ML19345G997
| ML19345G997 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/14/1981 |
| From: | Shaffer W NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Scarano R NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| References | |
| REF-WM-39 NUDOCS 8104230001 | |
| Download: ML19345G997 (3) | |
Text
.
@ KECy jo UNITED STATES g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
e
$ c-
-,E wAswruoTON, D. C. 20555 S Mi.D
[e ArR1/ '.Sai
's, * * "
- g h
- s [ g
'f
'AtUR: 3001.5 WM-39 O
&V 9
L h.
.Ng
/
/:
g c s'f
'EMORANDUM FOR: Files os su
'HRU:
Ross A. Scarano, Chief Uranium Recovery Licensing Branch FROM:
William M. Shaffer III, Project Manager Uranium Recovery Licensing Branch
SUBJECT:
MINUTES AND AGREEPINTS - MEETING WITH DOE TO DISCUSS NRC/ DOE INTERACTION REGARDING DOE EXECUTION OF THE UMTRAP (FEBRUARY 20,1981)
Background
At the subject meeting, called at our request, the agreements listed below were reached between you and rayself, representing the NRC staff, and 2obert W. Ramsey, Jr. Program Manager, Remedial Action Programs, and Donald H. Groelsema of his staff, representing the DOE. These agreements have been reviewed and concurred in by DOE by approving the final draft copy of this memorandum.
In addition, NRC legal staff concurrence has been obtained from Robert L. Fonner, ELD, who reviewed the same final draft as transmitted to DOE. The resulting memorandum therefore represents agreement between NRC-Uranium Recovery (WMUR), NRC-Legal (ELD), and DOE.
As you know, the meeting was originally scoped to provide infonnal comments on DOE's draft generic Technical Criteria for UMTRAP tailings disposal site selection activities. Hewever, the discussion was subsequently broadened to include more general NRC/ DOE UMTRAP interactions and the agreements reached reflect this broadening.
NRC/ DOE Staff Agreements:
1.
We will provide fonnal NRC staff comments to DOE on the referenced draft generic site selection Technical Criteria as soon as feasible. This action item currently is assigned a March 11, 1981 suspense date by us. The NRC staff will ultimately concur in these Technical Criteria, and subsequently in any final disposal sites selected through use of these criteria.
810428 0 col
- APR I 4 IS81 2.
The point was discussed, and clarified for DOE, that the NRC does not intend to promulgate new uranium mill tailings regulations specifically for the DOE UMTRAP inactive tailings sites. It is understood that the NRC will instead apply, in the UMTRAP final disposal site licensing process, the intent of the Technical Criteria and Long Tem Site Surveil-lance Criteria in Appendix A of the existing NRC Uranium Mill Licensing Regulations. These are as published October 3,1980 in the Federal Register (FR, Vol. 45, No. 194, P. 65521-38), and will be applied as much as practicable as they pertain to mill tailings stabilization and
(
di sposal. As such, it was also agreed that all parties involved in considering alternate disposal sites should be made aware of this intent on the part of the NRC staff.
3.
The NRC staffs, both WMUR and ELD, would make an assessment and reach a conclusion regarding the degree of flexibility we may have in interpreting the UMTRCA's definition of " vicinity" sites such that we could potentially agrea with DOE on a generic and simplified approach to NRC staff concurrence in selection and perfomance of remedial action at " vicinity" sites.
This was completed on February 23, 1981 and it has been concluded that, except for any unusually significant vicinity properties, which may warrant consideration as separate sites from a remedial action plan or NEPA Process standpoint, vicinity sites will be considered as part of the originally designated primary tailings pile processing site. An
" unusually significant" characterization may be warranted due to size, location, cost, remedial action feasibility, or schedular considerations.
Examples of such vicinity sites discussed were the sewage treatment plant and fire station vicinity sites at Salt Lake City, UT, and the PRR Landfill vicinity site associated with Canonsburg, PA. The DOE will promptly advise of all unusually significant vicinity sites as they are identifi ed. Othemise, it will be DOE's plan to include all vicinity sites, other than those detemined to warrant separate consideration, in the EIS or EA for the main processing site. These may be discussed and evaluated in such documents on a group basis, such as privately owned residences, public buildings and facilities, road fcundations, etc.
4.
As a consequence of 3., NRC staff concurrence in the selection of remedial actions, for other than separately considered vicinity sites, will be through its concurrence in the plans for remedial action for both the primary processing site and its associated vicinity sites as presented in the final EIS or EA for the primary processing site. Thus, the NRC staff will not nomally anticipate concurring in the selection of remedial actions for an individual vicinity site.
5.
For any vicinity sites considered separately from the original processing site, NRC staff concurrence in the selection of remedial actions will be obtained on a case by case basis.
e APR
. as......
6.
The NRC will begin its review and con,dtrence of remedial actions by concurring in the Draft Remedial Action Concept Paper (RACP) for a processing site. Pre NEPA Process conceptual plans for vicinity sites will be incorporated in the RACP for a processing site. A RACP will present all feasible remedial action alternatives and indicate a preferred one to assist in scoping the subsequent EIS or EA, recognizing that a different remedial action may ultimately be chosen as a result of executing the full NEPA process for that processing si+a.
7.
The NRC staff will provide detailed for=al comments on the DOE's October 3,1980 Draft UMTRAP NEPA I=plementation Plan as soon as feasible.
(This ha:: since been co=pleted and was trans=itted to DCE on February 23, 1981.) The NRC staff anticipates formally concurring in the final version of this Plan.
% L m. p f,r sc William M. Shaffer III, Project Manager Uranium Recovery Licensing Branch Division of Waste Management cc: Robert W. Ramsey, Jr., DOE Donald H. Groelsema, DOE Robert L. Fonner, ELD William E. Mott, DOE
.!1 chard H. Camobell, DCE-Albucuerque l
i
.