ML19225C555
| ML19225C555 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/06/1979 |
| From: | Hendrie J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Domenici P SENATE |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7908010040 | |
| Download: ML19225C555 (8) | |
Text
.
j#" "%
k UNITED STATES 3%*
h NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
[
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
=
c
\\ %g June 6, 1979 CHAIRMAN The Honorable Dete Domenici United States Senate Washinoton. D.C.
20510
Dear Senator Domenici:
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission would like to request your support for legislation to resolve questions arising from the effactive date provisions of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 enacted by the last Congress.
The Commission received the letter dated April 26, 1979, signed by you and the other principal authors of this legislation in both the Senate and House of Representatives, which expressed the intent of the drafters regarding the date on'which licensing authority and procedural requirements under the Act would become effective with respect to the Commission and affected State governments.
Your letter supports the position that existing authority of Agreement States to license uranium mills and to control dll tailings should not be disrupted during 'he three-year interim period forlowing enactment cnd that during this period the NRC should not be required to exert concurrent licensing authority over tailings produced in milling activities regulated by the Agreement States.
The Commission is mindful c f and sympathetic with these views.
Nonetheless, after a careful analysis oi the language of the 1978 Act, a majority of Com-missioners hava concluded that without amendments to the Act the NRC is required to license tailings at Agroement State-regulated uranium mills during the three-year period before the Act permits renegotiated agreements to become effective.
Nrsuant to this decision is to the meaning of the Act, implementing regulations md associated arrangemen+ s are now being prepared.
Enclosed with this letter :s a draft of statutory language t section-by-section analysis which would ar.complish the intent of the principal authors of the legislation, as expressec in the April 26, 1979 letter.
All Commissioners agree that such clarifying language is desirable.
Some additional clarification which the Commission believes necessary are also included and are described in the section-by-section analysis. The Commission believes that prompt enactment of this legislation is necessary to assure that the intent expressed by the authors of the Act may be carried out during the remainder of the three-year interim period.
wky.0EE
,200R 443 293 Joseph M. Hendrie
^
Enclosures:
y, 1.
Draft legislation 2.
Analysis 7908010090
AN ACT To cdd clarifying amendments to the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation
. Control Act of 1978, and for other purposes:
Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Reoresentatives of the United States of America in Concress assembled, SEC. 1.
Section 204(b) of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1973 is amended by adding at the end thereof a ne:S paragraph to redd as follows:
"(3).
Notwith; standing any other, rovision of this tit'le, where a State assumes or has assumed, pursuant to an agree-ment entered into 'mder section 274b of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, authority over my activity which results in the production of byproduct material as defined in section 11e. (2) of that Act,, the Commission shall not, until the date three years after the date of enactnent of this Act, have licensing authority over such byproduct material produced in any activity covered by such agreement, rnless the agreement is' terminated.
If, upon expiration of the three-year interim, a State has not entered into such an agreement with respect to byproduct material as defined in section lle. (2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, the Commission shall have authority over such byproduct material."
SEC. 2.
Section 204 (h)(1) of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Centrol Act is amended to read:
Ee "Sec. 204(h)(1).
On or before the date three years after the date of enactment of this Act, notwithstanding any pro-vision of this title, any State may exez ise any authority under State law (indluding authority exercised pursuant to an agreement entered into pursuant to Section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended) respecting (a) by-product material, as defined in section lle. (2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, or (b) any activity wrich results in the production of byproduct material as so defined, in the-same manner and to the same extent as permitted before the enactment of this Act; provided, however, that n.othing in this section shall be construed to preclude the Commission or the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency from taking such act. ion under section 275 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 as may be necessary to implement title'I of this Act. "
SEC. 3 The last sentence of section 83a of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 is amended to read:
"Any license in effect on the effective date of this section.
a ad subsecuently terminated without renewal shall comp.'.y with paragraphs (1) and (2) upon termination.
SEC.
t.
Section 204(e) is amended by adding at the end thereof a new pragraph to read as follows:
443 295 bbb1
3
"(2).
This subsection shall be effective on the date three years after the date of enactment of this Act. "
e O
O 9
9 P003DRGML 443 296
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS A product of the hectic final days of the 95th Congress, the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 contains certain provisions regarding dates of effectiveness which, if left to stand, may be subject to differing legal inter-pretation.
Specifically, two questions of immediate concem have arisen regarding the timing of State and NRC implementation of title II of the Act:
(1) Do both the States and the Federal Government have authority to license uranium mill. tailings (i.e., exercise concurrent licens-ing jurisdiction) for the three years following enactment of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act?
(2) Are the requirements of new section 274o of the Atomic Energy Act pertcining to procedures to be followed by Agreement States in 1ssuing source material licenses for uranium mills i:maediately effective?
These questions have arisen because one section of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (section 208) makes the provisions crf the regulatory
_ program in title II of the Act icmediately effective unless otherwise specified_, -
and another section df the Act. (section 404(h)(1)) delays the effectiveness of certain provisions of the Act regarding State authorities for three years after the date of enactment.
Accordingly, the Nuclear Regulatory Comission. has proposed amendments to clarify the effective dates of title II.
These amendments generally provide a three-year interim period before the requ. ire-ments in title II of the Uranium Mill Tailing; Radiation Control Act (Mill Tailings Act) apply to milling operations and tailings licensed by Agreement States.
In non-Agreement States, the NRC would have immediate authority to itplement the regulotory program in title II.
Although section 204(h)(1) preserves prior State authority for three years, in case of conflict between Federal and Stite law, the Federal would prevail.
One of the provisions in title II (section 205) adds a new section 275 to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.
Section 275 authorizes certain Environmental Protec-tion Agency standards which are, under section 108(a)(2) of the Mill Tailings Act, a prerequisite to the remedial actions authorized in title I.
Thus it is stressed that these clerifying amendments are not intended to prevent the Adminis-trator of the Environmental Protection Agency or the Nuclear Regulatory Comission from taking such action under section 275 of the Ato'mic Energy Act as may be
.necessary to implement title I of the Mill Tailings Act.
Sec. 1.
During the three years following enactment of the Mill Tailings Act, section 1 prohibits the NRC from exercising duplicative authority over tailings produced in activities licensed tiy Agreement States unless the agrehnent is teminated within that period. The EPA and NRC may, however, take such action under 275 of the Atomic Energy Act as may be necessary to implement title I of the Mill Tailings Act.
Sec. 2.
This section makes the provision in-section 204(h)(1) of:the. Mill Tailings Act preserving' State authority:over' tailings and wastes for the three-year interim confom to the new requirements of the Mill Tailings Act which apply to both typroduct material and milling operations that result in the tailings and wastes now defined as byproduct material.
As enacted, section 204(h)(1) mentions only byproduct material specifically, although the regulatory program generally covers both milling an:i tailings.
As amended, this section explicitly covers both byproduct material and milling operations and applies also to States that enter into agreements during the n ee-year interim.
I UUn Ud uit J
443 298
Further provision is made so that EPA and NRC may take such action under section 275 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (as added by the Mill Tailings Act) as may be necessary to implement the remedial action program in title I of the Mill Tailings Act ir6ediately.
Sec. 3.
As originally enacteo, section 83 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 may ~be subject to various interpretations regarding its timing.
Its provisions are not, under section 202(b) of the Mill Tailings Act, to become
. effective until three years from their date of enactment.
Nonethel ess, section 83a (as added by section 202 of the Mill Tailings Act) states that licenses in effect on the date of enactment of this section must cra. ply with 83a(1) and (2) upon their renewal or termination, whichever first occurs.
Conceivably this renewal or termination could take place during the three-yaar period in which section 83 is not supposed to be effective.
The sentence as amended applies section 83a only to licenses that are renewed or terminated after the effective date of section 83.
Moreover, it might ce argued that a loophole was left for licenses issued after the date of enactment but before the effective date of section 83.
It could be argued that such licenses would not be covered by section 83a.
As amended, the section applies the requirements of section 83a to any license in effect on the effective date of section 83.
Sec. 4.
This section amends section 204(e) of the Mill Tailings Act to make it clear that the new Agreement State responsibilities regarding tailings P00RORGNA_
g
4_
and railling operations in new section 274o of the Atchic Energy Act are not
~
effective until three years after the enactment of the Mill Tail.ings Act.
The States are, however, encouraged to implement the new standards and requirements of the Mill Tailings Act to the maximum extent practicable.
9 s
+...-..
443 300
I-
- uiucw.sixw couancss c==
25bb.
" M"c ^.0%"L,o,m.
'"= :"$ 5
- "l"2^ 70,,',",,*,,
r, *;,"'g"^"*
COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND insular AFFAIRS ter uc avasu ataca^' cou~$ci.
0"d 'i".2"",%
'"" h0"/;ft-= _
u.s. souse or ncencscNr4Tivos STAN SC go,~;,r,;, g
,,, yrg-,_-=^"'-
WASHINGTON, D.C.
20515 f."l^"2 T m L""C".' """'a April 26, 1979 C,"l";,"L,.
ZT. !C,"T.u..
- "J.o*#1iC "F.
u 1"3A'.O.T
=":.~"JL"^1..
OJ MAES.
- "L"O."'2";I'
"!'"J."C',;.O..
1":: ';;".',9 "r
%1 0."1.
0"",'4 0 Z ",MONT."o=""'-
PAT WIL1JAa.5 Honorable Joseph Hendrie Chairman, Nuclear hegulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 F
I:
Dear Chairman Hendrie:
f During your testimony last nonth on the NRC fiscal year 1980 budger, request before the Senate Environment anc Public Works Committee and the House Interior
~
and Insular Affairs and Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, you referred to potential problems in implementing Public Law 95-604, the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978.
Specifically, you mentioned that there may exist some uncertainty based y
upon the language of the statute regarding the date by which the Agreement States
[
must meet the new requirements in the statute and the need for the Commission to F
exercise within the Agreement States its new licensing authority for uranium mill I
tailings.
At that time, you indicated the Commission's continued support for the i
three year grace period in making these requirements effective, but expressed the view that any interpretation of the present statutory language on these points would likely lead to litigation.
It is our view that these questions should be resolved promptly, in accor-dance with the intent of the Congress, and in a manner which will not cause dis-ruptions in the ongoing regulatory programs and activities of NRC and the Agreement States.
In that regard, we are concerned that the statute might be interpretcd to require the Agreement States to imediately meet the new requirements of the Act in all cases or to require the duplicate licensing by NRC of all uranium mills and mill tailings in the Agreement States.
Such intera ctations, in our view, would be contrary to the intent of Congress and would discourage rather than encourage the Agreement States from making every effort to meet the new requirements of t'i' Act as early as possible.
As the principal authors of the legislation in the House and the Senate, we are confident the Congress intended for NRC to exercise authority over mill tailings in the Non-Agreement States immediately, and intended to provide for a period of up to three years for Agreement States which license uranium milling Operations or mill tailings to meet the new requirements of the statute.
During this tnree year period, an Agreecent State could continue its licensing activities under previously existing authority.
New standards and requirements would be applicable to the maximun exte it practicable, and NRC is expected to make every 443 301
Honorable Joseph Hendrie, page 2 effort to encourage and assist the States in upgrading their licensing programs to meet the new requirements as early as possible.
The Congress did not intend for t'RC to immediately exercise licensing authority within Agreement States which were exercising authority over uranium milling operations or mill tailings on the date of enactment.
At the expiration of the three year interim period, however, NRC would exercise its authority in any State which did not then have in effect a licensing program satisfying all of the applicable new standards and requirements, p
I If the Commission would benefit in future enforcement of this intent and interpretation from clarifyi.C.agislation, we would be happy to provide our assistance.
Trul v i
i V
J k
Senator den ings andol ph Congressman John D. Dinge sa he w-ary art Congressman Morris K. Ud e
~
a.LLG3d
~-
enator Pete Domenici, Congressman Robert E. Bauman
!~
AA3 302