ML20128P890
| ML20128P890 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/23/1992 |
| From: | Davis A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Thompson H NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20128P868 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-GES96-347 NUDOCS 9610180148 | |
| Download: ML20128P890 (3) | |
Text
_ ,___ _ _ _
UNtito STATES
,,/g# 84%g',, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g REGION 111
$ a ,,,,coscy cyno,a g
o GLEN ELLYN,46uNOl$ 4013)
APR 2 31992 MEMORANDUM FOR: Hugh L. Thompson, Jr., Deputy Executive Director for Nuclear Materials Safety, Safeguards, and Operations Support FRON:
A. Bert Davis, Regional Administrator, RIII
SUBJECT:
ANSWERS TO CONGRESSMAN MILLER'S QUESTIONS REGARDING 00E DISPOSAL OF RADIOACTIVE CONTAMINATED WASTE (LETTER TO NRC CHAIRMAN DATED APRIL 1, 1992)
This is in response to your April 6,1992, memorandum to all Regional Administrators regarding the subject congressional letter to Chairman Selin.
We have worked very closely with Mr. John Hickey in preparation of answers to this congressional inquiry.
My staff first became aware of this matter in January 1992, when we received a letter (undated) on January 22, 19923 from DOE headquarters discussing the two suspect facilities in Ohio, CECOS landfill and S. D. Meyers oil waste and treatment facility. On February 14, 1992 Mr. W. L. Axelson contacted Mr. Lee Stevens of DOE to get further clarification for the two Ohio facilities.
Mr. Lee Stevens indicated that all materials shipped to the Ohio facilities were DOE criginated waste from its Oak Ridge Operations (Portsmith Ohio a Paducah,KY).
manifest specifics of these shipments and DOE will be performing further dose assessments of the Ohio waste, and depending on its dose assessments, DOE would conduct surveys and remediate the site, if warranted. DOE also informed us that appropriate congressional and state agencies were We notified including requested and they Ohio EPA, however, 00E did not notify Ohio Department of Health.This information was provided
. agreed to notify the Ohio Department of Health.to Mr. John Hickey and it agency lead on this matter because it involves several states.
Our preliminary review of the DOE data for the Ohio facilities shows very low levels of enriched uranium (approximately 1.7 mC1) which was disposed in drum volumes totally about 81,000 kilograms (about 90 tons). Most of this material (about 50%) was shipped in the 1984 timeframe to the CECOS landfill in Williamsburg, Ohio, and according to CECOS, this material was subsequently buried in that landfill.
aca a t c o re n - o ute s n - nacv:z.o a s 'o c **o 9610180148 961016 PDR FOIA VAN OES96-347 PDR i
~
1 Hugh L. Thompson 2 APR 2 3 '632 This landfill is currently closed. Accordingly, my staff believes this represents a minimal risk to public health and safety.
I A. Bert Davis Regional Administrator
' cc: J. Taylor, EDO -
J. H. Sniezek, DEDR R. M. Bernero, NMSS J. Lieberman OE C. Xammerer,,SP' J. T. Taylor, OIG T. Combs, OCA ,
K. Stab'lein OEDO !
J. Hickey, NMSS l Regional Administrators RI, RII, RIV. RY B
coa atcenn-ownsn - nac,: to se oc **o
- 1 b l k
0 W
Document Number 180 e
4 a
e f
- . -_ \
p -
i UNITED STATES
[ k NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION W ASHINGToN. O. C. 20506 April 24, 1992 ,
CHAIRMAN l
The Honorable George Miller, Chairman i Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs - ..
United States House of Representatives Washington,'O. C. 20515-6291
Dear Mr. Chairman:
f April 1, 1992 The Commission is r sponding to your letter oiiglowlevelsof (00E) regarding the shipment of various wastes conta n n tive radioactive contamination from Department of Energy -
facilities to waste processors not licensed to handle l
h Atomic materials.
Regulatory C.ommission's responsibility The answers toto your questionst enforce e Energy Act in non-Agreement States.
are enclosed. Sincerely, Ivan Selin
Enclosure:
As stated Rep. Don Young cc:
ED0/NMSS Originating Office:
Ref: CR-92-071 (Commission Correspondence)
- See crevious concurrence l,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
': OCM, , ,,, ,, ,
- , ,0,CM, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,{ , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
OCA * ....................
= >!..U.N.....i...... W,.,.,d ! ..
"~> ..p...9.uS.... . . .h?.9GD9.C...-
j ...M4 /R7..... . .i. ...,.
M I. h. . .. (f. . b......... . . ........ .. ....L........
< m e n'-
d 422j . .a ...... . 'YfTdt) RECORD DMNSn COPY m 6I *OI E6 *CI *s o h hh3hh pp
- t l
f y t I
DAument Ntnber 182 6-9
)
i .
usammen E '
ENCLOSURE t
NRC STAFF RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS FROM THE HONORABLE GEORGE MILLER I
When did the NRC first learn that unlicensed treatment, storage, l CUESTION 1: ,
and disposal facilities (TSDs) had been handling special )
l nuclear and byproduct materials from DOE weapons complexes? 1 How did the NRC learn of these shipments?
~
ANSWER: !
Based upon staff notes _and recollections reviewed as of this date, we conc !
that NRC staff first learned of such shipments in late April or early May 1991, by telephone from a newspaper reporter, who specifically identified Also, a DOE staff unlicensed f acility in Louisiana an Agreement State.
member informed the !!RC staff in May 1991 of the shipments and indicated there were probably other shipments to facilities in both. Agreement and 00E also indicated that it had imposed a moratorium on .
non-Agreement States.
waste shipments, would evaluate past shipments, would inform NRC of the DOE 1ater provided results, and would take remedial action as appropriate.
specific data on waste sent to Louisiana showing the waste to be centaminated with enri,ched uranium and technetium, but.not at levels public health hazard warranting NRC intervention.
The NRC staff has followed the actions taken by Louisiana health o
, Louisiana inspected the confirm that DOE waste shipments were terminated.
disposal facility and did not find any contamination in ash resid NRC has also monitored actions taken by three other incinerated waste.
Texas in July 1991, and Arkansas and Kansas in early 1992.
Agreement States:
soa a I c o nn-:> a n s n
- nast :ot ze cI *s o
" 4, .
1 I
In January 1992, 00E notified NRC of past waste shipments from its Oak Ridge J
f acilities to two unlicensac f acilities in Ohio, a non-Agreer.ent State, Review of the data provided by DOE indicated plus several Agreement States.
that the waste was slightly contaminated with enriched uranium and technetium, HRC mada and did not posi a health hazard' warranting NRC intervention.
follow-up contacts with 00E, and DOE confirmed that they would pcrform Subsequent contacts additional evaluations-and provide NRC with the results.
with COE have affirmed this comitment.
1 i
l .
l l
l l
l i
l l
1 G O ct aicsun-ownsn ,a nast :oi se cT so l
Has the NRC investigated possible violations of the /.tomic Energy QUEST *CN 2:
from DOE complexes? Please provide Act by TSDs receiving waste full and complete details of ali investigations.
IJlSWER;_
Except to support the ongoing 00E Inspector General's investigative effort, N The DOE has not conducted any investigation of disposal'of 00E waste.
Inspector General has requested the assistance of the NRC Inspector Ge with respect te a DOE investigation of waste disposal in Louisiana, an
~
The Agreement State, and the NRC Inspector Generai is providing assistance.
DOE investigation is still pending. NRC interds to review the results of the DOE investigation for new infomation about waste disposal in non-Agreeme .
States and take any regulatory action warranted to protect the public heal and safety.
lod 3iCenn_pungn
- M d 6 EO I as CI '90
I
- ( (. i OUESTION 3:
What procedures has NPC put in place to make certain that DOE l does not ship nuclear and byproduct waste to unlicensed I facilities? What procedures should DOE put in place to make l
certain that such shipments do not occur in the future? l I
l ANSWER:
With certain exceptions, DOE facilities are exempt from NRC regulation.
~
Inherant in DOE's ' operating authority are the necessity and responsibility to make decisions regarding release of airborne effluents, liquid effluents, equipment, and waste which may contain slight levels of radioactive con.
tamination.
DOE is responsible for assuring that appropriate criteria are established for releasing slightly contaminated waste to unlicensed facilities, and that waste is properly monitored for compliance with the criteria prior to release. Furthermore, DOE is also obligated to ensure that the parties to whom the waste is to be transferred hold a valid license or do not require one.
In general, NRC has statutory authority to regulate only the private facil DOE has identified about who may be receiving slightly contaminated DOE waste.
The 150 such potential recipient facilities, and there could be more.
resources required to inspect and evaluate DOE disposals at all of these f acilities would be large, and the potential public health hazard associa Nevertheless, the MRC with waste contaminated at'very low levels is small.
staff will inspect or evaluate 00E disposals at comercial facilities in non Agreetnent States if there is an indication of a threat to the pub safety.
ooa atconn-ownsn - wast : oI se ct 's o
____ =
QUESTION a: What other action has the NRC taken to -ensure that the Atemic Energy Act is currently being enforced?
3 ESP 0fiSE:
!!RC is prepared to take and will take any appropriate action necessary to protect the public health and safety with respect to radioactive material our jurisdiction, including actions at unitcensed facilities in non-Agreement It is our understanding that DOE has imposed a States who receive DOE waste.
i moratorium on. suspect waste shipments which remains in effect, is evaluat past shipments with respect to public health significance, will continue t advise the HRC staff of the results, and will take remedial action where -
Thus far, the levels of radioactive contamination that DOE has warranted.
identified are very slight and do not appear to pose a threat to public hea and safety such that NRC intervention is warranted.
I I
I Oca TCONW-ownsn
- Weet : CI as ci 90
, -