ML20129E084
| ML20129E084 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/18/1996 |
| From: | Paperiello C NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Morrison D NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES) |
| References | |
| FRN-62FR26730, REF-WM-3 AF65-2-007, AF65-2-7, NUDOCS 9610250261 | |
| Download: ML20129E084 (3) | |
Text
.
October 18, 1996
'MEMOR'ANDUM T0:
David L. Morrison, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 1
FROM:
Carl J. Paperiello, Director I0riginal signed by M. R. Knapp for:)
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards i
SUBJECT:
NMSS CONCURRENCE ON A RULEMAKING PLAN FOR AMENDING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS FROM URANIUM RECOVERY LICENSEES AT LICENSE TERMINATION - 10 CFR 51.60 My staff has reviewed the subject rulemaking plan. Attached is a copy of page 5 of the plan with minor clarifying revisions.
I concur with the rulemaking plan revised as shown in the attachment.
If you have any 2
questions, please contact the cognizant Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
)
staff member, Myron Fliegel at 415-6629.
Attachment:
Revised page 5.
cc:
W. Olmstead, 0GC R. Bangart, OSP proofed /CJ 10/10/96 fl b-l CONTACT:
M. Fliegel, NMSS/DWM 415-6629
[J11 -
1-[lb,i DISTRIBUTION w/ Encl.:
NMSS 9600360 E Fil e, Center..
NMSS r/f DWM r/f URB r/f PUBLIC CCain RIV MBell JAustin MWeber MFederline URB t/f DWM t/f Dir Off r/f CPoland DGillen DOCUMENT NAME:
S:\\DWM\\ URB \\MHF\\RULEPLN.P51
- see previous concurrence OFC URB
- URB
.,4 r
NAME MFliegel JHolonich JhvSs MKna h b CPaph1b DATE 10/8/96 10/8/96 hb/r1/96 10/(T5f96 10/ #96 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY 9(s- / 3h g423gg9;more WIREM M PDR
l MEMORANDUM T0:
David L. Morrison, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research FROM:
Carl J. Paperiello, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
SUBJECT:
NMSS CONCURRENCE ON A RULEMAKING PLAN FOR AMENDING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS FROM URANIUM REC 0VERY gg y
LICENSEES AT LICENSE TERMINATION - 10 CFR 51.60 3
My staff has reviewed the subject rulemaking plan.
Attached is a copy of page 5 of the plan with minor clarifying revisions.
I concur with the rulemaking plan revised as shown in the attachment.
If you have any questions, please contact the cognizant Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards staff member, Myron Fliegel at 415-6629.
Attachment:
Revised page 5.
cc:
W. Olmstead, 0GC R. Bangart, OSP i
se{p CONTACT:
M. Fliegel, NMSS/DWM 415-6629 DISTRIBUTION w/ Encl.:
NMSS 9600360 File Center NMSS r/f DWM r/f URB r/f PUBLIC CCain RIV MBell JAustin MWeber MFederline URB t/f DWM t/f Dir Off r/f CPoland DGillen DOCUMENT NAME:
S:\\DWM\\ URB \\MHF\\RULEPLN.P51 0FC URB //
//
URB \\s\\.
DWM NMSS NMSS NAME MFliegek JH M kh JGreeves MKnapp CPaperiello DATE 10 E /96 O
10/2/96 10/ /96 10/ /96 10/ /96 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY
h1 sk ah b s awm 7
i.
I.
groundwarter restoration; decommission ng of a nonconventional plant involves plant dismantling, wellfield restorati
, and groundwater restoration.
These
)
activities are carried out according to lans and cost estimates submitted to l
and approved by NRC or Agreement States. fecomissioning and reclamation are
}
followed by transfer of ownership of the site to the United States Government or the State where the site is located, who assume responsibility for long-term surveillance of the site. These actions must be completed before the NRC license may be terminated. A number of conventional facilities currently are i.
in the process of decommissioning and reclamation.
Several licensees have dismantled their mills and are engaged in reclamation of tailings and/or groundwater restoration.
Some nonconventional facilities, which typically j
i decommission portions of their wellfields while retaining other portions in
{
production, also are decommissioning.
f NRC staff estimate that over the next decade as many as 12 conventional facilities will complete decomissioning.
Five mills are expected to complete i
decomissioning within the next five years, and one of them is expected to i
complete decommissioning in the relatively near future.AtwMr YV W g" l
i NRChashadlimitedexperiencewithterminya'n of licenses for uranium recovery facilities and tne preparation of (b)(3) type environmental reports.
To date, only one facility, Edgemont, has reached the point,of license I
termination.
Edgemont ceased operatiod in the early 1970's, and the original i
mill and tailic.gs site was decommissVoned.
The licer.we, the Tennessee Valley l
Authority, conducted cleanup activi 'es at the site from 1984 to 1989, and carried out groundwater monitoring rom 1986 to 1996, and submitted semiannual l
l reports to NRC. NRC conducted its Completion Review Report, determining that i
reclamation and decommissioning had been acceptably completed, in December 1995, and in January 1996 m tified the TVA of its approval of completion of the site reclamation and decomissioning.
TVA then applied to terminate its l
license and transfer ownership of the site to DOE.
In support, TVA submitted i
a three-page Environmental Report Supplement on April 30, 1996, which summarized the steps that had been taken with respect to reclamation, l
decommissioning, and monitoring.
This report provided a short background j
concerning the site; referenced the Decomissioning Plan Environmental Report submitted to NRC in February 1979 and approved by NRC in June of 1982; and j
summarized groundwater monitoring and reclamation activities at the mill site and tailings disposal site associated with the facility.
The Environmental Report Supplement also referenced the NRC's Completion Review Report, and i
provided a short concluding paragraph noting that there are no apparent environmental problems at the site, the environmental radiological conditions were being met, and no significant environmental changes have occurred since j
completion of decommissioning. On June 27, 1996, NRC terminated TVA's license and placed the site under the custody and long-term care of DOE.
As a means of solving this problem, NRC considered the preparation of a Standard Format and Content Guide for Environmental Reports supporting license j
termination.
The staff believes that very little could be required in such a i
Guide, because at the time of license termination all of the significant 1
environmental issues will have already been addressed by the series of reports and staff decisions that make up the decommissioning and reclamation process.
l Although one approach to resolving the regulatory problem could be to develop j
5 Attachment y
m v
--~.--,1
-,-