ML20203D647

Submits follow-up to 971219 NRC Ltr Re Staff Review of Document Entitled, Remediation Workplan for Ameristeel Incident-Related Matls at Clearfield & Wendover,Utah. Additional Info Required for Completion of Review

ML20203D647
Person / Time
Issue date:	02/19/1998
From:	Jim Hickey NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To:	Mccloskey J External (Affiliation Not Assigned)
References
REF-WM-39 NUDOCS 9802260109
Download: ML20203D647 (5)

Text

_ _ _ _ _

cea ei g" 4

UNITED STATES g,

[

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4'

' WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 o

44*****

,o February 19, 1998 Mr. John F. McCloskey, Vice President Associated Environmental Services, Inc.

1210 HamHen Roai Suite 900 Kingwood, TX 77339

Dear Mr. McCloskey:

I am writing to followup to my letter to you, dated December 19,1997, regarding the Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff's review of the document entitled "Remediation Workplan for the J Ameristeelincident Related Materials at Clearfield and Wendover, Utah." NRC staff has completed its review of the workplan and has concluded that additional information will need to be provided by Associated Environmental Services, Inc. (AESl) before NRC staff can complete its review of the proposed disposal of the incident-related material. A summary of this additional information is enclosed.

Please note that, while NRC staff reviewed the entire workplan (and discussed the results of our review with Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Radiation Control (UDRC) staff) our comments are limited to issues associated with the disposal of the incident-related materialin Idaho. Most of the activities described in the workplan are associated with managing the incident-related material (i.e., facility remediation, treatment / packaging of the incident-related material, sampling and analysis of treated material, etc.) in Utah. Utah has entared into an agreement with the NRC wherein NRC has relinquished authority for the regulation of source, most special nuclear, and byproduct material with'n the State of Utah to the UDRC. As such, the UDRC is the appropriate regulatory authority to rev ew and approve activities associated with managing the incident-related materialin Utah. However, NRC staff would expect that all of the conditions described in the Final Staff Technical Position entitled

" Disposition of Cesium-137 Contaminated Emission Control Dust and Other Incident-Related kj Material" (62 Endetal Reaister 13176, March 19,1997) would be satisfied and AESI will k

i h [ b [g L

QQ$g g gg?l rJ tEO AJ Y

sea supp5M9 9902260109 980219 I

PDR WASTE i

l WM-39 PDR 3

i

i r

- d. f. McCI' skey 2

o demonstrate this to NRC prior to shipping the treated, incident related material to the disposal facility in Idaho..

- If you have any questions concerning the staffs comments, please contact Nick Orlando at (301) 412-6749.

Sincercly, u':l l

..~

.i

s John W N. Hi

key, Chief Low-Level Waste and Decommissioning Projects Branch Division of Waste Management Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

Enclosure:

As stated cc: Nancy Hunt, U.S. EPA Craig Jones, UDRC 7

+

d a

I 4

.,-r.--

e

-e

3. F. McCI'oskey 2

demonstrats this to NRC prior to shipping the treated, incident related material to the disposal facility in Idaho.

If you have any questions concerning the staff's comments, please contact Nick Orlando at (301)412-6749.

Sincerely,

[0RIGINAL SIGNED BY:]

John W.N. Hickey, Chief Low-Level Waste and Decommissioning Projects Rranch Division of Waste Management Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Enclosu'1: As stated cc: !. acy Hunt, U.S. EP.'

Craig Jones, UDRC 4 TICKET:LLDP-7216 a DISTRIBUTION.CMjile ? LLDP r/f NMSS r/f RJohnson

6. /h-).4e / CS/

M f./ w I/ Q t'r, 65/0

/

Pus 3, u c.

DOCUMENT NAME:S;\\DWM\\LLDP\\DAO\\AMERISTE.WPD 50FC LLDP LLDP LLDRM -

//

DOrlahev RNelso JH key NAME DATE 2//k98 2/l7/98-2//fl98 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY LSS:

YES NO X ACNW:YES[ NO[

IG:

YES NO X Delete file after distribution YES NO i:-

e

O NRC STAFF COMMENTS ON PROPOSED AESI WORKPLAN

1. The final concentration of Cesium 137 (Cs) in the inci

.t related material that will be disposed of in a facility permitted under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)is unclear. Page 8 of the Treatment Plan indicates that only incident-related material containing Cs at concentrations greater than 130 picocuries per gram (pCi/g) will

.J disposed of as radioactive waste. However, on page 13 of the Remediation Workplan and page 8 of the Quality Assurance and Sampling Plan (QASP)it appears that inciden!-

related material with ' 'Cs concentrations below 100 pCi/g will be shipped for disposal at a Subtitle C facility. Also, please note that the Final Technical Position discusses the allowable concentration of Cs as the pre-treatment average concentration. It is not clear from the workplan if the concentration of the material will be determined before or after treatment. Please clarify wh7t 9e final '87Cs concentration in the incident related material will be and whether this #

determined before or after treatment of the material.

2. Page 8 of the Treatment Plan also indicates that material that is not suitable for dkposal in a Subtitle C facility will be treated to remove its hazardous characteristic after wnich it will be sent to the Richland, WA, low-level radioactive waste disposal facility. The Final Staff Technical Position discusses the disposal of emission control dust from the primary production of steelin electric furnaces and other incident related materials. The emission control dust is considered a " listed

• waste under 40 CFR 261.32. Other incident related materials would also be considered hazardous waste under 40 CFR 261 because they are derived from the treatmut of the dust. Because the incident related materialis a " listed

• waste, the material cannot be treated to remove its hazardous characteristic. Please clarify the iniended disposci of this material.

In addition, classification of the incident-rehted material as hazardous waste is the subject to the requirements of the appropriate State regulatory authority for hazardous wastes, or the Environrnental Protection Agency. Please clarify that all the necessary approvals will be obtained from all appropriate regulatory authorities in both Utah and Idaho prior to transferring the material for disposal.

3. The secotid paragraph under the section entitled " Aggregation of IRM" on page 8 of the OASP indicates that incident-related material with Cs concentrations less than 100 pCi/g will be disposed of in a Subtitle D facility. NRC staff believes that this is a typographical error, as this material would not be suitable for disposalin a Subtitle D facility. Please clarify that the cotidtion described on paGe 8 of the QASP is en error.

4. The Final Technical Position requires that the total Cs activity, contained in emission control dust and other incident-related materials that is transferred to a Subtitle C, RCRA-permitted, disposal facility, has been specifically approved by the appropriate Agreement State (s) and that the total activity disposed does not exceed the total activity associated wi*h the inadvertent melting incident. Please describe how AESI will demonstrate that the transfer has been specifically approved by the appropriate Agreement State. In addition, please provide the total activity of Cs ' hat will be disposed of in the RCRA-permitted facilit e and demonstrate that thic does not exceed the total activity associated with the incident.

Enclosure

e

• a

5. The Final Staff Technical Position requires that the RCRA disposal facility operator has been notified in writing of the impending transfer of the incident-related materials and has agreed in writing to receive and dispose of the packaged materials.. Please clarify how AESI will demonstrate this to NRC (see footnote 8 in the Final Staff Technical Position).

6 The Final Staff Technical Position requires that the licensee providing the radiation protection program, notifier, in writing, the Commission or Agreement State (s) in which the transferor and transferee are located, of the impending transfer, at least 30 days before the transfer. Please state whether AESI intends to make the notifications discussed in the Final Staff Technical Position.

7. The Final Staff Technical Position requires that etabilized material has be packaged for transportation and disposal ire non-bulk steel packagings as defined in DOT regulations at 49 CFR 173.213, and that the dose rate at 1 meter from the surface of any package containing stabilized waste does not exceed 23 prt m per hour, above backgiound. Please clarify that these conc.aons will be met.

8. The Final Staff Technical Position states that aggregation of "'Cs-contaminated emission control dust and other incident related material, before stabilization treatment, is acceptable if, among other things, aggregation involves the same characteristic or listed hazardous waste, the wastes are amenable to, and undergo, the same appropriate treatment for land-disposal restricted waste and that aggregation does not increase the overall total volume nor the radioactivity of the incident-related waste. Please provide information to demonstrate that aggregation of incident related matehals will be conducted such that these conditions are satisfied.

.