ML20135E669

Summary of 961115 Meeting W/Nrc & DOE to Discuss Closure & post-closure Issues for Sites

ML20135E669
Person / Time
Issue date:	12/06/1996
From:	Joseph Holonich NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To:	David Williams ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
References
REF-WM-3 NUDOCS 9612110410
Download: ML20135E669 (9)

Text

_.

Mr. Donald Willians

'Superfund Division (6SF-LN)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 6 1445 Ross Avenue Dallas, Texas 75202-2733 SUBJECT; MINUTES FROM NOVEMBER 15, 1996, MEETING ON URANIUM MILL TAILINGS TITLE II/ CERCLA SITES CLOSURE

Dear Mr. Williams:

Enclosed for your information is a report of the November 15, 1996, meeting between staff of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the U. S. Department of Energy.

The meeting was held to discuss closure and post-closure issues for sites subject to both NRC or Agreement States licensing requirements and EPA permitting under the Comprehensive Environmental Resource Compensation and l

Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA).

If you have any questions regarding the enclosed meeting report, please contact Ken Hooks, the NRC Project Manager for the New Mexico sites, at (301) 415-7777.

Sincerely, Joseph J. Holonich, Chief Uranium Recovery Branch Division of Waste Management Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards l

Enclosure:

As stated l

i l

cc:

S. Ghose, USEPA Region 6 i

i S. Kent, NMED J. Curtiss, NSP je3 qf J. Velasquez, UNC gfg,j,Q (1

l R. Cellan, Homestake

,j l

D. Simpson, Colorado l

Attendees DISTRIBUTION w/ Encl.:

File Center NMSS r/f URB r/f PUBLIC AGarcia CCain, RIV DGillen RFonner CAbrams I '

w/o Encl.:

JSurmeier#

DOCUMENT NAME:

S:\\DWM\\ URB \\KRH\\ CERCLA 0FC URB g

OGC y

URB NAME KHooks/aeglk MSchwartzh JHNnich DATE Q/f/96 I Q/[/96 [

13/b/96 l

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY 9612110410 961206 PDR WASTE

,r,f f

HM-3 PDR 96-i a V g {Q{ frNEb

l l

4 MEETING ON TITLE II/ CERCLA SITE CLOSURE

Purpose:

To discuss closure and post-closure issues for sites subject to both NRC or Agreement State licensing requirements and EPA permitting under CERCLA.

Date:

November 15, 1996 Place:

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Two White Flint North 11545 Rockville Pike Rockville, Maryland Attendees:

NRC Maria Schwartz, OGC Joe Holonich, NMSS/DWM j

Ken Hooks, NMSS/DWM EPA Don Williams, Region 6 Jim Turner, Region 6 Joyce Olin, Headquarters

• Carolyn Hallett, Region 8 David 0'Very, Headquarters l

_D01 l

Joe Virgona, Grand Junction l

Don Metzler, Grand Junction Keith Landolt, Albuquerque Tom Crandall, Headquarters CONTRACTORS Mark Plessinger, MACTEC Grand Junction Carl Jacobson, MACTEC Grand Junction Pat Mackin, CNWRA San Antonio

• Participated by telephone l

l l

DISCUSSION A meeting was held at U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Headquarters on November 15, 1996, among representatives of the NRC's Uranium Recovery Branch and Office of the General Counsel; the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's)

Headquarters and Grand Junction, Colorado, offices; and the U.S. Environmental l

Protection Agency's (EPA's) Headquarters, Region 6 and Region 8.

The meeting l

was held at the request of DOE to discuss closure and post-closure issues for the Church Rock and Homestake sites in New Mexico (licensed by the NRC) and the Cotter-Canon City and Uravan sites in Colorado (licensed by Colorado, an Agreement State). The four sites are presently subject to NRC or Colorado licensing requirements under Title II of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 (UMTRCA) and EPA permitting under the Comprehensive l

Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). The New Mexico sites will be transferred to DOE for long-term care under the 10CFR40.28 general license, and the Colorado sites will be transferred to the I

State of Colorado, or to DOE if Colorado declines to take possession.

The major items discussed at the meeting were regulatory responsibility, integration of regulatory requirements, and possible effect of CERCLA on DOE's j

long-term care of the sites. The Memoranda of Understanding between the NRC l

I and EPA for Church Rock and Homestake were discussed (attached). The NRC is responsible for groundwater within the site boundary (including EPA requirements), and the EPA is responsible outside the site boundary.

Since DOE will be required to submit annual site status reports to the NRC, EPA stated that it may be possible to summarize these reports to form the five year report required by EPA. Although no final conclusions were reached l

during the meeting, EPA stated that it may be possible to remove one or more of the sites from the National Priorities List if the sites are cleaned up l

prior to transfer to D0E.

Such "de-listing" would be subject to state and i

possibly other agency concurrence.

EPA will investigate the question of " lead i

agency" designation for the sites, and will provide NRC and DOE with copies of relevant regulations.

j l

DOE suggested that EPA Region 8 and State of Colorado personnel meet with DOE i

and NRC personnel in Denver in May/ June in conjunction with the NRC/ National Mining Association meeting.

l 4

l

i j,

MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING I h*

Effice of Governmental and Public thesessanduenof UnderstensAng I. Purpose Affairs related to NWPA issues. In Segueen U.S.Ituelserllegulatory carrying out its responsibilities covered Conomiesten and U.S. Esistrennental This document establishes the roles, i

by tais Memorandum of Understanding.

Proteseen Agency re8ponsibilities, and relationship the NRC will avoid unnecessary between Region VI of the UA duplication of activities performed by Ae msev: Nuclear Regulatory EnvironmentalProtection Agency d

}

DOE.

Commission.

(" EPA") and Region IV of the U.S.

i Additional activities may be added to Acteest: Publication of Memorandum of Nuclear Regulatory Centissim i

those listed above. after consultation Understanding WRC'), hminefier conectinly between OCRWM and NRC.

mbrred k as the " Parties." maarding suesenAav:On August 23.1933, the remedial action at the UNC-Churchrock 11.Managemet and Progrm Guldelines Administrators of the UA Nuclear uranium millin MclGaley County, New 4

i i

As soon as practicable, following the Regulatory Commission's (NRCs)

Mexico. The Parties have overlapping l

end of each fiscal year, the NRC shall Region IV and the UA Environmental authority in connection with this site.

provide the DOE with a statement Protection Agency's (EPA's) Region VI and this Memorandum of Understanding certified by an independent auditory signed a Memorandum of Understanding

("MOU' ) will help assure that remedial i

setting forth the amount DOE is (MOU) concerning the Churchrock. New actions occur in a timely and effective i

obligated to pay for NRCs costs Mexico uranium mill site.

manner.

l incurred for work as defined in this The Churchrock site is licensed by the II. Basis ForAgreement i

MOU during the fiscal year just NRC and is also on EPA's National completed. DOE shall promptly.

Priority ust for remedial action under NRC will assume the role oflead i

following the appropriation of funds.,

Superfund.ne MOU provides the segulatory agsscy for the br.

N' deposit into the Ceneral Fund of the procedures which the two agencies will material disposal aree reclamation and i

Treasury of the United States a sum follow to help assure that rernedial clwm activities and EPA wiB mnitw j

equal to the certified NRC costs. If in actions at the site occur la a timely and all such activities and pmvide mview any year, the NRC audited costs effective manner.

and=====*= directly to NRC The j

significantly exceed the funds available The MOU is printed inits entimty objective of EPA's review and comment for NRC reimbursement based upon

below, wW be 2 assus kat activWes to be funds appropriated to OCRWM' DOE If a y member of the public muld authority adiow attainsnent of applicable conducted under NRCs regulatory i

shall promptly notify the NRC so that a t

con"*888 08 8 w mlevant and appropriate payment schedule can be set m

a y h amnh saluaments under the Canywhensin The NRC shall provide OCRWM. prior of the document, they would be most Environmental Response Compensation 8u I

the cost expect to inc and umbility Act of1930, as amnded l

the next three fiscal years. These

(* CERCLA"). 42 UAC 9e01 et seg Aponsas: Mail comunents to: Regulatory outside of the bypsoduct meterial I

estimates shall include a description of anticipated work and an explanation of Publications Branch. Division of disposal site. NRC will require the i

l how these amounts were derived. This Freedom of Information and -

I h=a-to 3=pla===t an approved 4

information shall be included in NRCs Publications Services. Office of disposal site reclamation plan which 8

budget submission to the Office of Administration and Resources meets the L,

• ts of to CFR Part Management and Budget.

Management. UA Nuclear Regulatory

40. Appendix A.as annended at 52 FR Further deiails regarding billin and Commission. Washington. DC 20585.

433553 through easse," Uranium Mill payment will be set forth in the annual Comments may be hand.delivwed to Tailings Regulations: Croundwater 7920 Norfolk Avenue.Bethesda.

Protection and other Issues." which s

interagency Agreement between the NRC and the Department of Energy, Maryland between the hours of 7:45 am.

conforms with the EPA 40 CFR 192.

and 4:15 p.m. weekdays except Fed ral Subpart D. EPA development and l

Ill. Ai=1=1straties holidays. Cor=maats received may be irnplementation ofits own site action viewed at NRCs Public Document Roosi requirernents for groundwater i

%is Memorandum of Understanding may be modified or amended by written in the Celman Budding,2120 L Street, conta.nination outside of the disposal agreement between NRC and OCRWM NW Waaliingka.DC.betman the ama wm be conduckd in acewdance h

hours of 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m.

with CERCLA and the National Oil and d

i db by the othe pa7ty.

weekdays except Federal holidays.

Hazardous Substances Contingency r ten notic This Merr.orandum of Understanding is Po# Puermest asPonsnavsoas costract:

Plan ( 'NClr') 40 CFR 300 including any effective when signed by both parties.

Harry J. pottengill. Uranlurn Recovery revisions thereto.The EPA cnd NRC The following signatures constitute Field OfRce,730 Simms Street. Suite agmf that the groundwater protection acceptance nf tMs altree nent.

100A. Golden, Colorado 80401 requirements of to CFR Part 40.

Nuclear Rc2ulatory Commission (Telephone (303) 236-2810).

Appendix A are the Federal Date: July 2o.19As.

Dad at Reint h%end.nis M de environmental and public health og g,p g,,

ggg, requirements applicable or relevant and Viceer Stello. )r appropriate to the disposal site.%e For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

EPA and NRC believe that conformance Erecutive Directorof 0pemtions.

e. Chief

• Department of Energy.

with 10 CFR Part 40. Appendix A (with Resulofory 8macA the possible exception of nitrate), will Dee Wa. m g.

Memoranden of U-i generally assure conformance with a

m i1 as A

and a

t o

4.

Region IV of De U.S. Nuclear comphance with it s specific regulatory Regulatory Commimmiam for Rennedial mquiments as discussed in ths 53 FR 37887 section.%e parties believe that the U.S.

ge,g,,,, g g

Putpltshed 9/28/84 Comment period expires 11/2s/88.

MiH in Mdinig County, NM Department of Energy or another responsible State or Federal authority will assume responsibility for long-term care of the byproduct material disposal site, following remediation of the site.

nail rt Sentemt er 30.1993 freset)

MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING i

1. L5ackground

• g oundwatzt protection and recovery

7. ne Parties will generally provide

%e State of New Mexico was actions contained in UNCs proposed each other with copies of all official responsible as an Agreement State for reclamation plan until such time as any lic;ns and regulating uranium mills inconsistencies have been resolved. lf correspondence and documents related to remedial actions at the site.ne within State until June 1.1986, at remedial action is determined in a which time the NRC resumed this Record of Decision to be necessary, EPA Parties will also normally provide copies cuthority at the request of the Governor intends to either enter into a Consent of other information upon request. in the Decree with UNC under which UNC will event that one of the parties does not

[

M' l

' g d pl hy' c nduct, with EPA ove

t. remedial information, documents, or wish to furnish certain specific "8

I j

sits on ge Nationsy Priority List ( NPL'.)

actions equal to or exc ng those corresondence to the other, then sa,d l

of sites for response action under outlined in an EPA Record of Decision.

i material shall be identified to the other CERCLA. EPA s policy is to list only to take appropriate enfortement action.

party along with the reasons for or perform remedial action itself withholding it.

men ont e ic 1 a 1 Pursuant to section 104 of CERCLA.

t

8. Whenever notice or information is in Agreement States, that is States reserving all r ghts to seek cost recovery

• h b

under section 107 of CERCLA. Such required to be forwarded by one party wi the u

to 274 of acti ne may be conducted as part of the to another under the terms of this MOU.

{

the Atomic Ene'EY Act of1964, as NRCs approval of the UNC plan or it shall be given by and directed to the caended, to regulate certain nuclear separately; but in any event EPA intends individuals at the addresses specified i

below-

)

cctivities in a manner compatible with to coordinate its actions Aret with the i

the NRCs prograsa. Mills in stat" NRC.

EPA: Allyn M. Davis. Director.

where NRC has direct licensing

3. If either Party detemines that Hazardous Waste Management euthrrity have not been placed on the remedial actions are deficient or Division, Region VI. U.S. EPA.1445 list. Although New Mexico is no long" unsatisfactory, then that Party shall Ross Ave Dallas. Texas 75202.

cn Agreement f tale insofar as uranium provide notice to the other Party of the NRC: Dale Smith. Director. Uranium rec:very operations are concerned and deficiency.%e NRC shall assume the Recovery Field Office. U.S. Nuclear th) NRC has reassumed primary lead role for notification to UNC, except Regulatory Commission. P.O. Box z

i jurisdiction, the site was properly placed for such notification as EPA might 25325. Denver, Colorado 80225.

en th) NPL and the physical conditions statutorily be required to provide in j

l resulting in that placement are still certain events. De notification shall

9. Routine communications may be l

present. Therefore, EPA has no intention specify a time period in which exchanged verbally,in person, or by regulatory compliance is expected to be telephone between the Parties to cf recommending delisting the site from achieved.Should compliance not be facilities the orderly conduct of work l

thm NPL until all authorised EPA and NRC controlled remedial activities.

achieved in this time period EPA will contemplated by this MOU.

l cddressing releases or threats thereof, at assume the lead for taking or seeking 10.U.nforcement documentation any enforcement action necessary for provisd under this MOU will be kept this f:cility are completed.

off. site groundwater and NRC will as exempt material by EPA and NRC, to IV. Agreement asurne the lead fw any one the extent legally possible, according to the policies and procedums under to i

In ceder to achieve satisfactory

[t are ory respons?bi CFR Part 2 and to CFR Part 2.790, clIanup of the UNC site, the NRC and i

Both Parties reserve all rights under this respectively.

l tha EPA agree to do the following:

1. The Parties shall cooperate with MOU to take whatever actions are V. AgencyResponsibilities i

e:ch cther in the oversight of" determined to be necessary, including l

rtcitraation and remedial activity at the the conduct of remedial actions on and A. NRC responsibilities UNC site, off. site in order to fulfill their regulatory

1. The NRC will require the owners /

2. Upon submittal by UNC of a requirements. In any event no action operators of the UNC Churchrock mill proposed site reclamation plan (.the will be taken by either party without (UNC) to implement an approved on-site

(

pt:n"). NRC and EPA will begin prior consultation w th the other Party.

reclamation plan that meets all relevant concurrent reviews of the proposed

4. Both Parties shall appoint a facility NRC requirements, including to CFR j

pt:n. EPA will review the plan and will coordinator who shall be responsible for Part 40. Appendix A, as amended. lf any provide comments to the NRC. NRC will oversight of the implementation of the such plan is not complied with by UNC, i

l tzvi:w and,if necessary, require MOU and the activities required herein.

NRC will take whatever actions it revisions to the plan to assure The facility coordinators shall be deems appropriate to ensure l

c:nf:rmance to 10 CFR Part 40.

appointed by each Party within seven compliance.

l Appendix A, as amended. prior t (7) days of th effative date of this 2.The NRC will direct UNC to provide epproving the plan via license MOU.ne Parties each have the right to both parties with copies of major work carndments. If EPA cannot conclude appoint a new facility coordinator at product submittals as they become sbH be available. Such work products will th t the plan approved by NRC meets Qti"{; Such ch

,p shed by not ying the Party,in include, but not be limited to, an CERCLA requirements. then EPA may initi te separate actions as may be writ ng, at least five (5) days prior to the adequate overall reclamation plan. and j

necusary to ensum confamanca with appointment of the name, telephone any other plans and specifications for j

CERCLA requirements outside of the number, and mailing address of said assessment. remediation, and disposal area site. NRC wiu not approve i

nit 5fcoordinator' monitoring, including all analytical data.

Putin wil1 meet periodicaHy at 3.The NRC agrees to provide progress tny specific components of the groundwater protection and recovery the re9uest of either Party and at least repwis m UNC minediation on a i

aspects of UNC's proposed reclamation semiannually insofar as it is necessary quarterly basis.

pl n until EPA has determined. In a to accomplish the objectives of the

4. The NRC will assist in the i

i Rzcord of Decision or by review of the MOU.The facuity coordinators should development ofinformation to support UNC plan an statement to NRC that it is communicate with each other on a

's deletion of the site from the NPL consistent with CERCLA requirements routine basis by telephone.

upon completion of the remedial action.

and/cr remedial actions required under

6. The Parties will provide technical 5.The NRC shall notify EPA of all CERCLA. NRC does not intend to advice and any necessary regulatory pending visits to the Churchrock approve any specific aspects of UNC's consultation to one another upon property which relate to the site closure request.

plan and shall afford EPA and its September 30,1993 (reset)

/,

MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING p'

consult:rits opportunity to ccccmp:ny meet st:.ndards set f:rth in the Basis for entzred into a Memor ndum of NRC personnel on such visits.

Agreement (Section II) of this MOU.

Understanding (MOU) to provide

2. %e site is deleted from the NPL general guidelines for interfac B. EPA Responsibilities

3. The site is tumed over to the between the two agencies.The MOU is

1. EPA will provide formalized review, Department of Energy or other designed to ensure that there will be no 1 consultation and comment throughout responsible State or Federal authority gaps in the protection of workers at i

the entire project.

for long term care.

NRC-licensed facilities where the OSHA

2. EPA will review and provide

4. Regulatory. Statutory, or other also has health and safety jurisdiction.

comments on the site reclamation plan, events occur which make this MOU At the same time, the MOU is designed and other associated deliverables, unnecessary, illegal, or otherwise to avoid duplication of effort on the part within timeframes as agreed to between inappropriate.

of the two agencies in those cases where NRC and EPA. In the event that EPA yIll. Modificorion it is not always practical to sharply determines that the implementation of identify boundaries between the NRC's the site reclamation plan has not The Parties may modify this,MOU responsibilities for nuclear safety and resulted in, or may not result in, cleanup from time to time in order to simplify conditions that meet applicable or and/or define the procedures contained the OSHA's responsibilities for industrial safety' h replaces an ex relevant and appropriate requirements herein. Each Party shall keep the other The MOU. whic under CERCLA. then EPA may take inf rmed of any relevant proposed whatever action it deems appropriate.

modifications to its basic statutory or procedure for interagency activities' M

h d-d

3. EPA intends to pursue and complete regulatory authority, forms, procedures.

a Remedial Investigation and Feasibility or priorities. This MOU shall be revised, re8ponsigities o og agencies.

Study' public comment and agency as necessary. by the adontion of such describes generally the efforts-of each to resporise process, and Record of modifications.The MOU should be achieve worker protection at NRC-Decision (ROD] directed at off-site reviewed on an annual basis by both the licensed facilities, and provides general i

groundwater contamination, with the Director.URFO Region IV. NRC and the procedures fir the coordination of intention of completing this process by Director.Hazardcus Waste Management interface activities and exchange of October 1.1988. EPA intends to Division. Region VI. EPA or their information between the NRC and implement. or require UNC or other designated representatives.

HA.The text of the MOUls set out potentially responsible parties to IX. Reservation ofRights implement, any EPA selected remedial The Parties reserve any and all rights Purpose and Background actions set forth in a ROD. Any remedial

~

actions conducted by UNC or other or authority that they may have.

1.The purpose of this Memorandum of i including but not limited to legal.

Understanding between the U.S. Nuclear potentially responsible parties to equitable, or administrative rights. This Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the implement an EPA selected remedy will ith t e 17r s rpecificauy includes EPA's and NRC's Occupational Safety and Health authenty to conduct. direct. oversee.

Administration (OSHA) is to delineate acco nce and/or require environmental response the general areas of responsibility of Consent Decree entered into with EPA.

in connecti n with the site, as well as each agency: to describe generally the EPA intends that any such Consent Decree woulci cover actions outside the the authority to enter the site and efforts of the agencies to achieve worker byproduct material disposal site needed require the production of information, protection at facilities licensed by the within each of their own areas of NRC: and to provide guidehnes for to implement the ROD remedy.

responsibility, coordination ofinterface activities VI. Dispute Resolution Executed and agreed to:

between the two agencies. If NRC licenses observe OSHA's s'.andards and In the event of dispute between EPA Dated: August 26,1988.

regulations. this will help minimize and the NRC concerning site activities.

Robert D. Martin.

w rkplace hazards.

the persons designated by each Agency Regional Ad.vrainistrator. U.S. Nuclear

2. Both NRC and OSHA have as primary or, in their absence, alternate Regulatory commission. Region IV.

jurisdiction over occupational safety contact points will attempt to promptly Ar/ington. Texas.

and health at NRC. licensed facilities.

resolve such disputes. lf disputes cannot Dated: August 28,1988.

Because it is not always practical to be resolved at this level, the problem Robert E. Layton. lt.. P.E.,

sharply identify boundaries between the will be referred to the supervisors of these persons for further consultation.

k#8l,##N, "j.. NloNf$h77e as.

nuclear and radiological safety NRC yy The supervisory referral and resolution regulates and the mdustrial safety process will continue,if necessary to

$3 FR 43950 OSHA regulates, a coordinated resolve the dispute, to the level of the Put>llshed 10/31/88 interagency effort can ensure against Regional Administrators of the NRC and gaps in the protection of workers and at !

EPA.

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR the same time, avoid duplication of Both Parties shall continue to effort. This memorandum replaces an maintain their respective rights or Occupational Safety and Health ex sting procedure for interagency Administration activities. " General Guidelines for responsibilities under the MOU during the dispute resolution process.

interface Activities between the NRC NUCLEAR REGULATORY Regional Offices and the OSHA.

VII. Execution ondModification COMMISSION This agreement shall take effect upon Memorandum of Understanding

"'m**' e*s^*

Fa execution by EPA and the NRC. It shall Between The Nuclear Regulatory remain in effect for the duration of the Commission and the Occupational 3.There are four kinds of hazards that program addressed herein unless Safety and Health Administration; may be associated with NRC-licensed terminated by mutual agreement by the Worker Protection at NRC-Ilcensed nuclear facilities:

two Agencies: or, the MOU may be Facilities

a. Radiation risk produced by terminated unilaterally if any of the radioactive materials:

conditions set forth below are present.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission

b. Chemical risk produced by

1. The planning or conduct of (NRC) and the Occupational Safety and radioactive materials; groundwater cleanup actions fail to Health Administration (OSHA) have MU-45 September 30,1993 (reset)

.-----~~.-

MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING I

D. He NRC's General Counsel has the issued in accordance with title 10 of the Licensee to implement an approved IIAal autbority toprovide legal Code of Federal Regulations, part 40.

disposal site reclamation plan which I

la on of me Commission's Prior to June 1,1986, activities at the meets the requirements of 10 CFR part site were regulated under a license

40. Appendix A. as amended at 52 FR fr. Elective Defe issued by the State of New Mexico in 43553 through 43568 (November 1987),

accordance with its status as an NRC

" Uranium Mill Tallings Regulations:

This Agreement will take effect after agreement state. During the period of Ground Water Protection and other it has bue signed by both parties.

State regulatory authority, the issues," which conforms with EPA 40 l

X. Durotion Homestake site was placed on the EPA's CMt part 192, subpart D. EPA and NRC l

Superfund National Priorities List at the agree that the requirements of 10 CFR Afo 1

afterthe flective is iY1

• 9" *f the State. A copy of the MOU, part 40. Appendix A. are the Federal which dehneates agenc responsibilities environmental and public health ed b tb t the site,is printed fo owing this requirements applicable or relevant and t

e eata on o e and tice.

appropriate to the disposal site. EPA,

l resolve any problems identified. This

• "". Hall. DirectorJ 10 CFR part 40. Appendix A,"will Agreement will be subject to riodic Ramon E mn reviews and may b ame modi 8ed upon written agreement b Recovery Field Office. Ryun IV, U.S.

generally assu,re conformance with both parties, and a b w Nuclear Regulatory Commission. P.O.

CERCLA requirements. However, each Box 25325. Denver. Colorado. 80225.

Party will be responsible for assuring i

upon 30 deys written notice by either Telephone: (303) 231-5800.

compliance with its specific regulatory i

P8MY-requirements as discussed in this MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING section. The parties believe that the U.S.

7 l

XI Sepaiobdhty BETWEEN REGION 8 OF11EE U.S.

DePanent oihergy or another i

l If any provision (s) of this Agreement, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECI10N AGENCY or the application of any provision (s) to AND REGION IV OF T1EE U.S. NIX 2. EAR responsible State or Federal authority t

any person or circumstances is held REGULATORY COMMISSION FOR will assume responsibility for long-term invalid, the remainder of this

""m4L ACTION ATTHE HOMESTAKE care of the byproduct material disposal MINING WMPANY URANIUM MILL IN site following remediation of the site.

Agreement and the application of such cmotA COm, NM provisions to other persons or III. Background l

circumstances will not be affected.

I Purpose The State of New Mexico was l

This document establishes the roles, responsible as an " Agreement Stato" for i

For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory responsibilities, and relationships licensing and regulating uranium mills

+

Canmission.

between Region 6 of the U.S.

within the State until June 1.1986, at Deted: November 2,1993.

Environmental Protoction Agency (EPA) which time, NRC reassumed this James M. Taylor.

and Region IV of the U.S. N' clear authority at the request of the Governor u

Esecutive Direeforfor Operonons-Regulatory Commission (NRC),

of New Mexico. Pnor to this change, hereinafter collectively referred to as the EPA had placed the HMC site on the i

For the State of Arkansas.

" Parties," regarding remedial action at National Priority List (NFL) of sites for Dated: November 17,1993.

the Homestake Mining Company (HMC) response action under CERCLA. EPA's Grete Joy Dicus, uranium rnillin Cibola County, New policy is to list only those uranium Director Dwision o/Jiadiation Controland Mexico. The Parties have overlapping mills meeting criteria for placement on EmergenqMonagemest. Arkansos authority in connection with this site the NFL which are located in Agreement D'Portment ofHocWA.

and, consistent with the purposes of the States,i.e., States which have entered March 16,1992. interagency into agreements with NRC pursuant to l

Memorandum of Understanding section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of I

between EPA and NRC entitled 1954, as amended, to regulate certain l

gg pyl 3700

" Guiding Principles for EPA /NRC nuclear activities in a manner Pubashed vases Cooperation and Decision Making," this compatible with NRC's program. Mills Ennethe 12/14/03 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in States where NRC has direct licensing will help assure that remedial actions authority have not been placed on the occur in a timely and effective manner, list. Although New Mexico is no longer Uranham W ReW Moe an Agreement State insofar as uranium

• • I8 I '

8""'"I recovery operations are concerned and AosNcy: Nuclear Regulatory NRC will assume the role of lead NRC has reassumed primary Commission.

Acnow: Notice of signing of regulatory agency for the byproduct jurisdiction, the site was properly Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) material disposal area reclamation and placed on the NPL and the physical cfosure activities and EPA will monitor conditions resulting in that placement between the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the all such activities and provide review are still present. After completion of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) comments directly to NRC. The closure of the disposal area and other objective of EPA s review and comment Iamedial measures undertaken in full concerning the Homentake Uranium will be to assure that activities to be compliance with to CFR part 40, g;gg' conducted under NRC's regulatory Appendix A (the applicable Federal guensAny:On December 14,1993, the authority will allow attainment of

tandards for disposal site reclamation),

NRC and the EPA s6gned an MOU applicable or relevant and appropriate EPA. pursuant to 40 CFR parts 425(e) 1-delineating agency responsibilities in requirements under the Comprehensive and 515(c)(3) and in consultation with regulating activities at the Homestake Environmental Response Compensation the State of New Mexico, shall Mming Company's Grants Uranium and Liability Act of 1980, as amended determine whether all required response Mill. The NRC has regulated edivities at

(" CERCLA"). 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.,

actions with respect to the site have the site since June 1,1986, under e outside of the byproduct material been implemented. Following such a source and byproduct material license disposal snelNKC will require the determination, the site may be considered for deletion for the NFL MU 113 September 29,1995

MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING IV. Agreement semiannually insofar as it is necessary levels, and diminish redon exhalation to In order to achieve satisfactory to accomplish the objectives of this appropriate regulatory standards. If any cleanup of the HMC site. NRC and EPA MOU. The facility coordinators should part of such plan is not complied with agree to do the following:

communicate with each other on a by HMC, NRC will take whatever

1. The Parties shall cooperate with routine basis by telephone, actions it deems appropriate to ensure each other in the oversight of

6. The Parties will provide technical compliance.

reclamation and remedial activitv at the advice and any necessary regulatory

2. NRC will ensure that the owners /

HMC site.

consultation to one another upon operators of the HMC uranium mill

2. EPA will review the amendments to request.

implement a compliance monitoring the site reclamation plan ("the plan")

7. The Parties will generally provide program for hazardous constituents that l

and will p ovide comments to NRC.

each other with copies of all official meets all relevant NRC requirements, l

NRC will review and. If necessary, correspondence and documents related including 10 CFR part 40. Appendix A, require revisions to the plan to assure to remedial actions at the site. The for the establishment of ground water l

conformance to 10 CFR part 40.

Parties will also normally provide protection standards and points of l

Appendix A, as amended. prior to Copies of other information upon compliance. NRC will verify l

approving the plan via license request. In the event that one of the implementation by HMC of any required l

amendments. NRC will provide EPA Parties does not wish to furnish certain compliance monitoring and/or gneund i

with copies of all license amendments specific information, documents, or water corrective action at the HMC which affect the site closure plan prior correspondence to the other, then said uranium mill site resulting from the to issuance for comment. If no material shall be identified to the other establishment of ground water comments are received within 30 Pany along with the reasons for Protection standards as soon as such is calendar days, NRC willissue the withholding it.

reviewed and accepted by NRC. If any j

amendment.

8. Whenever notice or information is ground water requirements are not

3. If EPA determines that remedial required to be forwarded by one pa.ty complied with by HMC NRC will take actions are deficient or unsatisfactory, to another under the terms of this MOU, appropriate action to ensure then EPA shall provide notice to NRC of it shall be given by and directed to the compliance.

1 the deficiency. NRC shall assume the individuals at the addresses specified as

3. NRC will direct HMC to provide 1

lead role for notification to HMC. except follows:

bcth Parties with copies of major work for such notification as EPA might EPA: Director. Hazardous Waste Management product submittals 6s they become statutorily be required to provide jn Division (6H). U S. EPA Region 6.1445 available. Such work products will certain events. The notification shall Ross Avenue, suite 1200. Dallas, Texas include a reclamation plan and any i

specify a time period within which 75202-2733.

other plans and specifications for l

regulatory compliance is expected to be NRC: Director. Uranium Recovery Field assessment, remediation, and achieved. Should compliance not be Office, Region IV, U S. Nuclear Regulatory monitoring, including all analytical achieved in this time eriod, EPA will Commission P.O. Box 25325. Denver, data.

's 8 225-assume the lead for ta ing or seeking

4. NRC agrees to provide EPA with any enforcement action within its area

9. Routine communications may be progress reports on HMC's remediation, onsibility and NRC exchanged verbally, in person, or by semiennuall.

of regulatory resfend for any f

l will assume the telephone between the Parties to

5. NRC wi 1 assist in the development i

within facilitate the orderly conduct of work ofinformation to support EPA s deletion enforcement actions necessar(ility.

its area of regulatory responsi contemplated by this MOU.

of the site from the NPL upon Both Parties reserve all rights under this

10. EPA enforcement documentation completion of the remedial action,if MOU to take whatever actions are Provided under this MOU will be kept appropriate.

determined to be necessary, including as exempt material by EPA and NRC, to B. EPA Responsibihties the conduct of rernedial actions within the extent legally possible, according t and outside the disposal area. in order the pohcies and procedures under 40

1. EPA will provide formalized review, consultation and comment to fulfill their regulatory requirements.

CFR part 2 and to CFR part 2.790' throuhA will review and provide hout the entire pr ject.

In any event, no actions affecting site respectively.

2. l remediation will be taken by either

11. The Parties shall notify each other OI y Pendin visits to the C

comments on the various components of Party without prior consultation with the reclamation plan, groundwater the Aner Party.

property c,

P an. To the extent that they are monitoring, and corrective action l

4. Both Parties shall appoint a facility coordinatr who shall be responsible for otherwise authonzed to do so, either submittals, and other related documentation, within timeframes as l

oversigF o he implementation of this Party and their consultants may, at their MOtf

.d as activities required herein. Option, accompany the other Party on agreed to between NRC and EPA. In the l

N "..cW / coordinators shall be such visits.

event that EPA determines that the implementation of the site reclamation l

apr n a by each Party within seven V. Agency Responsibilities plan, closure activities, and/or u

(7. sys of the effective date of this i

MOU. Each Party has the right to A. NRC Responss.bilities groundwater corrective action has not resulted in, or may not result in, l

appoint a new facility coordinator at

1. NRC will ensure that the owners /

cleanup conditions that meet applicable l

any time. Such a change shall be operators of the HMC uranium mill or relevant and appropriate accomplished by notifying the other implement an approved reclamation requirements under CERCLA, then EPA Party, in writing, at least five (5) days plan that meets all relevant NRC may take whatever action it deems prior to the appointment, of the name, requirements, including 10 CFR part 40, appropriate.

telephone number, and mailing address Appendix A, as amended. The of said facility coordinator.

reclamation plan will require HMC to R Dispute Resolution S. The Parties will meet periodically assure long term stability of the tallings, In the event of a dispute between EPA at the request of either Party and at least reduce gamma radiation to backgmund and NRC concerning site activities, the i

I September 29,1995 MU-114

' I, MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING l

/

persons designated by each Agency as require the production of information, loint Statement of Understanding tacility coorcinators, or in their absence, within each of their own areas of By October 24,1994, pursuant to Title XI altamate contact points will attempt to responsibility-of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (the "Act"),

the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the promptly resolve such disputes. If X. Severability "NRC")is directed to establish standards (the l

disputes cannot be resolved at this level, The nunancation of any one or more

" standards") for regulation of the gaseous the problem will be referred to the na r pr visions of a section of diffusion ursnium enrichment facilities (the supervisors of these persons for further this MOU,either by Agreement of the "facihties* or "GDPs") owned by the i

consultation.The supervisory toferral Prrties or b Admmistretive or Judicial Department of Energy (the " DOE *) in order

(

and resolution process will continue, if

^C' Ion. sha 1 not affect the other to rotect the pubuc health and safety from neces to resolve the dispute. to the 5'W.on8/Pmvisions of this MOU.

ra iological har.ard and provide for the common defense and security. Title XI of the level of e Regionai Adm'nistrators of Executed and agreed to' i

NRC and EPA. Both Panles shall Act also specifies that NRC establish a Dared: December 14.1993 certification process to ensure that the U.S.

j continue to maintain their respective rights or responsibilities under this James L Mdhoan, Enrichment Corporation (the Corporation"I, MOU during the dispute resolution Begional Admmisfrator. U S Nuclear which is to lease the facihties from DOE.

process.

ResulatoryCommission.ReponIV. Artmston, complies with the NRC standards. After NRC Teros establishes the standards, the Corporation is Vll. Execution and Termination required to apply at least ann,ually to NRC for a cecate of comphance wee j

l This agreement shall take effect upon standards.The requirement for a certificate of go,o~wg,gg,'. N.

i execution b EPA and the NRC. It shall MmP anca is in heu of any requirement for ti N#8'On "n

nt-S an)nmental remain in e fect for the duration of the

• c0 n Assen as n E Dann 7m a hcen2e for the facihties leased by the pf STom addressed hmin unless Corporation.The Act also provides that the l

terminated by mutual agreement by the Corporation may not operate the facihDes l

two Agencies; or this MOU may be unless the NRC makes a determination that i

terminated unilaterally if any of the the facthties are in compliance with the NRC conditions set Icnh below are present; standards to be established by October 24, 1994. or NRC approves a plan prepared by

1. The planning or conduct of DOE for achieving comphance with such 59 FR 4729 j

reclamation plan, closure activities, Published 2/1/94 standards.

and/or groundwater cleanup actions fail Title XIof the Act also provides that the to meet standards set forth in the Basis NRC, in mmhanon wgh the Environmental for A reement (Section !!) of this MOU.

Protection Ager.cv (the EPA ), shall review i

the operations of ' he Corporation to ensure 2.

he site la deleted from the NPL Joint Statement of Understanding t

3. The site is turned over to the Between Nucleer Regulatory that pubhc health and safety are adequately Department of Energy or other Commission and Departmentof protected. Further. Title IX of the Act pmvi+s the Corporanon shail lease the responsible State or Federal authority Energy on implementing Energy Policy gaseous diffusion facilitics of DOE at for long. term care.

Act Provisions on Regulation of Paducah, Kentucky and Portsmouth. Ohio for

4. Regulatory, statutory, or other Gaseotas Mtssion Wanium a six year period,beginning July 1,1993.

events occur which make this MOU Enrichment Plants Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, unnecessary, fliegal, or otherwise as amended,includingin particular the inappropriate.

AGENCV: Nuclear Regulatory provisions of the Energy Policy Att of 1992 Cornmission.

on regulation and certdication as generally Vill. Modificatson l

Action: Publication of Joint Statement of desenbed above, NRC and DOE are issuing The Parties may modify this MOU Understanding Between the Nuclear this loint statement of understanding (the from time to time in order to simplify Regulatory Commission and the loint Statement") to address matters relating and/or define the Procedurea contained Department of Energy.

to the process by which NRC will assume, herem.. Each Party shall keep the other and DOE will rehnquish at the time and to informed of any relevant proposed svuuAny:The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory the extent provided by law. responsibihty for modifications to its basic statutory or Commission (NRC) and the U.S, regulatory oversight under the Act for the i

DOE facihties leased by the Corporation as regulatory authority, forms, procedures. Department of Energy (DOE) have or priorities. This MOU shall be revised, entered into a Joint Statement of specmed by the Energy Policy Act of 1992.

1" *i'""Ith* **pticit framew rk of the Act as necessary,by the adoption of such Understanding which describes the under which NRC is to assume respons@ility modifications. The MOU should be roles of the DOE and NRC in I

P reviewed on an annual basis by both the implementing the Energy Policy Act of he h nd y nd e or o def e Director, Uranium Recovery Field 1992 provisions on the regulation of and security after NRC standards are Office, Region IV, NRC, and the gaseous diffusion uranium enrichment established and become effective for that Director, Hazardous Waste Management plants. The text of the Joint Statement purpose,this loint statement of Division, Region 6, EPA, or their of Understanding is set forth below.

Understanding identifies certain resp nsibilities of NRC and DOE with respect l

designated representatives.

FOR FURTHER INFORMAftON CONTACT: Mr.

Chpy es o c ayn S. R. Ruffin, Office of Nuclear Material

[t p

s g

9.

IX. Reservation of Rights Safety and Safeguards, MS 4-E-4, U.S.

successfut implementation of the process, u

ne PMes reserve any and aH Hghts Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and serves such other purpoacs as may be 3

or authority that they ma have, Washington, DC 20555, telephone 301-related thereto.

locluding but not,limite to legal.

504-2696.

In NRC requesting and DOE agreeing to supply information. DOE and NRC equitable. or administrative nghts. This Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day understand that the purpose is to help specifically includes EPA's and NRC's of January,1M establish NRC's regulatory framework under authority to conduct, direct, oversee, For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

the Act, not for NRC to estabbsh oversight and/or require environmental response before NRC asrumes regulatory jurisdicHon in connection with the site, as well as samuef f.ChifA the authority to enter the site and Secretaryof the Cominission.

over the facilities.

l, MU-115 September 29,1995 I