ML20028F897
| ML20028F897 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/20/1982 |
| From: | Dircks W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Palladino N NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| RULE-PRM-40-24 NUDOCS 8302070067 | |
| Download: ML20028F897 (6) | |
Text
.
- 4
. ~-
cme %
9
'F -
k UNITED STATES j
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION N
a j
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\\...../
m 2 o esz MEM0RANDUM FOR:
Chairman Palladino FROM:
William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
URANIUM MILL TAILINGS REGULATIONS This is in response to your memorandum of October 13, 1982 concerning reexamination of the uranium mill tailings regulations.' The Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS), has assigned lead responsibility for this task to the Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety (FC) with other NMSS Divisions and NRC Offices partici-pating.
A working group has been appointed to take a fresh look at the mill taliings regulations and to consider the options for change if any are indicated.
There are several. developments that have occurred within the past weeks that may influence the direction and timing of a plan for effecting any appropriate changes in the mill tailings reg'ulations. Among these recent' developments are the following:
L (1) The proposed amendments (Domenici amendment) to the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) that are con-tained in NRC's FY83 Authorization Bill.
These amendments establish a sequence and time frame for Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and NRC action. The staff is assum-l ing for planning purposes that Senator Domenici's amendment
~ < -
to UMTRCA will be adopted by the Congress.
5 (2) The petition for rulemaking (PRM-40-24) filed with the Commission by the' Union Carbide Corporation that requests NRC to reconsider and revise Criteria 1, 5, 6, and 10 of q-l Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 40.
The questions raised by this petition are among those that NRC will have to consider in establishing its own environmental standards in the event that EPA fails to provide general standards for NRC guidance i
A notice requesting public comment on this petition was published November 30, 1982 in the Federal Regf ster.
The 1-staff' is assuming that any further action on the petition l
will be deferred pending Agency response to the Domenici amendment.
8302070067 821220 PDR PR 40 PDR
.i t
2
+
(3) The action by the Tenth Circuit in which the, court vacated its judgment (but not its opinion) sustaining the Commission's mill tailings regulations and granted the petitioners' motion for rehearing en banc.
If the court reverses its initial ruling, one consequence may be a judicial mandate to undertake -
further rulemaking following EPA action.
Assuming that the Domenici amendment will be adopted and that EPA will meet the dates contained in the Authorization Bill for proposed and final standards for active sites under Title 11 of UMTRCA, the staff plans:
(1) To review 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A, and identify those -
portions that should be suspended following publication of EPA's proposed Title.II standards. This preliminary review will start immediately utilizing EPA's proposed final Title I standards for inactive sites that are currently undergoing OMB review, on the assumption that the proposed Title 11 standards will be similar enough to the proposed final Title I standards to justify this effort.
(2) To review the Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) in light of any suspended requirements and the changes necessary to conform those requirements to' EPA's proposed
(
standards in order to determine if further environmental review is needed.
(3) To analyze the options available,for translating EPA's standards into licensing requirements.
l (4) To prepare a Federal Register Notice for Commission action and public comment on substantive changes to Appendix A in time to meet the anticipated statutory schedule.
f Within ninety days after EPA proposes Title II standards, the staff will recomend suspension of selected portions of present regulations,'if any, which may be affected.
The Domenici amendment requires notice and oppor-tunity for public comment at this step. Upon publication of the EPA final l
l Title II standards, the staff will commence NRC rulemaking with completion scheduled six months after promulgation of EPA standards as mandated by
~
the Domenici amendment.
This effort will include an analysis of the present GEIS in reference to any changes in NRC regulations necessary to conform to the EPA standards and the preparation of a supplemental EIS if necessary.
Attached is a tentative schedule showing the major tasks to conform present regulations to final EPA Title II standards.
1 n-.,,
- ~,, - - -.,,,,, -
n---
.,a-
z..
3 In addition to these steps being undertaken in anticipation of' EPA standards, the staff has begun a reassessment of the health and safety issues related to mill tailings.
This assessment will include consid-eration of the methodology'of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) in analyzing and controlling risks' from radiation as one possible approach. The ICRP methodology presents a risk-based approach to health and safety objectives.
The ICRP approach has'a wide body of support in the scientific community and provides the basis for the major revision of 10 CFR Part 20, Standards for Protection Against Radiation, that is currently underway.
'O The staff will also consider a report on stability of cover which will -
\\-
address mill tailings disposal area siting and design relative to.poten-tial cover failure mechanisms over varying time periods.. A contract has i
been awarded for preparation and peer review of this report.
Completion i
of peer review is now scheduled for March 1983.
The reassessment of the health and safety issues combined with information i
from the stability studies should enable the staff to examine.the relation-
)
ship of exposure of individuals in the local population and collective dose- '
to requirements for cover which would prevent major degradation. of the tailings confinement, prevent dispersion of the tailings and reduce radon release over various time spans.
This should lead to more. specific defi-nition and justification 'of stabilization objectives and.. requirements to meet those objectives.
Results will be useful'in' two contexts:
(1)in
~
examining licensing options available to implement EPA standar;ds, or (2)'"
in developing NRC's' independent environmental standards should EPA fail to promulgate its standards.
Completion of this effort is tentatively 4
scheduled for June 1983.
The staff is alert to the need to ensure that current-or changed regulations are cicar and understandable. Discussions with industry have indicated that changes that clarify the way in which the criteria would be ' implemented would be useful.
The staff is now prepared to make.recom-(
mendations regarding a number of clarifying amendments to 10 CFR Part 40',
Appendix A, to accomplish this objective. These clarifying amendments, however, would not alter the original intent or objectives of the require-ments.
But in view of the-larger task now being undertaken', the staff does not now propose a separate rulemaking for this purpose.
The staff recommends that any such clarifying changes be included in any subsequent substantive rulemaking.
Total resource requirements for anticipated conforming or independent rulemaking are not clear since the extent of the change from present rules, if any, is not known at this time.
However, it is estimated e
e
~ - - - -
m.s
+
,,g
a.
. -,. _. ~ - -
,,--,.m,.---
. +, - - -
g.
r 4
that approximately one staff year effort would be required to simply conform Appendix A to the EPA Title II standards and one additional staff year will be required to complete the reassessment of radiological and,
stability objectives.
Gble$ YM,am!.Dircki William J. Dircks Executive Directar for Operations
Enclosure:
As stated cc: Comissioner Gilinsky Comissioner Ahearne Comissioner Roberts Comissioner Asselstine James Tourte11otte
~
OIA o
4
j A,.
,, r.
TENTATIVE SCHEDULE FOR CONFORMING PRESENT REGULATIONS TO FINAL EPA STANDARDS EPA publishes proposed Title II Standards Starting Date (10/31/82)*
Staff immediately prepares a Federal Register 15 Days **
Notice for Commission action and public comment on suspension of selected portions,'if any', of
~
present regulations.
Public comment period.
30 Days -
= ~.
Staff analysis of comments and recommendation 30 Days to the Commission on suspension of selected portions of present regulations.
Commission action to suspend selected portions 90 Days after EPA of present regulations.
publishes proposed Title 11 Standards ReviewiGEIS Jin light of any suspended requirements and changes necessary to con-form to' EPA proposed standards to determine if further environmental review is needed.
Analyze options available for translating EPA standards into licensing requirements.
EPA promulgates final Title If Standards.
11 Months after EPA-L publishes proposed L
Title II Standards (9/30/83)*
Staff immediately prepares a Federal Register 15 Days **
Notice for Commission action and public comment on substantive changes, if any, to present regulations.
9
- Dates in parentheses are from the Domenici Amendment.
f' p,
-TENTATIVE SCHEDULE FOR CONFORMING PRESENT REGULATIONS TO FINAL EPA STANDARDS-(Continued)
Public coment period.
45 Days Staff analysis of coments and recomendations 90 Days to the Comission on substantive changes to present regulations.
Comission action on substantive changes to 6 Months after.
present regulations.
promulgation of
' final EPA Title II Standards (3/31/84)*
if
.s.
\\
(
l tl.
- Dates in parentheses are from the Domenici Amendment.
l l
-