ML20199H752

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Concludes That Inspections & Routine Remedial Measures That Are Being Performed,Re 1997 Insp of Durango Title I Site, Are Acceptable
ML20199H752
Person / Time
Issue date: 01/30/1998
From: Joseph Holonich
NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To: Edge R
ENERGY, DEPT. OF
References
REF-WM-48 NUDOCS 9802050114
Download: ML20199H752 (1)


Text

f WM y ;i. / 4 m January } 0,v 7.1998,1 R

- JM4F f #e o N iB% T 1

a fU.SLDepartment of Energy ~

Q Al M A m

A ~ '

ATTN; Mr. Rt,ssel Edge, Project M: nager:

4 2 Grand, Junction Project Office : * > j ' J ' i t

P.O. Box 2567l j h N

',f

(

2597 8 3/(Road M W f / ( '

4:0,

f f Grand Junction,' Colorado 81502 t

i

, f yq/ y l N [& j y l SUBJECTR1997 INSPECTION, OF DURAN. G, O TITLE l SITE -

?

4-.

l:

Dear Mr. Edge:

p#

u b

The U. S. NurIsar Regulatory.Corpmission staff has reviewed the 1997 annualinspection report -

for the Durango, Colorado Title i sits. Based on this review, we conclude that the inspections and the. routine remedial measures that are being performed are acceptable.'

o The staff notes that minor gullying,' erosion, sedimentation, and vegetation growth have been observed at the site. ~Although none of these problems appear to be significant at inis time,-

your continued observations of the problems are importani, i.

b For the Durango site, and possibly other licensed sites, it would be useful if the U.S.

Dopertment of Energy (DOE) could provide further information regarding the reletive

(

' significance of specific problems that are occurring, particularly if the problems are unexpected.-

In addition, it would be usefulif DOE could analyze the problems and determine at what point the problems at a specific sits becoms significant. For example, the Durango site is experiencing some sedimentation and vegetation growth in the diversion channels; in this case, minor sedimentation likely will not affect channel capacity or velocities in the channel.

l However, it is important to know at what point the problem will become significant, to properly direct and manage future site inspections and to determine the need for mitigative measures.

+

Recognizing that some conservatisms have been used in the dedgn, it is also important to -

L

' know if these conservatisms have been considered by DOE in its analysis of site problems.

The staff rMiuests that DOE consider these suggestions and requests that a meeting or -

5 conference call be held within the next 34 months to discuss the need for establishing _ site-specific mitigation criteria for sHes experiencing problems.

This review was performed by Ted Johnson. lf you have any questions, he may be contactM at (301) 415-6658.

Sincerely, o

g2'o 980 00 Original. Signed By WM-48 PDR r i&

wi_

Joseph J. Holonich, Chief (p W '

Uranium Recovery Branch y ;;;yof f. /

j

=*A :

W

- N Division of Waste Management:

k ' % ':1 ll ll lllfll* lf l"l l-ll7and Safeguards -

Office of Nuclear Material Safety j

A 4W s

y% - F ky 7,'..

p,; 4 % '

Y LDISTRIBUTIONi h[+PUBLlC[

-s a.

NMSS r/f; URB r/f-CAbrams CNWRA W ' ACNWu *~

WCCain RIV i MLayton DOCUMENT NAME: S:tDWMtURStTLJ\\DUR971NS.

d URBM (b

O OFC4 URS ;

i-t IUdtb Nef C

4 V

NAME1 TNn?

O DGil UI Mdich v

s DATE-

1/N/98w

'1/ 21%98 NJ

!1/4)/98 -

F L

    • ' 1 7 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY 9b73 k
p

_