ML20215J596
| ML20215J596 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/10/1987 |
| From: | Knapp M NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Arthur W ENERGY, DEPT. OF |
| References | |
| REF-WM-60 NUDOCS 8705080123 | |
| Download: ML20215J596 (6) | |
Text
-
+
e WM60/GNG/87/03/27/ DUP April 10, 1987 W. J. Arthur, Ill
. Deputy Project Manager Uranium Mill Tailings Project Office Department of Energy P.O. Box 5400 Albuquerque, NM 87115
Dear Mr. Arthur:
In response to your March 20, 1987 request regarding draft documents concernin the Riverton remedial action, we have enclosed specific comments (Enclosure 1)g As an overall coment, please recall that in the NRC, DOE and Wyoming DEQ discussions on March 17, 1987, the' parties identified no mechanisms by which DOE could transfer its responsibilities for the Riverton tailings to the NRC.
Furthermore, it is the' Comission's position that DOE is responsible for completion of remedial action for the Riverton site, regardless of the final disposal site selected.
I have enclosed for your information an NRC letter to Senator Simpson (R) of Wyoming, signed by Chairman Zech, addressing this and other points with respect to the Riverton remedial action (Enclosure 2).
We believe it would be advantageous for DOE to advise the Department of Interior (D0I) of the Congressional Notification, as well as the Cooperative Agreement Modification,-in order to facilitate compliance with Section 106 of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA). This would help remove compliance with Section 106 as a barrier to NRC concurrence with a remedial action plan involving disposal-on DOI-administered land.
Since NRC has not yet concurred with the overall remedial action, it is premature for NRC to concur with the Congressional Notification.
In fact, the Remedial Action Plan has not yet been provided for NRC review. However, we have no objection to DOE proceeding with the Congressional Notification independently.
NRC coments on the proposed DOE Prequalification Contracting Strategy were transmitted on April 6,1987. This transmittal therefore completes our review of.the draft documents enclosed in your March 20, 1987 letter.
Y!M Record fil3 P3.1Pmicci bO Dech: No.
F0"; V h k B7041o DisMhmom py
-~
9
[5it5[dlJ,]Q55)
r WM60/GNG/87/03/27/ DUP
' 'We will continue to provide every possible assistance to DOE and the State of Wyoming in' support of this action. Should you have any questions regarding this transmittal, please contact me (FTS 427-4433) or Giorgio N. Gnugnoli-(FTS 427-4788) of my staff.
Sincerely, ist Malcolm R. Knapp, Chief Low-Level Waste and Uranium Recovery Projects Branch Division of Waste Management Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
Enclosures:
1.
Comments on Riverton Remedial Action 2.
Ltr to Sen. Simpson from Chairman Zech cc w/ encl:
J. Baublitz, DOE /HQ J. ' Turi, DOE /NE-22 J. Anderson, DOE /AL R. Smith, URF0 J. Gorn, OCA
J J
WM60/.GNG/87/03/27/ DUP 0FFICIAL CONCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION RECORD s
. LETTER TO:
W. J. Arthur III Deputy Project Manager Uranium Mill Tailings Project Office Department of Energy P.O. Box 5400 Albuquerque, NM 87115 FROM:
Malcolm R. Knapp, Chief Low-Level Waste and Uranium Recovery Projects Branch Division of Rste Management Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
SUBJECT:
DATE:
April 10, 1987 f
DISTRIBUTION WM Ticket 87-159:
WH/SF NMSS RF MKnapp, WMLU JGreeves, WMEG WMLU RF DMartin, WMLU MFliegel, WMGT GGnugnoli, WMLU RFonner, 0GC STreby, 0GC MHalsch, OGC JBradburne, OCA HPettengill, URF0 EHawkins, URF0 CONCURRENCES ORGANIZATION /CONCUREE INITIALS.
DATE CONCURRED WMLU/kJ/GGnugnoli
- 2"/M M 87/04//C WMLU/DMartin
'WE 87/04//o OGC/ K%w RLFL Whm4DEsf 87/04//0 kELU/MRKnapp
/W 87/04//o criminal not received in Tim.
D
[en n ae,*'t EMCLOSURE 2 UNITED STATES
!'.,ij NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION d
2-C W ASHING TON. D. C. 20555 kD -[r.f s,.....s
- O EO CHAIRMAN The Honorable Alan Y. Sinnsor Subcommittee on Nuclear Reaulation Committee on the Envirnament and Public Norks United States Senate Washinoton, DC 20510
Dear Senator Simnson:
Thank you for your letter of Februarv ?5, 1987 reaardi"c the Susquehanna inactive uranium mill tailinos site near Riverton, Hyoming.
I assure you that the Comnission realizes the imoortance of providing prnmot remedial action for the inactive sites in Wyoming and throuchout the country.
In particular, the Commission sucoorts the ef# orts of the Department of Energy (DOE) in fully considering tha relocation of the Susquehanna tailings to an active ~sita now under license to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
This approach has several imoortant advantages.
The crasent tailings site would become free for other use, tha tailinos would be renoved # rom P.iverton, thereby eliminating future contamination there, and the number of final disposal sites requiring long-tern oversight would be reduced.
One candidate site for disposal of the Susquehanna tai 1ings is the American Nuclear Corporation (ANC) facility in the Gas Hills area of Wyoming.
The NPC staff has reviawed and aporoved a license amendmant request which authorizes ANC to receive all of the estimated 1.5 million cubic yards of residual radioactive ma+erial now at the Susquehanna site.
This amendment obligates ANC to provide final stabilization for the transferred Susouehanna material (and any comminnled ANC byproduct ma+eriell at the ANC site in accordance with ANC's reclamation nlan.
This reclamation plan, while not complete, is consistent with all applicable federal standards for stabilization of the Susquehanna and ANC materials.
00E is responsible for completion of renedial action 'or the Susquehanna material regardless of the #inal disposal site selected.
DOE may elect to rely on an active site licersee in that regard, but would remain responsible fnr completion of remedial action if the licensee # ails to perform.
He would expact the 00E to acknowledge its ultimata resoonsibility in any remedial action plan ornviding for relocation of inactive site material to an active site.
Originated:
NMSS:Gnugnoli 8 8 WIPc-c dn a N M.<f
-m" 2_3 E
4.
Also, there are two'other issues which naed to be resolved he'nra relocation to an active site can be implananted.
These stem frnn specific orovisions o' the Uranium f'ill Tailings Radiation Control Act (IINTRCA).
Thev are:
1.
Ifnder Title I of the 'JMTD.CA the State must acquira the final disposal site orior to relocation o' tha Susquehanna ma terial, unless it is already controlled bv DOE or made availabla 'or that purpose by the Secretary of the intarior.
2.
Also under Title I, the NRC is required to issue a license to the nnE for possession and caretaking of the Susquehanna matarial by the end of the authorizad reredial action procran I this date is currently March, 1990, but DOE is saaking an extension to September, 1993).
There is uncartaint.y that the Susquehanna remedial action, and the termination of the existing ANC license, can be accomplished in this time.
The Commission believes that through continued interaction with DOE and the State of Wyomino, resolutions to these problems can be found which permit the relocation approach to be adopted and carried out to completion.
Sincerely, Lando W.
Zech, Jr.
cc:
Sen. John B. Breaux
4 I
1-l
[
ENCLOSURE 1 Specific Comments on Riverton Draft Documents i
I.
DRAFT CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION 1.
Paragraph 1.
The first paragraph should delete the words "with the concurrence of," and an additional stipulation should be added which reads:
"The NRC has already approved a ifcense amendment for receipt of the residual radioactive materials at one candidate Title II site. Other aspects of the remedial..
~
3 action (suchasexcavationandcleanupoftheRiverton.pc.jp6 site) have not yet been presented for NRC review andt 6 f G '
t 1
< Me%'.
concurrence."
.$r e
2.
Paragraph 2.
We recommend that this paragraph be deleted. Further.
ble '
NRC is not directly responsible for reclamation ofETitle.
sites, rather we license private persons who conduct fi
'l l
reclamation. Therefore, if DOE wishes to retain the)
. fy5kh paragraph, an appropriate revision would be:
,i il.
"This letter constitutes Congressional notification that the DOE and the State of Wyoming desire that the Riverton, Wyoming uranium mill tailings pile be subject to the Title II rather than the Title I provisions of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA)."
3.
Paragraph 5.
The following editorial changes are recommended:
Delete " Title II" in the first line.
Replace " Title I/II" in the third line by "conningled".
4.
Paragraph 5.
Item 3b. The Cooperative Agreement primarily describes contractual arrangements between the State and the DOE.
~
This provision stipulates responsibilities for the active l
site licensee, who would nonnally not be a party to such an agreement.
It is not clear whether DOE intends to require i
that the licensee participate in the Cooperative Agreement, or whether this will be in a separate contract between DOE and the licensee. The enforcement mechanism of this l
provision should be clearly identified.
The word " control" and the following text should be deleted in the fourth, fifth and sixth lines. Substitute instead the word " license" after NRC.
1
.g I
ga?;J 9 %,,; ; Q n f,Nu
.2 rp 5.
Paragrap"h 5.",~ Item 3c. The following editorial changes are recomended:
"Upon such time as" should be replaced by "When".
" Title I/II" should be replaced by " commingled".
... take title to the site and..." should be deleted. Add "under NRC license" after " maintenance."
6.
Paragraph 6.
The following editorial change is recomended:
" Title I/ Title II" should be replaced by " commingled".
II. MODIFICATION OF DOE / WYOMING COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT:
cor7 [D ThepartiestothisagreementareDOEandtheState$D91 1.
Introduction.
Wyoming. The NRC is not a party, but is to concur
. $n Further, no Gas Hills sites other than the ANC site m '
'?-
presently have a pre-approved license condition allowing J'. fy We therefore recommepdf..m.W them to accept Title I material.
J that the paragraph be revised to read:
1.C V W.
"Whereas the Department of Energy (DOE), the Bureau of Lasid.%.)
Management (BLM), and the State of Wyoming agreet witWh P j 9 Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) concurrence that-thes Riverton, Wyoming Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action (UNTRA) Project Title I tailings material may be relocated i
to a Title II site in the Gas Hills...."
3 2.
Title I/II Program Responsibilities.
a)
Since relocation is planned, the language should be' revised to indicate that commingling will not occur at the Riverton site.
DOE does not presently have a concurrence role in the determination of the adequacy of a licensee's surety arrangements with NRC.
However, copies of arrangements will be forwarded to DOE for their use.
The,present NRC license for the ANC site does not specify September
- 30. 1992 for completion of remedial action.
3.
Design / Construction.
II a)
Satisfying Title II standards will in great part satisfy the Title I requirements for remedial action. However, satisfying ground-water protection standards under Title I is still an uncertainty, due to the court decision remanding them.
It is probable that Title I ground-water protection standards will not be more stringent than those of Title II. This section of the modification should refer to Section V on ground-water protection.
J' l
fyQ7M
~
4.
Ensi iCompliance 3 <.,,
I III a.
"... and EA..." should be deleted from the fourth line.
5.
Liability for Remedial Action Costs.
IV b.
DOE has no role in concurring with the NRC detennination of adequacy of surety for reclamation of the site under Title II.
(Seeconsent#2above). Whatever mechanisms for surety that DOE requires to be put in place by the contractor should be separate from the portion allotted for the Pond 1 reclamation. NRC's Uranium Recovery Field Office will provide a review of the adequacy of the surety arrangement, if DOE requests it. Again the September 1992 milestone has not been factored into the..
jfy
'f present surety / reclamation mechanism in place.
_,.- WP u J M l
As discussed in the 3/17/87 meeting, the NRC does not holdd N.p+
i bonds, but rather has an arrangement with Wyoming for thtState4/;
fn to do so.
If NRC were to receive the bond money on for6ftu a
it would be transferred to the U.S. Treasury as a miscella S. @..
l receipt.
It is reconnended that the last sentence be deleted y p%
i n;;.ji SiQ*
i 6.
Disposal Site Owner Land Use Provisions.
- 'N 1 This section should describe clearly what permits and other land use arrangements are to be made to handle the pre, during and post-reclamation land custody requirements. The Cooperative Agreement should specifically identify the DOE, State, NRC and Department of Interior roles. Since the Title II licensee isn't a party to the Cooperative Agreement, any necessary licensee actions should be specified in a contractual manner.
4
,Y-
- * ~ r %,
}
s a
_.-,_,__,__,,,,._--_..____.,.,,y
.__,__,,,,,__,,_,.7,_
- .S* **Re,
ENCLOSURE 2
/
UNITED STATES g
.r NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l1 i
f waswo.oroN. o. c. aosse March 23, 1987 cweauaN The Honorable Alan V. Simnson Subcommittee on Nuclear Reoulation Committee on the Enviroaeent and Public Works United States Senate Washinnton, DC 20510
Dear Senator Simnson:
Thank you for your letter of Februarv ?S, lo87 regardian the Susquehanna inactive uranium mill tailinas site near Riverton, Wyoming.
I assure you that the Commission realizes the imoortance of providing prompt remedial action for the inactive sites in 4
Wyoming and throughout the country.
in particular, the Commission suoonrts the ef' orts of the 4.
Department of Energy (DOE) in fully considering the relocation of the Susquehanna tailings to an active'sita now under license to ;
the-Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
This approach has several imoortant advantages.
The nresent tailings tite would become free for other use, the tailinas would be removed ' rom Riverton, thereby eliminating future contaminetion there, and the number of final disposal sites requiring long-term oversight would be reduced.
One candidate site for disposal of the Susquehanna tailinas is the American Nuclear Corporation (ANC) facility in the Gas Hills area of Wyoming.
The NPC staff has reviewed and apnroved a license amendment request which authorizes ANC to receive all of the estimated 1.5 million cubic yards of residual radiose.tive ma+erial now at the Susquehanna site.
This amendment obligates ANC to provide final stabilization for the transferrad Susouthanna material (and any comminnled ANC byornduct materf all at the ANC site in accordance with ANC's reclamation nlan.
This reclamation plan, while not complete, is consistent with all annlicable federal standards for stabilization of the Susquehanna and ANC materials.
00E ts responsible for completion of remedial action 'er the Susquehanna material regardless of the 'inal disposal site t
selected.
DOE may elect to rely on an active site licersee in that regard, but would remain responsible fer completion of remedial action if the licensea #411s to perform.
He would e.xpect j
the 00E to acknowledge its ultimata resoonsibility in any remedial j
action plan oroviding for relocation of inactive site material to an active site.
Originated:
I NHSS:Gnugnoli
,~q) s,
" D t ' -I (./ /f)] y b
d y
4
~
i Also, there are two' other issues which nead to be resolved he'nre
-I I
relocation to an active site can be implemanted.
These stem renn.
specific provisions o' the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control I
Act (HMTRCA).
They are:
1.
Under Title I of the UMTDCA the State must acquire the final disposal site orior to relocation o# the Susquehanna materdel, unless it is already contro11ad bv DOE or made available 'or that purpose by the Secretary of the intarior.
2.
Also under Title I, the NRC is required to issue a license to the nnE for possession and caretaking of the 4
Susquehanna matarial by the end of the authorizad
-j' remedial action procran I this date is currently i
March, 1990, but DOE is saaking an axtension to September, 1993).
There is uncartainty that the-3 Susquehanna ramedial action, and the termination of the existing ANC Ifcense, can be accomplished in this
~
time.
The Commission believes that through continued interaction with 4
00E and the State of Wyomino, resolutions to these problems can be found which permit the relocation approach to be adopted and carried out to completion.
Sincerely, i
Lando W. Zech, Jr.
cc:
Sen. John B. Breaux l
D
.. _ _ -. -... - -.. _. _., - - - - - _. -.. - ~. -
. _. -