ML20138E651
| ML20138E651 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/21/1995 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137P962 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-97-77 SECY-95-056-C, SECY-95-056-ERR, SECY-95-56-C, SECY-95-56-ERR, NUDOCS 9505010010 | |
| Download: ML20138E651 (3) | |
Text
a -
, 's April 21, 1995 i
C O P R E C T I O N U O T I C E i
TO ALL HOLDERS OF I
SECY- 9 5 - 0 5 6 - DEFERRAL OF_RflqUJAIf>RY OVERSIGHT TO THE U. S2 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTICN AGENCY FOR TWO SITES WITB RADIOACTIVS CONTAMINATELMD LANDFILL DISPOSAL QE LICENSED MATERIAh_FROM $EMEDIATION OF A THIRD SlIE PLEASE REPLACE PAGE 11 OF SECY-95-056 AND PAGE 3 OF ATTACHMENT 3 -
OF SECY-95-056 WITH THE ATTACHED REPLACEMENT PAGES. FO'R YOUR CONVENIENCE, PAGES INDICATING THE CHANGES ARE ALSO PROVIDFD.
ATTACHMENT:
AS STATED THE SECRETARIAT O #
1 b
sc - w,_ cca __
O 1 5050LLO/03 X&
{
. The Commissioners ,
]9 their own behalf, against: (a) any person who is alleged to be in violation of any standard, regulation, condition, requirement, or order under CERCLA; and (b) any Federal official who is alleged to have failed to perform a required duty, under CERCLA. Judicial relief, in such actions, may consist of an order to enforce and/or correct the violation or an order imposing any civil penalty provided for the violation;-and the court may award the prevailing party his costs of_ litigation, including reasonable attorney and expert witness fees.
RECOMMENDATIObji:
That the Commission:
- 1. Approve deferral to EPA's CERCLA program for the remediation of the thorium waste located on the E. I DuPont Superfund site in Newport, DE. 1
- 2. Approve deferral to EPA's Superfund program for remediation of the West Lake landfill / Cotter Corporation site in Bridgeton, MD.
- 3. Approve staff's plans to pursur a request submitted by Low Chemical Company for an exemption from the unrestricted release provisions of 10 CFR 40.42(j)(3) [Althcugh the amended rule does not refer to unrestricted release, but to release in accordance with NRC requirements, the criteria of the SDMP Action Plan apply.
These are essentially unrestricted release criteria.] and to authorize disposal of thorium waste from remediation in a landfill e in accordance with 10 CFR 20.2002. The landfill would be regulated under Michigan hazardous waste regulations that implement the RCRA program for long term control of the waste in the Salzburg Landfill cells, including reliance on institutional i
and State control and long-term monitoring of the Salzburg Landfill site in Midland, MI.
- 4. Note: i
- a. That although EPA is authorized to regulate byproduct, source, and special nuclear material under CERCLA and CAA, the State agencies, if they are not NRC Agreement States, are not authorized except under CAA.
That even though NRC is allowing disposal under the RCRA program i administered by EPA and Michigan Department of Natural Resources, NRC i staff will continue to regulate remediation of the Dow Chemical storage l sites in Michigan, which are currently licensed by NRC. With respect to the disposal in the Salzburg landfill, the staff will continue to review pcrtinent documents to ensure Michigan is not applying significantly less stringent waste disposal requirements than NRC.
- b. That reliance en instituticnal centrols over the lorg term may not provide as high a level of protection for the public health and environment as that attained if there were no reliance on institutional controls. This lower level of assurance results from the lack of a guarantee that there will always be a responsible party to maintain the controls.
4 l
4
period for the Salzburg Landfill w!il extend until approximately the year 2045. The post-closure institutional control period generally lasts 30 years and can be extended by the EPA Regional Administrator or State agency. The Salzburg Landfill is not a remote site, but because of the existence of the hazardous waste already buried there, the land can never be used productively again for farming and other non-industriel applications without extensive remediation. Dow has already imposed restrictive covenants in the Salzburg Landfill deed, in accordance with EPA requirements for hazardous waste landfills. If the thorium wastes are buried in the Salzburg Landfill, Dow proposes a requirement (to be inserted into the deed) to notify NRC (or its successor) before disturbing the landfill.
On balance, the staff believes that disposing of the thorium wastes at the Salzburg Landfill constitute; an as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) approach to remediation of the Bay City ard Midland sites, and that the conditions and restrictions placed on the landfill, combineo with the RCRA regulatory and cell design provicions, provide a comparable level of .
protection of human health and the environment, as is provided at other licensed low-level waste disposal sites. In the Office of tt' General Counsel's opinion, Dow's proposed s strictive covenants appear adequate to support an exemption. With one exception, the restrictive covenants, and the co-location of the thorium-contaminated waste disposal cells with hazardous and solid waste disposal cells, appear to achieve the same effect as if this thorium-contaminated waste were buried at a location where State or Federal control alone is considered sufficient to guarantee institutional care.
Inadvertent intrusion into the thorium waste disposal cells would be S controlled by the restrictive covenants on the deed as proposed by Dow in its exemption request. The one exception is that, as with the Envirocare facility in Utah, there is no assurance that, for the very long term, there will be a responsible party with the obligation to take additional remedial action should this become necessary.
Therefore, NRC staff proposes to allow disposal of licensed radioactive material in the landfill operated by Dow and regulated by EPA and the State of Michigan. This decision would be supported by an appropriate Environmental Assessment, which would presume the hdequacy of the cell design and institutional controls (including EPA and Michigan regulation) in protecting humans and the environment. NRC staff would notice in the Le(Le,ral e Reaister its intent to issue a license amendment to allow the disposal of 'ie waste in the Salzburg Landfill, including the exemption as is typically performed for SDMP sites (NMSS Policy and Procedures Letter 1-46, dated April 29, 1994).
Pursuant to Subpart L of 10 CFR Part 2, the notice will offer an opportunity for an informal hearing. The hearing would include approval of the decommissioning plan and the transfer and disposal under 20.2002 at the Salzburg landfill. Following completion of the necessary safety and environmental reviews, NRC staff anticipates issuing the amendment, provided the safety and environmental reviews are favorable. Because the Dow storage sites are currently licensed by the NRC, the staff would monitor the remedial activities being performed by Dow to ensure that NRC requirements are satisfied. The staff would review all pertinent documents and would tenninate the license after disposal of the radioactive material currently in storage at the Bay City and Midland sites and the storage sites are cleaned up to unrestricted use standards.