1 Develop Store Service Technical Requirements 2.3.1.2.1 Characterize Site for Storage Facility 2.3.1.2.2 Establish Storage Site Environment Baseline 2.3.1.2.3 Design Storage Facility 2.3.1.2.4 Build Storage Facility 2.3.2.1 Receive LLW for Storage 2.3.2.1.1 Establish Storage WAC & Generator Approval Process 2.3.2.1.2 Confirm Storage Need/Capability 2.3.2.1.3 Verify Waste Meets Storage WAC 2.3.2.1.4 Place Waste in Storage 2.3.2.2 Monitor Waste In Storage 2.3.2.3 Disposition Stored LLW 2.3.2.3.1 Ensure Conformance with T/D WAC 2.3.2.4 Maintain LLW Storage Facility 2.3.2 Operate & Maintain Existing Storage Facility 2.3.3 Close LLW Storage Facility 2.3.1.1.2 Negotiate Contract for Store Service 2.3.1.1.3 Develop Interface Process to Access Store Service 2.3.1.1.4 Administer Treat Service Contract 2.3.2.3.2 Transport Stored LLW to DOE or Commercial A-38 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 2 . 4 D i s p o s e L L W 2 .4 .1 A c q u i re LLW D i s p o s a l C a p a b i l i t y 2 .4 .1 .1 P r o c u r e L L W D i s p o s a l Capab i l i t y 2 .4 .1 .2 C o n s t r u c t N e w L L W D i s p o s a l F a c i l i t y ( N D F ) 2 .4 .1 .1 .1 D e v e l o p D i s p o s a l S e r v i c e T e c h n i c a l R e q u i r e m e n t s 2 .4 .1 .1 .2 N e g o t i a t e C o n t r a c t f o r D i s p o s a l S e r v i c e 2 .4 .1 .1 .3 D e v e l o p I n t e r f a c e P r o c e s s t o A c c e s s D i s p o s a l S e r v i c e

2 .4 .1 .1 .4 A d m in is te r D i s p o s a l S e r v i c e C o n t r a c t 2 .4 .1 .2 .1 C h a r a c t e r i z e S i te fo r D i sposa l Fac i l i t y 2 .4 .1 .2 .2 E s t a b l i s h D i s p o s a l S i t e E n v i r o n m e n t B a s e l ine 2 .4 .1 .2 .3 P r e p a r e P A / C A 2 .4 .1 .2 .4 D e s i g n D i s p o s a l Fac i l i t y 2 .4 .1 .2 .5 B u i l d D i s p o s a l Fac i l i t y 2 .4 .2 .1 R e c e i v e L L W f o r D i s p o s a l 2 .4 .2 .1 .1 E s t a b l i s h D i s p o s a l W A C & G e n e r a t o r A p p r o v a l P r o c e s s 2 .4 .2 .1 .2 C o n f i r m D i s p o s a l N e e d / C o m p a t i b i l i t y 2 .4 .2 .1 .3 Ve r i f y W a s t e M e e t s D i s p o s a l W A C 2.4 .2 .1 .4 E m p l a c e W a s t e 2 .4 .2 .2 M o n i tor D i s p o s e d W a s t e 2 .4 .2 .3 M a in ta in D i s p o s a l Fac i l i t y 2 .4 .3 .1 C l o s e L L W D i s p o s a l Fac i l i t y 2 .4 .3 .2 M o n i tor P o s t - C l o s u r e 2 .4 .3 .1 .1 D e v e l o p & Im p lem e n t C l o s u r e P l a n 2 .4 .3 .1 .2 U p d a t e P A / C A f o r C l o s e d C o n d i t i o n s 2 .4 .3 .2 .1 M o n i tor W a s t e C o n t a i n m e n t 2 .4 .3 .2 .2 M a i n t a i n C l o s e d D isposa l Fac i l i t y 2 .4 .3 .2 .3 M a i n t a i n P A / C A f o r C l o s u r e 2 .4 .2 O p e r a t e & M a i n t a i n E x i s t i n g L L W Disposa l Fac i l i t y 2 .4 .3 C l o s e & M o n i tor L L W D i s p o s a l Fac i l i t y DOE G 435.1-1 A-39 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 3.0 Evaluate LLW Program 3.1 Assemble Performance Measures 3..2 Collect Performance Data 3.3 Evaluate & Report Performance Data 3.4 Provide Program Feedback 3.1.1 Assemble Technical PMs 3.1.2 Assemble Cost PMs 3.1.3 Assemble Schedule PMs 3.1.4 Assemble Regulatory PMs 3.2.1 Collect LLW Technical, Cost, & Schedule Data 3.2.2 Collect LLW Generation Data 3.2.3 Collect LLW T/S/D Data 3.2.4 Collect Regulatory Data 3.3.1 Evaluate & Report Technical Cost and Schedule Performance 3.3.2 Evaluate & Report Actual vs Forecast LLW Generation 3.3.3 Evaluate & Report Available T/S/D Capacity 3.3.4 Evaluate & Report Performance Regulatory 3.4.1 Recommend Award Fees 3.4.2 Recommend Policy, Strategy, & Interface Improvements 3.4.3 Recommend LLW Configuration Improvements 3.4.4 Recommend Enforcement Actions A-40 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations BASIS FOR REGULATION OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE The revised Order, designated DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, establishes the requirements for management of radioactive waste consistent with the Department's Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, responsibilities to provide for radiological protection from DOE operations. The scope of DOE O 435.1 includes: (1) high-level waste, including closure of high- level waste tank systems and management of associated incidental wastes; (2) transuranic waste, including safe treatment, storage, and characterization/certification to support disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant; and (3) low-level waste, with attention to disposal and the impacts of interacting source terms on projected public dose. The revised Order does not contain requirements for the management of the decontamination or decommissioning of radioactively contaminated facilities. Those requirements are incorporated in a revision of DOE O 430.1, Life- Cycle Asset Management. Additionally, the requirements for the management of spent nuclear fuel are not contained in this Order. The hazards analysis performed to identify requirements for high-level waste did not address the functions associated with management of spent nuclear fuel. Thus the requirements contained in DOE M 435.1-1 do not apply to this DOE-managed spent nuclear fuel.

Risk The focus of the Radioactive Waste Management Order revision effort provided numerous challenges and opportunities to DOE for addressing risk. These opportunities and challenges operated at several different levels. As sources for understanding the overall scope of risk throughout the DOE complex and its operations, the DOE Risk Report to Congress and the findings of the Complex-Wide Review on low-level waste implemented under Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board (DNFSB) Recommendation 94-2 were invaluable. Through these sources, DOE was able to conceptualize both the breadth and causes of the major risks within DOE's operations at the complex-wide and site-specific managerial levels. DOE's Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) establishes a logical process for integrating consideration of risk into all of DOE's planning and activities, and provides a uniform and common process for thinking about the problems of risk and developing solutions. In particular, the ISMS dictates a simple but logical process for understanding and mitigating risks. Under ISMS, the development of work processes follows a simple five-step approach: (1) identify the functions that must be performed to complete the work; (2) conduct a safety and hazards analysis of those functions; (3) develop the appropriate mitigating measures and controls based on that analysis; (4) apply the controls and implement a periodic reassessment of the activities, and (5) provide for a feedback to revising the work processes as necessary. This analytical approach has been incorporated into the heart of DOE's effort to revise the Radioactive Waste Management Order and represents the overall philosophical approach and major steps of this effort. DOE G 435.1-1 A-41 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Performance-Based Requirements One of the factors that contributed heavily to the shaping of the efforts to revise DOE’s radioactive waste management requirements is the emphasis on performance-based requirements. Through the Department's system for revising and issuing directives there has been a strong movement away from detailed prescriptive requirements toward higher-level and more performance-based requirements. The implementation of performance-based requirements requires methods of measurement or demonstration in order to determine effective implementation and/or compliance. Such requirements are difficult to implement if the requirements are not clearly written, complete guidance is not provided, or the technical basis of the requirements is not known or understood. A particular challenge to this effort, therefore, was to develop not only the appropriate level of performance-based requirements, but to also develop the appropriate level of associated guidance and technical basis. Notably, these key elements of an effective performance-based requirements system have also been some of the key areas of failure with DOE's past requirements, especially with regard to DOE’s radioactive waste management requirements.

When both the goals of performance-based and risk-based requirements are considered, an approach is necessary, which if developed and used properly, can provide the avenue for implementing such requirements effectively. One method of achieving this balance and allowing for a graded approach in the application of the requirements is to implement the requirements at the site level through the development of operation-specific authorization basis documentation. Under the concept of authorization basis documentation, each site-specific waste management operation develops its own vehicle for demonstrating methods of compliance, documenting implementation-level procedures and requirements, and providing the baseline for measurement of performance. The authorization basis is developed based on site-specific conditions and the particular risks and performance needs for the facility, and is approved by the cognizant DOE manager. An example of such authorization basis documentation is the process that DOE currently uses for developing Safety Analysis Reports (SARs) and authorizing facilities to operate. Under this approach, each operation or facility is required to analyze the key hazards of the facility's operations and processes, describe them, develop the controls to mitigate the hazards and the technical basis for such, and provide an overall framework for the operation of the facility. When authorized, the facility then operates to the procedures and operational envelope identified in the authorization basis documentation. Events or occurrences which deviate from the authorization basis trigger re-evaluation and development of additional work process and requirements as necessary. The requirements developed under the General Requirements Chapter of DOE M 435.1-1 provide the umbrella which incorporates the considerations of risk, performance, and authorization basis A-42 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations documentation into DOE’s radioactive waste management system. The technical basis and crosswalk tables presented in this document address both the waste-type specific requirements and the general requirements of DOE M 435.1-1, and where appropriate, references across chapters of the Manual have been included. DOE G 435.1-1 A-43 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations CHAPTER I GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES 1. REQUIREMENTS A. Delegation of Authority. Managers charged with responsibilities within this Manual may delegate authority for these tasks to another manager. All delegations of authority shall be documented. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of almost all functions for all three radioactive waste types. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need for there to always be a DOE manager with direct responsibility for ensuring activities are conducted in a fashion that protects the public, workers, and the environment. This requirement specifically addresses several weaknesses and conditions associated with lack of management and lack of documentation of decisions. Requirements Analysis. New requirement derived for the Manual. Other Considerations. The requirement implements a best management practice in place at most Departmental levels, and is included to emphasize the importance of accountability for ensuring radioactive waste management activities conducted by the Department are done so safely.

B. Use of Guidance. Additional information supporting the requirements in this Manual is contained in the Implementation Guide for use with DOE M 435.1- 1, Radioactive Waste Management Manual. This Guide, DOE G 435.1-1, Implementation Guide for DOE M 435.1-1, shall be reviewed when implementing the requirements of this Manual. The Guide provides additional information and acceptable methods for meeting the requirements. Other methods may be used but must ensure an adequate level of safety commensurate with the hazards associated with the work and be consistent with the radioactive waste management basis. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of most Execute functions for all three radioactive waste types. A-44 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Safety and Hazard Analyses. This requirement derives from the vetting process used in the safety and hazards analyses. Mitigating activities were identified to control the weaknesses and conditions identified, and in many cases, better guidance was recognized as the most effective mitigating action, especially in cases where there was a longstanding requirement that was considered sufficient. The preparation of effective implementation guidance for all requirements was indicated as a result of the safety and hazards analyses. Requirements Analysis. The requirement partially derives from the evaluation of DOE O 251.1A, Directives System, DOE M 251.1-1A, Directives System Manual, and its implementation guidance. Other Considerations. The use of guidance to explain the intention of requirements, along with acceptable ways of meeting the requirements, is a well developed regulatory method used by the NRC. The use of guidance as described in the requirement implements this best management practice for DOE management of radioactive waste. Also, some of the acceptable ways for meeting requirements included in the guidance are there due to the vetting process used in development of performance-based requirements. The source of these acceptable methods is often another requirements document (e.g., WIPP Waste Acceptance Criteria). They may represent the only acceptable way to meet the requirement right now, but the level of specificity is not appropriate for the Manual and the activities to which it applies. The requirement includes the need to document the use of alternative methods, and a rationale if one is used. C. Radioactive Waste Management. All radioactive waste subject to DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and the requirements of this Manual shall be managed as high-level waste, transuranic waste, low-level waste, or mixed low-level waste. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of the top level functions for all three waste types: Formulate, Execute, and Evaluate. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The safety and hazards analyses conducted for determining the essential requirements for radioactive waste management assumed that all radioactive waste was either high-level waste, transuranic waste, or low-level waste, based on the definitions assumed for the three waste types (The definitions in DOE 5820.2A were assumed). Special case waste, non-defense transuranic waste, and other wastes that have been management problems in the past were included in the analysis for the purposes of determining technical requirements needed to manage them, and the essential requirements included in the manual are believed to be sufficient for managing all of the Department’s radioactive waste as one of the three waste types.

DOE G 435.1-1 A-45 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Requirements Analysis. New requirement derived for the Manual. Other Considerations. Because of the special needs of management of mixed low-level waste, the Department has established and manages a mixed low-level waste program independent of the low-level waste management program. The requirement includes consideration of the effectiveness of this program by recognizing that all DOE radioactive waste could be managed within one of these four programs. D. Analysis of Environmental Impacts. Existing and proposed radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities shall meet the requirements of 10 CFR Part 1021, National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures; and DOE O 451.1A, National Environmental Policy Act Compliance Program. All reasonable alternatives shall be considered, as appropriate. Nothing in this Order is meant to restrict consideration of alternatives to proposed actions. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of functions in all three waste types associated with siting, designing, and constructing new waste management facilities. It also partially derives from the analysis of the Develop the program functions for all three waste types Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement partially addresses some weaknesses and conditions associated with poor siting of facilities, and inadequate site characterization data. The requirement also partially addresses the need to involve stakeholders in decision making, a need identified in some of the program development requirements. Requirements Analysis. The requirement is essentially equivalent to and updates the reference in DOE 5820.2A, 6.10. to DOE 5440.1C, National Environmental Policy Act. Other Considerations. None. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. The following requirements and DOE directives are required for all DOE radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities as applicable. Any of the requirements for the following Departmental directives may be waived or modified through application of a DOE-approved requirements tailoring process, such as the “Necessary and Sufficient Closure Process” in DOE P 450.3 and DOE M 450.3-1 and DOE P 450.4, Safety Management System Policy, or by an exemption processed in accordance with the requirements of that directive or DOE M 251.1-1A, Directives System Manual. A-46 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of all Execute functions for all three radioactive waste types. Safety and Hazard Analyses. During the safety and hazard analysis, numerous weaknesses and conditions and needs for controls for radioactive waste management were identified as potentially covered by requirements or DOE directives already in place. Some examples of these weaknesses and conditions are safety documentation, personal protective equipment, and effluent monitoring. The safety and hazards analysis identified the controls and mitigating actions included in these other requirements and directives.

Requirements Analysis. The requirements and directives identified in the safety and hazard analyses that contained necessary mitigating actions and controls were evaluated for their adequacy in addressing the weaknesses and conditions identified for radioactive waste management. Many of these requirements and directives were found to provide controls that were essential to the protection of the public, workers, and the environment. These are listed below to ensure that the requirements they invoke are followed for radioactive waste management facilities. The directives that are listed under this requirement represent those that addressed weaknesses and conditions that; were associated with high hazard scenarios, were associated with numerous accident scenarios, or are known to be significant in management of one of the radioactive waste types. More discussion appears about the specific weaknesses and conditions addressed by the requirement or directive in the following sections. The requirement also imposes the Department’s Integrated Safety Management System as required under DOE P 45.4, Safety Management System Policy. This ensures that if any of these essential requirements and directives are modified or waived, that the hazard associated with the requirement is being adequately controlled. Other Considerations. The requirement includes allowing waivers or modifications to requirements in these directives through any of the accepted processes for doing so within the Department. This is included to implement the Department’s integrated safety management system. The principle allows that alternative requirements are acceptable if a similar process as the one followed in developing the Order demonstrates the controls are the correct set for the situation. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (1) Analysis of Operations Information. Data that measure the environment, safety, and health performance of radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities shall be identified, collected, and analyzed as required by DOE O 210.1, Performance Indicators and Analysis of Operations Information. DOE G 435.1-1 A-47 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of the Evaluate top-level function for all three waste types. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need to perform evaluations of the performance of radioactive waste management facilities in protecting the public, workers, and the environment, and improving performance in critical activities if indicated. Requirements Analysis. Analysis of DOE O 210.1, Performance Indicators and Analysis of Operations Information, indicates that it provides the essential requirements necessary for radioactive waste management facilities to implement an effective analysis of operations information. Other Considerations. None. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (2) Classified Waste. Radioactive waste for which access has been limited for national security reasons and cannot be declassified shall be managed in accordance with the requirements of DOE 5632.1C, Protection and Control of Safeguards and Security Interests, and DOE 5633.3B, Control and Accountability of Nuclear Materials. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of the Execute functions for all three waste types.

Safety and Hazard Analyses. The safety and hazards analyses assumed that classified waste was included in the radioactive wastes for which essential requirements were being developed. Requirements Analysis. Analysis of DOE 5632.1C, Protection and Control of Safeguards and Security Interests, and DOE 5633.3B, Control and Accountability of Nuclear Materials, indicate that they provide the essential requirements necessary for the national security protections needed for management of classified radioactive waste at DOE waste management facilities. Other Considerations. None. A-48 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (3) Conduct of Operations. Radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities shall be conducted in a manner based on consideration of the associated hazards. Waste management facilities, operations, and activities shall meet the requirements of DOE 5480.19, Conduct of Operations Requirement for DOE Facilities. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of the Execute functions for all three waste types. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need for adequate procedures to be developed and implemented for all radioactive waste management operations and activities important to protection of the public, workers, and the environment. Weaknesses and conditions associated with lack of or poor procedures were identified repeatedly in the safety and hazards analysis. Requirements Analysis. Analysis of DOE 5480.19, Conduct of Operations Requirement for DOE Facilities, indicates that it provides the essential requirements necessary for effective development of procedures and other conduct of operations at DOE radioactive waste management facilities. Meeting of these requirements is emphasized by this DOE M 435.1-1 requirement because the weaknesses and conditions associated with poor or lack of procedures was repeatedly identified as potentially contributing to management problems with radioactive waste. Other Considerations. None. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (4) Criticality Safety. Radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities shall be covered by a criticality safety program in accordance with DOE O 420.1, Facility Safety. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of the Execute functions for all three waste types. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need for criticality to be considered in the management of wastes containing fissile or fissionable materials. Potentially DOE G 435.1-1 A-49 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations catastrophic consequences were identified in the safety and hazard analyses for storage, treatment, and disposal scenarios involving weaknesses involving criticality concerns. Requirements Analysis. Analysis of DOE O 420.1, Facility Safety, indicates that it provides the essential requirements necessary for an effective criticality safety program at DOE radioactive waste management facilities. Meeting of these requirements is emphasized by this DOE M 435.1- 1 requirement because of the potential for large consequences indicated in the safety and hazards analyses if criticality safety programs are not carefully adhered to. Other Considerations. The requirement is included for emphasis based partially on comments of the Senior Review Panel on draft versions of the Manual.

E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (5) Emergency Management Program. Radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities shall maintain an emergency management program in accordance with DOE O 151.1, Comprehensive Emergency Management System. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of the Execute functions for all three waste types. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need for adequate emergency management to respond to accident scenarios and potentially hazardous situations involving radioactive waste management. The need for emergency management was identified as a very important mitigating action for situations involving high hazard activities, especially weaknesses and conditions associated with storage of high-level waste, and treatment and pre-treatment of high-level waste, and transportation of all wastes. Requirements Analysis. Analysis of DOE O 151.1, Comprehensive Emergency Management System indicates that it provides the essential requirements necessary for development of an effective emergency management program for DOE that will include radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities. Meeting of these requirements is emphasized by this DOE M 435.1-1 requirement to ensure that the high hazard activities involved in the management of some radioactive wastes has the necessary mitigating activities to ensure protection of the public, workers, and the environment. Other Considerations. None. A-50 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (6) Environmental and Occurrence Reporting. Radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities shall meet the reporting requirements of DOE O 231.1, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting, and DOE O 232.1A, Occurrence Reporting and Processing of Operations Information. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of all of the Execute functions and the Evaluate the program functions for all three radioactive waste types. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need to provide reporting of environmental monitoring and operational data for radioactive waste management operations and activities to ensure the protection of the public, workers, and the environment continues to meet regulatory and stakeholder requirements. The requirement also addresses the need to implement an effective feedback system within an integrated safety management system to effectively evaluate radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities. Requirements Analysis. The requirement is essentially equivalent to and updates the reference in DOE 5820.2A, 6. References to the environmental monitoring order which has been canceled, DOE 5484.1, and the occurrence reporting order which has been canceled, DOE O 231.1, Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting, and DOE O 232.1A, Occurrence Reporting and Processing of Operations Information were evaluated and found to be adequate in implementing environmental monitoring reporting requirements and occurrence reporting requirements for radioactive waste management. This is included to implement the Department’s integrated safety management system, as invoked in the introductory requirement to this section of the Manual, Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives.

Other Considerations. None. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (7) Environmental Monitoring. Radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities shall meet the environmental monitoring requirements of DOE 5400.1, General Environmental Protection Program; and DOE 5400.5, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of all of the Execute functions for all three radioactive waste types. DOE G 435.1-1 A-51 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need to provide monitoring of radioactive waste management operations and activities to ensure the protection of the public, workers, and the environment continues to meet regulatory and stakeholder requirements. The requirement also partially addresses the need to involve stakeholders in decision making, a need identified in some of the program development requirements. Requirements Analysis. The requirement is essentially equivalent to and updates the reference in DOE 5820.2A, 6. References to several environmental compliance orders which have been canceled that required environmental and effluent monitoring. DOE 5400.1, General Environmental Protection; and DOE 5400.5, Radiation Protection of the Public and Environment were evaluated and found to be adequate in implementing environmental monitoring requirements for radioactive waste management facilities. (Some additional monitoring requirements appear in the waste type chapters where specific waste management situations warrant.) Other Considerations. None. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (8) Hazard Analysis Documentation and Authorization Basis. Radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities shall implement DOE Standards, DOE-STD-1027-92, Hazard Categorization and Accident Analysis Techniques for Compliance with DOE 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports, and/or DOE-EM-STD-5502-94, DOE Limited Standard: Hazard Baseline Documentation, and shall, as applicable, prepare and maintain hazard analysis documentation and an authorization basis as required by DOE O 425.1A, Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities, DOE O 5480.21, Unreviewed Safety Questions, DOE 5480.22, Technical Safety Requirements, and DOE 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of the Execute functions for constructing a new facility for all three radioactive waste types. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need for the analysis of the specific hazards associated with a specific radioactive waste management facility, operation, or activity to be considered in the determination of whether the public, workers, and environment are adequately protected. Poor or lack of hazard analysis has been identified repeatedly by the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board as a weakness requiring correction for many Departmental programs. A-52 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Requirements Analysis. DOE O 425.1A, Startup and Restart of Nuclear Facilities, DOE O 5480.21, Unreviewed Safety Questions, DOE 5480.22, Technical Safety Requirements, and DOE 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports contain the Department’s requirements for implementing appropriate safety and hazards documentation for those facilities which warrant it. The requirement is emphasized here because of the potential for large consequences indicated in the safety and hazards analyses if this process is carefully adhered to.

Other Considerations. The requirement is included to implement one of the top-level requirements established for the Order revision, the use of the authorization basis concept. It was recognized during the development of essential requirements that some radioactive waste management facilities activities, and operations already function under the authorization basis system established in the Directives that are invoked by this requirement. This situation is addressed in the guidance on DOE M 435.1-1 under the General Requirement for a radioactive waste management basis. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (9) Life-Cycle Asset Management. Planning, acquisition, operation, maintenance, and disposition of radioactive waste management facilities shall be in accordance with DOE O 430.1A, Life-Cycle Asset Management, and DOE 4330.4B, Maintenance Management Program, including a configuration management process to ensure the integrity of physical assets and systems. Corporate physical asset databases shall be maintained as complete, current inventories of physical assets and systems to allow reliable analysis of existing and potential hazards to the public and workers. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of almost all functions for all three radioactive waste types. Safety and Hazard Analyses. Several effective mitigating actions were identified in the safety and hazard analyses that were assumed to be potentially covered by the implementation of a couple of newer DOE directives. These mitigating activities included improved planning for waste management activities, operations, and facilities, better maintenance of radioactive waste management facilities, equipment, and assets, and a configuration management process for controlling changes to facilities, activities, and requirements important to protection of the public, workers, and the environment. Numerous weaknesses and conditions in many functions were addressed by one of these mitigating actions. Requirements Analysis. DOE O 430.1A, Life-Cycle Asset Management, and DOE 4330.4B, Maintenance Management Program, were evaluated and found to be adequate in implementing DOE G 435.1-1 A-53 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations improved life-cycle asset planning, project management, configuration control, and maintenance for radioactive waste management. Implementation of DOE O 430.1A essentially updates the reference in DOE 5820.2A, 6. References, to the canceled DOE Orders, DOE 4700.1 Project Management System, and DOE 4300.1B, Real Property and Site Development Planning. (Some additional life-cycle planning requirements appear in the waste type chapters where specific waste management situations warrant.) Other Considerations. None. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (10) Mixed Waste. Radioactive waste that contains both source, special nuclear, or by-product material subject to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and a hazardous component is also subject to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), as amended. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of almost all functions for all three radioactive waste types.

Safety and Hazard Analyses. Mixed waste was included in the radioactive wastes that required management in the safety and hazard analyses for all three waste types. Needs for specific controls and specific weaknesses and conditions, if any, were addressed for the management of mixed waste. It was determined that, with a few exceptions, the hazardous constituents were probably sufficiently controlled by any hazardous waste requirements in place. Requirements Analysis. The requirement implements the longstanding Department policy, reflected in the requirement DOE O 435.1, 4.b.(4) that radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities will comply with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws and regulations. This is consistent with and essentially continues the DOE 5820.2A Policy O.5, references to 10 CFR Part 962, in DOE 5820.2A, 6. References. Other Considerations. None. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (11) Packaging and Transportation. Radioactive waste shall be packaged and transported in accordance with DOE O 460.1A, Packaging and Transportation Safety, and DOE O 460.2, Departmental Materials Transportation and Packaging Management. A-54 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of all Execute functions in all three radioactive waste type analyses that involve transport of radioactive waste to another facility. The requirement also derives from the packaging functions in the treatment, storage, and disposal functions for all three waste types. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need to provide adequate controls on the packaging of radioactive waste, and transportation of radioactive waste management from facility to facility, to ensure the protection of the public, workers, and the environment. Transportation of radioactive waste has long been recognized as one of the most hazardous activities associated with radioactive waste management, and also, the activity is conducted with regularity, increasing the chances of a mishap. The requirement also addresses the weaknesses and conditions associated with poorly packaged radioactive waste, leaking waste packages, repackaging of waste, waste that must be returned to the generator, and waste that does not contribute to the performance of a disposal facility. The requirement also partially addresses the need to consider stakeholders in development of requirements or in decision making, a need identified in some of the program development requirements. Requirements Analysis. The requirement is essentially equivalent to and updates the references in DOE 5820.2A, 6. References to several Departmental directives on transportation which have been canceled. DOE O 460.1A, Packaging and Transportation Safety, and DOE O 460.2, Departmental Materials Transportation and Packaging Management were evaluated and found to be adequate in implementing packaging and transportation requirements for radioactive waste. (Some additional packaging and transportation requirements appear in the waste type chapters where specific waste management situations warrant.) Other Considerations. None. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (12) Quality Assurance Program. Radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities shall develop and maintain a quality assurance program that meets the requirements of 10 CFR 830.120, Quality Assurance Requirements, and DOE O 414.1, Quality Assurance, as applicable.

Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of most of the Execute functions of all three waste types. DOE G 435.1-1 A-55 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need for radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities that are important to protection of the public, workers, and the environment to adhere to a controlled process for contracting, production, record keeping, auditing, labeling, and other elements that are addressed in quality assurance programs implemented in nuclear facilities. The requirement addresses the weaknesses and conditions of poor quality materials, workmanship, documentation, training, and evaluations. Requirements Analysis. This requirement implements requirements promulgated since DOE 5820.2A, 6. References, referred to DOE 5700.6B, Quality Assurance. 10 CFR 830.120, Quality Assurance Requirements and Responsibilities, and DOE O 414.1, Quality Assurance, provide Departmental approved quality assurance programs and processes adequate for radioactive waste management. They are emphasized in DOE M 435.1-1 because adherence to the requirements in Quality Assurance Programs was identified as an extremely effective mitigating factor for many weaknesses and conditions identified in the safety and hazard analyses . Other Considerations. Following the requirements of the quality assurance directives also addresses the needs for conducting effective evaluations of radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities which were identified in the analysis of the Evaluate functions for all three waste types. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (13) Radiation Protection. Radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities shall meet the requirements of 10 CFR Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection, and DOE 5400.5, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of all of the Execute functions for all three radioactive waste types. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need to provide the protection of the public, workers, and the environment from radioactive waste management operations and activities. Requirements Analysis. The requirement is essentially equivalent to and updates the DOE 5820.2A, 6. References to several environmental compliance orders which have been canceled that required protection of the workers, public, and the environment for radioactive waste management operations and activities. These requirements are also consistent with the Policy of DOE 5820.2A contained in that Order at paragraph 5. 10 CFR Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection, and DOE 5400.5, Radiation Protection of the Public and Environment are the A-56 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations fundamental Departmental directives that provide these protection requirements. This requirement implements three of the top-level requirements of the Department for providing controls on the management of radioactive waste, and also implements in the Manual, the fundamental requirements of DOE O 435.1, O.4, Requirements. Other Considerations. None. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives.

(14) Records Management. Radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities shall develop and maintain a record-keeping system, as required by DOE O 200.1, Information Management Program, and DOE O 414.1, Quality Assurance. Records shall be established and maintained for radioactive waste generated, treated, stored, transported, or disposed. To the extent possible, records prepared in response to other requirements may be used to satisfy the documentation requirements of this Manual. Additional records may be required to satisfy the regulations applicable to the hazardous waste components of mixed waste. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of almost all of the functions of all three waste types. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need for radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities to provide effective record keeping on information and data are important to protection of the public, workers, and the environment. The requirement addresses significant weaknesses and conditions associated with poor or lack of effective record keeping in storage, treatment, and disposal of waste. Particular concerns were identified when waste was left in storage longer than anticipated, during any transfers of waste and information, and for long-term considerations such as disposal. Requirements Analysis. This requirement implements requirements promulgated since DOE 5820.2A, 6. References, referred to DOE 5700.6B, Quality Assurance. DOE O 200.1, Information Management Program, and DOE O 414.1, Quality Assurance, were evaluated and found to provide adequate record keeping controls for radioactive waste management. The requirement specifically calls out record keeping for the activities of generation, storage, treatment, transportation, and disposal because some significant consequences were identified if record keeping was not sufficient, and because poor record keeping practices had already contributed to known problems in the complex. DOE G 435.1-1 A-57 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Other Considerations. This general requirement contains additional requirements beyond a reference to another DOE directive or a requirement due to consolidation of some similar requirements in the individual waste type chapters, and in response to comments on draft versions of the Manual. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (15) Release of Waste Containing Residual Radioactive Material. The process for determining and documenting that waste is suitable to be released and managed without regard to its radioactive content shall be in accordance with the criteria and requirements in DOE 5400.5, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of the Develop the program functions for low-level waste management. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need to recognize that some low- level waste contains so little radioactivity that it is more appropriate to manage it without regard for its radioactive content, and still provide adequate protection to the public, workers, and the environment.

Requirements Analysis. The requirement is a new requirement that further implements policies established by the Office of Environment and Health for release of property containing residual radioactive material, including waste. Guidance for the policy, implemented under DOE 5440.5, entitled Application of DOE 5400.5 Requirements for Release and Control of Property Containing Residual Radioactive Material, is the source of the requirement statement. The Order and guidance are considered sufficient to implement a program and process for managing some radioactive waste without regard to its radioactivity. Other Considerations. This requirement addresses the upper level criterion of achieving cost- effective operations for radioactive waste management. The final wording of the requirement is consistent with the policy direction of the Office of Environment and Health. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (16) Safeguards and Security. Appropriate features shall be incorporated into the design and operation of radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities to prevent unauthorized access and operations, and for purposes of nuclear materials control and accountability, where applicable; and shall be consistent with DOE O 470.1, Safeguards and Security Program. A-58 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of the Execute functions for all three waste types. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need for adequate security and safeguards of special nuclear material to be implemented and conducted for all radioactive waste management operations and activities. Weaknesses and conditions associated with lack of or poor security and safeguards were identified repeatedly in the safety and hazards analysis Requirements Analysis. Analysis of DOE O 470.1, Safeguards and Security Program, indicates that the essential requirements necessary for effective deployment of safeguards and security at DOE radioactive waste management facilities are in that directive. Meeting these requirements is emphasized by this DOE M 435.1-1 requirement because the weaknesses and conditions associated with poor or lack of security and safeguards for special nuclear material were repeatedly identified as potentially contributing to management problems with radioactive waste. Other Considerations. None. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (17) Safety Management System. Radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities shall incorporate the principles of integrated safety management as described in DOE P 450.4, Safety Management System Policy, and DOE P 450.5, Line Environment, Safety and Health Oversight, and meet the requirements of the safety management systems sections of 48 CFR Chapter 9, Department of Energy Acquisition Regulations and DOE M 411.1-1, Manual of Safety Management Functions, Responsibilities, and Authorities. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of the Evaluate functions for all three waste types.

Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need for the Department’s integrated Safety Management System’s policies and procedures to be implemented for all radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities. Weaknesses and conditions associated with lack of or poor oversight and evaluations of radioactive waste management functions were identified repeatedly in the safety and hazards analysis. The need for systematic evaluation of radioactive waste management programs, facilities, and operations was identified during development of the Implementation Plan in response to Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 94-2, and is included as a commitment to the Board in that document. DOE G 435.1-1 A-59 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Requirements Analysis. During the requirements analysis, the Department’s integrated Safety Management System was still in a developmental stage, and the benefits of full implementation of it were not recognized. Even though some elements of the system were used in the development of the Order and Manual, the original set of requirements did not include a citation for radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities to follow the Safety Management System requirements (see Other Considerations). Only a few requirements were cited in the Manual concerning evaluations of programs, facilities, operations, and activities and how to utilize the results of evaluations for improvement. Other Considerations. In response to comments on the draft versions of the Order and Manual by DOE-EH, the citation for following the Department’s integrated Safety Management System was added. Effective evaluations and oversight of radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities will result from following the Safety Management System Directives. Improvements from feedback systems, such as internal safety audits, will result from full implementation of the Safety Management System. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (18) Site-Evaluation and Facility Design. New radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities shall be sited and designed in accordance with DOE O 420.1, Facility Safety, and DOE O 430.1A, Life-Cycle Asset Management. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of the Execute function for constructing new facilities in all three radioactive waste type analyses. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need to provide adequate site characteristics to the facility design process, and for adequately designing the facility to address protection of the public, workers, and the environment. The requirement addresses numerous weaknesses and conditions associated with problems that could potentially develop from poor design, especially in terms of processing waste in treatment, and in the need for long-term performance of a disposal facility. The requirement partially addresses some scenarios in the safety and hazards analyses that have high consequences associated with an accident involving the facility. Requirements Analysis. The requirement is essentially equivalent to and updates the references in DOE 5820.2A, 6. References to DOE 6430.1A, which is canceled. DOE O 420.1, Facility Safety, and DOE O 430.1A, Life-Cycle Asset Management were evaluated and found to be mostly adequate in implementing site evaluation and facility design requirements for radioactive waste management facilities. However, some weaknesses and conditions significant to

A-60 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations management of radioactive waste are not specifically addressed in these two Orders. They are still invoked because they do address a large number of weaknesses and conditions, and also establish administrative and program elements that are necessary to control site evaluation and facility design. To address the specific weaknesses and conditions not addressed in the two Orders, additional site evaluation and facility design requirements appear in the waste type chapters where specific waste management situations warrant. Other Considerations. None. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (19) Training and Qualification. A training and qualification program shall be implemented for radioactive waste management program personnel, and shall meet the requirements of DOE O 360.1, Training, and DOE 5480.20A, Personnel Selection, Qualification, and Training Requirements for DOE Nuclear Facilities. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of the Execute functions for all three waste types. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need for adequate training and qualification of personnel to be implemented and conducted for all radioactive waste management operations and activities important to protection of the public, workers, and the environment. Weaknesses and conditions associated with lack of or poor training and personnel qualifications were identified repeatedly in the safety and hazards analysis Requirements Analysis. Analysis of DOE O 360.1, Training, and DOE 5480.20A, Personnel Selection, Qualification, and Training Requirements for DOE Nuclear Facilities, indicates that they provide the essential requirements necessary for effective development of training procedures and programs and qualification of personnel procedures at DOE radioactive waste management facilities. Meeting these requirements is emphasized by this DOE M 435.1-1 requirement because the weaknesses and conditions associated with poor or lack of training and qualification of personnel was repeatedly identified as potentially contributing to management problems with radioactive waste. Other Considerations. None. DOE G 435.1-1 A-61 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (20) Waste Minimization and Pollution Prevention. Waste minimization and pollution prevention shall be implemented for radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities to meet the requirements of Executive Order 12856, Federal Compliance with Right-to-Know Laws and Pollution Prevention Requirements, and Executive Order 13101, Greening the Government through Waste Prevention, Recycling, and Federal Acquisition, and DOE 5400.1, General Environmental Protection Program. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of specific functions identified in the analysis of all three waste types for minimization of waste generation. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The safety and hazard analyses identified that waste minimization, pollution prevention, and where appropriate, volume reduction, were effective mitigating actions against many of the hazards associated with radioactive waste management.

Requirements Analysis. The requirement is consistent with the policy implemented at DOE 5820.2A, paragraph 5. The existence of several executive level positions that are called out in the requirement provided the necessary controls that were needed to flow down to appropriate waste minimization techniques at the actual activity level, and were found to be sufficient. Other Considerations. Implementation of waste minimization and pollution prevention was one of the top-level principles formulating the basic requirements for the Order and Manual. E. Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. (21) Worker Protection. Radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities shall meet the requirements of DOE O 440.1A, Worker Protection Management for DOE Federal and Contractor Employees. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of all of the Execute functions for all three radioactive waste types. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need to provide the protection of the workers from radioactive waste management operations and activities that involve hazards not solely associated with the radioactive characteristic of material being used, but which are required to be conducted. Because of the need to provide protection from the radioactive hazard, workers A-62 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations may be subjected to other hazards, such as working in confined spaces, or with complex machinery, that involve their own hazards for which workers must be protected. Requirements Analysis. The requirement is consistent with the Policy of DOE 5820.2A contained in that Order at paragraph 5. for protecting workers. DOE O 440.1A, Worker Protection Management for DOE Federal and Contractor Employees is the Departmental directive that provides the basic protection requirements for workers. This requirement implements the top-level requirement of the Department for providing controls on the management of radioactive waste, and also implements in the Manual, the requirements of DOE O 435.1, O.4 Requirements, paragraph (3), Protect the work force. Other Considerations. None. 2. RESPONSIBILITIES A. Program Secretarial Officers. Program Secretarial Officers with radioactive waste management facilities, operations, or activities are responsible within their respective programs for ensuring that the Field Element Managers meet the requirements of DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and this Manual. B. Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management. The Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management is responsible for: (1) Complex-Wide Radioactive Waste Management Programs. Establishing and maintaining integrated Complex-Wide Radioactive Waste Management Programs for high-level, transuranic, low-level, and mixed low-level waste. These programs shall use a systematic approach to planning, execution, and evaluation to ensure that waste generation, storage, treatment, and disposal needs are met and coordinated across the DOE complex. (2) Changes to Regulations and DOE Directives. Ensuring changes to regulations and DOE directives are reviewed and, when necessary, incorporated into revisions of this Manual to ensure the basis for safe radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities is maintained.

C. Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety, and Health. The Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health is responsible for providing an independent overview of DOE radioactive waste management and DOE G 435.1-1 A-63 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations decommissioning programs to determine compliance with DOE environment, safety, and health requirements and applicable Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and state regulations, including: (1) Advising the Secretary of the status of Departmental compliance with the requirements of DOE O 435.1, this Manual, and applicable provisions of other DOE Orders. (2) Conducting independent appraisals and audits of DOE waste management programs. (3) Reviewing site Waste Management Plans with regard to compliance with DOE environment, safety, and health requirements. D. Deputy Assistant Secretary for Waste Management. The Deputy Assistant Secretary for Waste Management is responsible for: (1) Complex-Wide Radioactive Waste Management Program Plans. Developing, implementing, and maintaining integrated Complex-Wide Radioactive Waste Management Program Plans for high-level, transuranic, low-level, and mixed low-level waste. Each plan shall, at the DOE complex-wide level, describe the functional elements, organizations, responsibilities, and activities that comprise the system needed to store, treat and dispose of radioactive waste in a manner that is protective of the public, workers, and the environment. In addition, the plans shall: (a) Present a waste management strategy that integrates waste projections and life-cycle waste management planning into complex-wide facility configuration decisions; and (b) Describe the approach to research and technology development being pursued to improve safety and/or efficiency in managing radioactive waste. (2) Waste Management Data System. Establishing and maintaining a system to compile waste generation projection data and other information concerning radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities across the complex. E. Deputy Assistant Secretaries for Waste Management and Environmental Restoration. The Deputy Assistant Secretary for Waste Management and the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Restoration are responsible for: A-64 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations (1) Disposal. Reviewing and approving, along with EH-1, transuranic waste disposal facility performance assessments and other disposal documents as required in waste specific chapters for which DOE is responsible for making compliance determinations. Reviewing and approving performance assessments and composite analyses, or appropriate CERCLA documentation, for low-level waste disposal facilities, and issuing disposal authorization statements. (a) The Deputy Assistant Secretaries shall establish a review panel consisting of DOE personnel to review low-level waste disposal facility performance assessments and composite analyses, review appropriate CERCLA documentation, recommend low-level waste disposal facility compliance determinations to the Deputy Assistant Secretaries, and develop disposal authorization statements. (b) The Deputy Assistant Secretaries shall issue disposal authorization statements containing conditions that low-level waste disposal facilities must meet in order to operate with an approved radioactive waste management basis.

(2) Site Closure Plans. Reviewing and approving closure plans and other closure documentation for deactivated high-level waste facilities/sites and issuing authorization for closure activities to proceed. Basis: Functions Evaluated. Generally the Responsibilities do not derive from the analysis of radioactive waste management functions. The specific responsibilities reflected in the above requirements are derived from the analysis of the top-level functions of Develop, Execute, and Evaluate the Program evaluated for all three radioactive waste management types. Safety and Hazard Analyses. Generally, the Responsibilities do not derive from the safety and hazards analyses of radioactive waste management. These requirements address the Low-Level Waste Complex-Wide Review Vulnerabilities on Waste Forecasting, Disposal Facility Capacity, and Approval of Radiological Performance Assessments for low-level waste disposal facilities. The responsibility concerning changes to regulations did derive from the safety and hazards analyses. Existing regulations and directives were found to provide controls which mitigated weakness and conditions identified during the safety and hazards analysis, so any changes in these existing regulations need to be analyzed for their impact on the safety of radioactive waste management activities. DOE G 435.1-1 A-65 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Requirements Analysis. These requirements are essentially equivalent to the assignments of Responsibilities in DOE 5820.2A. The specific responsibilities reflect updates to the responsibilities in DOE 5820.2A to reflect the current organizations, revisions to remove any responsibility discussions of organizations that do not implement any essential radioactive waste management functions or requirements, the implementation of the principle of a radioactive waste management basis for operating a facility, and the implementation of the majority of radioactive waste management functions integral to protecting the public, the workers, and the environment by DOE field operations. Commitments made in response to Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 94-2 provide the basis for the review and approval of performance assessments and composite analyses, and the issuance of a disposal authorization statement (see Other Considerations). The low-level waste chapter technical basis contains additional discussions about these requirements. Other Considerations. The final wording and the elements that appear in the Responsibilities section result from achieving consistency between waste type chapters and from responses to comments on the draft versions of the Manual. The specific discussions on the review panel for low-level waste disposal facilities’ performance assessments and composite analyses are included in response to comments made by the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board so that DOE M 435.1-1 would be consistent with commitments made and review methods implemented in response to Recommendation 94-2. 2. RESPONSIBILITIES F. Field Element Managers. Field Element Managers are responsible for: (1) Site-Wide Radioactive Waste Management Programs. Developing, documenting, implementing, and maintaining a Site-Wide Radioactive Waste Management Program. The Program shall use a systematic approach for planning, executing, and evaluating the site-wide management of radioactive waste in a manner that supports the Complex-Wide Radioactive Waste Management Programs and ensures that the requirements of DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and this Manual are met.

(2) Radioactive Waste Management Basis. Ensuring a radioactive waste management basis is developed and maintained for each DOE radioactive waste management facility, operation, and activity; and ensuring review and approval of the basis before operations begin. The Radioactive Waste Management Basis shall: A-66 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations (a) Reference or define the conditions under which the facility may operate based on the radioactive waste management documentation; (b) Include the applicable elements identified in the specific waste-type chapters of this Manual; and (c) Be developed using the graded approach process. (3) Waste Minimization and Pollution Prevention. Ensuring implementation of waste minimization and pollution prevention programs. (4) Approval of Exemptions for Use of Non-DOE Facilities. DOE radioactive waste shall be treated, stored, and in the case of low-level waste, disposed of at the site where the waste is generated, if practical; or at another DOE facility. If DOE capabilities are not practical or cost effective, exemptions may be approved to allow use of non-DOE facilities for the storage, treatment, or disposal of DOE radioactive waste based on the following requirements: (a) Such non-DOE facilities shall: 1. Comply with applicable Federal, State, and local requirements; 2. Have the necessary permit(s), license(s), and approval(s) for the specific waste(s); and 3. Be determined by the Field Element Manager to be acceptable based on a review conducted annually by DOE. (b) Exemptions for the use of non-DOE facilities shall be documented to be cost effective and in the best interest of DOE, including consideration of alternatives for on-site disposal, an alternative DOE site, and available non-DOE facilities; consideration of life- cycle cost and potential liability; and protection of public health and the environment. (c) DOE waste shall be sufficiently characterized and certified to meet the facility’s waste acceptance criteria. DOE G 435.1-1 A-67 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations (d) Appropriate National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review must be completed. For actions taken under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), it is DOE’s policy to incorporate NEPA values into the CERCLA documentation. (e) Headquarters shall be notified of any exemption allowing use of a non-DOE facility and the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety and Health (EH-1) shall be consulted prior to the exemption being executed. (f) Host States and State Compacts where non-DOE facilities are located shall be consulted prior to approval of an exemption to use such facilities and notified prior to shipments being made. (5) Environmental Restoration, Decommissioning, and Other Cleanup Waste. Ensuring the management and disposal of radioactive waste resulting from environmental restoration activities, including decommissioning, meet the substantive requirements of DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and this Manual. Environmental restoration activities using the CERCLA process (in accordance with Executive Order 12580) may demonstrate compliance with the substantive requirements of DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and this Manual (including the Performance Assessment and performance objectives, as well as the Composite Analysis) through the CERCLA process. However, compliance with all substantive requirements of DOE O 435.1 not met through the CERCLA process must be demonstrated. Environmental restoration activities which will result in the off-site management and disposal of radioactive waste must meet the applicable requirements of DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and this Manual for the management and disposal of those off-site wastes. Field Elements performing environmental restoration activities involving development and management of radioactive waste disposal facilities under the CERCLA process shall:

(a) Submit certification to the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Restoration that compliance with the substantive requirements of DOE O 435.1 have been met through application of the CERCLA process; and (b) Submit the decision document, such as the Record of Decision, or any other document that serves as the authorization to dispose, to A-68 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Restoration for approval. (6) Radioactive Waste Acceptance Requirements. Ensuring development, review, approval, and implementation of the radioactive waste acceptance requirements for facilities that receive waste for storage, treatment, or disposal. Radioactive waste acceptance requirements shall establish the facility’s requirements for the receipt, evaluation, and acceptance of waste. (7) Radioactive Waste Generator Requirements. Ensuring development, review, approval, and implementation of a program for waste generation planning, characterization, certification, and transfer. This program shall address characterization of waste, preparation of waste for transfer, certification that waste meets the receiving facility’s radioactive waste acceptance requirements, and transfer of waste. (8) Closure Plans. Ensuring development, review, approval, and implementation of closure plans for radioactive waste management facilities in accordance with the applicable requirements in the waste- type chapters of this Manual. (9) Defense-In-Depth. Ensuring defense-in-depth principles are incorporated where potential uncertainties or vulnerabilities warrant their use when reviewing and approving radioactive waste management activities and documents. These principles advocate the use of multiple levels of engineered and administrative controls to provide protection to the public, workers, and the environment. (10) Oversight. Ensuring oversight of radioactive waste management facilities, operations, and activities is conducted. Oversight shall ensure radioactive waste management program activities are conducted in accordance with a radioactive waste management basis and meet the requirements of DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and this Manual. (11) Training and Qualification. Ensuring a training and qualification program is implemented for designated radioactive waste management program personnel, and the training is commensurate with job duties and responsibilities. Only those personnel who have been trained and qualified shall design or operate safety (safety class and safety significant) structures, systems, and components. DOE G 435.1-1 A-69 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations (12) As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA). Ensuring ALARA principles for radiation protection are incorporated when reviewing and approving radioactive waste management activities. (13) Storage. Ensuring all radioactive waste is stored in a manner that protects the public, workers, and the environment in accordance with a radioactive waste management basis, and that the integrity of waste storage is maintained for the expected time of storage and does not compromise meeting the disposal performance objectives for protection of the public and environment when the waste is disposed. (14) Treatment. Ensuring all radioactive waste requiring treatment is treated in a manner that protects the public, workers, and the environment and in accordance with a radioactive waste management basis.

(15) Disposal. Ensuring radioactive waste is disposed in a manner that protects the public, workers, and the environment and in accordance with a radioactive waste management basis. Reviewing specific transuranic or low-level waste documentation including the performance assessment and composite analysis, or appropriate CERCLA documentation, prior to forwarding them to Headquarters for approval, and obtaining and ensuring the facility is operated in accordance with the disposal authorization statement. Conducting performance assessment and composite analysis maintenance. (16) Monitoring. Ensuring monitoring is conducted for all radioactive waste management facilities as required. Ensuring that disposal facilities are monitored, as appropriate, for compliance with conditions of the disposal authorization statement. (17) Material and Waste Declassification and Waste Management. Ensuring, to the extent practical, radioactive material and waste generated under a program that is classified for national security reasons is declassified or rendered suitable for unclassified radioactive waste management. (18) Waste Incidental to Reprocessing. Ensuring that waste incidental to reprocessing determinations are made by either the “citation” or “evaluation” process described in Chapter II of this Manual. Ensuring consultation and coordination with the Office of Environmental Management for waste determined to be incidental to reprocessing through the “evaluation” process. A-70 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations (19) Waste With No Identified Path to Disposal. Ensuring a process is developed and implemented for identifying the generation of radioactive waste with no identified path to disposal, and reviewing and approving conditions under which radioactive waste with no identified path to disposal may be generated. Headquarters shall be notified of the decisions to generate a waste with no identified path to disposal. (20) Corrective Actions. Ensuring a process exists for proposing, reviewing, approving, and implementing corrective actions when necessary to ensure that the requirements of DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and this Manual are met, and to address conditions that are not protective of the public, workers, or the environment. The process shall allow workers, through the appropriate level of management, to stop or curtail work when they discover conditions that pose an imminent danger or other serious hazard to workers or the public, or are not protective of the environment. Basis: Functions Evaluated. Generally the Responsibilities for the Field Element Manager do not derive from the analysis of any specific radioactive waste management functions. However, the specific responsibility of the Field Element Manager to develop and implement a site-wide radioactive waste management program is derived from the analysis of the top-level functions of Develop, Execute, and Evaluate the Program evaluated for all three radioactive waste management types. Safety and Hazard Analyses. Generally, the Responsibilities do not derive from the safety and hazards analyses of radioactive waste management. These requirements do address the Complex- Wide Review Vulnerabilities on Waste Forecasting, Disposal Facility Capacity, Storage of Low- Level Waste, Waste Characterization, and No Path Forward Waste.

Requirements Analysis. These requirements are basically equivalent to the assignment of Responsibilities in DOE 5820.2A to the heads of field organizations. These specific responsibilities reflect updates to the responsibilities in DOE 5820.2A to reflect the current facilities, functions, operations, organizations, and activities associated with radioactive waste management, the implementation of the principle of a radioactive waste management basis for operating a facility, and the implementation of the majority of radioactive waste management functions integral to protecting the public, the workers, and the environment by DOE field operations. Commitments made in response to Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board Recommendation 94-2 provide the basis for several specific Field Element Manager responsibilities. The language for some of these is derived from the DNFSB 94-2 deliverable, “Revised Interim Policy on Regulatory Structure for Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management DOE G 435.1-1 A-71 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations and Disposal,” (letter from A. Alm, July 31, 1996), and the DNFSB 94-2 deliverable, “Guidance for Complying with DOE 5820.2A, Radioactive Waste Management, for Onsite Management and Disposal of Low-Level Waste (LLW) Resulting from Environmental Restoration Activities.” Language for the use of non-DOE facilities requirement is derived from, “Delegation of Authority to Grant Exemptions to Department of Energy Order 5820.2A to Allow for the Use of Commercial Facilities for Disposal of Department of Energy Low-Level Waste.” Other Considerations. Implementation of waste minimization and pollution prevention, defense- in-depth, a radioactive waste management basis, ALARA, and corrective actions reflect implementation of top-level criteria for the Order and Manual requirements development. Also, some of the requirements implement specific responsibilities of the Department’s Integrated Safety Management System. (The implementation of the top-level criteria and the Department’s integrated safety management system continues through the specification of some waste type chapter requirements. The waste type chapter technical bases should be consulted for additional discussions to find those contributions to meeting the upper level criteria). The final contents of some of the Field Element Manager responsibilities is due to achieving consistency among the waste types. This included consolidating elements of a requirement common to all three waste types into one general requirement, and responding to comments on draft versions of the Manual, especially from field personnel. G. All Personnel. All personnel are responsible for: (1) Problem Identification. Identifying and reporting radioactive waste management facilities, operations, or activities that do not meet the requirements of DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and this Manual, or that pose a threat to the safety of the public, workers, or the environment. (2) Shutdown or Curtailment of Activities. Stopping or curtailing work, through the appropriate level of management, to prohibit continuation of conditions or activities which pose an imminent danger or other serious hazard to workers or the public, or are not protective of the environment. Basis: Functions Evaluated. Generally the Responsibilities do not derive from the analysis of radioactive waste management functions. These responsibilities of all personnel involved with radioactive waste management derive from the analysis of the top-level function of Evaluate the Program for all three radioactive waste management types.

Safety and Hazard Analyses. Generally, the Responsibilities do not derive from the safety and hazards analyses of radioactive waste management. A-72 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Requirements Analysis. New requirement derived for the Manual. DOE O 440.1A, Worker Protection Management for DOE Federal and Contractor Employees, was evaluated and this essential set of requirements was derived from the requirements of that Order. Other Considerations. Implementation of responsibilities for identification of problems and implementing corrective actions through appropriate levels of management implements the Department’s integrated safety management system, as invoked in the introductory requirement to this section of the Manual, Requirements of Other Regulations and DOE Directives. DOE G 435.1-1 A-73 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations BASIS FOR REGULATION OF HIGH-LEVEL WASTE The Department of Energy (DOE) O 5820.2A, Radioactive Waste Management, issued in September 1988, established the policies and guidelines for managing the Department’s high-level waste and any other materials which, because of their highly radioactive nature (level of health risk, longevity of health risk and thermal activity) require similar handling. The Order assumed that unless demonstrated to the contrary, all high-level waste shall be considered to be radioactive mixed waste and subject to the requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. In addition, the Order did not apply to the management by the Department of commercially generated high-level radioactive waste nor did it apply to the geologic disposal of high-level waste produced by the Department’s activities and operations. Such materials were to be managed by the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management under the requirements of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended. The basic assumptions made in DOE 5820.2A for the management of high-level waste are still valid for DOE O 435.1. However, since the issuance of DOE 5820.2A the need to comply with a series of regulatory requirements has contributed to the focus and content of the revised Radioactive Waste Management Order, DOE O 435.1. For example, since 1988 the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management has issued DOE/RW-0351P, Waste Acceptance System Requirements Document (WASRD), that describes the technical requirements and functions to be satisfied by high-level waste form producers in order that their spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste can be accepted into the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System. The waste acceptance requirements contained in this document are derived from a number of documents, including statutes, regulations, and DOE directives with a primary driver being the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s 10 CFR Part 60 regulation, Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in Geologic Repositories. In response to the WASRD the DOE Office of Environmental Management has developed, and implemented, DOE-EM-0093, Waste Acceptance Product Specifications for Vitrified High-Level Waste Forms (EM-WAPS), which serve as the technical specifications which the high-level waste form producers are required to meet in order to ensure acceptance of their vitrified waste form into the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System.

In 1992, Congress passed amendments to the Solid Waste Disposal Act, entitled the Federal Facility Compliance Act, which required DOE to prepare plans for the developing treatment capacities and technologies for mixed waste. Pursuant to this Act, DOE prepared site-specific treatment plans, and consent orders or agreements that were reached with the affected States and EPA. These consent orders and agreements typically specify how and when high-level wastes which also exhibit hazardous characteristics or contain RCRA-regulated hazardous components are to be retrieved, characterized, treated, and stored for shipment to the geologic repository. This process has involved many stakeholder groups and different regulatory entities. A-74 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations The High-Level Waste Requirements chapter of the Radioactive Waste Management Manual, DOE M 435.1-1, is consistent with the legislation and requirements associated with the disposal of high-level waste at a geologic repository. In addition, to requirements contained in DOE 5820.2A, the current requirements for the management of high-level waste have been prepared to apply to a broad range of management functions, from generation through storage, pretreatment, treatment, and post-treatment storage. The previously detailed requirements related to managing and preparing waste for disposal are now replaced by a higher-level, performance-based set of requirements. The following pages explain the basis for the high-level waste management requirements included in DOE M 435.1-1. DOE G 435.1-1 A-75 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations CHAPTER II HIGH-LEVEL WASTE REQUIREMENTS II.A. Definition of High-Level Waste. High-level waste is the highly radioactive waste 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 other highly radioactive material that is determined, consistent with existing law, to require permanent isolation. Basis: Functions Evaluated. Requirement is not based on functions. Safety and Hazard Analyses. Requirement is not based on safety and hazard analyses. Requirements Analysis. The requirement is based on the definition of high-level waste contained in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended, and implemented by 10 CFR Part 60, Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Waste in Geologic Repositories. Slight revisions to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act definition for high-level waste were directed by DOE General Counsel for the definition contained in DOE M 435.1-1. These revisions include a deletion of the reference to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This is replaced by the wording “consistent with existing law,” and remains a mechanism for determining a waste is high-level waste. The wording in DOE M 435.1-1 is fundamentally the same as the definition contained in DOE 5820.2A. However, this latter definition, contained in an attachment to the Order titled, Definitions, did not include the authority for other waste to be determined to be high level that require permanent isolation. Other Considerations. This definition reflects DOE application of the statutory definitions to the scope of this Order. High-level waste, as defined in DOE M 435.1-1, does not include DOE- managed spent nuclear fuel since, at the time of the preparation of the Manual, DOE had not declared this material a waste.

II.B. Waste Incidental to Reprocessing. Waste resulting from reprocessing spent nuclear fuel that is determined to be incidental to reprocessing is not high-level waste, and shall be managed under DOE’s regulatory authority in accordance with the requirements for transuranic A-76 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations waste or low-level waste, as appropriate. When determining whether spent nuclear fuel reprocessing plant wastes shall be managed as another waste type or as high- level waste, either the citation or evaluation process described below shall be used: (1) Citation. Waste incidental to reprocessing by citation includes spent nuclear fuel reprocessing plant wastes that meet the description included in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (34 FR 8712) for proposed Appendix D, 10 CFR Part 50, Paragraphs 6 and 7. These radioactive wastes are the result of reprocessing plant operations, such as, but not limited to: contaminated job wastes including laboratory items such as clothing, tools, and equipment. (2) Evaluation. Determinations that any waste is incidental to reprocessing by the evaluation process shall be developed under good record-keeping practices, with an adequate quality assurance process, and shall be documented to support the determinations. Such wastes may include, but are not limited to, spent nuclear fuel reprocessing plant wastes that: (a) Will be managed as low-level waste and meet the following criteria: 1. Have been processed, or will be processed, to remove key radionuclides to the maximum extent that is technically and economically practical; and 2. Will be managed to meet safety requirements comparable to the performance objectives set out in 10 CFR Part 61, Subpart C, Performance Objectives; and 3. Are to be managed, pursuant to DOE’s authority under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and in accordance with the provisions of Chapter IV of this Manual, provided the waste will be incorporated in a solid physical form at a concentration that does not exceed the applicable concentration limits for Class C low-level waste as set out in 10 CFR 61.55, Waste Classification; or will meet alternative requirements for waste classification and characterization as DOE may authorize. (b) Will be managed as transuranic waste and meet the following criteria: DOE G 435.1-1 A-77 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations 1. Have been processed, or will be processed, to remove key radionuclides to the maximum extent that is technically and economically practical; and 2. Will be incorporated in a solid physical form and meet alternative requirements for waste classification and characteristics, as DOE may authorize; and 3. Are managed pursuant to DOE’s authority under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter III of this Manual, as appropriate. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement is not based on functions. Safety and Hazard Analyses. This requirement is not based on safety and hazard analyses. Requirements Analysis. The Citation process is based on the cited Federal Register Notice, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (34 FR 8712) for Appendix D, 10 CFR Part 50. The Evaluation process is based on the NRC response to the petition regarding disposal of waste at the Hanford site, the NRC (States of Washington & Oregon): Denial of Petition for Rulemaking, 58 FR 12342-12347, March 4, 1993; and the NRC previous determination that similar operations at SRS (separation of the low-activity fraction) should be characterized as incidental waste and not high- level waste (52 FR 5992-6001). DOE 5820.2A did not contain a requirement regarding a waste incidental to reprocessing determination process.

Other Considerations. Requirement reflects input from discussions with the NRC staff and the DOE Office of General Counsel and DOE Office of Environment, Safety, and Health (EH). Discussions with NRC staff resulted in their offer to review, on macro basis, DOE Evaluation Process determinations, if DOE decided their participation was needed. DOE General Counsel’s review of draft versions of the Evaluation process agreed with the NRC, NRC participation is not required and that DOE clearly has the authority to review and accept Evaluation process determinations. DOE EH review resulted in clarifying the differences in evaluation process criteria for low-level waste and transuranic waste. This requirement formalizes a determination process that has been used by DOE high-level waste sites. II.C. Management of Specific Wastes. The following provide for management of specific wastes as high-level waste in accordance with the requirements in this Chapter: A-78 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations (1) Mixed High-Level Waste. Unless demonstrated otherwise, all high-level waste shall be considered mixed waste and is subject to the requirements of both the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as amended, DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and this Manual. (2) TSCA-Regulated Waste. High-level waste containing polychlorinated biphenyls, asbestos, or other such regulated toxic components shall be managed in accordance with requirements derived from the Toxic Substances Control Act, as amended, DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and this Manual. Basis: Functions Evaluated. Requirement is not based on functions. Safety and Hazard Analyses. Requirement is not based on safety and hazards analyses. Requirements Analysis. This requirement is based on DOE policy to ensure conservatism in complying with the requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as amended, and the Toxic Substances Control Act, as amended. DOE 5820.2A, paragraph I.1., also required that all high-level waste be considered mixed waste unless demonstrated otherwise. Other Considerations. Since high-level waste may contain hazardous constituents, this requirement contributes to defense-in-depth and protection of workers and the environment, and is a best management practice. II.D. Complex-Wide High-Level Waste Management Program. A complex-wide program and plan shall be developed as described under Responsibilities, 2.B and 2.D, in Chapter I of this Manual. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of the top-level high-level waste management functions: formulate, execute, and evaluate the high-level waste program. Safety and Hazard Analyses. This requirement addresses the need for a complex-wide integrated program that is necessary for planning, executing, and evaluating the high-level waste program. The requirement addresses the needs for a description of functional elements, organizations, responsibilities and activities that comprise the system needed to manage high-level waste. It also addresses the need to develop a waste management strategy that integrates waste DOE G 435.1-1 A-79 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations projections and life-cycle waste management planning into complex-wide facility configuration decisions.

Requirements Analysis. The requirement for a high-level waste management program has no predecessor requirements in DOE 5820.2A. A site-wide radioactive waste program is established in Chapter I of the Manual to accomplish appropriate flow of information between the sites and the complex-wide program. The requirement for a high-level waste management program plan is an improvement to the requirement for a waste management plan in Chapter VI of DOE 5820.2A. The high-level waste management program plan is an integrated, complex-wide, plan developed using input from the site-wide radioactive waste management programs required in Chapter I of the Manual. Other Considerations. Facility optimization, configuration management, cost-savings, and the other goals of the high-level waste management program are best accomplished by an integrated program that includes documented milestones and measures of accomplishment. II.E. Site-Wide Radioactive Waste Management Program. In addition to the items in Chapter I of this Manual, documentation of the Site- Wide Radioactive Waste Management Program shall include a description of the High-Level Waste Systems Engineering Management Program to support decision- making related to nuclear safety, including high-level waste requirements analysis, functional analysis and allocation, identification of alternatives, and alternative selection and system control. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of the top-level high-level waste management functions: formulate, execute, and evaluate the high-level waste program. Safety and Hazard Analyses. This requirement addresses the need for a documented logical basis for making significant high-level waste programmatic decisions that are important to nuclear safety that are reflected in the site-wide radioactive waste management program. This site-wide integrated program that is necessary for planning, executing, and evaluating the high-level waste program at each site becomes an input to the complex-wide plan required by section II.D. Requirements Analysis. The content of this requirement is based on interim technical standard, EIA/IS-632 System Engineering dated December 1994, published by the Electronic Industries Association. This same interim standard is also cited in DRAFT DOE G 420.1-X Implementation Guide for Nonreactor Nuclear Safety Design Criteria and Explosive Safety Criteria, Rev. G dated September 1995. Standards Proposal No. 3537-A has been issued which proposes to upgrade and revise EIA/IS-632. When the proposed upgrade and revision is approved, the A-80 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations standard will be published as ANSI/EIA-632, and EIA-IS-632 will be CANCELED. DOE 5820.2A did not specifically require systems engineering to support decision making related to nuclear safety. Other Considerations. This requirement is included in DOE O 435.1 based on DOE’s Implementation Plan in response to DNFSB Recommendation 92-4, which proposed a systems engineering approach to construct a rational and integrated program at the Hanford site. No specific weakness from the hazard and risk analysis is cited to justify this requirement. However, the Order Revision Team used a systems engineering approach to identify the functions and conduct the hazards analyses. II.F. Radioactive Waste Management Basis.

High-level waste facilities, operations, and activities shall have a radioactive waste management basis consisting of physical and administrative controls to ensure the protection of workers, the public, and the environment. The following specific waste management controls shall be part of the radioactive waste management basis: (1) Generators. The waste certification program. (2) Pretreatment and Treatment Facilities. The waste acceptance requirements and waste certification program. (3) Storage Facilities. The waste acceptance requirements and the waste certification program. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of the top level high-level waste management functions: formulate, execute, and evaluate the high-level waste management program. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the weaknesses and conditions due to the lack of, or poor integration of programs, documentation, and controls considered important for the safe operation of high-level waste management facilities. Requirements Analysis. The requirement for a radioactive waste management basis for high- level waste management facilities has no predecessor requirements in DOE 5820.2A. As described in M 435.1-1, Section I.2.F.(2), the radioactive waste management basis references, or defines, the conditions under which a facility may operate based on radioactive waste management documentation, using the graded approach process. It also specifically includes certain elements identified in the specific waste-type chapters of the Manual. For high-level waste, the waste DOE G 435.1-1 A-81 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations certification program and the waste acceptance requirements are specifically identified. However, the identification of these two specific requirements does not preclude the inclusion of other requirements from the high-level waste Manual. For instance, the controls for maintaining a safe operating envelope under which the use of tanks that are known or suspected to have leaked previously for continued storage of high-level waste may very well be included as part of the authorization basis. The radioactive waste management basis employs the principles of the Authorization Basis for radioactive facilities, as required by DOE 5480.21, Unreviewed Safety Questions, and DOE 5480.23, Nuclear Safety Analysis Reports, and extends them to facilities and operations that are not subject to the requirements of these Orders. Other Considerations. The radioactive waste management basis concept being employed is performance-based and employs the graded approach process, i.e., the rigor of documentation is commensurate with the hazards of the activities being carried out at a given facility. The concept also supports the defense-in-depth philosophy for added worker protection. II.G. Quality Assurance Program. The following requirements are in addition to those in Chapter I of this Manual. (1) Product Quality. The requirements of RW-0333P, Quality Assurance Requirements and Description, shall apply to those high-level waste items and activities important to waste acceptance/product quality. (2) Audits and Assessments. The evaluation and assessment requirements of RW–0333P, Quality Assurance Requirements Document and Description, and associated implementing procedures shall be met for high-level waste acceptance and product quality activities, in addition to the assessment requirements of other DOE directives and requirements identified in Chapter I of this Manual.

Basis: Functions Evaluated. The requirement is based on the analysis of treating high-level waste and storing immobilized high-level waste Safety and Hazard Analyses. This analysis identified low range probabilities and consequences that resulted from a weakness in inspection of immobilized high-level waste and the treatment (immobilization) of high-level waste. Requirements Analysis. The requirement invokes the requirements contained in RW-0333P, Quality Assurance Requirements Document and Description. DOE 5820.2A contained QA requirements but did not cite DOE/RW-0333P. A-82 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Other Considerations. These requirements are also included based on statutory (Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended), regulatory (10 CFR Part 60) and DOE Policy (DOE/RW- 0333P) directives. For the purpose of activities within the scope of DOE O 435.1, the statute, requirement, and policy apply to development, production and acceptance of the solidified high- level waste form. The statute supports the DOE longstanding planning that DOE high-level waste be disposed in a geologic repository regulated by NRC, for which the Quality Assurance requirements are published in 10 CFR Part 60, Subpart G. Compliance with NRC’s quality assurance requirements must be demonstrated before DOE can dispose high-level waste at the repository. To prepare for that demonstration, as well as to meet its own quality standards, DOE’s Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM), published DOE/RW-0333P, Quality Assurance Requirements Document and Description (QARD). DOE/RW-0333P states that its provisions “… apply to every level of every organization performing work for, or to be accepted by, OCRWM.” DOE 5820.2A cited the quality assurance requirements in DOE 5700.6B and appropriate national consensus standards. However, DOE 5820.2A did not include the high-level waste specific quality assurance requirements related to the development, production and acceptance of immobilized high-level waste at the repository. II.H. Contingency Actions. The following requirements are in addition to those in Chapter I of this Manual. (1) Contingency Storage. For off-normal or emergency situations involving high- level waste storage or treatment, spare capacity with adequate capabilities shall be maintained to receive the largest volume of waste contained in any one storage vessel, pretreatment facility, or treatment facility. Tanks or other facilities that are designated for high-level waste contingency storage shall be maintained in an operational condition when waste is present and shall meet all the requirements of DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and this Manual. (2) Transfer Equipment. Pipelines and auxiliary facilities necessary for the transfer of waste to contingency storage shall be maintained in an operational condition when waste is present and shall meet the requirements of DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and this Manual. DOE G 435.1-1 A-83 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement is based on analyses of the following functions: operate, monitor and maintain high-level waste storage systems; maintain safe storage envelope; and transferring high-level waste to storage. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The analyses identified potential significant consequences from leaking storage tanks without adequate spare capacity and adequate transfer equipment.

Requirements Analysis. This requirement is based on that contained in DOE 5820.2A, paragraph 1.3.b.(4)(d), and draft DOE 5820.2B, Chapter II paragraph 3.c.(3)(g). However, the requirement in DOE M 435.1-1 goes further than that contained in DOE 5820.2B, in that it also invokes the requirements for design requirements for structural integrity for new tanks, should they be constructed for use as contingency storage. The new requirement also invokes the storage requirement for structural integrity for existing double and/or single shell tanks in order to use such tanks for contingency storage. Should it be necessary to use tanks that have, or are suspected to have, leaked in the past for contingency storage, the requirement provides in Section II.Q.(2), Structural Integrity Program, for the conditions under which such tanks could be used in emergency situations only, and is to include the identification of a safe operational envelope and the controls necessary to maintain that envelope. Other Considerations. The readily available capability to respond to emergency situations involving loss of confinement supports the defense-in-depth concept, protection of workers and the environment, and the radioactive waste management basis. II.I. Corrective Actions. The following requirements are in addition to those in Chapter I of this Manual. (1) Order Compliance. Corrective actions shall be implemented whenever necessary to ensure the requirements of DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management, and this Manual are met. (2) Operations Curtailment. Operations shall be curtailed or facilities shut down for failure to establish, maintain, or operate consistent with an approved radioactive waste management basis. Basis: Functions Evaluated. The requirement is derived from the analysis of the top-level functions: formulate, execute, and evaluate the high-level waste management program. A-84 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need for conducting evaluations, e.g., inspections, reviews, of high-level waste management activities associated with the protection of the public, workers, and the environment, and for correcting situations which are not in accordance with requirements of DOE O 435.1, or M 435.1-1. The requirement addresses a normal management function, i.e., to follow-up to see that directives are carried out in a disciplined manner, and to evaluate the effectiveness of the order to establish the overall requirements to mitigate the hazards posed by DOE radioactive waste management activities. The requirement also addresses the potential weaknesses and conditions due to poor, or non- existent documentation that demonstrates the implementation of an approved radioactive waste management basis for an operation and the need to limit the operation of waste management activities to the constraints/bounds identified in the facility’s radioactive waste management basis. Requirements Analysis. The requirement for corrective actions has no predecessor requirements in DOE 5820.2A. The authorization basis concept of DOE 5480.21, and DOE 5480.23, and their implementation, was utilized as a basis for the implementation of the radioactive waste management basis. Corrective actions are used by the NRC in reactor licensing for dealing with situations that could be inimical to public health and safety, however, no additional essential requirement language was derived from those requirements.

Other Considerations. The use of the corrective actions requirement, in conjunction with the radioactive waste management basis requirement, provide feedback mechanisms which are necessary to make measurable improvements to the high-level waste management program and is considered a best management practice. II.J. Waste Acceptance. The following requirements are in addition to those in Chapter I of this Manual. (1) Technical and Administrative. Waste acceptance requirements for all high- level waste storage, pretreatment, or treatment facilities, operations, and activities shall specify, at a minimum, the following: (a) Allowable activities and/or concentrations of specific radionuclides; (b) Acceptable waste form that ensures the chemical and physical stability of the waste under conditions that might be encountered during transfer, storage, pretreatment, or treatment; (c) The basis, procedures, and levels of authority required for granting exceptions to the waste acceptance requirements, which shall be contained in each facility’s waste acceptance documentation. Each DOE G 435.1-1 A-85 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations exception request shall be documented, including its disposition as approved or not approved; and (d) Pretreatment, treatment, storage, packaging, and other operations shall be designed and implemented in a manner that will ultimately comply with DOE/EM-0093, Waste Acceptance Product Specifications for Vitrified High-Level Waste Forms, or DOE/RW-0351P, Waste Acceptance System Requirements Document, for non-vitrified, immobilized high-level waste. Basis: Functions Evaluated. The requirement is derived from the safety and hazards analysis that addressed the following functions: transferring and receiving high-level waste for pretreatment, treatment, and storage activities and maintaining safe storage of high-level waste. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need for the establishment of waste acceptance requirements by pretreatment, treatment, and storage facilities receiving waste and for ensuring the waste acceptance requirements are met at the receiving facility. The requirement also addresses the weaknesses and conditions identified by the safety and hazards analyses concerning the receipt of incompatible high-level waste streams in high-level waste management facilities. In addition, the requirement ensures that no high-level waste management activity jeopardizes compliance with the EM Waste Acceptance Product Specifications for Vitrified High-Level Waste Forms (EM-WAPS) or the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System Requirements Document (DOE/RW-0406). Requirements Analysis. The high-level waste acceptance requirements have no predecessor requirements in DOE 5820.2A, however, waste acceptance requirements (criteria) were a requirement in the Order for low-level waste. Part of the requirement was derived from specific criteria for exceptions that appear in DOE site-specific waste acceptance criteria documents. Exception provisions are common in performance-based requirements documents, as long as the basis for the exception is identified and the authorizing process to avoid unjustified exceptions is provided. Other Considerations. Effective waste acceptance experience at DOE facilities establishes this requirement as a best management practice, supportive of the principle of defense-in-depth, and the DOE M 435.1-1 principle of radioactive waste management basis.

II.J.(2) Evaluation and Acceptance. The receiving facility shall evaluate waste for acceptance, including confirmation that the technical and A-86 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations administrative requirements have been met. A process for the disposition of non-conforming wastes shall be established. Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement is derived from the safety and hazards analysis that addressed the following functions: transferring and receiving high-level waste for pretreatment, treatment, and storage activities and maintaining safe storage of high-level waste. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need for establishing a confirmation step for assuring that generators meet waste acceptance requirements of storage, pretreatment, and treatment facilities and that the receiving facility verifies that the acceptance requirements are met before the waste is accepted. The requirement addresses potential weaknesses and conditions that could arise from a storage, pretreatment, or treatment facility receiving poorly characterized waste or waste containing unacceptable constituents. The requirement also addresses the weaknesses and conditions identified with the acceptance of waste that does not conform with the requirements of the facility that received it. Requirements Analysis. The requirement has no predecessor requirement in DOE 5820.2A, however, waste acceptance requirements (criteria) were a requirement in the Order for low-level waste. Specifically, DOE 5820.2A, Requirement III.3.e.(4) required audits of waste certification programs. Current waste acceptance documents and practices were evaluated for the essential requirements to address the weaknesses and conditions identified Other Considerations. The requirement adds defense-in-depth to the waste acceptance and waste certification processes by adding an evaluation and acceptance step by the receiving facility. The language was developed from best management practices of current DOE facilities and allows for flexibility in implementation and use of the graded approach. II.K. Waste Generation Planning. The following requirements are in addition to those in Chapter I of this Manual. (1) Life-Cycle Planning. Prior to waste generation, planning shall be performed to address the entire life cycle for all high-level waste streams. (2) Waste With No Identified Path to Disposal. High-level waste streams with no identified path to disposal shall be generated only in accordance with approved conditions which, at a minimum, shall address: (a) Programmatic need to generate the waste; DOE G 435.1-1 A-87 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations (b) Characteristics and issues preventing the disposal of the waste; (c) Safe storage of the waste until disposal can be achieved; and (d) Activities and plans for achieving final disposal of the waste (compliance with DOE/EM-0093, Waste Acceptance Product Specifications for Vitrified High-Level Waste Forms). Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement derives from the analysis of generator functions for certifying waste, providing waste forecast data, and approval of generator processes by the receiving facility.

Safety and Hazard Analyses. The requirement addresses the need for generators, and pretreatment, treatment, and storage facilities management to identify and acquire as much information as possible about a waste stream prior to its generation; to prevent the generation of waste streams that may not have a path forward to disposal; and to implement an authorization process for managing no path forward wastes. Specific weaknesses and conditions addressed are the generation of waste streams that can not be certified or accepted at high-level waste management facilities because they have no path forward through disposal, or they challenge the capacity of existing waste management facilities. Requirements Analysis. The requirements have no direct predecessor requirements in DOE 5820.2A, however, Chapter VI does require a Waste Management Plan. This requirement, and the concepts it embodies, have been significantly modified in DOE M 435.1-1 to clarify that the focus of these activities is on the life-cycle management of high-level waste streams and not on information about managing facilities and their achievements. The requirements in DOE M 435.1-1 emphasize life-cycle planning and the resolution of issues that may prevent the disposal of high-level waste in accordance with the provisions of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended. However, this requirement must be viewed in the context of the related requirements in DOE M 435.1-1, Chapter I. These requirements assign to the Field Element Manager the responsibility to approve conditions under which radioactive waste with no path to disposal may be generated, and to notify DOE HQ of any decision to generate such waste. The objective is to bring issues associated with the potential generation of high-level waste with no identified path to disposal to the attention of appropriate DOE Managers before such waste is generated to resolve problems that preclude its disposal. The requirement and guidance establishes a Departmental position to avoid the generation of such waste. The guidance also expressly elicits the development of plans for resolving issues that prevent disposal. A-88 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Other Considerations. The concepts of life-cycle planning and approval, prior to generation, support the defense-in-depth philosophy. The objective of resolving issues that prevent disposal before the waste is generated addresses the need for waste management personnel to ensure that a high-level waste stream is not generated unless there is evidence to support confidence that the waste can ultimately comply with the Office of Environmental Management Waste Acceptance Product Specifications for Vitrified High-Level Waste Forms (EM-WAPS). II.L. Waste Characterization. High-level waste shall be characterized using direct or indirect methods, and the characterization documented in sufficient detail to ensure safe management and compliance with the waste acceptance requirements of the facility receiving the waste. (1) Data Quality Objectives. The data quality objectives process, or a comparable process, shall be used for identifying characterization parameters and acceptable uncertainty in characterization data. (2) Minimum Waste Characterization. Characterization data shall, at a minimum, include the following information relevant to the management of the waste: (a) Physical and chemical characteristics;

(b) Volume, including the waste and any solidification media; (c) Radionuclides or source information sufficient to describe the approximate radionuclide content of the waste; and (d) Any other information which may be needed to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the DOE/EM-0093, Waste Acceptance Product Specifications for Vitrified High-Level Waste Forms, or DOE/RW-0351P, Waste Acceptance System Requirements Document, for non-vitrified, immobilized high-level waste. (3) Hazardous Characteristics. Waste characterization processes shall yield sufficient chemical and physical data to clearly identify any hazardous characteristics that may degrade the ability of structures, systems, and components to perform their radioactive waste management function. DOE G 435.1-1 A-89 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Basis: Functions Evaluated. The following functions were evaluated to support this requirement: transfer high-level waste to storage (slurry); transfer high-level waste to storage (calcine); disposition of non-high-level waste streams; maintain a safe storage envelope; and disposition of non-immobilized high-level waste. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The analyses identified weakness related to characterization that included record-keeping errors and inadequate analysis equipment. Requirements Analysis. This requirement is based on the requirements contained in DOE 5820.2A at paragraphs 1.3.b.(1)(a), 1.3.b.(1)(b), and DOE Draft O 5820.2B, paragraph 3.b.(3). Other Considerations. Characterization of waste is necessary to determine compatibility when wastes from different processes or tanks are combined, and to support determinations of structural integrity, all of which are necessary to maintain a safe storage envelope. Characterization is also necessary to ensure that waste accepted for storage can be processed to meet the requirements of DOE/EM-0093, Waste Acceptance Specifications for Vitrified High- Level Waste Forms. Characterization data to support safe storage and meeting vitrified waste acceptance specifications contribute to defense-in-depth and protection to workers, the public and the environment. The data quality objective process invoked for characterization provides a structured, industry-accepted process approach to determining specific characterization requirements. II.M. Waste Certification. A waste certification program shall be developed, documented, and implemented to ensure that the waste acceptance requirements of facilities receiving high-level waste for storage, pretreatment, treatment, and disposal are met. (1) Certification Program. The waste certification program shall designate the officials who have the authority to certify and release waste for shipment; and specify what documentation is required for waste generation, characterization, shipment, and certification. The program shall provide requirements for auditability, retrievability, and storage of required documentation and specify the records retention period. (2) Certification Before Transfer. High-level waste shall be certified as meeting the waste acceptance requirements before it is transferred to the facility receiving the waste. A-90 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations (3) Maintaining Certification. High-level waste that has been certified as meeting the waste acceptance requirements for transfer to a storage, pretreatment, treatment, or disposal facility shall be managed in a manner that maintains its certification status.

Basis: Functions Evaluated. This requirement is based on the functions of transferring high-level waste to storage, pretreatment, or treatment facilities prior to immobilization, and comparing the high- level waste characteristics to the waste acceptance criteria of the receiving facility. Safety and Hazard Analyses. This requirement resulted, in part, from the hazard of combining incompatible waste streams in a waste storage tank, pretreatment facility, or treatment facility. The consequences could result in a tank being placed in a condition that is outside the receiving facility’s radioactive waste management basis, or loss of confinement due to a deleterious chemical/thermal reaction. Requirements Analysis. This requirement is considered necessary to ensure a facility or operation’s radioactive waste management basis, or authorization basis, is identified and maintained. This requirement did not appear in DOE 5820.2A. Other Considerations. This requirement, together with the requirement for Waste Acceptance (Section II.J.) provides defense-in-depth by requiring that both the generator and the receiver implement a program that documents that the waste to be transferred meets the receiving facility’s waste acceptance requirements. Implementing such a program reduces the likelihood that transferred wastes contain unacceptable materials or characteristics, thereby avoiding hazards that would occur from the unnecessary transportation and handling of waste streams which do not meet waste acceptance requirements. A certification program also contributes to waste minimization and is a best-management practice. II.N. Waste Transfer. The following requirements are in addition to those in Chapter I of this Manual. (1) Authorization. High-level waste shall not be transferred to a storage, treatment, or disposal facility until personnel responsible for the facility receiving the waste authorize the transfer. Basis: Functions Evaluated. The requirement derives from the analysis of the functions to transfer waste to storage, pretreatment and treatment facilities. DOE G 435.1-1 A-91 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations Safety and Hazard Analyses. The hazards are that safe storage will not be maintained and that waste will be received or generated for which there is no path forward to disposal. The hazards are created by the receipt of waste without the cognizance or approval of personnel at the receiving facility, or because the receiving facility personnel failed to properly determine the acceptability of the waste. The receipt of waste prior to authorization may preclude instituting the controls necessary for its safe management. The waste may be incompatible with the receiving tank materials and/or the contents of the tank, leading to loss of containment via overflows, degradation of its structural integrity, or by chemical /criticality reactions. The receipt of waste which is incompatible with that already contained in the receiving tank could also result in generating a waste with no path forward for disposal. Requirements Analysis. This requirement addresses the need for establishing a process for assuring that personnel at the receiving facility verify the acceptance of the waste to be received, including its compatibility with the receiving tank and its contents, and have authorized the transfer. The requirement that high-level waste shall not be transferred until personnel responsible for the facility receiving the waste authorizes the transfer has no predecessor in DOE 5820.2A. The requirement provides for appropriate controls to ensure safe management of high-level waste during transfers.

Other Considerations. This requirement provides an additional level of defense in depth to avoid the receipt of incompatible wastes and/or wastes with no path forward for disposal. Authorization by receiving facilities for transfer provides this defense-in-depth when waste is transferred, a vulnerable period in the life cycle of the waste. II.N.(2) Data. Waste characterization data and generation, storage, pretreatment, treatment, and transportation information for high-level waste shall be transferred with or be traceable to the waste. Basis: Functions Evaluated. The requirement derives from the analysis of the function to maintain safe storage, and from the functions to verify the waste meets the acceptance criteria at storage pretreatment and treatment facilities. Safety and Hazard Analyses. The hazards are that safe storage will not be maintained and that waste will be received or generated for which there is no path forward to disposal. The hazard arises because of the potential for losing the characterization data for specific wastes, which in turn could lead to situations in which waste will be received that is incompatible with the tank or the contents of the tank; or waste will be received or generated for which there is no path for disposal. Data supporting the acceptability of canistered waste forms are also important to preclude the receipt of waste which might not be acceptable at a geologic repository. Specific A-92 DOE G 435.1-1 7-09-99 Appendix A – Technical Basis and Considerations weaknesses and conditions include losing knowledge about waste at any step of the waste management process. Particularly vulnerable stages of the process include transfer op