ML20249B691
| ML20249B691 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/19/1998 |
| From: | Joseph Holonich NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Rael G ENERGY, DEPT. OF |
| References | |
| REF-WM-69 NUDOCS 9806240060 | |
| Download: ML20249B691 (4) | |
Text
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
d l
June 19, 1998 Mr.'Georgs Real, Director U.S. Department of Energy Albuquerque Operations Office ERD /UMTRA P.O. Box 5400 Albuquerque, NM 87185-5400
SUBJECT:
REVIEW OF MAYBELL, COLORADO " DRAFT" COMPLETION REPORT (PART I)
Dear Mr. Rael:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has completed its review of the Maybell, Colorado " DRAFT" Completion Report (Part I), dated December 1997, which was submitted by U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) letter dated February 18,1998. The DOE transmittalletter states that Part 1 of the Completion Report (CR) contains information on site remedial actions taken through December 1997, and therefore does not represent a completed site.
Since the CR (Part 1) does not contain as-built calculations, as-built drawings, or any riprap placement or materials data, the NRC staff review was, of necessity, limited in scope, and a review to establish acceptance of the CR will be performed after submittal of Part ll. The staff's comments on the CR (Part 1) are enclosed for your information, and these comments should be addressed in DOE's submittal of the CR (Part II).
If you have any questions concerning this letter or the enclosed comments, please contact the NRC Project Manager, Robert Carlson, at (301) 415-6678, or Ken Hooks, at (301) 415-7777.
Sincerely, N[epboN0i$
f f
Uranium Recovery Branch i
Division of Waste Management Office of Nuclear Material Safety jd j [
{j 7
and Safeguards
Enclosure:
As stated c
cc: W. Woodworth, DOE Alb p M M, l F. Bosiljevac, DOE Alb E. Artiglia, TAC Alb DISTRIBUTION w/ Encl.:
File Center NMSS r/f URB r/f PUBLIC ACNW EBrummett CNWRA TJohnson BJagannath MLayton w/o Encl.: MFederline CAbrams DOCUMENT NAME: S:DWM\\ URB 1KRH\\MAYBELL.CR OFC' URB
_ E, URB \\h h Uh N
k DGil J
nich NAME KHooks H
06/h98 OkC(98 06/lf /98 l DATE OFFlglAL RECORD COPt \\
9906240060 990619 PDR WASTE WM-69 PDR
'l I. ~ '# '
O Tl o
33 - ;ya
-u
, n, k
L,. %" "
]
tM U4 g-4 UNITED STATES' j
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20666-0001
\\,***_
- /'
~*
June 19, 1998 Mr. George Rael, Director U.S. Department of Energy Albuquerque Operations Office ERD /UMTRA P.O. Box 5400 Albuquerque, NM 87185-5400
SUBJECT:
REVIEW OF MAYBELL, COLORADO " DRAFT" COMPLETION REPORT (PART l}
Dear Mr. Rael:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has completed its review of the Maybell, Colorado " DRAFT" Cornpletion Report (Part I), dated December 1997, which was submitted by U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) letter dated February 18,1998. The DOE transmittal letter states that Part 1 of the Completion Report (CR) contains information on site remedial actions taken through December 1997, and therefore does not represent a complated site.
l Since the CR (Part I) does not contain as-built calculations, as-built drawings, or any riprap placement or materials data, the NRC staff review was, of necessity, limited in scope, and a review to establish acceptance of the CR will be performed after submittal of Part II. The staff's comments on the CR (Part I) are enclosed for your information, and these comments should be addressed in DOE's submittal of the CR (Part II).
If you have any questions concerning this letter or the enclosed comments, please contact the NRC Project Manager, Robert Carlson, at (301) 415-6678, or Ken Hooks, at (301) 415-7777.
Sincerely, w;
cr-/
v Joseph 0. Holonich, Chief
)
Uranium Reccvery Branch Division of Waste Management Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
Enclosure:
As stated cc: W Woodworth, DOE Alb F Bosiljevac, DOE Alb E. /.rtiolia, TAC Alb
4 COMMENTS ON MAYBELL " DRAFT" COMPLETION REPORT (PART I)
Backaround The Maybell mill and tailings site is located about 5 miles northeast of the town of Maybell and about 25 miles west of the town of Craig in Moffat County in northwestem Colorado.
The mill was established in 1955-56, and operated until 1964. Surface remediation was begun in April 1995. The site is being remediated by the U.S. Department of Energy under Title i of the Uranium Mill Tailing Radiation Control Act.
The " DRAFT" Completion Report (Part I) contains information on site remedial actions taken through December 1997, and therefore does not represent a completed site. The Completion Report (CR) states that the site is currently schedule to be completed in September of 1998, at which time a final version of the CR will be prepared and issued. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff comments listed below should be addressed in the final CR.
Radiation Protection and Soil Cleanup
- 1. The Remedial Action Plan (RAP) indicated that areas known or suspected of containing elevated levels of Th-230 below the depth of Ra-226 remediation will have 100% of the grids analyzed. Windblown areas will not be analyzed for Th-230, and other areas will have 10%
of the grids verified for Th-230. Appendix J of the Completion Report (CR) states that Th-230 sampling was performed on nearly 100% of the sub-pile grids, and approximately 4% of the off-pile grids. The DOE should clarify if there is a discrepancy between the RAP commitment and the Th-230 verification performed.
- 2. As mentioned to DOE concerning other documents,40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 192.21 was revised as of January 1995 (60,FE 2854). Therefore, the supplemental standard criteria designation mentioned on pages 6,32, and 43 of the CR should be revised (c= cost, h=other radionuclides).
- 3. On page 33 of the CR, conceming the supplemental standard for a section of Johnson Wash and three of its gullies, DOE states that some of the ore materials have been influenced by mill processes. However, the soil data provided indicates all ore (highest Ra-226/U-238 ratio is 11.3 and apparently at 6-12 feet deep, page 49). DOE should indicate what data demonstrate that there are tailings in the area or if supplemental standards are just needed for the elevated Th-230 that could be natural.
- 4. The final radon flux calculations should be provided in the final CR.
Geotechnical During an investigation to determine the extent of frost damage to exposed or partially covered radon barrier material, it was determined that the radon barrier thickness was 13 inches,13 inches,14 inches, and 18 inches in the four test pits dug in the northeast comer of the disposal cell. This data needs to be evaluated to determine if further tests are required to establish that design specifications were met during construction of the radon barrier.
Enclosure
e
'- DOE should submit calculations to support its position that only 13 inches of competent radon barrier is adequate, and also establish that the radon barrier thickness over a major portion of the disposal cellis as-designed (18 inches). If the as-built thickness of the radon barri6r is less than 18 inches over a major portion of the disposal cell, then the thickness of the competent radon barrier must be correspondingly reduced in radon flux calculations to
)
account for a frost depth of 66.8 inches, Groundwater Hydrolooy No information was provided in the CR on well abandonment. DOE should provide documentation detailing which monitoring wells have been abandoned at the site.
Additionally, locations of wells not abandoned, including any piezometers, should be included on the as-built drawings included in the final CR.
Surface Water Hydrofoav and Erosign Protection No riprap material data or final surface contour data was provided in the CR, so no evaluation could be performed. The data should be provided in the final CR.
1
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ -