ML20209B099
| ML20209B099 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/31/1987 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20209A941 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8704280359 | |
| Download: ML20209B099 (22) | |
Text
. - . . . _ _ - _ _ _ _
e o
BRIEFING PAPER ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS IN PREPARATION FOR A HEARING ON THE PROPOSED " URANIUM MILL TAILINGS RECLAMATION ACT" b MARCH 1987.
- THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY THE NRC STAFF AS AN UPDATE TO THE GA0 STAFF BRIEFING PAPER TO ASSIST THE SUBC0ffilTTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT, HOUSE COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS PREPARE FOR A HEARING ON TWO BILLS. IT IS BASED ON THE MOST CURRENT READILY l AVAILABLE INFORMATION. ALL PAGES WERE REVISED TO REFLECT THE NRC'S CURRENT INFORMATION ON THE MILL LICENSEES (AS OF MARCH 1, 1987).
l l .
l l
l i
kDR* fojjj g g22 ENCLOSURE 1 CORRESPONDENCE PDR
8 o
2 FOREWORD This report is an NRC-prepared modification of a July,1985 GA0 Briefing Paper.
Changes from the original GA0 version are indicated by vertical bars in the margin space.
In September 1986, an NRC-prepared markup of the GA0 report was provided to the Subcommittee on Energy Research and Development of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. This NRC modification further updates and formalizes the chances to the GA0 report previously provided by the markup.
These revisions reflect information available as of March 1,1987. The najor reasons for the changes are revisions to the status of licensed facilities, amounts of waste tailings produced, and amounts of existing financial surety arrangements to assure adequate funds for site closure and long-term surveillance.
The sureties for the New Mexico licensees are those held by the State of New Mexico which were in effect prior to that program's return to NRC on June 1, 1986 and are based on the State requirements which were not fully compatible with the NRC requirements. The NRC staff is currently updating reclamation plans, including the sureties, for 11 facilities. This includes four of the five New Mexico mills. (The remaining New Mexico mill has not yet submitted a revised reclamation plan for review.) The NRC staff expects the surety amounts to increase for the majority of these sites currently under review.
4 3
~l QUESTIONS ADDRESSED IN THIS PAPER HOW MANY " ACTIVE" URANIUM MILL SITES ARE THERE?
J-
- WHAT VOLUME OF URANIUM MILL TAILINGS HAS BEEN GENERATED BY FEDERAL AND '
.i COMMERCIAL URANIUM PURCHASES?
WHAT ARE THE ESTIMATED COSTS OF RECLAIMING THE MILL TAILINGS? l WHO IS LIABLE FOR RECLAIMING URANIUM MILL TAILINGS? l
--ARE CURRENT OWNERS LIABLE?
--ARE PARENT COMPANIES OR OWNERS LIABLE?
s i
--00 COMPANIES HAVE FINANCIAL RESOURCES TO PAY CLEANUP COSTS?
l- --CAN THE EPA SUPERFUND BE USED TO FINANCE CLEANUP ACTIVITIES?.
ARE THERE IMPORTANT ISSUES RAISEC BY THE SUBJECT BILLS DESERVING OF i CONGRESSIONAL CONSIDERATION?
--FINANCIAL PROVISIONS
--FEDERAL / STATE RELATIONSHIPS 1
i 1
i
e 4'
a ACTIVE URANIUM MILLS NUMBER OF MILLS REGULATED BY THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
--SOUTH DAK0TA 1
--UTAH 4
--WYOMING 9 b
--NEW MEXIC0 7 21 REGULATED BY STATES c
--COLORADO 4
--TEXAS 3
--WASHINGTON 3 T- I TOTAL 31 PAGE 13 LISTS THE ACTIVE URANIUM MILL LICENSEE LOCATIONS, THE PARENT COMPANIES OF MILL LICENSEES (WHERE APPLICABLE), AND THE CURRENT STATUS OF EACH MILL.
a AS DEFINED IN S. 1004 AND H.R. 2236, ACTIVE URANIUM MILLS INCLUDE MILLS WITH LICENSES IN EFFECT ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 1978.
b NRC REASSERTED REGULATORY AUTHORITY IN NEW MEXIC0 AT THE REQUEST OF GOVERNOR ANAYA. THE EFFECTIVE DATE WAS JUNE 1, 1986. THE NRC IS PROCEEDING TO BRING THE NEW MEXICO MILLS INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE FEDERAL STANDARDS INCLUDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE SURETY REQUIREMENTS.
c TWO 0F THE COLORADO LICENSEES ARE HEAP-LEACH OPERATIONS AND ARE INCLUDED IN THIS REPORT DUE TO THE MODERATE VOLUME OF TAILINGS AT THE TWO SITES.
5 WHAT VOLUME OF MILL TAILINGS HAS BEEN GENERATED BY FEDERAL AND COMMERCIAL URANIUM PURCHASES?
a VOLUME GENERATED BY MILLS FEDERAL COMMERCIAL REGULATED BY CONTRACTS CONTRACTS TOTAL b
--(MILLIONS OF SHORT TONS ) _
NRC 48.8 122.5 171.3 STATES 7.1 27.0 34.1 i
TOTAL 55.9 149.5 205.4 PERCENT OF TOTAL 27.2% 72.8% 100.0%
i aDATA AS OF MARCH 1, 1987
! b l METRIC TON IS EQUAL TO 1.102 SHORT TONS (2,000 LBS.)
SEE PAGE 14 FOR VOLUMES OF MILL TAILINGS BY MILL.
,-o-4 6
~SUMARYOFCURRENTSURETYAMOUNTS{0R URANIUM MILL TAILINGS RECLAMATION
)
CURRENT NUMBER EXISTING SURETY- COST MILL LOCATIONS OF MILLS VOLUME AMOUNTS PER TON (MILLIONS OF (MILLIONS)
SHORTTONS)
NRC LICENSED b
l SOUTH DAKOTA 1 3.6 $ -
3 _
b l UTAH 4 16.2 6.5 0.40 WY0 MING 9 65.4 53.0- 0.81 NEW MEXICO 7 86.1 34.6 0.40 SUBTOTAL 21 171.3 94.1 0.55c 2
STATE LICENSED COLORADO 4 15.2 52.0 $ 3.42 TEXAS 3 13.7 15.5 1.13 WASHINGTON _3 5.2 7.0 1.35 SUBTOTAL 10 34.1 74.5 2.I8c 0.82 c j TOTAL 31 205.4 168.6 j
a SEE PAGE 15 FOR RECLAMATION SURETY AMOUNTS BY MILL. !
- i a
RECLAMATION INCLUDES DECOMMISSIONING MILL BUILDINGS, STABILIZING THE TAILINGS 3
PILE, AND CLEANUP 0F ANY WINDBLOWN TAILINGS. MOST OF THE EXISTING SURETY l ARRANGEMENTS OR COST ESTIMATES 00 NOT INCLUDE GROUNDWATER RESTORATION FROM 4 TAILINGS SOLUTION CONTAMINATION.
b
{ SEE FOOTNOTES ON PAGE 16.
1 i
C WEIGHTED AVERAGE.
1 I' l t' l 1
l
4 1 7 i
URANIUM MILL TAILINGS RECLAMATION RESPONSIBILITY 4,
CURRENT LICENSEES (LICENSED AND REGULATED BY.NRC OR STATES) ARE LIABLE FOR .
4 RECLAIMING MILL TAILINGS PILES IN COMPLIANCE WITH EPA GENERAL
- ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AND NRC/ STATE REGULAT:0NS.
NRC AND STATES REQUIRE LICENSEES TO ESTABLISH SURETY ARRANGEMENTS TO COVER RECLAMATION COSTS. OF THE 29 MILLS THAT HAVE GENERATED MILL TAILINGS, 26 HAVE HAVE ESTABLISHED SOME FORM 0F SURETY ARRANGEMENT.
THE REMAINING TWO MILLS WERE LICENSED FOR CONSTRUCTION AND ONE WAS NEVER BUILT AND THE OTHER WAS BUILT BUT NEVER OPERATED. (SEE j PAGES 15 THRU 19 FOR DETAILS).
BECAUSE THE TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY IS A GOVERNMENT AGENCY, NRC IS NOT j REQUIRING TVA TO ESTABLISH SURETY AGREEMENTS FOR RECLAMATION OF THE EDGEMONT, S.D., MILL.
I
) PARENT COMPANIES OF MILL OWNERS ARE LIABLE FOR RECLAMATION OF MILL 1 TAILINGS PILES IF SPECIFIC ARRANGEMENTS, CALLED CORPORATE GUARANTEES. HAVE y
BEEN MADE. -
THIS HAS OCCURRED AT 7 0F 25 MILLS FOR WHICH SUBSIDIARY / PARENT
- COMPANY RELATIONSHIPS EXIST (SEE PAGES 15 THRU 19).
4 EPA SUPERFUND MONEYS CAN BE USED TO PAY FOR RECLAMATION OF MILL TAILINGS.
l IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT IN A FEDERAL REGISTE_R NOTICE ISSUED ON SEPTEMBER 8, l 1983 (48 FR 40658) THE EPA MADE THE FOLLOWING POLICY STATEMENT: " EPA HAS i CHOSEN NOT TO LIST RELEASES OF SOURCE, BYPRODUCT AND SPECIAL NUCLEAR
[ MATERIAL FROM ANY FACILITY WITH A CURRENT LICENSE ISSUED BY THE NRC ON THE
! GROUNDS THAT THE NRC HAS FULL AUTHORITY TO REQUIRE CLEANUP OF RELEASES
] FROM SUCH FACILITIES." WITHOUT A CHANGE TO THIS EPA POLICY IT DOES NOT ,
1 APPEAR THAT FUNDS FOR CLEANUP OF MILL TAILINGS WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO THOSE
. SITES LICENSED BY THE NRC.
4 l FOUR MILLS ARE ON THE EPA SUPERFUND NATIONAL PRIORITY LIST. THEY ARE:
]
4 -- CANONCITY,CO(C0TTERCORPORATION)
) --
URAVAN,CO(UMETCOHININGCOMPANY) 1 --
- -- CHURCHROCK,(NM(UNITEDNUCLEARCORPORATION)
GRANTS, NM HOMESTAKEMININGCOMPANY)
THE CHURCHROCK AND GRANTS MILLS WERE LICENSED BY NEW MEXICO WHEN THEY WERE
- PLACED ON THE NATIONAL PRIORITY LIST. HOWEVER, THESE TWO MILLS ARE NOW LICENSED BY NRC. NRC IS WORKING WITH EPA TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS PROPER FEDERAL COORDINATION FOR THE NEW MEXICO SITES.
i
)
-.=---.=. s--.-.._ ...- -..- - -.-.-- -_--.- . , _ - . . . - - -
4 8
URANIUMMILLLICENSEEFIgANCIAL SURETY ARRANGEMENTS FINANCIAL SURETY ARRANGEMENTS FOR URANIUM MILLS GENERALLY INVOLVE A COMBINATION OF LEGAL COMMITMENTS, AND/0R FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS.
SOME MILL OWNERS SIGN A CONTRACT OR OTHER LEGAL DOCUMENT WITH A GOVERNMENT (KNOWN AS AN OWNER GUARANTEE) COMMITTING THEM TO PAY SITE CLEANUP COSTS. A CORPORATE GUARANTEE IS A SIMILAR COMMITMENT SIGNED BY AN OFFICIAL OF THE MILL OWNER'S PARENT COMPANY.
OTHERARRANGEMENTSINCLUDE(1)ESCROWACCOUNTS,(2)SURETYBONDS ISSUED BY AN INSURANCE OR BONDING COMPANY TO COVER EXPECTED RECLAMATION COSTS, AND (3) LETTER OF CREDIT ISSUED TO NRC OR A STATE l GUARANTEEING THAT A BANK WILL HONOR THE BEARER'S REQUEST FOR SPECIFIED AMOUNT SHOULD THE MILL OWNER DEFAULT. (SEE PAGES 17 THRU 19 FOR THE TYPE, AMOUNT, AND PURPOSE OF EACH MILL'S FINANCIAL SURETY ARRANGEMENTS.)
- a THE CURRENT SURETY ARRANGEMENTS ARE:
CORPORATE GUARANTEES 7 LETTERS OF CREDIT 7 ,
SURETY BONDS 6 OWNER / LICENSEE GUARANTEE 3 OTHERS 3 1
a ALL OF THESE SURETY ARRANGEMENTS ARE TO INSURE THAT THERE WILL BE FUNDS FOR RECLAMATION IF THE LICENSEE DEFAULTS ON ITS LICENSE COMMITMENTS TO PERFORM TAILINGS RECLAMATION.
9 URANIUM MILL COMPANIES' FINANCIAL RESOURCES THE FISCAL YEAR 1984 CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE 12 COMPANIES WITH THE LARGEST VOLUMES OF URANIUM MILL TAILINGS (INCLUDING 4 MILL OWNERS AND 8 PARENT COMPANIES OF MILL OWNERS)
SHOWED THAT:
ASSETS RANGED FROM $3 MILLION TO $63.3 BILLION.
-- NET INCOMES VARIED FROM A LOSS OF $300,000 TO A PROFIT OF $5.5 BILLION. (SEE PAGE 20 FOR DETAILS.)
l 3 SEVEN OF THE PARENT COMPANIES HAVE EXECUTED CORPORATE GUARANTEES COMMITTING THE CORPORATIONS TO PERFORM RECLAMATION OR PAY RECLAMATION 1 COSTS IF THE SUBSIDIARY DOES NOT HAVE THE FINANCIAL CAPAB:LITY TO PERFORM RECLAMATION.
l 4
10 4
(REPLACES PAGE 8 0F THE REPORT)
FINANCIAL PROVISIONS OF S.1004 SUBSTITUTE LEGISLATION: AMENDMENT NO. 1729 URANIUM REVITALIZATION AND TAILINGS RECLAMATION ACT OF 1986 INTRODUCED BY SENATOR DOMENICI (NM) APRIL 8, 1986
, VOLUNTARY AND TARIFF-LIKE IMPORT RESTRICTIONS REDUCING THE AH0VNT OF IMPORTED URANIUM FOR CIVILIAN POWER GENERATORS TO LESS THAN 50%.
ESTABLISHMENT OF A FUNDING MECHANISM: "THE URANIUM MILL TAILINGS FUND" (UMTF). TO PROVIDE THE NECESSARY FUNDING FOR RECLAMATION OF COMMERCIALLY LICENSEL URANIUM MILLING SITES.
i CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE UMTF ARE STIPULATED BY EXPLICIT FORMULAS IN THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION TO RESULT IN THE FOLLOWING BREAKDOWN OF PERCENTAGES:
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT 30%
URANIUM ACTIVE SITE OWNERS OR LICENSEES 30%
CIVILIAN NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS 30%
STATES (ONLY THOSE STATES WITH ACTIVE URANIUM SITES WITHIN THEIR BORDERS WOULDPARTICIFATE) 10%
TOTAL 100%
f FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CONTRIBUTIONS ARE IN THE FORM OF REVENUES GENERATED BY THE REORGANIZATION OF THE DOE URANIUM ENRICHMENT PROGRAM INTO A MIXED GOVERNMENT / PRIVATE CORPORATION.
j CIVILIAN NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR'S CONTRIBUTIONS ARE IN THE FORM 0F A FEE OF
$22.00/KG OF URANIUM LOADED INTO EACH REACTOR AND IN THE FORM OF ANY TARIFFS FOREXCEEDINGTHE50%LIMITFORIMPORTEDURANIUM($500/KGABOVETHE50%).
MILL LICENSEES AND THE STATES CONTRIBUTE A FEE PER DRY TON OF TAILINGS AT EACH SITE:
URANIUM MILL LICENSEES: $2,000,000 and $1.00 PER DRY TON STATES : $0.50 PER DRY TON i
1 1
6
l l
l R
11 THE TOTAL OF ALL CONTRIBUTIONS INTO THE UMTF IS EXPECTED TO BE ONE BILLION DOLLARS. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT APPROPRIATION IS AUTHORIZED TO BE $350,000,000
- WITHOUT ANY U.S. TREASURY APPROPRIATION.
THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION STIPULATES THE UMTF PARTICIPATION BY THE MILL LICENSEES AS BEING THE ONLY FORM OF FEDERALLY IMPOSED FINANCIAL LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION IN CONNECTION WITH RECLAMATION OF ACTIVE MILLING SITES.
i 4
1 J
l 4
W i
l l
l I
I i
! i
! l l
i l 1
l I
12 s (REPLACES PAGE 9 0F THE REPORT)
ISSUES RAISED BY SUBSTITUTE LEGISLATION:
THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION IS IN CONFLICT WITH THE PRESENT FINANCIAL SURETY PROVISIONS FOR RECLAMATION ACTIVITIES UNDER THE UMTRCA 0F 1978, AS AMENDED, AND WITH THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT. SPECIFICALLY, ACTIVE MILLING SITES APPEAR TO HAVE NO SUCH OBLIGATIONS, IF THEY CHOOSE TO PARTICIPATE (OR EVEN NOT PARTICIPATE) IN THE UMTF.
THE NRC'S ROLE IN APPROVING THE LICENSEE RECLAMATION PLANS HAS BEEN OBSCURED BY GIVING THE LICENSEE THE POWER TO SELECT AND PERFORM THE REMEDIAL ACTION
' (SEC.211)ANDBYGIVINGDOEBROADREGULATORYPOWERSINTHEAREA0FRECLAMATION (SEC. 223), WHICH ARE NRC'S UNDER UMTRCA (SEC, 203).
OTHER URANIUM RECOVERY OPERATIONS MAY OR MAY NOT BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE UMTF. THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION IS NOT CLEAR IN THIS REGARD.
f l
l 3
1
~
l
)
13 ACTIVE URANIUM MILLS OWNER / LOCATION PARENT COMPANY MILL STATUS LICENSED BY NRC TVA-EDGEMONT.(SD) DR (04/83)
UMETC0 (UT) UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION OP l
ATLAS CORPORATION (UT) IS(04/84)
PLATEAURESOURCES(UT)
CONSUMER POWER COMPANY IS(08/82)
RIOALG0M(UT) RIO ALG0M LTD (CANADA) OP EXXON (WY) EXXON CORPORATION DR(06/84 AMERICAN NUCLEAR CORP. (WY) DR(04/84 PETR0TOMICS(WY) TEXACO (GETTY OIL) DR (05/85 l MINERALS EXPLOR. (WY) UNION OIL COMPANY IS (11/81 UMETC0(GASHILLS)(WY) UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION IS(11/81 WESTERNNUCLEAR(WY) PHELPS D0DGE CORPORATION DR (00/87 l PATHFINDER GAS HILLS) (WY) COGEMA (FRENCH) SS (04/85 PATHFINDER SHIRLEYBASIN)(WY) C0GEMA (FRENCH) OP BEAR CREEK WY) UNION PACIFIC CORPORATION DR(00/86)
ANACONDA-BLUEWATER (NM) ATLANTIC RICHFIELD DR(00/83)
HOMESTAKEMININGCOMPANY(NM) HOMESTAKE MINING COMPANY OP KENNECOTT MINERALS (NM) SOHIO RESERVE DR(00/86)
QUIVIRA MINING (NM) KERR MCGEE CORPORATION IS(02/85)
UNITED NUCLEAR CORPORATION (NM) UNITED NUCLEAR CORPORATION DR (08/79) l B0r.UM RESOURCES CORPORATION (NM) NB CHEVRON / GULF MINERALS (NM) STANCARD OIL OF CALIFORNIA NB LICENSED BY STATE CONOCO-PIONEER NUCLEAR T DUPONT DR 00/83 EXXON MINERALS COMPANY T EXXON CORPORATION DR 00/80 CHEVRON RESOURCES (TX) STANDARD OIL OF CALIFORNIA OP
[
WESTERNNUCLEARINC.(WA) PHELPS D0DGE CORPORATION IS(07/84)
DAWNMINING(WA) NEWMONTMINECORP.(51%) IS (12/83)
MIDNITE MINES INC. (49%)
J0YMININGCOMPANY(WA) DR/LS(06/85)
COTTERCORPORATION(CO) COMMONWEALTH EDISON IS (01/87) l UMETCO MINERALS (CO) UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION IS (11/85)
UNETC0MAYBELL(CO)HEAPLEACH UNION CARSIDE CORPORATION IS HECLA(CO)HEAPLEACH IS FOOTNOTES:
OP = OPERATING l DR = DEC0fEISSIONING AND RECLAMATION UNDERWAY OR PLANNED IS = INDEFINITE SHUTDOWN SS = SHORT-TERM SHUTDOWN NB = NEVER BUILT OR NEVER OPERATED LS = LICENSE SUSPENDED
14 ACTIVE URANIUM MILL TAILING PILE VOLUMES AS OF MARCH 1, 1987 VOLUMES GENERATED FEDERAL COMMERCIAL FACILITY CONTRACTS CONTRACTS TOTAL
(MILLIONS OF SHORT TONS)----
l TVA-EDGEMONT 1.6 2.0 3.6 (
UMETCO 2.2 2.2 ATLAS 6.0 4.6 10.6 PLATEAU RESOURCES 0.05 0.05 RIO ALG0M 3.3 3.3 EXXON 11.3 11.3 AMERICAN NUCLEAR 2.1 3.8 5.9 PETR0T0MICS 0.7 5.7 6.4 MINERALS EXPLOR. 2.4 2.4 UMETCO (GAS HILLS) 2.1 7.1 9.2 WESTERN NUCLEAR 3.4 4.3 7.7 PATHFINDER (GASHILLS) 2.7 8.0 10.7 PATHFINDER (SHIRLEYBASIN) 7.1 7.1 BEAR CREEK 4.7 4.7 ANACONDA-BLUEWATER 8.8 15.4 24.2 HOMESTAKE MINING 11.4 10.6 22.0 KENNECOTT MINERALS 3.3 3.3 QUIVERA MINING 10.0 23.0 33.0 UNITED NUCLEAR CORPORATION 3.6 3.6 BOKUM RESOURCES CORPORATION 0.0 CHEVRON / GULF MINERALS 0.0 SUBT0TALS 48.8 Irl !i T71 7 LICENSED BY STATES CONOCO-PIONEER NUCLEAR 8.7 8.7 EXXON MINERALS COMPANY 0.5 0.5 CHEVRON RESOURCES 4.5 4.5 l WESTERN NUCLEAR INC. 2.3 2.3 DAWN MINING 1.1 1.8 2.9 J0Y MINING COMPANY 0.003 0.003 COTTER CORPORATION 0.3 2.4 2.7 UNETC0 MINERALS 5.7 5.3 11.0 UMETCO MAYBELL 1.0 1.0 HECLA MINING 0.5 0.5 SUBTOTAL ~771I 27.0 34.1 TOTAL 33[lf 149.5 205.4 PERCENT OF TOTAL 27.2% 72.8% 100.0%
15 ESTIMATED RECLAMATION COSTS FOR ACTIVE URANIUM MILLS CURRENT TAILINGS SURETY COST FACILITY VOLUME AMOUNT PER TON (MILLIONS OF (MILLIONS) (DOLLARS SHORTTONS) PERTON)
LICENSED BY NRC f
TVA-EDGEMONT 3.6 $ -
UNETCO(WHITEMESA) 2.2 3.g" 1.73 ATLAS 10.6 - -
PLATEAU RESOURCES 0.05 1.9 38.00 RIO ALG0M 3.3 0.8 a 0.24(0.94)d EXXON 11.3 8.8,(3.1)d 0.78 8
AMERICAN NUCLEAR 5.9 4.1 a 0.69 PETR0T0MICS 6.4 1.4 ,e 0.22 MINERALS EXPLOR. 2.4 2.2 0.92 UMETC0 (GAS HILLS) 9.2 6.0 0.65 WESTERN NUCLEAR 7.7 11.1 1.44 PATHFINDER (GASHILLS) 10.7 6.4 aa 0.60 PATHFINDER (SHIRLEYBASIN) 7.1 5.2 0.73 BEAR CREEK 4.7 7.8 1.66 ANACONDA-BLUEWATER 24.2 8.6 aa 0.36 HOMESTAKE MINING 22.0 4.3 0.20 KENNECOTT HINERALS 3.3 11.0"a 3.33 QUIVERA MINING 33.0 8.2 0.25 UNITED NUCLEAR CORPORATION b
3.6 2.5 0.69 BOKUMRESOURCESCORP0gATION 0.0 - -
CHEVRON / GULF MINERALS 0.0 - -
SUBTOTALS 171.3 94.1 0.55 .
LICENSED BY STATES CONOCO-PIONEER NOULEAR 8.7 7.2 0.83 l l EXXON MINERALS COMPANY 0.5 3.0 6.00 :
CHEVRON RESOURCES 4.5 5.3 1.18 l I WESTERN NUCLEAR INC. 2.3 6.0 2.61 '
DAWN MINING 2.9 1.0 0.34 JOY MINING COMPANY 0.003 0.0 -
l COTTER CORPORATION 2.7 10.6 3.93 UMETC0 MINERALS 11.0 40.0 c 3.64 i UNETC0 MAYBELL 1.0 1.3 1.30 HECLA MINING 0.5 0.1 .20 SUBT0TAL TCT TGi 2.18 TOTAL 205.4 h 168.6 0.82 FOOTNOTES ARE ON THE NEXT PAGE 4
1 I
MM
16 a
RECLAMATION PLAN WAS UNDERG0ING NRC REVIEW AS OF PARCH 1, 1987 AND THE SURETY AMOUNT MAY CHANGE.
b N0 TAILINGS BECAUSE THE MILL WAS NEVER BUILT OR NEVER OPERATED.
c A RECENT COURT AGREEMENT REQUIRES FINAL DETAILED RECLAMATION PLANS AND COST ESTIMATES TO BE SUBMITTED BY MID JUNE 1987. THE 40.0 MILLION DOLLARS WAS AN ESTIMATE PROVIDED BY UNETCO DURING THE COURT NEGOTIATIONS.
d VALUE WHEN FULLY FUNDED AT $3,064,312.
'SIGNIFICANT RECLAMATION WORK HAS BEEN COMPLETED AT THIS SITE. THE SURETY AMOUNT ONLY COVERS THE REMAINING WORK.
I FINAL COSTS ESTIMATED BY TVA ARE $37,000,000 WHICH GIVES $10.28 PER TON FOR THE 3.6 HILLION TONS OF TAILINGS. TVA IS NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE A SURETY THEREFORE THESE VALUES WERE NOT USED IN THE TOTAL SURETY AMOUNTS OR THE COST PER TON CALCULATIONS.
9 THERE IS NO SURETY IN EFFECT FOR THE ATLAS MILL THEREFORE NO COST VALUES WERE USED IN THE TOTAL SURETY AMOUNT OR THE COST PER TON CALCULATIONS. THE COST ESTIMATE FROM AN OLD RECLAMATION FLAN WAS ABOUT $6,000,000 WHICH GIVES
$0.57 PER TON FOR THE 10.6 MILLION TONS OF TAILINGS.
17 URANIUM MILL LICENSEE FINANCIAL SURETY ARRANGEMENTS l
(LICENSED BY NRC AS OF MARCH 1, 1987)
TYPE OF ISSUED SCOPE FACILITY ARRANGEMENT AMOUNT TO OF SURETY a
TVA-EDGEMONT NO SURETY - , ,
REQUIRED UMETCO CG/FT $ 3,792,600 NRC .
250,000 DECQM.-RECL.
LTC TOTAL S 4,042,600 8
ATLAS NO SURETY - - -
PLATEAU LC $ 1,946,393 NRC DECOM.-RECL.
RESOURCES c
RIO ALG0M EA $ 765,000 UTAH RECOM.-RECL.
EXXON LC $ 8,800,000 WYOMING DECOM.-RECL.d AMERICAN CD $ 99,727 WY0 MING DECOM.-RECL.
NUCLEAR LC $ 500,000 WYOMING TB $ 3,530,000 WYOMING TOTAL $ 4,129,727 PETR0T0MICS LC $ 1,432,205 WY0 MING 416,250 DECQM.-RECL.
LTC TOTAL $ 1,848,455 MINERALS EXPLOR. CG $ 2,231,892 WYOMING DECgM.-RECL.d 365,000 LTC
)
TOTAL $ 2,596,892 UMETC0(GASHILLS) SB $ 6,044,600 WY0 MING DECOM.-RECL.
WESTERN NUCLEAR SB $11,114,767 WY0 MING DECgM.-RECL.
250,000 LTC .
TOTAL $11,364,767 l
PATHFINDER LC $ 6,403,500 NRC 350,000 DECQM.-RECL.
(GAS HILLS) LTC TOTAL $ 6,753,500 PATHFINDER LC $ 5,168,300 NRC DECgM.-RECL.
(SHIRLEYBASIN) 350,000 LTC
$ 5,518,300 I
l
18 TYPE OF ISSUED SCOPE FACILITY ARRANGEMENT AMOUNT TO OF SURETY BEAR CREEK CG $ 7,847,000 WY0 MING DECgM.-RECLd 432,000 LTC TOTAL $ 8,279,000 f
ANACONDA-BLUEWATER SB $ 8,625,000 NEW NEXIC0 DECgM.-RECL.
EA $ 1,000,000 LTC TOTAL $ 9,625,000 f
HOMESTAKE MINING OG $ 4,257.,750 NEW MEXIC0 DECgM.-RECL.
EA $ 1,000,000 LTC TOTAL $ 5,252,750 f
KENNECOTT MINERALS SB $10,950,000 NEW MEXIC0 EA 246,390 DECQM.-RECL.
LTC TOTAL $11,196,390 f
QUIVIRA MINING CG $ 8,200,000 NEW MEXIC0 EA $ 1,000,000 DECQM.-RECL.
LTC TOTAL $ 9,200,000 f
UNITED NUCLEAR OG $ 2,500,000 NEW MEXIC0 DECgM.-RECL.
CORP. EA 703,797 LTC TOTAL $ 3,203,797 B0KUM RESOURCES NB -
CORP.
CHEVRON / GULF NB -
MINERALS FOOTNOTES CD = CERTIFICATE OF CREDIT CG = CORPORATE GUARANTEE LC = LETTER OF CREDIT EA = ESCROW ACCOUhT TB = TREASURY BILL SB = SURETY BOND 0G = OWNER GUARANTEE FT = FINANCIAL' TEST NB = MILL NEVER BUILT DECOM. = DECOMMISSIONING OR NEVER OPERATED RECL. = RECLAMATION a
LTC = LONG-TERM CARE SEE FOOTNOTE f ON PAGE 16.
LTC FUNDS ARE NOT TO BE USED FOR RECLAMATION, THEREFORE THEY SHOULD NOT BE NOT FULLY FUNDED, REQUIRES $3,064,312.
lUSEDINTHECOSTESTIMATESONPAGES6AND15.
INCLUDES SOME MONEY FOR GROUNDWATER RESTORATION.
' COST ESTIMATE BY ATLAS WAS $5,989,625 BASED ON AN OLD RECLAMATION PLAN.
THE SURETIES HELD BY NEW MEXICO 00 NOT MEET THE STANDARDS IN CRITERIA 9 AND 10 0F APPENDIX A TO 10 CFR'PART 40
19 URANIUM MILL LICENSEE FINANCIAL SURETY ARRANGEMENTS (LICENSED BY STATES AS OF MARCH 1, 1987)
TYPE OF ISSUED SCOPE FACILITY ARRANGEMENT AMOUNT TO 0F SURETY CONOCO-PIONEER NULLEAR OG $ 7,187,634 TEXAS RECL. & LTC EXXON MINERALS C0. CG $ 3,000,000 TEXAS RECL. & LTC CHEVRON RESOURCES CG $ 5,292,397 TEXAS RECL. & LTC WESTERN NUCLEAR INC. SB $ 6,000,000 U.S. DEPT. RECLAMATION OF INTERIOR DAWN MINING LC $ 1,000,000 WASH. DECOM.-RECL.
b J0Y MINING C0. NO SURETY COTTER CORP. SB $ 10,500,000 COLORADO DECOM.-RECL.
CO $ 68,000 COLORADO DECgM.-RECL.
EA $ 329,383 COLORADO LTC TOTAL $ 10,897,383 UMETCO MINERALS CG/FT $ 40,000,000 COLORADO DECOM.-RECL.
UMETC0 (MAYBELL) LC $ 1,300,000 COLORADO DECgM.-RECL.
LC $ 490,000 COLORADO LTC TOTAL S 1,790,000 HECLA MINING C0. UB $ 105,000 COLORADO DECOM.-RECL.
FOOTNOTES C0 = COLLATERAL EA = ESCROW ACCOUNT LC = LETTER OF CREDIT SB = SURETY BOND FT = FINANCIAL TEST OG = OWNER GUARANTEE CG = CORPORATE GUARANTEE UB = UTILITY BOND DECOM. = DECOMMISSIONING RECL. = RECLAMATION LTC = LONG-TERM CARE ;
a LTC FUNDS ARE NOT TO BE USED FOR RECLAMATION, THEREFORE THEY SHOULD NOT BE b
USED IN THE COST ESTIMATES ON PAGES 15 AND 5.
THE STATE OF WASHINGTON HAD A SURETY BOND FOR $93,000.00 FOR DECOMMISSIONING AND RECLAMATION. WHEN THE STATE SUSPENDED THE LICENSE FOR THE J0Y MINING FACILITY, THEY REQUESTED PAYMENT OF THE BOND. AT THAT TIME, HOWEVER, THE BONDING COMPANY WAS IN BANKRUPTCY AND N0 FUNDS HAVE BEEN COLLECTED.
20 SELECTED COMPANY 1984 FINANCIAL RESOURCES TOTAL STOCK- NET TOTAL LIABILI- HOLDERS INCOME PARENT COMPANY ASSESTS TIES EQUITY REVENUES LOSS
BILLIONS OF D0LLARS---------------------
EXXON CORP.a $63.3 $34.4 $28.9 $97.3 $5.5 TEXAC0 (GETTY OIL) $37.7 $24.0 $13.7 $47.9 $0.3 DUPONT $24.1 $11.9 $12.2 $36.2 $1.4 ATLANTIC RICHFIELD 322.1 $12.2 $ 9.9 $25.2 $0.6 UNION CARBIDE CORP.a $10.5 $ 5.6 $ 4.9 $ 9.5 $ 0.3 UNION PACIFIC CORP.a $10.4 $ 5.7 $ 4.7 $ 7.9 $ 0.5 XERR McGEE CORP. $ 3.8 $ 2.0 $ 1.8 $ 3.5 $ 0.1 PHELPS D0DGE CORP. $ 1.7 $ 0.9 $ 0.8 $ 0.9 $(0.3)
MILL OWNERS -----------------MILLIONS OF DOLLARS---------------------
HOMESTAKE MINING $692.5 $135.0 $557.5 $319.7 $ 29.2 ATLAS CORP. $103.3 $ 19.4 $ 83.9 3 41.5 $ (3.9 AMERICANNUCLgAR S 25.5 $ 27.5 $ (2.0) $ 0.3 $(10.5 MIDNITE MINZS $ 3.5 $ 0.2 $ 3.3 $ 0.0 $ (0.0 a
PARENT COMPANY THAT HAS EXECUTED CORPORATE GUARANTEE WITH NRC OR STATE.
b MIDNITE MINES INC. 0WN 49% OF DAWN MINING C0. NEWMONT MINES HOLDS THE REMAINING 51%. ;
SOURCE: SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION. (SEC FORMS 10K AND 10Q FOR i CALENDAR YEAR 1984)
Mgp"
, - r -
1 TFE NRC SOURCES OF INFORMATION FOR trPDATING THE GA0 REPORT The data used to update the GA0 report was collected as follows:
- 1. Tailings Volumes Volumes for the Agreement State licensees were provided by the State Health Departments of Colorado, Texas, and Washington.
Volumes for the NRC licensees were provided by the NRC Uranium Recovery Field Office as abtained from the individual mill operators.
Volumes for the AEC contract tailings were from the DOE Comingled Tailings Report (June, 1982).
- 2. Surety Amounts and Mechanisms Surety amounts and mechanisms for Agreement State licensees were provided by the State Health Departments.
Surety amounts and mechanisms for NRC licensees were provided by the NRC Uranium Recovery Field Office in Denver, C0.
The general NRC surety requirements and the process NRC uses to approve surety mechanisms and develop surety amounts are presented in the following discussion.
The NRC regulations on financial surety arrangements for uranium recovery operations are contained in Criteria 9 and 10 of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 40.
Criterion 9 requires mill operators to establish financial surety arrargements to carry out the decontamination and decommissioning of the mill and site and for reclamation of any tailings or waste disposal areas. The' amount of funds to be ensured by such surety arrangements are to be based on Comission-approved cost estimates in a Comission-approved decommissioning and reclamation plan.
The surety must also cover the long-term care charge specified in Criterion 10.
Criterion 9 states that the following surety arrangements are acceptable: :
- 1. Surety bonds
- 2. Cash deposits
- 3. Certificates of deposits
- 4. Deposits of government securities
- 5. Irrevocable letters or lines of credit, and ENCLOSURE 2
2
- 6. Combinations of the above or such other arrangements as may be approved by the Comission.
In addition to the above arrangements, the Division of Waste Management of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards has issued a policy statement which allows the use of a parent corporation guarantee in conjunction with a financial strength test of the parent corporation.
The use of any arrangement which essentially constitutes self-insurance is specifically prohibited, since this provides no additional assurance other than that which exists through license requirements.
The licensee must submit a reclamation plan as part of its license application (new, renewal, or major amendment) which includes the licensee's estimate of the cost of decomissioning and reclamation for NRC approval of the plan. The NRC staff performs its own independent assessment of the costs using available contractor costs for the geographic area.
Criterien 10 requires that each mill operator must pay, prior to the termination of the mill license, a minimum charge ($250,000 in 1978 dollars) to cover the costs of long-term surveillance. The amount of this charge is adjusted for inflation by using the Consumer Price Index. The current adjusted charge would be $407,960 (1986 dollars). This amount must be included in the surety required in Criterion 9.
Typical steps a licensee follows to obtain NRC approval of a surety arrangement are:
- 1. Submit a decomissioning and reclamation plan for NRC review.
- 2. Upon NRC approval of the engineering aspects of the proposed plan, the licensee updates the cost breakdown to accomplish the approved plan. The licensee usually submits a drafc cost breakdown as part of the reclamation plan.
- 3. Within 90 days of NRC approval of the plan including' cost estimates, the licensee must supply NRC evidence that an effective surety is in place. This is usually shown by the licensee submitting a copy of the effective surety arrangement.
- 4. The licensea is required, at least annually, to assure that the surety provides sufficient funds to complete the reclamation plan if the work had to be performed by an independent contractor. The amount of the surety must be adjusted to recognize any increases or decreases resulting from inflation, changes in engineering plans, activities performed, and any other conditions affecting costs.
The NRC staff is currently reviewing eleven reclamation plans which, when approved, may affect the existing sureties for those facilities.
- - ._. _ - ,