ML20043B290
| ML20043B290 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/24/1990 |
| From: | Hurt R NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Haughney C NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| References | |
| REF-PROJ-M-32 NUDOCS 9005250211 | |
| Download: ML20043B290 (4) | |
Text
"
j )$ ) ;
At caso hf
,o UNITED STATES V
'i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t
.P
- {- ~
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 a
\\g
[
MAY 2 4 1990 Project M-32 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Charles J. Haughney, Chief Fuel Cycle Safety Branch Division ~of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety
. FROM:-
R. Davis Hurt
-Advanced Fuel and Special Facilities Section Fuel Cycle Safety Branch Division-of Industrial and Medical Nucl_ ear Safety
SUBJECT:
MEETING CONCERNING A FEDERAL FACILITIES COMPLIANCE AGREEMENT FOR THE WEST VALLEY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT The Department of Energy'(00Ei is negotiating a compliance a consent order with the Envirt,nmental Protection Agency (EPA)greement and that would cover DOE: activities at the West Valley Demonstration Project.
The' New York State Energy Research_and Development Authority (NYSERDA), DOE's partner in the West
' Valley Demonstration Project 'and the owner of-the West Valley property, would be a party to-these agreements.
So would the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the state agency authorized by EPA to regulate -
i hazardous. wastes.
The. purpose of the agreement under negotiation would be to t
establish =a' process for implementing plans and schedules for the management of radioactive mixed waste consistent with the requirements of the Resource-Conservation and Recovery Act and the New York State Environmental Quality -
Review Act.
On May 10, 1990, I attended a' meeting in New York, New York, on_this matter, accompanied by James R. Wolf of:the Office of the General Lounsel. and Dominic A.
.Orlando,0fithe Division of Low-Level Waste Management and Decommissioning.
.:A. list of' attendees from the other agencies is enclosed. Most of the other parties present had apparently met several times before. This-was the first meeting. attended by representatives from-the Nuclear Regulttory Commission (NRC).
=NRC has an interest in this subject for two reasons.
First, we have responsibilities under the terms of the West Valley Demonstration Project Act for matters of safety presented by the Project. Any measures' undertaken by DOE by: virtue of new agreements with EPA may need review by NRC for this purpose.
Second, NRC will have a -large role in determining how the site should L
~
be cleaned up.
The West Valley legislation specifically gave NRC the responsibility of defining decontamination and decommissioning criteria for the
. facilities and materials used by DOE in connection with the Project. Any
-facilities or materials under DOE's custody at present but not used by DOE in connection with the Project would, at a minimum, revert to NRC's licensing i
' authority when the Project is completed.
So under the current regime, NRC's i
decontamination and decommissioning standards will be directly applied, sooner or'later, to all parts of the West Valley site tnat were covered by the original
.l 9003250211 900524 PDR PROJ
'l M-32 PDC
{
b/
[f
E7 ] <
-4
. MAY 2 4 1'990
. Charles 11. Haughney
?'-
NRC' license, which is to say all parts of the site except the state-licensed burial ground.
DOE and NYSERDA have undertaken to write an Environmental Impact Statement on the topic of site closure that will consider all features of-the site, both the parts currently under DOE control and the state-licensed burial ground.
NRC has agreed to work closely with DOE and NYSERDA to ensure
,that the Environmental Impact Statement properly reflects NRC's standards. Any agreement made with EPA regarding remedial actions will have to be closely assessed for its impact on this-site closure evaluation process.
L It was cle6r in the meeting that DOE and NYSERDA have not completely agreed on-the-division of responsibility for any remedial actions that might have to be taken on the site, either at the site closure stage or b'efore. When the EPA' representatives asked when such responsibilities would be determined, the NYSERDA. representatives suggested that the conditions of the suspended NRC I
license might prevent action on their part.
We said that we did not think the NRC license should be an impediment to any needed remedial' actions, and that we would be prepared to consider amendments to the license if.the need arises.
[JO
/[.
R. Davis Hurt, Project Manager Advanced Fuel and Special Facilities Section a
Fuel Cycle Safety Branch Division of Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety
Enclosure:
list of attendees 2
I b
e
~
MAY 2 41990 -
Charles J. Haughney-2-
F
_NRC license,-which is to say all parts of the site except the state-licensed burial ground.
DOE and NYSERDA have undertaken to write an Environmental'
-Impact Statement on the topic of site closure that will consider all features of the site, both the parts currently under DOE control and the state-licensed burial ground.
NRC has' agreed to work closely with DOE and NYSERDA to ensure that the Environmental Impact Statement properly reflects.NRC's standards. Any agreement made with EPA regarding remedial actions will have to be closely assessed for its impact on this site' closure evaluation process.
It was' clear in the meeting that DOE and NYSERDA.have not completely agreed on the division of. responsibility for any remedial actions that might have to be taken on the site, either at the site closure stage or before. When the EPA l
representatives' asked when such responsibilities would be determined, the.
NYSERDA representatives suggested that the conditions of the suspended NRC license might prevent action on their part. We said that we did not think the NRC license should be'an impediment to any needed remedial actions, and that we would be prepared to consider amendments to the license if the need arises.
R. Davis Hurt, Project Manager
[
Advanced Fuel and Special Facilities Section l
Fuel Cycle Safety Branch L
Division of' Industrial and Medical Nuclear Safety
Enclosure:
List of attendees DISTRIBUTION:
Project M-32 PDR/LPDR JRoth, Reg I NRC File Center IE Reg I L
NMSS R/F LPittiglio, LLWM IMAF R/F FBrown l
IMSB R/F RWeller, HLWM INNS Central File RECunningham JJSwift GLSjoblom RDHurt MAustin, Reg I
'GCComfort D0rlando, LLWM JWolf RBoyle, LLWM
[DH/ MEETING ON WEST VALLEY DEM0]
T OFC :IMAF Ji{p-
- I F
- 0GC l i\\
'pt--:------------:------------:-----------
9---------f'[-
uNAME :DHurt:jcils W:
Brown
- J ft
- JWol
- DATE :05/M90
- $h-0------: 4 d /90
:---------fb-:P
/9
- 05/
- 05/% 90 0FFICIAL RECORD CUPY v
{ ', q;,z;: ;
~
u ;.: e
+ : --
g
+
t.-
LIST OF ATTENDEES :
- 0. Hurt'(IMNS J.-Wolf (OGC))
NRC:
L.-
L-D. Orlando-(LLWM)
DOE:
W. Bixbyl(WVPO)
C. Ljungberg (WVPO).
f R.-Bowhen(IdahoOperations-P.Hinman(IdahoOperations}0GC) l D. Rasch (Idaho Operations)
T.McIntosh(HQ)
M. Stahr- (HQ)-
L. Waldo-Smith (H0)
C. Blake (HQ)
V. Franklin (contractor)
J. Knabenschuh-(contractor)
G. Baker (contractor)
R. Carter (contractor)
EPA:
J. Gorman C. Howard W Sawyer NYSERDA:
H. Jack (counsel)
-P. Gitlen D.' Miller NYSDEC:
J. Jones T.- Diguilio D. Christian i
S. Quine K. Johnson i
t f
Y s
d