ML19261D026
| ML19261D026 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/23/1979 |
| From: | Scarano R NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Topp A BOKUM RESOURCES CORP. |
| References | |
| REF-PROJ-M-12 NUDOCS 7904230379 | |
| Download: ML19261D026 (5) | |
Text
)hb 8
%'4 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 'i,
fd WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 c
o,.
n.
+...
am.
jp;j Alphonso Topp f,adiation Protection Section Environmental Improvement Division P. O. Box 968, Crown Bldo.
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87003
Dear Mr. Topp:
i In response to your recent request, we are resuming the NRC review and evaluation of the Bokum Resources proposal. This evaluation will be based on the Bokum submittals through March 6,1979, as any additional materials become available, please provide copies. We will be scheduling the completion of our review for late April.
Attached is a second round of questions for our radiological impact analysis. Question one on the list was inadequately answered in Bokum's response to our October 19, 1978 information request, and a response to this question, as well as to number ~ two, is essential to a credible radiological impact evaluation.
Items two through nine are for infor-mation required in our most recently updated UDAD code, and are prompted largely as a result of GEIS related studies. It vould behoove Bokum to provide the requested information, however, we can assume reasonable, yet conservative, values and complete our analysis.
As we and our consultants proceed through' our evaluation, we anticipate that occasional questions may arise. While I realize that time is short, all such questions will be forwarded to you, and in the absence of a timely response, our review will continue with any deficiencies and/or ambiguities noted.
Please keep us informed of all recent events in this case, and if you have any questions on our involvement, feel free to call.
Sincerely, lA 6?k W W Ross A. Scarano, Section Leader Uranium Mill Licensing Section Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety 7904.23o377
QUESTIONS REQUIRING RESPONSES IN ORDER TO EVALUATE RADIOLOGICAL IMPACTS OF THE B0KUM URANIUM MILL 1.
In a letter dated Dec mber 19, 1978, off-site receptor locations were listed in terms of x and y distances from a central location (x=0,y=0).
Please in'..cate the precise location of this central location on a map or in some other unambiguous manner.
2.
Indicate an a map all areas within 3 miles of the site thich are available or used for grazing meat animals.
Indicate locations of all milk animals (cows or goats) within 3 miles.
3.
nescribe effluent controls of yellowcake packaging operations
- nd provide estimated releases.
Include details of filters /
scrubbers, design and estimated efficiencies, air to cloth ratios (if applicable), and fraction of product reaching effluent controls.
Include yellowcake crushing and barreling operations and provide schematic diagram of air flow paths from controlled areas to filters.
4.
Information available to tne staff indicates a total ta tiags area of approximately 315 acres with dust controlled only by the moisture content of fresh tails.
On this basis the staff estimates that about 80% of the t_il t.js area will be available for dusting (dry surface area).
'least provide any information re.rding fractions of the pile area which will be dry, moist, saturated, and/or under a layer of standing water.
Provide a detailed basis for estimates, including water balance considerations, and indicate significant time variation.
5.
Provide the estimated useful lifetime of the mill facility and the number of years after mill shutdown prior to completion of the reclamation program for the tailings pile.
Specifically include the number of years required to dry the pile prior to reclamation (with full basis) and any proposed dust control measures during the drying period.
6.
Please provide the estimated annual Rn-222 release from the Bokum mine.
7.
Provide details of plans for storage and disposal of low grade ore extracted from the Bokum mine which is not economical to process through the mill.
Include volumes, areas of covered surfaces, locations, and average ore grades.
Indicate any plans to control airborne or seepage / runoff effluents from these sources.
--%w-,
, 8.
Estimate dust releases of ore material from trucks transporting ore fro 1 the Bokum mine to the mill.
Include number of trucks per day, average load (tons of ore), one-way distance, and specific release rate while travelling with load (pounds / ton-mile).
Indicate any planned dust control measures (e.g., canvas covers).
9.
Please review the attached preliainary table of assumptions and data to be used to assess raoicactive emissions from the Bokum mine and mill and indicate any data with which you are in subst?->.ial disagreement.
In such cases, please provide a rer' ent estiamte and a full justification. Where the NRC
.f. has not indicated a value,left a blank) please provide a
Je with a justification if possible.
a PRELIMINARY TABULATION OF ASSUf1PTIONS AND DATA TO BE USED TO ESTIfMTE AIRBORNE EMISSIONS OF RADI0 ACTIVE f%TERIALS FROM THE BOKUM URANIUf1 MINE AND URANIUM MILL Bokum Uranium Mine I
General Information A,
Ore production rate:
800 tons / day B,
Operational:
351 days /yr C,
Average ore grade:
% U308 II Ore Storage A,
Storage area of ore to be processed:
acres;
%U0 3
Storage area (8 ultimate) of ore not economical to process; B.
acres;
% U308 III Ore Handling A,
Dust loss in transfer to ore storage:
lbs/ ton B.
Dust loss in truck loading from ore storage:
lbs/ ton C.
Dust loss in truck loading direct from mine:
lbs/ ton D,
Processable ore transferred from mine to truck directly:
tons / day (average)
E.
Processable ore transferred to storage area at mine:
tons / day (average)
F, Non-processable ore transferred to storage:
tons / day (average)
G, Dust loss in ore hauling to mill:
lbs/ ton-mile H.
Distance from mine to mill:
- miles, Bokum Uranium flill I
General Information A.
Ore processing rate:
2200 tons / day B,
Average ore grade:
0.12% V308 C.
Operational:
351 days /yr D,
Anticipated lifetime: 20 years
2 II Ore Handling and Storage A.
Fraction of received ore sent to ore storage pad:
100%
B.
Dust release from truck dump to ore pad:
lbs/ ton C.
Dust release from front end loader pickup of ore from
?ad:
lbs/ ton D.
Dust release from front end loader dump of ore to feeder apron:
lbs/ ton E,
Storage pad area:
acres III Ore Crushing, Grinding, Milling A.
Fraction of ore reaching effluent control: 1%
B.
Effluent control average efficiency: 90%
IV Yellowcake Operations A.
Yellowcake production rate-845 tons /yr B.
Product purity: 85% U 038 C,
Fraction of ore content appearing in product:
uraniom thorium
Fraction of product reaching applicable effluent control:
from drying (to scrubber),1%; from crushing
_%; from barreling
%; from other E.
Removal efficiency of applicable effluent control device:
dryer r,crubber, 95%; crushing dust filter
%; barreling dust filter
% other yellowcake dust filter V
Tailings Impoundment A.
Total area: 315 acres B,
Fraction of area available for dusting: 80%
C.
Fraction of area under standing water:
D.
Required drying time prior to reclamation:
yrs,