ML20207A862
| ML20207A862 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/17/1988 |
| From: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| FRN-47FR53889, RULE-PR-40-MISC, TASK-RINV, TASK-SE AC56-1-16, AC56-1-4, SECY-88-083, SECY-88-83, NUDOCS 8804120011 | |
| Download: ML20207A862 (54) | |
Text
- - -
Q ,9c-56-/
[/A i / . ...,s
....f..
March 17, 1988 RULEMAKING ISSUE . SECY-88-83 (NotaLon Vote)
For: The Comissioners From: Victor Stello, Jr. 1 Executive Director for Operations - -
Subject:
FROF0 SED AMENDMENTS TO 10 CFR FART 40 FOR GENERAL LICENSES I
FOR THE CUST0DY AND LONG-TERM CARE OF URANIUM MILL TAILINGS SITES Purpose' To obtain approva* to publish for public coment anerdments to 10 CFP Part 40 to provide a procedure to license the custody and long-term care of decemissioned uranium or thorium mill tailings sites, i
Backgrcund:
This rulemaking Radiation Controlis required Act of 1978by(UMTRCA).the Uranium UMTRCA requires Mill Tailings that the NRC license the custodial agency (DOE or a State) for the long-term care of remediated uranium or thorium mill tailings sites. NRC must license the long-term care of both inactive (Title I) and active or licensed sif.es
! (Title II). This rulemaking issues aeneral licenses that l provide criteria and procedures to ensure that the custodial agency will maintain uranium or thorium nill tailings sites in such a manner as to protect the public Fealth, safety, and the envircreent af ter closure. Tais rulemaking complerents other LMTRCA required regulaticns for Title II sites wnich have baan completed and that cover activities thrcugh closure.
Discussion: In the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 j the Congress recognized that uranium rill tailirgs rav pose a poteatially significant rad 4ation health hazard to tFe publis.. Orr of the reasures enacted by Congress to centrol this hazard is to place the lonc-tern custodial care of the uranium or thorium mill tailings disposal site, after cerpletier.
of all remedial a:tions, in the hands of gover. rent.
Contact:
CFalifield, RES Ext. ?3H77
'f ' N . ' ( ' ' ' &*
.- m .. . m .; .
. r i
Tha Commissioners 2 Title I of.UMTRCA defines the statatory authority and roles of the Department of Energy (DOE) and the NRC with regard to the remedial action program for inactive uranit:n mill tailings rites. Title I requires that, upon completion of the remedial action program by DOE, these sites be maintained by the DOE, or other Federal agency designated by the President, under a license issued by the Comission. Title II of UMTRCA contains similar requirements for NRC licensing of presently active uranium or thorium mill tallings sites following their closure and operating license termination. These sites would be licensed by the Commission upon their transfer to the Fed'eral Government or the State in which they are located, at the option of;ti.e State.
The proposed regulatory additions to Part 40 will provide for two new general licenses. The general licenses in
$40.27 and $40.28 will correspond 'to Title I and Title II of UMTRCA, respectively. The provisions in 640.27 would apply to inactive sites and the provisions in 640.28 would apply to active sites. Although the recuirements in 40.27 and $40.28 will differ somewhat due to the differenc in Title I and Title II of the Act, the criteria for determining what constitutes adequate monitoring, maintenance, and emergency measures for long-term custodial care are the same.
These proposed regulations deal only with uranium or thorium mill tailings sites after remedial actions have been completed. Upon satisfactory reclamation (by 00E for Title I, or an NRC or Agreement State licensee for Title II) to applicable closure standards, the NRC will receive a detailed surveillance and maintenance plan (SMF) frcm POE or an appropriate State. The SMP will discuss ownership (whether Federal or State) and tody (agency responsible) of the si a , site conditions, the surveillance program, recuired hilow-up inspections, and how and when custcdial maintena.7ce and emergency repairs will be accomplished.
The general license will become effective for each individual Title I or Title II site upon NRC receipt of an SMF that meets the requirements of the general license.
For sites coverned by the provisiens of $40.27 (iitle I sites), the general license applies only to the 00F cr another Federal agency designated by the Fresident. For sites governed under the provistons of %40.28 (Title II sites). DOE, or another Federal agency, will subrrit the SMP, unless the State, at its option, decides to td e custody o' the site and be included in the general license. The authority to grant a long-term care license it reserved to the NRC. States may be the custndial agency, but are not authorized to grant this type of license.
The Comissioners 3 Both 540.27 and $40.28 allow for potential future uses of the sites. As provided in UMTRCA, any future use would require a separate Comission license to assure that the site remains in or is restored to a safe and environmentally sound condition.
The proposed rulemaking would issue a general license to governmental bodies for possession and maintenance of uranium or thoriun mill tailings sites after closure, pursuant to statute. Therefore, this rulemaking has no direct impact upon the private sector.
Recommendation: That the Comission:
(1) Approve for publication in the _Fe_deral Register the proposed amendments to 10 CFR Part 40 for general licenses for the custody and long-tem care of uranium mill tailings sitec (see Enclosure 1).
(2) Note:
(a) That the rotice of proposed rulemakino in Enclosure 1 will be published in the Federal Register allowing 60 days for public Coment.
(b) That the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration will be infomed of the certification and the reasons for it, as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
(c) That this proposed rule does not contain new or amended information collection recuirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act.
(c) That the proposed rule, if adopted, would not result in any activity that significantly affects the cuality of the human envircrrent. The environmental assessment forming the basis for this determination is containad in Enclosure 2, Environmental Assessrent and Findire of No Sicnificant impact.
(e) That ccmpliance with CPGR charter requirements is not applicable for this rulemakino action as the rulemakino applies only to custodial care of remediated uranium or thorium mill tailings sites.
(fl That a regulatory analytis, Erclosure 3, has been prepared for this rulemaking.
(g) That thD appropriate Congressional cce ittees will be informed of this action by letters similar to those in Enclosure 4.
The Comissioners 4 (h) That a public announcement Enclosure 5, will be issued by the Office of Public Affairs when the proposed rulemaking is filed with the Office of Federal Register.
I l
l (i) That OGC has reviewed the proposed rulemaking l
package and has no le objection ,
+4
/ctorNtello, k /I Executive Direc,.)
tor for Operations
Enclosures:
- 1. Federal Register Notice of Froposed Rulemaking
- 2. Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
- 3. Draft Regulatory Analysis
- 4. Draf t Congressional letters
- 5. Draft Public Announcement Commissioners' cornents or consent should be provided directly to the Office of the Secretary by c.c.b. T_hursday, 3 April 7, 1988.
Commission Staff office comments, if any, shot.ld be submitted to the Commissioners NLT p'.onday, March 28, 1988, with an.infor-mation copy to the Office of the Secretary. If the paper is of such a nature that it requires additional time for analytical review and ccmmer.t , the Comaissioners and the Secretariat should be apprised of when comments may be expected.
DISTRIBUTION:
Cornissioners OGC (H Street) 01 OIA GPA REGIONAL OFFICI:S EDO OGC (WF)
./
I
} l l
1 I
I EliC L O S U R E 1 - PROPOSED RULE' i40TICE i <
l !
t I i
I i
l I
I l
- 1 I I l
i 1
l 4
l l _
1
r NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 10 CFR Part 40 Custody a-d Lo1g-Term Care of Uranium Hill Tailings Sites AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY
- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is proposing to issue genercl licenses that would permit NRC to license the custody and long-term care of decommissioned uranium or thorium mill tailings sites af ter remedial actions under the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act have been completed. The intended effect of this action is to provide a procedure that ensures the maintenance of closed sites in a manner sufficient to protect the public health and safety and the environment. This action is necessary to meet the requirements of Titles I and 14 of the Uranium Hill Tailings Radiation Control Act.
DATE: Comment period expires (60 days after publication). Comments received after this date will oc considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to assure consideration only for comments received on or before this date.
ADDRESSES: Send comments to: Secretary,'U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555 Attention: Docketing and Service Branch Deliver comments to. Room 1121, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC between 7: 30 am and 4:15 pm.
Comcents received, the environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact, and the regulatory analysis can be examined at: The NRC Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Haisfield, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, Mail Stop NL/S-260. Telt,' hone (301) 492-3877.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background.
II. Proposed Action.
III. The Stabilization and Long-Term Care Program (Title I and Title II).
IV. The Surveillance and Maintenance Plan.
V. Future Uses of the Disposal Site.
VI. Petition for Rulemaking. '
VII. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Availability. -
VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement.
IX. Regulatory Analysis.
X. Regulatory Flexibility Certification Statement.
XI. List of Subjects.
I. Background In the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 (UMTRCA) the Congress recognized that uranium mill tailings may pose a potentially signi-ficant radiation health hazard to the public. One of the measures enacted oy Congres; to control this hazard is to place the long-term custodial care of the uranium or thorium mill tailings disposal site, after completion of all remedial actions, in the hands of government.
Title I of LMTRCA defines the statutory authority and roles of .he Department of Energy (00E) and the NRC with regard to the remedial action program for inactive uranium mill tailings sites. Title I requires that, upon completion of the remedial action program by CCE, these sites be maintained by the DOE, or other federal agency designated by the President, under a license issueu by the Comission. Title II of UMTRCA contains similar requirements for NRC licensing et presently active uranium or thorium mill tailings sites following their closure and operating license termination. These sites would be 2
I I licensed by the Commission upon their transfer to the Federal Government or the State in which they are located, at the option of the State. These proposed regulations will complement other UMTRCA required regulations which have been completed and cover activities through closure.
II. Proposed Action The proposed regulatory additions to Part 40 will provide for two new general licenses. The general licenses in $40.27 and $40.28 will correspond to Title I and Title 11 of UMTRCA, respectively. The provisions in 640.27 would apply to inactive sites and the provisions in 640.28 would apply to active sites. Although the requirements in S40.27 and $40.28 will differ somewhat due to the differences in Title I and Title II of the Act, the criteria for determining what constitutes adequate monitoring, maintenance, and emergency measures for long-term custodial care are the same.
These proposed regulation's deal only with uranium or thorium mill tailings sites after remedial actions have been completed. Upon satisfactory reclamation (by 00E for Title I, or an NRC or Agreement State licensee for Title II) to applicable closure standards, the NRC will receive a detailed surveillance and maintenance plan (SMP) from 00E or an appropriate State. The SMP will discuss cwnership (whether federal or State) and custody (agency responsible) of the site, site conditions, the surveillance program, required follow-up inspections, and how and when custodial maintenance and emergency repairs will be accocplished. (See the section entitled "The Surveillance and Maintenance Plan".) The general license will become effective for each individual Title I or Title 11 site upon NRC receipt of an SMP that meets the requirements of the general license, for sites governed by the provisions of $40.27 (Title I sites), the general license applies only to the DOE or another federal agency designated by the President. For sites governed under the provisions of $40.28 (Title Il sites), 00E. or another fececil agency, will submit the SMP, unless the State, at its option, decides to take custody of the site and be included in'the general license. The authority to grant a long-term care license is reserved to the NPC. States may be the custodial agency, but are not authorized to 3
I grart this type of license. See Section 83 b(1)(A) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 as amended and 10 CFR 150.15a.
There are some differt.nces in requirements for sites located on Indian lands. For Title I sites, the Indian site will remain in the ownership of that tribe. The NRC and 00E have generally agreed that sites on Indian lands should be handled in the same manier as other Title I sites, including conduct of surveillance and maintenance under proposed S40.27. $le also understand that 00E and the appropriate Indian tribes have agreed that 00E would provi;e for long-term care.
For Title II sites on Indian lands it is not clear who will br responsible for monitoring, maintenance, and emergency measures at the site- UMTRCA provioes that long-term monitoring and maintenance will be done by the United States and that the licensee will be required to enter into arrangements with the Commission to ensure this monitoring and maintenance. However, UMTRCA was not explicit as to which Federal agency is responsible for the site, and should these sites ever require emergency measures, additional authorizations may be required. The basic obligations for thes'e sites have already been codified in Part 40, Appendix A, Criterion 11F, and are not part of this rulemaking.
Both 140.27 and S40.28 allow for potential future uses of the sites. As provided in LMTRCA, any future use would require a separate Commission license to assure that the site remains or is restored to a safe a7d environmentally sound condition. See the, "Future Uses of the Disposal Site" section.
The proposed rulemaking would issue a general license to gGverr. mental bodies for possession and maintenance of uranium or thorium mill tailings sites after closure, pursuant to statute. Therefore, this rulemaking has no impoct upon the private sector.
4
I
.\
III. The Stabilization anu ; 'a-Term Care Program Although the end result for custodial care licensing for Title I or Title II sites is similar, the processes leading up to closure of Title I or Title II sites are different. The following provides background on these processes, as well as some of the differences between Title I and Title II licensing.
Title.I (24 sites)
UMTRCA charged the EPA with the responsibility for promulgating remedial action standards for inactive ui lium mill sites. The purpose of these standards is to protect the public health and safety and the environment from radiological and non-radiological hazards associated with radioactive materials at the sites. The final standards were promulgated with an effective date of March 7, 1983 (48 FR 602; January 5, 1983). See 40 CFR Part 192-Health and Environmental Protection for Uranium Mill Tailings, Subparts A, B, and C.
The Department of Energy (00E) will select and execute a plan of remedial action that will satisfy the EPA standards and other applicable laws and regulations. All remedial actions must be selected and performed with the concurrence of the NRC. The required NRC concurrence with the selection and performance of proposed remcdial actions and the licensing of long-tern surveillance and maintenance of disposal sites will be for the purpose of ensuring cempliance with UMTRCA.
The stabilization and long-term care program for each site has four distinct phases. In the first phase 00E selects a disposal site and design.
This phase includes preparation of an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement, and a Remedial Action Plan. The Remedial Action Plan is structured to provide a cceprehensive understandinJ of the remedial actions proposed at thSt site and contains specific design and construction require +ents. NRC and State / Indian tribe concur ir *.he Re edial Action Plan to complete the first phase.
The second phase is the performance phase. In this phase the Lctual decontamination, decor.missioning, and reclamation at the site is done in 5
l accordance with the Remedial Action Plan. The NRC and the State / Indian tribe, as applicable, must concur in any changes to this plan. At the completion of reclamation activities at the site, NRC concurs in DOE's determination that.the activities at the site have been completed in accordance with the approved plan. Prior to licensing, the next phase, title to the disposed tailings and contaminated materials and the land upon which they are disposed must be in Federal custody (except for sites on Indian larids) to provide for iong-term Federal control, at Federal expense.
~
NRC concurrence in the DOE determination that reclamation of the site has been accuaplished in accordance with the approved plan may have a conditional clause regarding ground water. For example, ground-water restoration, through either active techniques or passive restoration through natural flushing, may take many years. If a conditional clause is required, the post-licensing phase may requi e monitoring the site to ensure that restoration is proceeding as planned or require other actions as necessary. Bectise EPA ground-water standards are currently being revised, this practic, of conditional concurrence and planned activities during post-licensing may have to be re-examined.
The third phase is the licensing phase. The general licens? does not apply until (1) NRC concurrence in the DOE determinativn that the site has been properly reclaimed and (2) the surveillance and maintenance plan (SMP) has been received by NRC. The SMP should be submitted witMn 4 nonths of the NRC concurrence in completion. Certification indicates that the site has been stabilized in accordance with EPA standards. Current plans also include a federal Register notice of NRC's receipt of the SMP and public meetings to inform the local public of the future plans for the site and to provide an epportunity for public cercents. There is no termination date for the general license.
The final phase of the progr3m is surveillance, monitoring, and maintenance and begins 3tter NRC receives the $PP. In this phase 00E and NRC periodically inspect tne site to ensure its integrity. The surseillance and maintena,1ce plan will require the DOE to rake repairs, if reeded.
6
I +
One of the requirements in the EPA standards is that control of the tailings should be effective for up to 1000 years without active maintenance.
Thus, although the NRC license will require repairs as necessary, the design of the stabilized pile is such that this should he minimized. In the event that significant repairs are ever necessary, a determination will be made as to the need for additional National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) actions.
Title II UMTRCA also charged EPA with the responsibility for promulgating standards for active uranium or thorium sites. EPA comoleted this in Subpart 0 and i of 40 CFR Part 192 issued October 7, 1983 (48 FR 45946).
Title II sites have active NRC or Agreement State licenses. Each licensee is responsible for having a remedial action plan that is approved by the NRC or j an Agreement. State. This plan describes how the licensee will close the site to meet all applicable standards after completion of operations.
j Before the NRC, or an Agreement State, terminates a licerse the site must be closed in a manner sufficient to meet applicable standards. These include j the requirements contained within 10 CFR Part 40 - Domestic Licensing of Source i Material, or similar Agreement State requirements, and the EPA standards in 40
) CFR Part 192. In addition, 10 CFR 150.153 requires that prior to the l
termination of any Agreement State license for byproduct material, the.
, Commission shall have made a determination that all applicable standards and requirements have been met.
,i i Following the opera'.ing license termination, invoking the general license for Title Il sites is similar to the process used for Title I sites. The most I l
l significant differences are: '
l \
- 1. A State, at its option, may take over custodial care of a Title II '
site instead cf the D0E. I i l
\
i 7
I
f *
- 2. In some rare cases, such as may occur with deep burial where no ongoing site surveillance will be required, surface land ownership '
transfer requirements may be waived for a Title II site.
- 3. Potential future uses of a Title I site are limited to subsurface rights, whereas, a Title II site could also potentially allow the usage of surface rights. (See the section entitled "Future Uses of ;
~
l the Disposal Site".) l 1 i
- 4. All surface and subsurface rights for a Title I site must be in l
Federal custody (except when on indian land). For a Title II site ;
I the Corunission may take into account the status of ownership'and l rights to the land, and the ability of a licensee to transfer title ;
and custody to the United States or a State, l 1
- 5. There is an additional Title II requirement when an operating license in an Agreement State is terminated and the site transferred to the -
United States for long-term custodial care. All funds collected by [
l the State for long-term monitoring and maintenance will be [
teansferred to the United States. This requirement has already been i codifica in Part 150 and is not part of this rulemaking.
1
, 6. Title I covers designated inactive uranium mill tailings sites. '
- Title !! covers sites licensed as of January 1, 1978 and new uranium ;
i and thorium mill tailings sites. !
l IV. The Surveillance and Maintenance Plan j
! l DOE, or the appropriate State, will submit a site-specific surveillance !
and maintenance plan to the NRC after site closure has been satisfactorily i completed. The NRC will review the SMP and supporting documentation to ensure i that the ownership of land and materials is adequately documented, and that the !
! proposed surveillance and maintenance provides the necessary conditions for f I that site.
! L
}
i
I The DOE has developed a "Guidance for UMTRA Project Surveillance and -
Maintenance" document issued in January 1986. Copies of this document are l available from the U.S. Department of Energy, UMTRA Project Office, Albuquerque [
Operations Office, P.O. Box 5400, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87115. This docu-ment, which was developed with NRC staff coordination, provides detailed generic guidance for what information should bi considered in designing a site-specific SMP for Title I sites. (This guidance has not been evaluated by NRC for application to Title Il sites. While many provisions may be i appropriate, site closure and remediation by actively regulated licensees may !
result in somewhat different procedures. NRC is considering what additional :
guidance and what modifications to existing guidance may be appropriate for i Title II sites.) The document addresses five primary activities. These :
activities, wnich are discussed in the following par a ahs, are .
l I
- 1. Definition and characterization of final site conditions. :
. 2. Site inspections. (
- 3. Ground-water monitoring.
- 4. Aerial photography. [
- 5. Custodial maintenance and :ontingency (or evergency) repair. ;
i l
00E indicated that final site co ditions should be defined and i r
characterized prior to the completion of remedial actions at a site. As-built t drawings should be compiled, a final topographic survey should be performu.', a vicinity map should be prepared, and ground ind aerial photographs should be h taken. Survey monuments, site markers, and signs should be established. If the site-specific SMP specifies that ground-water monitoring is required, then i a network of monitoring wells should be identified and new wells established if (
needed. !
?
DOE describes three types of inspections: Phase I. Phase II, and contin- !
I gency inspections. Scheduled phase I inspections would be conducted by a small [
team to identify conditions that may affect design integrity. Phase 11 inspections would be unscheduled a1d dependent upon potential problems ,
ider.tified during a Phase ! inspection. Team members of a Phase II inspection should be specialists in the poteatial problem areas (e.g., geotechnical j engineer for settlement). Contingency inspections would also be unscheduled !
9 !
i
and occur when information has been received that indicates that site integrity has been, or may be, threatened by natural events (e.g., severe earthquake) or *;
other means.
The need to monitor gro nd-water conditions should be determined on a r site-specific basis. If it s determined that ground-water monitoring is required, then it should be :onducted in two phases, screening monitoring and esaluative monitoring. Scre ning monitoring would be designed to oetect ;
changes in ground-water quai ty attributable to the tailings. If a significant change is apparent, evaluative monitoring should be initiated. Evaluati e '
monitoring will be more extensive and will quantify the rate and magnitude of the change of conditions. ,
1 i
Initial surveillances should include tl.e acquisition and interpretation of !
aerial photography. The principal purposes of aerial photography are to aid inspectors in the field and to provide a permanent, visual record of site conditions. Color infrared stereo photos, high oblique prints, and low '
. oblique, natural color photographs should be take + the completion of i remedial action. Follow-ap aerfal photography would only be done if the Phase '
I or Phase II inspections identified a need for this.
Custodial maintenance such as grass mowing or fence repair may be requited at come sites. Extreme natural events or purposeful intrusion may occur at a site which would require immediate emergency measures. When compared with con-tingency (or emergency) repair, custodial maintenance will be less costly, smaller in scale, and more frequent in occurrence. In contrast, contingency (or emergency) repairs are very unlikely to be needed; however, repair costs j may be substantial. I i
V. Future Uses of the Disposal Site UMTRCA provides for potential future uses of the disposal site. For a i Title ! Site, it provides that the Secretary of the Interior, with the concur-rence of both the Secretary of Energy and the NRC, may dispose of any subsur-face mineral rights, if this occurs, the NRC will issue a specific license to 10
the Secretary of the Interior to assure that the tailings are not disturbed, or if disturbed are restored to a safe and environmentally sound condition. ;
For a Title Il site the same provisions as above apply with the following ,
additions. First, surface as well as subsurface estates may be available for use. Second, although the request to use these rights may be received from any -
a person, if permission is granted, the person who transferred the land shall 1 receive the right of first refusal with respect to this use of the land. !
I i I
- Environmental impacts would be evaluated prior to any action granting the use of surface or subsurface estates. !
3 VI. Petition for Rulemaking ,
i, On December 5, 1980, the NRC received a petition for rulemaking submitted !
by the Sierra Club (PRM-40-23). An amenoment to this petition was received by :
the NRC on March 21, 1983. The original petition requested that the NRC amend ,
its regulations to license'the possession of uranium mill tailings at inactive ,
j storage sites. The petitioner proposed that the NRC take the following regu-l latory action to ensure <that public health and safety and the environment is j adequately protected from the hazards associated with uranium mill tailings.
h
}
- 1. Repeal the licensing exemption 'or inactive mill tailings sites !
t
] subject to the Department of Energy's remedial program. !
e f
) 2. Require a license for the possession of byproduct material on any ;
j other property in the vicinity of an inactive mill tailings site if j f the byproduct materials are derived from the inactive mill tailings j site, l
- 3. Or alternatively, conduct a rulemaking to determine whether a l licensing exemption of these site > or the byproduct material derived !
! from the sites constitutes an unreasonable risk to public health and
- {
safety. !
l i l
\
11 i
. . I
i j .
- In the 1983 amendment, the petitioner requests that, in the event that NRC i denies the petitioner's earlier request that NRC repeal the~licens'ing exemption l a
for inactive sites or conduct the requested rulemaking, the NRC take further . ,
action. Specifically, the petitioner requests that the NRC ensure that the !
management of byproduct material located on or derived from inactive' uranium processing sites is conducted in a manner that protects the public health and safety and the enviroraent from the radiological and nonradiological hazards l associated with uranium mill tailings. !
Whether the original petition is granted or not, the petitioner also requests that the NRC establish requirements to govern the managemen) of l byproduct material, not subjec* to licensing under section 81 of the Atomic
! Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 211?.), comparable to the requirements applicable to I
similar materials under the Solid Waste Dirnosal Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. ,
, 6901 et seq.), In the alternative, the pet)'ioner suggests that NRC extend the ;
coverage of the requirements in 10 CFR Part 40, App'endix'A, which are now ,
j arplicable only to licensed byproduct material, to byproduct material not i j
subjecttolicensing. In addition, the petitioner requests that NRC issue l l
l regulations that would require.a person exempt from licansing to conduct i
! monitoring activitie*., perform remedial work, or take any other action neces- I i sary to protect health and safety and the environment.
l I j One of the purposes of this proposed rulemaking is to provide a licensing ,
procedure for custodial care of inactive sites. Although this is not what the !
petitioner requested, the end result directly addreshes their concerns. Inac-q tive sites will be licensed and will be managed to ensure their long-term integrity.
j f Another concern of the petitioner is that until 00E ccmpletes remedial actions, the tailings will be unregulated. While it is true that the sites are unregulated in a legal sense, they have not oeen ignored by COE. 00E has )
proceeded with its remedial action program. 00Ei s program is oriented tcward l
completing high priority sites first. Hign priority sites are those generally :
closest to population centers. There are eigtit high priority sites, i
- Reclamaticn activities at four are completed or underway and activities for the l other four are in active planning or design phases. The activities for redium
{
l s
12 l.
t
, l
. i and low priority sites are in various phases - initial planning has been -
completed for all, and activities for several have progressed into the construction phase. In addition, DOE ronitors the sites before and during :
remedial actions.
After the complet!on of this rulemaking, NRC will make a final determina-l tion on the issues raised by the petitioner and publish its findings in the
- Federal Register.
] l q VII. Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact: Avrilability The Commission has determined under the National Environmental Policy Act
.; of 1969, as amended, and the Commissior.'r regulations in Subpart A of 10 CFR i
Part 51, that this rule, if adopted, would not be a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment and therefore an environmental impact statement is not required. The proposed rulemaking will j establish general licenses for custodial care of uranium or thorium mill I tailings sites by another Federal agency or State. The licensing action will be done after remedial actions are completed, and would en:ure that sites l
] remain in good condition. If unexpected repairs are ever required, the ;
1 licensee will be responsible to make the necessary repairs. Therefore, tte
- actions required under these regulations are preventative of adverse ;
I environmental impacts.
I I i i
! The environmeri;al assessment and finding Lf no significant impact on ^<hich i
- this determination is based are available for inspection at the NRC Public l Occument Room, 1717 H Street, NW Washington, DC. Single copies of the l environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact are available !
I f rom Mark Haistield, Of fice of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.5, Nuclear (
Regulatory Comenission, Washington, DC 20555, Mail Stop NL/5-260. Telephone !
(301) 492-3877. ;
i l
i .
) l l
13 i
. -_ _ - - . m _ -_- _ _,. .- ,n ,_ _ , , , c .-, y- nn- __,-- .._,,- 4
l e
- VI!!. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement Thh preposto rule does not contain a new or amended information collection requi ement' subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). Existing reoutrements were approved by the Office of Managem:nt and Budget approval number 3150-0020..
- IX. Regulatory Analysis
.l The Comission has prepsred a draft regulatory analysis on this proposed regulation. The entlysis exanines the costs and benefits of the alternatives a g
considered by the Commission. The draft analy;is is available for inspection in the NRC Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC. Single -
j copies of the draft analysis may be obtained from Mark Haisfiald, Office of i
- Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, i D.C. 20555, Mail Stop NL/5-260.
4 l !
] The Commission requests public' comment on the draft regulatory analysis' ;
) Comments on the draft analysis may be submitted to the NRC as indicated under l
j the ADDRESSES heading. I t
X. Regulatory Flexibility Certification Statement
(
.i As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U,S.C. 605(o), -
the Commission certifies that this rule, if adopted, will not have a signifi-l cant economic impact upon a substantial number of small entitles, lhis rule l will apply only to a Federal agency or an appropriate State. Therefore, a Pegulatcry flexibility Analysis is not required and has not been prepared. f
. XI. :.in of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 40 1
i Government contracts, Hazardous materials-transpot tation, Nuclear i I
materials, Psnaltys Reporting a' ecordkeepir'g requirements, Source material, and Uranium.
4 1
- i 1-14 I i
(
. l Under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reorganization i Act of 1974, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 553, and the Uranium Hill Tailings Radiation t'
Control Act of 1978, as amended, the NRC is proposing the follwing amendments to 10 CFR Part 40. 1 1
i I
i a i 4
l t .
4 s
1 4
- i i
.L
(
s l i i
l '
l I
4 l
i i 4
1 1
f t
b 1
9 l' t i
)
1 I
i 15 t
l l
- - . . . _ - . - - . . _ . , , - . _ . - . ... . - - . ~ - - - - - - - -
PART 40 - DOMESTIC LICENSING OF SOURCE MATERIAL
- 1. The table of contents for Part 40 is amended by adding entries for $540.27 and 40.28 to read as follows: l GENERAL LICENCES ,
l r
, . =
L i
l >
40,27 General license for long-term care of 00E remedial i
action s,ites.
I 40.28 General license for long-term care of uranium or thorium i byproduct tailings sites, f
- 2. The authority citation for Part 40 cont'.ued to read as follows: ,
l AUTHORITY: Secs. 62, 63, 64, 65, 81, 161, 182, 183, 186, 68 Stat, j 932, 933, 935, 948, 953, 954, 955, as amended, secs. 11e(2), 83, 84, Pub.
L.95-604, 92 Stat. 3033, as amended, 3039, sec. 234, 83 Stat. 444, as l
( amended (42 U.S.C. 2014(e)(2), 2092, 2093, 2094, 2095, 2111, 2113, 2114, I 2201, 2232, 2233, 2236, 2282); secs. 274, Pub. L.86-373, 73 Stat. 688 (42 I l U.S.C. 2021); secs. 201, as amended. 202, 206, 88 Stat. 1242, as amended, 1244, 1246 (42 U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846). Sec. 275, 92 Stat. 3021, as !
amended by Pub. L.97-415, 96 Stat. 2067 (42 U.S.C, 2022). I l
l Section 40.7 also issued under Pub. L.95-601, sec. 10, 92 Stat. 2951 !
1 l l
(42 U.S.C. 5851). Section 40.31(g) also issued under sec. 122, 68 Stat. j 939 (42 U.S.C. 2152). Section 40.46 also issued under sec.184, 63 Stat. -
954, as amended (12 U.S.C. 2234). Section 40.71 also issued under sec. - 187, 68 Stat. 955 (42 U.S.C. 2237). !
For the purposes'of sec. 223, 68 Stat. 958, as amended (42 U.S.C.
2273); 5540.3, 40.25(d)(1)-(3), 40.35(a)-(d), 40.41(b) and (c), 40.46, I 40.51(a) and (c), and 40.63 are issued under sec.161b, 68 Stat. 948, as
, amended (42 U.S.C. 2201(b)); and SS40.5, 40.25(c) and (d)(3) and (4), l 1
16 l
i l _ _ _ -
i i .
]
40.26(c)(2), 40.35(e), 40.42, 40.61, 40.62, 40.64, and 40.65 are issued under sec. 161o, 68 Stat. 950, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2201(o)).
l 1
I i
- 3. Section 40.1 is revised to read as follows: '
540.1 Purpose. ,
i (a) The regulations in this part establish procedures and criteria ;
for the issuance of licenses to receive title to, receive, possess, use, transfer, provide for long-term custodial care, or deliver source, by- i product materials, and residual radioactive material, as defined in this , i part, and establish and provide for the terms and conditions upon which 7 the Commission will issue these licenses. The regulations in this part !
also establish certain requirements for the physical protection of import, export, and transient shipments of natural uranium. (Additional require- j ments applicable to the import and export of natural uranium are set forth' !
in Part 110 of this chapter.) f
. i (b) The regulations contained in this part are issued under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (68 Stat. 919) Title II of the i Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended (88 Stat. 1242), and Titles !
I and !! of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978, as ,
amended (42 U.S.C. 7901).
4 In $40.2a, paragraph (a) is revised to read as fnllows: I
\
l 540.2a Coverage of inactive tailiras sites.
(a) Prior to the completion of the remedial action, .*e Commission f will not require a license pursuant to 10 CFR Chapter I for possession of I residual radioactive materials as defined in this Part that are located at I a site where milling operations are no longer active, if the site is designated a processing site covered by the remedial action program of Title I of the Uranica Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978. The l Coanitsion vill exert its regulatory role in remedial actions primarily through concurrence and consultation in the execution of the remedial [
l i l
17 l l
i
action pursuant to Title I of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978. After remedial actions are completed, the Commission will license the long-term custodial care under the requirements set out in
$40.27.
A A A A A
- 5. Section 40.3 is revised to read as follows:
$40.3 License requirements.
A person subject to the regulations ir this part may not receive title to, own, receive, possess, use, trans1'er, provide INr long-term custodial care, deliver byproduct material o* residual radinactive material as defined in this part or any source material after removal from its place of deposit in nature, unless authoriltd in a specific or general l license issued by the Commission under the regulations in this part. .
j l
- 6. In $40.4, paragraph (s) is added to read as follows! l S40.4 Definitions.
)
(s) "Residual radioactive material" means: (1) Waste (whi.h the Secretary of Energy determines to be radioactive) in the form af tailings resulting from the processing of ores for the extraction of oranium and other valuable constituents of the ores; and (2) other waste (which the Secretar, of Energy determines to be radioactive) at a processing site
, which relates to such processing, including any residual stock of unpro-cessed ores or low grade mater'als. This term is used only with respect to materials at sites subject to remediation under Title I of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiat!an Control Act of 1978.
18 u _ _ - - _ _ .
In $40.7, paragraph (f) is revised to read as follows:
7.
S40.7 Employee protection.
A A A A A (f) The general .fcenses provided in $$40.21, 40.22, 40.25, 40,27,
]
and 40.28 are exempt from paragraph (e) of this section, i
- 8. Section 40.20 is revised to read as follows:
$40.20 Types of licenses.
- (a) Licenses for source material are of two types
- general and i specific. The general licenses provided in this part are effective j without the filing of applications with the Commission or the issuance of licensing documents to particular persons. Specific licens~es are issued to named persons upon applications filed pursuant to the regulations in this part.
I (b) Section 40.27 contains a general license applicable for custody and long-term care of residual radioactive material at uranium mill tailings disposal sites remediated under Title I of the Uraniue Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978.
(c) Section 40.28 contains a general license applicable for custody and long-term care of byproduct material at uranium or thorium mill tailings disposal sites remeatated under Title !! of the Uranium Hill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978.
- 9. New S$40,27 and 40,28 are added to read as follows:
540.27 General license for long-term care of 00E remedial action sites.
19
.. i (a) A general license is issued for the custodial care, to include i.
j monitoring, maintenance, and emergency measures necessary to protect public health and safety and other actions necessary to comply with the [
standards of section 275(a) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, for remediated ura..ium mill tailings sites under Title I of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiatun Control Act of 1974, as amended. The license is available only to the Department of Energy, or another Federal agency designated by the President to provide custodial care. The purpose of this general license' is to ensure that uranium mill tailings sites will be
- maintained in such a manner as to protect the public health, safety, and. 7
! the environment after closure. '
. 1 i (b) The general license in paragraph (a) of this section becomes ;
j effec when the Commissior. receives a site-specific M g-term sur- I
] veillance and maintenance plan (SMP) that meets the requi"ements of tnis l section. The Department of Energy, or other Federal agracy designated by ;
the President, shall submit the SMP within 120 days following Commission concurrence in the Secretary of Energy's determ. ation of completion of
(
remedial action at each site. The plan may incorporate by reference I information contained in documents previously submitted to the Commission if the references to the individual incorporated documents are clear and !
Each SMP must include--
specific.
i i
(1) A legal description of the site to be licensed, including docu- i mentation on whether land and interests are owned by the United States or i an Indian tribe. If the site is on Indian land, then, as specified in the Uranium Hill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978, the Indian tribe and !
any person holding any interest in the land shall execute a waiver releasing the United States of any liability or claim by the Tribe or i person concerning or arising f rom the remedial action and holding the l United States harmless against any claim arising out of the performance of the remedial action; (2) A detailed description of the final site conditions, including l existing ground water characterization. This description must be detailed !
1 enough so that future inspectors will have a baseline to determine changes !
)
20 ,
. i
. l to the site and when these changes are serious enough to require main-tenance or repairs. If the site will have continuing aquifer restoration requirements, then the SMP must provide details on how restoration is to i be complvted and how contingencies will be resolved;
- r i
(3) A description of the long-term surveillance program, including ,
proposed inspection frequency and reporting to the Commission, frequency and extent of ground-water monitoring if required, inspection personnel l 4
qualifications, inspection procedures, recordkeeping and quality assurance :
procedures; !
(4) A description of the critar'a for follow-up inspections based on
{
routine inspections or extreme natural events; and ;
(5) A description of the criteria for performing custodial mainten-l.
ance and emergency measures. This description must specify what l constitutes custodial maintenance ard'what requires emergency measures. !
? l (c) The custodial agency under the general license established by '
paragraph (a) of this section shall -- t (1) Maintain the site in accordance with the provisions of the approved SMP;
}
j (2) Obtain concurrence from the Commission for all changes to the SMP; I l
(3) Guarantee permanent right-of-entry to Comissicn representatives I for the purpose of periodic site inspections; and f
- (4) Notify the Comission prior to undertaking any major construction related to the site. j i
) (d) As specified in the Uranium Niil Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1578, the Secretary of the Interior, with the concurrence of the !
i Secretary of Energy and the Comission, may sell or lease any subsarface 1
.. i mineral rights associated with land on which residual radinactive ,
materials are disposed. In such cases, the person acquiring the rights !
and the Secretary of Interior shall comply with section 104 (h) of the
] Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978. This section l requires, among other things, that the Comission issue a license to the
- Secretary of the, Interior to assure that the site remains in a safe and I environmentally sound condition. The Commission shall respond to each l licensing request on a site-by-site basis. , l
(
1 $40.28 General license for long-term care of uranium or thorium l byproduct tailings sites. '
i I (a) A general license is issued for the custodial care, to include I i monitoring, maintenance, and emergency measures necessary to protect the i j public health and safety and other actions necessary to comply with the j j standards promulgated pursuant to section 84 of'the Atomic Energy Act of
) 1954, for remediated uranium or thorium mill t ilings sites under' Title II l of the Uraniui Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1976, as amended. ;
) The license is available to the Department of Energy, to another Federal i
! agency designated by the President, or to the State where the remediated site is located if the State exercises its option to acquire the site. ;
l The purpose of this general' license is ',o ensure tnat uranium or thorium i mill tailings sites will be maintained in such a manner as to protect the
! public health, safety, and the environment af ter closure. [
j l (b) The general license in paragraph (a) of this section becomes '
' ef fective when the Comission receives a site-specific long-term surveil-lance and maintenance plan (SMP) that meets the requirements of this l l section. The intended general licensee shall submit the 5MP after the [
operating licensee has comp.leted recedial action meeting the requirements j of Appendix A of this Part or applicable Agreement State requirements. l 2
The plan may incorporate by ieference information contained in documents i
- previously submitted to the Commission if the reference to the individual '
)
incorporated documents are clear and specific. Each SMP must include" j i
I 4
i i 22 1 l
. . t (1) A legel description of the site to be licensed. The description '
must show that the operating licensee has made all reasonable efforts to !
transfer title and any other interests in the land to the United States or I a State. See Appendix A, Criterion 11 of this Part for more detailed ?
criteria regarding land transfer; e (2) A detailed description of the final site conditions, includi.,g i existing ground-water characterization. This description must be detailed :
)
4 enough so that future inspectors will have a baseline to determine changes to the site and when these changes are serious enough to require main- '
- tenance or repairs; (3) A description of the long-term surveillance program, including l l proposed inspection frequency and reporting to the Cor. mission,(see .
l Appendix A, Criterion 12 of this Part for more details on inspections and :
I 1
reporting), frequency and extent of ground-water monitoring if required, t
j inspection personnel qualifications, inspection procedures, recordkeeping. ,
and. quality assurance procedures; (4) A description of the criteria for follow-up inspections based on .
j routine inspections or extreme natural events; and
] !
l (5) A description of the crituria for performing custodis) main- 1 t
{ tenance and emergency measures. This description must specify what con- ;
P l stitutes custodial maintenance and what requires emergency measures. li l
i !
- (c) The custodial agency who has 1 general license established by j paragraph (a) of this section shall -- ;
i i
(1) Maintain the site in accordance with the provisions of the l approved 5HP l
I
, (2) Obtain concurrence f rem the Comission for all changes to the }
1 SMP I
l 1
1
- 1 23 i i !
l I i !
i .
l e .
4 (3) Guarantee permanent right-of-entry to Commission representatives !
for the purpose of periodic site inspections; and 1
(4) NotifytheCommissionpriortoundertakinganymajor
] construction telated to the site.
(d) (1) ltpon application, the Commission may issue 4 specific i license, as specified in the Uranium Mill Taitings Radiation Control Act i of 1978, permitting the use of surface and/or subsurface estates transferred,to the United States or a St.te. Although an application may j
be received from any person, if permission is granted, the person who {
transferred the land to DOE or the State sha)1 receive the right of first
~
l refusal with respect to this use of the land. The application must j i demonstrate that--
I j i (i) The proposed action does not endanger tha publi* health, safety, j i
welfare, or the environment; !
i 1
(ii) Whether the proposed action is of a temperary or permanent !
(
nature, the site would be maintained and/or restored to meet requirements l 3 in Appendix A of this Part for reclaitred sites. l l
j (2) A pero n receiving a specific license to use the surface or l subsurface trea of a site shall ensure that the site will be maintained or l restored to conditions corrplying with Appendix A of this Part. On a [
case-by-case determination, the Comission may require financial arrangerents to ensure that the licensed person is able to maintain'the }
- .I I l i
1 i
l I
i i !
I i 4 i I
i !
e l* e site undisturbed, or if disturbed is able to restore. tiie site to a safe ,
and environmentally sound condition.
l l
l l Dated at Washington, DC this day of , 1988.
l l .
! For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission l
l
, Samuel J. Chilk, ,
Secretary of the Commission 9
l l
l l i
i i
l l
l 25 1
e l i
'~
. i I
)
EllCLOSURE 2 - EilVIR0fiMEitTAL ASSESSHEitT AND F ilid lilG O F (10 S I GilI F I C Alli IMPACT 4
4 k
-n-- -
.~ - _ ..
}
Environmental Assessment for Rulemaking on the Custody and Long-Term Care .
of Uranium Mill Tailings Sites j (UMTRCA Title I and Title II) i Background ;
j 2
In the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 (UMTRCA) the -
Congress recognized that uranium mill tailings may pose a potentially ;
significant radiation health hazard to the public. One of the measures j authorized by Congress to control this haiard is to require that the long-term
~
{
remedial actions have been completed, will reside in a governmental body. The ,
proposed rulemaking will provide procedures and criteria to ensure that i
, adequate monitoring, maintenance, and emergency repairs,.if required, are
- performed by the United States or an appropriate State.
f
- Upon satisfactory certification (by 00E' for Title I sites and by license j terminatinn for Title II sites) that the uranium or thorium mill '.ailings at e 4
the site have been constructed to meet applicable closure standards, the NRC
! discuss ownership of the site, site conditions, the surveillance program, required follow-up inspections, and how and when custodial maintenance and f eu9rgency repairs will be accomplished. The general license will become f effective for each individual site upon NRC receipt of an SMP that meets the l
! requirements of the general license. l l
l Although the regulations differ somewhat in regards to inactive sites (Title I of UMTRCA) and active sites (Title II of UMTRCA), the basis for what will l r
constitute adequate long-term custodial care are the same. One difference is !
l that Title II sites may be transferred to the United States or a State, l
- whereas, Title ! sites will only be transferred to the United States. This
! provision does not apply to sites located on Indian lands, to which dif ferent
{
i 1 .
requirements apply based upon whether it is a Title I or Title II site. :
f i
r
4
. The Stabilization and Long-Teim~ Care Program ,
Although the end result for custodial care licensing for T.itle I or Title II l sites is similar, the processes leading up to closure of Title I or Title II sites are different. The following provides background on these processes as well as some of the differences between Title I and Title II licensing.
Title I (24 sites)
UMTRCA charged the EPA with the responsibility for promulgating remedial action j standards for inactive uranium mill sites. The purpose of these standards is to protect the public health and safety and the environment from radiological '
and non-radiological hazards associated with radioactive materials at the '
sites. The final standards were promulgated with an effective date of March 7, 1983. (See 40 CFR Part 192-Health and Environmental Protection for Uranium Mill Tailings, Subparts A, 8, and C). '
,. t i
The Department of Energy (DOE) will select and execute a plan of remedial i action that will satisfy the EPA standards and other applicable laws and l regulations. All remedial actions must be selected and performed with the concurrence of the NRC. The required NRC concurrence with the selection and performance of proposed remedial actions and the. licensing of long-term ,
surveillance and maintenance of disposal sites will be for the purpose of ensuring compliance with UMTRCA.
i l The stabilization and long-term care program for each site has four distinr.t .
phases. In the first phase DOE selects a disposal site and design. This phase l
]
includes preparation of an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Imptet f j Statement, and a Remedial Action Plan. The Remedial Action Plan is structured ,
j to provide a comprehensive understanding of the remedial actions proposed at I j that site and contains specific design and construction requirements. NRC and State / Indian tribe concur in the Remedial Action Plan to complete the first .
i f phase. (
5
- The second phase is the performance phase. In this phase the actual
. decontamination, decommissioning, and reclamation at the site is done in '
1 2
l f m-- --, - - , , v, - - - -r,, , w .- .- -m-s,-n,,,--- , -p , e-. y -- , -e. -
r .- e-,. y -w y w-~~ ~ v -w----- -
~ q
accordance with the Remedial Action Plan., The NRC and the State / Indian tribe, as applicable, must concur in any changes to this plan. At the completion of reclamation activities at the site, NRC concurs in DOE's determination that the i activities at the site have been completed in accordance with the approved plan. Prior to licensing, the next phase, title to the disposed tailings and ;
contaminated materials and the land upon which they are disposed must be in Federal custody (except for sites on Indian lands) to provide for long-term Federal control, at Federal experise.
r
, NRC concurrence in the DOE determination that reclamation of the site has been accomplished in accordance with the approved plan may have a conditional clause regardin'g ground water. For e'. ample, ground-water restoration, through either -
[
active techniques or' passive restoration through natural flushing, may take [
L many years. If a conditional clause is required, the post-licensing phase may [
require monitoring the site to ensure that restoration is procecding as planned or require other actions as necessary. Because EPA ground-water standards are y currently being revised, this practice r of condi.tfonal concurrence and planned !
activities during post-iicensing may have to be re-examined.
- The third phase is the licensing phase. The general license does rot apply until (1) NRC concurrence in the DOE determination that the site has been
- properly reclaimed and (2) the surveillance and maintenance plan (SMP) has been !
- received by NRC. The SMP should be submitted within 4 months of the NRC i
~
concurrence in completion. Certification indicates that the site has been '
j stabilized in accordance with EPA standards. Current plans also include a 1
I Federal Register notice of NRC's receipt of the SMP, and public meetings to
] inform the local public of the future plans for the site and to provide an i j
opportunity for public comments. There is no termination date for the general t
] license.
i J
\ l The final phase of the program is surveillance, monitoring, and maintenance and begins after NRC receives the SMP. In this phase 00E and NRC periodically 1
i inspect the site to ensure its integrity. The surveillance and maintenance i plan will require the DOE tv make repairs, if needed. l
} l 4
1 4
i l
3 i r--y-. - , .--. ., -- - ,,-.,y
- *,w- - - - - - - - - - - , - - . - - - -------,----,--,,c- -
,-.-,-_--,,,,m. - , , - ,,-,--,.y-.-e7 y - . - -,.e.--, _ ~ 7--.v,,,---r-w-wx---- r=-
One of the requirements in the EPA standards is that control of the tailings should be effective for up to 1000 years without active maintenance. Thus, although the NRC license will require repairs as necessary, the design of the stabilized pile is such that this should be minimized. In the event that significant repairs are ever necessary, a determination will be made as to the need for additional National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) actions.
,T_i, tl e I I
~
UMTRCA also charged EPA with the responsibility for promulgating standards for active uranium or thorium sites. EPA completed this in Subpart D and E of 40 CFR Part 192 issued October 7, 1983.
Title 11 sites have active NRC or Agreement State licenses. Each licensee is responsible for having a remedial action plan that is approved by the NRC or an .
Agreement. State. This plan describes how the licensee will close the site to meet all applicable standards af ter completion of operations.
Before the NRC, or an Agreement State, terminates a license the site must be closed in a manner sufficient to meet applicable standards' These include the requirements contained within 10 CFR Part 40 - Domestic Licensing of Source Material or similar Agreement State requirements, and the EPA standards in 40 CFR Part 192. In addition, 10 CFR 150.15a requires that prior to the termination of any Agreement State license for byproduct material, the Commission shall have made a determination that all applicable standards and requirements have been met.
Following the operating license termination, invoking the general license for Title !! sites is similar to the process used for Title I sites. The most significant differences are:
- 1. A State, at its option, may take over custodial care of a Title II l t
site instead of the 00E. )
4
)
, 2. In some rare cases, such as may occur with deep burial where no
, ongoing site surveillance will be required, surface land ownership.
transfer requirements may be waived for a Title II site.
- 3. Potential future uses of a Title I site are limited to subsurface rights, whereas, a. Title II site could also potentially allow the usage of' surface rights. (See "Future Uses of the Disposal Site" b'elow.) ,
- 4. All surface and subsurface rights for a Title I site'must be in-Federal custody (except when on Indian land). For a Title II site ;
the Commission may.take into account the status of ownership and l rights to the land, and the ability of a licensee to transfer title !
1 and custody to the United States or a State. ,
i j ,
- 5. There is an additional Title II requirement when an operating licens'e i j in.an Agreement. State is terminated and the site transferred to the i
f' United States for long-term custodial care. All funds collected by I the State for long-term monitoring and maintenance will be j transferred to the United States. This requirement has already been ;
codified in Part 150 and is not part of this rulemaking.
- 6. Title I covers designated inactive uranium mill tailings sites. (
i Title II covers sites licensed as of January 1,1978 and new uranium and thorium mill tailings sites. :
l l The Surveillance and Maintenance Plan !
l j 00E, or the appropriate State, will submit a site-specific surveillance and f I
maintenance plan to the NRC after site closure has been satisfactorily [
i completed. The NRC will review the SMP and supporting documentation to ensure 1 4
that tne ownership of land and materials is adequately documented, and that.the proposed surveillance and maintenance provides the necessary conditions for l 0
that site. I t
I 5
a .
j
The 00E has developed a "Guidance for UMTRA Project Surveillance and Maintenance" document issued in January 1986. This document, which was developed with NRC staff coordination, provides detailed generic guidance for what*information should be considered in designing a site-specific SMP for Title I sites. (This guidance has not been evaluated by NRC for application to Title II sites. While many provisions may be appropriate, site closure and remediation by actively regulated licensees may result in somewhat different procedures. NRC is considering what additional guidance and what modifications to existing guidance may be appropriate for Title II sites.) The document addresses five primary activities. These activities, which are discussed in the following paragraphs, are:
- 1. Definition and characterization of final site conditions.
- 2. Site inspections.
- 3. Ground-water monitoring.
- 4. Aerial photography.
- 5. Custodial maintenance and contingency (or emergency) repair.
00E indicates that final site conditions should be defined and characterized prior to the completion of remedial actions at a site. As-built drawings
- should be compiled, a final topographic survey should be performed, a vicinity inap should be prepared, and ground and aerial photngraphs should be taken.
Survey monuments, site markers, and signs should be established. If the site-specific SMP specifies that ground-water, monitoring is required, then a network c,f monitoring wells should be identified and new wells established if needed.
DOE describes three types of inspections: Phase I, Phase II, and contingency inspections. Scheduled phase I inspections would be conducted b'y a small team to identify conditions that may affect design integrity. Phase II inspections would be unscheduled and dependent uppa potential problems identified during a Phase I inspection. Team members of a Phase II inspection should be specialists in the potential problem areas (e.g., geotechnical engineer for settlement). Contingency inspections would also be unscheduled and occur when information has been received that indicates that site integrity has been, or may be, threatened by natural events (e.g., severe earthquake) or other means.
6
. . . l The need to monitor ground-water conditions would be determined on'a site-specific basis. If it is determined that ground-water monitoring is required then it should be conducted in two phases, screening monitoring and evaluative monitoring. . Screening monitoring would be designed to detect changes in I ground-water quality attributable to the tailings. If a significant change is apparent, evaluative monitoring should be initiated. Evaluative monitoring will be more extensive and will quantify the rate and magnitude of the change of conditions.
Initial surveillances should include the acquisition and interpretation of aerial photography. The principal purposes'of aerial photography are to aid inspectors in the field and to provide'a permanent, visual record of site conditions. Color infrared stereo photos, high oblique prints, and low j oblique, natural color photographs shcold be taken at the completion of remedial action. Follow-up aerial photograpny would only be done if the Phase I or Phase II. inspections identified a need for this.
Custodial maintenance such as grass mowing or fence repair may be required at some sites. Extreme natural events or purposeful i'ntrusion may occur at a site which would require immediate emergency measures. When compared with contingency (or emergency) repair, custodial maintenance will be less costly, l
smaller in scale, and more frequent in occurrence. In contrast, contingency (or emergency) repairs are very unlikely to be needed; however, repair costs may be substantial.
Future Uses of the Disposal Site UMTRCA provides for potential future uses M the disposal site For a Title I site, it provides that the Secretary of the Interior, with the concurrence of both the Secretary of Energy and the flRC, may dispose of any subsurface mineral righ.ts . If this occurs, the f4RC will issue a specific license to the Secretary of the Interior to assure that the tailings are not disturbed, or if disturbed are restored to a safe and environmentally sound cordition.
For a Title !! site the same provisions as above apply with the following additions. First, surface as well as subsurface estates may be available for 7
1
use. Second, although the request to use these rights may be received from any person, if permission is granted, the person who transferred the land shall rec?ive the right of first refusal with respect to this use of the land.
Environmental impacts would be evaluated prior to any action granting the use of surface or subsurface estates.
Need for Proposed Regulation UMTRCA requires that NRC license the long-term custodial care of inactive and active (as defined in Title I and Title II) uranium or thorium mill tailings sites. There are 24 inactive sites and currently 28 sites licensed either by NRC or an Agreement State that have accumulated tailings. Completion of the Title I program is currently scheduled for 1994 and these sites will need to be licensed (many sites will be completed prior to 1994). Eventually all of the currently licensed sites will also need a custodial care license. Of the 28 facilities, 23.have shut down and 13 have decommissioning and reclamation either planned or underway. The NRC, in response to the licensing directive of UMTRCA, must establish and carry out a plan for licensing these tailings sites as remedial action activities and closure are completed.
Environmental Impacts The NRC does not foresee any significant adverse environmental impacts based on this proposed regulation. The regulation will provide a licensing procedure to ensure that remediated sites will remain in a safe and environmentally sound condition.
Prior to completing remedial actions at each site a detailed Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared. The major impacts associated with the site, therefore, have already been addressed in detail. The environmental impacts dealing with long-term custodial care are those resulting from inspections, custodial maintenance, ground-water monitoring, and repairs.
8
Inspections, custodial maintenance, and monitoring require a team of inspectors at the site. This will be done at least annually. The inspectors would generally 3xamine the disposal site and facilities, and surrounding areas. !
Custodial maintenance to repair signs, fences, etc. would be done as needed. l Ground-water monitoring, which may not be required at all sites, requires sampling ano laboratory analysis and will provide information to ensure that the site is performing as expected. If aquifer restoration is continuing under the custodial license, ground-water monitoring would be an integral part of the program. Any adverse environmental impacts associated with these activities i (dust from the car, disturbing wild life, etc.) are trivial in relatio'nship to the benefits gained from prcviding routine inspections, maintenance, and ;
monitoring to ensure site integrity. '
If repairs are required, the NRC, in coordination with the custodial agency, ;
will determine if further NEPA considerations are needed on a case-by-case !
basis. For example, repairs to a g'ully forming on the side of a site would not likely require further NEPA considerations, whereas extensive preventative !
measures due to river meander probably would.
l NRC could choose to license these sites with a general license or by issu;.'g !
separate licenses for each site. The licensing basis would be the same. Tne l
use of general licenses (one for Title I and one for Title II), with approved '
SMPs, is the most efficient use of resources. Each site, inactive and active, to which the general license will eventually apply, has undergone a full NEPA review in conjunction with a remedial action, or a licensing action, which has fully addressed site specific environmental concerns. Accordingly, no further environmental review is seen as necessary for the general licenses, or for the receipt of SMPs.
The following agencies were consulted during the development of this environmental assessment: DOE and uranium mill Agreement States.
The following sources of information were used: UMTRCA of 1978, as amended, 10 CFR Parts 40, 51, and 150, NUREG/BR-0058, Regulatory Analysis Guidelines of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG/CR-0053 Regulations Handbook, UMTRA-9
l DOE /AL-350124.0000, Guidance for VMTRA Project Surveillance and Maintenance (Jan. 1986). j Finding of No Significant Impact :
The NRC is proposing two general licenses for the long-term custody and i
) maintenance of uranium or thorium mill tailings sitos. This licensing is L required by the Uranium Mill Tailings Radia.can Control Act of 1978 (UMTRCA). j
, The two general licenses relate to Title I of UMTRCA (inactive sites) and Title !
II of UMTRCA (active sites). Although the regulatioris differ somewhat between. l c
Title I and Title II licen..t.9, '1o bases for what will constitute adequate l
l long-term custodial care are the same.
The Commission has determined under the National Environmental Policy Act of !
- 1969, as amended, and la Commission's regulations in Subpart A of 10 CFR Part l l 51, that this rule, it adopted, would not be a major Federal action signifi-j cantly affecting the quality of the human environment and therefore an environ- ,
j mental impact statement is not required. The proposed rulemaking will -j establish general li:enses for custodial care of uranium or thorium mill [
1 tailings sites by tM 00E, or other Federal agency designated by the President, !
t
- or a State. The litansing action will be done after remedial actions are l
- completed and would ensure that sites certain in good condition. If unexpected f repairs are ever required, the licensee will be responsible to make the necessary repairs. Therefore, the actions required under these regulations are preventative of adverse environmental imlacts. !
2 i
l i !
I l .
i :
1 !
10 l I
v , + .- -r ~-- - - r--,-,-,-,-.,?-.,-,-.,,r ----,-c.- ,,,,e.,
e nn &m - ,-.m-? -- --n.---,- , ,r-+ w,,~,- - - -- . - -e,--
- a e #
'0 0 9
i l -
.)
I l
EtiCLOSURE 3 - DRAFT REGULATORY AtlALYSIS 8 l
e d
t 1 .
i.
i, e
a !
I i
t
Regulatory Analysis for Rulemaking on the Custody and Long-Term Care of Uranium Hill Tailings Sites (UMTRCA Title I and Title II)
- 1. Statement of the Problem The Uranium Hill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 (UMTRCA) requires that the NRC license the custody and long-term care of uranium or thorium mill tailings sites after remedial actions have been completed. These sites include both inactive (UMTRCA Title I) sites and currently licensed (UMTRCA Title II) sites. .There are no current regulatory procedures or criteria to meet this licensing need.
All of the DOE remedial action sites (Title I) are expected to'be completed by the end of the program in 1994. Also many Title II sites have decommissioning and reclamation either planned or underway.
These regulations are needed to meet the NRC's statutory requirement and to provide assurance that closed sites will remain in a safe and environmentally sound condition.
- 2. Objectives The objective of this regulation is to provide a procedure to ensure that closed sites are maintained to protect public health and safety and the environment. This will include procedures for monitoring the sites, 8 providing for minor maintenance, and ensuring that, if required, emergency measures are made.
l l
1
e *
}
..* . I 1
~
- 3. Alternatives I l
The alternatives are of style not substance. NRC could choose to license !
these sites with a general license or by issuing separate specific i
, licenses for each site. e 1
- 4. Consequences :
l Either of the alternatives will have the same licensing bases and the end l
- result would be the same. In providing for one general license for Title l I sites and one for Title II sites, NRC, 00E, State,- and Indian resources l l
will be used most efficiently. Only the site-specific SMPs will need to I I f be reviewed by NRC. NRC should expend about one staff year of effort to 3
complete this rulemaking. !
[
3
' i I Upon satisfactory reclamation (by DOE for Title I, or an NRC or Agreement 1 l
j site meet applicable closure standards, the NRC'will receive a detailed surveillance and maintenance plan (SMP). The SMP will discuss ownership !
] of the site, site conditions, the surveillance program, required follow-up f
- inspections, and how and when custodial maintenance and emergency measures
] will be accomplished. The general , license will become effective for each !
I individual site upon NRC receipt of an SMP that meets the requirements of
- the general license.
i i The Department of Energy (or another Federal agency designated by the
{ President) or a State will develop the R tailed SMP for each site. In j January 1986, the Department of Energy developed a document titled "Guidance for UMTRA Projet.t Surveillance and Maintenance." Specific SMPs j for Title I sites will be modelled from this guidance. For Title I sites the Department of Energy has estimated, thr6 ugh oral communication; that i
- the site-specific "tPs will average $20,000 to develop. Implementation of 1 the site-specific SMPs will obvioJsly vary, but on average the DOE
estimates about $50,000 the first year, $27,000 per year over the next 5 j years, and $17,000 por year thereafter for the anticipated 00E activities
) at the Title I sites. The preliminary nature of DOE's cost estimates, j coupled with the uncertainty in applying the SMP planning .
) 2 1 ,
guidance to Title II sites, prevent extrapolation o'f the estimates to Title II sites.
- 5. Decision Rationale Based on the above discussion, the NRC will propose to use general licenses to meet our statutory requirement.
- 6. Implementation NRC is planning to issue the proposcd rule for Federal Register publication by February, 1988. The final rule should be published during 1988.
By the beginning of 1989 several Title I sites should be ready for submittal of SMPs with the rest scheduled by 1934. Title II sites will be -
licensed as reclamations are completed. There is no termination of date for the general licenses.
3
- _. 4% u O e e
- t S 1 e s
l ENCLOSURE 4 - DRAFT CONGRESSIONAL LETTEP.S j
. f t
i c
I f
f u
I l
l I J f t .
d 1
4 1
_ r 1
I J
_._m. . _ . . , -.,_- , , 1 _ , - _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _._ _. , _ . .