ML20206U643
| ML20206U643 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07001489 |
| Issue date: | 08/12/1985 |
| From: | Nixon W NRC |
| To: | Miller W NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20206U346 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-98-341 NUDOCS 9902170090 | |
| Download: ML20206U643 (9) | |
Text
...!
j v u. u a vu u v...
Q Docket 70-1489 NMSS R/F FCUP R/F 08/12/85 VLTAhrpe DOCKET NO.
07001489 MEMORANDUM FOR: WILLIAM 0.
MILLER, CHIEF LICENSE FEE MANAGEMENT BRANCH OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION FROM W.
NIXON DIVISION OF FUEL CYCLE & MATERIAL SAFETY OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIALS SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS
SUBJECT:
COSTS AND MANHOURS FOR LICENSING ACTION THE CONTRACT COSTS INCURRED AND MANHOURS USED IN REVIEWING THE APPLI-CATION DATED 07/30/84 ARE TABULATED BELOW FOR LICENSE NO. SNM-1461.
1 1.
NAME:
GOODYEAR AEROSPACE CORP.
AKRON, OH. 44315 2.
A) CASEWORK CONTROL NO. 07001489010S B) MAIL CONTROL NO. 23906 i
C) TAC NO.
- 3. A) PERIOD COVERED (STAFF HOURS) 12/23/84 - 01/14/85 B) COMPLETION DATE:
01/14/85 0 - Tiiis application was cancelled by licensee.
C) AMENDMENT NO.
4.
CONTRACT COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS APPLICATION: C 0 PERIOD COVERED (CONTRACT COSTS) 5.
TAC WORK BY OTHER OFFICES:
0 HOURS 6.
HOURS DURING REPORTING PERIOD:
0.0 7.
FEE CHARGABLE : $ 0 8.
TOTAL COST TO PROCESS APPLICATION : o 0
APPRUVED:
e
/
W.
CROW W. ' N I X 0 t(
BRANCH CHIEF PROJECT MANAGER 9902170090 990209 PDR FOIA Y9'O 7 / '/Og 9 0
/
g POST 98-341 PDR
RUN DATE REGULA';0RY INFORMATION TRACKING SYS~icM PAGE
. o8/12/85 DETAIL LISTING OF NOURS REPORTED ON CASEWORK 99
?
PERIOD COVERED: 12/23/84-01/14/85 PROJECT MANAGER: WA NIXON CASEWORK NUMBER: 07001489010S FACILITY NAME: GOODYEAR AEROSPACE CORP.
DATE CLOSED: 01/14/85 NATURE OF ACTIVITY:
SNM-1461 RENEWAL REGULAR REVIEWER WEEK ENDING NOURS NO MANPOWER RECORDS EXIST FOR TNIS CASE!
i l
i m
s CONVERSATION RECORD f/jg./pp O vlSIT O CONFERENCE gTELEPHONE N AM E/SYM BOL INT O INCOMING Location of Visit / Conference:
$ OUTGOING NAME OF PE SON (S) CONTACTED OR IN CONTACT ORGANIZATIO.
(Office. dept bureau.
PHONE NO.
f &m tje g n A m,esa.)~ )1 0 - w 1 f
' " ~ ' ' '
$dxmt//4lAh,,ab &&W D/
/
.f f
t.s14#> +W% a//d ~b sk inti Musw 1
l e6sd aJ AGo/ am AM12h sadi ~
anda M L La a;&dd's 61. Aam,T/
wa A9 sda 6k dorhvAt n/AaVA 1
n add sod &. #/an,, d d W'2 & x L a a d ;4 u n e /% An k AsxKeaik
//
// ~ ~
l k4sk /A nsM/4 x a nesww,.-
momit'avh FM nLL A mAsLa m a& RWA LA &14;rAlm men (kn achaMia/
V~f
~
/v kor/we,, Ohm n#1dlM40'M& ad r#.3
- g. t d w:
r y
/
r/
n
& f) O EI e)$ $k n M) lNbo-.$/iAP n Al 5>AUN s//t LMShd,/8wd A/edaw NE m a 4 +s-es u$ m[
ACTION REQUIRED NAME OF PERSON DOCUMENTING CONVERSATION SIGNATURE
[/
[DATE [
'~
JWL h
ACTION TAKEN SIGNATURE TITLE DATE ANI 50271-101 mmMM END ggt,0,NTME O
EF SE
,,,,, 3,,,,,,33
,,3 L
N'.
{[j7/ff
^
CONVERSATION RECORD O VISIT O CONFERENCE O TELEPHONE NAM /SMOL INT l
glNCOMING l
Location of Visit / Conference:
O OuToOina NAME OF PERSON (S) CONTACTED OR IN CONTACT ORGANIZATION (Office, dept., bureau.
TELEPHONE NO.
h* Y d
l f
Yb 7
~~
Lasat run/,,, Awww JkA. ? O, Jhk-tYft l
l
/$v2/m/b //.2xl RE'b Yd b.
2 sin) p io
/
h% 2N) Y b.Y W Asm adou s sp.ot$
TT.
l-
/
A AllM
+ bA DJ Jf Y
d i AAY
/
r g
p
- a. % d A ude.htw &,
G L &
j l
MA aJ#.aw mf+4b> A
/
/
b.
A M /1Y h Nh Y j
$4 b/
YAff/
M 1/5 A
J R Aylasai AOntdb Maddow sh44w2 A >&2sJHawA r
s'
/
y ACTION REQUIRED NAME OF PERSON DOCUMENTING CONVERSATION SIGNATURE DATE ACTION TAKEN SIGNATURE TITLE DATE
"##8-
CONVERSATION RECORD gg80NAL Q*M Qg"S
- oo i 1985 o - 4u-27s (2009o)
,g E
F
'i
~
^"
CONVERSATION RECORD g/u/g.
O VISIT O CONFERENCE O TELEPHONE NAME/SWBOL INT Q INCOMING Location Of Visit / Conference:
O OUTGOING NAME OF PERSON (S) CONTACTED OR IN CONTACT ORGANIZATION (OfGce, dept bureau.
TELEPHONE NO.
WITH YOU etc.)
q.J.
bNANAJ Ob$U f h ffy SilBJECT f
AuPdA4fb 114.*.
f
SUMMARY
h.
A Md.fa/ MIA n &f/
ML LabY AlAlb au/d'vt wt des aw da/ duc-h hrd% at sYo. -la/bdaa-I I' Lf-2 eedd. Hie saa. L:a& JM%dv r w u.h!v d d w>hd~' Ales S.
0 A
V
h
) AMJ
> A" 4
D!M A/Th!/ L #d
~
ardau /kt dM dA dd/ dam'.
j i i
o u (D bSen x. dash 9hf) kh~bwh d)' e. AR2V,dwE) d
' d h k / s v ia h s u / w 1 A
//o ! a a s S M r $ # L m A.8 NKk F49. kul ou 2spo m. TAwbnd b h> IT c.~
Y aawAdE17a$VA$ rett dewd FY7. L1.W 1lG's$taww&4"}'em Aux %.
7 ACTION REQUIRED /
NAME OF PERSON DOCUMENTING CONVERSATION SIGNATURE DATE ACTION TAKEN SIGNATURE TITLE OATE
' ##3~3
CONVERSATION RECORD OgOgL 0"$r'dN'SE
C GPo a 1995 0 ** 463-M5 (2009c) g E
j CONVERSATION RECORD
^ f/gw/,g O visit O CONFERENCE O TELEPHONE NAME/SmeOL INT O INCOMING Location of Visit / Conference:
O OUTGOING NAME OF PERSON (S) CONTACTED OR IN CONTACT ORGANIZATION (Office, dept., bureau, TELEPHONE NO.
WITH YOU etc.)
gjf L
A NfO het{p"hh&
Ambsw. /&mAun 5th fanh
~"
g
. TD LJLoA> :
l AA eto Aw, mad
'"""^"'
eddudd OY '13. A/dah /d4 hub 6 /r hua
~
" O$2U Of M
N.
W /tf 4.:A
V-247 Quo: OGA!nu~ 7)-Db s#'
A 3.
r-e-.
Y l0 f ~ '
- Mhdeu n.z AL, i.: 552 Med
- dL A,:o okk,Aa b T> ~si x).
- dikli!L.. ide,,6L-idW,
- 2Rh> nalas - <= a.C /n a
/
'/
//
(f)FSo /ded west Ad/un A dad idA Msfads
- M dex.- 4 L X
< O Mn s~d zky Mwn Jsgyyg-y-nggg9-n
^cr'on "mu'"co Y5 kh.N N Yantby l~ ^4 L.~
~&gzw&
NAME OF PERSON DOCUMENTING C A
RE p
gg, -[
h //f" [ gf ACTION TAKEN gL,fy,
>.Lw.1 ee. Au 614wfu oh) 9'Ao sa6 SicNATURE TITLE DATE l
5 ##8-308 CONVERSATION RECORD
$'0N F Q
~SE L ""
}
4nTME o cro, sees o. 462-27s (2 cow)
CONVERSATION RECORD O visit O CONFERENCE O TELEPHONE NAMEisWBOL INT O INCOMING Location of Visit /Conferenet:
O OUTGOING NAME OF PERSON (S) CONTACTED OR IN CONTACT ORGANIZATION (Office, dept., bureau, TELEPHONE NO.
WITH YOU etc.)
jf ak 4xew onv s u - a,rt ilfr.v hs*fAMAs 4
M
{
~
l J'
l
SUMMARY
- 1
\\
b
'At$) Yd)glevh5L s
\\
sulk V
l w mid A at /4fu A th.)A 6 v.to.
u#!w)wLL.sb wfEa%swj
-9w n no2w; k &uud/LHa
- $Pl 4/
$)
/
m - kuu % a rn. h!.a nA/AA>-rdf
% $ ld': L dm A looli/n a tk e rhu' /a/4.
I T
~
e
/
/ ~
%w:JJ - maan A so As w2Eh N NliNYl
-dm id O'
2 J) vr/2 AWlJY Y
,= #1 -
ACTION REQUIRED j
- YllWi!$b NAME OF PERSON DOCUMENTING CONVERSATION /
SIGNdME DATE ACTION TAKEN SIGN ATUR E TITLE DATE 50##3-I'8
- CPO e 1985 o - 463-275 (20090)
AR ME F EF S
W i
CONVERSATION RECORD g/I[g4 0 VISIT O CONFERENCE g TELEPHONE NAME/ SYMBOL INT O INCOMING Location of Visit / Conference:
O ourcOiNo NAME OF PERSON (S) CONTACTED OR IN CONTACT ORGANIZATION (Office, dept., bureau, TELEPHONE NO gy &
pf) y et c.)
gyfy fff,-(,2[~hg wlTH YOU
)I W b de /e'e, ora [J GACs
&%h30~$$O s
SUBJECT I.
k' QML R & /[f(
Z./%
~ddAA I
.=
(AfL sly A 6,J % k/ho 4~?$0, mda,b ita: ib&,Wrs f#w a%aW sdno %/A R
. runu a.
NW
/$
M/
$/ /
Y llld44
?
ll
} h%" AthtALN 0)
.' mima &> asa LAnw </adifaMS),6 2WbboYD bN2bif Ok$I Y
~
o (3
n s m ddan1d h d t& A ed 4&o b tits l
/
V) wkbis aawb4% 4'/dff 7 ACTION REQUIRED f/
- h. kt NHL Al 4
r NAME OF PERSON DOCUMENTING CONVERSATION SIGNATURE DATE ACTION TAKEN SIGNATURE TITLE DATE s/n RM 2 76) 5o271-101 CONVERSATION RECORD go,NAL j sE
= cro i 29es o - 46i-27s (2 cow)
ME p
I
\\
^
CONVERSATION RECORD Sjff4 l#
TYPE l
O vis:T o CONFERENCE
@ TELEPHONE NAM E/SYM BOL.
INT O INCOMING l
Location of Visit /Conferenet:
@ OUTGOING NAME OF PERSON (S) CONTACTED OR IN CONTACT O
(Office, dept., bureau.
TELEPHOPE NO.
~
"" ' y j p(> Sh RGANIZATION'hg
.116-gry!ga 12 i awl M lY 6 !v.
0
'"""^"'
O. A fb t 4 d 6 n O p hes n ' O d U to d 1/s 6 4 4 /eng b mA an' s ir^& mv $4/dd b acA, la$7. 4'1r//
/
]_J e
/
y d du A h adn ar sidl-A T
\\
a2dm J> s 6a)62 Adss/k/L &
w%sdsa ah Absu. a6ds2d A,a l a a u h U m a n d 6 % d m L & a,
A bcdA. fs 4tr/sa fd da k sd e na d J G A A u dstaw6 % J J a k~
W
/
A YY O
A aa d / A A.!/ (/0 f
0
/'
Mm2b4 o'ud.ab aaveaWada%%b
%hAn/,at %%b%de Ldde Aw-
/)flJ$ktb)
A J/t h 8 WAJ 14(A
/
ACTION REQUIRED j
[
/
I NOME OF PERSON DOCUMENTING CONVERSATION SIGNATURE DATE i
l l
l ACTION TAKEN gg, g J
g
[g
/
/
' WNI
- 8. M M
M
- A n n$24)-a u, o n % J a > a d l>//d6 >$4 MA Ad SIGNATURE
[
LE
[
M
[ ATE
[
htaY h lh 503'3-102
- CPO 1985 0 - 461-275 (20090)
E R ME F EF N E
N
'l p esog UNITEo STATES i
o g-g NUCLEAR EGULATORY COMMISSION 7
8 l
p, HEGION lli I
5 f
799 ROOSEVELT ROAD g
cLEN ELLYN, ILLINOIS 60137 MAR 271986 SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT License Number:
)
Docket Number:
070-01489 Licensee:
Goodyear Aerospace Corporation Akron, Ohio 44315
Subject:
Amendment request to terminate licensed activities, dated January 16, 1986 Background / History In a letter, dated July 30, 1984, Goodyear Aerospace Corporation (GAC) indicated a desire to renew its NRC License Number SNM-1461.
Subsequent to this request, NMSS amended the license to extend the expiration date to April 1, 1986 in accordance with a letter dated July 23, 1985.
Region III has had the renewal request pending since July 30, 1984 as Control No. 23906.
The July 23, 1985 letter indicated that GAC was discontinuing the activities authorized on the license and planned to decontaminate and decommission the equipment and facilities.
In a letter dated January 19, 1986, GAC indicated that they had completed the decontamination activities; and they requested that the license be terminated.
The letter also enclosed a copy of GAC's close-out survey for the facilities.
The license was issued on January 14, 1974 for normal and depleted uranium and uranium enriched in U-235 (not to exceed 349 grams of U-235 l
in 46 kilograms total uranium).
The material was used as uranium hexafluoride l
(UFe) and standards for the development and testing of gas centifuge equipment.
The place of use was the Wingfoot Lake Advanced Technology Center (see diagrams of facility and surrounding areas in Attachment 1).
Conclusions / Recommendations The licensee's survey is only confirmatory (i.e., it utilizes only random samples taken at points where the licensee surmised would have presented the greatest potential for contamination during plant operations).
It is therefore not a complete close-out survey and the licensee should be instructed to resubmit.
Following receipt of an adequate close-out survey, the NRC should perform a confirmatory survey at the GAC site prior to termination.
In the interim, the license should be amended to extend the expiration date to August 31, 1986 to I
8811030247'860327 l
POR ADOCK 07001489 C
PDC AM*
N Y
D Safety Evaluation Report 2
allow GAC sufficient time to retrieve the necessary survey results.
There will be no increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released off-site, no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational exposure, and no potential for or consequences from radiological accidents as the result of this amendment.
Therefore, no Part 51 Environment Report is necessary in accordance with 10 CFR 51.22(c)(ii).
[
YA Bruce S. Mallett, Ph.D., Chief l
Materials Licensing Section
d MAR 271986 Goodyear Aerospace Corporation ATTN:
J. V. Pflaum, CIH Industrial Hygienist, Sr.
Corporate Industrial Hygiene and Safety Department 131 G1 Akron, OH 44315
)
Gentlemen:
As discussed in a telephone conversation between Mr. J. V. Pflaum of your organization and me on March 19, 1986, we have received your January 19, 1986 request to terminate your NRC License Number SNM-1461.
However, the survey report enclosed with your request is not sufficient for us to authorize you to release the facilities at the Wingfoot Lake Advanced Technology Center for unrestricted use.
In order to obtain this authorization, you will need to submit a more detailed final survey report including the items listed below.
In the interim, we have amended your license to extend the expiration date to August 31, 1986.
1.
Operational History of the Site Please specify the types and quantities of radioactive material that was received and utilized on-site over the period of time your license was in effect.
Indicate the form of material (solid, liquid, gas), when material was last used, and the areas where and equipment in which material was used.
As discussed with Mr. Pflaum, this information is needed to determine the areas where there was a potential for contamination.
2.
Decommissioning / Survey Procedures a.
We have data from previous inspections of your facilities indicating results of monitoring surveys (effluent and contamination) performed during operations at the site through 1982.
Please provide the results of any surveys performed from 1982 to the present to assess the presence of radioactive material in effluents from the site or as contamination on equipment or in areas. The results should include the instruments used and their sensitivity and calibration.
You may wish to utilize some of this data from surveys performed at the time materials were last utilized (e.g., monitoring of effluent to sanitary sewerage system) in your close-out survey results.
8811030243 860327
{DR ADOCK 070014e9 PDC
Goodyear Aerospace Corporation 2
b.
Please submit a complete close-out survey of all areas and/or equipment utilized.
The survey should include a description of the:
(1) Names and qualifications of individuals who performed.
(2) Methods utilized to identify and/or eliminate areas or equipment to be surveyed.
l (3) Methods utilized to obtain samples and analyze the results (e.g., areas divided into small survey zones and multiple samples averaged as a result for each zone, direct reading and removable contamination sample results keyed to zones).
(4) Dates of surveys.
The survey report should include any air or water samples and analyses performed for effluents from use to unrestricted areas.
The results of all surveys should be tabulated in the report and indicate that reasonable efforts were made to decontaminate all use areas and equipment to levels below those specified in the attached guidi ce.
c.
Please indicate the methods utilized in your material inventory and control system to determine the quantity of special nuclear material l
added to or removed from material possessed at your site.
to the report enclosed with your January 16, 1986 letter does not j
indicate to us whether the amount of material indicated as being removed was measured or estimated.
In addition, was any of the material transferred as contamination on equipment?
If you have any questions or require clarification on any of the information l
stated above, you may contact us at (312) 790-5625.
l Sincerely, Original Signed By Bruce S. Mallett, Ph.D., Chief Materials Licensing Section
Enclosures:
1.
Amendment No. 02 2.
SRP for Termination l
yl RIII RIII RIII RIII RIII (L
fh
\\&
Mallett/cm Burgin Wie erpan g*a Wa A
m 3/g/86 4;
yt,7/([f 3 M
\\
l ht$ (7)C O N D l, 'JUN i 1 1986 1 Goodyear Aerospace Corporation License No. SNM-1461 l ATTN: J. V. Pflaum, CIH Industrial Hygienist Senior Corporate Industrial Hygiene and Safety i 1 Department 131 G 1 1210 Massillon Road l Akron, Ohio 44315-0001
Dear Mr. Pflaum:
This refers to the confirmatory survey of your Wingfoot Lake Advanced l Technology Center by Oak Ridge Associated Universities (0RAU) during the week of May 12-16, 1986. As was discussed with you during the survey and in subsequent telephone conversations with this office, several areas were identified that exceeded l maximum release levels of 15,000 dpm per 100 cme (specifically, the 1 decontamination areas and grid block C-42). While the ORAU survey report has not yet been finalized, it is our understanding that the referenced areas will either be further decontaminated or physically removed to meet the NRC facility release criteria established in Policy and Guidance Directive FC 83-23,, " Guidelines for Decontamination of Facilities and Equipment Prior to Release for Unrestricted Use or Termination of Licenses for Byproduct. Source, or Special Nuclear Material" (copy enclosed). Subsequent to these activities, we request that you provide us with a final close-out survey of the facility including: A diagram of your facility with survey results keyed to specific a. locations, b. The name of the person performing the survey. c. The date the survey was performed. d. The instrument (s) used. e. 3t.ckground readings. f. The date that the survey instrument was last calibrated. ) Following our review of your final survey, we will (1) arrange for ORAU representatives to confirm that all previously excessive areas meet NRC release 80 bC ofs9 R ll l C PDR 4'r ANf.
( ( Goodyear Aerospr.ce Corporation 2 JUN 11 1988 criteria, and (2) continue with our licensing action to release the Wingfoot Lake Advanced Technology Center for unrestricted use. Should you i../e questions concerning the above, please contact this office. Your cooperation with us is appreciated. Sincerely, i k., M L. lia xeAson, Chief WNuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/ enclosure: J. D. Berger, ORAU DCS/RSB (RIDS) bec w/ enclosure: J. A. Hind, RIII RIII RIII
- RIII, RIIIh 14 jo uk9
\\\\Li 6 BurgTn/jl Wiedemin h Ma11ett Axehob 6/p /86
- [ic y
G(,g
.i. I ' b, i
- (..
~ GUIDELINES FOR DECONTANINATION OF FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT PRIOR TO RELEASE FOR U RESTRICTED USE OR TERMINATION.OF LICENSES FOR. BYPRODUCT, S'0URCE, OR SPECIAL NUCLEAR PATERIAL \\ f. ( et U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety Washington, D.I. 20555 %4 July 1982 f ENCLOSURE 2 t W-
s . i wa The instructions in this guide, in conjunction with Table 1, specify the ) radionuclides and radiation exposure rate limits which should be used in decontamination and survey of surfaces or premises and equipment prior .to abandonment or release for unrestricted use. The limits in Table 1 do not a'pply to premises,-equipment, or scrap containing induced radio-activity for which the radiological considerations pertinent to their use may be differ,ent. The release of such facilities or items from i . regulatory control is considered on a case-by-case basis. 1. The licensee shall make a reasonable effort to eliminate residual contamination. 2. Radioactivity on equipment or surfaces shall not.be covered by paint, plating, or other covering material unless contamination levels, as determined by a survey *and documented, are below the limits specified in Table 1 prior to the application of the covering. A reasonable effort must be made to minimize the contamination prior to use of any covering. 3. The radioactivity on the interior surfaces of pipes, drain lines, or ductwork shall be determined by making measurements at all traps, and other appropriate access points, provided that contam-ination at these Tocations is likely to be representative of contamination on the interior of the pipes, drain lines, or ductwork. Surfaces of premises, equipment, or scrap which are likely to be contaminated but are of such size, construction, or location as to make the surface inaccessible for purposes of measurement shall be presumed to be contaminated in excess of the limits. Upon request, the Conmission may authorize a licensee to relinquish 4. possession or control of premises, equipment, or scrap having 1 surfaces contaminated with materials in excess of the limits specified. This may include, but would not be limited to, special circumstances such as razing of buildings, transfer of premises to another organization continuing work with rad' eactive materials, or conversion of facilities to a long-term storage or standby status. Such requests must: Provide detailed, specific information describing the premises, a. equipment or scrap, radioactive contaminants, and the nature, extent, and degree of residual surface contamination. b. Provide a detailed health and safety analysis which reflei,ts that the residual amounts of materials on surface areas, together with other considerations such as prospective use of the premises, equipment or scrap, are unlikely to result in an unreasonable risk to the health and safety of the public. 1 i
i \\ g-2 .? 5. Prior to release of premises for unrestricted use, the licensee '~ shall make a comprehensive radiation survey which establishes that contamination is within the limits specified in Table 1. A copy of the survey report shall be filed with the Division of Fuel Cycle and haterial Safety, USNRC, Washington, D.C. 20555, and also the Administrator of the NRC Regional Office having jurisdiction. The report should be filed at least.30 days prior to the planned date of abandonment. The survey report shall: a. Identify the premises. b. Show that reason'able effort has been made to eliminate ~ residual contamination. c. Describe the scope of the survey and general procedures followed. d. State the. findings of the survey in units specified in the instruction. Following review of the report, the NRC will consider visiting the facilities to confirm the survey. ~ fC
I '.- g s r i n f t eo 6 t hi t i tt e ft N e gt a se m a g on nn r md a ie e rue [3 n 2 2 a t m v orc d f m m n cu a t u e c c a er rsd e e g rt 'e ene c 0 i 0 rs h ti r xf b 0 2 u 0 e on t l eo m c 1 t ci i ee E 1 L / c / e ftb tr O o 0 y b ye a a oe 0 0 s bh e yid nt A "m 0 1 d t r rrl e VO p 1 / a n d a dpu dm M d / m p a eh oo li E m p ' d nt e hrh ut R 0 p d ii c t ps on 0 d 0 a mw a i p he 0 0 0 h r f was sc 0 0 0 p ed r l 1 2 2 1 l t e u ane se a et s eav rr da r e ea r i s ahl t u o sc s t t q f ao e tit is s l awn m d l s h e er s 1 e aa f. t en e h i o pi ap i er s nwr ms s rt gi t l t o t i e am b at c pep ga a mc e ih r t a j wt e ag s ef b h ti e v o ynt el ic bo bl 2 s ti r i 2 m t cr o dld mm m c at F eae e i S. c m oe nin r7 im iri f L 0 i E 0 2 0 l do mem n V ( 0 2 m 1 ae r rt r ga E 1 m . c / e rg e eae nh L d / c y h t t mt i t e 0 s t yd e e e t N b 0 0 bn m ded l e O n m 0 1 m a v ur u p 1 / p s n e eis so I T g d / m d t o, r 'h t i em y a c r m p s i A g 0 p d 0 i sc u daa t N u 0 d 0 x sn q l oe no .e I M H 0 0 0 e ie s uir on 0 0 mi oda A i 1 T 5 0 0 5 s ec 1 2 h a th m sre ag N 1 3 3 1 e i t-O d ff n c c nu of a af a io l t C i e h 0 eof mr E c e t 0 r r ah T C u t, 1 at u tt A n ad e ns n F rn r n eu od R g u o a cos ce U n eo m h ams r i h r t f ae eu S t t g r r l cs E t k e e ue aa i sc v r shf f e L B m na o o t o rm A e ab m f u T e d ogs s, P a mr e t nt y m o g o 2 ic hl E C 2 2 m )f a n mse t e C m m a e r csj, iv 'L c c g t r e f ebd wi I 0 2 m 0 a nt a ~ o 0soe t 2 uo v 0s p dc c a 1 ani ee 0 m c 0 t i c 1 c 1 e me e e ow t p / 0 / b t b r rd as b e 0 0 y re a enne ie E 0 1 s d ed t paob cr G m 1 / n p o n ,i o td A p / m m a e n a l s. R d m p p st aeal sm E p d d na d o irnu ac V 0 d a oi l t ruio 0 0 0 h ir u esmh sI A. 0 0 0 p t p o. s t sas l 0 0 0 0 l ao ht e aet et mrne va 5 1 1 5 a rr sc i gp e l poc e hy ep tj p e ca l r tl t a nb p ve f h ot n a o a it er n/ bn in n t al u od crbs ia e sa ih l mc e aea t r yd i bn dy au v odve am s s e (b t s e ioor i dmmi d0 8 6 e u np n l 2 2 dno oe md oh a et a ae id pe cc n rgrn r1 2 1 l s i h nd t n d v a o n e ein md ,r ee i dt a 1 ct an ai yee un e g t l nc R. ' u t a n au 1 nrn iy cs ar a bl hh ma eo0 ml ib ro n a pW t 3 02 ( i .do 629 93 h p9 ap b o ef i vp xm 0r 2 - 2 - 2 st s -. t p a v m oa .d ac 3 p 2 a1 r-ro re na t e ad a m n m 2 - p - SU e rSv o t e t e,ya I A( t so a cd s u f v n rrc d - y a ,1 t e tt l i n oi o eny nt r Ua R dnpa eu hi r c f pel aae 8. 24 i .c a e 25 32 mooe co t m se oail b 5 E 5d s22 223 ericd ah td m pca err D 3 c1 3 sie f s nr n u t in gh o m ntf o a/s l 2d ih - ha1 aysct r ie ee I d nf i L - e nT1 t R -
- n. ai o
us p mb rdb C Ut a 1 r cm) n se d e oeet eaa U a r.. aeen d es rd a mb r vr u01 t3. gd os ei st ul m ar no ael i .i t c s32 a21 ai r rl un s u owp a F a o n22 n23 ahh se ec u ao e esoo e 2. t __ ns a - - - - 1 t t psh h u s o ch h hb nr h o . - s rh c h a - cil it W n Ac is l T ak p i0t t . Ua Tl A TR1 O waf o a b C d f
\\ p rir 4 6 h:f f Q JUL 0 71986 1 /gy Goodyear Aerospace Corporation License No. SNM-1461 ATTN: J. V. Pflaum, CIH Industrial Hygienist Senior Corporate Industrial Hygiene and Safety
- "-,g Department 131 G I q
T 3gk ~h 1210 Massillon Road { g 6 bf.. . g~ 'd'u b ee us2 Akron, Ohio 44315-0001 *( c 'Q $..'.% h .,., a - h
Dear Mr. Pflaum:
This is in reference to a follow-up, confirmatorj survey of your Wingfoot Lake Advanced Technology Center' performed by Oak Ridge Associated Universities (0RAU) on June 19, 1986. As discussed with you during the survey and subsequent telephone conversations, the ORAU survey identified areas with residual radioactivity above NRC's criteria for relcase for unrestricted use. This criteria was given to you in our letters dated March 27, 1986 and June 11, 1986. Since this was the second time we have requested ORAU to perform a survey and each time the results indicated areas with residual radioactivity exceeding NRC's criteria, we will not request ORAU to perform further surveys until you submit evidence that the activities in the areas idantified in this letter are below NRC's crituia. This evidence should be in the form of a report and contain the following information: 1. The scope of the decontamination and survey. This should include a description and/or diagram of all areas decontaminated and surveyed, the decontamination procedures used, the survey grid size or blocks used, the type survey performed (direct reading alpha and beta-gamma, smear testing, soil samples), and the locations of samples taken. 2. The name and qualifications of the individuals performing the decontamination and surveys. 3. The instruments and methods used to analyze the results. 4. The results of the survey keyed to the locations specified in Item 1 above. A 0 h /
- 9607100244 860707
( g DR ADOCK 0700 9 \\ l
s Goodyear Aerospace Corporation 2 ~JUL n' -~ The following is a list of the areas that must be decontaminated, a final survey performed, and evidence submitted as requested above. Enclosure 1 is a diagram which will be utilized to describe these areas. 1. The areas traversed by the drain line from the sink and shower stalls through the septic system. This encompasses areas whera the drain was found to contain residual radioactivity above NRC's criteria. All soil samples taken by ORAU down to the "T" for the drain line indicated acceptable levels for release as of June 20, 1986. However, any further decontamination and/or removal of contaminated drain line may have led to contamination of soil in these areas. 2. Two areas identified as C-42 and F-48 grid blocks by ORAU survey. The C-42 grid block is Northeast of the test pit area in Enclosure 1 and Southeast of the decontamination area. The F-48 grid block is an area to the west of an area (E-48 grid block) where one-half inch of concrete was removed for a 30 by 50 centimeter square. The E-48 grid block is located in the decontamination area in Enclosure 1. 3. The concrete pad outside the facility known as the casing area where contaminated floors, etc. were deposited after removal from the Wingfoot site. 4. Any equipment utilized to perform the decontamination (e.g., vacuum cleaners, saws, chisels,etc.). Upon receipt and evaluation of your report, we will schedule ORAU to perform a final survey of the site. The survey will include the areas identified in' this letter and areas where there is a potential for contamination as a result of your decontamination efforts. If ORAU's survey indicates no further areas with residual radioactivity, we will continue with our licensing action to release the Wingfoot site for unrestricted use. Prior to our receipt of your report and ORAU's final survey, it is our understanding that you will continue to renovate the sites for office use. However, you will take steps necessary to insure that the. renovation will not cause spread of contamination in any area identified in this letter and the soil areas where drain lines were removed can be sampled by ORAU. In addition, we understand that steps will be taken to ensure against spread of contamination in material stored in the outside casing area until the material is packaged and transferred to an authorized recipient.
1 i b Goodyear Aerospace Corporation 3 JUL 071986 If you have any questions concerning the above, please contact Bruce Mallett or Bob Burgin of my staff at (312) 790-5625. Sincerely. ,1 William L. x son, Chief Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/ enclosure A. Boerner, ORAUDCS/RSB(RIDS) i l h j? RIII RIII RIII RIII y by .fr Mallett/pd Burgin Wiedeman A son 7/g /86 7/ 7 /86 7/ 7 /86 7/S /86
AIR M'NITOR LOCA"'C"- -18 ~ acoopua e \\ ff,
- ----- \\ --
[ w 3- .s o d i j - _ ~- I" 9 4z4 l ll!!i} Y'E[c 7 : 5 g i a o z n-wa< 5 l o r >c*ws r: I o
- u4>
t=. l v __Q CL p g us m ./ -- _s e p m. 1,.a, g3 g< [ .,, M,. :.I. l e I a z t;; m - wg m, @ a:E 23 [.b ..._~ }._. 4" .. -. ~ ow ,i v>a e l O Y I -l-3 w / -_.G. y s o -o w I a E
- l sO I
e t l g i wn t gQ ; ,s \\ 1 ev u ,Q;i re t Q -J
- y G. t\\t
~ 4 / s,? m.s Y:. ). i = j i -(.\\.\\ i 0 J f e ,y r c i 7 Us . 6 n!. 1: 'D. - ;'-i,.. ; ifNEL 5 !E i '- s .) 'm W,.3
- --FAS~~ 11 i
o 2* N N-7 l' 6 u e l' RAS-l A 72 l y, T ALPHA e.e / (w w,, c e.,, m., - 9 6., 4 o., C:v.73 e= "; i r e l 3 [s lO Ol lO O' 12 01 ) m-..- n.~ co 5" i 10.0i.t O. O !.', 0: u ie 9 lOrOl lOn 3: <C SC'. o u. c i c e e- ~ r w
- O'O;
- 070: iCil 5>
3: z 10_OJ to O!:.O OI wE c; ( gg i m: I, / n 1 5'
- 7 D E c o t4 T A M I N AT10 N [
ye ) g l. o2 f g AREA 7, L ~, ~ - aAs, h* es m' $3 (r - - 7< i s. ~ u c E 1u s t - t I 1 -y . ALPhn ? i e ".-9670 _a 3 g h p v ,v 3 Y M. 5 f,4) m R OL N o. ,S ,y n
'6 ] 1 4 l \\ 7 M~ f d.wniae m. sum-luu j OY W W Amx&a \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ \\ TERl lFJ^ ~ 4 i 1 1
Oak Ridge Manpower Education, Associated' Post Office Box 117 Research, and Training Universities Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-0117 Division September 19, 1986 Mr. Bruce Mallet Region III Nuclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137
Dear Mr. Mallet:
Enclosed are six copies of the draft report on the Confirmatory Radiological Survey of the Wingfoot Lake Advanced Technology Center, Goodyear Aerospace Corporation, Akron, Ohio. If you have any questions about this report, please contact me at FTS 626-3305. Sincerely, -g Jame,D. Berger, Manager Rad logical Site Assessment Program mec Enclosures cc: J. Counts, NRC/I&E D. Corley, NRC/I&E
- yso/24 63 7p SEP 2 216 pg
t 5.) MAY 9, 1994 MEMORANDUM FOR: Goodyear Aerospace Files Docket -1489 FROM: D. G. W man, Senior Health Physicist, Fuel Facilit and Decommissioning Section
SUBJECT:
Response to questions to the NRC from concerned citizens living near Wingfoot Lake Advanced Technology Center, Portage County, Ohio (Conversation Record) During a meeting with Dr. Martha Nelson, M.D., Health Commissioner for Summit County Health District on April 29, 1994, the allegers provided the NRC representatives a list of 32 questions they had which were unanswered at that time. On May 5, 1994, I contacted the alleger and provided answers to their questions. Attachment A to this memo is a list of the questions which were asked and below is a summary of the answers: (1) We did not take a sample of water from Well No. MW-3 because the former licensee representatives we dealt with during the inspection were not aware of any monitoring wells at the Wingfoot facility. Subsequently, we found out that well MW-3 is a shallow well located approximatcly 200 yards to the Southeast of Blimp Hangar No. 91. This well was installed to monitor the contamination caused by aircraft fuel at their former Fuel Cell Test Facility which was in operation dating back to the 1940s'. However, we sampled a deep well in close proximity to MW-3 and we sampled a shallow well approximately k mile from MW-3, on Wingfoot Road. (2) We have no indication that airborne releases exceeding the NRC limits were made during the entire time the license was in effect. l (3) Yes, low level radioactive waste was generated during licensed activities, all non-recoverable radioactive material was transferred to Teledyne Isotopes and all recoverable material was transferred back to 00E. (4) Teledyne Isotopes was a waste broker, the NRC computer lists them as expired in 1990 at the address of 1509 Frontago Rd., Northbrook, 11., License No. 12-01843-04. "Bessy" and " Perry" are Davis-Besse and Perry Nuclear Power Plants are both located in Ohio. (5) The type of radwaste generated (non-recoverable) consisted of booties, caps, anti-c clothing, etc. This waste was transferred to Teledyne Isotopes
- nd subsequently buried at one of the three low-Level Radioactive Burial sites.
Licensee's are required under 10 CFR Part 20 to maintain disposal records for only 5-years after the last shipment. (6) ORNL and ORISE are not the same, ORISE is an NRC contractor for confirmatory surveys and laboratory analyses support. To the best of my knowledge, the NRC.is not (at this time) associated with ORNL regarding these YOhkh$"~ f$$
i li services. (7) We mailed a copy of the Scoping Survey plan to her during the first week of May. The F0IA request should be mailed to her within the next 2-3 weeks, it was in HQ under going final review for un-releasable data. (8) We do not release this type of information to the public prior to an inspection. (9) Our inspection frequency is based upon health and safety significance. This facility was not a high risk site. l (10) This question was regarding potential releases (airborne), I explained that our records do not indicate any airborne releases in excess of the NRC limits during the time the license was active. (11) This question was more of curiosity, she asked why they (Goodyear) did not treat their sewerage prior to discharge to the leach field, my answer was I don't know. (12) One Goodyear employee ~we interviewed during the inspection has been with l Goodyear for over 25 years, all names and titles of the emnbyees we interviewed will be in the inspection report. l (13) This item was not a question, only a comment. (14) Regarding what other activities DOE was involved in at the site, my comment was "I don't know". We conducted an inspection at Goodyear because they were a former licensee of the NRC and we were investigating her allegations regarding that site. (15) I informed the alleger that I conducted a cursory radiation survey at Sam Weiners Military Surplus on Thursday, Ar-il 28, 1994, and did not find any radiation levels above natural background. (16) This item was not a question, only a statement. (17) This item was a general statement regarding an occupational marbidity study of a population of workers exposed to epoxy resins, hardeners and l solvents at other enrichment facilities in the U.S. by ORISE. (18) This item was not a question, oi,1f a comment regarding a F0IA request for documents at DOE. (19) I informed the alleger that I could not comment on a study conducted by ORISE, she should contact the authors of the study and ask them her question., See question 17 regard the study. (20) I informed the alleger that Goodyear had meteorological instrumentation at Building No. 91; however, I did not know if it was there during licensed activities and did not know if it was computerized. The O SW was referenced in a letter from Goodyear to Ohio EPA (0 EPA), I informed her that I did not know the significance of this reference and she should discuss this item with OEPA.
\\ 4 (21) On the day of the inspection the wind was blowing to the Northeast; 1 however, I informed the alleger that I did not know which way the prevailing winds blow in that area, she should contact the local weather station. (22) This item was not a question, only a comment regarding her previous phone calls to the NRC staff. (23) I explained to the alleger that the total inventory for incoming and out-going shipments of 50 pound containers of UF, during the entire time that licensed activities took place will be included in her F0IA request. (24) This question was inadvertently listed in the questions for the NRC; however, it should have been directed to OEPA and U.S. EPA. (25) One of the questions we asked all participants that provided a water sample was "how has your health been", two of the participants were from the allegers current and former residence and another water sample from the other allegers residence, both claim to have medical problems. (26) We attempted to get water samples in a 360 radius around Wingfoot Lake, these samples came from deep wells (160'), shallow wells (35-50') and municipal water systems. (27) The soil and sediment samples were sent to the NRC office in Illinois, the drinking water samples and fish were sent to Oak Ridge, Tn. for analyses. (28) This item was not a question, only a comment regarding the amount of documentation that DOE has on centrifuge operations. (29) I informed the alleger that our files do not contain health statistics and health studies conducted by the Ohio Department of Health, and she should contact them for copies. (30) The alleger asked general questions regarding blcod tests and wholeb'ody counters that would indicate the amount of exposure to radiation and it's biological effects.. I informed the alleger that she should discuss this question with her personal family physician. I also informed the alleger that I was not aware of any blood test that would show exposure to environmental levels of radiation or any test that would indicate the long term biological effects from the exposure to environmental radiation. (31) This was not a question only a comment that her personal family physician stated that he did not know what tests to order for her medical problems. (32) This was not a question only a comment regarding a second health study is being considered on workers at enrichment facilities. 1 informed the allegers that we consider my telephone conversation with them as our response to their questions and they should not expect a written response; however, I would write up a conversation record regarding my response to their questions. The telephone conversation addressing the questions lasted 14 hours cc: D. funk
Sb fY po/'I dh"M0" p / NRC ,7 p un 1. Mk.. was it one of the monitoring wells you checked. ?. Could there have been contamination of venting going downwind and j landed on gardens and children ingested it? i 3. Was there Rad Waste from the process of the centrifuge project.D,[Q) 4. Who is Teledyne Isotopes? Where located? What did they have to -lvq 4 do with the U 235? Who is Bessy or Perry? Where are they? . m...f, 5. What type of rad waste? Where did it go? Proof? 6. Oak Ridga Institute and education is the same place as Oak Ridge <l. e - l National Laboratory. Why did you send the samples here. 7. Where is my protocol? My FOIA? 8. Why did you wait to the end of the week to give it to me? 9. Why did you inspect the facility only two times when the U 235 I was being used.
- 10. Releases?
Cylinder gas - cooled-solik-heat-releases. 11. NO TREATMENT PLANT
- 12. Which employees did you interview from Goodyear?
When vere they j employeed? Years? )
- 13. I asked Jane Greenwalt at DOE 6155761216 if DOE vould assist in i
a health study? )
- 14. How can we find out if DOE did any other testing there? You are here because you regulated Goodyear for the centrifuge project?
i
- 15. If you will not go on Weiners to check for decontamination because you did not license them.
Who can I go to? Centrifuge-Top Secret-2 class reviews, one in Washington l l 16. G. Sect. 'A study is probably going to happen on the people in the area if the samples are being taken back there" per Jane Greenwalt?
- 17. OR ; Wingfoot ;
Garret; the three places project was done? DOE Headquarters - Centrifuge k-25 Study (same program) One report is out second is being released! While I was talking to Jane, a call came in from Torrence CA the Garret program, a man wanting info. resident! She said ATSDR should be able to tell if i i problems are occuring from Centrifuge project? i
- 18. There is six cubit feet of info. at ORNL.
I have FOIA them!. i l i
- 19. Oak Ridge University did a study?
Explain 20 Did Goodyear have a computerized weather station 3t Wingfoot during.' 0 proj ect? Why was 0 SW in file?
- 21. Can they tell bs which direction the venting of air went?
- 22. Phone calls are long but I feel you are paid to help us!
23. Goodyear had 150 lbs. how often?
- 24. c-The soil and water contamination is small now because you removed the tank in 1986, what about before 1986; how long was it leaking?
How q{ '[ can you tell me nothing is wrong out there? 25. Did you test any wells of sick people? Where is my protocol? 26. How did you decide which wells to test? Which aquifiers did you hit? Where is y'our blueprints? 27. The Beacon Journal said you were sending testing to chicago -is this
- 28. Six Cubit feet of info. at OakRidge all classified, Centrifuge true?
only would not have that much infor. i
- 29. Where is the Health Dept. information on Wingfoot?
~~..- - fj;
- ,'7p**[fl
- 'W
n jo Ch,. c. e - (,, x,. : ' d ,.T g e- ~ j; i p ~,\\ A TTACHMENT A _[c z, ipg) e... b, s...}}