DRC-2009-008034 - 0901a06880140982

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
FOR
INTERNATIONAL URANIUM (USA)CORPORATION'S URANIUM MILL SITE
WHITE MESA,SAN JUAN COUNTY,UTAH
IN CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO
SOURCE MATERIAL LICENSE SUA-1358 FOR THE
RECEIPT AND PROCESSING OF THE
MAYWOOD ALTERNATE FEED
PREPARED BY
THE U.S.NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
DIVISION OF FUEL CYCLE SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
FOR THE
MAYWOOD ALTERNATE FEED REQUEST
INTERNATIONAL URANIUM CORPORATION'S URANIUM MILL SITE
WHITE MESA,SAN JUAN COUNTY
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background and Need for Proposed Action
This Environmental Assessment (EA)is being performed to evaluate the environmental impacts
of the proposal for the White Mesa Uranium and Tailings Mill to receive and process material
from the Maywood facility located in Maywood,New Jersey.The mill site is located in San Juan
County,Utah,approximately 8 kilometers (km)(5 miles)south of Blanding,Utah.International
Uranium (USA)Corporation (IUSA)submitted a license amendment application by letters dated
June 15,2001,June 22,2001,and August 3,2001,and supplemented by letter dated,
November 19,2001,December 6,2001,December 10,2001,March 11,2002,and July 1,
2002,to amend its U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)Source Material License SUA-
1358,to allow its White Mesa Uranium Mill near Blanding,Utah,to receive and process up to
600,000 cubic yards (840,000 tons)of alternate feed material from the Maywood site located in
Maywood,New Jersey.The radiological portion of the Maywood site is being remediated under
the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP)by the U.S.Army Corps of
Engineers.The materials are by-products from the processing of thorium from monazite sands
and lanthanum from thorium byproducts.IUSA is requesting that the material be received and
processed for its source material content.By-products from the extraction of source material
will be disposed in lined tailings cells with a groundwater detection monitoring program.A
separate Technical Evaluation Report (TER)will be completed by the NRC using the formal
guidance,"Final Position and Guidance on the Use of Uranium Mill Feed Material Other Than
Natural Ores."The NRC has approved similar amendment requests in the past for separate
alternate feed materials under this license.
The IUSA site is licensed by the NRC under Materials License SUA-1358 to possess byproduct
material in the form of uranium waste tailings and other uranium byproduct waste generated by
the licensee's milling operations,as well as other source material from multiple locations.
A draft EA was sent to the Utah Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)by letter dated
September 21,2001,with a copy sent to the Ute Mountain Utes in White Mesa,Utah.This
document was placed into the NRC's data management system ADAMS and made pUblically
available.Since the time the Draft Environmental Assessment was submitted for comment,the
NRC staff issued a request for additional information by letter dated November 30,2001,and
IUSA responded by letters dated February 15,2002,and March 11,2002,and July 1,2002.
The February 15,2002,letter from IUSA includes additional information on a well called the
"Jones Well"in which NRC staff needed more information.The March 11,2002,letter from
IUSA provides additional information regarding the temporary storage of alternate feed
materials on the ore pad regarding dust control,potential groundwater concerns,and surety
Attachment
cost issues.The NRC staff needed additional information in regards to potential seepage of
material while stored on the ore pad and IUSA adequately addressed those issues in their
July 1,2002,letter.
In addition IUSA submitted,by letters dated December 6,2001,and December 10,2001,
information that was missing from the original submittal relating to Attachment 2 of their
submittal and other background information regarding the Maywood site.
1.2 Previous National Environmental Policy Act (NEPAl Actions
A Final Environmental Statement (FES)was prepared by the NRC for the license application in
May 1979,an Environmental Assessment (EA)was prepared by NRC in September 1985 for
license renewal,an EA was prepared by NRC in February 1997 for license renewal,and an EA
was prepared for the reclamation plan in February 2000.In addition,an EA was prepared,by
letter dated November 30,2001,for the receipt and processing of alternate feed material from
the Molycorp site located in Mountain Pass,California.
1.3 Maywood Site Materials
The radiological portion of the Maywood site is being remediated by the U.S.Army Corps of
Engineers.This site began operations in 1895 and over the years processed monazite sands
for thorium,lanthanum from thorium byproducts,and other rare earth elements.Uranium was
not extracted and remains in the process residues.The FUSRAP material is currently located
on site and is also being cleaned up at off-site properties.Material on the site is licensed by the
NRC under STC-1333 for the Stepan Chemical Company.This license covers 19,000 cubic
yards of buried tailings.The Maywood material has been classified as byproduct material under
Section 11 e.(2)of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,as amended (NRC,2001).
The average uranium content,based on 4000 samples,ranges frglll.Don-detectable to 0.06
weight percent,with an average grade of 0.0018 percent ural")iuli1.HO'weV{3r,IUSA is proposing
to only receive material that contains higher than 0.01 percefJ't uranium.Tre thorium content of
the material ranges from non-detectable to 3,800 pCi/g with aD averageof 970 pCi/g.The
thorium content is relatively low due to thorium extraction at the"MaywOod site.
1.4 Review Scope
In accordance with 10 CFR Part 51,this EA serves to:(1)present information and analysis for
determining whether to issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)or to prepare an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS);(2)fulfill the NRC's compliance with NEPA when no EIS
is necessary;and (3)facilitate preparation of an EIS when one is necessary.Should the NRC
issue a finding of no significant impact,no EIS would be prepared and the license amendment
would be granted.
2.0 SITE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE WHITE MESA MILL AREA
The area surrounding the White Mesa facility is in an arid climate with an annual precipitation of
30 centimeters (cm)(12 inches)and a mean temperature of 9 degrees centigrade (50 degrees
2
Fahrenheit).Runoff in the project area is directed by the general surface topography either
westward into Westwater Canyon,eastward into Corral Creek,or to the south into an unnamed
branch of Cottonwood Wash.The San Juan River,a major tributary to the Colorado River,is
located approximately 29 km (18 miles)south of the site.
The population density of San Juan County is approximately 0.6 persons per square kilometer
(1.6 persons per square mile).The town of Blanding is the largest population center near the
facility with a population of 3162.Approximately 5.6 km (3.5 miles)southeast of the site is the
White Mesa Reservation,a community of approximately 320 Ute Mountain Indians.The
nearest resident to the mill is located approximately 5 km (3 miles)to the northeast of the mill,
which is in the prevailing wind direction.
Approximately 60%of San Juan County is federally-owned land administered by the U.S.
Bureau of Land Management (BLM),the U.S.National Park Service (NPS),and the U.S.Forest
Service.Primary land uses include livestock grazing,wildlife range,recreation,and exploration
for minerals,oil,and gas.A quarter of the county is Native American land owned by either the
Navajo Nation or the Ute Tribe.The land within 8 km (5 miles)of the site is predominantly
owned by residents of Blanding.The White Mesa mill site encompasses approximately 202
hectares (ha)(500 acres).
Groundwater beneath the site mainly occurs in three strata:the Dakota Sandstone,the Burro
Canyon formation,and the Entrada/Navajo Sandstone.The Burro Canyon formation hosts
perched groundwater over the Brushy Basin Member of the Morrison formation.The Dakota
Sandstone in this area is not considered to be an aquifer by the Utah DEQ (Utah DEQ,
10/31/01).The Entrada/Navajo Sandstones form one of the most permeable aquifers in the
region.The aquifer is separated from the Burro Canyon formation by the Morrison formation
and Summerville formation.Recharge to the aquifers occurs by infiltration along the flanks of
the Abajo,Henry,and La Sal Mountains,and along the flanks of the structural folds.
Groundwater in the perched aquifer (Burro Canyon Formation)is monitored by the mill in the
groundwater detection monitoring program.Water in this zone flows south to southwest.
Status
T
E
3
Scientific Name
Carex specuicola
Gila elegans
Navajo Sedge
Bonytaili•Ii
\
\I
Seventy-six groundwater applications,within an 8 kilometer (5 mile)radius of the site,are on
file with the Utah State Engineer's office.The majority of applications are by private individuals
and for wells drawing small,intermittent quantities of water,less than eight gallons per minute
(gpm)(0.02 cubic feet per second),from the Burro Canyon formation.For the most part,these
wells are located upgradient (north)of the facility.Stockwatering and irrigation are listed as the
primary uses.Two water wells are completed in the Entrada/Navajo sandstone located 4.5
miles (7.25 km)southeast of the site on the Ute Mountain Ute Reservation.These wells are
used as domestic water supply wells and are completed approximately 365 meters (1200 foot)
below the ground surface.
r--In';he vicinity of the site,the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service provided the following list on July 9,
2002,of endangered (E),threatened (T),and candidate (C)species that may occur in the area
around the site:
I Common NameI
Colorado Pikeminnow
Humpback Chub
Razorback Sucker
Bald Eagle
California Condor
Gunnison Sage Grouse
Mexican Spotted Owl
Southwestern Willow
Flycatcher
Western Yellow-billed
Cuckoo
Black-footed Ferret
Ptychocheilus lucius
Gila cypha
Xyrauchen texanus
Haliaeetus leucocephalus
Gymnogyps californianus
Centrocercus minimus
Strix occidentalis lucida
Empidonax traillii extimus
Coccyzus american us occidentalis
Mustela nigripes
E
E
E
T
E
C
T
E
C
E
In addition,the following species may occur within the project area that are managed under
Conservation Agreements/Strategies:
Common Name
Colorado River Cutthroat Trout
Gunnison Sage Grouse
Scientific Name
Oncorhynchus clarki pleuriticus
Centrocercus minimus
\
While the ranges of the bald eagle,peregrine falcon,and willow flycatcher emcompass the
project area,their likelihood of utilizing the site is extremely low.The black-footed ferret has not
been seen in Utah since 1952 and is not expected to be seen any longer in the area.NRC
staff contacted wildlife biologists from the Bureau of Land Management and the Utah Wildlife
Service to gather local information on the presence of these additional species surrounding the
mill.The California Condor has only rarely been spotted in the area of Moab,Utah,(70 miles
north)and around Lake Powell (approximately 50 miles south).The Mexican Spotted Owl is
only found in the mountains in Utah and is not expected to be on the Mesa.The Navajo Sedge
has not been observed in the area surrounding Blanding and is typically found in areas of
moisture.The Southwestern Willow Flycatcher,Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo,and Gunnison
Sage Grouse are also not expected to be found in the immediate area around the mill site.
No populations of fish are present on the project site,nor are any known to exist in the
immediate area,of-the site.Four speciesof,fjsh designated as endangere'd or threatened occur
in the San J,uan Rive'\29 km(18 miles)south'bfthesite.There are no discharges of mill
\effluents t6 surface waters;therefore,no significant impacts are expected for the San Juan
'~r Or fish due to operations at the mill.
Since this action will not effect any additional potential habitat for listed species and will utilize
existing mill structures,we have determined that this action will have no effect to endangered or
threatened species and critical habitat.The NRC asked the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service for
concurrence on the decision of no effect by letter dated July 25,2002.Fish and Wildlife
Service concurred with this decision by letter dated August 5,2002.
4
3.0 OPERATIONS
The White Mesa uranium miil was developed in the late 1970's by Energy Fuels Nuclear,Inc.
(EFN)as an outlet for the many smail mines that are located in the Colorado Plateau.After
about two and one-half years,the miil ceased ore processing and entered a total shutdown
phase.In 1984,a majority ownership interest was acquired by Union Carbide Corporation's
(UCC)Metals Division,which later became Umetco Minerals Corporation (Umetco),a wholly-
owned subsidiary of UCC.In May of 1997,IUSA purchased the assets of the EFN and is the
current owner and operator of the facility.The mill has gone through operation and shut down
periods throughout the 1980's and 1990's.i"h§cljrrentIi9§!l§especifiE):si:ll11a)(illlulllprgdugtion
rate of 4380 tons of yeilowcake per year.The facility is currentlyTii-operationand since early'
"1997;"Tfi-emlirFiasp'roEessed513,463-ions from several additional alternate feed stocks.
The tailings facilities currently consist of four lined ceils with leak detection systems (LOS)and a
groundwater detection monitoring program consisting of six monitoring wells.These weils are
sampled quarterly for chloride,potassium,nickel,and uranium.These constituents are
indicator parameters to detect potential groundwater impact.Currently,there is no indication of
groundwater impact from the tailing cells based on the groundwater sampling.Environmental
monitoring consists of groundwater and surface water sampling,gamma radiation
measurements,soil,and vegetation sampling.
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
4.1 Transportation Considerations
IUSA does not have a contract to receive Maywood alternate feed material at this time and
therefore,the exact mode of transporting the materials to the miil has not been determined.
Transportation may be similar to that of other alternate feed materials shipped to the mill.This
would consist of inter-modal containers shipped by rail then by truck.If the maximum volume
requested,600,000 cubic yards (840,000 tons),were shipped to the mill,IUSA estimates that
7500 rail cars over seven years by rail and 46-86 truckloads per week would occur over a seven
year period.It is more likely that 206,000 cubic yards would be shipped which would require
46 truckloads per week.The NRC does not expect there to be a significant impact from the
transportation of these materials due to exclusive-use containers,the smail increase in truck
traffic (4 to 7.4 percent),and the transportation of the material in lined,covered containers.
Based on this information,a very minor increase in truck traffic from this action is anticipated
and therefore,environmental impacts from this increase are expected to be negligible.
4.2 Handling and Processing at the Mill Site
The material wiil be added to the Miil circuit in a similar manner to that used for normal
processing of conventional ore,either alone or in combination with other approved alternate
feed materials.The material wiil either be dumped into the ore receiving hopper and fed to the
semiautogenous grinding mill,or run through an existing trommel,before being pumped to the
pulp storage tanks.The leaching process may begin in pulp storage tanks with the addition of
sulfuric acid.
5
4.3 Control of Airborne Contamination
The NRC does not anticipate any unusual or extraordinary airborne contamination dispersion
when processing this material.The contamination potential is expected to be comparable to
the processing of conventional ores which has been evaluated under previous NEPA actions.
Environmental monitoring will continue and has been evaluated under previous NEPA actions.
This includes monitoring of surface and groundwater,airborne particulates,radon,soils,and
vegetation,according to the existing License Conditions.
IUSA will continue to conduct a Dust Suppression program in accordance with the License
Renewal Application for the White Mesa Mill,sections 2.0 and 4.0 (Umetco,1991),and the
September 11,1997,Utah Division of Air Quality Approval Order for White Mesa Mill (Air
Quality Permit Conditions).
4.4 Groundwater Effects
Material would be handled on the ore pad in a similar manner to conventional ores and other
approved alternate feed materials.Potential environmental effects to groundwater have already
been evaluated for operations at the mill in previous NEPA docurnents.Material from Maywood
does not contain any additional chemicals that would pose an increase in threat to the
groundwater resources above conventional ore.Tailings from the Maywood material
processing will be disposed in the lined tailings cells along with other process tailings.A
groundwater detection monitoring program is implemented to determine if any leakage from the
tailings cells has occurred.In addition,if groundwater contamination were to occur,the NRC
would require that IUSA conduct corrective action to restore groundwater to the groundwater
standards in its license per 10 CFR Part 40,Appendix A,Criterion 5.
Due to comments from the Ute Mountain Utes and members of the public on the draft
Environmental Assessment regarding potential impacts to groundwater,by letter dated
November 30,2001,NRC staff requested that IUSA provide additional information regarding
the potential for groundwater impacts to occur while the Maywood material was temporarily
placed on the ore pad at the mill.IUSA adequately addressed these issues in their July 1,
2002,submittal.IUSA conducted multiple infiltration and permeability tests on the shallow soil
at the ore pad and demonstrated that infiltration of seepage from the Maywood material while
on the ore pad would be very limited.Due to the dry climate,low permeability and highly
compacted nature of the ore pad surface,and the limited duration of storage,significant
impacts to the groundwater resource from the Maywood material is not anticipated.The NRC
staff will evaluate the need for additional controls on alternate feed materials on a case by case
basis.For example,with the Molycorp material,approved in a previous amendment,IUSA
committed to placing the material on a bermed concrete pad due to the high moisture content
and lead content of that material.The Maywood material does not have those concerns and is
similar in nature to previous alternate feed materials such as Ashland and Linde which has
processed at IUSA.
6
4.5 Endangered.Threatened,and Candidate Species and Critical Habitat
This action does not include any additional disruption of potential habitat around the mill site
and will not result in any discharge to surface waters;therefore,no effect to the identified
endangered,threatened,or candidate species in the area is anticipated.Maywood material
would be delivered to an existing ore pad and then fed into the mill and processed with existing
mill structures and the waste disposed of in eXisting tailings cells.In addition,IUSA manages a
"wildlife pond"a few hundred yards from the ore pad area to minimize wildlife migrating to the
tailings ponds.This pond will also minimize any contact that wildlife would have with Maywood
material while temporarily stored on the ore pad.Potential impact to wildlife from mill
operations was evaluated in the 1979 FES and is beyond the scope of this EA.Staff concludes
that no effect to endangered or threatened species or critical habitat is expected as a result of
the Maywood action.Concurrence from the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service on the no effect
determination was received by letter dated August 5,2002.
4.6 Cumulative Impacts
NRC staff has found no other activities in the area that could result in cumulative impacts.
5.0 ALTERNATIVES
The action that the NRC is considering is approval of an amendment request to a source
material license issued pursuant to 10 CFR Part 40.The alternatives available to the NRC are:
1.Approve the license amendment request as submitted;or
2.Amend the license with such additional conditions as are considered necessary or
appropriate to protect public health and safety and the environment;or
3.Deny the request.
Based on its review,the NRC staff has concluded that the environmental impacts associated
with the proposed action do not warrant either the limiting of IUSA's future operations or the
denial of the license amendment.The NRC staff has concluded that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.Alternatives with equal or greater
impacts need not be evaluated.Therefore,the staff considers that Alternative 1 is the
appropriate alternative for selection.
6.0 FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
Based on the foregoing evaluation of the environmental impacts of the IUSA amendment
request,the Commission has determined that there will not be a significant effect on the quality
of the human environment resulting from the granting of IUSA's request and will,therefore,
publish a FONSI in the Federal Register.The following statements support the FONSI and
summarize the conclusions resulting from the EA.
7
1.An acceptable environmental and effluent monitoring program is in place to
monitor effluent releases and to detect whether applicable regulatory limits are
exceeded.Radiological effluents from site operations have been and are
expected to continue to remain below the regulatory limits.A groundwater
monitoring program is in place to detect potential seepage of contaminants from
the tailings cells.The Entrada/Navajo Sandstone Aquifer is separated by low
permeability formations from the tailings cells further decreasing a potential impact
to groundwater resources.The potential for seepage to occur while the material is
temporarily stored on the ore pad is minimal due to the dry climate,low
permeability and highly compacted nature of the ore pad surface,and the limited
duration of storage.An existing dust suppression program will be implemented at
the Mill to reduce the potential for airborne contamination.No disruption of
potential habitat to endangered species will occur with this action,therefore,no
significant impact to endangered or threatened species and critical habitat is
anticipated.
2.Present and potential environmental impacts from the receipt and processing of
the Maywood material were assessed.No significant impacts have been identified
as a result of this action;therefore,the staff has determined that the risk factors
for health and environmental hazards are insignificant.
6.1 Environmental Justice
Because the staff has determined that there will be no significant impacts associated with this
action,there can be no disproportionally high and adverse effects and impacts on minority and
low-income populations.Consequently,further evaluation of Environmental Justice concerns,
as outlined in Executive Order 12898 and NRC's Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards Policy and Procedures letter 1-50,Revision 1,is not warranted.
7.0 STATE,TRiBAL,AND FISH AND WilDLIFE CONSULTATION AND PUBLIC
COMMENTS
A draft EA was sent to the Utah Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)by letter dated
September 21,2001,with a copy sent to the Ute Mountain Utes in White Mesa,Utah.This
document was placed into the NRC's data management system ADAMS and made publically
available.The Utah DEQ responded by letter dated October 31,2001,and the Ute Mountain
Utes provided comments by letter post marked November 13,2002.
7.1 Public Comments
Eight other parties provided comment to the draft EA.These parties included environmental
groups,resource groups,members of the public,and their representatives.
These commenters had similar issues to the DEQ and the Utes.Some of the comments did
not focus on the draft EA and potential environmental impacts from this action and,therefore,
they are beyond the scope of this EA.
8
Some members of the public commented that an EIS not an EA should be completed.The
purpose of the EA was to determine if an EIS was necessary.The NRC concluded that based
on the finding of no significant impact from the EA,that an EIS was not necessary.This is
consistent with 10 CFR Part 51.A Finai Environmental Statement for mill operations was
competed in 1979.
Other comments focused on issues relating to the Ute Mountain Ute Indians and environmental
justice issues,although these comments were not sent by the Indians themselves.The Ute
Mountain Utes were sent a draft EA,by letter dated September 21,2001,when the Draft EA
was sent to the Utah DEQ and the NRC has had a continuing open communication with the
Utes.Comments from the Utes are addressed in section 7.3.
Regarding comments on the Maywood material potentially being classified as a hazardous
waste,the NRC will not approve the receipt and processing of the Maywood material if it is
classified as a hazardous waste when it comes to the Mill.The NRC has classified the
Maywood material byproduct material under Section 11 e.(2)of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,
as amended (NRC,2001).Under 40 CFR Part 264.4,"byproduct"material as defined under
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,as amended,is excluded by definition as a solid or hazardous
waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).
In response to a concern about wildlife becoming exposed at the Mill,no disruption in habitat is
anticipated to occur with this action.Therefore,no significant impact to wildlife or endangered
species is predicted.Potential environmental impacts for general rnill operations have been
considered in previous environmental evaluations.In addition,IUSA has implemented a
program at the Mill to reduce wildlife coming in contact with tailings water.This consists of
creating several ponds away from the tailings ponds for wildlife to congregate and setting up
cannons and fake Eagles to scare birds away from the tailings ponds.The wildlife ponds
should also provide an alternate habitat that will discourage species from congregating near the
ore pad where the Maywood material would be temporarily stored.
Some commenters stated that the mill shouldn't receive any ore other than natural ore.This
issue previously has been assessed by hearings which were subsequently appealed to the
Commission.The result of those proceedings was that the mill can receive alternate feed
materials (see,International Uranium (USA)Inc.White Mesa Uranium Mill,CLI-00-1,51 NRC 9,
(2000)).
Other commenters voiced concerns over the impact on groundwater resources.In NRC's
evaluation,there is no increase in the potential impact to groundwater from that of milling
natural ore.The tailings cells are lined and a groundwater detection monitoring program is in
place to detect the presence of any potential seepage from the tailings cells.The small
concentrations of organic chemicals in the Maywood material do not present any additional
potential for significant impacts over the chemicals already used in the milling operation such as
sulfuric acid and kerosene.The tailings cells were designed to prevent groundwater
contamination from tailings and chemicals used in the milling process.The potential impact to
groundwater from the milling operation was comprehensively evaluated in the FES in 1979.
Accordingly,IUSA has adequately addressed NRC concerns over the potential seepage of
Maywood material while the material is temporarily stored on the ore pad.Due to the dry
climate,low permeability and highly compacted nature of the ore pad surface,and the limited
duration of storage;significant impacts to the groundwater resource from the Maywood material
are not anticipated.
9
Comments were received regarding the transportation of the feed to the mill.Transportation
considerations are addressed in section 4.1.Based on the small increase of trucks through
Moab,the NRC does not consider these additional trucks to be a significant impact (4 to 7
percent increase at the most).
Some commenters voiced concerns over thorium concentrations.An NRC health physicist
reviewed information pertaining to the Maywood material and did not find thorium or any other
radiological concerns over that of natural ore.Radiological safety procedures and
environmental monitoring are implemented at the mill to assure that radiation levels from mill
activities are safe.Other commenters stated that it is illegal for the mill to receive materials with
thorium.Although this is outside the scope of this assessment,the mill is licensed to receive
materials containing uranium and thorium,as long as it is,in fact,processed to extract either
uranium or thorium,the resulting tailings will be 11 e.(2)byproduct material (see International
Uranium (USA)Inc.White Mesa Uranium Mill,CAI-00-1 (2000)and International Uranium
(USA)Inc.White Mesa Uranium Mill,CAI-OH8 (2001)).
7.2 Utah DEQ Comments
DEQ commented on potential hazardous waste issues related to the Maywood material.As
mentioned earlier,the NRC staff has determined that the Maywood material is classified as
"byproduct"material and therefore,will be excluded by definition as a solid and hazardous
waste under RCRA (40 CFR Part 261 .4).The NRC staff has evaluated health,safety,and
environmental aspects of chemicals in the Maywood material and find that no significant
impacts will occur.Since the Maywood material is classified by the NRC as "byproduct"
material and therefore excluded from RCRA,speculative accumulation of hazardous waste
does not apply.
DEQ also commented on the issue of available tailings capacity.The NRC is aware of tailings
space constraints at the mill and will place the following condition in the license:
Prior to the licensee receiving materials from the Maywood site,the licensee must make a
determination that adequate tailings space is available for the tailings produced from the
processing of this material.This determination shall be made based on a Safety
Environmental Review Panel (SERP)approved internal procedure.Design changes to the
cells or the reclamation plan require the licensee to submit an amendment request for NRC
review and approval.
In addition,the NRC sent a Geotechnical Engineer to the mill during a September 2001 site
inspection specifically to assess the licensee's implementation of determination of tailings
capacity prior to receiving various alternate feed materials.These procedures also apply to
other alternate feeds being received by the mill.
7.3 Ute Mountain Ute Tribe Comments
A letter from the Ute Mountain Utes was received by the NRC post marked November 13,2001,
with comments on the Draft EA.A population of Utes live close to the mill and the NRC values
their comments.The first comment asked whether any additional airborne threats would be
10
expected with the Maywood material.The NRC does not expect any additional airborne risk in
addition to natural ore.In addition,multiple air monitoring stations have been set up between
the Mill and the White Mesa Ute tribe to address the Ute's concerns prior to this Maywood
request.As mentioned earlier in the EA,a dust suppression program is being implemented at
the Mill to prevent airborne contamination from the alternate feed materials on the ore pad.The
other comments relate to groundwater and potential hazardous waste issue that were
addressed above.
7.4 U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service Consultation
The NRC asked the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service for concurrence on the "no effect"decision
by letter dated July 25,2002.Fish and Wildlife Service concurred with this decision by letter
dated August 5,2002.
8.0 REFERENCES
International Uranium (USA)Corporation (IUSA),"Reclamation Plan,White Mesa Mill,
Blanding,Utah,Revision 2.0,"May 1999.
IUSA,"Groundwater Information Report White Mesa Mill,Blanding,Utah,"submitted to Utah
Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ)Divisions of Water Quality (copy to NRC),
May 28,1999.
U.S.Fish and Wildlife SerVice,"Concurrence on No Effect To Endangered and Threatened
Species and Critical Habitat,"letter from Henry Maddux,Utah Field Supervisor,to William von
Till,NRC,August 5,2002.
U.S.Nuclear RegUlatory Commission (NRC),"Final Environmental Statement related to
operation of White Mesa Uranium Project,Energy Fuels Nuclear,Inc.,"NUREG-0556,May
1979.
NRC,"Environmental Assessment for the Renewal of Source Material License No.SUA-1358,
Energy Fuels Nuclear,Inc.,White Mesa Uranium Mill,San Juan County,Utah,"February 27,
1997.
NRC,"Environmental Assessment Prepared by the Uranium Recovery Field Office in
Consideration of the Renewal of Source Material License No.SUA-1358,for the Umetco
Minerals Corporation,White Mesa Uranium Mill,",September 26,1985.
NRC,"Environmental Assessment,"for the reclamation of the White Mesa Uranium Mill,
February 10,2001.
NRC,"Interim Position and Guidance on the Use of Uranium Mill Feed Material Other Than
Natural Ores,"NRC Regulatory Issue Summary 2000-23,November 30,2000.
NRC,"Disposal of FUSRAP Material at Envirocare,"letter from Martin J.Virgilio,NRC,to
Jonathan P.Carter,Esq.,Envirocare,September 20,2001.
11
NRC,"Consultation Request on Listed Species,"letter from William von Till,NRC,to Utah Field
Supervisor,U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service,July 25,2002.
Umetco Minerals Corporation,1991,"1991 White Mesa Mill License Renewal,"4 vols.,August
1991.
Utah Department of Transportation.Phone conversation with Ms.Vicki Hanshew of the
Program Development Division with William von Till of NRC regarding traffic statistics on
Highway 191 and through Moab,Utah.December 20,2000.
12