ML20246M205

Response to Hastert Committee on Public Works & Transportation Question 4 for 890713 Hearing

ML20246M205
Person / Time
Issue date:	07/13/1989
From:	NRC
To:	Hastert J HOUSE OF REP.
Shared Package
ML20246M176	List: ML20246M170 ML20246M178 ML20246M192 ML20246M199 ML20246M205 ML20246M218 ML20246M243 ML20246M259 ML20246M265 ML20246M274
References
CCS, HASTERT-890713, NUDOCS 8909070117
Download: ML20246M205 (1)

Text

- -- _ .

t ,

e,, -

-QUESTION 4 What risks would be posed by leaving the tailings where they are?

ANSWER.

-The EPA estimated risks in EPA 520/4-82-013-1.for various strategies in

. establishing standards under which the uranium mill tailings could be reclaimed and stabilized. The risks were characterized in terms of deaths avoided in the first 100 years following remedial action. EPA estimated 200 deaths avoided in the first 100 years should the uranium tailings be mitigated, as opposed to being left there unreclaimed in any fashion.

In the case where the uranium mill tailings were moved--for example, the Salt Lake City processing site--the DOE estimated no significant differences in the radiological impacts to the general population, regardless of whether the uranium tailings were relocated or stabilized in place. The estimated impacts to workers differed slightly in short term. DOE estimated 0.2 excess cancer deaths, due to radiological exposure, over a three year period for stabilization in place (SIP) versus 0.5 excess cancer deaths over a three year pe.riod for the transportation of the tailings to the Clive disposal site.

For the uranium mill tailings sites considered in the program up to this point, DOE's decisions on relocating or stabilizing tho uranium mill tailings in place were based on other factors as well as radiological risks. These factors included the importance of the existing sites for land development, the impacts to useable ground-water systems, and the surface stability of the disposal design.

8909070117 890814 PDR ORG NE ED PDC