ML20043F267
| ML20043F267 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/24/1987 |
| From: | Doda R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | Nussbaumer D NRC OFFICE OF STATE PROGRAMS (OSP) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20043F230 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-TUYL90-36 NUDOCS 9006140307 | |
| Download: ML20043F267 (11) | |
Text
.
?
FEE 14 4'7 fyI
/
MEMOP,ANDUM FOR: Donald A. Hussbaumer, Assistant Director State Agreements Program, Office of State Programs FROM:
Robert J. Doda, State and Governmental Affairs Staff
SUBJECT:
LETTERS TO THE NRC REGARDlHG THE CONOCO CONQUISTA TAILINGS IMPOUNDMENT This is in response to your memoranda of January 14, 1987 and February 9, 1987 We have attached answers and State actions reperding the questions contained in your memoranda.
Under separate cover to J. F. Kendig, we have included enpies of significant information and documents concerning this subject.
We plar to discuss the above information by telephone with your office and other NRC staff before reaching any conclusions.
C+rb"i r1ned By i.. J. CODA Robert J. Doda State and Government Affairs Staff bec: RDHartin PSCheck RLBangart RSHeyer GFSAnborn
-pTexas file RDSmith, URF0 (w/ enclosure)
RIV:SGA
->RJDoda:vp 2/$9/87 s
N 9006 [0307 900423-90-36 PDR M8 A
h LETTER FROM CONGRE SMAN E. (K!KA) DE LA GAR 21. TO CHA!PMAN LANDO W. iECH, JR. PE CONOCO-CONQUISTA URANIUM MILL 1.'lLINGS DISPOSAL SITE In regard to the subject letter (copy attached), the following subject areas and/or questions are reviewed below:
1.
Data concerning water e,uality of water from well(s) on Leonard Korrekwa property and effects from tailings disposal site.
Current Status or Answer Drinking water in this area comes from rural water supplies. The shallow wells in this area are effected by a variety of factors: (1) uranium deposits lie within the upper aquifers, (2) many wells and uranium mines remain as sources of contaminants (3) the Korzekwa property is down gradient from Susquehanna Western rather than Conquista. DOE has some of 1
the most comprehensive water quality data in the area. Much data is available but specific data on the Korzekwa property would be difficult to evaluate due to these outside factors.
State Actions The Texas Department of Health's (TDH) water hygiene people monitor s
drinking water supplies. The Railroad Comission (RRC) regulates wells and mining activities (e.g., monthly well analyses are compiled). The Texas Water Comission (TWC) has surface water authorities and RCRA i
responsibilities. The BRC met with the TWC regarding chemical hazardous l
constituents in the wastes from Rhone Poulenc (on 2/13/87).
l i
l 2.
Data, concerning levels of radon gas emission from the tailing site and L
concentrations at Mr. Korzekwa's residence.
Current Statuy or Answer ho specific radon data at Korzekwa property, because he is not the nearest resident: Other redon data from inspection reports indicate regulatory standards are met.
ftate Actions Continue inspections at mill in accordance with nomal requirements.
1 i
- t
' N
o
.?.
3.
Nurter of truckload deliveries to the site, origin of the deliveries and quantity of tailirts brought to the site? Were any deliveries received from France or Australia?
Current Status or Answer Thelatestcompreher.s4veinvestigation(November 1986)confirmedall licensees are meetin, :Icense requirements. Shipments were sampled and confirmed at point of origin and at the Conquista facility. The entire investigation showed that all regulatory requirements for waste shipments-were being met. It appears that two flat-bed trucks and one tank truck operate on a daily basis at the facility. All waste comes from U.S.
plants, however, foreign ores are processed at Rhone Poulenc.
State Actions Continue inspections at mill in accordance with normal requirements.
4 Data on contamination of ptsture with molybdenum and any observed effects on cattle if molybdenum is 3 resent.
Current Status or Answer This is an old issue dating back to the 1970's and is an AEC problem with an ore storage station on the Droperty. It was brought about by uranium mining activity primarily. In addition, three counties have a copper deficiency and molybdenum excels in the soil. The treatment for cattle is to provide copper supplements.
State Actions None on this subject.
a il' s
1 b
3 5.
Information concerning the oder and burning irr,tetion to resident's eyes and rioses in the vicinity of the tailir.gs site.
Current Status or Answer This h s never been confirmed by BRC inspectors in person. However, they believe it occurs when the ammonium nitrate wastes from Rhone Poulenc react with the acidic mill tailings in the tailing pond. Texas Air Control Board inspectors have visited the area, too (however, this is a low priority subject for them). The Rhone Poulenc wastes are now discharged below the surface and the " fuming" problem has been minimized.
State Actions The below surface discharge may have corrected ~this crublem. State will monitor on a continuino basin.
6.
How does the licensee determine, and the State verify, that the waste l
being disposed of in the tailing impoundment is in accord with the licenso?
Current Status or Answer 1
i Records are caintained by all licensees. The State checks during inspections and takes samples for analyses. A detailed investigation (November 4,1986)fromacitizen'scomplaint,confirmedshipment contents, licensee records, amounts, shipment dates, etc. The waste shipments from Rhone Poulenc to Conquista met all regulatory requirements. Dr. Bernstein's letter of December 22, 1986, refuted all i
allegations.
State Actions insp c.ttens the State will continue its k=:ti;; tin: in accordance with normal V
requirements.
i a
\\
N l
O 4
7 Vhy did the Texas Bureau of Radiatier Wrol reduce the sampling progren to once per year? What type of sar.p' h et taken and are the results within regulatory limits?
Current Status or Answer The BRC inspects the mill site every 6 months. Samples are taken frorr monitor wells, sumps, tailings pond, Conouista Creek, etc. TLDs are taken qcarterly. Samoling data compares favorably with the licensee's data. Both the BRC and t1e licensee's RSO state that all sampling results are within regulatory limits. Nr. Korrekwe's property used to be visited in the 1970's in relation to the molybdenosis question.
State Actions The State will probably mount additional effort for environmental trend analysis of some sort. This is made difficult due to all the existing conditions: (1)uraniumorebodiesliewithintheuppertwoaquifers (2)uraniumoreoutcroppingsexist,and(3)someminesanduncesedwells exist throughout the area.
8.
Has an environmental assessment been performed for this license? What was the conclusion? Did the assessment consider the disposal of tailings and residues from other sites?
Current Status or Answer No environmental assessment has been performed. When the license was l
issued (May1978)therewasnorequirementforanEA. There is, however, auch environmental information available which relates to such a l
document. No assessment was made of the wastes from Rhone Poulenc. The l
regulations allow the disposal of type.2 byproduct material.
l_
State Actions
~
The State plans to perform an environmental assessment when the license r
is reissued (and a reclamation plan has been finalized).
u l
1 l
l F
4 m e
i k
O 4
i,
9.
What is the status of the reclamation program for the tailing impoundment area? When will the site be fully reclaimed?
Current Status or Answer Efforts with regard to the reclamation plan have been suspended until the ownership amendment has been decided. URF0 had a number of problems with the plan submitted by Conoco; the principal one being a "ponded" surface. The BRC also objected and Conoco, in discussions, agreed to a "run-off" surface. No written conmitments have been made by Conoco.
State Actions The State will work on getting a completed reclamation plan prior to license renewal.
- 10. Was a hearing held in connection with the issuance of the license? If a hearing was not held, was there an opportunity to request a hearing?
What was the outcome of the hearing if one was held?
Current Status or Answer Nohearingonoriginallicenseissuance(nonerecuiredatthattime).
The license has been in timely renewal status since September 30, 1980.
All amendments since that time have had opportunity for a hearing. No han 1ngs had been requested until the presera hearing on ownership change.
State Actions i
The State plans to continue and complete the current hearing process with respect to ownership change before going ahead with reclamation plans and license renewal efforts.
u
LETTER FROM HENRY AND KELLY, AUSTIN TEXAS 4
TO G. WAYNE KERR RE CONOCO-CCNQUISTA URAN 10M MILL TAILINGS O!$PO!AL SITE In regard to the subject letter, the following subject artes and/or questions are reviewed below:
1.
Was the application for license renewal timely filed:
Current Status or Answer 1
License No. 9-1634, issued to Conoco, Inc. for the Conquista Project, was due to expire September 30, 1980. An application for renewal was required at least 30 days prior to the expiration date. Conoco cpplied for license renewal August 27, 1980, with a statement included that, *an environmental report would be furnished shortly." The environmental along(withanamendedapplication report was received September 16, 1980, BRC) advised Conoco of the form. The Texas Bureau of Radiation Control timely renewal status of the license by letter dated September 19, 1980.
State Actions The license is in timely renewal and the BRC plans to follow nomal procedures to complete a reclam6 tion plan before renewing the license.
l 2.
Status of Texas licensing review procedure for the request for renewal.
[
What did the request for renewal ask for?
Current Status or Answer The request for renewal asked for uranium mill operations with mill, laboratory, warehouse, maintenance, and office facilities. The mill site
-was 378 acres. The tailings impoundment was 220 acres, which contained 1
l 6,800,000 tons of processed tailings. After cessation of milling t
operations, reclamation was planned. There was no mention of disposal of l
other wastes.
State Actions The State plans to complete the hearing process for the amendment for change of ownership. Then a reclamation plan and an updated environmental report will be required prior to any license renewal action.
3.
Has URF0 encountertd such a situation where it has authorized transfer of a uranium mill license before reclamation and stabilization was completed to a company that is not in the business of processing ore solely for its i
uranium content?
Current Status or Answer URF0 has not issued an amend m c for ownership change for a uranium mill licensee changing to a reelemation and waste disposal licensee. URF0 has issued amendments for a uranium mill licensee to change to a different uranium mill licensee (new ownership).
- t T
State Actions The State plans to complete the hearing process for the amendment for change of ownership.
4 What does the Rhone-Poulene license allow? Is the license for a process for extracting or concentrating uranium or thorium from any ore processed primarily for its source material content or is it primarily for processing and recovery of rare earths? Do any of the waste streams contain concentrations of uranium or thorium?
Current Status or Answer The license is primarily for the processing of ores for the recovery of rare earths. Some uranium is recovered in a side circuit. The license condition, # 19, Amendment No.1, issued February 2,1981, authorized radioactive waste to be transferred to " authorized conventional uranium mill tailings ponds." Some U and Th is contained in the waste streams.
[
State Actions This license has been in tienely renewal since April 1983, and the BRC plans for continued license review in the near future.
5.
Is the request for transfer of license for the same purpose as originally issued?
i Current Status or Answer No, ur n ium oilling and processing is not requested as N authorized use. Tne application mentions, " continuing the mine reclamation and tailings pond reclamation activities, and utilizing the east portion of the tailings impoundment for disposal of by-product material."
State Actions TheStateintendstocontinuethehearingprocess(April 1987)forthe amendment request for change in ownership. The hearing is restricted to the subject of ownership change only, at the present time.
6.
Did Texas Bureau of Radiation Control personnel evaluate the qualificationsofpersonnelofConquistaProjectCorporation(CPC)for conducting a safe radiation protection program for operating the tailings impoundment and reclaiming and stabilizing the tailing impoundment?
Current Status or Answer The same staff will be available at the facility after the change to CPC as the licensee. The same RSO will continue for the new licensee (he has been employed at the facility for over 15 years).
)
c-j F
3 State actions No further evaluation of oualifications of personnel are planned by the ERC with resp 5.:t to the amendment for change of ownership.
7 Has Texas conducted a financial test of CPC (Conquiste Project
)
Corporetion) to determine if the proposed new licensee has the financial i
resources to complete en approved Reclamation and Stabilization of the tailing impoundment?
J l
Current Status er Answer Before an ownership change, a trust instrument would be finalized which would cover a ifollar amount agreeable to the BRC. The amount appears to I
be in the renge of 7.b9.6 million dollars.
l State Actions The TDH's legal staff is working on an acceptable trust agreement. The BRC is still evaluating the amount they believe would be acceptable.
8, What has been the compliance history nf the Rare Earths racility and Conoco Conquista Project?
Current Status or Answer i
The compliance history for both facilities generally shows a willingness to correct any violations found. An inspection of Rhone Poulenc, in August 1986, showed a need to upgrade the radiation protection program due to a new, inexperienced RSO. A recent com)rehensive investigation by theBRC(November 1986)foundthatthewasteclipmentsgoingtothe Conquista tailings pond were performed and recorded in accordance with all recuirements.
State Actions The investigation of November 1986 covered a number of activities related to all shipments of waste to Conquista. All backup information has been complied in a special investigation file that makes.it easier to review the entire subject of waste shipments to Conquista. In general, regulatory requirements were being met.
- 9. _
What is the chemical and radiochemical characteristics of Rhone-Poulenc's waste stream that is being deposited in the conoco Conoc h'.i tailings impoundment? How do these chemicals compare with the cheniuls and radiochemicals introduced in the tailing pond from the waste stream of the Conoco Conquista project?
t Current Status or Answer The major difference is an amonium nitrate stream from Rhone Poulenc with a much higher pH than the low pH of the conventional mill tailings Sond. in addition, a thorium nitrate waste product from Rhone Poulenc 1
1as a radioactivity level of about an order f magnitude greater than l
corventional mill tailings.
1
t...
S State Actions i
The BRC will monitor Rhone Ponienc's continuing efforts to reduce the amount of radiologically contaminated waste being generated at the facility.
- 10. Regarding 40 CFR 192 ground water monitoring, what does the ground water 3
monitoring for the Conoco Conquista tailing pond reveal? Is there seepage? What is the extent of the seepage? What chemicals and radiochemicals are present and what are the concentrations? Are the concentrations within regulatory limits of 40 CFR 1927 What have been the trends over the years?
Current Status er Answer Monitoring wells encircle the tailings pond. Some seepage appears to exist, although the extent is not well defined. Current data may or may not confirm leakage. There is much data on monitoring wells at the Railroad Comission of Texas. Only one excursion case has been documented--that in 1981. The licensee speculated that a lignite pocket was responsible.
State Actions The BRC is meeting with the Texas Water Comission regarding RCRA requirements. A monitoring program according to 40 C:R 192 requirements is being worked on by the $ tate to include the responsibilities tf the involved agencies.
- 11. Did Texas perform a technical evaluation of the proposal for disposing of wastes from the Rhone-Poulenc f acility before granting permission for disposal into the Conoco Conquista tailing impoundment?
Current Status or Answer No technical assessment was performed. TheTexasregulation[provided for this disposal of by-product material. The BRC has much information on the waste streams. They believed the wastes were similar to conventional tailings and represented a small addition to a large volume of conventional tailings.
State Actions Further actions by the State are unspecified at this time.
1
- 12. What is the status of the reclamation plan and surety for the conoco Conquista uranium tailings pile?
l L
Current Status or Answer It is not being actively worked on at this time. URF0's technical assistance to Texas on a reclamation plan submitted by Conoco in June 1986, indicated the plan was unacceptable. A proposed "ponded" surface was a ma.ior problem. The present status is the plan will not be worked on until the disposition of the amendment on ownership.
1 e.
--m-
-,,,.. ~
,m--o
5 S_ tate Actions i
During discussions with the BRC, Conoco has nnt objected to changing the impoundment to a runoff surface for final reclam tion. No written comitmentjhave been made however, j
i k
i 4
h W
w