[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 40, Volume 24]
[Revised as of July 1, 2006]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 40CFR194.44]

[Page 54-55]
 
                   TITLE 40--PROTECTION OF ENVIRONMENT
 
         CHAPTER I--ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CONTINUED)
 
PART 194_CRITERIA FOR THE CERTIFICATION AND RE-CERTIFICATION OF THE WASTE 
ISOLATION PILOT PLANT'S COMPLIANCE WITH THE 40 CFR PART 191 DISPOSAL 
REGULATIONS--Table of Contents
 
         Subpart C_Compliance Certification and Re-certification
 
Sec. 194.44  Engineered barriers.

    (a) Disposal systems shall incorporate engineered barrier(s) 
designed to prevent or substantially delay the movement of water or 
radionuclides toward the accessible environment.
    (b) In selecting any engineered barrier(s) for the disposal system, 
the Department shall evaluate the benefit and detriment of engineered 
barrier alternatives, including but not limited to: Cementation, 
shredding, supercompaction, incineration, vitrification, improved waste 
canisters, grout and bentonite backfill, melting of metals, alternative 
configurations of waste placements in the disposal system, and 
alternative disposal system dimensions. The results of this evaluation 
shall be included in any compliance application and shall be used to 
justify the selection and rejection of each engineered barrier 
evaluated.
    (c)(1) In conducting the evaluation of engineered barrier 
alternatives, the following shall be considered, to the extent 
practicable:
    (i) The ability of the engineered barrier to prevent or 
substantially delay the movement of water or waste toward the accessible 
environment;
    (ii) The impact on worker exposure to radiation both during and 
after incorporation of engineered barriers;
    (iii) The increased ease or difficulty of removing the waste from 
the disposal system;
    (iv) The increased or reduced risk of transporting the waste to the 
disposal system;
    (v) The increased or reduced uncertainty in compliance assessment;
    (vi) Public comments requesting specific engineered barriers;
    (vii) The increased or reduced total system costs;
    (viii) The impact, if any, on other waste disposal programs from the 
incorporation of engineered barriers (e.g., the extent to which the 
incorporation of engineered barriers affects the volume of waste);
    (ix) The effects on mitigating the consequences of human intrusion.
    (2) If, after consideration of one or more of the factors in 
paragraph (c)(1)

[[Page 55]]

of this section, the Department concludes that an engineered barrier 
considered within the scope of the evaluation should be rejected without 
evaluating the remaining factors in paragraph (c)(1) of this section, 
then any compliance application shall provide a justification for this 
rejection explaining why the evaluation of the remaining factors would 
not alter the conclusion.
    (d) In considering the ability of engineered barriers to prevent or 
substantially delay the movement of water or radionuclides toward the 
accessible environment, the benefit and detriment of engineered barriers 
for existing waste already packaged, existing waste not yet packaged, 
existing waste in need of re-packaging, and to-be-generated waste shall 
be considered separately and described.
    (e) The evaluation described in paragraphs (b), (c) and (d) of this 
section shall consider engineered barriers alone and in combination.