ML20127P538

Requests Reconsideration of Restriction of Technical Info Exchange Between State of Il & NRC Re Sheffield,Il Radwaste Disposal Site.Restriction Counterproductive

ML20127P538
Person / Time
Site:	02700039
Issue date:	06/13/1985
From:	Fonner R NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD)
To:	Moran E ILLINOIS, STATE OF
Shared Package
ML20126L908	List: ML20126L904 ML20126M048 ML20126M081 ML20126M089 ML20126M689 ML20126M749 ML20126M782 ML20126M803 ML20126M821 ML20126M881 ML20127A089 ML20127A275 ML20127A320 ML20127A475 ML20127A649 ML20127B448 ML20127B815 ML20127P538
References
FOIA-92-71 NUDOCS 8507020452
Download: ML20127P538 (3)

Text

- - . - - .. . . - . - - - -._ _.- - - -.- - . - . .

4 bCHL /

S w sp.y ,, e { h JUN 131985 oem C.4s ?tovilJ Edmund B. Moran, Jr. Esq.

Assistant Attorney General Environmental Control Division 100 West Randolph Street, 13th Floor Chicago, IL 60601

Dear Mr. Moran:

In your letter of May 30,198S you suggested that all correspondence regarding the Shef field, Illinois, radioactive waste disposal site be directed through attorneys for the parties. In accordance with your desire I have instructed the NRC staff not to correspond directly with any person in any lilinois agency regarding the Shef field site except through you. I assume that you will likewise counsel relevant Illinois agencies. ( For your information I enclose examples of correspondence from IDNS to NRC staff).

I I feel compelled, however, to state a belief that restricting direct correspondence between NRC technical staff and their state counterparts is counterproductive. The exchanges of data and technical information have been mutually beneficial, particularly as we are both exploring ways of satisfactorily closing the site, it is also my recollection that at the last general meeting among the parties in Chicago two years ago that direct exchange of technical information was encouraged in l

order to facilitate the DOE test case. Finally, since full disclosure I of technical information is the rule in NRC adjudications ! do not see how any of the parties can be prejudiced, if active adjudication resumes, by the open and direct exchange of technical data among the technical staffs of the NRC and State agencies. Absent a real litigative motive for restricting such correspondence, I fail to-see justification for it in the simple fact that an agency adjudication is still open on the books.

I would like to encourage you to reconsider your position on' direct exchanges of technical information among the technical people. I know that NRC staf f value such exchanges and I suspect that State agency personnel value it as well. We are all looking for a positive solution to a comon problem and should foster rather than restrict beneficial communication.

Sincerely yours, Robert L. Fonner Counsel for NRC staff

Attachment:

As stated DISTRIBUTION RLFonner JShaffncr OELO R/F OELD S/F Regs File Central File }

OFC 0  : ' '

~

.....$. ELD . . .( .f . . . - : .

NAME:RLF]er  :

C b 39 C F,, - "" ! "* " ~ " ~ " " !*

([lI """

g...:_----------2:----:-4--*-----------'-----------'--""--"

.DATE :6//3/85  :

~

r  : J  !

{NI' i

a t;

i ffnw-n, ,

1 . j c

"inois Depar: men:: of Nuc' ear Sa ety i 1035 Outer Park Drive Springfield, Illinois 62704 (217)S466100 Don Etchison Director Terry R. Lash  !

Deputy Director )

NCf:" ICE 70:

Recipient of sheffield Invironmental Surveillance Data FROM: Division of Health Physics, IDNS DATE: March 26, 1984 s

SL%'IOT: Monthly Updates Please find enclosed a conthly update for environ:nental j

surveillance data for the Sheffield Iow Level Waste Disposal Site y c,

as of Karch 26,1984. If you have any questions or coments, N rnX 7

N 3C please contact Melanie samel or Laura carstens at IDNS. $$

g

o s

NCTE: o 6

The high gross alpha and gross beta concentrations obtained by DC:

are the result of analyses of unfiltered samples, .

IDNS' lab filters water samples prior to analysis, and runs separate gross alpha and gross beta analyses on the sample filtrates and

• residues.

WM Ettord file gyMPrCltCl-

'"******* Docket No..c22- 3' C POR- / l O!stributien LPDR /

3 15 . bA x,1, .- +.

q- _

iReturn to WM. 623 SSj[ z.,

-. . . - . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . _ - . _ . .

k.[#*' i

. g' ..

l: .

s. '

+

M E M0 RA N DU M i

TO: Don Etchison and Terry Lash

, FRON: Dave Ed- h.

• DATE: August 27, 1984 ,

6 MUBJECT: ANL Analyses of Sheffield Water for Pu In a recent. phone conversation with-Don Nelson, AHL, he informed me that pre limina ry da ta indica te e x tre me ly- low concentrations of Pu-239 in the samples. taken earlier this summer.

Sanples taken from the mine spo11a pond to' the nor thea s t of the si te showed c onc e n tra tions in the range-of 0.1 to'0.2 fC1/1

, dissolved Pu. W e l l ,"}'". o n site s h o y,e d the, hi g he s t c o n c e n t r a t i o n_

approximating I f C i /1, d is s o l v e d 'p l u s -;s;u s pie n d e d P u .

of reference, Lake Ml:higan averages-around 0.3 fCi/1'

'As a point- -Q.

dissolved and 200 fC1/gm suspended Pu-239.,

averages about.5 fCi/gm (a femto Curie (fC1) equals 10' Illinois soil.normally or one millionth of one billionth-of a' Cu rie ) .

Clearly, if one accepts the validity of these results, the re is no evidence of Pu mig ra tion at the Sheffitid site. '

DDE:lah cc David Piller Melanie Hamel -

n wo -c l .

i. * '

4 e

':- -. -. . , , , - .- . - , . . . . - . , , . , _ . . , . , , - , , - , . . - , , . . . . _ , , - - , . . - - . . - - , . _ . . . . . . . . . - . . - - . . . . - . .,-