ML20153H249

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Draft Technical Evaluation Rept for Proposed Remedial Action Plan at Grand Junction Tailings Site,Grand Junction,Co. NRC Review of Data Designs Indicates Number of Significant Outstanding Items Still Remain
ML20153H249
Person / Time
Issue date: 08/31/1988
From: Lohaus P
NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To: Arthur W
ENERGY, DEPT. OF
Shared Package
ML20153H251 List:
References
REF-WM-54 NUDOCS 8809090130
Download: ML20153H249 (3)


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:, DG 8/17 LTR -1 AUG 3 1 1993 W. John Arthur, Ill, Project Manager Uranium Hill Tailings Project Office Department of Energy Albuquerque Operations Office P.O. Box 5400 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87115

Dear Mr. Arthur:

Cornmission (NRC) staff has completed a review of the The Nuclear Regulatory (DOE) preliminary Final Design ard Remedial Action Plan Departrent of Energy (RAP) and all associated documentation pertinent to the proposed remedial action at the Grand Junction site. This review is documented in Enclosure 1, the draft Technical Evaluation Report (TER), which discusses the proposed remedial action and the results of our evaluation. Staff review of data and designs submitted by 005 for che r wedial action at Grand Junction indicates there are still a number ef significant outstanding items. These items were identified to your staff in a telephone conference call on August 25, 1988. Once the outstanding items have been satisfactorily resolved, the hRC will be in a position to provide our concurrence in the proposed remedial action. The draf t TER documents all outstanding items and what is needed for resolution. The open issues presented in the draft TER are prir.arily related to the EPA groundwater standard, outstanding inform:tiot. related to the conceptual cover design, ar.d design of the rock erosion protection. A sunnary of these open items is presented in Table 1.1 of the TER. in addition, Enclosure 2 provides more specific cornments related to the review of groundwater aspects of the remedial action plan. It is essential that all open items of concern be addressed before full concurrence on the proposed remedial action can be granted by HRC. However, in your letter of June 21, 1988, you requested a stepped approach to concurrence, including an initial conditional concurrence for all activities up to placement of the radon barrier. In order for us to provide this (onditional concurrence, DOE needs to respond to each of the open issties with either information to close the issue or an explanation of why the issue can be deferred, p-{0[NUO PDC hp).$d kl6L

li e (o l DG 8/17 LTR 2 t I i If you have any questions regarding the information in the enclosures, please contact me at FTS 492 0553 or the NRC project manager, Dan Gillen, at FIS 492 0517 Sincerely, l Il) t i Paul H. Lohaus, Chief Operations Branch Division of Low-Level Waste Management j and Decommissioning [ 4 1

Enclosure:

As stated l e I cc: Debra Hann, DOE /AL l Elizabeth Damler, DOE /AL Howard Rottman, Colorado Dept. of Health j A\\h 0FG: LLOB /s :LLOB F-

LLOB J

P /............. 54.'............................ NAME:DGillen/dfw :HHiege

PLoh us DkTE h h fbb fff/fkk kkfbb OfflGIAL RELUMD COPY l

l t r I i i f t ? l I i f t f

DG 8/17 LTR DISTRIBUTION: ~% Central File 4 t 'u y - to n - t'/') NMSS r/f d LLOB r/f DGillen, LLOB MFliegel, LLOB PLohaus, LLOB JSurreier, LLTB MBell, LLRB JGreeves, LLWM MKnapp, LLWM R.D. Smith, URF0 MTokar, LLTB JStarmer, LLTB i J 1 _ _ _.}}