ML20206E919

EDO Control of Rulemaking Package Re 10CFR40, U Mill Tailings Regulations:Conforming NRC Requirements to EPA Stds. Continuation of Rulemaking Approved

ML20206E919
Person / Time
Issue date:	05/20/1985
From:	Dircks W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To:	Jennifer Davis NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
References
NUDOCS 8606240042
Download: ML20206E919 (34)

Text

- -

q

, k i

g2 0 1985 t h

MEMORANDUM FOR: John G. Davis, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards FROM: William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations

SUBJECT:

CONTROL OF NRC RULEMAKING By memorandum of February 13, 1984, " Control of NRC Rulemaking by Offices Reporting to the EDO," Offices were directed that effective April 1,1984, (1) all offices under ED0 purview must obtain my approval to begin and/or continue a specific rulemaking, (2) resources were not to be expended on rule-makings that have not been approved, and (3) RES would independently review rulemaking proposals forwarded for my approval and make recorrsnendations to me concerning whether or not and how to proceed with the rulemakings.

In accordance with my directive, the following proposal concerning rulemaking has been forwarded for ray approval.

Proposed rule,10 CFR Part 40, " Uranium Mill Tailings Regulations: Conforming NRC Requirements to EPA Standards." (Sponsored by NMSS - memorandum, Minogue to EDO dated May 14,1985.)

I approve continuation of this rulemaking. The NRC Regulatory Agenda (NUREG-0936) should be modified to reflect the status of this rulemaking.

(Signed) Jack W. Roe William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations cc: V. Stello J. Roe H. R. Denton J. Taylor 8606240042 e50520 R. B. Minogue EDO RM 40 P. G. Norry PDR Distribution:

WJDircks JHSniezek VStello WSchwink JPhilips JHenry ED0 rf Central File DEDR0GR cf n . /*

OFC :ROGRs 5 :ROG E :DE R EDO  :  :  :

'2_ :: .........:. __________:.._________ :.......____

.....:.__........_:.[ze__k____:_(..

NAME :BG el :VSelo  : ircks  :  :  :

..... : ..j ......  : e........__:.__.._.... _:. _.. __ ...:__ ..._.....:______.. ___:.._ ..._.._

DATE :5/16/85 :5/,E, /85 :5/1,j/85 :5/E/85  :  :  :

i L

=.-

o, ,

ROUTING AND TRANSMITTAL SUP MAY 151915 -

m (Neme. omee symbol, room numbw, inRials Date hunding, Agency /PosQ g,0[,.Q6f *O$OROS s.

. 3.

s.

XAction File Note and Retum Approwel For Cleerence Per Conversation As Requested For Correction Prepare Reply Circulate For Your Information See Me Comment investigste Signature Coordination Justify REMARMS Qg$',_D>L M & :==+

b 7;t.4 alm SS -

."O AT

. . . k N C 0 * "' *^^^E^^

6 e eA sh, " /%# y .

3 ,

O M OY' DO NOT use this form as a RECORD of approvels, concug, disposals, clearances, and similar actions l FROM:(Nemo, org. symbol, Agency / Post) Room No.-Bldg.

\ } > KA&B, c"S enon. No.

n a->c w l 8048-102 OFFIONAL F

^ ne2 o - ut-sn mn rPasm tea101-11.206 cN)g 41 (Rev.

--- 7-76)=

r -

e:nuq a

, 30g UNITED STATES y 7, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Ri o G j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

\...../ MAY 141985 MEMORANDUM FOR: William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations k

FROM: Robert B. Minogue, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research

SUBJECT:

CONTROL OF NRC RULEMAKING: RES INDEPENDENT REVIEW 0F EFFECTIVE RULEMAKING SPONSORED BY NMSS Based on our independent review of the rulemaking, " Uranium Mill Tailings Regulations (10 CFR Part 40): Conforming NRC Requirements to EPA Standards,"

sponsored by NMSS, RES agrees with the recommendation of the Director, NMSS, that the rulemaking effort should continue.

The basis for our recommendations is as follows:

Under section 18(a) of Pub. L.97-415, the NRC Authorization Act for FY 82 & 83, the NRC is required to conform its regulations to EPA's standards in Subparts D and E of 40 CFR Part 192 by no later than March 31, 1984. In keeping with section 18(a), NRC suspended portions of its Oct. 3, 1980, mill tailings regulations in App. A of 10 CFR Part 40 in 1983. Those portions of the regulations suspended were determined to be in conflict or inconsistent with EPA's standards.

(The suspension terminates automatically upon conclusion of this conforming rulemaking.)

On Nov. 26, 1984, NRC published a proposed rule not only to conform its regulations to EPA's standards under UMTRCA, but also to establish general requirements for the management of urtnium and thorium byproduct materials at least comparable to requirements applicable to the management of similar hazardous wastes regulated by the EPA under the Solid Waste Disposal Act (The rulemaking is consistent with 1985 policy and planning guidance with respect to timing).

i.

CE' -<

4 MAY 141985 2

This ongoing rulemaking (a companion to the mill tailings regulation on groundwater protection) may be characterized as a matter which does not require a Commission decision at a meeting, but nevertheless requires Commission concurrence. (SECY-83-523 submitted the notice of proposed rulemaking to the Commission for Notation Vote.)-

The complete RES independent review package has been sent to OED0 (Attention:

DEDROGR) and to the Director, NMSS.

$~

Robert B. Minogue, W rector Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research e

L

1 $

. MAY 14 BBS MEMORANDUM FOR: William J. Dircks l Executive Director for Operations I

FROM: Robert B. Minogue, Director

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research

SUBJECT:

CONTROL OF NRC RULEMAKING: RES INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF EFFECTIVE RULEMAKING SPONSORED BY NMSS Based on our independent review of the rulemaking, " Uranium Mill Tailings Regulations (10 CFR Part 40): Confoming NRC Requirements to EPA Standards,"

sponsored by NMSS, RES agrees with the recommendation of the Director, NMSS,

! that the rulemaking effort should continue.

The basis for our reconnendations is as follows:

Under section 18(a) of Pub. L.97-415, the NRC Authorization Act for

FY 82 & 83, the NRC is required to conform its regulations to EPA's j standards in Subparts D and E of 40 CFR Part 192 by no later than

! March 31, 1984. In keeping with section 18(a), NRC suspended portions l of its Oct. 3, 1980, mill tailings regulations in App. A of 10 CFR i Part 40 in 1983. Those portions of the regulations suspended were i determined to be in conflict or inconsistent with EPA's standards. -

i (The suspension terminates automatically upon conclusion of this

! confoming rulemaking.)

On Nov. 26, 1984 NRC published a proposed rule not only to conform its regulations to EPA's standards under UMTRCA, but also to establish general requirements for the management of uranium and thorium byproduct materials at least comparable to requirements applicable to the management of similar hazardous wastes regulated by the EPA under the Solid Waste Disposal Act (The rulemaking is l consistent with 1985 policy and planning guidance with respect to timing).

OFC: DRPES/WMB :DRPES/WMB :DRPES/D :RES/DD :RES/D :RIRB  :

NAME:JStewart:pd :FCostanzi :KGoller  : Dross :RMinogue :FGillespie :

DATE:3/ /85 :3/ /85 :3/ /85 :3/ /85 :3/ /85 :3/ /85 :

3 1

- _ . - . . _ . . ____...u- .:_...__._..______._._,_._

MAY 141935 This ongoing rulemaking (a companion to the mill tailings regulation on groundwater protection) may be characterized as a matter which does not require a Comission decision at a meeting, but nevertheless requires Comission concurrence. (SECY.83-523 submitted the notice of proposed rulemaking to the Commission for Notation Vote.)

The complete RES independent review package has been sent to OEDO (Attention:

DEDROGR) and to the Director, NMSS.

W 998 nonutzs.museen Robert B. Minogue, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research DISTRIBUTION Subj. FCostanzi Circ. KGoller Chron. Dross WMB/rf RMinogue JStewart WOTT l

.nb 1 n

Q<As 0FC ES/WMB :R 'WMB :DRPES/D  : D :F  :  :

......................v........--.

NAM tewart:pd : zi :KGoller  : Dross :L ogue :F esp e :

DATE / 2 1 /85 /1'.L/85 d/21/85 / /85 :3/ /85  :

h/l{/85

a RES INDEPENDENT REVIEW PACKAGE

.. _ m. _ - . _ _ __ __

l RES INDEPENDENT REVIEW BOARD VOTING SHEET TO: RIRB FROM: F. P. Gillespie, Chairman, RIRB TITLE OF RULEMAKING: Uranium Mill Tailings Regulations: Confoming NRC Requirements to EPA Standards (Part 40)

,j AGREE WITH DRAFT RES REQUEST RIRB V INDEPENDENT RECOP9tENDATIONS MEETING.

IN DRAFT INDEPENDENT REVIEW PACKAGE.

MODIFY DRAFT RES NOT PARTICIPATING.

INDEPENDENT RECOMMENDATIONS AS INDICATED BELOW.

6 e6srsA"'A C0094ENTS AND SUGGESTIONS:

c,5 T a. w,C b (yj g summed h McL- D s15, 'll a ,le ;by as a ns '

( M, L A4ci \  %(B 4n14d muck ,

4 yq k ho h tV f '1 **

t WY (9 - on, q< gym nctuf

%% G 0 "l- [ s t, e 4*I p orqsf5 40 w k h cog L9W < $ ,

0

MEMjER,RIRB

! 4/(/f

/I #

f l DATE

/

RES INDEPENDENT REVIEW BOARD VOTING SHEET TO: F. P. GILLESPIE, CHAIRMAN, RIRB FROM: G. A. Arlotto, Menber, RIRB TITLE OF RULEMAKING: Uranium flill Tailings Regulations: Confonning NRC Requirements to EPA Standards (Part 40)

/' AGREE WITH DRAFT RES REQUEST RIRB d _,

INDEPENDENT RECOMMENDATIONS IN DRAFT INDEPENDENT REVIEW MEETING.

PACKAGE.

MODIFY DRAFT RES NOT PARTICIPATING.

INDEPENDENT RECOMMENDATIONS AS INDICATED BELOW.

COMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS:

l

\

}[

j DATE e

. . :. . . . . . ( . . . ..

= _, _ ;_ _ ,

l RES INDEPENDENT REVIEW BOARD VOTING SHEET TO: F. P. GILLESPIE, CHAIRMAN, RIRB FROM: W. M. Morrison, Member, RIRB TITLE OF RULEMAKING: Uranium Mill Tailings Regulations: Groundwater Protection and Other Issues (Part 40)

AGREE WITH DRAFT RES REQUEST RIRB INDEPENDENT RECOMMENDATIONS MEETING.

/ IN DRAFT INDEPENDENT REVIEW PACKAGE.

MODIFY DRAFT RES NOT PARTICIPATING.

INDEPENDENT RECOMENDATIONS AS INDICATED BELOW.

ComENTS AND SUGGESTIONS:

Straight approval.

l l

i IV///l0mA W. M. MORRISON MEE ER, RIRB l

.. +/Wrr DATE ,

-.--w- c -- - -

. ,- . , g- .

, , , , ;;~;, ,

)

\

(RGS IND6t'2RDEA)T R2rnsw' or nMss-stosisanto gure.

~

.,m -

suk geese opnaer, seem menew. . eenen. eene 3, W. M. Morrison. Member RIRE S. G. A. Arlotto, tiember. RIRB -

4 F. P. Gillespie. Chaiman. RIRB 1 hauen one seses ans netw .

heem=1 per aswones -

per consweeuen he nessesses per omnessen seismo meser tweenses per weer ensememen seean.

benensat savesnesses eennetem

• - r---

aessur amannus v e r w M T r_se = s- h.w :

3-w yNWM5%&A*

nnte 9 ,

We are at step III.C.2. "RIRS deliberations ' of.the .

i RES independent review procedu'res fo'r the attached specific ongoing rulemaling sponsored by NA155.

Please evaluate the . attached dra'ft independent review package and provide RM1RB with your voting sheet indicating your. position on the rulemaking.

l Your response by c.o.b.

will assist in RES' makir.g independent recommendations .

to the EDO in a timely manner.

j S0 000f ese elds tonn es a IIEDDIID et eensenenses, qpayeests,

eteneennes, ans r asmens M (Nang esg, areast, W/ Posy ,

neem W .

RAMRB staff .

Fees. Ine.

443-7885

. ,, e e m aus e - mi.ine ::::

yg es. m l

1

MEMORANDUM RES TO ED0 WITH DIVISION DIRECTOR CONCURRENCE

l t ,

MEMORANDUM FOR: William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations FROM: Robert B. Minogue, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research

SUBJECT:

CONTROL OF NRC RULEMAKING: RES INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF EFFECTIVE RULEMAKING SPONSORED BY NMSS Based on our independent review of the rulemaking, " Uranium Mill Tailings Regulations (10CFRPart40): Confoming NRC Requirements to EPA Standards,"

sponsored by NMSS, RES agrees with the reconnendation of the Director, NMSS, that the rulemaking effort should continue.

The basis for our recommendations is as follows:

i NRC must comply with the Congressional mandate to confom existing NRC regulations for uranium mill tailings to EPA standards. In i addition, certain provisions of Appendix A of 10 CFR Part 40 are in conflict, or are inconsistent with recent EPA standards.

. Proceeding with effective rulemaking is in conformance with NRC 1 Planning Guidance for uranium mill tailings regulations which indicates that the remaining changes for implementing EPA's standards

, shall be completed by January 1, 1988.

l At this time RES is not aware of any reasonable alternative to proceeding with this rulemaking effort to make NRC's non. groundwater regulation consistent with EPA standards as directed by Congressional mandate.

Robert B. Minogue, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research DISTRIBUTION l Subj. FCostanzi Circ. KGoller Chron. Dross WMB/rf RMinogue JStewart WOTT NOTE

• See previous concurre'.ce 1

0FC: DRPES/WMB :DRPES/WMB :DRPES/D :RES/DD .RES/D :RIRB  :

l ..............._............. . _..________......._............_._.......................

j NAME:JStewart:pd :FCostanzi :KGoller  : Dross :RMinogue :FGillespie :

I l

DATE:3/ /85 :3/ /85 :3/ /85 :3/ /85 :3/ /85 :3/ /85  :

l MEMORANDUM FOR: William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations FROM: Robert B. Minogue, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 4

SUBJECT:

CONTROL OF NRC RULEMAKING: RES INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF

EFFECTIVE RULEMAKING SPONSORED BY NMSS Based on our independent review of the rulemaking " Uranium Mill Tailings

Regulations (10 CFR Part 40); Conforming NRC Requirements to EPA Standards,"

sponsored by NMSS, RES agrees with the recommendation of the Director, MMSS, that the rulemaking effort should continue.

The basis for our recommendations is as follows:

l NRC must comply with the Congressional mandate to conform existing NRC regulations for uranium mill tailings to EPA standards. In addition, certain provisions of Appendix A of 10CFR Part 40 are in j conflict or inconsistent with recent EPA standards.

Proceeding with effective rulemaking is in conformance with NRC Planning Guidance for uranium mill tailings regulations which

, indicates that the remaining changes for implementing EPA's standards shall be completed by January 1,1988.

At this time RES is not aware of any reasonable alternative to proceeding with this rulemaking effort to make NRC's non-groundwater regulation consistent with EPA standards as directed by Congressional j mandate.

I Robert B. Minogue, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research DISTRIBUTION

( Subj. FCostanzi Circ. KGoller i Chron. Dross l WMB/rf RMinogue

! JStewart WOTT NOTE *See previous concurrence

- V 0FC: DRPE B  : RPES/WMB : :RES/DD :RES/D  : RIRB  :

NAME:JSt :pd : . nzi :KGol r  : Dross :RMinogue :FGilespie :

DATE:3/B 85 :3/1(4/85 :3/p/85 :3/ /85 :3/ /85  :  :

i

. _ . _ . . . . _ ~ . . . _ . _ _ _ . - , _ _ _ _ . - - . _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ . . _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ . - _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ - - , . , _ , _ _ _ . ~ , _ , , . _ _ . . . _ _ _ _

o#" UNITED STATES y- %g*g 4 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

%,*****4$

MAR 2 2 E05 MEMORANDUM FOR: K. R. Goller, Director Division of Radiation Programs and Earth Sciences, RES FROM: Frank P. Gillespie, Chairman RES Independent Review Board

SUBJECT:

CONTROL OF NRC RULEMAKING: RES INDEPENDENT REVIEW 0F ONGOING RULEMAKING Enclosed is a rulemaking(review RES independent review. Enclosurepackage

1) received from a sponsoring office for In accorda'nce with procedures approved by the ED0 on May 30,1984, the rule-making review package is assigned to your Division for action. (Enclosure 2).

The ED0-approved procedures allow a total of 20 working days:for completing the RES independent review. To assist RES in completing its independent review in a timely manner, please submit the draft independent review package for this specific rulemaking to RAMRB by 7 working days from the date of this memorandum.

(1

,- \

\

d Frank P. Gillespi , Chairman RES Independent Review Board

Enclosures:

1. " Uranium Mill Tailings Regulations:

Conforming)NRC (10 CFR 40 Requirements to EPA Standards"

2. Procedures for Conducting RES Independent Review of Rulemakings

?

a f.*

i 0FFICE REVIEW PACKAGE RECEIVED FROM NMSS

• . me e, ,-e- -

e #'@'**0%

• y" , , ,. ,

h% UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

-I caswmcron. o. c. zem ,

N711 Wit 14 1525 MEMORANDUM FOR: William J. Dircks Executive Director for Operations FROM: John G. Davis, Director Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

SUBJECT:

CONTROL OF NRC RULEMAKING - EDO QUARTERLY REVIEW In response to your memorandum of February 13, 1984, and in accordance with instructions provided in subsequent memoranda from the Office of Nuclear Regu-latory Research (NRR), the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) has reviewed the ongoing or proposed rulemaking activities listed in Attachment 1 to this memorandum. On the basis of our review, we recommend approval of continued activity on these rules, with the exception of "Certifi-cation of Industrial Radiographers" and " Shallow Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste". Staff efforts on these are now directed toward terminating the two rulemaking activities. '

Also, as directed by your memorandum and the subsequent instructions from RES, we have prepared Review Packages for all of the listed rulemaking activities.

These are included as attachments to this memorandum, with copies forwarded to RES and the other reviewing offic

• l .

^ ,

J hn G. Davis, Directer Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards s

Attachments:

As stated l

bec: RES RM DRR l

t

., -- - ^

,y,

( gf3 e

DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT

" Uranium Mill Tailings Regulations: Confoming NRC Requirements to EPA Standards"

Contact:

Kitty Dragonette 427-4300 i

l 1.

=- . _ . , - . - - - - - _ . ._ - - - - _ . _ ___

. = , . O oQ o O.- O 4 . . Q. D Q -

. . . . .@ ga g O9 h g g e G 4

NRC REGULATORY AGENDA ENTRY I

l t

l l

l l

. s l

l

~ - -

:.=W e, . \

u.

n+9wEw:;. hh ,veka.,. i:=.s e .M . % i 2 W . . V :

~- ~ .

. s. ..

g.. m m*v'..7.;:y..-  ;

~

7:?,,  ?-

. TITLE'r .

- Urafriumr~ Mill Ta'i.l'i nga Regulatif ons: Confo'rming NRC Requirements to EPA Standards -

~

~*{

CFR CITATIOK;.

10'CFR 4Q . .

AasTRACT:

' - The proposed rule would revise the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's regulations governing the disposal of uranium mill tailings to conform them to regulations recently published by the Environmental Protection Agency that. set standards for protecting the environment from these wastes. The proposed rule would remove ineensistencies between NRC and EPA requa.rements and incorporate in NRC. regulations the stability, radon release, and other provisions of the EPA standard not related to groundwater. This actiert ir necessary to comply with provisions of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act and- the NRC Authorization Act f or FT 1983; therefore no alternativer to this action need to be .

considered. EPA has estimated that compliance with their recently putriished regulations would cost the uranium milling industry from about $310 million to $540 million to dispose of all existing tailings and tailings to be generated by the year 2000.

This includer the coser of the groundwater protection provisions which. are to be addressed in future NRC rule changes. The EPA regulations are binding on NRC licensees in the interim. The final rule should be in place within 6 months after publication of the proposed rul and require r.17 : rinal (lere k [ ehen 0.2 FTEt_NRC staff resources. ,

TIMETABLE: I * #' '/ b #pJ #f MPRM C:l;;i B 4, jll2(,lfq N*s / W, b k Vi n.Me, /. /

e4, ..

LEGAL AUTHORITY:

42 USC 2014; 42 USC 2092; 42 USC 2093; 42 USC 2094; 42 USC 2095;Wlf

1. Hise ce4r*

a- .Cow ad /d' .'af ne 42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2113; 42 USC 2114; 42 USC 2201; 42 USC 2232;g 42 USC 2233; 42 USC 2236; 42 USC 2282; 42 USC 2021.; 42 USC 5841 ,

} e c.6en.

EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No AGENCT CONTACT:

Kitty S. Dragonette

. Office of' Nuclear Material Safety and i Safeguards Washington, DC 20555 301 427-4300 .

92 r-

l TITLE:

Uranium Mill Tailings Regulations: Conforming NRC Requirements to ,

EPA Standards .

j

.I I

CFR CITATION: l

10 CFR 40 !l ABSTRACT

!

The proposed rule would revise the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's regulations governing the disposal of uranium mill tailings to conform them to regulations recently published by the Environmental Protection Agency that set standards for protecting the environment from these wastes. The proposed rule would remove  !

inconsistencies between NRC and EPA requirements and incorporate in NRC regulations the stability, radon release, and other provisions of the EPA standard not related to groundwater. This action is necessary to comply with provisions of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act and the NRC Authorization Act for FY 1983; therefore no alternatives to this action need to be considered. EPA has estimated that compliance with their recently published regulations would cost. the uranium milling industry f rom about $310 million to $540 million to dispose of all ,

existing tailings and tailings to be generated by the year 2000.

This includes the costs of the groundwater protection provisions ,

which are to be addressed in future NRC rule changes. The EPA i regulations are binding on NRC licensees in the interim. The '

I final rule should be in place within 6 months after l publication of the proposed rule and require only nominal (less than at $25,044) NRC staff resources.

TIMETABLE:

NPRM 11/26/84 49 FR 48418 NPRM Comment Period Begin 11/26/84 49 FR 48418 NPRM Comment Period End 01/10/85 Next Action Undetermined LEGAL AUTHORITY:

42 USC 2014; 42 US'C 2092; 42 USC 2093; 42 USC 2094; 42 USC 2095; l 42 USC 2111; 42 USC 2113; 42 USC 2114; 4 USC 2201; 42 USC 2232; 42 USC 2233; 42 USC 2236; 42 USC 2282; 4 USC 2021; 42 USC 5841 EFFECTS ON SMALL BUSINESS AND OTHER ENTITIES: No -

AGENCY CONTACT:

Kitty S. Dragonette Office of Nuclear Material Safety and-Safeguards Washington, DC 20555 301 427-4300 l ..

N OR fG- 0936 36 Of Vol. 3,Me T f.akr. I9 W a

v

• h" .

• l

• RULEMAK1HG AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED I

i t

t I

f TEXT OF FINAL RULE HAS NOT YET BEEN DRAFTED

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

d 6 g

Proposed Rules .

Vol 30. No. It

. Wednesday. january 1e.1985 TNs secton of the FEDERAL PIEGISTER peal PUstTNEft usPontSAftest CostfACT:

eenemme notees to the andac of the Robert Former. Office of the Executive proposed leeuence of swees and 143al Diro: tor, on (301) 492-8092, or segulatona. The purpose of these nonces Kitty S. Dragonette Division of Weste b se gewe inseressed persons an blansgement on (301) 427-4300. U.S. .

ng .

• • T

,, " g"d'm anal Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington D.C.20555.

Deted at Washlagton. D.C. this 11th day of January. tees.

NUCLEAR REQULATORY ~

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

COMMISSION samuelJ cadik.

Secretary ofee Commission.

[FR Doc. 85-use %d 1-15-45. s.45 em]

• emm ecom m ee w j Urantune IIIB Tsuing Regulatione; I Conforming NRC Requirements to EPA Standards aessect Nuclear Regulatory Comminalaa ' .

acTiost Proposed rule: extension of comment period.

eussasany: On November 28.1984. (49 FR 46418), the NRC published for public mounent a proposed rule amending its gulations governing the disposal of eranium mill tailings.He proposed changes are intended to conform cxisting NRC regulations tothe

! regulations published by the i EnvironmentalProtection Asency.De l comment period for this proposed rule w s to have expired on January 10.1985.

A rumber of commenters have requisted an extension of the comment period. In view of the importance of the proposed rule, and the desire of the -

Coaunission to allow all parties to fully express their views, the NRC has

• decided to extend the comment period for en additional thirty days.He sxtended comment period now expires on F.bruary 10.1985.

. oATas:He co:nment period has been i cxt:nded and now expires February 10 l . 1985. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do l 80 but assurance of consideration

( cannot be given except as to comments '

l received before this date.

I aoonassas: Send written comments or l suggestions to the Secretary of the i Commission. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

! Commission. Washington. D.C. 20555.

I Attention: Docketing and. Service Branch. Copies of comments received * '

pay be examined at the NRC Public s3ocument Room.1717 H Street NW. .

W shington.D.C. .

s l

l

i B.2 43413 Federal Register / Vol. 40. No. 228 / Monday. N;vember 28. 1984 / Proposed Rules consideration may not be given except opportumty for public comment. Today's for comments received on or before this proposal addresses that responsibihty.

da te.

Previous Ac6oes 4800steet: Mail comments to Secretary.U.S Nuclear Regulatory In kupmg with section te(al of the Commission. Washington. DC 20555. NRC Authonsstion Act.the Commission Attention Dockenng and Service suspended portions of its October 3 Branch Dehver comments to Room 1121. 1900 mill tailmes regulations after notice 1717 H Street NW. Washmston. DC and opportunity for pubhc comment (48 between 8.15 a m and 500 p.m FR 35350 August 4.1983). As required weekdsys by the Act. this suspension termmated automatically Apn11.1964.Those rememsa swoaneanon coortact portions of the Commission's tegulations' i

Roben Former. Office of the Executive l which were suspended we e those that '

l.egel Director, telephone (301) 432-4802.

were determined to be m confhet or or Kitty S. Dragonette. Division of inconsistent with EPA's proposed Waste Management. U.S. Nuclear requirements. More specifically. the Regulatory Commission. Washmston. suspended portions were those that DC 20555. telephone (301) 427-4300.

would require a maior commitment or suoptaaseertaav meeonesatsoec The ma;or action by heensees which would Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC be unnecessary if: (1) The DA proposed or Commission)is proposing standards were promulgated m fmal modifications to its regulanons for the form without modification. and (2) the purpose of conformmg them to generally Commission's regulations were modified applicable requirements recently to conform to the EPA standards. The promulgated by the Environmental objective of the suspension was to avoid Protection Agency (DA).nese new a situation where a licensee or applicant DA requirements are contained in might asic a major coeumtment or take Subparts D and E of 40 CFR Part192 (48 a major action which would be FR 4502a; October 7.1963). are unnecessary or ill. advised after applicable to the management of subsequent rulemaking to modify uramum and thonum byproduct permanently the existmg regulations on matenal. and became effective for NRC the basis of EPA's real standards.

and Agreement State licensees and The final EPA standards are very license appbcants on December 6.1983. similar to those that were proposed.

The action proposed herein would Nevertheless. the Commission has

_ - - _ _ _ . _ . _ modify previously existmg regulations of reconsidered the appropriateness of the Coaumseion to conform them to the changes to Appendix A to 10 CFR Part NUCLEAR REQUI.ATORY new EPA requirements and would 40 in light of the new EPA standards.

COtStetS$40N incorporate certain of the new EPA and the need for additional supporting requirements into the Comaussion's documentation. The changes proposed 10 CFR Port 40 rsgulations. De effected Commission today are more modest than the Uranium IIIN Talung Reguistions;

• d Appendix A previous suspension.

Conforming NRC .tr ( FR Part cotaind 0. k te to EPA promulgated in final form on October 3. Scope oNs Proposal Staneensa 1980 (45 FR r3521). In addaion to conforming its existms aemocv: Nuclear Regulatory The modSications to Commission res.!ations to new DA standards. -

Commission. regulations proposed herem will under the provisions of the UMTRCA.

Actices Proposed rule. incorportste withm NRC regulations the Commission has a further legislated slome of the new EPA requirements. The responsibihty:it must establish general ausssaany:ne Nuclear Regulatory action that the Commission will take requirements.for the management of Commission (NRC)is proposing to with respect to the remamder of these byproduct matenal, with DA amend its regulations governing the new DA requirements is the subject of concurrence, which are to the maximum disposal of uranium mill tailings.The an Advanced Notice of Proposed extent practicable. at least comparable proposed rule changes are intended to Rulemaking (ANPRM). which requests to requirerrents apphcable to the conform exist.ing NRC regulations to the comment on that subject. also issued managernar.t of similar hazardous regulations pubhshed by the this day.These new EPA requirements matens' :egulated by the EPA under the Environmental Protection Agency for were dev' eloped and issued by EPA Solid M *.ste Disposal Act (SWDA). as the protection of the environment from pursuant to section 275b. of the Atomic amendt d. The Commission deliberated these wastes.his action is being taken Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2022). as added by as to how best to deal with these related to comply with the legislative mandate section 206 of Pub. L 95 404, the rulemaking needs and decided on the set out in the Uranium Mill Taihngs Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control course of action resulting in this Radiation Control Act and the NRC Act of1973 (UMTRCA). Under section proposal and the accompanying Authorization Act for FY 1983. te(s) of Pub. L 97-415. the Nuclear ANPRM. This proposal addresses all the eats:The comment penod expires on Regulatory Commission Authonsstion changes to the existing Commission l

lanuary 10.1985. Comments received Act for fiscal years 1982 and 1983. the regulations in Appendix A to to CPR after th:s date will be cor.sidered if it is Commission was directed to conform its Part 40 that can be legally promulgated practical to do so but assurance of regulations to EPA's with notice and without additional supportmg i

t jL

Federal Register / Vol. 49. No. 228 / Monday November 28 1964 / Proposed Rules 46419 documentation. Other changes to the (2) Adhere to applicable requirements standards promulgated by the Commission's regulations for mill in 40 CFR Part 440. " Ore Mmms and Environmental Protection Agency in 40 taihngs management resultingJrom the Dressms Pomt Source Category: Effluent CFR Part 192. Subparts D and E."

EPA standard are the subject of the 1. imitations Guidelines and New Source Aeoson:The flexibility to propose accompanymg ANPRM Performance Standards. Subpart C. alternatives to the Commission s and The content of these two rulemakmss Uranium. Radium. and Vanadium Ores EPA standards was included m Pub L also may be charactented in terms of Subcategory /'97-415 changes to the AEA. The added the need for EPA concurrence. although (3) Mamtem releases of redon to the paragraph paraphrases the language m that was not the deciding factor.This atmosphere dunng operations as low as Section tec. The added paragraph proposal consists of modifications not is practicable: explicitly acknowledges the legislative requinns EPA concurrence. includmg (4) Close disposal areas so as to intent and provides licensees and conformmg changes to existing NRC proude reasonable assurance of applicants the opportunity to propose .

rules and mcorporation of EPA effect we control for 1.000 years. to the extent reasonably achievable. and. in alternatives as a routme licensms requirements not denvmg from the matter. Licensees would have to provide SWDA. Those modifications that are the any case. for at least 200 years: a site specific rationale to enable the subject of the ANPRM accompanyms (5) Limit average poet. closure releases Commission to make the required this proposal denvmg from the SWDA of radioactive redon gas to no more than fin' ding. This genene approach was require EPA concurrence pursuant to 20 picocunes g.r square meter per taken instead of modifying individual section se of the Atomic Energy Act. second(pCi/m s);and (6) Set hmits for msinual entena to provide flexibility. A genenc Mod fications addressed in the ANPRM approach avoids the chance of not include:(1) Incorporation into NRC concentrations of radioacuve radium

' left in soil. above background. in onsite identifying all areas where Dexibility

• regulations of SWDA requirements may be needed and preserves the already imposed by the EPA.12) any areas not subject to the closure existing support for Appendix A.

I

' further modifications to NRC regulations f'9uif'2'n'8IfI'88'V8'Y88d'8d'8 Administratively, alternatives are easier necessary to establish SWDA. nieau control.

to process under an explicit provision comparable requarements as called for Proposed Modancations and Rationale than exceptions to rules.

by the UMTRCA. and (3) any further modifications needed to address In accordance with the above. the 2. Cntenon J prescnptive provisions that were Commission proposes the following modifications to Appendix A to 10 Cm I*I I" .first persgraph delete the suspended pnor to Apnl1.1984 but not Pan 40, phrase. for thousands of years proposed for modification by this action. * * * " and insert " * * * ."

This course of action was chosen to L Introduction Reason:De thousands of years allow the Commission to both conform (a)In the second sentence of the third language conflicts with the 40 Cm its regulations to EPA's and incorporate paragraph. change "amendability" to 192.32(b) standard of design of control non SWDA provisions in a prompt and " amenability.- measurn to be effective for 1.000 years.

orderly manner and deal with the Aeoson:This change corrects a (b)In the second hated item of the complex of SWDA requirements and typographical error. first paragraph, delete the word issues in a separate. comprehensive and (b) Delete the fourth paragraph in its " usable."

unified rulemakmg. entirety. Reason: Both to CR 264.221 and 40 Caetant of his Proposal Acosone nia change deletes an CFR 264.92. which are included by information submittal requirement reference in 40 CR 192.32(a). require

The new EPA requirements in to CFR I which was established in connection isolation of contamments from all Part 192. (44 FR 45926) included by with implementation of the ongmal qualities of groundwater, not just usable reference several sections from to CFR Appendix A critena. The due date groundwater sources.

Part 284. promulgated by the EPA ongmally set for submittals is past. A pursuant to authenty provided by the new due date for revised submittals is J' Cnedon 3 Resource Conservation and Recovery not considered necessary. 14 Delete the mortilwrchiah quahts "

Act (RCRA), which modified the SWDA. (c) Add the following paragraph at the for groundwater in the second sentence These SWDA (or RCRA) requirements end:" Licensees or applicants may of the second paragraph.

imposed under 40 CFR Part 192 are propose alternatives to the specific - Aeoson:The EPA standards require addressed in the ANPRM accompanyms . requirements in this Appendix. The protection of all qualities of this proposal;The few conforming alternative proposals may take into groundwater, not just high quahty

, changes to NRC's existing Appendix A account local or regional conditions. sources.

regulations made necessary by these including geology. topography.

newly imposed SWDA requirements are hydrology. and meteorology. The t Ch""#" 4 addressed in this document. as are . Comnussion may find that the proposed (a) Revise paragraph (a) by deleting conforming changes and other changes alternatives meet the Commission's " maximum possible flood" and inserung necessary to reflect and incorporate the requirements if the attematives will " Probable Maximum Flood."

non.SWDA elements of EPA's new achieve a level of stabilization and requirements. These non SWDA Aeoson: Probable Maximum Flood contamment of the sites concerned. and reflects the appropnate hydrologic terms Provisions include requirements to-f (1) Adhere to applicable requirements a level of protection for public health, safety. and the environment from for a design basis and the ongma! intent of the provision when Appendix A was

m 40 CFR Part 190. "Enytronmental radiological and nonradiological promulgated.

l Radiation Protection Standards for hazards associated with the sites, which I Nuclear Power Operations" for uranium is equivalent to. to the extent & Chudon 5 byproduct matenal. and essentially the practicable. or more strmgent than the (a)la the Arst paragraph. delete the same requirements for thenum level which would be achieved by the byproduct matenal: first two sentences begmning " Steps g requirements of this Appendix and the shall be taken * * * " and endmg i

o-

m -

~

,. mage Federal Register / W1. 49. Ns. 228 / Monday.' N1vember 26. 1964 / Proposed Rules

" potential use? and the phrase '" *

• an earthen cover shall tw placed over

.- (d) At the end of Cnterion 6. add a la order to accomphsh thss objective."in tailings or wastes at the end of milling new peregraph to reed:"The design the third sentence. opierstions and the waste disposal area Aeoson:The EPA youndwater requirements in this Cntenon for .

shall be closed in accordance mth a longevity and control of redon releases protection standards referenced in 40 design 8 whn.h shall provide reasonable shall apply to any portion of a licensed CFR 192.32(a) do not permit any seepage assurance of control of radiological and/or disposal site unless such portion to groundwater. haurds to til H* *ll*, in e f..r mi..

contams a concentration of radium m .

(b)In the first 1:sted item under the thousand years. to the extent reasonably land. everaged over areas of 100 square '

first paragraph besmnmg with achievable. and. in any case /for at least meters. which. as a result of byproduct

" Installation of * * * " delete the words 200 years. and (til limit releases of matenal does not exceed the

" tow permeabihty" as a charactenstic of redon.222 from uranium byproduct background level by more than:(i) 5 bottom imers.

Aeoson:The EPA groundwater matenals. and redon.220 from thonum picocunes per gram (pCi/g) of radium-protection standard referenced m 40 byproduct matenels. to the atmosphere 226. or. m the case of thonum byprodhet CFR 192.32(a) requires a Imer that so as to not exceed an average

• release matenal. redium.228. sveraged over the rate of 20 picocunes per square meter first 15 centimeters (cm) below the prevents migraticn of wastes out of the per second (pCi/m8s)."

impoundment into the adiacent soil and surface. and (ii) 15 pC3/g of radium.226.

Acason:The change replaces previous W. in the case of thonum byproduct groundwater. Low permeabihty imphes Commission requirements for mmimum that some migration is allowed- matanal. rodium-22s. averaged over 15-cover thickness and post-closure redon em thick layers more than 15 cm below (c)In the second paragraph begmning "Where groundwater impacts * * *

• control with the EPA standards for the surface."

delete the phrase "to its potential use longenty and redon control.De EPA Aseson This change incorporetes the before millms operations began to the standard m 40 CFR 192.32(b) for EPA requirements for site cleanup maximum extent practicable. environmental protection after closure outside the actual disposal area. in specifies that the control method must areas where the longevity and redon Aeoson:The EPA standard in 40 C R provide teesonable assurance that 192.33. by referencmg 40 CFR 264.100. control closure standards are not requires a corrective action program to releases of redon-222 do not exceed 20 applicable (ese 40 CFR 192.32(b)(2) and i restore groundwater to standards picocunes per square meter per second. 192.41). I rather than 2 picocuries. Under the EPA established under 40 CFR 284.92-264.94. #N## #

This standard is essentially a standard the thickness of cover will be a

)

nondegradation standard. Restoration of function oflongevity and redon release (a) At the end of the Srst full and will be determined based on paragraph. add a new sentence to reed -

ece r to ri ent al u e e meetmg the 20 value insteed of 2.De "During operations and pnor to closure.

inconsistent with EPA standard. thr'e meter mmimum Precnptive radiation doses from redon emissions

' c (d) Delete in its entirety the third requirement was developed to achieve a from surface impoundments shall be t

paragraph beginnmg "While the pnmary 2 picocurie emanation rate based on the kept as low as is practicable. (.

assumed typical sod conditions. Reasom This change incorporetes the method of protectmg groundwater s.ha.ll (b) Add to Cntenon 8 the followmg be isolation * * * " and ending . . EPA requirement imposed under 40 CFR from current or potential uses." two footnotas which accompany the 192.32(a)(4).

Ascson:The EPA standards for revised first sentence: footnote. (1)"The (b) Followm, g the third full paragraph  !

groundwater protection in 40 CFR standard apphes to design. Morutorms of Cntenon 3. hast before Critanon SA.

192.32(a) protect groundweter primanly for redon after installation of an ansert the followmg two new on the basis of background-level appropnately designed cover is not paragraphs:

concentration hmits for herzardous required." and footnote (2)"This "Millms operetions producing or constitutents. and not in terms of current average shall apply to the entire surface involvmg thorium byproduct matenst or potential uses. The deleted sentence of each disposal area over penods of at shall be conducted in such a manner as allowed consideration of teilings in least one year. but short compared to to provide reasonable assurance that the contact with groundwater. De EPA 200 years. Redon mil come from both annual dose equivalent does not exceed standard permits no seepage to uranium W ct matenals and from 25 mdlirems to the whole bocy. 75 groundwater. coverms matenals. Radon esussions millireme to the thyroid, and 25 (e)la the first sentence of the fifth from covenne matenals should be nulhreme to any other organ of any paragraph begmams "11 mis information . estimated as part of developmg a member of the public se a result of shall be gehered * * '" delete the word closure plan for each site. The standard. exposure to the planned discharge of

" usable" where it modifies howevn epplies only to emissions from radioecnve matenals. redon 220 and its

" groundwater.- byproduct materials to the atmosphere." daughters excepted, to the general Aeoson:The EPA standard m 10 CFR Acason:This change fully environment." .

192.32(a) does not distmguish between incorporates the EPA redon control " Uranium and thorium byproduct

" usable" and nonusable acquifers. The standard. matenals shall be managed so as to groundwater protection standard (c)In the fifth sentence of the first conform to the applicable provisions of ,

applies umversally to acquifers of any paragraph. replace "non.soded" mth Title 40 of the Code of Federal  ;

quality or potential use. "non sod." and replace the words "to Regulations. Part 440. Ore Mining and a Critenona reduce tailmss covers to less than three Dressing Point Source Category Effluent meters" with the words "as cover I.imitatwas Guidelines and New Source (a) Delete the first sentence in matenals." Perfonnance Standards. Subpart C.

entirety, begmnmg with " Sufficient earth Aeason:The first change corrects a cover * * '" and andmg with "* * ' Uranium. Radium and Vanadium Ores typographical errer. The second is an Subcategory, as codified on January 1.

mater per second.". and in its place editonal change to be consseent with 1983?

msert "In cases where weste byproduct the deletion af the thste meter unmanum Aeoson:Dese new paragraphs matenalis to be permanently disposed, requirement as discussed in (a) above.

1 incorporate EPA requirements imposed e b'

. Federal Register / Vol. es. Ms. 228 / Monday. Nsvember 28. 1984 / Proposed Rules 48421 under 4s GE ts2.4Md) and to CFR regards arenium mill taDings sites and 1st.32ta)(31. respectreely. rulemakms action. can be viewed as the have no broader connotanon. lead agency.

g. CrHene 2. 7.9.10. u, and 12 are not The Commisalon beheves that affected by the new EPA standards or hcansee proposals for alternativas can Paperwerk Reducteo Act Statement editonal changes and no moddicauon is be an unportant and effacaee way to proposed forany portion of thase This proposed rule does not cessem a help deal wah the problems associaeed entene. with Isoplamenting the new EPA new or amended informetion cotiecton requirement subsect to the requirements Consnesion Authority and standards. The Commiseeon expects that of the Paperwork Raduction Act of ageo

""pensW it may require several years to have its (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq 1 Emisting conformmg regulanons fully in place. It requirements were approved by the Secnos etc.of the Atorruc Energy Act e,cpects to use the flexibdity provided Office of h4anagesient mod Budget state that. A Ucassee may propose by secton to in the interun to consider altematives to specific requirements approval sember 3150 4020.

and approve altamative proposals from adopted and enforced by the *"

licensees. Section etc. provides NRC - -' FleadW1'I CardBen Commismon under this act.Such attemative proposals may take mto sufficient authonty to mdspendently As required by the Regulatory approve attemeuves so long as the Flexibility Act of 1980. 5 U.S.C. 005{b),

account local or regsonal condicons.

Commission can make the required meluding geology. topography. determination. .the Comminaion certtflee that this rule hydrology and meteorology.The will not,if promulgated, have a Commission may trest such alternatives P dha sagmficant econosuc impact upon a as satisfying Comraission requirements substantial number of small enuties.

if the Comminion determines that auch The Commission's action in proposing 'Iherefore,we beve not performed a these modificatione to its regulations in alternatrves wiu actueve a level of AppendLx A to 10 CFR Part epia to RegeistoryFledbGity Analysis.De stabdsaaties and contatament of the basis for this Anding is that of the confons them to the amar EPA stes concerned. and a level of standards. These changes are for the bceased uranism mule. only one protecuan for public health. safety, and purpose of avoiding conflicts and qualifies as a smaB entity. Almost all l h environment from radiological and the mins are ewasd by large inconsistsacies. and foe clanfyms nonrediological hazards associated with previously existing language so as to be corporations.hree of the mills are such sites. which is equivalent to. to the compatible with the new requeensente partly-owned by contpanies that eenid extent precucable. or rnore stnngent The accon proposed here by the quahfy as amaD 5 "n asserdams to than the level which would be schieved Comnussion is a consequence of the Smau Euanases Admunestration by standards and requirements adopted gemensassau entity dm6 mass of 300 previous actions taken by the Congresa and enforced by the Commission for the and the EPA. and is legally mandated la employeen.However, moder the

same purpose and any final standards section 275b(3)of the AtosnicEsasSy Act Regulatory FlexibGity Ats. a smal!

promulgated by the Administrator of the of 1954. as amended. bustness le aos that is independently Environnecial Protecuan Agency m owned and operated. Since these three Coreaussion action in the case as accordance with secnon 275 esentially nondiscretionary m natise. stiDe are not independently owned by The Commission histoncal!y has had and for purposes of enescareental do not quaufy as smau entities.

the authonty and responsibility to analysis. rests upon exioung regulate the activines of persons List of Sableets im 30CFR Part et environmental and other tmpact beensed under the Atoc: c Energy Act of evelos: ions in the following documents- Govemment commacts.Hazardams 1954. as amended. Consistent with that matenale-transportanen. Neclear authonty and in accordance with (1)*Tmal EnvironmentalImpact matarsale. Penmity. Reporang and Statement for Standards for the Control recordkeeping requirennents. Source section 84c. of that Act. the Commission of Byproduct Adatenals from Uramuam has the discreuon to reuew and material. and Utenisert approve site spectfac altemauses to Ore Procesetas (40 CFR Part 1921."

Volumes 1 and 2. EPA $20/1-43-406-1 Under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954.

standards promulgated by the and 2. September les3. and (21 as amended. the Energy Reorsamsanon Commismon and by the Admtmstrator of " Regulatory impact Analysis of Final Act of 1974, as amended. 5 U.!LC. 853.

the Environmental Protection Agency. In Enttronmental Standards for Uramam and the Uranaam Mall Tailings Radianon the exercise of t.'ns author:ty. Secnon Mill Tailing at Acuve Sites." EPA 520/1- Control Act of 1975, as amended, the 64c. does not require the Commission to f

33-010. Sep* ember 1983. both prepared l obtam the concurrence of the . in support of Subparts D and E of 40 ,,"[8 ]

Admmistrator m any site specif*r CFR Peret 192. and (31 Tmal Genenc alternative which satisfies Conu..ission Environmentallmpact Statement on PART 40-004tESTIC LICENSING OF requirements for the les el of proaction SOURCE ttATERIAL i for pubbc health, safe'y. and the Uranium Millms." NUREG-0706.

I, September 1900, prepared m support of 1.The authonty citenon for Part 40 is environment from radio logica! and Appendix A of 10 CFR Part 40. The nonradiological hazards at uran:um mill revised to read as follows:

tulms sites. As an example. the Commission beheves that these Authenty:Seca E a3. at a5. e1. tal.1e2.

suppornng analyses for the new EPA ta3. tes. es Stat. ss2. en en est osa, sSt Commisson need not seek concurrence standards and the existing Commission of the Admtmstratoris case bv-case 953. es amended secs.12e[21. e3. at Pub.1.

regulations provide a more than 95 4o4. 92 S*.at son as amended. 3039. eec.

determmanons of attemenve ' adequate environmental review for the 234. as Stat. 444. es amended (42 USC concentration limits and delistmg of hatardous constitutents for specific standards addresed herem. and that no yj4egJoer.aos2.30et additional impact analysis is warranted 22n 223e sites. It should be understood that the by the conformmg actions proposed Pub. L 05 373,73 Stat. ese (42 USC. aorth proposed conforrruns regulations deal herein. The EPA engaged in and sec. act. as amende:L aor. 20s se Stat.1242.

with the exercise of the Commission's completed a NEPA process with full as amended. tase. lace (42 USC 3e41. Ses2.

responsibihty and authonty under the sessi. 5ection ars, et Saat. 3021. as amended consideretion of environmental by Pub. t. e7-415. Se Stat 3087 (42 USC.

Atomic Energy Act of 1954. solely as concerns. and for the purposes of this a0221

. .n. -

, e'

~ w - m ,- < -,.w.- ----- , ,-,,, . - --,--, - ,,,- -- -

48G2 Federal Register / Vcl. 49. Ns. 228 / Monday November 26. 1984 / Proposed Rules Socnon #7 aise lemmed under pub. L 5- take into secount local or reponal condibona. (that is. where the ased for any specially e01. sec.10.32 Stat 351 (42 USC $451). includag geology, topography. hydrology. constructed retention structure to ehmineted).

Section #31(g) also issued under sec.122. es and meteorology. The t'a===on may and The evaluauen of alternanve sites and Sut. ess (42 UAC 21:21. Section #48 also that the proposed alterneuves meet the disposat methode performed by edl lesued under sec. tes. es Stat see. el Co==namon's requireraents tf the alternanves operetors a support of their proposed taihnas amended 142 USC 2234). Sectica #71 also wdl achieve a level of stabdiaanoe and dasposal program (provided in apphcanta woued under sec. ter, es Stat 985 (42 USC. containment of the sites con:ernett and a environn. ental reports) shall reflect eenous 2237). level of protecnon for pubbe health, safety. considereuon of thia &sposal mode in some For the purposes of sec. 223. se Stat. ess. as and the eenronment from radiolopcal and metences. below grade dispocal may not be amended (42 U.S C 2273). Il 40.3. 40.25(dl(1)- nonrediological hasards associated with the the moet envtronmentally sound approach.

(3). ec.3s(e Hdl. eo 41 (b) and (c). 40 es. 40 51 estes. which is equivalent to. to the extent such as sught be the case if a groundwater (e) and (cl. and to 43 are resued under sec. practicable. or more etnnsent than the level fonneuon is relanvoly close to the surface or telb. es Stat. 948. as amended. (42 U S C. wiuch would be schieved by the not very wou moleted by overtyme code and 2201(b)k and il 40.28 (c) and (d) (3) and (4L requiremente of this Appendam and the rock. Also. geoloinc and topographic 40 se(c)(2). eo.36(el. 40 42. 40 61. 40 e2. 40 se standards promulgeted by the F.nytronmental "

and so es are issued under sec. Isto. es Stat. conditions might .make full below yede protocuon Agency in to CFR part 192. bunal impracticable: for example, bedrock eso, as amended (42 U.S.C tactio}) Subperte D and L may be aufhciently near h surface ht pg qw4 1. TechmcolCnreno blastma would be roquared to excavate a sposal pit at excessive cost and more Cntenon 1--in selectmg among ahernanve

2. Appendix A to Part 40 is revised to '*

reod as follows:

teihnge 6eposal sitee or pudstne the adequacy of emionas tadings mies. the @N("i $*"[ ,*lable.

pmcucah b mm of rete strucmin AppensRx A to Part es4.riteria (Q'g'teMma. which mU and mae and steepnese of slopes of Relating to the Operettes of Uraaisans broad objecove of iso the ladings and escociam uposed embahts aban be Mille anal the Disposition of Tanhage or numnimad by excavenon to the maximum eseeciated costasmante tros man and the Wastes Proshaced by the Extraction or one romment for toco years, thereafter. etwnt masoneW ec e er oppmpnaw Caecnetratice of Sourta Material Froes own es geologic and hydrologe condinons without masome eenve maintenasce shau be I Oves Pesessmed Primarily for Their ceasidered: ee

• Remotenese bom populated esese:

C"'I* emgee**

",g $must

• F* M be Senarse Material Content

• Hydrolopc and other natural con &tions program mU pmnde masonably equnalent a.a-.a " isolence of the ladings from asturel erosaceal as by coen'abum a connaud Every appucant for a boenee to poseees munobihaanen and isolanon of contasunante I*'****

and ime souros matenal in conjunction with from groundwater sources: and Cnwnoe MMoUoweg aim and demen eramam er thenas adhag or byproduct

• potennal for amanusme erosion. muna chan be edbend to whe&ar tedings metenal at estee forme ly naan=ted with disturbance and dispersion by natural forces or wasta em disposed of abow or below i auch adhng. ne required by the provisions of over the long tene. 8'* d'-

I 4031[h) to laclude in a hcense apphcauon The site selecnon procese chan be en (el Upstmem rainfan catchment areas must proposed specificanoes reletme to mdlag optmusanon to the maximum extent be uninused to decmass woesoa pounnal operations and the &eposinon of tedings or reasonably actuevable in terms of these and the size of the probable blanimum Flood weetes resulting from such ethng activities. features. which could erode or wash out sections of the T1ue oppendia estabhehee techatcal. In the selection of disposal sites. pnmary tathnge &sposal ama.

Anancial ownerslup, and long-term site emphasis abau be even to isoleuon of (b) Topographic feetures should provide

, ou vedlanos critene relating to the atmg. tathnes or westes. a matter having long-tenn good mad prowcuon.

l operanoa. decantamaanon. impacts. as opposed to considereuon only of (c) Embankment and cover slopes shau be i decommessonas. and reclamanoe of mila short term convenience or benefits. such se relenvely flat after final stabihaanon to i

and tanhnge or waste systems and sites at maamisetnoe of transportation or land amtmtse wooion potential and to provide I

wtuch such naus and systems are located. As acquiennon coste. Whde isolenon of tadings conservenve factore of safety assur ng long-I used in this appen&z the term "as low as is wd! he a funcnoa of both site and engmeenna tenn stabihty.The broad objecove should be l reasonably achievable" has the same to contour final slopes to grades which are se design. overnding consideration shau be

{ meenme es m I an.1(c) of to CFR part 30 of given to senas features given the long-term cloce se possible to thoes which would be this chapter. nature of the tadmes hasarde provided tf tadmge were &sposed of below in many cases. flexibdify is provided in the Tedings aball be disposed ofin a manner grade: this could, for example. lead to elopes entens to allow achievtag an opumum that no acave maintenance is required to about 10 bonzontal to 1 verucal (10h:1vl or tedings disposal program on a este.epecific preserve conditions of the site. less steep. In generet slopes should not be beeis. However. in such cases the oblecoves. Critenon 3-To avoid prohferation of emeu steeper than about sh tv. Where steeper technical alternanves and concerns which waste disposal sites and thereby reduce slopes are proposed. reasons why a slope must be taken into account in developmg a perpetual survedlance obbsenone. byproduct leu steep than Sh:1v would be mpracticable teihnee program are idennfled. As provided metenal from in estu extrecuon opersuono, should be provided. and compenesung by the provisions of I ecL31[hl opphcations such as residuee from solution evaporation or factors and conditions which make such for hcenses must clearty demonstrate how contaanated control procenes. and weetes slopes acceptable should be identified.

the entena have been addressed. from small remote above ground extracnon (d) A full self sustammg vegetative cover The specifications shan be developed opereuona shall be disposed of et existmg shall be estabhshed or rock cover empioyed considenne the expected full capacity of large all tadmge disposal sites: unlese. to reduce wind and water erosion to tedmge or weste systems and the hfetune of considenne the narure of the westes. such as negligible levels.

ad! operetions. Where later expansions of their volume and specific activity, and the Where a full vegetative cover is not likely systems or operanone may be hkely (for costo and environmentalimpacts of to be self sustatams due to chmanc or other esemple. where large quennnes of ore now trenoporting the westes to a large disposal condinone. such as in semi end and and mergmally uneconomical may be stockpiledl. site. such offsite disposal is demonstreted to regions, rock cover shall be eenployed on the amendabihty of the &sposal system to be unprocticable or the advantages of onsite slopes of the impoundment system.The NRC accommodate meressed capactues without bunal clearly outweigh the benefits of will consider relammg this requirement for degradetion in long term etabihty and other reducmg the perpetual serveillance extremely gentle slopes such as those which performance factore shall be evaluated. obligehone. they may exist on the top of the pile.

IJcensees or apphcante may propose Cnienon 3-The " prune option" for The following factor, shall be considered alternahves to the specific requirements in &sposal of tenhage is placement below grade. in estabhehms the naal rock cover design to this Appen&m.The alternative proposate may either in sunes or speciauy excavated pits avoid displacement of rock perneles by

~ ~~~

~ ~ ~

w ..

- - . en l.

s

. Federal Register / Vol. 49. No. 228 / Monday. Novernber 26. 1964 / Proposed Rules 46423 human and erusal traffic or by natural sods are to be rehed upon for seepove parameters such es permeebihty sh.ill not he process, and to preclude underru'ima and contrui. sests shalt be cimducted weh determmed on the besin of lebursiory p, ping- represefitee ne teihnes solutions innd c!st enelpas of semples alone e sufficient a shape. sise..esopoeiugn and eredation metenels to confirm that no significant emount of (seld testing te e . pump testst shall of rock particleslenorpting beddme metenal detenoration of premeehihty or ste5""y be conducted to ensure atiual field properties everage perucles oise shall be si least cobble properties will occur with continous esposure are eJequaiely undersioud 1.: sting snell be saae or greaterk of clay to reihnas solutions Tesis theii tse run conducted to allow estimatina themi surption a Rock cover thicknese and sonme of for a suftrient penod of time to eneel en) ettenuation pnsperties of underlymg soil and perticles by sise; and effects of thav ere emnx tu occur tir some ruth e Sleepnene ul undertyme slopes e.etes dei *rinretion has heen obseru d to e lacetion entent. quehty cepeuty and individual rock freements shet! be denne m. cut rather rapidly sher shout nme months i.urrent uses of any groundwater et and near sound. and resissent so ebrasion end shell be of esposurell the site.

free from ceachs. seems and other defects e heill process desiens which proude the Furthermore. steps shall be teken durms that would send to unduly increase their mesimum practicable rerycle of solunnns stockpihng of ore to mmimize penetrebon of destruction by weter and frost actions Week. and conservaison of newe to redure the net radionuchdee into underiving soils. suiteble Inable. or lamisated aggregate shall not be input of hquid to the teihnas impoundment methode include being an'd/or compaction of used. e Dewatenne of teihnes by process o,, ,io,,,, ,,, ,,

Auch covenne of slopes may not be deuces and/or m situ dramep systems (At Crownon M com whee wape required where top covers are very thich lon new estes. fedinge shall be dewatered by e .

the order of 10m or greateri. impoundment dramage system meseHed at the bottom of the byproduct malerhil se to be pensenently elopee are very pende ton the order of to h tv impoundment to lower the phreenc surface disposed en earthen cover shall be pieced or least bulk cover metenals hate inherently and reduce the dnvmg head for seepage-om tail w was e me end d milhng operetsone end. the weste disposal eres shall leverable erosion resistence cherectensues. unless tests show teihngs are not amenable and. there is negheible drainese cetchment be closed m accordance with a design' to such a syvem. Whm in-sieu dewelenng is mhoch shou prende mesonable esaurene of erea upstream of the pde and good wind to be conducted. the impoundment bottom protection as descnbed m points ie) and Ibl eheil be graded to eseure that the drems are con o bees

, g of this Cntenon. et a low point The drems shall he protected seaannebly achievable. med. ta any ones. For Furthern. ore. au uf-hat surfaces by suitable filer metenets to ensure that at least m yeom and (n) han miesses of shall be contoured to avoid areas of drame remain free nennmg The dramese concentroted surface pusoff or abrupt or eyelem shah eleo be adequately essed to @ mnse byWuct mienele, ehery changes na elope yedsent. In addition escure good dremogel and redenWmm monum byproduct to rock cover os elopes, erees loword which "*"*I****"**'h"**** **

a Neutruhsetion eurface nasoff might be directed shell be well of sonic embetences. to pmmote immobihantion enced ensmege8 miesse row au"s '

protected with substaanal rock cover inp Where youndweier impacts are occurring pococunse pw squam mur pw escend (pC /

rep). In addstion to provedmg for siebihty of el en esistme seee due to seepage. action shall m 3s). In compunne mquired ladings com the impoundment systein itself. overeu be taken to elleviste conditions that lead to mockneuse. mosetum m soih in men of etebihty. erosion posenueL and encessive seepage impacts and restore ***""" I'""d "*"""U Y 'I*' d8

• geomorphology of surroundmg terrain shall groundwater quahty De specific seepage emular circumstasca de'"n 'n"o"t be

be evelseled to assure that there are not control and groundweter protection method. considedJimet gmme supoem fmm me l ongoms or potential processes. such as gully or combmation of methods to be used must tashrge or weases ekoeld be reduced to erosion. which would lead to impoundment be worked out on a site specific basis. bechsmund imis. m effects of any mm instabihty. Technical specifications shall be prepared to synthenc leyee den not be when mio (e)Deimr "- f shalinot belocated controlinstallation of seepage control account a determinmg the calculated redon near a capable fault that could cause a systeme. A quahty eesurance. testmg. and exhalanon imL ff nomasel mesmale em memimum credible earthquake larger than mopection proyem. which meludes proposed as cow wwnels. H must be that which the unpoundment could superweion by a gushried engmeer or dmonstrowd that such mienals win not reasonably be expected to withesend. As scienuet, shan be estabhohed to escure the crack er degrade by differential settlement.

. seed m this cntenon. the term " capable fault" speariconone ere met. weathenne. or omer mchanism. om W has the same meaning as defined in section in support of a tadings disposal system wnn om mtmals.

Near oudece com metmals (i e, wohin Illis) of Appendia A of10 CFR 1tNL The term proposal. the opphcant/operstor shell supply "maaimum credible earthquake ~ means the mformation concernmg the following. the top three meters) shall not mclude weste earthquake which cause the mamamum

• The chemecal and radioactive or rock met contems elmwd imte of vibratory yound motion based upon an charactenonce of the weste solutions. radiust soile used for neer surface cover evaluanon of earthquake potennal +De cherectenstics of the underlyms soil must be essenuaHy the same. es for as -

considenne the regional and local geology and geologic formations perucularly es they radioectmty is concerned. es that of and seismology and specific cherectenouce unti centrol transport of contammants and sunounding ndece sods Ms,is to mum of local embourface meteneL

• solutions. he shall mclude detailed that surface redon enhalation is not (f) De impoendreent. where feasible. informanon concernmg estent, thickness. significantly above background because of should be designed to incorporate features uniformity. shape. and onentation of the cover matenalitself.

which ordi promote depostion. For example, undertymg strata Hydrauhe gradients and W dungo mquiments in this entenon design features which promote deposition of conductmtiu of the venous formations shall for longevity and control of redon releases sediment suspended in any nanoff which be determmed. shah apply to any poruon of a licensed and/

flows into the impoundment eres might be Die information shah be gathered from or disposal site unless such portion contams utihted; the obtect of such a design feature bonnge and field survey methods taken a concentranon of redim in land. sweged would be to enhance the thickness of cos er withm the proposed impoundment area and userhme. in surroundmg areas where contammients 'The siendard apphes to design Momtonne for Cntenon 5-The followmg shall be might migrate to groundwater. The redon eherinseell.iion of an appreensiety desipied considered: mformation gathered on boreholes shall cover is nei required

• installation of bottom hners (Where melude both geologic and geophysicallogs in 'Tks everage shall apply so the entire surface of synthene hners are used. a leaksee detection sufficient number and degree of **ch disposal pH "er penods of et lusi t ynr.

system shall be installed immediately beluw sophisucation to s!!ow determinmg hun shen compemd io te yms Redon wiu come the hner to ensure mepor faderes are detected significant discontmuities. fractures. and s em I",,,

, "",,*'um bypmduc

,,3,,g, y, a ,,g if they occur. Die is in addihon to the channeled deposits of high hydraube youndweter eionstonns program conducted ,,,,,,,Ws M he soumeied as een of deens conductmty. If field survey methods are e closure pies le sech a The sianded. however.

se provided in Cntenon 7. Where clay hners used. they should be in addition to and apphes sety to emineions frosn areanum hyproduca are proposed or reietively thm. in-situ clay cohfibrated with borehole loggmg Hydrologic meiensis to the atmosphere l

l 4k J'

46424 I Federal Register / Vcl. 49. Ns. 228 / Monday. Nuember 26. 1964 / Pr:pos;d Rules over erees of100 square meters. which. as a needed correcuve actions have been based en Commiesson-approved cost result of byproduct reairnal does not exceed idenufied and implemented All each the background level by more then: (i) 5 eenmates m a Comaussion. approved plan i

ceseahona. cornctive actions. and re-starts for-(1l Decontammsuon and picocunn pu gram [pC /g) of radium-228. or. shall be reported to the appropnete NRC decommissiorung of suu bud &nes and the

• to the cue of thonum byproduct attenal regional office se m&cated m Cntenon SA. m mdtma otte to levels wbch would allow reasum-228. everaged over the first 15 wnting. within to days of the subsequent unrestncted use of these areas upon centuneters (cm) below the surface. and (u) restart. decommissioning. and (2) the reclamation of 15 pCi/g of radium-22s. or, m the case of To control dustme from taihnge. thei thonum byproduct matenal. redium-228 tadmga and/or waste d sposal stese m portion not covered by standing hquids shall averas d over 15-cm thick layera more thati be wetted or chemically stabhzed to prevent accordance with technical cntena delineated 15 cm below the surface m Section I of this Appendix.h heensee or mmamaze blowmg and dustmg to the shall submit this plan m contuaction with an t.rwrion Tat les one tuH w.ir tireur en meumum estent reasonobly achievable. The any maior este construenon. a preooerational environmental report that addresses the requirement may be relemed af tathnge are exoected environmentalimpacts of the monitonng program shall be conducted to effectively sheltered from wmd. such as may provide complete basehne data en a mdhng be the case where they are d sposed of below milhas opereuon, decommissionmg and site and its environe. Throughout the grade and the teihnsa surface is not exposed tailmes reclamation. and evaluates '

construction and operatir4 phases of the mdl. to wind. Considereuon ohell be given in attemehves for auttgating these unpacts. The en opere tional monitonne program shall be plannmg teihnge &sposal programa to eurety shall also cover the payment of the conducted to mesouro or evaluate comphence methods which would allow phased coverms charge for long tenn survedlanca and control with apphcable standards and regulabons. to and reclamation of taihnge impoundmenta required by Cntenon 10. In estabhohing evaluate performance of control systems and emco this will help to controlhng particulate specific surety arrangemente. the bcensee e procedures. to evaluate environmental and redon emissione dunne operauon. To cost estimates shall take teto account total unpects of operenon: and to detect potennal control dusting from effuse sources. such as costs that would be incurred if an long term effects. tedings and ore pade where automatic independent contractor were hired to perform Cntenon e-Mdhng opereuono shall be controls do not apply. operetore shau develop es decommasonmg and metamanon work.

conducted so that all airborne effluent wntten operstmg procedures specdytag the in order to avoid unnecessary dupbcation releases are reduced to levels es low as is methods of control wluch will be utdtaed. and expnm se Commamon may accept reasonably achievable.The pnmary meana of Enancial sureuse set have been Malms operenona producing or evolvmg

[ accomphehms this shan be by means of thonum byproduct metenal shou be coneohdatd was Ansamal w surety i

emesion osotrole. Insutunonal controle. eud runtfurted m such a manner me to proude arrangemente estabhohed to meet se extendme the site boundary and exclusion reasonable aneurance that the annual does requirements of other Federal er state ares may be employed to ensure that offsi;e equivalent does not exceed 23 adhrome to agencies and/or local goveming bodies for exposure hauts are met, but only after au the whole body. 73 aulhroes to the thynod, nch duommis% hoot-con, preencable measures have been taken to ,,gg, ,,,,,,g g g,, ,,, ,,gg,,,,

and 25 milbroma to any other organ of any control emestons et the source. member of the pubhc as a result of exposures eM ccM provided nch arrangemaam am Notwithstandmg the existence ofindmdual to the planned discharge of radioacuve ceded de a musty em dose standarde. etnet control of enussions is matenals. redon-220 and tea daughters ,, g g g, ,,g,, g g, necessary to secure that population excepted. to tha general environment. w 2ch '

• l 1 exposures are reduced to the maximum gg, , on &m "8

Urenium and thonum byproduct matenala mee mm extent reasonably achievable and to esoid shall be managed so as to conform to the and eseociated areas, and the long-term site contammanon. The smotest potennel apphcable provisiona of Title so of the Code fundi"8 ch8' is clearly identified and sources of offste radiauon exposure (aside of Federal Regulahoma. or o t 440. " Ore Mmms enunitud fw see a accoadahing em from redon exposure) are dueting from dry and Dreestna point Souna Category: EfDuent **'*""NI'**""*""T"*""'**

surfaces of the taihng disposal area not mll be reviewed annuaUy by the Conuntasion covered by tadmes soluuon and eaussions 1.tautshone Guidehnee enr. New Source performance Standards. Subert C. Uraruum, to enum est eu emt unde wald be from yellowcake dryms and packagtr4 evadable for completion of the reclamacon Radium. and Vanadium Oree M.:ste;ory.-

operations. Dunns opereuona and pnor to as codified on january 1.13s3. plan af the work had to be performed by an closure, radiation doses from redon Cntena 3A-Dady mopections y %dmge adependet catraca h amount d sumy enussione from surface unpoundments of or weste rotennon eyetene shall tce habdity should be ediusted to recognies any uranium or thonum byproduct matenale shall conducted by a quahfied engineer or scientist increases or decrosses resulung from be kept se low as is practicable. annahon. chanan in engineenne plana.

and documented. The appropnete NRC Checks abau be made and logged hourly of regional office as indicated in Appendia D of actmun pufonned, and any othw allparameterele3 differentialpremuros and to Cm part 20. or the Duoctor. Office of conditione effecting costs. Regardless of scrubber weter flow retes) which detennme Inspecton and Enforcement. U.S. Nuclear whethw mclamation is phased & rough es the efficiency of yellowcake stack emission life of the opneuen or takw piece et the end Regulatory Commission. WeahmstorL DC control equipment operation. It shall be of oPestions. an oppmpnem pwuon d 30655. shall be inseediately noufied of any determmed whether or not condshons are failure m a taihnge or weste mtennon system surety habihty shall be retamed untd final within a range preecnbod to ensure that the which results in a release of taihngs or =sete . comphance with the reclamation plan is equipment to operstmg consistently near anta unrestitcted areas, and/or of any determned. His wtU yield a surery that is et peak efficiency corncove scuon shallbe taken when performance is outside of unusual condinons (condiuons not least sufficient et all umes to cover the costs contemplated m the design of the mtention of decomaussioru,ng and reclamacon of the peesenbed renses. EfDuent control devices system) wiuch af not corrected cculd mdicate arves that er, expected to be disturbed shall be opereuve at au times during drytas the potential or lead to failure of the system and packasms opereuens and whenever air before the next hcanoe mnewaL The tem of and result in a release of tadmge or weste the surety mechanism met be open ended, is exhausung from the yellowcake stock. into unrestricted areas.

Dryms and pechegms operanons shall utdese at can be demonstrated that another arrangement would provide an equivalent ternunate when controls are moperenve. If. TmoncealCriterro when checke mdicate the equipment is not level of assurance. This assurance could be Cntenon e-Financial surety arrangementa provided with a surety instrument which to operstmg withm the tense presenbed for shall be estabbshed by each adl operator peak efficiency. act one shau be taken to written for e specified pened of time (e4,5 pnot to the commencement of operetions to years) yet wluch must be automatically restore parameters to the presenbed range. assure that sufficient funds will be available renewed unlen the surety sottflee the When this cannot be done without shutdown to car =y out the decontamination and bene $ciary (therwmos se the State and repairs. dryms and pockesms operetions decoaunissiorung of the sull and site and for regulatory agency) and the pnacipal(the shau cease se soon et precucable. the reclamauon of any taihngs or waste Operations may not be n-stoned after licensee) some reasonable tsee (e4 30 days) diept T. areas. The amount of funds to be prior es the renewel date of their tatsstion cessation due to off.nstmal performance untd ans6 ed by such surety arrangements sha!! be not to renew. In such a situation the surety s'

- .. +

.- Federal Register / Vd. 40. No. 228 / Monday. November 28. 1984 / Proposed Rules 46425 seguirement sti5 iniste nad the Itcenese for the sheposel of any.such byproduct would be regu. sed to euhast an accepteble staisung ultimate cuetely of the one where seienal er is sesential to ensure the long tashngs. er westee are stored to confann the M -- t surety within a knef pened of term etabahty of such droposal este. shau be ha'io to sHow at loest W doye for the meegnty of the stabilised lashnge er eeste aguletery agency to asueet. trenefened to the Umsed Settee er the State .

in which such land is located at the option of . eyotees and to determme the need. if any. foe proof of forfeiture must met be neceasery to such Siste. In view of the fact that phpar:el mantenance and/or monitonne Results of the inspection shell tw reported to the collect the surety so that to the event that the ecolarien must be the pnmery means oflong- Comaussion withm 80 days following each heenese could not provide an acceptable term centrol and Cosernment lend roptocement surety witten the regered time. inspection. The Commission may require oumership is a desirable supplementary more frequent sete inspections if. en the bee e the surety shall be outematically collected measure. ownership of certain severable pner to its espiretion. The conditione of a este epecdec evaluation. such a need subourface intersete (for esemple. mmeret desenbod above would have to be clearly appeare necessary due to the features of a nghtel may be deteemmed to be innecessary stered on any surety instrument which se not particular tashnge or weeis disposal eyetent to protect the pubhc health and eefety and opengnded. and must be agreed to by all the enviresument. In any ceae. however, the dew at Mogen. K es m hy of perhee. Financial swety arrangemente spohcantloperotor must'demonstrute a Novembw im. -

generally ecceptable to the Commisson are lel Surety bonde; eenous effort to obtain such subourface For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

rephie. and must. rn the event that certain (bl Cash deposite.

nghts cannot be obtained, provide Seimmel O CE Icl Ceruncates of deposit. s, notification in local pubisc land recorde of the * '"cf,seryoMeCosidersseron.

Idl Deposite of gosernment sei. unties fact that the' land es heme used for the telirrevocable letters or hneo of credit. and duposal of radioactive malenel and se enAsso seessmo4 w if) Combinations of the above or such other subleet to either en NRC general er specific types of arrangemente as may be approved hcenae prohibitag the diensation and by the Commission Howeser. self enourance. disturomace of the tashnge. la some rare

' or any arrangement which essent ally cases. auch as may escar with deep binnel

= coneritutes self meurence le-3 a contract where no ongoing este survedlance will be with a state or Federei agency) will not regered. surface land ownership treaefer estisfy the surety requirement since this requiremettia may be weaved. For licenses provides no additional assursace other than issued before Nevainther & IM. 6e that which already emiere throuest license Commesion may take mee account the stehie requirements.

of the ownereaup of such teacL and internete Cntenon 10.-A minimism charge of therem. and the abihty of a licensee to i

SI/ Aces (1973 dellatel to cover the caste of trenefer atle and custody thereof to the

' long tene servellance eheu be paid by each United States or a State.

mil operater to the general treasury of the D. If the Commissies embesquent te atte United States or to da appropnaie State esency pner to the termaation of a uranium trenefer desermmes that use of the surface or embourface estates. or both. of the land er thonum nu hcense.

transferred to the Ussied Seetes er to a State if eine surveillance or control regustemente ' =di not endanger the pubhc beelth, esfety.

et a particular este are determined. on the welfare. or environment, the r '===v==a besse of a site.epecihc evaluation. to be may permit the use of the surface er sigmficantly greater than those specified in sulwurface estates, or both, of such lead in a Cntenon 121e a.. if fencing is determined to manner :oneestent with the proviesene .

he necessaryL sonence m fundmg provided in these entene. If the Commission requiremente may be specified by the perusta r och use of such landL it wiu provide Commeeson. In any case, the total charge to the pereen who treneferred such land with cover the coste of long term surveillance shall the nght of Aret refusal with respect to such be such that. with an easemed I percent use er such lensL annual real mierest rete. the collected funde E hietanal and land treaeferred to the wdl ywid interest m an amount sufficient to l United States or e State e accordance with cover the annual cooie of sale surveillance. this Cntenes shall be treneferred without The total charge =di be adeueted annually cost to the United Stasee er a Siate other than pner to actual payment to recoginae inflation. eduumistrative and legal costs incurred an The mflauen rete to be used is that edicated carrymg out such trenefer, by the change in the Consumer pnce Inden pubhehed by the U S. Department of Labor. F. The provisions of this part respectmg transfer of ntle end custody to land and Bureau of Labor Stanstice. .

tailinge and westes shau mot apply a the

//1. Sne oad #yprueluct Meaenel Oie nerehe case oflande held in eniet by the United Cntence 11- States for any Indian inbe or lande owned by A. These entena roletute to ownership of eisch Indian tribe einblect to a eseanction sadings and their disposal estes become against ebensteen imposed by the United effective en November & test. and apply to States. In the case of such lande which are used for the dir.poest of byproduct malenal all licenses teranated, issued. er renewed as defined a this port. the bcensee shall after that date.

enter into arrangements with the Commseien B. Any uteruusi er thonum milhnt hcense er taihnge hcense shall contem such terme se may be appropnate to eseure the long.

sene survedlance of such lande by the Uruled and conditione se the Comesuesson States.

determines necessory to oesure that pner to termination of the hcenee. the kceasee wiu IV. Leng.Tenn Sao Survedience comply with ownership requiremente of ahis Catenon 12-The final disposition of entenon for estes used for tenhage disposal teihnge or westes et milhng sites should be C. Title to the by product matenel licensed such that engeing actrve mentenames is not under ilus pen end land, including any necessery to preserve neeleties. As e intereste therein lether than land owned by smamust. enmuel este inspecnone sheE be the United States or by e State) which is used conducted by the government agency Jl

I . 1 NMSS TASK LEADER EVALUATION ,

I h

S 9 h l

B.4 l

l NMSS OFFICE FINDING ON PROPOSED RULEMAKING 1 Uranium Mill Tailings Regulations:

Conforming NRC Requirements to EPA Standards

1. Issue Comply with Congressional mandate to conform existing NRC regulations for -

uranium mill tailings to Environmental Protection Agency standards for these wastes published October 3, 1983.

2. Need In addition to the Congressional mandate, certain provisions of Appendix A of 10 CFR Part 40 are in conflict or inconsistent with the more recent EPA standards. Since licensees are subject to both regulations, these conflicts and inconsistencies should be removed.

3. Alternatives i

None other than ignoring the law and handling conflicts and inconsistencies on a case basis.

4 Proposed Action Proposed rule changes were published for public comment in the Federal <

Register November 26, 1984. The comment period was extended from January 10 to February 10, 1985. A final rule package will be prepared after the public comments are analyzed.

5. Effects of Proposed Action The final rule should remove all conflicts and inconsistencies between EPA and NRC's rules. The final rule will also contain all the provisions of the EPA standard not related to ground water and eliminate the need to refer to two rules on all topics except ground water.

6. Resources and Schedule Resources to analyse the comments and prepare a final rule are estimated l to be about 0.2-0.4 FTE in FY 85 depending on the comments received. No I

contractual support is planned. The final rule is expected to be in place j within 6 months after publication (i.e., by the end of May). The nature l

of the comments and the need for Commission approval could impact this target.

m l

!' B.5

~

BACKGROUND REFERENCES Documents relating to this rulemaking include the following:

1. Uraniuir. Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1976, as amended.

2. SECY-83-523, " Proposed Amendments to Uranium Mill Tailings Regulations and -

Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking", December 28, 1983.

3. SECY-83-523A, " Proposed Amendments to Uranium Mill Tailings Regulations (SECY-83-523)", February 3, 1984.

4. Memorandum for the Comissioners from Dircks, " Proposed Amendments to Uranium Mill Tailings Regulations (SECY-83-523 and 523A)", March 2, 1984.

5. Memorandum for the Comissioners from OGC, " Proposed Amendments to Uranium Mill Tailings Regulations (SECY-83-523 and -523A)", March 14, 1984.

6. Memorandum for the Comissioners from the Chainnan, " Tentative Recommendations Concerning Mill Tailings Resulting from Meeting on April 19, 1984", April 20, 1984.

7. Memorandum for Dircks from Chilk, "SECY-83-523/523A - Proposed Amendments to Uranium Mill Tailings Regulations and Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking", July 10, 1984.

8. Memorandum for Chilk from Rehm, "SECY-83-523/523A - Proposed Amendments to Uranium Mill Tailings Regulations and Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking - Policy Statement". July 25, 1984.

I

9. Hemorandum for Dircks from Chilk, " Commission Action on Uranium Mill Tailings Regulations", November 2, 1984.

10. FRN 49 FR 46a18 dated November 26, 1984.

11. FRN 50 FR 2293 dated January 16, 1985.

NOTE: Items 10 and 11 are included as B.2. Other documents are available in the files if desired. In view of the scope and mandate, the other documents were not considered necessary for EDO review.

-- -