BRWM [Board on Radioactive Waste Management] will undertake a task-oriented examination of the scientific, technical, and procedural issues in siting a low-level radioactive waste (LLRW) facility in New York State, and in choosing the disposal or isolation technology for such a site. A committee of the board will evaluate the specific reports and documentation provided by NYS Department of Health (DOH) relating to the scientific, technical, and procedural approach used by the Siting Commission in (1) the site selection process and excluding lands from consideration, (2) selection of a preferred disposal technology, and (3) projection of the LLRW source term. In addition, the committee will consider scientific and technical material from all interested parties.

The NRC/BRWM will arrange for the empanelment of a multidisciplinary scientific and technical review committee of about 18 experts in appropriate fields such as geology, hydrology, geochemistry, seismology, civil and mining engineering, material science, toxicology, LLRW processing and management, risk analysis, public health, environmental law, health physics, and quality assurance. The committee will meet as a committee of the whole and as three subcommittees on siting, disposal methodology, and source term determination.

The first three tasks in a five-task study will include the study of documents related to the criteria, methodology, procedures, and the decision process used by the Siting Commission to select potential LLRW facility sites. The review will evaluate the nature, sources, and quality of any specific data, analyses, procedures, modeling, and calculations that the commission used in the decision-making process. These documents will relate to (1) considerations in the exclusion of lands as potential sites, (2) how the range of alternative sites was narrowed to 10 candidate areas, and (3) how the 5 potential sites were selected.

The fourth task will review commission reports and other information relating to the selection and justification of a preferred disposal method. The same considerations will be evaluated as for the siting documents.

The fifth task will address the projected source term. The committee will review commission reports and consider other scientific and technical information relating to the decision-making process leading to projection of the types, quantities, or activity level of LLRW, or source term, intended for emplacement in a permanent LLRW facility. The same considerations will be evaluated as for the siting and the disposal technology documents.

The results of the study will be five reports, one for each of the tasks, and, if feasible, a final summary report which will be reviewed and distributed in accordance with NAS-NRC procedures. NYS DOH will receive 250 as per their request; additional copies will be provided to BRWM committee members and other parties in accordance with NRC policy. The reports will be made available upon request to all states and the public without restriction.

As part of its review the committee will address the following questions and concerns of importance to New York State:

1. Are NYS exclusionary criteria based on sound technical principles?
2. Was the commission's application of exclusionary criteria to volunteered and nonvolunteered lands consistent with good scientific practice?
3. Were the commission's decisions to exclude sites containing existing mines, which were not part of the exclusionary criteria, based on sound technical considerations?
4. Was the process to select LLRW disposal sites, established by the commission, consistent with good scientific practice?
5. Were the decisions made by the commission in selecting or narrowing the range of sites for LLRW disposal based on sound technical considerations?
6. Was the development and application of preference criteria (including weighting and scaling factors) designed to identify sites with geological characteristics adequate to contain radioactive waste? Was the commission's use of criteria unrelated to site performance (including weighting and scaling factors) based on good scientific practice?
7. Was the commission's application of information obtained through field surveys, site visits, aerial inspections, or any other field investigation used for evaluating potential sites consistent with good scientific practice?
8. Did the commission seek and/or utilize information from all available sources, including within identified areas?

Where questions posed raise policy concerns as well as scientific ones, the committee will attempt to be clear about these distinctions. The committee will take no position on policy matters that it identifies.