ML20137K465
| ML20137K465 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/14/1984 |
| From: | Martin D NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| References | |
| REF-WM-41 NUDOCS 8601240097 | |
| Download: ML20137K465 (6) | |
Text
l Distribution WM 39 s/f/
WMLU r/f NMSS r/f DEM/84/11/14 i hy1i}gg4 RE Browning NOTE: Branch Chief, WMGT Branch Chief, WMEG FROM: Dan E. Martin, WMLU
SUBJECT:
Branch Concurrences on Proposed Higginbotham to Themelis 8 Letter Conditionally Concurring in DOE Plan to relocate Salt Lake City Tailings to Clive, Utah.
Based on available information we believe the proposed letter to DOE (copy attached) is appropriate. Before this step is taken we should have firm agreement that all necessary reviews have been completed and no other unresolved issues (except rock size) need to be brought to DOE's attention.
Since the scope, content, results, and basis for conclusions of these reviews have not yet been documented, I am requesting each Branch Chief, or Acting Chief, to provide a written answer to the following question, using the form attached for this purpose.
The question is:
"Has your branch completed all assigned reviews with respect to the Remedial Action Plan for relocation of the Salt Lake City tailings to Clive, Utah, and concluded that no unresolved issues exist beyond those mentioned in the WMLU-proposed letter to DOE (other than issues concerning ground water at the Salt Lake City site)?"
A prompt yes or no answer is requested. Several staff hours were spent yesterday attempting, but failing, to secure appropriate tranch concurrences in the letter itself. Your cooperation on this matter now is needed to avoid further unnecessary delay.
Dan E. Martin Attachments:
(1)WMLU-ProposedLetter WM Remrd File WM ProhctN-(2) Branch Concurrence Form -_ Occket ib. ____ _ __
PDR < _ _ _
LPD:1 cc: LB Higginbotham Dishibution:
~
GN Gnugnoli -
RA Pennifill -- - - - --
__ _ ___i __
(Return to WM. 623 SS)
- -- *------ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
E DR ,
=----:-------- .. :------------:------------:------------:------------:------------:-----------
DATE:84/11//y : : : : : :
, ,f ucgk
. UNITED STATES ,
8
"(3 e
9 E NUC'_ EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 o N !
\..v.../
Enclosure 1 Mr. John G. Themelis, Project Manager UMTRA Project Office U.S. Department of Energy Post Office Box 5400 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87115
Dear Mr. Themelis:
Enclosed is the signed signature page for the Salt Lake City Site Remedial 8ActionPlan. As we have discussed in the past, this concurrence is conditional with respect to two issues. If these conditions are not acceptable to you, please contact me imediately.
The first condition is with respect to the rock size to be used,for the erosion protection cover at Clive. The rock size to be used has not been agreed upon by NRC and DOE. Prior to the rock cover being placed on the pile, the DOE will receive concurrence from NRC on the size of rocks to be used.
The second condition is that the durability specifications provided in the attachment to your letter to me dated October 29, 1984, be provided to Utah with the changes discussed in the second enclosure to this letter. These changes have been discussed with Ron Rager of the TAC and are editorial and typographical clarifications.
I would also like you to note that the modeling which supports your assumptions W of a 2-bar moisture content in the radon cover, which we previously requested, was no+ sent to us. Therefore, we have not been :.ble to make a determination if using the 2-bar moisture content will be acceptable at other sites, such as Shiprock. Our basis for accepting this moisture content at Salt Lake City is also discussed in the second enclosure to this letter.
Sincerely, Leo B. Higginbotham, Chief Low-Level Waste and Uranium Recovery Projects Branch Division of Waste Management
Enclosure:
- 1. Signature Page
- 2. Resolution of Geotechnical Issues cc: Larry Anderson, Utah Bureau of Radiation Control
~
, l DISTRIBUTION:
NMSS r/f WMLU r/f WM s/f RE Browning WM41/ RAP /84/11/08 MJ Bell J0 Bunting M Knapp L Barrett Mr. John G. Themelis, Project Manager D Gillen, WMEG S Smykowski, WMEG UMTRA Project Office M. Weber, WMGT B Ford, WMGT U.S. Department of Energy TL Johnson, WMGT M Blackford, WMGT Post Office Box 5400 G Gnugnoli, R Pennifill Albuquerque, New Mexico 87115 C Flory D Martin
Dear Mr. Themelis:
Enclosed is the signed signature page for the Salt Lake City Site Remedial Action Plan. As we have discussed in the past, this concurrence is conditional 8withrespecttotwoissues.If these conditions are not acceptable to you, please contact me immediately.
The first condition is with respect to the rock size to be used for the erosion protection cover at Clive. The rock size to be used has not been agreed upon by NRC and DOE. Prior to the rock cover being placed on the pil,e, the DOE will receive concurrence from NRC on the size of rocks to be used.
The second condition is that the dLrability specifications provided in the attachment to your letter to me dated October 29, 1984,.be provided to Utah with the changes discussed in the second enclosure to this letter. These changes have been discussed with Ron Rager of the TAC and are editorial and typographical clarifications.
I would also like you to note that the modeling which supports your assumptions of a 2-bar moisture content in the radon cover, which we previously requested, was not sent to us. Therefore, we have not been able to make a detennination if using the 2-bar moisture content will be acceptable at other sites, such as Shiprock. Our basis for accepting this moisture content at Salt Lake City is also discussed in the second enclosure to this letter.
Sincerely, Lee B. Higginbotham, Chief Low-Level Waste and Uranium Recovery Projects Branch Division of Waste Management
Enclosure:
- 1. Signature Page b N#m N (*""""a e w " *
- ur w# ==
- * # * " " '* # "'"I
- 2. Resolution of Geotechnical FM.M~ % fMcM *N AT Cuw, vTM. Out-Issues * *"" "5 # * " ' " " '" # #
cc: Larry Anderson, Utah Bureau * *"* 8'*'" * "8 s # 'A'" ***T * "" * '
of Radiation Control &coressra esonr v rwe Vanu corr o Cam S8r w- ..jp i
E- nkffJ n inbotb '. ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~~~-~~-~~
y - ;"", 6 p ;a;r ,a;a; r :a;a; .i----g--
- U.S. Department of Energy Agreement No. DE-FC04-81All6309 Append,ix B SIGNATURE PAGE The United States of America State of Utah Department of Energy Departmept-of Health By: By: 8%+
Theetis V. Hill Ksnneth Lee Alkema, Director ~
Contracting Officer Division of Environmental Health e
By:
James A. Morley _
Project Manager, UMTRA ,
Albuquerque Operations Office Concurrence: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commis; ion By:
Leo B. Higginbotham Chief, Low-level and Uranium Projects Branch Division of Waste Management t
l 1
I
NOV 0 9 E84 RESOLUTION OF OPEN GE0 TECHNICAL ENGINEERING ISSUES SALT LAKE CITY RAP REVIEW
- 1. Rock Durability Specifications detailed in Attachment B of DOE's response, including those pertinent to rock durability criteria, are found to provide an acceptable 8 program for ensuring that the most durable rock that is available in sufficient quantity and is located within a reasonable distance of the site will be used for erosion protection. Note that there are two inconsistencies in the Attachment B specifications. The absorption criteria given as 10% in the first paragraph should be 1.0% as indicated at a later point in the attachment. In addition, the reference to ASTM C131 in item 2 on the second page should be deleted to be consistent with statements in the first paragraph of the attachment. It is understood that these specifications are to be included in the general specifications that will be provided to the RAC (State of Utah) by the TAC. A copy of these specifications should be submitted to the NRC when they are finalized.
- 2. Cover Material Dispersivity The staff will not require further testing to determine the dispersive characteristics of the cover material provided that the RAP's commitment to meeting appropriate filter criteria is strictly adhered to. Section 6 of Appendix B to the RAP indicates that D 1 filter base < 5 will be the criterion used in final design. Thisksanac/D,fablecriterionfor ceh design of the filters beneath the cover for this project. A study by Sherard (Ref. 1) has recently concluded that this criterion is conservative, employs the appropriate characteristics of the filter and
~
base, and should be continued as the main criterion for judging filter acceptability.
- 3. Slope Stability The staff concludes that the TAC's treatment of the upper clay layer in the dynamic stability analysis is auequately conservative based on the following facts:
- a. The TAC's August 22, 1984 response to NRC questions incorrectly reported 4 = 34 for this layer, when in actuality $ = 23 was used in the analysis.
d NOV 0 91984
- b. Whatever remains of this layer at the base of the excavation will be either scarified and compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density (ASTM D698), or removed by overexcavation, moisture conditioned, and recompacted. Thus, actual strengths of this material would exceed values used in the analysis.
- 4. Cover Moisture Content Using correlations proposed by Rawls (Ref. 2), the staff has independently calculated the long-term, 15 Bar, moisture content of the proposed cover material to be approximately 13%. However, the TAC's use o# 18% in the cover thickness calculations is determined to be acceptable for the following reasons:
e
- a. In-situ, near-surface moisture contents of the cover niaterial at the site have been shown to range between 21% and 35% (ave. of 29%) in both February and August. The cover material therefore exhibits high moisture retention with little seasonal fluctuation,
- b. The staff recognizes that the filter and rock layers over the soil cover will significantly improve the cover's moisture retention capability.
t 1
J l
Ref. 1 Sherard, J. L. , Dunnigan, L. P. , and Talbot, J. R. , " Basic l Properties of Sand and Gravel Filters," Journal of Geotechnical ;
Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 110, No. 6, June, 1984.
1 Ref. 2 Rawls, W. J., and Brakensiek, D. L., " Estimating Soil Water l Retention from Soil Properties," Journal of the Irrigation and j Drainage Division, ASCE, Vol. 108, No. IR2, June, 1982.
l l