ML20215J373
| ML20215J373 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/30/1987 |
| From: | Martin D NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | James Anderson ENERGY, DEPT. OF |
| References | |
| REF-WM-74, REF-WM-75 NUDOCS 8705070382 | |
| Download: ML20215J373 (8) | |
Text
._ __
y WM74/SB/3/17/87 James R. Anderson, Project Manager Uranium Mill Tailings Project Office U.S. Department of Energy Albuquerque Operations Office P.O. Box 5400 Albuquerque. NM 87115
Dear Mr. Anderson:
The NRC staff has completed it's review of the draft Comparative Analysis of Disposal Site Alternatives Report (CADSAR) for Belfield and Bowman, North Dakota. No significant flaws or potential issues were identified by the staff based on the limited information provided.
Enclosed are staff coments that should be addressed in development of the finalCADSARordraftRemedialActionPlan(RAP),asindicated. These comments are essentially the same as the draft version transmitted by telefax on March 26, 1987. Should you have any questions, please contact Susan Bilhorn of my staff atFTS(301)427-4145.
Sincerely, CRIsamar.srseusgr Dan E. Martin, Section Leader Uranium Recovery Projacts Section Low-Level Waste and Uranium Recovery Projects Branch Division of Waste Management Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards 1
Enclosures:
As stated 4
D WM Record File WM Project Docket flo.
PDR /
LFOR -
g507pl870330 E15f iWtle f
WM74/SB/3/17/87 0FFICIAL CONCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION RECORD LETTER TO:
James R. Anderson, Project Manager Uranium Mill Tailings Project Office U.S. Department of Energy Albuquerque Operations Office P.O. Box 5400 Albuquerque, NM 87115 FROM:
Dan E. Martin, Section Leader Uranium Recovery Projects Section Low-Level Waste and Uranium Recovery Projects Branch Division of Waste Management Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
SUBJECT:
STAFF COMMENTS ON DRAFT CADSAR FOR BELFIELD AND B0WMAN, NORTH DAKOTA DATE:
DISTRIBUTION WM FILE: W'If WMLU/SF NMSS RF RBrowning, WM M8 ell, WM JBunting, WMPC MKnapp, WMLU JGreeves, WMEG DEMartin, WMLU SBilhorn, WMLU MFliegel, WMGT DGillen, WMLU JGrimm. WMLU TJohnson, WMLU SSmykowski,WMLU MYoung, WMLU RDSmith, URF0 CONCURRENCES ORGANIZATION /CONCUREE INITIALS DATE CONCURRED N[
87/Af/sco WMLU/SBilhorn WMLU/DGillen t-% 6t ;
87/ N/ M 87/QS/JC M.FI,4f WMLU/DEMartin y
'/-/43' n! '.1 :ucied b 7 ccP Late
/,
Time r
c 2-UMTRA DOCUMENT REVIEW FORM SECTION 1 Site: Belfield and Bcwman, North Dakota
. Date: March 26. 1987 Document: Oraft CADSAR Commentor: hkC Staff / General Ccmcent:
1 Page 2, Purpose of CADSAR DOE states that the purpose of the NRC review of the final CADSAR is to reach agreement that the preferred alternative will meet the EPA standards. This is inconsistant with the DOE and NRC agreement regarding UMTRA activities. The purpose of the final CADSAR is to provide information to support selection of a preferred alternative for further evaluation in the EA and RAP.
The staff's review of the final CADSAR is to identify significant technical deficiencies and potential design issues that may affect a site's abiility to meet the EPA standards.
Our determination as to whether the EPA standards will be met is reserved for NRC concurrence on the final RAP.
This statement needs to be corrected.in the final CADSAR.
SECTION 2 Response: PaSe By:
Date:
Plans for Implementation:
SECTION 3 Confirmation of Implementation:
Checkeo by:
, Da te :
Approved by:
Date:
.n
. UMTRA COCUMENT REVIEW FORM SECTION 1 Site: Belfield and Bcwman, North Dakota
, Date: March 26,1987 Document: Draft CADSAR Commentor: NRC Staff / Surf ace Water Hydrology Comment:
2 Page 13, Erosion Protection Materials The draft CADSAR states that alluvial deposits in the area "... yield a rock generally less than one inch in size, which is inadequate, because UNTRA project standards require a mean rock diameter of it inches for the
' top of a stabilized tailings pile.."
This li inch minimum rock size is specified in the DOE Technical Approach Document (TAD) and is not necessarily an NRC requirement. The NRC staff could accept the use of smaller rock if other design changes (such as flattening the top slope) were proposed, if differential sefblement was shown to be essentially zero, and if this rock constitutes the best quality rock that is reasonably available. This information shoula be considered in development of the final CADSAR.
SECTION 2 Response: Page By:
Date:
Plans for Implementation:
SECTION 3 Confirmation of Implementation:
Checked by:
, Da te:
Approved by:
Date:
UMTRA DOCUMEllT REVIEW FORM SECTION 1 Site: Belfield and Bowman,fiorth Dakota
, Date: March 26, 1987 Document: Draft CADSAR Commentor: NRC Staff /Geotechnical Engineering Comment:
3 Pa~ge~39, Characterization of Centaminated Material
~
NRC staff suggests Lthat 00E include characterization of the certaminated
~
material as part of their field characterization activities in preparation of the final CADSAR.
Particularly since the contaminated
~
material is lignite'. ash and nay have diffe' rent characteristics than materials encountered at other UMTRAP sites.
's SECTION 2 Response: Page By:
Date:
Plans for Implementation:
SECTION 3 Confirmation of Implementation:
Checked by:
, Date:
Approved by:
Date:
. UMTRA C0CUMENT PEVIEW FORM SECTION 1 Site: Belfield and Bowman, North Dakota Date: March 26, 1987 Cocument: Draft CADSAR Commentor: NRC Staff /Gectechnical Engineerinc Comment:
3 Page 39, Characterization of Contaminated Material NRC staff suggests that DOE include characterization of the contaminated material as part of their field characterization activities in preparation of the fir.al CADSAR. Particularly since the contaminated material is lignite ash and may have different characteristics than materials encountered at other UMTRAP sites.
3 SECTION 2-Response: Page By:
Date:
Plans for Implementation:
SECTION 3 Confirmation of Implementation:
Checked by:
Date:
Approved by:
Date:
i
-._,..---,--.-,-r-
L.-
DiTRA DOCUMENT REVIEW FORM
'SECTION 1 Site: Belfield and Bowman, North Dakota
, Da'te: March 26, 1987 Document: Draft CADSAR-Commentor: NRC Staff / Ground Water Hydrolooy Comment:
4 Field Characterization Activities Regarding the field characterization program DOE plans to conduct in preparation of the final CADSAR, DOE-should consider the following:
a)
One monitoring well has been constructed at the Bull Creek alterr, ate disposal site (page 26).
If this site is seriously considered as an alternative, more than one. monitoring well will be needed to adequately characterize ground-water quality and the ficw regime at that site; (Page 1 of 2)
SECTION 2 Response: Page By:
Date:
Plans for Implementation:
r r
SECTION 3 Confimation of Implementation:
Checked by:
, Da te :
. Approved by:
Date:
. ~ -
o 7-Comment:
4 Field Characterization Activities (Page 2 of 2) b)
DOE plans to characterize the site hydrcgeologic conditions and water quality based on laboratory results frca two rounds of ground-water sampling (page 39).
It may not be possible to adequately characterize the processing or alternate disposal sites based on such few sample-results, especially if the near-surface ground water exhibits seasonality.
Several sampling for at least one year will likely be needed to pr..ide a technical basis for decisions related to site hydrogeologic conditions and water quality that will be discussed in future environmental documents.
s e