ML20042C964
| ML20042C964 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/02/1986 |
| From: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20042C965 | List: |
| References | |
| TASK-PINV, TASK-SE SECY-86-140, NUDOCS 8605160026 | |
| Download: ML20042C964 (23) | |
Text
QUESTION 31
)
) 2
./
^
E e
5
'l
\\, * * * * * /
May 2,1986 SECY-86-140 POLICY ISSUE (Notation Vote) i FOR:
The Comissioners FROM:
Victor Stello, Jr.
Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
REASSERTION OF CERTAIN REGULATORY AUTHORITY IN THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO l,
CATEGORY:
This paper covers a minor policy matter. Resource estimates are Category I, preliminary.
PURPOSE:
To obtain Commission approval of a Federal Register notice on reassertion of certain regulatory authority in New Mexico.
DISCUSSION:
By letter dated March 18,1986 (Enclosure 1)
Governor Anaya of New Mexico requested that the NRC reassert its authority over uranium milling and mill tailings in New Mexico. The Governor stated that because of severe budget constraints, as well as other compelling reasons, the State can no longer assume regulatory responsibility for uranium mill tailings. The other compelling reasons relate to (1) difficulties in attempting to enforce EPA regulations in 40 CFR 192 directly, (2) difficulties anticipated in upgrading the New Mexico regulations to be compatible with revised 10 CFR 40 Appendix A, (3) inability to upgrade mill surety arrangements under State law and (4) high staff turnover. These problem areas are discussed in more detail in the enclosure to the Governor's letter. The Comission's acknowledgement of the Governor's letter is provided as Enclosure 2.
Although New Mexico has not issued any licenses for thorium milling the Governor has been infomed that we are assuming that his aquest inc ed thorium N' s' o
L[ -
b@
Contact:
/
1
,y b'
J. F. Kendig, OSP
[
492-9886 e.
J
since it is included with uranium as a category of material in the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978.
In order to effect the reassertion of NRC authority as requested by the Governor, Section 274j of the Atomic Energy Act requires a finding by the Comission that it is necessary for the Commission to terminate that part of New Mexico's agreement relinquishing NRC authority over uranium and thorium milling activities and to reassert NRC licensing and regulatory authority over these activities in New Mexico in order to protect the public health and safety. The staff was informed by New Mexico personnel that the Environmental Improvement Division budget effective July 1, 1986 does not include money or staff to implement a uranium recovery regulatory program. Thus, it is likely that a regulatory hiatus could exist if the Commission does not reassert its authority prior to that date.
Therefore, staff believes that it is necessary for the Comission to reassert its -
authority over milling and mill tailings in New Mexico.
Even if the State continued with the program, the prospect of New Mexico developing and administering a regulatory program for uranium milling and mill tailings which is compatible with EPA and NRC regulations in the near term is considered remote given the type of problems identified by the Governor.
Failure of the State to develop a compatible regulatory program as required by the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act in a reasonable period of time, would necessitate action by the Comission to reassert its authority.
The proposed Federal Register notice shown in would provide notice that such finding has been made by the Commission and that reassertion of NRC authority would be effective on a specified date. _The recommended effective dateJsJun_e_1, 1986_which_wiLLa U ow for an_ orderly transfer of.
appropr_ tate _ files and other_r_egula_ tory _ mate'ri~arto
'the NRC.as.well_as notification to affected lici~nsees. The staff 6e'lievei'thitt th~e~ Commission shoiDii fiEe action to keep the existing State licenses and license requirements in effect until modified by the staff. is a Commission order which provides that the existing State licenses in effect become NRC licenses.
3 4
The State requested a May 1, 1986 effective date for the reassertion of NRC regulatory authority. The Governor was informed by letter dated April 14, 1986 that it was unlikely that this date could be met.
Reassertion by the NRC will impact the resources allocated to the NRC's uranium mill regulatory program.
It is estimated that a cumulative total of approximately 15 FTE direct staff effort will be required to bring the New Mexico licenses into-compliance with the Federal standards.
Staff believes that this level of effort would probably have been needed for the State of New Mexico to bring their licensees into compliance with the Federal standards as well. There are seven licensed conventional uranium mills (two have not operated) and six other licenses consisting of heap leach, in l
situ leach, and ion exchange operations and one mine backfill operation. The above work effort, which would be expended over the next several years, includes about 1 FTE for inspections. Upon completion of all efforts to bring the licensees into compliance with Federal standards, the staff estimates that 2 to 3 FTE direct staff effort per year will be required to maintain these licenses, which includes about 0.6 FTE for routine inspections.
NRC staff is holding discussions with the staff of the State Environmental Improvement Division concerning transition arrangements. The mill sureties and the State's perpetual care fund are of particular interest. The staff raust. decide _h_ow best to deal with the mill suretT _es and how to assure that the State's mill tailings pshiuTFTa"rp and
~
' monitoring fund will be preserved for this purpose.
The Director of the State Environmental Improvement Division stated at a Comission briefing on September 10, 1985 that the sureties posted for decomissioning and reclamation of the uranium mill tailings and mill sites in New Mexico are not sufficient for closure in accord with existing EPA and NRC standards.
The staff is working with the New Mexico legal staff to determine if the existing State sureties will remain in effect following transfer of the program.
If not, the staff plans to issue orders, effective on the date of transfer, requiring the licensees to provide sureties for the amounts previously held, as a minimum. The staff will then evaluate the surety mechanisms and amounts and will require the licensees to upgrade the sureties to meet NRC
~
regulations. The staff has also asked the State to address the status of its perpetual care and monitoring fund after the program transfer.
If this fund cannot be preserved by the State for the purpose intended, the staff will have to require the licensees to provide a guarantee of sufficient funds as required by NRC regulations (10 CFR 40 Appendix A Criterion 10).
As noted on page 2 of the attachment to Governor Anaya's letter (Enclosure 1) two of the mill sites
+
are on the EPA National Priorities List for Federal
+
Superfund treatment because of groundwater problems.
This.is a matter NRC staff, EPA and the State will need to address after reassertion of NRC authority.
When the New Mexico licenses for uranium recovery activities are transferred to the NRC, they will become subject to the Commission's license fee regulations in 10 CFR 170. Any applications for renewal or amendment of the license that are on file at the time of the transfer and are required to be processed to completion by the NRC will be subject to fees.. Amendment or renewal fees will be assessed based on the full cost (professional staff hour and contractual services costs) required to process the applications up to the prescribed ceilings in 10 CFR 170. Any inspections that are conducted after the transfer is made will be subject to inspection fees.
Fees would neither be charged for orders issued pursuant to 2.204 nor for amendments resulting specifically from such Comission orders. New l
Mexico does not have a license fee program.
Although Governor Anaya stated he was withdrawing the State's application for an amended agreement, it should be noted that NRC did not receive a formal request from New Mexico for an amended agreement-pursuant to the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act. The NRC staff, however, did review and provide coments on draft proposals.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Comission:
1.
Find that termination of that portion of the Section 274b Agreement with New Mexico covoring uranium and thorium milling and mill tailings is required to protect the public health and safety.
2.
Approve publication of the Federal Register notice announcing the Commission decision (Enclosure 3).
3.
Approve the order provided as Enclosure 4 and direct the Secretary to issue such order.
4.
Note:
a.
No change to the Agreement document is necessary since New Mexico did not obtain an amended agreement pursuant to the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act.
b.
The Comission order will be published in the Federal Register along with the notice of reassertion of authority, c.
The Governor of New Mexico will be notified of the Comission decision by letter shown in Enclosure 5.
d.
A public announcement (Enclosure 6) will be issued by Public Affairs.
e.
The appropriate Congressional Comittees-(Enclosure 7) will be informed of the Comission decision.
f.
Existing uranium milling licensees in New Mexico will be advised of the change in r
regulatory authority.
SCHEDULING:
Comission decision is requested at the earliest practicable titre and no later than May 14, 1986.
The Governor requested an effective transfer date of May 1,1986 primarily because of budgetary considerations.
However, by letter dated April 14, 1986 the NRC informed Governor Anaya that it was unlikely that this date could be met.
Staff needs to be informed promptly of Comission decision on reassertion of authority and recommends an effective date of June 1, 1986.
/ :}
V ctor Stello, Jr.
Executive Director for Operations
Enclosures:
1.
Ltr. dtd. March 18, 1986 from Governor Anaya 2.
Comission Acknowledgement Ltr. of April 14~,1986 3.
Proposed Federal Register Notice 4
Proposed Comission Order 5.
Draft Ltr. to Governor Anaya from Chairman 6.
Draft Public Announcement 7.
Draft Congressional Letter
r i
~
r a.
In order to expedite this action Commissioners' comments or i
consent should be provided directly to the Office of the Secretary by c.o.b. Friday, May 9, 1986.
Commission Staff Office comments, if any, should be submitted to the Commissioners NLT Wednesday, May 7, 1986, with an infor-mation copy to the Office of the Secretary.
If the paper is of such a nature that it requires additional time for analytical review and comment, the Commissioners and the Secretariat should be apprised of when comments may be expected.
DISTPIBUTION:
Commissioners' OGC OPE OI OCA OIA OPA REGION IV EDO ELD ACRS ASLBP ASLAP SECY I
A 1
}
l l
I a
.1-STATE CF New Mexico H
omcsonussevones n:
SANTA Fr gg Tcsrv Aw4rA aooo March 18,1986 Samuel J. Chilk, Secretary l
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Dear Secretary Chilk:
i As you are aware, the State of New Mexico has, for the past several years, l
had pending before the Commission an application to amend the 1974 i
Agreement between the State and the Commission to cover uranium mill tailings in accordance with the requirements of 42 U.S.C. $ 2021(o).
To date, the Commission has dec!!ned to approve the application for a by product' l
material agreement.
The Commission has. properly pointed out that the existing state regulations fall. to meet applicable federal statutory and regulatory requirements in several respects.
As you must also be aware, under the Atomic Energy Act, as amended, the Commission is authorized to enter into an agreement ' with a state only.if l
certain conditions are met, one of which is "that the state desires to assume regulatory responsibility for such materials (subject to the proposed agreement].
., 42 U.S.C. 5 2021(d).
At this time, New Mexico no longer desires to assume this regulatory responsibility.
Because of severe budgetary constraints, as well as other compelling reasons,-
the State of New Mexico can no longer assume regulatory responsibility for uranium mill tailings.
(See attached - memorandum from Denise Fort to Governor Toney Anaya. )
Consequently, on behalf of the State of New Mexico, I am hereby withdrawing the State's pending application under 42
.. U.S.C. $ 2021 with respect to - the regulation by the State, of uranium mill tailings.
Of course, the withdrawal of this pending application is intended to, and will, have the effect of leaving intact existing State programs under the 1974 Agreement, as to radioactive materials and devices other than uranium mills and mill tailings.
In exercising this option-to " discontinue the licensing of uranium milling and mill tailings control, while retaining authority to license other materials licensable under the Agreement States Program", I am acting in ~ accord with the. expressed intent of Congress when it enacted Section 204 of the Uranium Mill Tallings -Radiation Control Act of 1978.-
See House Report No. 95-1480, Part 1 (p. 21) and Part 2 (p. 45), containing. the above-quoted language.
l As I reiterated to the New Mexico uranium mill owner.s in my -letter dated i
November - 15, 1985, New Mexico and the other - Agreement States are bound-
- directly to enforce the currently applicable EPA standards promulgated in 40 CFR 192 against Agreement State.IIcensees, under the commission's directive to the Agreement States dated March. 22, 1985.
Three 'of our five " active site" licensees have responded to my letter and to your directive by stating
.i
.l
\\
i March 18,1986 Page 2 i
that they dispute the legal power of the State directly to enforce such federal requirements, and that they do not intend to comply with such federal i
requirement unless and until they have been incorporated into State law through formal rulemaking by the Environmental improvement Board.
In view of this posture on the part of several New Mexico licensees, the public interest would not be served by a
protracted transition period.
Consequently, I must request that the Commission complete whatever steps are required to resume federal regulation of uranium mill licensees in New Mexico no later than May 1,1986.
We will continue to work with you after that date, but for legal purposes the program should be considered transferred at that time.
I assure you that' the State of New Mexico stands ready to assist the Commission in its assumption of licensing and regulatory activities with respect to uranium mills and mill tailings in New Mexico.
I am informed that 42 U.S.C. $ 2021(1) provides authority for the Commission to contract with the State "to perform inspections or other functions
,n a cooperative basis a,s the Commission deems appropriate." As you know, the State has a number of experienced and skilled employees who might well be utilized on a contractual basis under 5 2021(i), in the event that the Commission should deem it advisable to seek such expert assistance in its uranium milling and mill tailings program in New Mexico.
We would be pleased to explore this possibility with you at any mutually convenient time.
With regard to the mechanics of transferring the uranium program from the State to the Commission, we will make every effort to see to it that the transition is accomolished with a minimum of disruption to licensees and to the public.
I sugger, <'1at you communicate directly with the Director of the New Mexico Environe -
u Improvement Division, Denise Fort, concerning how the transfer is to F accomplished.
in closing, I wish to express my appreciation for the assistance and cooperation that the State has received from the Commission over the years.
We look forward to similarly good relations with the Commission, as the State continues to discharge its obligations under the existing 1974 Agreement.
L If you have any questions about this letter or its implications, please feel free to contact me at any time.
Sincerely, b
.s w=
TONEY At A
Governor TA/ddf/jdv Attachment cc:
Ms. Denise D. Fort, EID Director Mr. Wayne Kerr, Nuclear Regulatory Commission
r c,
3 gE TONEY ANAYA -
eE GOVERNOR:
l T
-s-, o
[
m DENtSE Q. PDAT
<eE
'"AJ STATE OF MEW MEXICO
- mL eT N~h m-H ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENT DIVISION i
e O
ENTy
,,,,,,,,,, m,,,,,,, -,
t MEM0RANDUM TO:
Toney Anaya, Governor, State of New Mexico l
FROM:
Denise Fort Environmental Improvement Division, Director DATE:
March 19, 1986 I
SUBJECT:
Continued State Administration of the Uranium Licensing Program j
l i
1.
Introduction.
In the early 1950s uranium was first discovered in 'the Grants region.
The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) opened a -branch office in Grants in 1950 and -
i prospecting began in earnest.
In 1955 uranium are.was discovered in Ambrosia!
Lake some 25 miles northwest of ' Grants.
' Prior to 1940 the world's entire 1
production of U 0s had been little more than 7,500 tons; by 1960 the San Juan l
3 Basin alone produced more than 7,800 tons.
In 1977 the Basin's production of ore amounted to 46 percent of the national production of 16,700 tons; in 1978,-
the Basin produced 47% of the U.S.
total of 20,200 tons.
At this time, seven-companies were actively operating thirty ur'anium mines and four major mills:
i
- Anaconda, Quivira, Homestake Mining Corporation, and United Nuclear Corporation..
1 In 1974 the State of New Mexico became an " Agreement State" with the AEC and assumed jurisdiction for licensing by-product material excluding mill tailings.
In 1976 the State exercised authority over mill tailings with the consent of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), the successor agency to -
the AEC.
In 1978 Congress passed the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA), that amended the' Atomic Energy Act of 1954, and allowed the State to enter into an amended agreement with NRC if it wished to continue regulating mill tailings.
UMTRCA was designed to address ; problems with both " inactive" uranium tailings piles (Title -!)- and " active" piles and milling operations (Title II).
The " inactive" piles are specifically. listed in the legislation.
- Remaining piles, whether the company is in operation in 1986 or not, are considered " active" within the meaning of the ~ statute. Under Title !! of the Act the federal' Environmental Protection' Agency (EPA) was mandated to promulgate generally applicable standards for active uranium mills and-mill tailings.
These standards were then to be -implemented through licensing and 7
rul e-making activities by the NRC and by so-called " Agreement States",
including New Mexico, which opted to regulate uranium mills and mill tailings.
m om m*
Memo to Governor Anaya March 19, 1985 Page 2 In October, 1985, NRC finally promulgated its revised regulations which established minimum federal standards.
New Mexico is required to conform under the " Agreement State" provisions of UMTRCA with these federal standards; it has not adopted conforming regulations, and does not have an approved agreement pursuant to UMTRCA.
All uranium recently mined and milled in New Mexico comes from the Grants Mineral Belt, an area of about 2,500 square miles stretching north and west of Grants.
There are five active uranium mill tailings piles in this area, subject to regulation under Title II of UMTRCA:
a.
Homestake Mining Company (HMC) near Milan, New Mexico, with 22 million tons; b.
Anaconda Minerals Company near Bluewater and Grants, with 24 million tons; Quivira Mining Company at Ambrosia Lake, with 34 million tons; c.
d.
United Nuclear Corporation (UNC) northeast of Gallup, with 3.6 million tons; and Sohio-Western (Kennecott/L-Bari near Seboyeta, with 3.3 million tons.-
e.
All of the five Title 11 sites have documented ground water contamination due to seepage from unlined tailings ponds.
Two of the sites. Homestake and UNC, are on the National Priorities List for federal Superfund treatment, primarily because of ground water problems.
Homestake has installed a new public water supply at its own expense and implemented a pump back system, augmented by a fresh water injection process in an attempt to reclaim the polluted aquifer.
EPA has not yet determined what remedial action will be required at UNC's tallings pile.
Currently, all of these five sites are required to comply with State Water Quality Control Commission regulations, which are less stringent y
than those adopted by the EPA and currently applied by the NRC.
d The uranium industry is going through a transition phase at the current time since the majority of the companies are no longer milling cre and stabilization and reclamation has not yet begun.
The need to stabilize and reclaim proceeds from the federal regulatory scheme, which controls releases of wind blown tailings, radon gas, and ground water contamination.
The current regulatory issues no longer focus on environmental control during operations; the long-term requirement o f. stabilization is the standard by which the program must be measured.
II.
Scoce of the Problem.
The State's regulation of uranium licensees has not been very effective during the 10 years that the State has operated the program.
Much evidence could be cited to support this statement.
Most importantly environmental problems are occurring at every site; the sites do not have approved stabilization plans; j
the sites do not have adequate sureties to protect the State in case of default; the applicability of federal regulations has not been settled; license renewals are long overdue; and the adoption of new State regulations will require hearings with the potential of protracted appeals.
j i
l l-l Memo to Governor Anaya March 19, 1986 Page 3 Second, EID's budget has been severely reduced in the last few years.
The Division has been plagued with constant and disruptive staff turnover, the need to reduce positions in the agency and uncompetitive salaries.
In i
addition, several companies have refused to accept the applicability of L
federal regulations.
The disagreements between industry and the State over applicable standards have already consumed inordinate staff time and could easily consume several more years as hearings are held, appeals litigated and issues retried.
With the potential costs incurred in hearings to develop regulations and the litigation which has accompanied and will presumably continue to accompany almost every regulatory development, there is no way this agency can continue to bear the costs of this demanding program.
- Third, I
seriously question whether the State's regul atory system can withstand the pressures which will result from imposition of high costs on a nearly defunct industry.
Had regulatory development not been forestalled at the State and federal level during the boom years, the costs could have been I
properly internalized by the industry.
The threatened imposition of these costs has already resulted in a 1986 legislative memorial, disapproving the I
very regulations the NRC has directed that we impos e.
Whil e you. have supported federal legislation to hel p producers with these costs, in the absence of legislation the State is caught between federal requirements, environmental protection and the position of many legislators.
III.
Enforcement problems.
1.
Protracted Litication.
Two licensees, HMC and Quivira, are currently pursuing license renewal.
Requests by the State for revised stabilization plans that address federal standards have drawn responses from these two licensees that federal standards are not enforceable by the EID.
These licensees have indicated that they will fight State implementation of the minimum federal requirements and will litigate those requirements if adopted as State regulations.
The cost of litigation will be in addition to the cost required for adoption of the requirements, and this litigation may result in a delay of several years in the enforcement of State regulations.
-2.
Financial Sureties.
Existing financial sureties for mill tailings reclamation are inadequate to ensure reclamation even to existing State standards, and they appear woefully
- inadequate to meet federal standards.
The State requirements for interim financial sureties currently stand at
$25,000 per acre.
By contrast, the most recent studies indicate the need for $250,000-$350,000 per acre to address the problem realisticrily.
As an example the current surety amount for Quivira Mining Company is $8.75 million, whereas the Department of Energy's estimate for the site is
$123.75 million.
Without sufficient financial sureties, the taxpayers of New Mexico may ultimately bear the costly burden of clean-up.
3.
Loncevity.
With respect to engineering design, the longevity recuirement of tne existing State regulations requires stabilization of the tailings piles for only 200 years.
Federal regulations require stabilization for
MemohoGovernorArsya March 19, 1985 Page 4 1,000 years, unless it can be demonstrated that a shorter period should be allowed, but in no case less than 200 years.
4 Radon. Radon emanation rates are not addressed in the existing State regulations, while the federal regulations establish a 20 pC1/m2/Sec s tanda rd.
El evated levels of radon gas have been associated with an increase in the incidence of lung cancer, and the health risks of radon were a primary concern when Congress enacted UMTRCA.
5.
Ground Water Protection.
EPA standards specify that background concentrations of most constituents will not be exceeded in ground water.
These standards are substantially more stringent than existing state requi rements.
TV.
Reasons for Returning the Procram to NRC.
1.
More Effective Environmental Regulations.
The NRC and EPA regulations are much more effective than those of the State for mill decomissioning, tailings stabilization, cl ean-up of properties contaminated by uranium mills, and ground water protection.
Specifically, NRC standards would have to be addressed adequately under the federal regulations with respect to engineering design, ground water protection, long term stabilization, radon barrier thickness, and resistance to long-term flooding.
With the full force of the federal government behind these regulations, effective environmental and health protection standards would be enforced.
2.
Firancial Sureties.
The federal regulations would immediately recuire modification of the existing inadequate financial surety arrangements to ensure that uranium mill tailings are reclaimed to the federal standards if abandoned by the mining companies.
The State now stands a
substantial risk of having to clean up abandoned tailings piles, with
~~
sureties many millions of dollars below estimated costs.
This risk is one we must take every step to prevent.
3.
High staff turnover.
High staff turnover has been a probl em in the Uran 1u= Licensing Program since 1974 Lack of continuity has drastically
]
affected this program, as relatively long periods of familiarization with specific licenses are required before effective licensing decisions can be made.
The difference in salaries paid by the EID and those by private industry and nearby national laboratories has primarily entributed to the rapid turnover in this area.
The problem is not likely to be resolved in the near future.
4 Lack of Resources.
The Uranium Licensing Program has had to rely on outside consul tants to do some of the detailed engineering / design evaluations on reclamation pl a ns.
Staff turnover have exacerbated the
, need for such outside help, yet the division has had to cancel outside contracts as a cost savings measure.
Memo to Governor Anaya March 19, 1986 Page 5
~
5.
Budget savinos.
The State is perfoming a federal responsibility at State expense and without any federal funding.
If the program were returned to the NRC, the State would save at least 4 FTE, travel, training and outside contract costs annually.
Conclusion i
i Y would not dispute that there are some benefits to continued State administration
[
of the program.
Certain of the mill tailings piles represent major environmental problems for the-State and loss of direct State control, however problematic its -
exercise has been, is always subject to question.
Moreover, the companies may i
benefit from EID's geographic accessibility.
In my mind three factors tip the balance towards the resumption of NRC control.
Our agency budget. dictates that we j
seriously question each and every. program we administer in tems of net environmental benefit. Second, the State is now dangerously unsecured in the event of abandonment of the mill tailings piles. With NRC administration, fgderal regulations including the surety provisions, will immediately be effective.
Finally, I believe the expertise and political support needed to better protect the environment and administer the program is found within the NRC.
For these reasons I recommend we initiate action to return the program to the NRC.
DF/MB/cyg i
t l
I f
i i
l 8
r
f UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
-l f
wasmmarow.o.c. noses j
e i
N, ~
]
e Q* *CN April 14, 1986-CHAHtuAN i
1 1
j The Honorable Toney Anaya Governor of New' Mexico Santa Fe, New Mexico 87503 1
Dear Governor Anaya:
l 18, 1986 requesting that the;NRC We are in receipt of your letterof Marchreassert its regulatory resultant tailings in the State of New Mexico. step necess j
1 request.
As you suggested, NRC staff is holding discus l
i Althougn we are not aware of any thorium recovery activities.in N j
we are assuming.that your request includes tho
)
f material in the Uranium Mill Tailings' Radiation Control' Act of 1978 ll
~
must also deal with mill sureties and how to assure tha tailings. perpetual care and monitoring fund will be preserved for t purpose.
mentioned in your letter, but the timing is ve kl l
In order to avoid a regulatory hiatus. New i
i ibility over uran um-l that this date can be met.
. Mexico should continue to exercise authority and respons milling and tailings until a mutually agreeable date-is reached l
femal response to your temination request un temination of the agreement.
i licensees and transferring files to our Uranium Recovery Field Of 31, 1986, we believe-As our staff discussed with Ms. Fort on March it is important to' strive for a smooth transition so that any unce Denver.
l I am sure that regarding the status of licensed operations are' eliminated.
is our mutual objective.
f We will continue to work with your staff to com
-l our point of contact in the event there are any questions.
)
=
,,-c,
The Honorable Toney Anaya 2
We appreciate the cooperation the State of New Mexico has provided over the years and look forward to a continuing cooperative relationship under the remaining portion of the Agreement State Program.
Sincerely,
/
Y omas M. Roberts Acting Chaiman ec: Ms. Denise D. Fort EID Dir., N.M.
I e
e 4
O t
o Nuclear Regulatory Commission Proposed Federal Register Notice Reassertion of Certain Regulatory Authority in the State of New Mexico t
By letter dated March 18, 1986 Governor Toney Anaya of New Mexico, requested that the NRC reassert its authority over uranium milling and mill tailings in New Mexico. The Governor stated that because of severe l
budget constraints, as well as other compelling reasons the State can no longer assume regulatory responsibility for uranium mill tailings. The other compelling reasons related to legal problems in attempting to enforce Federal regulations directly, difficulties anticipated in upgrading the New Mexico regulations and mill surety arrangements and high staff turnover. A copy of the Governor's letter is on file in the Commission's Public Document Room at 1717 H. Street, Washington, D.C.
Pursuant to the provisions of section 274j of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended the Nuclear Regulatory Commission found on that is is necessary to terminate that part of New Mexico's agreement relinquishing NRC authority over uranium and thorium milling activities and mill tailings and to reassert NRC licensing and regulatory authority over these activities and the mill tailings produced in order to protect the public health and safety. This finding ensures that there will be no lapse of licensing and regulatory authority over these activities and materials upon relinquishment of this authority by the State of New Mexico. This reassertion of authority will become effective on
,1986. This action does not affect the remaining portion of the New Mexico agreement State program which covers regulation of byproduct material (as defined in Section 11(e)(1) of the Atomic Energy Act), source material, and special nuclear material in quantities not sufficient to form a critical mass.
Persons seeking licenses for activities within New Mexico involving byproduct material as defined in section 11e(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or activities resulting in the production of such byproduct material should file such applications with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Uranium Recovery Field Office, Box 25325, Denver, 4
Colorado 80225, Attention R. Dale Smith, Director.
f Existing uranium milling licensees in New Mexico are being advised of this change in regulatory authority.
Pursuant to a Commission order published with this notice, existing New Mexico licenses affected by this change will become effective NRC licenses under conditions set forth in the order.
l l
For information regarding this reassertion action contact the NRC's Office of State Programs, Mr. Donald A. Nussbaumer (301-492-7767) or John F. Kendig (301-492-9886).
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this day of
, 1986.
FOR THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t
G. Wayne Kerr, Director Office of State Programs b
i I
I
e i
P t
b f
United States of America Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nunzio J. Palladino, Chairman Thomas M. Roberts Janes K. Asselstine Frederick M. Bernthal I
lando W. Zech, Jr.
1 In the Matter of the return to the United States of the New Mexico program for the licensing of extraction or concentration of source material from source material ore and the resulting byproduct material.
Order The Commission has determined pursuant to Section 274j(1) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, that it is appropriate for the protection of the public health and safety to accept the return to the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission of the New Mexico program for the licensing and regulation of the extraction and concentration of source material from source material ore and the management and disposal of the resulting byproduct material as defined in Section 11e(2) of the Act.
New Mexico is an Agreement State, but its Agreement does not include a needed amendment to cover the regulation by the State of the byproduct material (as defined in Section 11e(2) of the Act) produced by the extraction or concentration of source material from source material ore.
For this and other reasons, the Governor of the State has advised the Commission that the State is no longer in a position to administer that portion of its Agreement State program and has requested its return to Commission jurisdiction.
It is obvious that the extraction of source material from source material ore and the management and disposal of the resultant byproduct material cannot be left unregulated. Accordingly, the Commission finds it necessary to accept the return of that portion of the New Mexico program. Since the State will continue to license and regulate source material for other uses no revision is needed in the present text of the New Mexico Agreement. It is also pertinent to note that the returned portion of the program does not remove from the State any authority with respect to the mining of source material cre. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission does not regulate the mining of source material cre.
2 The Commission staff has reviewed the files of the New Mexico Environmental Improvement Division and has identified all relevant licensing documents for transfer to the Commission. In order to aid in a smooth transition, however, the Commission deems it essential to maintain continuity in the licensing and regulatory obligations of the New Mexico licensees whose dockets are being transferred to the Commission. Such continuity may be assured by keeping in effect on an interim basis all New Mexico licenses as currently issued, until such time as the licenses are modified to meet Federal standards for the processing of source material ore and the management and disposal of the resulting byproduct material.
Therefore, the Commission hereby orders that all New Mexico issued licenses, license amendments, outstanding orders (if any), or other documents establishing obligations for specific licensees that are transferred to the Commission, shall remain in full force and effect as if issued by the Commission. The Commission staff will review all transferred licensing documents and see to their revision as necessary to meet applicable Federal standards.
For the Commission Secretary of the Commission Dated at Washington, D. C.,
this day of 1986.
i
The Honorable Toney Anaya Governor of New Mexico Santa Fe, New Mexico 87503
Dear Governor Anaya:
As a result of your letter of March 18, 1986, the Commission, on
,1986 agreed to terminate that part of New Mexico's agreement relinquishing the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) authority over uranium and tho'rium milling activities and to reassert NRC licensing and regulatory authority over these activities and the mill tailings produced, in order to protect the public health and safety. The effective date of the termination is
, 1986.
Enclosed is a copy of the Federal Register notice which we expect to be published in the next few days. We also expect to issue a public announcement in conjunction with issuance of the Federal Register notice.
Ms. Denise Fort, Director of the Environmental Improvement Division was informed of the decision on
,1986.
I understand she is making arrangements for transfer of the appropriate files and other material to the NRC.
We appreciate the State's cooperation in this matter and look forward to continuing our cooperative relationships on the remaining portion of the State Agreement program.
Sincerely, Nunzio J. Palladino Chairman
Enclosure:
As stated
e Draft Public Announcement NRC REASSERTING AUTHORITY OVER URANIUM AND THORIUM MILLING ACTIVITIES IN NEW MEXIC0 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is reasserting its licensing and regulatory authority over uranium and thorium milling activities and the mill tailings resulting from these activities in the State of New tkxico.
The action, which is effective on (date), is being taken in order to assure that the public health and safety will be protected after Governor Toney Anaya, in a March 18 letter, advised that the State could no longer assume these responsibilities due to severe budget restraints and other compelling reasons.
The other compelling reasons cited by the Governor, in his letter asking the Commission to reassert its authority, include legal problems in attempting to enforce Federal regulations directly, difficulties anticipated in upgrading New Mexico's regulations and mill surety arrangements (assurance that funds for decommissioning will be available) and high staff turnover.
Uranium and thorium mill licensees in New Mexico are being advised of the Commission's action in an Order dated (date) and the NRC staff has identified all licensing documents in the State's files which are to be transferred to the NRC.
In the meantime, the New Mexico licenses, as currently issued, will remain in effect until they can be revised, if necessary, to meet Federal standards governing uranium and thorium milling and management of the resulting mill tailings.
The State's authority for regulating the possession and use of other radioactive materials in New Mexico will remain in effect under the terms of the existing agreement with the NRC.
l Persons seeking new licenses for activities involving the milling of uranium or thorium and/or the management of the resulting mill _ tailings in New Mexico should file applications with the Nuclear Regulatory i
Commission, Uranium Recovery Field Office, Box 25325, Denver, Colorado 80225, Attention:
R. Dale Smith, Director.
I
Draft Congressional Letter i
.i
Dear Mr. Chairman:
At the request of the Governor of New Mexico, the Commission, on
, 1986 agreed to terminate that part of New Mexico's agreement relinquishing the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) authority over uranium and thorium milling. activities and to reassert NRC licensing and regulatory authority over these activities and the uranium mill tailings produced, in order to protect the public health f
and safety. The effective date of the termination is 1986.
Enclosed is a copy of the Federal Register notice which we expect-to be published in the next few days. We also expect to issue a public announcement in conjunction with issuance of the Federal Register notice.
Sincerely, t
Victor Stello, Jr.
Executive Director for Operations
Enclosure:
As stated
!